Agenda Packet 2006-03-14
CITY OF
Tony Ferrara
Jim Guthrie
Jim Dickens
Joe Costello
Ed Arnold
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Agenda
City Council
.
'1~_Sl~_L I FOR ~j!y/'f
"-~~~'.'
Steven Adams City Manager
Timothy J. Carmel City Attorney
Kelly Wetmore City Cierk
AGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 14,2006
7:00 P.M.
Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
1.
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
3.
FLAG SALUTE:
ARROYO GRANDE LIONS CLUB
4.
INVOCATION:
OPEN DOOR CHURCH
PASTOR ROBERT BANKER
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
5.a. Honorary Proclamation Recoanizina March as "American Red Cross Month"
6. AGENDA REVIEW:
6a. Move that all ordinances presented tonight be read in title only and all further readings
be waived.
AGENDA SUMMARY - MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 2
7. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present
issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda.
Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City
Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not
published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or presiding
Council Member may:
. Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you.
. A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you.
. It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a future
Council agenda.
Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
. Comments should be limited to 3 minutes or less.
. Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed
to individual Council members.
. Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or
member of the audience shall not be permitted.
8. CONSENT AGENDA:
The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group.
The recommendations for each item are noted. Any member of the public who wishes
to comment on any Consent Agenda item may do so at this time. Any Council
Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit
discussion or change the. recommended course of action. The City Council may
approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion.
B.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification (KRAETSCH)
Recommended Action: Ratify the listing of cash disbursements for the period
February 16, 2006 through February 28,2006.
B.b. Consideration of ADDrOyal of Minutes (WETMORE)
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of
February 14, 2006 and the Special City Council and Regular City
Council/Redevelopment Agency meetings of February 28, 2006, as submitted.
8.c. AdoDtion of Ordinance Modifvina the California Public EmDloyees' Retirement
System (CaIPERS) Contract (KRAETSCH)
Recommended Action: Adopt an Ordinance amending the contract with California
Public Employees' Retirement System.
B.d. Consideration of a Motor Vehicle Emission Reduction (MOVER) Proaram Grant
ADDlication (HEFFERNON)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution to apply for the Motor Vehicle Emission
Reduction (MOVER) grant from the Air Pollution Control District to construct the
Arroyo Grande Creek Path from the Village to the Post Office.
AGENDA SUMMARY - MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 3
8. CONSENT AGENDA (continued):
8.e. Consideration of AdoDtion of an Ordinance of the Citv Council of the City of
Arrovo Grande Addina ChaDter 5.76 to the Arroyo Grande MuniciDal Code.
Establishina Reaulations for Peddlina and Solicitina Activities and AdoDtion of
a Resolution Establishina a Solicitation Permit ADDlication Fee
(CARMEUAEIL TS)
Recommended Action: 1) Adopt, by title only, an Ordinance entitled: "An Ordinance
of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Adding Chapter 5.76 to the Arroyo
Grande Municipal Code, Establishing Regulations for Peddling and Soliciting
Activities"; and 2) Adopt a Resolution establishing a solicitation permit application fee.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9.a. Consideration of Vestina Tentative Tract MaD No. 05-003 and Planned Unit
DeveloDment No. 05-007 for a Phased. Mixed-Use DeveloDment Located on Fair
Oaks Avenue East of Arroyo Grande Community HosDital: ADDlied for by
Central Coast Real Estate DeveloDment (HEFFERNON)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007.
9.b. Continued Public Hearina - Consideration of ADDeal of Plannina Commission
Denial of Plot Plan Review 05-008 to Allow Two (2) Second-Floor ADartments in
an Existina Two-Storv Office Buildina at 230 Station Way (HEFFERNON)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the
Planning Commission's denial of Plot Plan Review 05-008.
9.c. Continued Public Hearina - Consideration of ADDroval of the 2005 Urban Water
Manaaement Plan (SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution approving the 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan.
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS:
10.a. Consideration of Fire Consolidation Oversiaht Committee ProDosal (ADAMS)
Recommended Action: 1) Approve the proposed structure and scope of work for
the Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee; and 2) Appoint a representative from the
City Council to participate on the Committee.
11. NEW BUSINESS:
11.a. Presentation of Financina Alternatives for the LODez Water Treatment Plant
UDarade Proiect (KRAETSCH)
Recommended Action: Receive the San Luis Obispo County staff presentation on
the four financing alternatives proposed for the Lopez Water Treatment Plant
Upgrade Project for Flood Control Zone 3 and provide feedback regarding the
altematives to Council Member Costello to take forth to the Zone 3 Water Advisory
Board.
AGENDA SUMMARY - MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 4
12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by a Council Member who would like
to receive feedback, direct staff to prepare information, and/or request a formal
agenda report be prepared and the item placed on a future agenda. No formal action
can be taken.
a. Request to Appeal Conditional Use Permit Case No. 05-007; Phase II of the
Long's Center, 1375 E. Grand Avenue. (GUTHRIE)
13. CITY MANAGER ITEMS:
The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the City Manager in order to
receive feedback and/or request direction from the Council. No formal action can be
taken.
a. None.
14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Council.
15. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Manager.
16. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present
issues, thoughts, or suggestions. Comments should be limited to those matters that
are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. The Brown Act restricts the Council
from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda.
17. ADJOURNMENT
*************************
All staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item of business referred to On the agenda
are On file in the City Clerk's office and are available for public inspection and reproduction at cost. If
requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a
disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability-related
modification or accommodation, contact the Administrative Services Department at 805-473-5414 as soon
as possible and at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date.
**************************
Note: This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2. Agenda
reports can be accessed and downloaded from the City's website at www.arrovoarande.ora
OF
5.8.
.~;:;:..
""I' ~:ta
';~rr.~i" C A L I FOR ~I A . -..1..... f
&"<,, f!~ ."'(J.
"i~'-~_ ~\~!~
:}-{onorary Procfamation 'Recognizing
:JvlarcFi 2006 as .
".J\.merican 'Rea Cross :JvlontFi"
WHEREAS, each year during the Q:1onth of March the American Red Cross is fonnally
recoqnized for its essential humanitarian role in our community; and this year, GIS we celebrate
the 125th anniversary of the first American Red Cross, we honor the role of the San Luis Obispo
County Chapter's contribution to making our community, and America, a stronger, safer and
healthier place; and
WHEREAS, for more than 89 years, the Red Cross in San Luis Obispo County has led the effort
to prevent. prepare for and respond to disasters. It has been the place where compassionate
people freely give their time and talent to help prevent and ease human suffering among
friends, neighbors, and even strangers; and
WHEREAS, 2005 presented unprecedented chaflenges. The year began with an almost
unimaginable tsunami, a deadly event spanning thousands of miles; and the hurricanes of
2005. including Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, dwarfed even the intense Florida
hunicanes of 2004, destroying communities and uprooting families. Never have so many of
our neighbors, near and far, needed the help of the Americcm Red Cross. The citizens of our
community made contributions to fund the cost of providing immediate relief to local fmnilies
as wefl as for those living along the gulf coast. Others learned CPR so that they would be ready
to save the lives of friends, neighbors, and strangers, and many volunteered their time to help
those in need; and
WHEREAS. major disasters dominated the headlines in 2005, but the Scm
Luis Obispo County Chapter responded to 45 local emergencies. assisted
144 military families and trained over 13,000 people in lifesaving skills such
as CPR and first aid. Red Cross volunteers were there to bring aid,
information and just as importantly, comfort to those in need. To the Red
Cross, there are no "sman disasters." only neighbors in need; cmd
+ American
RedCro$$
~lWaln5aWali/r
WHEREAS. the San Luis Obispo County Chapter - and its volunteers and donors - provide
valuable tools and education to individuals, families, workplaces and schools, making us an
stronger and more resilient; and when we celebrate the contnbutions of the American Red
Cross in San Luis Obispo County and across the Nation, we must also look forward c:md do our
part to ensure that the Red Cross remains vi!a1. ready to help us prevent, prepare for cmd
respond to the unknown chaDenges that lie ahead.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Tony Ferrara, Mayor of the City of Arroyo Grande,
on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim March 2006 as "American Red Cross Month",
in the City of Arroyo Grande, and urge an Americcms to continue to volunteer their time,
donate blood Glnd money, c:md give generously to the American Red Cross.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hc:ve hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal
of the City of Arroyo Grande to be affixed this 14'" day of March 2006,
TONY FERRARA. MAYOR
8.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL. fl
ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES 1/[
FRANCES R. HEAD, ACCOUNTING SUPERVISO~
CASH DISBURSEMENT RATIFICATION ~
BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
MARCH 14, 2006
. RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for
the period February 16 through February 28,2006.
FUNDING:
There is $638,573.88 fiscal impact All payments are within the existing budget.
DISCUSSION:
The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual
operations. It is requested that the City Council approve these payments.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
. Approve staff's recommendation;
. Do not approve staff's recommendation;
. Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Cash Disbursement Listing
Attachment 2 - February 17, 2006, Accounts Payable Check Register
Attachment 3 - February 17,2006, Payroll Checks & Benefit Checks Register
Attachment 4 - February 21,2006, Accounts Payable Check Register
Attachment 5 - February 24, 2006, Accounts Payable Check Register
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CASH DISBURSEMENTS
For the Period of February 16 Through February 28, 2006
March 14,2006
Presented are the cash disbursements issued by the Department of Financial Services for
the period February 16 to February 28, 2006. Shown are cash disbursements by week of
occurrence and type of payment. .
WEEK TYPE OF PAYMENT A TT ACHMENT AMOUNT
February 17, 2006
Accounts Payable Cks 125036-125123 2 $ 84,690.79
Payroll Olecks & Benefit Olecks 3 $ 401,232.27
$ 485,923.06
February 24, 2006
Accounts Payable Cks 125127-125131 4 $ 58,568.24
Accounts Payable Cks 125132-125221 5 94,082.58
$ 152,650.82
lWO-WEEK TOTAL $ 638,573.88
U,\MSWORD\ CITY COUNCIL FORMS\ CASH DISBURSEMENT FORMS\ CASH DISBURSEMENT SCHED wEXCEL WKS.doc
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
INDEX FOR BUDGET DEPARTMENTS
EDEN COMPUTER SYSTEM
GENERAL FUND (010)
Citv Government (Fund 010)
4001 - City Council
4002 - Administrative Services
4003 - City Attorney
4101 - City Manager
4102 - Printing/Duplicating
4120 - Financial Services
4121 - Taxes/ Insurance/ Bonds
4130 - Community Development
4131 - Community Building (CDBG)
4140 - Management Information System
4145 - Non Departmental
Public Safetv (Fund 010)
4201 - Police
4211 - Fire
4212 - Building & Safety
Public Works (Fund 010)
4301 - Public Works-Admin & Engineering
4303 - Street/Bridge Maintenance
4304 - Street Lighting
4305 - Automotive Shop
Parks & Recreation (Fund 010)
4420 - Parks
4421 - Recreation
4422 - General Recreation
4423 - Pre-School Program
4424 - Recreation-Special Programs
4425 - Children in Motion
4426 - Five Cities Youth Basketball
4430 - Soto Sport Complex
4213 - Government Buildings
4460 - Parkway Maintenance
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Park Development Fee Fund (Fund 213)
4550 - Park Development Fee
Traffic Signal Fund (Fund 222)
4501 - Traffic Fund
Transportation Fund (Fund 225)
4553 - Public Transit System
Construction Tax Fund (Fund 230)
4556 - Construction Tax
Police Grant Funds
4201 - Law Enforcement Equip. (Fd 272)
4202 - State AB3229 Cops Grant (Fd 271)
4203 - Federal Universal Hiring (Fd 274)
4208 - Federal Local Law Enforcmt (FD 279)
Redevelopment Agency ( Fund 284)
4103 - Redevelopment Administration
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Sewer Fund (Fund 612)
4610 - Sewer Maintenance
Water Fund (Fund 640)
4710 - Water Administration
4711 - Water Production
4712 - Water Distribution
Lopez Administration (Fund 641)
4750 - Lopez Administration
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS (Fund 350)
5501-5599 - Park Projects
5601-5699 - Streets Projects
5701-5799 - Drainage Projects
5801-5899 - Water/Sewer/Street Projects
5901-5999 - Water Projects
U:\MSWORD\ CITY COUNCIL FORMS\ CASH DISBURSEMENT FORMS\ CASH DISBURSEMENT SCHED wEXCEL WKS.doc
ATTACHMENT 2
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
1
Bank code : boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account Amount
REIMBURSE HOTEL ACCOMODATI'
REIMBURSE HOTEL ACCOMODA TI'
010.4001.5501 665.57
Total: 665.57
REGISTRATION
REGISTRATION FOR ROBERT CHIL
010.4211.5501 275.00
MATTHEW PALM
010.4211.5501 275.00
RYAN BIRD
010.4211.5501 275.00
JOHN KING
010.4211.5501 275.00
Total: 1,100.00
REGISTRATION FEES
REGISTRATION DRIVER OPERATC
010.4211.5501 275.00
MATTHEW PALM
010.4211.5501 275.00
RYAN BIRD
010.4211.5501 275.00
JOHN KING
010.4211.5501 275.00
Total: 1,100.00
DEC 2005 INSURANCE PAYMENT
DEC 2005 INSURANCE PAYMENT
011.0000.2113 2,542.21
JAN 2006 INSURANCE PAYMENT
011.0000.2113 2,735.48
FEB 2006 INSURANCE PAYMENT
011.0000.2113 2,735.48
125036
2/10/2006 001221 DICKENS, JIM
REIMBURSEMENT
125037
2/10/2006 000484 PASO ROBLES, CITY OF
020806
125038
2/10/2006 000484 PASO ROBLES, CITY OF
0208
125043
2/10/2006 000733 STANDARD INSURANCE CO
INSURANCE
Page: 1
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
2
Voucher
Bank code: boa
PO#
125043
125047
125048
125049
125050
125051
125052
125053
Dale Vendor
Invoice
Description/Account
Amount
8,013.17
416.46
416.46
68.00
68.00
575.00
575.00
40,00
40.00
489.00
489.00
695.05
695.05
2/10/2006 000733
000733 STANDARD INSURANCE CO
(Continued)
Total:
2/14/2006 000088 BRIDGE, F BARRY
0209
EXPENSES FOR CONFERENCE-
EXPENSES FOR CONFERENCE-
010.4201.5501
2/14/2006 000496 PHOENIX FOODSERVICES
Total:
MEALS- OFFICER SAFETY CONF.-
MEALS- OFFICER SAFETY CONF.-
010.4201.5501
0210
Total:
2/14/2006 002926 CA ST OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SVCS 021006
REGISTRATiON FEES: W. RAETZ
REGISTRATION FEES: W. RAETZ
010.4201.5501
Total:
2/14/2006 003288 SOUZA, JEFFREY
020906
MEALS-CONFERENCE (SOUZA, JEI
MEALS-CONFERENCE (SOUZA, JEI
010.4201.5501
Total:
2/14/2006 003015 SAN DiEGO REGIONAL
0209
REGISTRATION FEES: BECKY MILl
REGISTRATION FEES: BECKY MILl
010.4201.5501
Total:
2/14/2006 002651 MILTON, BECKY
0209
EXPENSES- RECORDS SUP.CON.
EXPENSES- RECORDS SUP.CON.
010.4201.5501
Total:
2/15/2006 002633 SBC GLOBAL SVCS, INC
SB231572
PHONES-SUPPLIES
Page: 2
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125053 2/15/2006 002633 SBC GLOBAL SVCS, INC (Continued)
PHONES-SUPPLIES
010.4130.5201 136.76
PHONES-SUPPLIES
010.4301.5201 136.76
PHONES-SUPPLIES
010.4101.5201 347.93
Total: 621.45
125055 2/17/2006 001732 AEP WORKSHOPS 020906 2006 SPRING CEQA-T.MCCLlSH
MEMBERSHIP
010.4130.5503 120.00
WORKSHOP
010.4130.5501 120.00
Total: 240.00
125056 2/17/2006 000010 AFSS 0216 REG. FEES FOR N.HAGLUND
REG. FEES FOR N.HAGLUND
010.4211.5501 25.00
Total: 25.00
125057 2/17/2006 004815 AIRGAS WEST 103170779 WELDING CYLINDERS-RENTAL
WELDING CYLINDERS-RENTAL
010.4420.5255 16.90
Total: 16.90
125058 2/17/2006 000034 APEX SHARPENING WORKS 26545 PLUG & LABOR REPAIR-EDGER
PLUG & LABOR REPAIR-EDGER
010.4420.5603 . 22.95
26582 AIR FILTERS- MOWERS
AIR FIL TERS- MOWERS
010.4420.5603 32.18
Total: 55.13
125059 2/17/2006 002632 API WASTE SERVICES 61XOO061 R/O BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS.
R/O BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS.
010.4213.5303 297.92
Page: 3
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
4
Bank code: boa
Voucher
125059
125060
Date Vendor
2/17/2006 002632
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account Amount
Total: 297.92
PARK DEPOSIT- ELM ST PARK 1/22
PARK DEPOSIT- ELM ST PARK 1/22
010.0000.4354 29.00
Total: 29.00
BALANCE DUE FOR L1C. FEE-
BALANCE DUE FOR L1C. FEE-
010.4003.5319 10.00
Total: 10.00
MERLIN PHONES:
MERLIN PHONES:
010.4145.5403 41.22
Total: 41.22
COPY OF MAP
COPY OF MAP
010.4130.5201 10.73
Total: 10.73
ORTL Y PEST CONTROL: CITY HALL
ORTL Y PEST CONTROL: CITY HALL
010.4213.6401 98.00
Total: 98.00
PROTECTALL
PROTECTALL
010.4211.5601 59.52
MISC. PARTS & SUPPLIES
MISC. PARTS & SUPPLIES
010.4211.5601 60.82
SEAT KIT F201
SEAT KIT F201
010.4211.5601 59.81
002632 API WASTE SERVICES
(Continued)
2/17/2006 005407 AREVALO, CLEMENTE
021406
125061
2/17/2006 005315 ASCAP
500581207
125062
2/17/2006 002180 AVAYA,INC
2722951867
125063
2/17/2006 Q00078 BLUEPRINT EXPRESS
012006
125064
2/17/2006 000087 BREZDEN PEST CONTROL, INC
46494
125065
2/17/2006 000094 BRUMIT DIESEL, INC
85858
86272
86450
Page: 4
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
5
Voucher
Bank code: boa
Date Vendor
125065
125066
125067
125068
125069
125070
125071
2/17/2006 000094
000094 BRUMIT DIESEL, INC
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
180.15
580.81
308.88
889.69
125.00
125.00
13.79
13.79
202.03
202.03
1,111.86
1,111.87
2,223.73
194.95
194.95
2/17/2006 000096 BURTON'S FIRE, INC.
(Continued)
Total:
26455
LIGHT DISPLAY
LIGHT DISPLAY
010.4211.5601
TOE EYE-F108
TOE EYE-F108
010.4211.6301
28410
Total:
RENEWAL FOR LICENSE: D.SPAm
RENEWAL FOR LICENSE: D.SPAm
010.4301.5503
2/17/2006 000126 CA ST DEPT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS 42993
2/17/2006 000603 CAROUEST AUTO PARTS
2/17/2006 000154 CENTRAL COAST SOD
2/17/2006 005410 CENTRAL COAST SPRING & ALIGN.
2/17/2006 001990 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS
480052
Total:
ELECTRIC SWITCH FOR PW51
ELECTRIC SWITCH FOR PW51
612.4610.5601
Total:
57645
750 SO FT SOD-
750 SO FT SOD-
010.4420.5605
Total:
18487
ADDITION OF SPRINGS E6695
ADDITION OF SPRINGS E6695
010.4211.5601
ADDITION OF SPRINGS E6695
010.4211.5603
020206
Total:
IT BROADBAND CONNECTION
IT BROADBAND CONNECTION
010.4140,5303
Total:
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125072 2/17/2006 000163 CHERRY LANE NURSERY 16394 FERTILIZER
FERTILIZER
010.4430.5274 178.25
16400 FERTILIZER
FERTILIZER
010.4420.5274 59.42
16489 MULCH & SEED
MULCH & SEED
220.4303.5613 39.64
16530 FLATS IVY GERANIUMS
FLATS IVY GERANIUMS
010.4420.5605 29.71
16579 MULCH & NETTING
MULCH & NETTING
220.4303.5613 219.76
16649 SOD
SOD
010.4420.5605 970.34
16721 ROSE TREE
ROSE TREE
010.4420.5605 28.95
16725 MULCH
MULCH
010.4420.5605 12.85
Total: 1,538.92
125073 2/17/2006 002407 CINGULAR WIRELESS 123079092 CELL PHONE: ROB STRONG
CELL PHONE: ROB STRONG
010.4130.5201 62.37
Total: 62.37
125074 2/17/2006 001925 CLEARWATER COLOR NURSERY 39542 PLANTS-LANTANA
PLANTS-LANTANA
010.4420.5605 90.09
Total: 90.09
Page: 6
vch list Voucher List Page: 7
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125075 2/17/2006 004270 CMTA- CA MUNICIPAL 42276 MEMBERSHIP(KRAETSCH, HEAD, f
MEMBERSHIP(KRAETSCH, HEAD, f
010.4120.5503 145.00
Total: 145.00
125076 2/17/2006 000181 COMMUNICATION SOLUTIONS 3519 LEVEL TRANSDUCER
LEVEL TRANSDUCER
612.4610.5610 903.24
Total: 903.24
125077 2/17/2006 003703 CUELLAR, ANNETTE 021506 PARK DEPOSIT
PARK DEPOSIT
010.0000.4354 29.00
Total: 29.00
125078 2/17/2006 000196 CUESTA EQUIPMENT CO 315640 SHOVELS
SHOVELS
220.4303.5273 148.05
CLEANER
220.4303.5601 29.49
316526 COTTER PIN
COTTER PIN
220.4303.5603 183.18
Total: 360.72
125079 2/17/2006 005091 DEERE LANDSCAPES, JOHN 09237059 SPRINKLER NOZZLES
SPRINKLER NOZZLES
010.4420.5605 9.36
Total: 9.36
125080 2/17/2006 003449 ENVIRO CHEMICAL RESEARCH 121505 RELEASE MATERIAL
RELEASE MATERIAL
220.4303.5603 499.50
Freight
220.4303.5603 79.00
Total: 578.50
Pag~: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page: 8
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code : boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125081 2/17/2006 005408 ERRECALDE, KAROL 020906 WATER DEP.REFUND- 411 GOLDE!
WATER DEP.REFUND- 411 GOLDEI
640.0000.2302 60.52
Total: 60.52
125082 2/17/2006 000240 FARM SUPPLY CO 887157 COUPLING
COUPLING
010.4430.5605 37.10
898340 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4420.5605 34.71
Total: 71.81
125083 2/17/2006 001525 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC 1020219 6" REPAIR CLAMP
6" REPAIR CLAMP
640.4712.5610 127.63
1026678 METER GASKETS
METER GASKETS
640.4712.5610 100.28
Total: 227.91
125084 . 2/1712006 000262 FRANK'S LOCK & KEY, INC 23536 KEYS
KEYS
010.4420.5605 8.85
Total: 8.85
125085 2/17/2006 000605 GAS COMPANY, THE 2/07-910 GAS SERVICES: 910RANCHO PKV\
GAS SERVICES: 910 RANCHO PKV\
010.4145.5401 92.78
2/10-1375 GAS SERVICES: 1375 ASH ST
GAS SERVICES: 1375 ASH ST
010.4145.5401 444.32
2/1 0-350 GAS SERVICES: 350 S ELM ST
GAS SERVICES: 350 S ELM ST
010.4145.5401 329.06
Page: 8
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
9
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Dale Vendor
Invoice
PO# Description/Account Amount
GAS SERVICES: 140 TRAFFIC WY
GAS SERVICES: 140 TRAFFIC WY
010.4145.5401 1,047.98
GAS SERVICES: 200 E BRANCH ST
GAS SERVICES: 200 E BRANCH ST
010.4145.5401 70.54
GAS SERVICES: 208 E BRANCH ST
GAS SERVICES, 208 E BRANCH ST
010.4145.5401 52.40
GAS SERVICES: 214 E BRANCH ST
GAS SERVICES: 214 E BRANCH ST
010.4145.5401 129.17
GAS SERVICES: 215 E BRANCH ST
GAS SERVICES, 215 E BRANCH ST
010.4145.5401 31.74
GAS SERVICES: 1500 W BRANCH ~
GAS SERVICES: 1500 W BRANCH ~
010.4145.5401 9.21
GAS SERVICES: 200 N HALCYON
GAS SERVICES: 200 N HALCYON
010.4145.5401 322.37
Total: 2,529.57
ENGRAVING RADIOS
ENGRAVING RADIOS
010.4211.5603 104.57
Total: 104.57
TRAILER HITCH
TRAILER HITCH
010.4420.5601 81.51
HITCH
HITCH
010.4420.5601 93.31
125085
2/17/2006 000605 GAS COMPANY, THE
(Continued)
2/2-140
2/6-200 E
2/6-208
2/6-214
2/6-215
217-1500 W
2/9-200
125086
2/17/2006 000499 GRAND AWARDS, INC
60211
125087
2/17/2006 000301 HEACOCK TRAILERS & TRUCK
20548
20615
Page: 9
vchlist Voucher List Page: 10
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code : boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125087 2/17/2006 000301 000301 HEACOCK TRAILERS & TRUCK (Continued) Total: 174.82
125088 2/17/2006 000928 HI-TECH EMERGENCY 112881 MISC. PARTS & SUPPLIES
MISC. PARTS & SUPPLIES
010.4211.5601 390.04
112942 MISC PARTS & SUPPLIES
MISC PARTS & SUPPLIES
010.4211.5601 1,317.28
112969 MISC PARTS & SUPPLIES
MISC PARTS & SUPPLIES
010.4211.5601 140.53
Total: 1,847.85
125089 2/17/2006 002820 INDOFF,INC 643843 OFFICE SUPPLIES-SEWER
OFFICE SUPPLIES-SEWER
612.4610.5201 60.41
OFFICE SUPPLlES- STREETS
220.4303.5201 29.88
Total: 90.29
125090 2/17/2006 000330 INFORMATION TECH DEPT 4415 CONSUL TING- NETWORK MIGRATI
CONSUL TING- NETWORK MIGRA TI
010.4140.5303 771.82
Total: 771.82
125091 2/17/2006 000344 J C LANDSCAPING JANUARY LANDSCAPE MAINT.- JAN 2006
LANDSCAPE MAINT.- JAN 2006
010.4420.5303 460.00
LANDSCAPE MAl NT.
217.4460.5355 165.00
LANDSCAPE MAl NT.
217.4460.5356 125.00
Total: 750.00
125092 2/1712006 000348 J W ENTERPRISES 180069 TOILET RENTAL
TOILET RENTAL
220.4303.5552 95.73
Page: 10
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List .
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
11
Voucher
Bank code: boa
PO#
125092
125093
125094
125095
125096
125097
Date Vendor
Invoice
Description/Account
Amount
95.73
957.50
957.50
33.56
33.56
22,140.10
22,140.10
501.35
20.31
521,66
841.91
202.71
19.31
101.89
2/17/2006 000348
000348 J W ENTERPRISES
(Continued)
Total:
2/17/2006 002880 LAND CONSERVANCY, THE 10 & 11
CONSULTING
SAVING SPECIAL FARMS IN AG
010.4130.5303
2/17/2006 005202 LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC 254637
Total:
SIREN PARK DEACTIVATOR-F318
SIREN PARK DEACTIVATOR-F318
010.4211.6301
Total:
2/17/2006 005069 MALlBU-PACIFIC TENNIS COURTS PW 2004-02
THEIS/KEISLER TENNIS COURTS
THEIS/KEISLER TENNIS COURTS
350.5524.7001
Total:
2/17/2006 000893 MASTERPIECE ENGINEERING 56632
PARTS FOR CONCRETE SAW SHAI
PARTS FOR CONCRETE SAW SHAI
220.4303.5603
Freight
220.4303.5603
Total:
2/17/2006 000426 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS 107757
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002
WEED BARRIER
220.4303.5613
GORILLA HAIR- SHREDDED
GORILLA HAIR- SHREDDED
010.4420.5605
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002
107981
108038
Page: 11
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
12
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
125097
2/17/2006 000426 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS (Continued)
108108
108325
CONCRETE POND- REPAIR AT SOl
CONCRETE POND- REPAIR AT SOl
010.4430.5605
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002
GRANITE
GRANITE
010.4420.5605
TEE MIX
TEE MIX
010.4420.5605
TEE MIX
TEE MIX
010.4420.5605
TEE MIX
TEE MIX
010.4420.5605
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002
TEE MIX
TEE MIX
010.4420.5605
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002
TEE MIX
TEE Mix
01li.4420.5605
TEE MIX
TEE MIX
010.4430.5605
57.92
368.94
108343
57.92
108350
72.93
108365
72.93
108372
72.93
108467
107.25
108519
18.23
108525
148.01
108553
36.47
108574
2,187.90
Page: 12
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Vougher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
13
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
POI
Description/Account
Amount
125097
2/17/2006 000426 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS (Continued)
108595
TURF RENOVATION
TURF RENOVATION
010.4430.5605
TURF RENOVATION
TURF RENOVATION
010.4430.5605
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002
108614
108718
Total:
125098
2/17/2006 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 061786
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4213.5604
FUNNEL
FUNNEL
640.4712.5273
BUSHING
BUSHING
612.4610.5610
CREDIT- PVC
CREDIT- PVC
612.4610.5610
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4213.5604
72083
72699
72740
86174
Total:
125099
2/17/2006 005409 MORENO, RICARDO
021406
W/C- COMMUNITY CENTER-
W/C- COMMUNITY CENTER-
010.0000.2206
SUPERVISION 21.25 HRS @ $9.00
010.0000.4355
Total:
1,458.60
1,458.60
326.04
7,610.49
16.57
4.82
7.49
-5.89
4.28
27.27
250.00
-191.25
58.75
Page: . 13
vchlist Voucher List Page: 14
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125100 2/17/2006 000441 MULLAHEY FORD FOCS163767 OIL CHANGE/SERVICE B-3
OIL CHANGE/SERVICE B-3
010.4213.5601 31.65
Total: 31.65
125101 2/17/2006 000466 NOBLE SAW, INC 145112 POWER BLOWER-SHOP
POWER BLOWER-SHOP
010.4420.5603 154.44
Total: 154.44
125102 2/17/2006 000468 OFFICE DEPOT 324069739-001 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4130.5201 65.83
Total: 65.83
125103 2/17/2006 001886 OFFICEMAX -HSBC BUS.SOLUTIONS 06502J0101 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4211.5201 4.17
Total: 4.17
125104 2/17/2006 000472 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE INC 00052216 HITCH PINS
HITCH PINS
010.4420.5603 17.73
Total: 17.73
125105 2/17/2006 003363 RIPPY, NINA 021406 BALLET-JAZZ FOR KIDS(FEB 2006)
BALLET-JAZZ FOR KIDS(FEB 2006)
010.4424.5351 341.95
Total: 341.95
125106 2/17/2006 002932 RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP 464939 PROF. LEGAL SERV.-THROUGH12/,
PROF. LEGAL SERV.-THROUGH12/,
284.4103.5303 64.50
Total: 64.50
125107 2/17/2006 000575 SANTA MARIA TIRE, INC 533376 TIRES B405
Page: 14
vchlist Voucher List Page: 15
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125107 2/17/2006 000575 SANTA MARIA TIRE, INC (Continued)
TIRES B405
010.4212.5601 363.54
Total: 363.54
125108 2/17/2006 003108 SBC/MCI T4639560 PC PHONE LINE
PC PHONE LINE
010.4145.5403 28.38
T4648241 473-0379: PAYROLL
473-0379: PAYROLL
010.4145.5403 14.35
T4e48252 473-5100
473-5100
010.4145.5403 950.21
T4648254 473-5400
473-5400
010.4145.5403 1,704.12
Total: 2,697,06
125109 2/17/2006 001685 SIGNTECH 15148 REFLECTIVE VINYL STRIPES-EXPE
REFLECTIVE VINYL STRIPES-EXPE
010.4211.6301 538.75
Total: 538.75
125110 2/17/2006 004592 SLOCAPRA 0216 COMMISSIONERS WORKSHOP
COMMISSIONERS WORKSHOP
010.4420.5501 30.00
Total: 30.00
125111 2/17/2006 002327 SOFTCHOICE CORPORATION 1016034 IT L1CENSES- NETWORK MIGRATIC
IT L1CENSES- NETWORK MIGRATf(
010.4140.6101 9,544.19
1017624 IT L1CENSES- NETWORK MIGRATIC
IT L1CENSES- NETWORK MIGRATIC
010.4140.6101 28.95
Total: 9,573.14
Page: 15
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
16
Voucher
Bank code: boa
PO#
125112
125113
125114
125115
125116
Date Vendor
Invoice
Description/Account
Amount
102.89
200.40
102.89
406.18
62.31
62.31
171.60
171.60
.28.10
28.10
52.87
53.23
64.35
2/17/2006 003641 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC 1327491
DUMPSTERS - RANCHO GRANDE F
DUMPSTERS - RANCHO GRANDE F
010.4213.5303
DUMPSTERS - FIRE STATION
DUMPSTERS - FIRE STATION
010.4213.5303
DUMPSTERS - STROTHER PARK
DUMPSTERS - STROTHER PARK
010.4213.5303
1329845
1332302
Total:
2/17/2006 000620 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY
437469
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4430.5605
2/17/2006 002837 STRONG, ROB
Total:
REIMBURSEMENT FOR APA OCT 2
REIMBURSEMENT FOR APA OCT 2
010.4130.5501
013006
Total:
2/17/2006 000624 SUPERIOR QUALITY COPIERS, INC
33028
STAPLES FOR COPIER
STAPLES FOR COPIER
010.4130.5201
Total:
2/17/2006 002370 TITAN INDUSTRIAL
1010169
RAIN COVERALLS-IAN BENNETT
RAIN COVERALLS-IAN BENNETT
640.4712.5255
MISC. PARTS & SUPPLIES
MISC. PARTS & SUPPLIES
010.4211.5601
LATEX GLOVES
LATEX GLOVES
612.4610.5255
1010178
1010209
Page: 16
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
17
Bank code: boa
Voucher
125116
Date Vendor
2/17/2006 002370 TITAN INDUSTRIAL
Invoice
PO# Description/Account Amount
RUBBER BOOT liNERS
RUBBER BOOT liNERS
612.4610.5255 22.80
SAFETY GLASSES
SAFETY GLASSES
640.4712.5255 51.35
VISION AID LENS CLEANER
VISION AID LENS CLEANER
612.4610.5255 4.83
REFLECTIVE SAFETY JACKET
REFLECTIVE SAFETY JACKET
612.4610.5255 74.00
Total: 323.43
CONCRETE
CONCRETE
350.5632.7002 506.02
Total: 506.02
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
220.4303.5613 583.91
Total: 583.91
PURCHASE CD W/REDDING BANK
PURCHASE CD W/REDDING BANK
010.4145.5508 174.90
Total: 174.90
HYDRANT DIFFUSER
HYDRANT DIFFUSER
640.4712.5610 66.32
Freight
640.4712.5610 12.72
(Continued)
1010235
1010236
1010301
1010332
125117
2/17/2006 000650 TROESH READY MIX, INC
88711
125118
2/17/2006 000669 UNION ASPHALT, INC
221338
125119
2/17/2006 005326 UNITED PORTFOliO MGT INC
18761
125120
2/17/2006 000660 USA BLUE BOOK
111007
Page: 17
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
18
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO# Description/Account Amount
VALVE TUBING
VALVE TUBING
640.4711.5603 148.72
Freight
640.4711.5603 13.55
Total: 241.31
CELL PHONE
STREET SUPREVISOR
220.4303.5403 69:00
PW INSPECTOR
010.4301.5403 34.50
ENGINEER
010.4301.5403 34.50
Total: 138.00
PAGERS
FIRE
010.4211.5403 22.65
BLDG
010.4212.5403 11.32
IT PAGER MONTHLY CHARGE
IT PAGER MONTHLY CHARGE
010.4140.5303 11.32
Total: 45.29
CONSULTANT SERV FOR BRISCO/I
CONSULTANT SERV FOR BRISCO/I
350.5642.7701 7,889.77
Total: 7,889.77
Bank total: 84,690.79
Total vouchers : 84,690.79
125120
2/17/2006 000660 USA BLUE BOOK
(Continued)
111202
125121
2/17/2006 002137 VERIZON WIRELESS
2013024779
125122
2/17/2006 002000 VERIZON WIRELESS MESSAGING SVC L5245715GB
L5252720GB
125123
2/17/2006 004897 WOOD RODGERS
43127
80 Vouchers for bank code: boa
80 Vouchers in this report
Page: 18
vchlist
02/17/2006 9:47:47AM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
19
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
Page: 19
ATTACHMENT 3
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION
PAY PERIOD
01/27/06 - 0219/06
02/17/06
FUND 010
FUND 220
FUND 284
FUND 612
FUND 640
360,164.45
15,189.29
5101
5102
5103
5105
5107
5108
5109
5110
5111
5112
5113
5114
5115
5121
5122
5123
5126
5127
5131
5132
5133
5134
5135
5143
5144
5146
5147
5148
5149
5150
6,702.25
19,176.28
401,232.27
Salaries Full time
Salaries Part-Time - PPT
Salaries Part-Time - TPT
Salaries OverTime
Salaries Standby
Holiday Pay
Sick Pay
Annual Leave Buyback
Vacation Buyback
Sick Leave Buyback
Vacation Pay
Comp Pay
Annual Leave Pay
PERS Retirement
Social Security
PARS Retirement
State Disability Ins.
Deferred Compensation
Health Insurance
Dental Insurance
Vision Insurance
Life Insurance
Long Term Disability
Uniform Allowance
Car Allowance
Council Expense
Employee Assistance
Boot Allowance
Motor Pay
Bi-Lingual Pay
212,438.58
20,763.26
6,693.30
10,043.14
352.50
772.23
4,102.54
6,423.30
3,549.97
2,238.97
69,901.29
19,074.46
368.42
1,084.27
775.00
34,585.14
4,291.77
953.61
751.28
1,054.54
500.00
239.70
75.00
200.00
401,232.27
A TT ACHMENT 4
vchlist
02/21/2006 2:18:03PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
1
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
438 ORAL BOARD SUPPLIES
ORAL BOARD SUPPLIES
010.4301.5316 11.00
MILEAGE
010.4101.5501 14.55
439 MAYOR'S MEETING
MAYOR'S MEETING
010.4001.5501 20.98
440 MEETING EXP/CAL POLY PARKING
MEETING EXP/CAL POLY PARKING
010.4130.5501 4.00
442 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4130.5201 13.93
443 MILEAGE: TRAFFIC COMM.
MILEAGE: TRAFFIC COMM.
010.4301.5501 8.10
444 MILEAGE: M.BASSETT
MILEAGE: M.BASSETT
010.4101.5501 30.55
445 ASCE LUNCH MEETING
ASCE LUNCH MEETING
010.4301.5503 30.00
446 HRACC MEETING
HRACC MEETING
010.4101.5501 29.55
447 MEETING EXP/D.SPAGNOLO
MEETING EXP/D.SPAGNOLO
010.4301.5255 17.00
448 WATER
WATER
010.4145.5201 13.84
ORAL BOARD SUPPLIES
010.4120.5316 21.04
125127
2/21/2006 000492 PETTY CASH
Page: 1
vchlist .
02/21/2006 2:18:03PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
2
Bank code: boa
Voucher
125127
Date Vendor
2/21/2006 000492 PETTY CASH
Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
(Continued)
449 OFFICE EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4301.5201 8.57
450 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
640.4712.5610 2.00
451 OFFICE EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4101.5201 20.38
452 MILEAGE
MILEAGE
640.4712.5501 14.99
453 APWA LUNCH MTG
APWA LUNCH MTG
010.4301.5503 20.00
454 HRACC MEETING
HRACC MEETING
010.4101.5501 38.35
455 MSA DINNER/SEMINAR
MSA DINNER/SEMINAR
220.4303.5501 20.00
456 APWA MEETING/LUNCH
APWA MEETING/LUNCH
010.4301.5503 20.00
457 LUNCH MEETING SUPPLIES
LUNCH MEETING SUPPLIES
010.4301.5503 18.30
458 PEST CONTROL REGIST.FEE
PEST CONTROL REGIST.FEE
010.4420.5303 10.00
459 PARKING FEES
PARKING FEES
010.4101.5501 6.75
Page: 2
vchlist ..
02/21/2006 2:18:03PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
3
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
(Continued)
460
PO# Description/Account Amount
SAFETY COMM SUPPLIES
SAFETY COMM SUPPLIES
010.4145.5501 8.75
FILING FEES
FILING FEES
010.4002.5201 6.00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4101.5319 6.87
MILEAGE
MILEAGE
010.4301.5255 8.90
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4301.5201 3.21
REGISTERED MAIL
REGISTERED MAIL
010.4421.5303 8.29
PARKING/ASCE LUNCH MTG
PARKING/ASCE LUNCH MTG
010.4301.5501 3.00
LUNCH MEETING
010.4301.5503 30.00
Total: 468.90
POSTAGE FOR METER
POSTAGE FOR METER
010.4145.5201 10.93
Total: 10.93
FIVE CITIES SHUTTLE SERVICE
FIVE CITIES SHUTTLE SERVICE
225.4553.5511 1,049.59
Total: 1,049.59
473-0386-LONG DISTANCE FAX
125127
2/21/2006 000492 PETTY CASH
461
462
463
464
465
125128
2/21/2006 000975 PITNEY BOWES PURCHASE POWER 011706
125129
2/21/2006 005411 REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY 7460-06.006
125130
2/21/2006 003108 SSC/MCI T4648242
Page: 3
vchlist "
02/21/2006 2:18:03PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
4
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
125131
2/21/2006 000602 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT DIST
123105
PO# Description/Account Amount
473-0386-LONG DISTANCE FAX
010.4145.5403 19.25
Total: 19.25
SEWER COLLECTIONS DEC 2005
SEWER SVC COLL- 12/05
760.0000.2304 55,484.47
SEWER HOOKUPS-12/05
760.0000.2305 8,400.00
SAN.DIST- 203 N.RENA- 12/05
010.4145.5401 13.47
SAN.DIST-ASH R/RM-12/05
010.4145.5401 13.47
HANDLlNG-HOOKUPS- 6/05-12/05
010.0000.4753 -6,819.84
HANDLlNG-HOOKUPS-06/05.12/05
010.0000.4753 -72.00
Total: 57,019.57
Bank total: 58,568.24
Total vouchers : 58,568.24
125130
2/21/2006 003108 SBC/MCI
(Continued)
5 Vouchers for bank code: boa
5 Vouchers in this report
Page: 4
ATTACHMENT 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125132 2/22/2006 002697 EARTHLlNK, INC 247428715 INTERNET SERV: DEC 21 TO JAN 2
INTERNET SERV: DEC 21 TO JAN 2
010.4201.5607 45.90
Total: 45.90
125133 2/22/2006 002949 LEWIS PARTNERS, INC, BILL 022106 REGISTRATION FEES: TONY AEIL T
REGISTRATION FEES: TONY AEIL T
010.4201.5501 570.00
Total: 570.00
125134 2/22/2006 005412 AEILTS, TONY 0221 LODGING/PER DIEM FOR SEMINAF
LODGING/PER DIEM FOR SEMINAF
010.4201.5501 397.20
Total: 397.20
125135 2/24/2006 000013 AIR-VOL BLOCK, INC 208315 COUNTRY STONE RETAINING WAl
COUNTRY STONE RETAINING WAl
010.4420.5605 357.11
208391 COUNTRY STONE RETAINING WAl
COUNTRY STONE RETAINING WAl
010.4420.5605 67.16
Total: 424,27
125136 2/24/2006 001050 AMERICAN TEMPS 00043546 PAYROLL DATES: 1/30 TO 2/3/06
T.ALLEN
220.4303.5303 1,171.60
00043588 PAYROLL DATES: 2/6 TO 2/10/06
T.ALLEN
220.4303.5303 1,171.60
Total: 2,343.20
125138 2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS F014891 JACKET-KORD
JACKET-KORD
010.4430.5143 39.67
Page:
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
2
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
125138
2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS
(Continued)
F014893
JACKET- PETE
JACKET-PETE
010.4420.5143
FIRE DEPT COVERALLS
FIRE DEPT COVERALLS
010.4211.5272
JACKET-MARK
JACKET-MARK
010.4420.5143
COVERALLS - HERON
COVERALLS - HERON
220.4303.5143
FIRE DEPT MATS
FIRE DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
POLICE DEPT MATS
POLICE DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
RECREATION CENTER MATS
RECREATION CENTER MATS
010.4213.5303
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
612.4610.5143
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
220.4303.5143
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
640.4712.5143
ENGINEERiNG DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4301.5143
37.53
F014908
67.54
F015608
42.89
F016930
61.13
F546786
21.15
F564445
12.13
F564446
21.50
F 56444 7
5.60
F564448
14.00
F564449'
14.00
1.40
Page: 2
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
3
Bank code: ' boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS
125138
Invoice
po#
Description/Account
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4420.5143
SOTO UNIFORMS
010.4430.5143
CORP YARD MATS
CORP YARD MATS
010.4213.5303
BUILDING MAl NT. UNIFORMS
010.4213.5143
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS '
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
010.4305.5143
FIRE DEPT MATS
FIRE DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
BUILDING DEPT MATS
BUILDING DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
CITY HALL MATSfTOWELS
CITY HALL MATSfTOWELS
010.4213.5303
ENGINEERING DEPT MATS
ENGINEERING DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
COMM CENTER MATS
COMM CENTER MATS
010.4213.5303
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
612.4610.5143
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
220.4303.5143
Amount
27.48
2.80
11.03
2.80
10.41
21.15
6,31
10.75
5.00
9.45
5.60
14.00
(Continued)
F564450
F564451
F564452 '
F570349
F570352
F570353
F570354
F570355
F570357
F570358
Page: 3
vchlist
02/24/2006 12;07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
4
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
125138
2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS
(Continued)
F570359
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
640.4712.5143
ENGINEERING DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4301.5143
PARKS DEPT UNiFORMS
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4420.5143
SOTO UNIFORMS
010.4430.5143
BUILDING MAINT UNIFORMS
BUILDING MAINT UNIFORMS
010.4213.5143
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
010.4305.5143
POLICE DEPT MATS
POLICE DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
RECREATION CENTER MATS
RECREATION CENTER MATS
010.4213.5303
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
612.4610.5143
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
220.4303.5143
ENGINEERING DEPT UNIFORMS
ENGINEERING DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4301.5143
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
640.4712.5143
F570360
F570361
F570363
F576231
F576232
F576233
F576234
F576235
12.60
1.40
19.60
2.80
2.80
4.11
12.13
21.50
5.60
14.00
1.40
12.60
Page: 4
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
5
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
125138
2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS
(Continued)
F576236
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4420.5143
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4430.5143
BUILDING MAINT UNIFORMS
BUILDING MAINT UNIFORMS
010.4213.5143
CORP YARD MATS
010.4213.5303
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
010.4305.5143
FIRE DEPT MATS
FIRE DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
BUILDING DEPT MATS
BUILDING DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
CITY HALL MATSITOWELS
CITY HALL MATSITOWELS
010.4213.5303
ENGINEERING DEPT MATS
ENGINEERING DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
COMM CENTER MATS
COMM CENTER MATS
010.4213.5303
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
612.4610.5143
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
220.4303.5143
27.48
2.80
F576237
2.80
11.03
F576238
10.41
F582164
21.15
F582167
6.31
F582168
10.75
F582169
5.00
F582170
9.45
F582172
5.60
F582173
14.00
Page: 5
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
6
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO#
Description/Account
Amount
125138
2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS
(Continued)
F582174
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
640.4712.5143
ENGINEERING DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4301.5143
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4420.5143
SOTO UNIFORMS
010.4430.5143
BUILDING MAINT UNIFORMS
BUILDING MAl NT UNIFORMS
010.4213.5143
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
010.4305.5143
POLICE DEPT MATS
POLICE DEPT MATS
010.4213.5303
RECREATION CENTER MATS
RECREATION CENTER MATS
010.4213.5303
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS
612.4610.5143
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
STREET DEPT UNIFORMS
220.4303.5143
ENGINEERING DEPT UNIFORMS
WATER DEPT UNIFORMS
640.4712.5143 '
ENGINEERING DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4301.5143
F582175
F582176
F582177
F588045
F588046
F588047
F588048
F588049
14.00
1.40
19.60
2.80
2.80
4.11
12.13
21.50
5.60
16.80
11.20
1.40
Page: 6
vchlist Voucher List Page: 7
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125138 2/24/2006 003817 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS (Continued)
F588050 PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS
010.4420.5143 27.48
SOTO UNIFORMS
010.4430.5143 2.80
F588051 CORP YARD MATS
CORP YARD MATS
010.4213.5303 11.03
CORP YARD MATS
010.4213.5143 2.80
F588052 AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS
010.4305.5143 10.41
Total: 870.50
125139 2/24/2006 004161 APCO MMBR# 227104 MEMBERSHIP: NANETTE PENNOCI
MEMBERSHIP' NANETTE PENNOCI
010.4201.5503 108.00
Total: 108.00
125140 2/24/2006 000042 ARROYO GRANDE FLOWER SHOP 24914 FLOWERS: GBPD
FLOWERS: GBPD
010.4201.5504 62.21
Total: 62.21
125141 2/24/2006 000056 BACKYARD IMPROVEMENT CTR, INC 612 PIPE
PIPE
220.4303.5613 94.25
Total: 94.25
125143 2/24/2006 000058 BANK OF AMERICA 2/8-2031 FUELfTRAVEUMEETINGS
Page: 7
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
8
Bank code: boa
Voucher
125143
Date Vendor
2/24/2006 000058 BANK OF AMERICA
Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
(Continued)
FUEL- LEAGUE OF CITIES MEETIN(
010.4211.5501 74.92
LODGING-LEAGUE OF CITIES MEE
010.4211.5501 86.10
ANNUAL FIREFIGHTER AWARDS C
010.4211.5255 1,344.00
STAFF MEETING
010.4211.5501 43.52
2/8-2059 MISC
RSVP RECOGNITION
010.4211.5504 100.00
REGISTRATION FOR CA FIRE MEC
010.4211.5501 480.00
FUEL
010.4211.5501 21.74
2/8-2083 MISC
NATIONAL NOTARY EXAM-MEN DO;
010.4130.5501 268.83
OFFICE MAX-OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4130.5201 42.89
RESTAURANT-RUS DIRECTORS M'
010.4130.5501 20.00
SHARED PARKING- BOOK
010.4130.5503 81.90
BOND COPY
010.4130.5201 9.92
REST.RS WITH J.LlNE & B.SWAGG
010.4130.5501 44.00
LEAGUE OF CA CITIES-CONF. RS
010.4130.5501 490.00
Page: 8
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
9
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
(Continued)
2/8-2091 SUPPLIES/ MEETINGS
GINA'S - MEETING FOR ORAL BOAI
010.4120.5201 52.90
OFFICE MAX- STENO MANAGERS (
010.4101.5201 232.76
SUPPLIES
010.4101.5201 47.95
MIS-SUPPLIES
010.4140.5602 113.95
SUPPLIES
010.4140.5602 65.41
BRANCH STREET DELI-MEETING
010.4101.5201 18.09
SUPPLIES
010.4101.5319 284.30
ALBERTSONS-SUPPLlES
010.4101.5319 84.76
2/8-2581 OFFICE EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
010.4301.5201 323.81
CONFERENCE FOR D.SPAGNOLO
010.4301.5501 460.00
WATER PROGRAM
640.4712.5501 10.00
2/8-7762 SUPPLIES
MISC SUPPLIES
010.4425.5255 543.46 ,-
SNACK SUPPLIES
010.4425.5259 242.23
SPECIAL EVENTS: VOLUNTEER BA
010.4424.5252 138.40
125143
2/24/2006 000058 BANK OF AMERICA
Page: 9
vchlist Voucher List Page: 10
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125143 2/24/2006 000058 BANK OF AMERICA (Continued)
2/8-9328 MEETING/BOOKS
MARGIE'S DINER-SLO COUNTY MT
010.4101.5501 12.40
LOCC-CITIBOOKS-CODE OF ETHIC
.' 010.4101.5501 5.00
2/8-9436 TRAVEL
PILOT/FUEL FOR RENTAL CAR-MA'
010.4001.5501 24.26
SHERATON GRAND HOTEL-LOCC:
010.4001.5501 4.00
HOTEL
010.4001.5501 367.20
FUEL
010.4001.5501 30.58
FLYERS 25/FUEL
010.4001.5501 20.94
HERTZ-RENTAL CAR-MAYOR FERF
010.4001.5501 170.84
2/8-9444 ORGANIZER REFILUCALENDAR
ORGANIZER REFILUCALENDAR
010.4002.5201 25.00
Total: 6,386.06
125144 2/24/2006 001917 BOB'S EXPRESS WASH JAN 2006 CAR WASH-PD
CAR WASH-PD
'010.4201.5601 196.00
CAR WASH
612.4610.5601 50.00
CAR WASH
640.4712.5601 50.00
Total: 296.00
125145 2/24/2006 000084 BOXX EXPRESS, THE 1088 UPS SHIPPING CHARGES- JAN 06
UPS SHIPPING CHARGES- JAN 06
010.4201.5201 37.21
Page: 10
vchlist Voucher List Page: 11
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125145 2/24/2006 000084 000084 BOXX EXPRESS, THE (Continued) Total: 37.21
125146 2/24/2006 000090 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER YARD 127122 BOLTS/NUTS FOR VALVE REPAIR
BOLTS/NUTS FOR VALVE REPAIR
640.4712.5610 2.68
127292 944 PAINT
944 PAINT
010.4201.5601 23.10
Total: 25.78
125147 2/24/2006 000134 CA ST DEPT OF JUSTICE 552800 FINGERPRINT CHECKS-DEC 2005
POLlCE- BIDDLE
010.4201.5324 32.00
CITY- DICKEY
010.4212.5315 32.00
IN/OUT
010.4201.5329 1,210.00
Total: 1,274.00
125148 2/24/2006 002488 CALBO - CA BUILDING OFFICIALS 022106 CALBO MEMBERSHIP
CALBO MEMBERSHIP
010.4212.5503 215.00
Total: 215.00
125149 2/24/2006 000603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 46551 GEN SET
GEN SET
010.4201.5601 36.73
48007 SPOT LIGHTS
SPOT LIGHTS
010.4201.5601 118.75
48859 INSULATED TERM AST
INSULATED TERM AST
010.4201.5601 14.01
Total: 169.49
125150 2/24/2006 004793 CFPI 022106 16TH ANNUAL FIRE PROTECTION-
Page: 11
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
12
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO# Description/Account Amount
16TH ANNUAL FIRE PROTECTION-
010.4212.5501 300.00
Total: 300.00
GLOVES
GLOVES
010.4211.5272 81.98
Freight
010.4211.5272 9.99
Total: 91.97
AUTO TRACK XP JAN 2006
AUTO TRACK XP JAN 2006
010.4201.5303 250.00
Total: 250.00
WATER SAMPLES: JAN 2006
WATER SAMPLES: JAN 2006
640.4710.5310 1.540.00
Total: 1,540.00
B/BALL LGE.SCORER.CONAWAY
BIBALL LGE.SCORER-CONAWAY
010.4424.5352 22.50
Total: 22.50
BOTTLED WATER
BOTTLED WATER
010.4212.5303 5.75
Total: 5.75
BLACK EQUIP. CASE FOR AIR BAG
BLACK EQUIP. CASE FOR AIR BAG
010.4211.6201 133.78
Total: 133.78
125150
2/24/2006 004793 CFPI
(Continued)
125151
2/24/2006 002509 CHIEF SUPPLY
418935
125152
2/24/2006 004440 CHOICEPOINT BUSINESS &
AB0001372783
125153
2/24/2006 000171 CLINICAL LABORATORY OF
743510
125154
2/24/2006 002389 CONAWAY. MARCUS
022106
125155
2/24/2006 000195 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER CO
1/31.48519
125156
2/24/2006 000198 CURTIS & SONS, L N
1095746-00
Page: 12
vchlist Voucher List Page: 13
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125157 2/24/2006 001840 DELL MARKETING LP K63042318 PRINTER CARTRIDGE FOR EXEC E
PRINTER CARTRIDGE FOR EXEC E
010.4201.5201 85.79
Total: 85.79
125158 2/24/2006 000217 DRIVERS LICENSE GUIDE CO 469114 2006 ID CHECKING GUIDE
2006 ID CHECKING GUIDE
010.4201.5255 28.90
Total: 28.90
125159 2/24/2006 000904 EDEN SYSTEMS, INC 3733 INFORUM GOLD UB CONVERSION
INFORUM GOLD UB CONVERSION
010.4120.5597 1,968.75
Total: 1,968.75
125160 2/24/2006 004164 FEDEX 3-324-78608 TRANSPORTATION CHARGES
TRANSPORTATION CHARGES
010.4212.5303 91.81
Total: 91.81
125161 2/24/2006 004790 FLOYD, DEANNA 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE SCORER
BASKETBALL LEAGUE SCORER
010.4424.5352 22.50
Total: 22.50
125162 2/24/2006 003590 FLOYD, SERENA 022106 B/BALL LGE.SCORER-FLOYD
B/BALL LGE.SCORER-FLOYD
010.4424.5352 45.00
Total: 45.00
125163 2/24/2006 001803 FORD QUALITY FLEET GSM500203-0001 054 MAINTENANCE
054 MAINTENANCE
010.4201.5601 103.59
GSM500203-0002 031 UO/S REPLACE PINION SEAL
031 UO/S REPLACE PINION SEAL
010.4201.5601 349.66
Page: 13
vchlist Voucher List Page: 14
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125163 2/24/2006 001803 FORD QUALITY FLEET (Continued)
GSM500203-0003 982 RT SIDE POWER WINDOW
982 RT SIDE POWER WINDOW
010.4201.5601 83.90
GSM500203-0004 991 BATTERY CONNECTOR
991 BATTERY CONNECTOR
010.4201.5601 168.75
GSM500203-0005 MONTHLY SERVICE FEES(SEPT &
MONTHLY SERVICE FEES(SEPT &
010.4201.5601 27.73
Total: 733.63
125164 2/24/2006 004825 GALBREATH, FLAVA 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREE
BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREE
010.4424.5352 162.00
Total: 162.00
125165 2/24/2006 000288 GROVER BEACH, CITY OF 021606 DOG OBEDIENCE-START DATE 2/1
DOG OBEDIENCE-START DATE 2/1
010.4424.5351 169.60
Total: 169.60
125166 2/24/2006 004789 HALE, KRAIG 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREE
BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREE
010.4424.5352 162.00
Total: 162.00
125167 2/24/2006 005272 HAMIL TON COATINGS 246669 PAINT- SCOREBOOTHS & DUG OU'
PAINT- SCOREBOOTHS & DUG OU'
010.4430.5255 232.73
248196 FIELD MARKING PAINT FOR SOTO
FIELD MARKING PAINT FOR SOTO
010.4430.5255 102.92
Total: 335.65
125168 2/24/2006 000301 HEACOCK TRAILERS & TRUCK 20800 944 REMOUNT TAILlGHTS & CHECI
Page: 14
vch list Voucher List Page: 15
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125168 2/24/2006 000301 HEACOCK TRAILERS & TRUCK (Continued)
944 REMOUNT TAILlGHTS & CHECI
010.4201.5601 114.55
Total: 114.55
125169 2/24/2006 000330 INFORMATION TECH DEPT 4405 ENTERPRISE USAGE & ACTIVE PO
ENTERPRISE USAGE & ACTIVE PO .
010.4201.5606 163.73
Total: 163.73
125170 2/24/2006 000342 IRA'S BIKE SHOP " 021406 SERVICE 3 POLICE BICYCLES
SERVICE 3 POLICE BICYCLES
010.4201.5255 59.42
Total: 59.42
125171 2/24/2006 000413 JONES & MAYER, LAW OFFICES OF 020106 PROF. SERVICES: JAN 2006
PROF. SERVICES: JAN 2006
010.4201.5303 323.75
Total: 323.75
125172 2/24/2006 005416 KING. ROCHELLE 2946336 REFUND GARNISHMENT OVERPA)
REFUND GARNISHMENT OVERPA)
011.0000.2114 10.22
Total: 10.22
125173 2/24/2006 005413 KURTZ, GEORGE 021006 WATER DEPOSIT REFUND
WATER DEPOSIT REFUND
640.0000.2302 54.88
Total: 54.88
125174 2/24/2006 000387 LINSON SIGNS 4855 021 REFURBISH "CITIZENS" CAR
021 REFURBISH "CITIZENS" CAR
010.4201.5601 684.00
Total: 684.00
125175 2/24/2006 001136 LINTNER. DOUG 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREE
Page: 15
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
16
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
125178
2/24/2006 000419 MIDAS MUFFLER & BRAKE
13042
PO# Description/Account Amount
BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREE
010.4424.5352 162.00
Total: 162.00
REIMBURSE PROPERTY TAXES P,A
REIMBURSE PROPERTY TAXES P,A
010.4145.5551 2,aOO.92
Total: 2,800.92
BASKETBALL LEAGUE OFFICIAL
BASKETBALL LEAGUE OFFICIAL
010.4424.5352 54.00
Total: 54.00
022 FRONT BRAKE PADS/ROTORS
022 FRONT BRAKE PADS/ROTORS
010.4201.5601 ag.87
021 UO/F POWER STEERING FLUS
021 UO/F POWER STEERING FLUS
010.4201.5601 31.47
041 UO/F BRAKE PADS/ROTORS
041 UO/F BRAKE PADS/ROTORS
010.4201.5601 364.84
011 UO/F LIGHT BULBS
011 L/O/F LIGHT BULBS
010.4201.5601 50.22
051 UO/F INSPECTION
051 UO/F INSPECTION
010.4201.5601 30.47
971 UO/F ROTORS/CALIPERS
971 UO/F ROTORS/CALIPERS
010.4201.5601 421.18
943 UO/F WHEEL CYLINDERS/BRA
943 L10/F WHEEL CYLINDERS/BRA
010.4201.5601 280.85
125175
2/24/2006 001136 LINTNER, DOUG
(Continued)
125176
2/24/2006 000407 MANKiNS FAMILY RENTALS
022106
125177
2/24/2006 005414 MC CLELLAN, STEVE
022106
13073
13084
13087
13101
13109
13123
Page: 16
vchlist Voucher List Page: 17
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125178 2/24/2006 000419 MIDAS MUFFLER & BRAKE (Continued)
13152 025 UO/F INSPECTION
025 UO/F INSPECTION
010.4201.5601 30.47
13153 022 INSPECT ROTORS
022 INSPECT ROTORS
010.4201.5601 100.00
Total: 1,399.37
125179 2/24/2006 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 72684 HAND TOOL
HAND TOOL
010.4420.5605 12.08
72717 CLAMP GROUND
CLAMP GROUND
010.4420.5605 4.28
72887 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
010.4420.5605 19.06
72933 TOOL BAG
TOOL BAG
010.4420.5601 15.00
73071 BULBS
BULBS
010.4213.5604 19.28
73097 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4420.5201 36.44
73172 CABINET DRAWER
CABINET DRAWER
010.4420.5605 13.93
73257 OUTDOOR PLANTS
OUTDOOR PLANTS
010.4420.5605 21.78
87338 COUPLE/ADAPTER
COUPLE/ADAPTER
010.4420.5605 5.39
Page: 17
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
18
Bank code: boa
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO# Description/Account Amount
PAINT SUPPLIES
PAINT SUPPLIES
010.4213.5604 17.98
Total: 165.22
AUDIT SERVICES
AUDIT SERVICES
010.4120.5303 1,950.00
Total: 1,950.00
LAMPS/LENS REPLACEMENTS P5
LAMPS/LENS REPLACEMENTS P5
010.4430.5601 212.33
971 REPAIR WARNING SYST.lAIR E
971 REPAIR WARNING SYST.lAIR E
010.4201.5601 258.12
032 UO/F
032 UO/F
010.4201.5601 40.49
022 BRAKES & DOOR SEALS
022 BRAKES & DOOR SEALS
010.4201.5601 293.29
031 UO/F
031 UO/F
010.4201.5601 30.77
052 MAINTENANCE
052 MAINTENANCE
010.4201.5601 60.55
062 2006 FORD L TO CROWN VICTC
0622006 FORD L TO CROWN VICTC
010.4201.6301 22,700.00
061 2006 FORD L TO CROWN ViCTC
061 2006 FORD L TO CROWN VICTC
010.4201.6301 22,700.00
125179
2/24/2006 000429 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC
(Continued)
87423
125180
2/24/2006 000439 MOSS, LEVY & HARTZHEIM
914
125181
2/24/2006 000441 MULLAHEY FORD
107761
FOCS162817
FOCS163792
FOCS163794
FOCS16437
FOCS 164504
STOCK# 35458
STOCK#35459
Page: 18
vchlist Voucher List Page: 19
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125181 2/24/2006 000441 000441 MULLAHEY FORD (Continued) Total: 46,295.55
125182 2/24/2006 000468 OFFICE DEPOT 322270096-001 2 STAMPS FOR RECORDS
2 STAMPS FOR RECORDS
010.4201.5201 51.46
323801280-001 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4120.5201 325.19
Total: 376.65
125183 2/24/2006 001886 OFFICEMAX -HSBC BUS.SOLUTIONS 03109J0191 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201 28.40
05221J0171 PENS
PENS
010.4201.5201 8.56
05699J0201 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201 72.89
08041J0221 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4120.5201 293.16
09479J0331 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201 87.67
Total: 490.68
125184 2/24/2006 000481 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 2/10-620838 ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC
612.4610.5402 161.13
2/10-781296 ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC
010.4145.5401 14.58
Total: 175.71
125185 2/24/2006 000497 PISMO BEACH, CITY OF 021506 MEETING EXPENSE- JOINT FIRE -
Page: 19
vchlist Voucher List Page: 20
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125185 2/24/2006 000497 PISMO BEACH, CITY OF (Continued)
MEETING EXPENSE- JOINT FIRE -
010.4001.5201 435.00
Total: 435.00
125186 2/24/2006 003979 QUALIFICATION TARGETS 20600085 TARGETS (1,000) & TARGET STAN[
TARGETS (1,000) & TARGET STAN[
010.4201.5255 710.00
Freight
010.4201.5255 191.70
Total: 901.70
125187 2/24/2006 000519 R & B AUTO BODY 012606 993 PREP PAiNT & TAILGATE
993 PREP PAINT & TAILGATE
010.4201.5601 400.00
Total: 400.00
125188 2/24/2006 002751 RANGE MASTER 108213 FLASHLIGHT BATTERIES
FLASHLIGHT BATTERIES
010.4201.5255 268.07
Total: 268.07
125189 2/24/2006 005415 RETIREMENT ACCOUNT 1105RAD PAPER/STOCK FOR INVITATIONS-
PAPER/STOCK FOR INVITATIONS-
010.4102.5255 881.90
PRINTING SERVICES/ SET UP ART'
010.4102.5306 297.50
Total: 1,179.40
125190 2/24/2006 000531 RICHETTI WATER CONDITIONING 40946 REVERSE OSMOSIS RENTAL: JAN
REVERSE OSMOSIS RENTAL: JAN
010.4201.5604 15.00
Total: 15.00
125191 2/24/2006 003031 ROBERTSON SUPPLY 5889 GLOVES
GLOVES
220.4303.5255 62.21
Page: 20
vchlist Voucher List Page: 21
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125191 2/24/2006 003031 003031 ROBERTSON SUPPLY (Continued) Total: 62.21
125192 2/24/2006 004833 ROMO, STEVE 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE OFFICIAL
BASKETBALL LEAGUE OFFICIAL
010.4424.5352 54.00
Total: 54.00
125193 2/24/2006 004365 RUIZ, DANIEL 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE SCORER
BASKETBALL LEAGUE SCORER
010.4424.5352 45.00
/ Total: 45.00
125194 2/24/2006 003649 RUiZ, DON 022106 BASKETBALL LEAGUE SCORER
BASKETBALL LEAGUE SCORER
010.4424.5352 45.00
Total: 45.00
125195 2/24/2006 002470 S & S HOMES OF THE 021406 OVERPAYMENT ON CLOSING BILL.
OVERPAYMENT ON CLOSING BILL.
640.0000.1110 141.82
Total: 141.82
125196 2/24/2006 000569 SAN LUIS PAINTS 434024 FIELDMARKING PAINT- SOCCER FI
FIELDMARKING PAINT- SOCCER FI
010.4430.5255 64.35
G02962 FIELDMARKING PAINT- SOTO SPOI
FIELDMARKING PAINT- SOTO SPOI
010.4430.5255 64.35
G03059 PAINT & BRUSHES- SOTO SPORTS
PAINT & BRUSHES- SOTa SPORTS
010.4430.5605 66.76
G04852 JASCO TERMINATE GREEN GAL
JASCO TERMINATE GREEN GAL
010.4213.5604 19.25
G04868 SOLID ACRYLIC DECK
SOLID ACRYLIC DECK
010.4213.5604 69.37
Page: 21
vch list Voucher List Page: 22
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125196 2/24/2006 000569 000569 SAN LUIS PAINTS (Continued) Total: 284.08
125197 2/24/2006 000479 SBC 2/7.0183 451-0183: RADIO
451-0183: RADIO
010.4145.5403 186.94
2/7 -3953 841-3953
841-3953
010.4211.5403 32.02
2/7-3959 841-3959: ALARM
841-3959: ALARM
640.4710.5403 32.02
2/8-3956 841-3956: ALARM
841-3956: ALARM
220.4303.5303 32.02
2/8-9816 489-9816: PAY PHONE
489-9816: PAY PHONE
010.4145.5403 52.03
Total: 335.03
125198 2/24/2006 003108 SBC/MCI T4624053 267-8633: 1/1 TO 2/06/06
267-8633: 1/1 TO 2/06/06
010.4145.5403 88.51
T4639558 489-2174: 1/1 TO 2/7/06
489-2174: 1/1 TO 2/7/06
010.4201.5403 28.36
T4648247 473-2198: 1/1 TO 2/10/06
473-2198: 1/1 TO 2/10/06
010.4201.5403 16.72
T4648264 481-6944: 1/1 TO 2/10/06
481-6944: 1/1 TO 2/10/06
010.4201.5403 125.83
Total: 259.42
125199 2/24/2006 000587 SEBASTIAN OIL DiSTRIBUTOR CFN90633 GASOLINE 1/16 TO 1/31/06
GASOLINE 1/16 TO 1/31/06
010.4201.5608 51.68
Page: 22
vchlist
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
23
Voucher
Bank code: boa
PO#
125199
125200
125201
125202
125203
Date Vendor
2/24/2006 000587
Invoice
Description/Account
Amount
51.68
3,029.73
3,029.73
54.00
54.00
150.55
363.16
99.14
612.85
279.91
-33.30
85.94
-11.57
000587 SEBASTIAN OIL DISTRIBUTOR
(Continued)
Total:
2/24/2006 003838 SILVAS OIL COMPANY, INC
297802
11 97 GALLONS #2 CARB RED DIES
1197 GALLONS #2 CARB RED DIES
010.0000.1202
Total:
2/24/2006 003591 SIMMER, RICHARD
022106
B/BALL LGE.OFFICIAL-SIMMER
B/BALL LGEOFFICIAL-SIMMER
010.4424.5352
Total:
2/24/2006 000564 SLO COUNTY NEWSPAPERS
6305037
PC 12/17/05
PC 12/17/05
010.4130.5301
ASST I AND BLDG COORDINATOR-
ASST I AND BLDG COORDINATOR-
010.4421.5316
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING-APPI
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING-APPI
010.4002.5301
6307292
6309260
Total:
2/24/2006 000612 STAPLES
AA10172001
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201
RETURN- OFFICE SUPPLIES
RETURN- OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201
RETURN- OFFICE SUPPLIES
RETURN- OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201
AA10172011
AG13631001
AG13631011
Page: 23
vchlist Voucher List Page: 24
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount
125203 2/24/2006 000612 STAPLES (Continued)
B304315001 OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
010.4201.5201 195.32
Total: 516.30
125204 2/24/2006 000613 STATEWIDE SAFETY & SIGNS 46974 SIGNS/CLAMPS
SIGNS/CLAMPS
220.4303.5613 328.70
Total: 328.70
125205 2/24/2006 000616 STERLING COMMUNICATIONS 21342 ACOUSTIC TUBE VI & ADAPTER
ACOUSTIC TUBE VI & ADAPTER
010.4201.5606 74.00
21343 INSTALL CLA JACK IN 011
INSTALL CLA JACK IN 011
010.4201.5606 128.12
21376 SERVICE AGREEMENT- MARCH 20
SERVICE AGREEMENT- MARCH 20
010.4201.5606 974.00
21393 HT 1000 BATTERY & UHF ANTENNI
HT 1000 BATTERY & UHF ANTENNI
010.4201.5606 223.08
21394 CHECKED 8 HT1000 RADIOS AND r
CHECKED 8 HT1000 RADIOS AND r
010.4201.5606 279.50
Total: 1,678.70
125206 2/24/2006 000620 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY 437523 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
010.4430.5605 21.86
437534 TAIL PIECE
TAIL PIECE
010.4430.5605 5.57
Total: 27.43
125207 2/24/2006 000623 SUNSET NORTH CAR WASH 689 CAR WASHES-PO
Page: 24
Page: 25
vchlist Voucher List Page: 26
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Bank code: boa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice POI Description/Account Amount
125211 2/24/2006 002468 TRIBUNE, THE 2526084 ONE YR SUBSCRIPTION
ONE YR SUBSCRIPTION
010.4301.5503 171.00
Total: 171.00
125212 2/24/2006 000650 TROESH READY MIX, INC 88879 CONCRETE OAK PARK
CONCRETE OAK PARK
. 350.5632.7002 818.42
Total: 818.42
125213 2/24/2006 004609 TROESH RECYCLING, INC 2865 CLASS #2 BASE
CLASS #2 BASE
220.4303.5613 109.76
Total: 109.76
125214 2/24/2006 000653 TRULOCK, DOTTIE 0216 DOG OBEDIENCE CLASSES-STARl
DOG OBEDIENCE CLASSES-STARl
010.4424.5351 1,100.80
Total: 1,100.80
125215 2/24/2006 000669 UNION ASP HAL T, INC 222772 COLD MIX
COLD MIX
220.4303.5613 868.31
Total: 868.31
125216 2/24/2006 000684 VILLAGE FRAMING 021806 FRAMING-PLAQUE FOR PROCLAM.
FRAMING-PLAQUE FOR PROCLAM,
010.4001.5504 251.18
Total: 251.18
125217 2/24/2006 000687 WAYNE'S TIRE, INC 755739 943 TIRES (2)
943 TIRES (2)
010.4201.5601 95.74
Total: 95.74
125218 2/24/2006 000866 WHARTON, JAMIE 022106 B/BALL LGE.SCORER-HEINZE
Page: 26
vch list
02/24/2006 12:07:23PM
Voucher List
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Page:
27
Bank code : boa
Voucher
125218
Date Vendor
2/24/2006 000866 WHARTON, JAMIE
Invoice
PO# Description/Account Amount
B/BALL LGESCORER-HEINZE
010.4424.5352 45.00
Total: 45.00
B/BALL LGESCORER-WHARTON
B/BALL LGESCORER-WHARTON
010.4424.5352 45.00
Total: 45.00
MONTHLY TRAINING JAN 2006
MONTHLY TRAINING JAN 2006
010.4201.5322 350.00
Total: 350.00
JANUARY UST INSPECTION
JANUARY UST INSPECTION
010.4305.5303 99.00
Total: 99.00
Bank total: 94,082.58
Total vouchers : 94,082.58
(Continued)
125219
2/24/2006 000865 WHARTON, RON
0221
125220
2/24/2006 000704 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS
T4988
125221
2/24/2006 004764 XCEL SERVICES GROUP, INC.
167
88 Vouchers for bank code: boa
88 Vouchers in this report
Page: 27
a.b.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2006
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Ferrara called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:04 p.rn.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council:
Council Members Jim Dickens, Joe Costello, Ed Arnold, Mayor Pro Tem
Jirn Guthrie and Mayor Tony Ferrara were present.
City Staff Present: .
City Manager Steve Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, Director of
. Administrative Services/City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Director of Public
Works/City Engineer Don Spagnolo, Director of Financial Services Angela
Kraetsch, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities Dan Hernandez, and
Community Development Director Rob Strong.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Charles Howell and Aimee Clayton, representing Veterans of Foreign Wars 2829, led the Flag
Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Pastor George Lepper, Peace Lutheran Church, delivered the invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
5.a. Honorary Proclamation Recognizing February 28,2006 as "Spay Day USA".
Mayor Ferrara presented an Honorary Proclamation recognizing February 28, 2006 as "Spay
Day USA". Darell Sisk, representing Feline Network, accepted the Proclamation.
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Ordinances Read in Title Only.
Council Member Dickens moved, Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read in title only and all further
reading be waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS
NOne.
8. CONSENT AGENDA
COUncil Member Costello moved, and Council Member Dickens seconded the motion to approve
Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.1., with the recommended courses of action. The motion
carried on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Costello, Dickens, Arnold, Guthrie, Ferrara
None' .
None
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
PAGE 2
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period January 16, 2006
. through January 31, 2006.
S.b. Consideration of Annual Adjustment of Impact Fees.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3903 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADJUSTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES BY
THE CHANGE IN THE ENGINEERING NEWS RECORD CONSTRUCTION COST
INDEX".
S.c. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Action: Approved the minutes of the Special City Council and Regular City
Council/Redevelopment Agency meetings of December 13, 2005, and the Regular City
Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting of January 10, 2006 as submitted.
S.d. Consideration of Rejection of Claim Against City - Brighton Ridge Homeowners
Association.
Action: Rejected claim.
S.e. Consideration of Rejection of Claim Against City - D. Powers..
Action: Rejected claim.
S.f. Consideration of a Resolution Approving a Side Letter of Agreement to the Arroyo
Grande Police Officers' Association Memorandum of Understanding.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3904 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING A SIDE LETTER OF AGREEMENT TO
THE ARROYO GRANDE POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING':.
S.g. Consideration to Install Continuous Traffic Count Equipment for City Traffic
Signals.
Action: 1) Directed staff to add continuous traffic Count equipment into the scope of
work for the Camino MercadolWest Branch Street Traffic Signal Project and negotiate a
change order accordingly with the contractor; 2) Directed staff to purchase a laptop
computer and specialty software to download vehicle count data; and 3) Appropriated
$2,800.00 from the Traffic Signalization Fund.
S.h. Consideration of Approval of Employment Agreement: City Manager.
Action: Approved the revised Employment Agreement between the City of Arroyo
Grande and Steven Adams and authorized an appropriation of $5,126 from the General
Fund.
8.i. Consideration of Acceptance of Rotary Bandstand.
Action: . Directed staff to file a Notice of Completion and authorized the Mayor to accept
the Rotary Bandstand constructed by the Rotary Club of Arroyo Grande at the Village
Green.
9. PUBLIC HEARING
9.a. Consideration of Proposed Traffic Way Tree Master Plan.
Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities Hernandez presented the staff report and
recommended the Council adopt the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission
to approve Phase 1 of the Traffic Way Tree Master Plan and continue Phases 2 and 3 pending
further discussions and revisions between the Tree Guild and Traffic Way business owners.
CITY COUNCILlREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
PAGE 3
Scott Dowlan, representing Tree Guild of Arroyo Grande, gave a PowerPoint presentation (on
file in the Administrative Services Department) which highlighted the City's General Plan policies
and objectives specifically relating to the use of consistent street trees in the Village Core area
along Station Way and Traffic Way; presented the Street Tree Master Plan for Traffic Way;
explained the proposals for implementing the Master Plan in three phases; presented the
Brisbane Box and London Plane as the designated street tree species; and reviewed planting
products, installation, and maintenance methods that would be used to minimize the potential for
future infrastructure repairs.
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who
wished to be heard on the matter.
Lvnn Titus, Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the proposed Traffic Way Tree Master Plan.
Chuck Fellows, Arroyo Grande, referred to the many street trees in San Luis Obispo; spoke of
the benefit of trees to businesses; and noted that once Phase 1 trees are in, the project could be
eligible for grant funds. He supported the proposed Traffic Way Tree Master Plan.
Nicki Cassidv. Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the proposed Traffic Way Tree Master Plan.
Garv SCherauest, co-chair of the Tree Guild of Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the Traffic
Way Tree Master Plan.
Lisa Woodward, Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the Traffic Way Tree Master Plan and noted
that the proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan.
Ben Rodstein, Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the proposed Traffic Way Tree Master Plan.
Marie Cattoir, Arroyo Grande, spoke in opposition to the proposed Traffic Way Tree Master Plan
and noted the negative impacts of the Plan to the business community.
Jean Bowser, owner of property on Traffic Way, spoke in support of the proposed Traffic Way
Tree Master Plan.
No further public comments were received and Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing.
Council comments and discussion ensued regarding concern about letters received from
business owners opposing the Master Plan; finding ways to balance ambience with signage,
visibility, and parking requirements of businesses; the benefits of approving Phase 1 and
continuing Phases 2 & 3; acknowledgement that the Master Plan is COnsistent with the goals of
the City's General Plan; the benefits of additional trees along Traffic Way; avoiding potential
sight, visibility, and safety issues; acknowledgement that it is extremely important to include
business owners as part of this process; a suggestion to involve property owners to get input for
the remaining phases of the Master Plan; a recommendation that the full Master Plan be
approved in a timely manner; a suggestion to tie in other improvements (i.e., sidewalks) with the
Master Plan; a suggestion that the Tree Guild communicate with the business oWners to tie in
other improvements and to address ingress/egress issues once trees are planted;
acknowledgement of the Tree Guild's research on recommended tree types in order to avoid
future maintenance issues: and not waiting to address other cOncerns including underground
utilities.
Council Member Dickens moved to adopt the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation
Commission to approve Phase 1 of the Traffic Way Tree Master Plan and continue Phases 2
and 3 pending further discussions and revisions with the Tree Guild and Traffic Way business
owners, and to further direct staff to return in 4 to 6 months with a recommendation for Phases 2
and 3. Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote:
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
PAGE 4
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Dickens, Costello, Arnold, Guthrie, Ferrara
None
None
Mayor Ferrara requested, and the City Council concurred, to move up Agenda Item 11.a. for
consideration priorto item 10.a.
11. NEW BUSINESS
11.a. Consideration of Modification to California Public Employees' Retirement System
(CALPERS) Contract.
Director of Financial Services Kraetsch presented the staff report and recommended the Council:
1) Introduce an Ordinance amending the contract with the California Public Employees'
Retirement System to implement the 3% at 55 PERS retirement plan for members of the Arroyo
Grande Career Firefighters; and 2) Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City
the Resolution of Intention to amend the contract with the California Public Employees'
Retirement System.
Mayor Ferrara invited those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter, and upon
hearing none, he closed the public comment period.
Council Member Costello moved to introduce an Ordinance as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
CONTRACT BETWEEN, THE CITY AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM". Council Member Arnold
seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Costello, Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Ferrara
None
None
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie moved to approve and authorize the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City
the Resolution of Intention as follows: "RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE". Council Member Costello seconded, and the motiOn passed
on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Guthrie, Costello, Dickens, Arnold, Ferrara
None
None,' .
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
PAGE 5
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS
10.a. 'Consideration of a Presentation of the Various Elements of the Brisco Road-
Halcyon Road/Route 101 Interchange Project and Funding Process.
Director of Public Works Spagnolo presented the staff report and recommended the Council
receive a presentation of the various elements of the Project Approval and Environmental
Determination for the Brisco Road-Halcyon Road 101 Interchange project.
Mark Ravback, Wood Rodgers, Inc., presented an overview of the Brisco Road - Halcyon
Road/Route 101 Interchange Improvement Alternatives and the current status of the project.
James Worth lev, SLOCOG representative, gave an overview of the grant funding process and
the current funding status of the proposed Interchange project.
Director Spagnolo then presented the City's strategy to address the financial issues involved with
the project and efforts to pursue alternate funding sources to reduce the project timeline
schedule.
Mayor Ferrara invited those in the audience who wished to be heard On the matter.
Steve Ross, Arroyo Grande resident and Traffic Commissioner, stated it would be a disservice to
the community by closing any of the on and off-ramps at Brisco Road, and suggested realigning
the way traffic is directed, especially to the shopping center. He commented on the alternatives
that were presented and noted that the problem with traffic movernent under Brisco Road is
related to how Caltrans synchronizes the traffic signals. He also suggested various concepts for
the project that would eliminate stacking of vehicles, as well as a continUOUS lane to provide
direct access On 101 from Brisco to the Camino MercadolW. Branch intersection. He favored
widening Brisco in the underpass to eliminate the need for an overpass.
Upon hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public comment period.
Council comments and discussion ensued including acknowledgement of the financial
challenges facing the City for funding this Interchange project; thanking staff for the
comprehensive status report of the Interchange project;. and comments regarding the
alternatives presented and the need to continue moving forward with determining specific
features of each alternative so that the City is ready to build when funding becomes available.
There was further discussion about proposing a Caltrans design exception for the alignment of
W. Branch Street at Grand Avenue; discussion about the potential temporary closing of the on
and off ramps at Brisco Road to observe traffic behavior prior to making permanent modifications
at this location; as well as the importance of public educatiOn regarding the project as it
proceeds.
There was no formal action On this item.
Mayor Ferrara called a break at 9:30 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:40 a.m.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
PAGE 6
11.b. Consideration of Relocation of Viacom Outdoor Billboard, 145 West Branch Street.
Community Development Director Strong presented the staff report and recommended the
Council adopt a Resolution approving the Billboard relocation, but requiring removal on or before
August 11, 2011.
Mayor Ferrara invited those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter.
GreG Nester, property owner, spoke in support and noted that the proposal to relocate the
billboard is the best solution that meets both parties needs and represents a compromise
between both parties.
Mark Duran, representing Viacom, spoke in support and agreed that the proposal was the best
solution for all three parties: theCity, the property owner, and Viacom.
Upon hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public comment period.
Council comments included opposition to the proposal to relocate the billboard; an observation
that the proposed new location for the billboard is also an important entrance to the Village of
Arroyo Grande; reference to Municipal Code Section 16.48.110.B.3. relating to modification or
expansion of nonconforming uses; acknowledgement that the ultimate goal is to remove the
billboard from the site entirely; acknowledgement that the City has nO control over the content of
the billboard; an unwillingness to delay implementation of the Traffic Way Tree Master Plan for
the purpose of relocating the billboard; that the proposal should have been presented in
conjunction with a project for the subject property; and general consensus that the relocation of
the billboard is more intrusive than where it is currently located.
Council Member Arnold moved to deny the request for on-site relocation of the legally
nonconforming use and structure, double-faced, off-premise sign (billboard) from the frontage of
145 West Branch Street to a rear lot location adjoining Arroyo Grande Creek and requiring
removal on or before August 11, 2011. Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie seconded, and the motiOn
passed On the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara
None
None
12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS
None.
13. CITY MANAGER ITEMS
None.
14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
15. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
PAGE 7
16. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
None.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Ferrara adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m.
Tony Ferrara, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk
(Approved at CC Mtg )
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2006
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. ROLL CALL:
Mayor Ferrara called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Council Member Jim Dickens, Council Member
Ed Arnold, City Manager Steven Adams, and City Attorney Timothy Carmel were present. Council
Member Costello and Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie were absent.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT:
None.
3. CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION:
a. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8:
Property:
Agency Negotiator:
Negotiating Parties:
Under Negotiation:
APN: 007-192-038; Vacant Lot at 210 Le Point Street
Steven Adams, City Manager
Dorfman Homes, Inc., A CA Corp.
Price, Terms and ConditiOnS of Potential Purchase
4. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION:
Mayor Ferrara announced that there was no reportable action from the closed session.
5. ADJOURNMENT:"
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Tony Ferrara, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28,2006
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at
7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council/RDA:
Council/Board Members Jim Dickens, Ed Arnold, Mayor Pro TemNice
Chair Jim Guthrie, and Mayor/Chair Tony Ferrara were present
Council/Board Member Joe Costello was absent
City Staff Present:
City Manager Steve Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, Director of
Administrative Services/City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Director of Financial
Services Angela Kraetsch, Director of Building and Fire Terry Fibich, Chief
of Police Tony Aeilts, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Don
Spagnolo, Police Commander Craig Hendricks, Assistant Planner Jim
Bergman, and Assistant Planner Ryan Foster.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Alvin Evenson, representing American Legion Post No. 136, led the Flag Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Dr. Mayer-Harnish, Bahai Faith, delivered the invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
5.a. Mayor's Commendation Presented to Jim Bergman.
Mayor Ferrara presented a Mayor's Commendation to Assistant Planner Jim Bergman in
recognition of his membership in the City's Platinum Service Club for service above and beyond
the call of duty. Jim Bergman accepted the Commendation.
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Ordinances Read in Title Only
Council Member Dickens moved, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read in title only and all further
reading be waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS
Otis Paqe, Arroyo Grande, referred to previous COUncil deliberations on the Brisco/101
Interchange project; acknowledged the funding challenges related to the project; and
encouraged the Council to place a measure increasing the City's sales tax rate on the November
ballot He also suggested the Council consider making a final determination on whether the
project should include a Halcyon overpass or widening the lanes in the underpass. Mr. Page
referred to the City's Agricultural policy and questioned the City Council's intent on whether the
policy applied to prime soils or prime soils and those in open space. He suggested that the City
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 2
review the meeting tapes from October 9, 2001, December 10, 2002, January 14, 2003, and
March 23, 2004 and then firmly establish what the agricultural conservation policy is.
Rav Montana, representing Five Cities Dog Park Association, spoke about the Association's
efforts to establish a dog park in the area.
Dennis Murphv, representing South County Youth Coalition, thanked the Council for its generous
donation and briefly explained the activities and scholarships that the Youth Coalition provides to
youth in the area.
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Council Member Arnold moved, and Council Member Guthrie seconded the motion to approve
Consent Agenda Items B.a. through 8.e., with the recommended courses of action. The motion
carried on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Ferrara
None
Costello
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period February 1, 2006 through
February 15, 2006.
8.b. Statement of Investment Deposits.
Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of January 31,
2006. .
8.c. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Action: Approved the minutes of the Special and Regular City Council meetings of
January 24, 2006 as submitted.
8.d. Consideration. of Acceptance of Audited Annual Financial Report.
Action: Received and filed the respective Audited Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal
Year ended June 30, 2005.
8.e. Consideration of Award of Consultant Services Agreement to Produce Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Plan and Appropriation for Local Matching Funds.
Action: 1) Authorized the Mayor to execute a Consultant Services Agreement to
produce a multi-agency Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan to Category Five ProfessiOnal
Consultants, Inc. of San Luis Obispo, for the amount of $65,000; and 2) Approved an
appropriation of $11 ,625 from the General Fund Unappropriated Fund Balance.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.a. Consideration of Approval of the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan.
Director of Public Works Spagnolo presented a brief status report regarding the preparation of
the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan and requested the City Council COntinue the public
hearing to the Regular City Council Meeting of March 14, 2006.
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, and upon hearing no public comments, he closed the
public hearing.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 3
Council Member Arnold moved to continue the public hearing to the next Regular Meeting of
March 14,2006, Council Member Dickens seconded, and the motion passed On the following roll
call vote: .
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold,Dickens, Guthrie, Ferrara
None
Costello
9.b. Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Approving Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Projects for Year 2006.
Assistant Planner Bergman presented the staff report and recommended the Council adopt a
Resolution approving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects for Year 2006.
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, and upon hearing nO public comments, he closed the
public hearing.
Council comments and questions ensued regarding HUD guidelines for determining distribution
of fUnds among local jurisdictions; clarification that the formula for determining the number of
overcrowded houses is based On 2000 census data; concern about the lack of equity of
proposed funding among the organizations; a suggestion to revise the method of how funds are
allocated next year; as well as a suggestion that funds be allocated next year by category of
service.
. Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROJECTS FOR YEAR 2006". Mayor Pro Tem
Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Guthrie, Ferrara
Dickens
Costello
9.c. Consideration of Ordinance Establishing Regulations for Peddling and Soliciting
Activities.
City Attorney Carmel presented the staff report and recommended the Council introduce an
Ordinance adding Chapter 5.76 to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code establishing regulations
for peddling and soliciting activities.
Mayor Ferrara opened the publiC hearing, and upon hearing no public comments, he closed the
public hearing.
Council comments and questions ensued regarding the solicitation permit application fee as it
relates to covering all of the costs to the City associated with processing the permit; clarification
concerning the posting of "No Soliciting" signs' and how it impacts non-profit and/or
charitable/religious organizations; and clarification concerning the applicability of the permit
exemption clause for charitable/religious activities. There was further discussion regarding hours
of operation for peddlers and solicitors and Mayor Ferrara suggested amending Section 5.76.080
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 4
as follows: "It is unlawful for any person describ'ed in this chapter, whether permitted or
unpermitted, to enter upon any residential premises between the hours of ~ seven p.m. and
nine a.m.". Following discussion, there was consensus of. the Council to amend Section
5.76.080 as proposed.
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie moved to introduce an Ordinance by title only, as amended, as follows:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADDING
CHAPTER 5.76 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING
REGULATIONS FOR PEDDLING AND SOLICITING ACTIVITIES". Council Member Arnold
seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Guthrie, Arnold, Dickens, Ferrara
None
Costello
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS
None.
11. NEW BUSINESS
11.a. Consideration of Fiscal Year 2005-06 Mid-Year Budaet ReDort [COUNCIURDA]
Director of Financial Services Kraetsch presented the staff report and recommended the
Council/RDA: 1) Approve detailed budget adjustments in the Mid-Year budget report; 2) Approve
Schedule A; and 3) Approve (Deny) requests for additional appropriations in the General Fund.
Staff responded to questions from Council regarding the City's liability insurance program; and
clarifications regarding how appropriate adjustments are made to the Bi-Annual Budget at the
end of the first fiscal year.
Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on
the matter, and upon hearing no public comments, he closed the public comment period.
Council/Board Mernbers DickenS and Arnold supported staffs recommendations as proposed.
Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Guthrie expressed concern and hesitation about approving some of
the additional appropriations; specifically the additional $17,000 for scanning old City documents
(Public Works records) and stated that he preferred to wait and review the budget status for the
whole year to see if the City is On target before allocating any additional funds. Mayor Ferrara
noted that due to issues of emergency management and continuity of government, there is an
immediate need to ensure preservation and archiving of all vital City records. He noted that the
City should start budgeting now for doing this for all City departments, specifically for those rights
and interest records. City Manager Adams also noted that this task is a follow up to the
development review process which identified a number of automatiOn improvements to
streamline that process.
Council/Board Member Dickens moved to: 1) Approve detailed budget adjustments in the Mid-
Year budget report; 2) Approve Schedule A; and 3) Approve the requests for additional
appropriations in the General Fund. Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed
on the following roll-call vote: .
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 5
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Dickens, Arnold, Guthrie, Ferrara
None
Costello
11.b. Consideration of Site Plan and Additional Appropriation for Police Department
Expansion Project.
Police Commander Hendricks noted that he was the project manager for the Police Department
modular office expansion and explained that the Community Development Department staff
assisted the Police Department in the process to obtain the required use permits. Assistant
Planner Foster presented the staff report and recommended the Council: 1) Appropriate an
additional $4,200 for the Police Station modLilar unit due to design recommendations of the
Architectural Review Committee (ARC); 2) Delay installation of exterior enhancements to the
modular units Until November 2006; and 3) Approve the proposed removal of all eucalyptus trees
along the northern property line to enable location of the modular unit at the proposed location.
Staff responded to questions from Council concerning the proposed placement of the modular
building On the site; parking and building code requirements; how the Police Department
intended to use the modular building; and the approximate age of the trees.
Mr. Wes. Conner, certified arborist and landscape architect, explained that the trees are very old,
approximately 50-75 years; some have been cut and have regrown; and some are multi-trunk
"shrubby" trees. He explained that one tree is leaning and creating a hazard and that he did not
think the trees have been properly maintained.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the
matter.
Gary Scherauist, co-chair of the Tree Guild of Arroyo Grande, stated he had researched the
issues regarding the trees: He noted that the tree species are included in the City's approved
tree lists. He agreed that the trees need to be pruned and cut back, and he encouraged the
Council to save the trees.
Upon hearing no further publiC comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public comment period.
Council discussion and comments ensued which included opposition to removing the trees as
proposed; reference to the City's Tree City USA status; reference to the City's revised
Community Tree Ordinance and the importance of providing a consistent standard within the
City; support for trimming and pruning the trees; a suggestion to consider reconfiguring
placement of the building; acknowledgement that the modular office building is meant to be a
temporary structure; agreement to defer the installation of exterior enhancements to the modular
unit until November 2006; and acknowledgement of the proposed redevelopment of the adjacent
property by the VCA South County Animal Hospital and a suggestion that the issue of the trees
be revisited when that project comes forth for review.
Council Member Arnold moved to approve a flexible site plan for the Police StatiOn allowing for
some potential movement of the modular building if a better parking arrangement can be
proposed; appropriate an additional $3,600 to trim and maintain the trees, and delete the
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 6
addition of the arbor structure with the understanding that it may be revisited in November 2006.
Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Ferrara
None
Costello
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
a. MAYOR TONY M. FERRARA:
(1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA). 1) Reported, that $56 million had been
appropriated for 65 projects and encouraged Council Members to read the
SLOCOG newsletter, The Coordinator, to obtain detailed information regarding
Board discussions and actions; and, 2) Elected new officers.
(2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD). Plant
continues to operate in good condition.
(3) Other. Attending Zone 1/1A meetings; referred to Arroyo Grande Creek Erosion,
Sedimentation and Flooding Alternatives Study and distributed a copy of the
Study to staff for staff and public review.
b. MAYOR PRO TEM JIM GUTHRIE:
(1) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). Continuing to work On economic impact
reports based on various industries. Report should be coming to the City soon.
(2) Other. None.
c. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS:
(1) South County Area Transit (SCAT). No report.
(2) South County Youth Coalition. No report.
(3) Other. None.
d. COUNCIL MEMBER JOE COSTELLO: (ABSENT)
(1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board. No report.
(2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD). No report.
(3) Fire Oversight Committee. No report.
(4) Other. None.
e. COUNCIL MEMBER ED ARNOLD:
(1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA). No report. Meets next
week.
(2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA). No report.
(3) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). The Committee has
beE!n studying the additional capacity of the State pipeline and what, if any, is
available for the South County; and also the possibility of banking some extra
water above the Cuesta Grade.
(4) Other. None.
13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
None.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 7
14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS:
None.
15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Ferrara reported on the activities of the City Selection Committee and its nominations and
appointments to LAFCO and the California Coastal Commission. He noted that the Committee
is required to select one or more members from the City Councils and Board of Supervisors to
serve on these Commissions. He reported that Supervisor Achadjian was nominated and
appointed to the Coastal Commission; however, the City Selection Committee will be meeting
again on March 13, 2006 to recommend the nomination and appointment of a CitY Council
Member to the Coastal Commission. He stated if anyone on the Council was interested in
serving' on the Coastal Commission to submit a resume or bio to Vicki Shelby at the County
Clerk's office.
Council Member Arnold thanked the City for its efforts involved in showcasing the City of Arroyo
Grande during the successful Amgen Tour of California Bike Race. He also referred to the
Rotary Bandstand dedication ceremony, noted that the Bandstand is an excellent additiOn to the
City, and thanked City staff for its involvement in this successful project
16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
None.
17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
None.
18. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor/Chair Ferrara adjourned the meeting at 8:59 p.m.
Tony Ferrara, Mayor/Chair
ATTEST:
Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk/Agency Secretary
.,
(Approved at CC Mt!l . . - I
8.c.
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL i/
ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES 1M
TO:
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE MODIFYING THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CaIPERS) CONTRACT
DATE:
MARCH 14, 2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council adopt an Ordinance amending the contract with
California Public Employees' Retirement System.
FUNDING:
This modification will cause the City to incur approximately $26,000 of additional costs
and was included in the Fiscal Year 2006-07 budget.
DISCUSSION:
The attached Ordinance was introduced, without modification, at the City Council
meeting of February 14, 2005. The Ordinance and contract change increase retirement
benefits for the Arroyo Grande Career Firefighters from a 2% at 55 to a 3% at 55-
retirement plan. This modification will be effective July 1, 2006.
As discussed at the February 14, 2006 City Council Meeting, the City's annual
contribution rate for Fire will increase by 4.867% resulting in an increase in costs of
approximately $26,000.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are presented for the City Council's consideration:
Approve staff recommendation;
Deny staff recommendation;
- Modify staff recommendation and approve;
Provide direction to staff.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT
TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California
("City") is duly authorized and existing under the laws of said State; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande has contracted with the Board of Administration
of the California Public Employees' Retirement System to provide retirement benefits to
the employees; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande wishes to adopt the provisions of Section
21363.1 (3% @ 55 Modified formula) for local fire members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande, as follows:
Section 1: That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of
Arroyo Grande and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees'
Retirement System is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached
hereto, marked "Exhibit", and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein
set out in full.
Section 2: The Mayor of the City of Arroyo Grande is hereby authorized, empowered,
and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of said City.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect on April 14, 2006.
Section 4: A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published
and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council
meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full
text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within
fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of those
City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again,
and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance.
On motion of Council Member
and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted this
day of
2006.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 2
TONYFERRARA,MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
I
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
A
CalPERS
EXHIBIT
California
Public Employees' Retirement System
..
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
Between the
Board of Administration
California Public Employees' Retirement System
and the
City Council
City of Arroyo Grande
..
The Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System,
hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency,
hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective July
10, 1964, and witnessed June 16,1964, and as amended effective September 16,
1966, May 24, 1973, July 4, 1980, June 24, 1988, February 12, 1999, October 15, 1999,
September 28, 2000, January 4, 2002, July 2, 2004 and December 31, 2004 which
provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency
hereby agree as follows:
A. Paragraphs 1 through 13 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed
effective December 31, 2004, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs
numbered 1 through 12 inclusive:
1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public
Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein
unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall
mean age 55 for local miscellaneous members and age 55 for local safety
members.
_CASE DO NOT SiGN "EXH!BIT o;':~.
2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement
System from and after July 10, 19.64 making its employees as hereinafter
provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public
Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a
contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments
to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions
thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency.
3. Employees of, Public Agency in the following classes shall become
members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as
are excluded by law or this agreement:
a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members);
b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members);
c. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as
local miscellaneous members).
4. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by
said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become
members of said Retirement System:
a. EMPLOYEES COMPENSATED ON AN HOURLY BASIS; AND
b. ELECTED OFFICIALS.
5. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of
credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall
be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law
subject to the reduction provided therein for Federal Social Security
(2% at age 55 Modified and Full).
6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of
credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be
determined in accordance with Section 21363.1 of said Retirement Law
subject to the reduction provided therein for Federal Social Security (3% at
age 55 Modified).
"-"III"IT f"\;'"'' '
,- "lJ:[ rn \10T CI~:..1 't. ;-,J~ t ;:<
./"\' "'.JIJ'.J Vi '.....1; 1 I\ll.ul Vi....
- ~,_......-
7. Public Agency elected and elects to be subject to the following optional
provisions:
a. Section 21222.1 (One-Time 5% Increase - 1970). Legislation
repealed said Section effective January 1, 1980.
b. Section 20965 (Credit for Unused Sick Leave).
c. Section 21024 (Military Service Credit as Public Service).
d. Section 21027 (Military Service Creditfor Retired Persons).
e. Section 20042 (One-Year Final Compensation).
f. Section 21548 (Pre-Retirement Optional Settlement 2 Death
Benefit) for local miscellaneous members.
8. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20790,
ceased to be an "employer" for purposes of Section 20834 effective on
July 4, 1980. Accumulated contributions of Public Agency shall be fixed
and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20834, and
accumulated contributions thereafter shall be held by the Board as
provided in Government Code Section 20834.
9. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions
determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with
respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said
Retirement System.
10. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows:
a. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one
installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of
administering said System as it affects the employees of Public
Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the
periodic investigation and valuations required by law.
b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one
installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special
valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of
the periodic investigation and valuations required by law.
11. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be
subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public
Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the
Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and
valuation required by said Retirement Law.
12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid
by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the
end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed
by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of
contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in
connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of
errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct
payments between the employee and the Board.
B.
This amendment shall be effective on the
day of
."
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION ~\\~\
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETI\~~gN1SYSTEM
..,!\,.....\\')
\I,\-. ',~
...\ ......'
BY r':' ',,\
.'" . "
LORI MCGARTLANb, CHIEF
EMPLOYER SERVICES DIVISION
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
1"'"
BY ..'.\
PRESIDING OFFICER ~~ \:.;.>'
\S\)\
C' ,.
\\ ~\'\
r'\
,...\-, , 1\"
/ '--"\"'"
,'" \ ...,)
'l"-"""'.
Witness Date)
,.' .
'-.) -.'
Attest:
Clerk
AMENDMENT ER# 0545
PERS.CON.702A (Rev 10\05)
8.d.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: K~ ROB STRONG, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
r- .
SUBJECT: MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION REDUCTION (MOVER) PROGRAM
GRANT REQUEST APPLICATION
DATE:
MARCH 14,2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to apply for the Motor
Vehicle Emission Reduction (MOVER) grant from the Air Pollution Control District to
construct the Arroyo Grande Creek Path from the Villaqe to the Post Office.
,
FUNDING:
The Arroyo Grande Creek Path from the Villaqe to the Post Office project is estimated
to cost $233,000. The grant request is for $100,000. The City would provide $131,000
in matching fund and in-kind funds for long-term property lease/easement. This funding
would need to be budgeted at the time the grant is approved and contract is awarded.
No funding commitment is made at the time of application.
DISCUSSION:
A Creekside pedestrian promenade and pathway system has been developed from City
Hall, Village Green, Heritage Square, Farmer's Market, Olohan Alley and Kiwanis Park
in the Village between Mason Street and Bridge Street. The U.S. Postal Service is
relocating from 250 Traffic Way to a Village Creek Promenade location at Traffic Way
and Station Way by October 2006. The Arroyo Grande Creek Path does not yet exist
for the 300 feet between Bridge Street and Traffic Way.
The MOVER project would enable the City of Arroyo Grande to construct the Arroyo
Grande Creek Path from the Villaqe to the Post Office, closing the gap and encouraging
pedestrian traffic rather than motor vehicle access between the historic area's many
public facilities and the new Post Office. The City would acquire the Creekside path
right of way or easement, design the pathway connection and monitor pedestrian traffic
during 2007 to demonstrate how many short motor vehicle trips are thus avoided by this
essential extension of the Creekside path to close the gap.
The project is consistent with the City's adopted General Plan, smart growth principles,
Clean Air Plan objectives, the Circulation/Transportation Element and Parks and
Recreation Element policies and trail system proposals and the top priority of the
S:ICOMMUNITY _DEVELOPMENTlPROJECTSISTAFFI06-001 MOVER GrantlCC SR 0231406.doc
City Council
Consideration of the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan
February 28, 2006
Page 2 of 2
proposed 2006 Bikeway and Pedestrian Enhancement Program. It is an immediate
improvement to increase pedestrian use of already established segments and to link
the new U.S. Post Office location and Village Creek Promenade by walking instead of
short motor vehicle trips. The project would provide significantly improved access and
walkability and pedestrian connectivity for this important segment within the Village
Mixed Use district.
Cost and a project map are included in the Attached application in Exhibit "A". If the
City Council adopts the attached Resolution, the City will submit the MOVER
application on March 15, 2006.
AL TERNA TIVES:
1. Adopt the Resolution;
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide direction to staff.
Attachment: MOVER Application
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING A 2006 APCD/MOVER
GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED ARROYO
GRANDE CREEK PATH: VILLAGE TO POST OFFICE
PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) on February
1, 2006, requested proposals for the Motor Vehicle Emission Reduction (MOVER) Program
for the 2006-2007 period; and
WHEREAS, the primary program objective is to reduce motor vehicle emissions by funding
projects that implement relevant transportation control measures and enhancing innovative
public education programs that focus on reducing motor vehicle emissions; and
WHEREAS, the historic Arroyo Grande Village Core Downtown area contains a Creekside
pedestrian promenade and pathway system from City Hall, Nelson Green, Heritage
Square, Farmers' Market, Olohan Alley and Kiwanis Park between Mason Street and
Bridge Street; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Postal Service is relocating the Arroyo Grande Post Office to a Village
Creek Promenade location at Traffic Way and Station Way by October, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the planned Arroyo Grande Creek Path does not yet exist for the 300 lineal
feet distance between Bridge Street and Traffic Way;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
hereby authorizes submittal of an APCD/MOVER Grant Application for the Proposed Arroyo
Grande Creek Path: Village to Post Office Project, a copy of which is on file in the
Administrative Services Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though set
forth in full.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Arroyo Grande and the Village Improvement
Association will budget and provide the matching funds and in-kind matching services,and
perform the 2006-08 project construction and performance monitoring program to
demonstrate the actual short motor vehicle trip reductions achieved by this essential
extension of the Arroyo Grande Creek Path system.
On motion by Council Member
following roll call vote, to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
, and on the
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2006.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
TONYFERRARA,MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
EXHIBIT A
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
Motor Vehicle Emission Reduction Program
2005-2007
Request for Proposal
1.0 EXHIBIT SUMMARY SHEET! COVER PAGE
Project Title: Arroyo Grande Creek Path: Village to Post Office
Brief Project Description: Construct basic creek pathway (300 lineal feet) along south
side of Arroyo Grande Creek from Bridge Street Bridge to Traffic Way and Station Way
crosswalk to new Post Office.
Applicant (include other participating entities): City of Arroyo Grande and Village
Improvement Association
Contact Person: Rob Strong, AICP, Community Development Director
Address: (Physica/:)
City of Arroyo Grande
214 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
(Mailing:)
City of Arroyo Grande
PO Box 550
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
Telephone: (805) 473-5420 Fax #: (805) 473-0386 E-mail: rstrong@arroyogrande.org
Total Project MOVER funds Matching In-Kind Match Total Project
Budaet funds Costs
Materials $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 3,000 $ 205,000
Personnel $ 0 $ 20,000 $ 2,000 $ 22,000
Other $ 0 $ 5,000 $ 1,000 $ 6,000
Total $ 100,000 $ 125,000 $ 6,000 $ 233,000
Implementation Area for Project: South side of Arroyo.Grande Creek from Bridge Street
to Traffic Way crosswalk to Post Office: Village Core Downtown from Mason Street to
Traffic Way/Station Way.
Estimated Emission Reductions/ Cost Effectiveness Not Applicable
Useful Life of Project (years): 20 years
Total Lifetime Emissions Reduced (in Ibs. of NOx, ROG, PM1o): Not Applicable
Cost-Effectiveness ((CRF*Funding)/ (ROG+NOx+PM1o)) Not Applicable
CRF = capital recovery factor
Estimated Audience To Be Reached: Not Quantifiable
2.0 RESOLUTION/AUTHORIZA TION
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AUTHORIZING A 2006 APCD/MOVER GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED
ARROYO GRANDE CREEK PATH: VILLAGE TO POST OFFICE PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) on February
1, 2006, requested proposals for the Motor Vehicle Emission Reduction (MOVER)
Program for the 2006-2007 period; and
WHEREAS, the primary program objective is to reduce motor vehicle emissions by funding
projects that implement relevant transportation control measures and enhancing innovative
public education programs that focus on reducing motor vehicle emissions; and
WHEREAS, the historic Arroyo Grande Village Core Downtown area contains a Creekside
pedestrian promenade and pathway system from City Hall, Nelson Green, Heritage
Square, Farmers' Market, Olohan Alley and Kiwanis Park between Mason Street and
Bridge Street; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Postal Service is relocating the Arroyo Grande Post Office to a
Village Creek Promenade location at Traffic Way and Station Way by October, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the planned Arroyo Grande Creek Path does not yet exist for the 300 lineal
feet distance between Bridge Street and Traffic Way;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
hereby authorizes submittal of an APCD/MOVER Grant Application for the Proposed Arroyo
Grande Creek Path: Village to Post Office Project, a copy of which is on file in the
Administrative Services Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though set
forth in full.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Arroyo Grande and the Village Improvement
Association will budget and provide the matching funds and in-kind matching services, and
perform the 2006-08 project construction and performance monitoring program to
demonstrate the actual short motor vehicle trip reductions achieved by this essential
extension of the Arroyo Grande Creek Path system.
On motion by Council Member
following roll call vote, to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
, and on the
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2006.
TONYFERRARA,MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
3.0 Project Description:
Existing Conditions and Purpose Statement
3.1 Existing Conditions
A Creekside pedestrian promenade and pathway system has been developed from City
Hall, Nelson Green, Heritage Square, Farmers' Market, Olohan Alley and Kiwanis Park in
the Village between Mason Street and Bridge Street. The U.S. Postal Service is relocating
from 250 Traffic Way to a Village Creek Promenade location at Traffic Way and Station
Way by October 2006. But the Arroyo Grande Creek Path does not yet exist for the 300
feet between Bridge Street and Traffic Way.
3.2 Purpose Statement
This MOVER project would enable the City of Arroyo Grande to construct the Arrovo
Grande Creek Path from the Villaqe to the Post Office, closing the gap and encouraging
pedestrian traffic rather than motor vehicle access between the historic area's many public
facilities and the new Post Office. The City would acquire the Creekside path right of way
or easement, design the pathway connection and monitor pedestrian traffic during 2007 to
demonstrate how many short motor vehicle trips are thus avoided by this essential
extension of the Creekside path to close the gap.
3.3 Plan Consistency:
The project is consistent with the City's adopted General Plan, smart growth principles,
Clean Air Plan objectives, the Circulationffransportation element and Parks and
Recreation element policies and trail system proposals and the top priority of the proposed
2006 Bikeway and Pedestrian Enhancement Program. It is an immediate improvement to
increase pedestrian use of already established segments and to link the new U.S. Post
Office and Village Creek Promenade by walking instead of short motor vehicle trips. The
project would provide significantly improved access and walkability and pedestrian
connectively for this important segment within the Village Mixed Use district.
3.4 Geographic Area Served
Although the general South County/Five Cities region and the entire City of Arroyo Grande
will be served by the completion of this important pedestrian pathway, the main benefit
area will be the historic Village Core Downtown and Village Creek Promenade districts.
Specifically, Arrovo Grande Creek Path: Villaqe to Post Office will link the Traffic
Way/Station way Village Creek walkways to the existing Olohan Alley Creek Promenade
and Heritage Square/Nelson Green sidewalks and pathways east of Bridge Street and
extending to Mason Street. (See Project Vicinity Map).
3.5 Description of How Project Would Benefit Local and Regional Community and
Support APCD/MOVER Program Objectives
The historic Arroyo Grande Village Area is a regional tourist and resident destination, civic
and cultural activity center for the Five Cities part of local commercial and service
employment. The Village contains the historic three block downtown commercial core,
City Hall, Heritage Square museums, Nelson Green, Farmers' Market, Olohan Alley Creek
I?romenade and Kiwanis Park, Rotary Bandstand, Village Gazebo and Short Street
swinging bridge, all pedestrian oriented along the Arroyo Grande Creek Pathway.
The U.S. Post Office has long been at 250 Traffic Way, an essential public facility and
activity center close to, but beyond walking distance form the historic Village and therefore
a source of many snort distance motor vehicle trips. Now the Arroyo Grande Post Office is
being relocated to 160 Station Way at Traffic Way on the Village Creek Promenade on the
south side of arroyo Grande Creek just west of Traffic Way. This new location is
separated from pedestrian connection to the Village by only a 375 foot "gap" in the planned
Arroyo Grande Creek Path system. Closing this gap will enable City Hall workers, Village
merchants, residents and visitors to walk rather than drive to the new Post Office and
Village Creek Promenade shops and services. Similarly, this short link would enable the
Village Creek Promenade employees and customers to walk into the historic Village where
most of the restaurants, convenience and specialty shops and many other services are
available.
, Because these two adjacent areas have never been connected by pedestrian path, or
even a complete network of sidewalks, the community and regional visitors have been
forced to drive, despite less than a half mile distance from Mason Street and East Branch
Streets to Station Way and Fair Oaks Avenue. The potential benefits of completing the
Arroyo Grande Creek Path between the Village and the Post Office is far more than just
Motor Vehicle Emission Reductions due to elimination of many short trips. It will reduce
congestion on Highway 227 and Traffic Way, enhance resident and tourist recreation and
relaxation along all segments of the Creek Path; increase community regional and visitor
awareness of the historic resources and natural environmental assets of the Village areas;
and enable more efficient use of existing parking, transit and bike facilities serving the
community core.
3.6 Description of Existing Conditions and How the Proposed Project Will
Integrate Into and Complement the Present Conditions
The entire Village area from Crown Hill to Freeway 101 and from LePoint Street to East
Cherry Avenue is a compact, mixed use "walkable" neighborhood, only one half mile
square. But this centrally located short gap in the arroyo Grande Creek Path makes east-
west pedestrian connection difficult. For more than forty years the City's General Plan
circulation and recreation elements and policies have proposed a "Creek Greenbelt". But
only during the last decade have the Heritage Square path and Olohan Alley Creek
Promenade been developed to implement this important feature between Mason Street
and Bridge Street. Now the relocation of the Post Office to the Village Creek Promenade
at Traffic Way and Station Way makes the western extension of the Arroyo Grande Creek
Path between Bridge Street and Traffic Way a critical gap in the pedestrian circulation
network. Without this important safe and convenient link enabling a pedestrian short-cut,
the community's resident and visitors will continue to drive between these two adjacent
areas. This linkage is needed to enhance "walkability" within the compact Village core and
promote the Smart Growth principles of transit oriented and pedestrian friendly circulation
within the mixed use Village neighborhood.
3.7 Outline of the Applicant's Fiscal Strategy to Maintain and continue the Project
after the Designated 2005-7 Funding Period
The existing segments of the Arroyo Grande Creek Path were previously assisted by
SLOCOG grants and are being enhanced and maintained by City crews and volunteer
groups including the South County Historical Society, Village Improvement Association
and local service clubs. This same fiscal strategy of "Grass Roots Community
Development" encouraged by regional grant increments or installments will continue to
make possible key capital improvements and economical, community maintenance of
important infrastructure and amenities. City budgets are challenged to sustain essential
public services and facilities, but occasional special grants and other community groups
and volunteers have enabled important amenities, cultural and civic improvements,
particularly concentrated in the Village area. The City provides basic maintenance of
these improvements assisted by many of the same volunteer community groups including
the South County Historical Society, Village Improvement Association, and local Rotary
and Kiwanis Clubs. This same strategy will be utilized for the proposed Arroyo Grande
creek Path: Village to Post Office, assuming that the requested APCD/mover grant is
awarded to assist construction of this connecting pedestrian linkage to close the existing
gap. It will be used to help maintain the path and landscaping after completion and to
promote and monitor its utilization. And in all probability it will continue to be the primary
strategy for future easterly extension of the Arroyo Grande Creek Path to East Village
Plaza and along CorbettlTally Ho Creek in the Village.
3.8 Description of the Proposed Facility/Installation and Maintenance
The Arroyo Grande Creek Path: Village to Post Office Project consists of a proposed 375
lineal feet long, 12 foot wide decomposed granite pathway within a 25 foot wide
landscaped pedestrian public access right of way (or leased easement) on the south side
of Arroyo Grande Creek between Bridge Street and Traffic Way/Station Way. Painted
crosswalks at both ends and a 75-foot long segment of eight foot wide concrete sidewalk
on the east side of Traffic Way will complete the link between the Village area and the new
U.S. Post Office. A top of bank four foot tall wood plank rail and wire fence will be
constructed along approximately 375 feet at the north side of the pathway to provide safety
and prevent people or animals from trespassing into the creek habitat and existing riparian
vegetation adjacent to the waterway. Five heritage character, pedestrian street light
fixtures and poles will be located at 75 foot spacing to provide safety lighting along this
new pathway segment. The Traffic Way bridge, Bridge Street! Olohan Alley and Traffic
Way/Station Way intersection crosswalks are already well lit, as are existing Creek
Promenade and Heritage Square pathway segments of the creek walk. Both sides of the
pathway will be landscaped with street trees at 35 foot spacing and drought tolerant,
riparian compatible native vegetation with basic underground drip irrigation system to
enhance appearance and minimize maintenance.
The Arroyo Grande Creek Path will be constructed during July to October 2006 including
underground electrical conduit and irrigation lines and meters. Landscaping and lighting
will be completed during the same period or by December 2006, depending on materials
and City work crew availability. Monitoring will be conducted during 2007 to document the
actual pedestrian use and enable emission reduction calculations. The Village
improvement Association will assist the City of Arroyo Grande in public outreach
dedication ceremony, Creek Path promotional brochure preparation, production and
distribution, and in volunteer maintenance and monitoring programs.
In this instance, the City of Arroyo Grande will acquire the Arroyo Grande Creek Path right
of way or leased pedestrian access easement within a 25 foot top of bank creek setback
across private property between Bridge Street and Traffic Way on the south side of the
Creek. The City has also provided the Preliminary project design and cost estimates to
enable this APCO/MOVER grant application. Additionally, the City will provide the
planning, engineering and construction management and matching funds for materials and
personnel for project construction, including landscaping and lighting systems. Finally, the
City will perform basic maintenance of the Arroyo Grande creek Path: Village to Post
Office upon completion.
4.0 Project Background and Organization
4.1 City of Arroyo Grande Commitment to fulfill MOVER Program Objectives
The City of Arroyo Grande has a currant population of 16,537. The City is aggressively
pursuing policies and programs for the reduction of vehicular traffic and vehicular
emissions from short motor vehicle trips, particularly in the City's mixed use districts. The
General Plan includes several policies and implementation measures in both its Land Use
and Circulation elements, to increase pedestrian access, connectively and walkability. The
City has entered into an MOU w/San Luis Obispo Greenbuild. Additionally, the City has
recently completed a pedestrian/bikeway plan.
5.0 Emission Calculations/ Cost-Effectiveness
5.1 Pedestrian Facilities Impact on Emission Reduction
Pedestrian facilities replace auto trips by providing or improving pedestrian access and
reduce emissions when auto trips are replaced by walking. Based on 2002-2005 parking
studies and a preliminary Village area concept plan, the City prepared a parking space
inventory and estimate of existing commercial and office development. The seven block
Village area north of Arroyo Grande Creek between Traffic Way and Crown Hill, contains
202,411 sq. ft. of building, 641 off-street parking spaces and 164 on-street parking spaces.
It is estimated that these 800 cars currently are driven to and from the U.S. Post Office for
most customer, public or employer trips despite the close proximity between the Village
and Post Office. Similarly, the Village Creek Plaza and Promenade commercial area west
of Traffic Way and along Station Way currently has more than 120,000 sq. ft. of office and
retail building area and about 400 additional off-street parking spaces that are near the
Village but depend on driving for connection.
Ideally, at least ten percent of those short trips connection between the two adjacent areas
could be attracted to walk if the one block gap in the Arroyo Grande Creek Path-VillaQe to
Post Office is completed. Even a five percent utilization would reduce short vehicle starts,
stops, congestion and vehicle emissions from the 1,200 care parking spaces in both areas.
At 10%, the reduction would be 120 trips and at 5% at least 60 trips would be eliminated
daily.
5.2 Emission Calculations (Source: California Air Resources Board, Methods to Find
the Cost-Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality Projects, For Evaluating Motor Vehicle
Registration Fee Projects and Congestion Mitigation and Air Qualtiy Improvement (CMAQ)
Projects, May 2005)
Table A. Inputs for Trips Eliminated
Funding Dollars (Funding) $231,000
Effectiveness Period (Life) 20 years
Inputs for Trips. Eliminated
Auto Trips (T) eliminated 600 trips
one-way/week
Length (L) of Auto Trips eliminated 1 mile
one direction/trip
Weeks (W) 52 weeks
(of operation )/year
Table B. Input for Trips Added
Adjustment (A) for Auto Access Trips to transit, vanpools, and carpools 1.0
Note: No adjustment is made on Length (L) of Auto Trips eliminated because
access trip length is an insignificant portion of annual VMT reduced.
Table C. Emission Factor Inputs for Auto Travel
Auto Trip End Units Auto VMT Factor Units
Factor
ROG Factor .866 grams/trip 0.229 grams/mile
NOx Factor 0.387 " 0.269 "
PM10 0.016 " 0.219 "
Factor
Source, Average Auto Emission Factors Table 3
Formulas
Annual Auto Trips Reduced =
W*T*A
(52) * (600) * (1)
31,200 trips/year
Annual Auto VMT Reduced =
W*T*L
(52) * (600) * (1)
31,200 miles/year
Annual Emission Reductions (ROG, NOx, and PM10) =
[(Annual Auto Trips Reduced)*(Auto Trip End Factor)
+ (Annual Auto VMT Reduced)*(Auto VMT Factor)]/454
ROG = (31,200 * .866 * 31,200 * .229)/454 =
NOx = (31,200 * .387 * 31,200 * .269)/454 =
PM10=(31,200 * .016 * 31,200 * .219)/454 =
425,213Ibs/year
223,212Ibs/year
7,513 Ibs/year
Capital Recovery Factor (CRF) =
(1 + I)" (t)
(1 + i)" - 1
where:
i = discount rate (Assume 3 percent)
n = project life
(1 +.03)20 * (.03)
(1 +.03)20 - 1
=
.63654
20.218
.0315
Cost-Effectiveness of
Funding Dollars =
(CRF * Funding) / (ROG + NOx + PM1 0)
(.0315 * 231,000)/ (425,213 +223,212 + 7,513) = 7276.5/655938=
.011 dollars/lb
6.0 Work Statement
A. Riqht of Way or Easement Acquisition: The subject property is owned by
, and contains a short portion of Arroyo Grande Creek,
including both steep vegetated creek banks, a wooden storage building and large
metal garage building and paved and unpaved top of bank property on the south
side of the creek channel between Traffic Way and Bridge Street bridges. The large
metal garage building, until recently, was home to Valley Auto Repair but now has
as tenants. The wooden storage building appears to be an
accessory storage structure located near the middle of the property abutting the
south top of bank, behind the metal garage structure. (See aerial photo). On
February 2, 12006, the City initiated contact with the property owner, proposing
independent appraisal and suggesting possible purchase of the creek channel,
banks and the south side creek setback areas (within 25 feet form top of bank), or
at least a 20 year lease for creek trail easement. Depending on the owners
response, the City will pursue the necessary right of way or easement, consistent
with adopted creek setback policies, for trail development as described above. By
April 15, 2006, the City will prepare legal description and initiate topographic survey
of the creek and setback areas to enable right of way or easement mapping for
acquisition and design. On or before july 1, 206, assuming approval of the
APCD/MOVER grant application, the City would 'proceed to acquire the necessary
right of way or easement.
B. Refinement and Review of Desiqn and Improvement Plans and Specifications:
During April and May, 2006, the City will refine the preliminary project description
into more detailed plans for arroyo Grande Creek Path: Village to Post Office
improvements. These will include 1) electric meter, underground conduit and
foundations for five pedestrian, lighting poles and fixtures; 2) 'clock and automatic
controller, water meter, lines and valves for drip irrigation systems for street trees
and other landscaping within the 25' setback area; 3) Planting plans and
specifications for at least 16 street trees and other drought-tolerant, riparian
compatible shrubs and ground cover for both sides of the 12 foot wide, compacted
decomposed granite path; 4) Path, sidewalk/driveway, crosswalk and other
improvement or construction plans and specifications; and 5) Wood post, plank and
wire fence and other construction plans and specifications.
Concurrent with the project contract preparation period during June and July, 2006,
the City would process the Design and Improvement Plans and Specifications to the
Staff Advisory Committee (SAC), the Architectural Review Committee (ARC), the
Parks and Recreation Committee (P&RC) and the City Council for review and
approval. Some elements, such as electrical street lighting system or concrete work
may be bid and awarded during July and August for installation by qualified private
contractors, while the path, irrigation system, tree planting and other landscaping
and fence will be installed by City crews and or volunteer organization work parties
supervised by the City.
7.0 Funding Request/Cost Breakdown
7.1 Village to Post Office Creekside Pedestrian Pathway
The City is requesting $100,000 MOVER grant funds to construct pedestrian pathway
connection within the City's Village Mixed Use District:
TASK Description Cost
1 320 lineal feet of 12 ft. wide pathway of $18,000 lump sum
decomposed granite 620 lineal feet of 4inch
benderboard border (3,840 s.f.)
2 100 lineal feet of 10 ft. wide sidewalk including $10,000
36 foot wide driveway (east side of Traffic (@ $1 O/sq. ft.)
Way)
3 16 Street Trees, London Plain or Sycamore for $7,200
35 feet spacing along path and sidewalk (@ $450/tree)
4 6 Street light poles, decorative bases and $16,800
heritage character fixtures, including electric (@$2,800/pole)
meter and 420 lineal feet of underground
conduit
5 320 I.f. of post and rail, 4 ft. high fence, $10,000 lump sum
including 40 posts and 960 If.f. of rail with wire
mesh
6 640 I.f. of drip irrigation system including water $8,000 lump sum
meter, valves, lines, clock and emitters
7 3,840 sq. ft. ground cover landscaping and $17,000 lump sum
shrubs along pathway
8 10% Design engineering and electrical plan $7,700
9 10% Construction administration $7,700
10 10% Contingency Allowance $7,000
TOLAL REQUEST $100,000
The City will provide $125,000 in matching funds in easement acquisition/lease, and a
In-Kind match of $6,000 for public outreach as described below:
Total MOVER funds Matching .. In-Kind Match Total Project
Project funds Costs
Budget
Materials $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 3,000 $ 203,000
Personnel $ 0 $ 20,000 $ 2,000 $ 22,000
Other $ 0 $ 5,000 $ 1 ,000 $ 6,000
Total $ 100,000 $ 125,000 $ 6,000 $ 231,000
8.0 Schedule of Deliverables
8.1 Breakdown of Deliverables
A.
Design Development
B.
Contract Preparation
C.
Construction of Project- Phase I
(pathway and underground conduit,
irrigation lines and meters)
D.
Construction of Project - Phase II
(Landscaping and lighting)
E.
Village to Post Office Project Public
Outreach and Dedication
F.
Monitoring for documentation of
actual pedestrian use
June 1 - June 30,2006
June 1 - June 30, 2006
July 1 - October, 31 2006
September 1- December 31,2006
December, 2006 - January 30, 2007
January 30, 2007 - December 31, 2007
9.0 Self Monitoring Program
9.1 Self Monitoring
Monitoring will be conducted during 2007 to document the actual pedestrian use and
enable emission reduction calculations. The Village improvement Association will assist
the City of Arroyo Grande in public outreach dedication ceremony, Creek Path promotional
brochure preparation, production and distribution, and in volunteer maintenance and
monitoring programs.
City staff will conduct 12 manual count surveys. Pedestrian trips will be monitored by
manual counts at both the Village Promenade end of path destination and the Post Office
once a month for six months. The counts will be conducted at the same time and day of
week each month. Screenlines may be utilized.
~
ns
3:
(.)
IE
E
....
"C
c:
ns
-
(1)
~
.-
CJ)
(1)
C)
"C
.-
I..
In
c:
(1)
(1)
3=
G)
In
.c::
-
ns
Q.
~
(1)
(1)
I..
o
"C
(1)
(/)
o
Q.
o
I..
Q.
8.e.
TO:
CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
TONY AEIL TS, CHIEF OF POLICE
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY-{V
CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADDING CHAPTER
5.76 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING
REGULATIONS FOR PEDDLING AND SOLICITING ACTIVITIES AND
ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SOLICITATION
PERMIT APPLICATION FEE
SUBJECT:
DATE:
MARCH 14,2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Council: 1) adopt, by title only, the attached Ordinance
entitled: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Adding Chapter
5.76 to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, Establishing Regulations for Peddling and
Soliciting Activities"; and 2) adopt the attached Resolution establishing a solicitation
permit application fee.
FUNDING:
The adoption of the attached Ordinance and Resolution will not require any specific City
funding.
DISCUSSION:
At its February 28, 2006 meeting, the City Council introduced an Ordinance, as
amended, which would require commercial peddlers and solicitors to obtain a
solicitation permit (as well as a standard City business license) and to comply with
certain time, place and manner restrictions imposed on the permit. The Council
amended Section 5.76.080 of the Ordinance regarding hours of operation, as follows:
"It is unlawful for any person described in this chapter, whether permitted or
unpermitted, to enter upon any residential premises between the hours of ~ seven
p.m. and nine a.m....
Additionally, Section 5.76.050 requires the City Council to establish a fee to offset the
cost to the City of processing an application for a solicitation permit. The attached
Resolution establishes the solicitation permit application fee at sixty two dollars and fifty
cents ($62.50). The fee recommended by staff reflects approximately one half of the
total cost for processing an application for a solicitation permit, in recognition of the fact
CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR PEDDLING AND SOLICITING
ACTIVITIES
MARCH 14, 2006
PAGE 2
that most solicitors who apply for this permit utilize it for a limited period of time and that
each permitee will be required to annually renew the permit.
It is recommended that the Council separately adopt the attached Ordinance and
Resolution.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
Approve staff's recommendation and adopt the Ordinance and Resolution;
Do not approve staff's recommendation;
Modify staff's recommendation as deemed appropriate; or
Provide direction to staff.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE ADDING CHAPTER 5.76 TO THE
ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING
REGULATIONS FOR PEDDLING AND SOLICITING
ACTIVITIES
WHEREAS, persons and organizations have been and are visiting private residential
properties in the City of Arroyo Grande ("City") for the purpose of peddling and soliciting
orders for the sale of goods, wares, merchandise or services; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a variety of aggressive sales tactics,
misrepresentations, and frauds are at times employed in such activities and that such
peddling and solicitation activities are often considered by impacted residents to be
highly intrusive, disruptive and bothersome; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that public safety and welfare necessitates the
exercise of the police power of the City through the enactment and enforcement of this
Ordinance for the purpose of protecting the health, safety, welfare, and privacy of
residents.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande, as follows:
SECTION 1: The above recitals and findings are true, correct, and incorporated herein.
SECTION 2: Chapter 5.76, entitled "Peddlers and Solicitors", is hereby added to the
Arroyo Grande Municipal Code to read in its entirety as follows:
CHAPTER 5.76 PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS
5.76.010. Legislative findings.
The City Council finds that persons and organizations have been and are visiting private
residential properties in the City for the purpose of peddling and/or soliciting orders for
the sale of goods, wares, merchandise or services, and that some residents find such
visits and the tactics used by such visitors to be bothersome and highly intrusive. The
City Council further finds that a variety of misrepresentations and other frauds are at
times employed in such activities. The City Council further finds that the public safety,
welfare and convenience necessitates the exercise of the police power of the City
through the enactment and enforcement of this chapter for the purpose of protecting the
privacy of residents and preventing aggressive, threatening, abusive and fraudulent
practices by persons representing themselves as peddlers and solicitors.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 2
5.76.020. Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, "Peddler"
or "Solicitor" means any person who goes upon the premises of any private residence in
the City, not having been requested or invited by the occupant thereof, soliciting, selling
or taking orders for, or offering to sell or take orders for the sale of goods, wares and
merchandise for present or future delivery, or for services to be performed immediately
or in the future, whether or not such person has, carries or exposes a sample of such
goods, wares and merchandise, or not and whether or not the person is collecting
advance payments on such sales or not.
5.76.030. Solicitation permit required--Exemption.
(a) Except as otherwise provided by this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to act as a
peddler or solicitor within the City without having first obtained a solicitation permit
issued pursuant to this chapter. Each individual peddler or solicitor, shall obtain a
solicitation permit.
(b) Any person peddling or. soliciting on behalf of any institution or organization
recognized by a tax board of the State and the Internal Revenue Service of the United
States, which institution or organization is conducted wholly for the benefit of charitable,
religious, or nonprofit purposes and from which profit is not derived, either directly or
indirectly, by any person, shall be exempted from the requirements of this chapter.
5.76.040. Application for a solicitation permit.
Applicants for a solicitation permit under this chapter shall file with the Chief of Police an
application in writing on a form to be furnished by the City, which shall give the following
information:
(a) Name and physical description of the applicant.
(b) Date of birth, driver's license or other identification number, Social Security number.
(c) Permanent home address.
(d) Local address and telephone number.
(e) The nature or character of the goods, wares, merchandise or services to be offered.
(f) If employed, the name, address and telephone number of the employer, or if acting
as agent, the name, address and telephone number of the principal who is being
represented, with credentials in written form establishing the relationship and the
authority of the employee or agent to act for the employer or principal, as the case may
be.
(g) The length of time for which the right to peddle or solicit is desired.
(h) Two photographs of the applicant, taken within sixty days immediately prior to the
date of filing of the application, measuring one inch by one inch, and showing the head
and shoulders of the applicant in a clear and distinguishing manner.
(i) The names of, and a means of contacting, at least two reliable persons residing in
the County of San Luis Obispo, who will certify as to the applicant's good character and
. ~: ,
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 3
business reputation, or, in lieu of the names of such references, such other available
evidence as to the good character and business reputation of the applicant as will
enable an investigator to properly evaluate the applicant's character and responsibility.
0) A statement as to whether or not the applicant has been convicted of any criminal
offense, whether felony or misdemeanor, other than minor traffic violations. As to any
such offense, the date and place of conviction, the nature of the offense, and the
punishment or penalty imposed must be provided.
(k) Proof of possession of any license or permit which, under federal, state or local laws
or regulations, the applicant is required to have in order to conduct the proposed
business, or which, under any such law or regulation, would exempt the applicant from
the licensing requirements.
5.76.050. Permit fee.
At the time the application for a solicitation permit is filed with the Chief of Police, the
applicant shall pay a fee sufficient to cover the cost to the City of processing the
application. The amount of the fee shall be set by resolution of the City Council.
5.76.060. Investigation and permit issuance.
(a) Upon receipt of an application, the Chief of Police, or authorized representative,
shall cause an investigation to be made of the applicant's moral character and business
reputation, as deemed necessary for the protection of the public health, safety and
general welfare.
(b) The Chief of Police shall deny an application for a permit if he or she makes any of
the following findings:
(1) The applicant has failed to pay the application permit fee.
(2) The applicant has made one or more material misstatements in the application
for a permit.
(3) The applicant has ever been convicted or held liable for a crime of moral
turpitude, or any felony or. misdemeanor offense that reasonably and directly indicates a
potential risk to the public.;
(4) The applicant has had a judgment in an action for fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation entered against it, her, him, or them by any court of competent
jurisdiction within ten years prior to the date of application.
(5) The applicant fails to provide proof of possession of any license or permit
which, under federal, state or local laws or regulations, the applicant is required to have
in order to conduct the proposed business.
(6) The applicant has previously been convicted for violation of any provision of
this chapter, or who has had any permit issued pursuant to this chapter revoked.
(7) The Chief of Police, or authorized representative, possesses any other credible
information concerning the applicant, his or her employer or principal that reasonably
and directly indicates the peddling or soliciting activities will likely be used as a means
of committing crime, fraud or deceit.
(c) If the application is disapproved, the reasons for disapproval shall be noted on the
application, and the applicant shall be notified that his or her application is disapproved
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 4
and that no permit will be issued. Notice shall be mailed to the applicant at the address
shown on the application form, or at the applicant's last-known address.
(d) If the Chief of Police finds that the applicant's character and business responsibility
are satisfactory, he or she shall endorse his or her approval on the application and shall,
upon payment of the prescribed fee, deliver the required solicitation permit to the
applicant.
5.76.070. Permit expiration.
All permits issued under the provisions of this chapter shall expire one year from date of
issuance, unless an earlier expiration date is noted on the permit.
5.76.080. Hours of operation.
It is unlawful for any person described in this chapter, whether permitted or unpermitted,
to enter upon any residential premises between the hours of seven p.m. and nine a.m.
5.76.090. Soliciting where "No Soliciting" sign is posted.
It is unlawful for any person described in Section 5.76.020 of this chapter, whether
permitted or unpermitted, to perform or attempt to perform the acts described in such
section by ringing the doorbell or knocking at the door or otherwise calling attention to
the person's presence of or at any residence whereon a sign bearing the words "No
Peddlers", "No Solicitors" or words of similar meaning is painted or affixed so as to be
exposed to public view, and no such person described in Section 5.76.020 shall perform
or attempt to perform any of the acts described in such section in any building, structure
or place of business whereon or wherein a sign bearing the words "No Peddlers", "No
Solicitors" or words of similar import, is painted or affixed so as to be exposed to public
view. Additionally, no person described in Section 5.76.020 shall perform or attempt to
perform any of the acts described in such section upon any property which has
registered and been included on the City's "Do Not Solicit Registry."
'.
5.76.100- Creation of a "Do Not Solicit Registry".
There is hereby created within the City a "Do Not Solicit Registry." The purpose of such
registry is to allow residents within the City to register their name and the address(es) of
such places that they do not want any peddling or solicitation.
5.76.110. Applicability of a "Do Not Solicit Registry".
The "Do Not Solicit Registry" shall only be applicable to residential addresses within the
City.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 5
5.76.120. Maintenance of a "Do Not Solicit Registry".
(a) The Director of Financial Services shall maintain the "Do Not Solicit Registry" ("the
"Registry") which shall consist of a list of residential addresses within the City whose
residents wish to deny any and all peddling or soliciting acts at the described residence.
(b) It shall be the duty of the resident to apply for such Registry, maintain current
addresses, and to remove their name and address(es) from such Registry when so
desired.
(c) It shall be the duty of the Director of Financial Services to have a current and true
copy of the Registry, available during normal business hours.
(d) At the time of issuance of a business license, the Director of Financial Services, or
his/her designee, shall provide a current copy of the Registry at no cost to a peddler or
solicitor who possesses a valid solicitation permit. ,
(e) Any person may acquire a current copy of the Registry subject to payment of
duplication fees.
(f) Upon the request of any duly licensed peddler or solicitor pursuant to this chapter,
the Director of Financial Services, or his/her designee, shall provide a current copy of
the City's "Do Not Solicit Registry" at no cost.
5.76.130- Compliance "Do Not Solicit Registry."
It is unlawful for any person to peddle or solicit on private property where the resident
has registered his or her address and such address appears on the City's "Do Not
Solicit Registry."
\.
5.76.140. Other conditions and regulations.
The following conditions and regulations shall also apply to the exercise of the privileges
granted by solicitation permits issued under the provisions of this chapter in addition to
those set forth in other parts of this chapter or elsewhere in this code:
(a) Every person issued a solicitation permit must be in possession of the solicitation
permit, a current copy of the City's "Do Not Solicit Registry", and a current City business
license issued pursuant to Chapter 5.02 of this Code at all times when engaged in the
business herein permitted. The permittee must produce and show the solicitation
permit, business license, and copy of the "Do Not Solicit Registry" on the request of any
person solicited or of any public safety officer or official of the City. No person issued a
permit shall alter, remove or obliterate any entry made upon such permit, or deface
such permit in any way. Each solicitation permit shall be personal and not assignable or
transferable, nor shall any permit be used by any person other than the permittee.
(b) Every peddler or solicitor, upon the request of any public safety officer or official of
the City, shall sign the solicitor or peddler's name for comparison with the signature
upon the solicitation permit or the signature upon the permit application.
(c) Every peddler or solicitor who solicits orders shall, if requested by the customer,
provide a receipt plainly stating the quantity of each article or commodity ordered, the
price paid to be paid therefor, the total amount purchased or ordered and the amount to
be paid on or after delivery.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 6
(d) Every peddler or solicitor shall, if requested by the customer, provide his/her name,
business address and telephone number and the name, business address and
telephone number of the person, organization, or entity on whose behalf solicitation is
being made.
5.76.150. Peddler--Revocation of Solicitation permit.
(a) A solicitation permit issued under this chapter may be suspended or revoked by the
Chief of Police for any of the following causes: .
(1) Fraud, misrepresentation or false statement contained in the application for
permit;
(2) Fraud, misrepresentation or false statement made in the course of carrying on
'the business of peddler or solicitor;
(3) Any violation of this chapter;
(4) Conviction of any crime including misdemeanors involving moral turpitude;
(5) Peddling or soliciting in an unlawful manner or in such a manner as to
constitute a breach of the peace or to constitute a menace to the health, safety or
general welfare of the public.
(b) This section shall be self-executing and the suspension or revocation shall be
effective immediately. The Chief of Police shall give notice of the suspension or
revocation of the permit and sufficient notice shall be given if mailed or delivered to the
permittee at permittee's address listed on his or her application.
5.76.160. Appeals to City Manager,
In the event that any applicant or permittee desires to appeal from any order, revocation
or other ruling of the Chief of Police or any other official of the City, made under the
provisions of this chapter, such applicant or any other person aggrieved shall have the
right to appeal such action or decision to the City Manager within fifteen (15) days after
the notice of the action or decision has been mailed to the person's address as shown
on the permit application. An appeal shall be taken by filing with the Police Department
a written appeal statement setting forth the grounds for the appeal. The Chief of Police
shall transmit the written statement to the City Manager within ten days of its filing and
the City Manager shall set a time and place for a hearing on the appeal. A hearing shall
be set not later than thirty (30) days from the date of filing of the applicant's written
appeal statement with the Police Department. Notice of the time and place of the
hearing shall be given to the appellant in the same manner as provided for the mailing
of notice of suspension or revocation. The decision of the City Manager, or his
designee, on the appeal shall be final and binding on all parties concerned.
5.76.170. Violations.
Any person who violates a provision of this chapter is guilty of a separate offense for
each day or part of a day during which the violation is committed, continued or
permitted. Any person who violates any provision in this chapter shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 7
SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days from its adoption.
SECTION 4: A summarydfthis Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published
and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council
meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full
text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within
fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of those
City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again,
and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance.
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member
, and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted this
day of
2006.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 8
TONY FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF
A SOLICITATION PERMIT APPLICATION FEE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has adopted Ordinance No.
_' adding Chapter 5.76 to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code establishing regulations
for peddling and soliciting activities; and
WHEREAS, newly adopted Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 5.76.050 contained
in Chapter 5.76 requires that the City Council establish a fee for the processing of an
application for a solicitation permit ("solicitation permit application fee"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the documentation provided by the Police
Department and Financial Services Department regarding the cost to the City of
processing an application for a solicitation permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande as follows:
1. As authorized by Municipal Code Section 5.76.050, the solicitation permit
application fee is set at sixty-two dollars and fifty cents ($62.50).
2. This Resolution shall become effective upon the effective date of Ordinance No.
On motion of Council Member
on the following roll call vote, to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
, and
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this _ day of
,2006.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
TONYFERRARA,MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
9.a.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
On TUESDAY, MARCH 14,2006, the Arroyo Grande City Council will conduct a public
hearing at 7:00 P.M. in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET to
consider the following item:
CASE NO'S:
LOCATION:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Case No. 05-003 and Planned
Unit Development Case No. 05-007
Fair Oaks Ave. (vacant property east of Arroyo Grande
Hospital)
The City Council will review a mixed-use development
proposed in two phases on a 5.5-acre site, located east of
Arroyo Grande Community Hospital on Fair Oaks Avenue.
Proposed Phase 1 includes thirty (30) 2-story town homes
and a half-acre common open space area. Phase 2 is
tentative at this time, but conceptually includes up to 120,000
square feet of medical office space with underground parking.
Central Coast Real Estate Development (CCRED)
Jason Blankenship
PROPOSAL:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
The Council may also discuss other hearings or business items before or after the item
listed above. If you challenge the proposed action in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in
this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the
public hearing. Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds
for any court to invalidate the action of the legislative body for which the notice was
given.
Information relating to these items is available by contacting Arroyo Grande City Hall at
473-5414. The Council meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20.
, I ! ,
.-/ .;:,' J,. .' I .
:1., 'J. I. ) fl'" ,.l . .
,........;, ,I U. ! 'I: I -........1 I ! ').'_.~
i . 'X ~', ,_.;. "., '_ " ,- . -'
Kelly Wetlnore;clty Clerk
Publish n, The Tribune, Friday, March 3, 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM:IL ~ KELLY HEFFERNON
1\11, ACTING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
05-003 AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 05-007 FOR
A PHASED, MIXED.lJSE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON FAIR
OAKS AVENUE EAST OF THE ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY
HOSPITAL; APPLIED FOR BY CENTRAL COAST REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT.
DATE: MARCH 14,2006
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends the Council adopt a resolution approving
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007.
FUNDING:
There would be additional City costs associated with landscape maintenance within the
creek setback area and pedestrian easement if the City accepts the offer of dedication
of the creek channel, creek setback area and pedestrian easement (proposed Lot 31).
The City currently maintains the pedestrian trail and existing landscaping within the
pedestrian easement. The project proposes to enhance the trail with new signage and
landscaping. Enhancement of the riparian habitat within the creek setback area is
required as mitigation.
PROJECT LOCATION:
Jj:.';'I:>lllIL~'~I"'~~ / \
""~h- ~. < .
~--"J 1--]'(> _ I-~ ,(-- \
t"i:--'--'{,--'- --' - - = - . ~ \,
~='-":::..~ -:' ~ -;j' >
j-' ~ ,"
ag~~ . -;~. ~~~F-
. I -m~1 //
';"'~ 1. ./_
~u"'S~I... ~. =rdJ...-L
: ~.)'/::1'
c I .. "Ii....!
: - - ~.I/y
, r--J
. _ .. _L - [1----.
~ J. ., . ':., J. ,@\
r;lfFWtJ" I
'~-'~::,;,'::
o 6.. n~.d:ll"JJ.:r;;..~\=",~~
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 2
DISCUSSION
Backaround
The project site is 5.5 acres in size and is currently vacant. Surrounding the property is
single-family residential development to the north and south, Arroyo Grande Creek and
Agricultural property to the east, and Arroyo Grande Community Hospital to the west. A
City-maintained recreational path with exercise stations runs along the eastem border of
the site adjacent to the creek and along a portion of the northern border connecting to
Woodland Drive.
The topography of the project site is varied, descending at a slight slope of 7% towards
the southeast, increasing to approximately 14% slope near the central portion of the
site, decreasing to nearly level in the southeast portion, then dropping sharply to a 40%
slope along the southwest boundary where the property adjoins Fair Oaks Ave. The
site drains to the southeast towards Arroyo Grande Creek. The project site
predominantly consists of a declining fruit and nut tree orchard (English walnut, Plum,
Apricot, and Black walnut) with a stand of eucalyptus on the southwest portion of the
property. The orchard has not been maintained for over two decades.
The project is subject to the Office Mixed Use (OMU) standards (see table below) and
to Design Overlay OMU-D-2.20. Because the project involves an irrevocable offer of
dedication to the City of the creek channel, the 25' creek setback area and the
pedestrian trail, and because an interpretation of Agricultural buffer policy and Overlay
OMU-D-2.20 is necessary, the City Council must take final action on this project.
The City Council considered a Pre-Application for this site on August 23, 2005 (see
Attachment 1 for Meeting Minutes). Discussion focused on traffic impacts, especially
with regard to possible extension of Woodland Drive; parking; tree protection and
removal; adherence to the OMU Design Overlay; future needs of the Arroyo Grande
Community Hospital; adequacy of the agricultural buffer; enhancement of the
recreational trail; provision of open space; and creek impacts.
The Planning Commission considered the proposed project on January 3, 2006 and
January 31, 2006 (see Attachments 2 and 3 for Meeting Minutes). On a 3:2 vote, the
Planning Commission recommended approval of the project with the following
amendments:
. Modify the conditions of approval and mitigation measures per the memo from
Associate Planner Heffernon, dated January 31,2006 (Attachment 4).
. Amend condition of approval No. 23 to change one tree every 75 feet to one tree
every 35 feet.
. Reinsert MM 4.6, amended as discussed.
. Modify MM 4.7 with language that explicitly defines the extent of the
enhancement and restoration needs in the riparian habitat area beside the path.
. Delete MM 4.10.
. Retain the walnut tree located in the proposed tot lot area.
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 3
The above changes have been made to the conditions of approval.
OMUD
t St d d
eve opmen an ar S
.~l Table 16.36.020 (H) . . .Propo~ed Project
. .'
Office. Mixed USe (OMU) , . .
. Minimum Site DevelopmentStandards . .'
1. Maximum Density Mixed 20 dwelling units/acre (du/ac). Density equivalency is 41 units. 30
Use Projects physical units proposed.
2. Maximum Density Multi- 15 du/ac (or 42 units)
Family Housing
3. Minimum Density 75% of maximum density (or 31
units).
4. Minimum Lot size 10,000 square feet (gross); 20,000 Minimum lot size is 1,224 square
square feet for residential projects. feet.
5. Minimum Lot Width 100 feet. 20 feet.
6. Front Yard Setback 0-10feet. Varies.
7. Rear Yard Setback 0-15feet. Varies.
8. Side Yard Setback 0-5 feet. Varies.
9. Street Side Yard Setback 0-15feet. Varies.
10. Building Size Limits Maximum height for mixed Project will not exceed the 35-foot
residential/commercial use is 35 height limit. Most of the units are
feet or three stories. whichever is two-stories.
less. Maximum building size is
50,000 square feet (except
properties SUbject to D-2.20
overlay). Three-story building
components allowed only with
substantial transitional space
and/or lower story elements
adjacent to residential districts or
uses.
11. Site Coverage and Floor Maximum coverage is 70%. Average lot coverage is 41 %.
Area Ratio Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is Average FAR is 0.59 (3 lots exceed
1. the FAR).
12. Site Design and Signs See OMU-D-2.20; Section No signage is proposed. Mixed-
16.48.065; Chapter 16.60 for use design considerations include
signage. privacy issues (fencing, patios,
etc.), pedestrian paths, recreational
amenities, open space, and
compatible architectural design.
See also conditions of approval and
mitigation measures.
13. Off-Street Parking and Chapter 16.56 for parking. Project is over parked by one guest
Loading (Parking requirement is 2-car space.
garage plus 0.5 guest space per
unit).'
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 4
As indicated in the table above, the project meets most of the requirements of the OMU
district and deviates on standards allowable through the Planned Unit Development
process.
Design Overlay O-D-2.20 requires the following:
Use Reaulations: Mixed-use development with 75% office use compatible with
Hospital Facilities Plan. All other uses as specified in underlying zoning district
(OMU).
Site DeveloDment Criteria:
1. As specified in the underlying zoning district, (OMU). Three-story building
components allowed only with substantial transitional space and/or lower
story elements adjacent to residential districts or uses. Future hospital
redevelopment shall include public transportation improvements
(reference development approval CUP 02-006, Planning Commission
resolutions 02-1839 and 02-1841).
2. Maximum building size may exceed maximum standard of 50,000 square
feet specified in underlying zoning district (OMU).
Performance Standards: Section 16.48.065 Mixed Use developments. Section
16.48.120 Performance Standards.
Desian Guidelines: None.
Additional Information: These parcels were zoned with a -D overlay at the time
of the 2004 Development Code Update to clarify development standards that
pertain to the subject parcels. A Hospital Facilities Plan must be completed and
submitted to the Community Development Department prior to any use permit
approval within the OMU-D-2.20 Overlay.
The proposed project generally adheres to the OMU Design Overlay standards by
comparing the square footage of floor area versus land area. The approximate square
footage of the medical office use is 120,000, while the estimated square footage of the
residential use is 45,000, which exceeds the 3:1 ratio by 5,000 square feet. The project
is conditioned to adhere to the OMU-D-2.20 overlay by restricting the total square
footage of residential living area to 40,000 square feet. Although Phase II is purely
conceptual, condition of approval no. 11 has been added to require submittal of plans
for development of Phase II that satisfy all mixed-use development standards for the
OMU district and overlay. Said plans. must be reviewed and approved by the City
Council prior to issuance of grading or building permit for Phase I. As an alternative, the
City Council may consider a Development Code Amendment to modify the standards
for the OMU overlay to enable this project to move forward separate from a non-
residential component. In such a case, staff would recommend an agreement between
Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) and the applicant regarding development of Phase II
to meet hospital needs, as approved by the City Attorney.
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUP 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 5
Proiect Description
The proposed project includes a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit
Development to construct the first phase of a two-phased mixed-use project. Phase I is
a 30-unit single-family residential development (41 density equivalent units - see below
for density equivalency table) in a townhouse configuration with 45,631 square feet of
open space to be dedicated to the public (Lot 31), 14,060 square feet of common open
space, and 8,974 square feet of private open space. Phase II is a medical office
complex of up to 120,000 square feet of floor area in four (4) separate buildings with
subterranean parking. Approximately one (1) acre of the Phase I property is
undevelopable due to agricultural setback, creek channel, creekway setback, and
easements.
rr--
Density Equivalency Table
-_._------~_._---.~.-_._-- ---. -IIDenSity~qU-iva'len~- .--"-
IlfeSidential Dwelling Unit I
I Type J
- .
,ILivelWork Unit il.5 I
1_' - ,.., '. -.. - -. -- ...---'
iIStu~~om_ . n__. .,....mm__ - m_ _11.5 __d- .- J
il1-bedroom --- il.75 J
I. .
112-bedroom _ il1 I
- _ n" ---- !
II . iI1.~__ _ j
13-bedroom
11~:~edro~~~ .~. . . - ---. m' ... 'm
.J2. i
---- - '--'." 'm' J
Although the project is considered "mixed-use" based on zoning and proximity to Phase
II commercial development, Phase I only includes residential development. Hence, an
allowed density of fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre (du/ac) is applied. Given the 2.77-
acre site area, a total of forty-two 42 units are allowed, and the minimum density is 75%
of the maximum, or thirty-one (31) units. Based on the density equivalency calculation,
forty-one (41) units are proposed (30 physical units), which is within both the maximum
and minimum density requirements.
The project plans show Woodland Drive extended through the site separating the two
uses and constructed to City standards for future dedication. A condition has been
added to narrow the north end of Woodland Drive to a width of twenty feet (20') for a
distance of approximately seventy feet (70') to allow access for pedestrians and cyclists.
Woodland Drive will terminate at the north project boundary with a gate and knox box,
allowing for emergency vehicle access only.
Design and future development of Phase II will be subject to separate discretionary and
environmental review.
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 6
The residential lot sizes are from 1,224 to 4,630 square feet. Open space areas
combined are about one acre in size and consist of a mini park on the north side of the
property that includes a play structure and bench (to be maintained by a homeowners
association), the recreational trail easement adjacent to the creek, the creek bank and
channel, and pedestrian easements. The recreational trail will be enhanced as part of
this project with new landscaping, low profile lighting, signage, etc. Unit sizes average
1,500 square feet and are two-stories (unit "D" has two-stories and a basement). Plan
types A-C are three-bedroom units, while Plan D is a two-bedroom unit.
Architectural Desian
There are four (4) separate floor plans and four (4) color schemes proposed as
summarized below. The architectural style is considered "Contemporary Farmhouse".
PLAN NUMBER IN NUMBER OF UNIT SIZE s.f. HEIGHT
TYPE SUBDIVISION BEDROOMS
PlanA 10 3 1,656 All buildings are
PlanB 8 3 1,525 not to exceed
PlanC 3 3 1,362 35' in height
Plan D 9 2 1,337
(Lots 9 & 16 are
1 ,355 sJ.)
(Lots 12 & 14 are
1,463 sJ.)
COLOR SCHEME
DETAILS
No.4
. Vertical wood siding in Connected Gray
. Stucco in Oatmeal
. Red Brick
. Com Roofin in Weathered Sa e
. Vertical wood siding in Empire Gold
. Stucco in Sandstone
. Com Roofin in Pewter Gre
. Vertical wood siding in Grizzle Gray
. Stucco in Aspen
. Com Roofin in FossilGre
. Vertical wood siding in Weathered Shingle
. Stucco in French Vanilla
. Red Brick
. Com Roofin in Granite
No.1
No.2
No.3
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM OS-003; PUD OS-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 7
Mixed-Use Proiects (Section 16.48.065)
This section of the Development Code outlines design considerations, mix of uses, site
layout standards, performance standards, and requirements for mixed-use discretionary
projects. Listed below are the specific mixed-use standards followed by how the project
meets or falls short of these standards.
A. Desion Considerations. A mixed-used project shall be designed to achieve the
following objectives.
1. Potential noise, odors, glare, pedestrian traffic, and other potentially
significant impacts on residents shall be minimized to allow a compatible mix
of residential and nonresidential uses on the same site. (The units are
clustered on the other side of Woodland Drive away from future commercial
development. Noise from Fair Oaks Blvd. and Agricultural operations is
partially buffered by the creek. Design of the units does not create excessive
glare (standard residential windows are proposed). Odors are not expected
to be an issue with the future medical office use or the proposed residential
use. Pedestrian walkways and sidewalks are included throughout the
development in addition to the existing pedestrian trail easement).
2. The design of the mixed-use, project shall take into consideration potential
impacts on adjacent properties and shall include specific design features to
minimize potential impacts. (Any development on the project site will have a
visual impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood since the site is
currently vacant. The pedestrian trail and enhanced landscaping will serve as
a buffer. The Ag. property is naturally buffered from the project by means of
\
the creek and Ag. buffer).
3. The design of a mixed-use project shall ensure that the residential units are of
a residential character, and that privacy between residential units and
between other uses on the site are maximized. (Each unit will have private
space, either within enclosed yards, decks, or both).
4. The design of the structures and site planning shall encourage integration of
the street pedestrian environment with the non-residential uses through the
use of plazas, courtyards, walkways, and street furniture. Design amenities
shall encourage travel by walking, bicycling and public transit. (The project
includes pedestrian walkways and a play area. Phase /I should provide
amenities such as plazas and courtyards as a transition from the commercial
to residential development).
5. Site planning and building design shall be compatible with and enhance the
adjacent and surrounding residential neighborhood in terms of scale, building
design, color, exterior materials, roof styles, lighting, landscaping and
signage, to preserve the rural nature and small town character of Arroyo
Grande. (The proposed .Contemporary Farmhouse" architectural style of the
units was selected to go with the agrarian feel of the area given the adjacent
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM OS.Q03; PUD OS.Q07 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 8 .
Ag. land. The townhouse configuration is considered compatible with
adjacent Single Family Residential development).
B. Mix of Uses.
1. A mixed use project may combine residential uses with any other use allowed
in the applicable zoning district by Section 16.36.030, provided that where a
mixed use project is proposed with a use required by Section 16.36.030 to
have Minor Use Permit or Conditional Use Permit approval in the applicable
zoning district, the entire mixed use project shall be subject to that permit
requirement. (The proposed uses for both phases of the project are allowed,
and the Planned Unit Development serves as a Conditional Use Permit for
Phase I. Phase /I will be subject to a separate Conditional Use Permit and
environmental determination).
2. For substandard lots, a mixed-use project that provides commercial andlor
office space on the ground floor with residential units above (vertical mix) is
encouraged over a project that provides commercial structures on the front
portion of the lot with residential uses placed at the rear of the lot (horizontal
mix). (The project site is not a substandard lot). '
C. Site Layout Standards. Each proposed mixed-use project shall comply with the
property development standards of the applicable zoning district, and the
following requirements:
1. Open Space. A minimum of three hundred fifty (350) feet of any
combination of public or private open space shall be required for each
residential unit and be permanently maintained. (The project exceeds this
requirement by 58, 165 square feet. This issue is addressed in greater
detail below);
2. Loading Areas. Commercial loading areas shall be located as far as
possible from residential units and shall be screened from view from the
residential portion of the project to the extent feasible. (The commercial
development will be located across the street away from the proposed
residential units, and commercial loading areas will be located within the
commercial parking area);
3. Refuse and Recycling Areas. Areas for collection and storage of refuse
and recyclable materials shall be located on site in locations that are
convenient for both the residential and non-residential uses. (The town
homes will have private waste wheelers for trash and recycling).
D. Performance Standards.
1. Lighting. Lighting for the commercial uses shall be appropriately shielded
to minimize impacts on residential units. (This will be a condition of
development for Phase /I).
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 9
2. Noise. All residential units shall be designed to mitigate impacts from non-
residential project noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations.
(This is handled through the building permit process through compliance
with the Uniform Building Code).
3. Hours of Operation. A mixed-use project proposing a commercial
component within three hundred (300) feet of a residential unit, that will
operate outside of the hours of from eight am to six pm shall require a
minor use permit (unless the proposal involves a conditional use permit as
required by Section 16.36.030(A)(1) to ensure that the commercial use will
not interfere with the residential uses within the project. (A CUP will be
required for Phase II).
E. Reauirements for Use Permit Proiects. A mixed-use project that requires minor
use permit or conditional use permit approval in compliance with subsection (B)
is subject to the following requirements:
1. Property Development Standards. The approval of a minor use permit or
Planned Unit Development for a mixed-use project may include:
a. Conditions of approval that require provisions and standards in
addition to, or instead of the property development standards of the
applicable zone district to ensure compatibility of uses and
surroundings; or
b. Variation or exception to standards required by the applicable zoning
district, to the extent allowed by use permit approval in other sections
of these regulations, to make particular use combinations more
feasible.
2. Mandatory Findings for Approval. The approval of a minor use permit or
conditional use permit for a mixed use project shall require that the review
authority first make all of the following findings, in addition to the findings
required for the permit approval as applicable.
a. The mixed uses are consistent with the general plan and are
compatible with their surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with
each other. (The General Plan allows for residential development in
Mixed Use land use designations. Phase I multi-family residential
development serves as a transition between the hospital property to
the west and single-family residential neighborhood to the north);
b. The design protects the public health, safety, and welfare. (The
proposed drainage solution betters the existing situation by
repairing the corroded drainage pipe that outfalls to the creek and
installing an inline filtration system to remove pollutants and
sedimentation from stormwater. Water and sewer requirements are
consistent with City standards); and
c. The mixed uses provide greater public benefits than single-use
development of the site. This finding must enumerate those benefits,
such as proximity of workplaces and housing, automobile trip
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM OS.o03; PUD OS.o07 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 10
reduction, provision of affordable housing, or other benefits consistent
with the purposes of this section. (The town homes provide an
opportunity for employees of the A.G. Community Hospital or nearby
medical offices to walk to work, thereby reducing automobile trips. The
improved recreational trail is expected to encourage more trail
utilization and less reliance on the automobile for local destinations.
The project also restricts 15% of the units to the moderate-income
level).
3. Mandatory Findings for Variation or Exception to Standards. To allow
property development standards that deviate from those of the underlying
zone, the review authority must make one of the following findings:
a. Site-specific property development standards are needed to protect
all proposed uses of the site, in particular residential uses; or
b. Site-specific property development standards are needed to make
the project consistent with the intent of these regulations.
Planned Unit Develooment
The purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process is to ''facilitate
development of properties designated for residential and commercial uses or planned
development in the General Plan and Development Code. This process is used where
greater flexibility in design is desired to provide a more efficient use of land than would
be possible through strict application of conventional zone or land use' district
regulations." (Development Code Section 16.16.060).
The primary concern with applying PUD standards to higher density mixed use projects
is satisfying open space requirements. Open space standards are discussed further
below.
Environmental Assessment
Staff has reviewed this project in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the City's Rules and Procedures for the Implementation of CEQA. Based on
the review, staff does not anticipate that this project will have a significant effect on the
environment. Therefore, staff has prepared a draft negative declaration with mitigation
measures for the Council's consideration (see Initial Study, Attachment 5). Below is a
discussion of relevant environmental issues.
Tree Removal. Twenty-six (26) non-native trees are proposed to be removed on the
Phase I property that are mostly in decline, and ten (10) trees are to be protected
including a large signature Black Walnut tree located at the entrance to the project (refer
to Attachment E of the Initial Study for tree removal and protection details). No trees
will be removed on the Phase II property until after the City approves a formal
development application. The City's Tree Ordinance does not include non-native trees
as a protected species. However, the applicant has submitted a Preliminary Planting
Plan that shows roughly 155 trees to be planted on the project site in various sizes,
representing a 6:1 replacement ratio. All native trees on the project site, including the
four (4) Coast Live Oaks, will remain. As mitigation, the final landscape plan will also
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM OS-003; PUD OS-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 11
include native ground cover species, perennial grasses and riparian vegetation in
appropriate areas (see Attachments C and D of the Initial Study for letters from Firma
Consultants). Additionally recommended are fruit trees for use by residents to
encourage sustainable development.
Drainage. Project storm drainage will mainly be collected in several drop inlets and
conveyed in an 18" pipe to the creek. Other runoff will drain to Fair Oaks Ave. To
facilitate project stormwater drainage and improve water quality to the creek, the
applicant proposes four (4) biofiltration swales ("bioswales") to be installed along the
eastern side of the property. A study was conducted by the KC Design Group that
provides biofiltration calculations. The calculations show that the proposed bioswales
on the project site are adequately sized for the treatment of storm water runoff per
Caltrans guidelines (see Attachment H of the Initial Study). The project site is not within
a 1 DO-year floodplain.
The City recently filmed the inside of the existing 48" corrugated metal pipe (CMP)
located on the northern portion of the property and determined that about 120' of the
CMP is corroded, requiring remediation. Of this distance, about 40' is within the creek
bank, located on the adjacent property. The City's drainage easement does not
traverse this 40-foot section. The pipe carries water to Arroyo Grande Creek, where
water flows from a 3~-inch diameter CMP outlet onto barren soil. Over time, an erosion
gully has formed below the outfall. Continued outflow at this site would result in
additional erosion and the deposit of sediment within Arroyo Grande Creek.
Improvements, such as installing rock slope protection, may require some disturbance
to the riparian area that would trigger the requirement for a Streambed Alteration
Agreement (SAA) with the Ca. Dept. of Fish and Game (CDFG). Staff has had early
discussions with CDFG regarding the SAA, and because the improvements would be
bettering the situation, the process should be fairly straightforward. (See Attachment 6
for an exhibit of the existing outfall, cross section of approximate limits of erosion, and
proposed bank stabilization improvements).
Agricultural Buffer. The property is located across the creek from a 13.15-acre
agricultural parcel that is currently in row crop production. The contrasting land uses of
the project site (residential development) and adjacent agricultural property create
conflicting impacts. Arroyo Grande Creek acts as a physical barrier between these two
land uses, which considerably reduces most of the potential adverse impacts.
Consistent with City Ordinance No. 550 (creation of Agricultural Preservation Overlay
District), the project provides adequate separation by means of a buffer that ranges
from roughly 130' to 170' in width that includes Arroyo Grande Creek, dense riparian
vegetation, a recreational trail, and additional landscaping.
Traffic Impacts. Potential traffic related impacts for both phases were analyzed by
Penfield & Smith (see Attachment G of the Initial Study). The trip generation for Phase I
is estimated to be 240 new average daily trips, of which 19 will be generated during the
AM peak hour, and 24 during the PM peak hour. The Traffic Impact Study looked at
traffic conditions (intersections and roadway segments) for the following circumstances:
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 12
. Existing traffic conditions
· Existing plus project traffic conditions
· Cumulative conditions without project
· Cumulative conditions with project
As predicted, all major impacts to levels of service are from trips generated from Phase
II of the project. The study concludes that Phase I of the project will not significantly
impact intersection or road section traffic operations, as indicated in Tables 11 and 12 of
the Traffic Study. The study also addressed the Woodland Drive extension, concluding
that the diversion of trips would help alleviate impacts to particular intersections (e.g.
Halcyon Rd.lGrand Ave.), but issues of neighborhood compatibility from traffic access
through to Grand Ave. and consequent impacts to the intersection of Grand Ave.lS.
Alpine Street need to be considered. When Phase II moves forward with a separate
application, additional study will be required to address Woodland Drive extension
concerns, but the Planning Commission recommended for Phase I of the project,
Woodland Drive terminate at the north end with bollards for emergency access only.
Cultural Resources. An archaeological subsurface testing for the site was conducted in
1990 by Clay Singer and John Atwood and additional subsurface testing was performed
recently by Cogstone Resource Management, Inc. (see Attachment F of the Initial
Study). The September 2005 study revealed, after digging four (4) large trenches and
analyzing the soil contents, that no intact prehistoric deposits are evident on the subject
property, only redeposited fragments from another site. Monitoring is required as
mitigation for the proposed development. No other mitigation was recommended in the
report.
Proiect Clarifications and Modifications
The applicant submitted revised plans and additional information to help clarify earlier
issues raised by the Planning Commission related to open space calculations, setbacks,
lot coverage, agricultural buffer, future development of Phase II, and pedestrian trail
easement improvements. Below is a discussion of these project clarifications.
Open Space.
Private and common open space calculations have been clarified. Private open space
(decks, patios, yards) ranges in size from 75 to 651 square feet, with an average of 299
square feet per unit. Lot 31 is a common open space parcel that includes the creek, the
25' creek setback, and the trail easement (45,631 square feet). The City currently
maintains the trail. The project is conditioned to irrevocably offer this area (Lot 31) to
the City as public open space. If the City accepts the offer to dedicate Lot 31, the City
will maintain the creek setback area and trail easement (the City currently maintains the
trail easement). If the City decides not to accept the offer, a homeowners association
will maintain the creek setback area and the City would continue to maintain the trail. It
should be noted that the offer of dedication is irrevocable, meaning that the City could
accept the offer of dedication anytime in the future if it is rejected as part of the project
approval process. Other common open space areas are provided in the bioswales, tot
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 13
lot, and pedestrian walkways (14,060 square feet). Total open space (including
"private", general or public "open space" and "common" open space) is 68,665 square
feet.
There are various definitions of open space included in the Development Code, as
provided below:
Open Space. "Open space" means land used for recreation, resource protection,
amenity, andlor buffers and dedicated, designed or reserved for public or private
use. Open space may include, but is not limited to, lawns, decorative planting,
walkways, active and passive recreation areas, playgrounds, fountains,
swimming pools, wooded areas, and water courses. Open space shall not be
deemed to include driveways, parking lots, or other surfaces designed or
intended for vehicular travel or areas covered by buildings or accessory
structures (except recreational structures).
ODen Space. Common. "Common open space" means open space within a
project owned, designed and set aside for use by all occupants of the project or
by occupants of a designated portion of the project. Common open space is not
dedicated to the public and is owned and maintained by a private organization
made up of the open space users. Common open space includes common
recreation facilities, open landscaped areas, greenbelts, but excluding pavement
or driveway areas, or parkway landscaping within public right-of-way.
Open Space. Private. "Private open space" means usable open space which
adjoins and is directly accessible to a residential or nonresidential unit; may be
reserved for the exclusive use of the residents, owners or lessees of the unit and
their visitors, customers, or employees; and which is maintained by a private
entity. Private open space includes private patios or balconies and front, rear or
side yards on a lot designed for single-family detached or attached housing.
Open Space. Public. "Public open space" means open space that is accessible
and used by the general public for active or passive recreational purposes or
resource protection.
Open Space. Usable. .Usable open space" means outdoor or unenclosed area
on the ground, or on a roof, balcony, deck, porch or terrace, designed and
accessible for outdoor living, recreation, pedestrian access, or landscaping, but
excluding parking facilities, driveways, utility or service areas.
The general development mixed-use standards allow for any combination of public or
private open space to meet the minimum 350 square foot open space requirement per
unit, and the Planned Unit Development (PUD) standards are specific about the amount
and type of open space required in a project.
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 14
As indicated above, the total amount of "open space" provided is 68,665 square feet, or
an average of 2,288 square feet per unit. PUD standards require a mix of private and
common open space in larger percentages (see table below regarding PUD open space
requirements) than the general development standards for mixed-use projects (350
square feet). Depending on whether the general development mixed use standards or
PUD standards are used, the project is either over the open space requirement by a
total of 58,165 square feet or under the requirement by a total of 22,188 square feet.
The purpose of PUD standards is to create a more desirable environment by applying
more flexible standards than what the underlying zoning calls for. Specifically regarding
open space standards, a project can deviate from the amount of private and common
open space when it can be determined that:
(A) The objectives underlying the standards can be met without strict
adherence to them; andlor
(B) Because of peculiarities in the tract of land or the facilities proposed, it.
would be unreasonable to require strict adherence to these standards.
For this project, the higher density units would provide a transition between the adjacent
lower density residences and the future medical office complex. The design allows for
private open space in the form of decks, patios, and small yards with a common open
space area for children to play. The trail system and creek also provide open space
amenities.
The site is constrained by Arroyo Grande Creek, the 25' creek setback, Agricultural
setback, pedestrian trail easement, and other easements. Because the density
requirements cannot be waived through the PUD process, the project is further
constrained by the OMU district requirement to be within both the maximum (42 units)
and minimum (31 units) density. This level of density is difficultto achieve if PUD open
space standards are applied. The City Council will need to find that the PUD underlying
objectives are met, andlor the aforementioned site constraints are enough to warrant
deviation of open space requirements. Due to site constraints and underlying OMU
zoning, then, deviations from open space, lot size and lot width requirements are
necessary.
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 15
Table 16.32.050-C: Open_SP!lce Requirements for Planned Unit Devel~pments
j General
J Requirel!lent__.
Private I
open i
Space '
(average J
sJ. per lot)
Common I
Open I
Space II
(minimum
% of project
area) I
I
I
I
I
_ ___ _---.J _._..
Usable
Open
Space
(minimum
% of project II
jarea)., "
100-224
J';' General' ,. ,I General
Reguirement .~ Requirement
I .' 225-499 ; - , 500-999
I(a~e.f"o, ;:,proje,ct\s!
J..29~ s.~~:are_~~
1 30%,oi'36,248 sJ.j
I. ,. ,(excluding, I
, . .drivew~ys imd '
, parking. Also I
. excludes areas
'offered for
" dedication to the
I, 'public)
0%
I General
, Requirement
+1000
35%
10%
40%
, il ~
(proposed is 14,060;
. _ .._.1 s.f.~,o~ 1~O/c,) J_
i 40%, or 18,330 SJ:j
II' (prOPOSed, is, ~3'034j
, sJ.,or19Yo) .
, ,: :~ -'
I' ;' "
",'f ' ,
- ,~----....-..-~--,,~-- .~.
1-
I
_J
45%
45%
Setbacks and lot layout.
The applicant revised the property lines to simplify the site plan and clearly show the
building setbacks. All distances between buildings are at least ten feet (10'). Because
the OMU district has relaxed setback requirements, the project doesn't require setback
deviations through the PUD process.
Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio.
The lot coverage was calculated using the building footprint as a percentage of the lot
area, including garages. All of the lot coverages are within the 70% maximum for the
OMU district (average is 41%). The average floor area ratio (FAR) for the project is
0.59. However, the FAR increased from the original plans for lots 12, 13 and 14 due to
the relocation of property lines. Justification for exceeding the maximum 1.0 FAR on
these three lots is based on the already small unit size (1,337 - 1,463 square feet), and
responding to the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) recommendation of varying
the garage side elevation. (Project statistics are provided in the table below).
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM OS.Q03; PUD OS.Q07 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 16
Agricultural Buffer.
An "Evaluation and Recommendation for Agricultural Buffer" for the project was
prepared by Firma (see Attachment 7).: The report outlines the purpose statement and
range of issues, consultant experience, regulatory setting, Ag setbacks (including
discussion of the Queensland report), and proposed Agricultural buffer characteristics.
Included with the report is an exhibit that shows the Ag buffer setback line based on
zoning, and setback distances based em Ag activities. The report concludes that the
project functionally exceeds City Ordinance 550 and closely approximates the typical
Agricultural buffer requirements of the County and the Queensland report. Of particular
importance is that Arroyo Grande Creek and the existing riparian vegetation
considerably increases the effectiveness of the horizontal setback as a buffer, which will
be augmented by the project landscaping in the trail easement.
The 0.074-acre (or 3,223 square feet) triangular portion of land located northeast of the
project site is designated Agriculture on the current zoning map, but the General Plan
Land Use Map shows it as ConservationlOpen Space (C/OS). It should be noted that
because of different mapping techniques used for updating the land use and zoning
maps, this small segment of land was inadvertently shown as Agriculture on the most
recent zoning map. The 1991 Zoning Map designated this piece of land Public Facilities
(PF). Strict interpretation of Ordinance 550 would have the residential units setback
100' from this piece of land, effectively losing five (5) units. However, this piece of land
is not viable for Agricultural production because it contains non-prime soils (Class III), is
very small, slopes down to the creek, is"awkwardly located across the span of the creek
to the currently farmed property, is adjacent to existing residential development, and
has no access. This property was given a CIOS designation because most of the land
is within the 25' creek setback area. Ifthe City Council concurs with this interpretation,
staff will update the C/OS zoning district consistent with the General Plan as part of theiDevelopment Code update process.
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM OS-003; PUD OS-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 17
p' S
rOlect tatlstlcs
Lot Plan Footprint Living Lot FAR Private
Size Type s.f. Space s.f. Coverage Open Space
s.f. s.f.
Lot 1 3,013 Plan B 1,014 1,525 34% 0.51 447
Lot 2 1,894 PlanA 1,100 1,656 58% 0.87 272
Lot 3 2,595 Plan B 1,014 1,525 39% 0.59 449
Lot4 2,455 PlanA 1,100 1,656 45% 0.67 457
Lot 5 4,630 Plan B 1,014 1,525 22% 0.33 359
Lot 6 2,966 PlanC 935 1,362 32% 0.50 415
Lot 7 2,079 PlanA 1,100 1,656 53% 0.80 360
Lot 8 3,981 Plan B 1,014 1,525 25% 0.38 410
Lot 9 3,194 Plan 0 744 1,355 23% 0.42 75
Lot 10 2,975 Plan 0 681 1,337 23% 0.45 75
Lot 11 1,906 Plan 0 681 1,337 36% 0.70 75
Lot 12 1,224 Plan 0 699 1 ,463 57% 1.19 75
Lot 13 1,227 Plan 0 681 1,337 56% 1.09 75
Lot 14 1,224 Plan 0 699 1 ,463 57% 1.19 75
Lot 15 3,032 Plan 0 681 1,337 22% 0.44 75
Lot 16 2,472 Plan 0 744 1,355 30% 0.55 75
Lot 17 2,642 Plan 0 681 1,337 26% 0.51 75
Lot 18 2,794 PlanA 1,100 1,656 39% 0.59 651
Lot 19 2,588 Plan B 1,014 1,525 39% 0.59 392
Lot 20 2,441 Plan B 1,014 1,525 42% 0.63 245
Lot 21 1,912 PlanA 1,100 1,656 58% 0.86 303
Lot 22 2,323 Plan B 1,014 1,525 44% 0.66 257
Lot 23 2,094 Plan C 935 1,362 45% 0.65 255
Lot 24 1,993 Plan A 1,100 1,656 55% 0.83 382
Lot 25 2,646 PlanA 1,100 1,656 42% 0.63 437
Lot 26 2,676 PlanA 1,100 1,656 41% 0.62 456
Lot 27 2,144 PlanA 1,100 1,656 51% 0.77 534
Lot 28 2,422 PlanC 935 1,362 39% 0.56 474
Lot 29 2,543 Plan B 1,014 1,525 40% 0.60 427
Lot 30 2,054 Plan A 1,100 1,656 54% 0.81 317
Total = 8,974
Ave. = 299
Lot 31 45,631
{Common\
Total 59,691
Common (49% of
Open site)
SDace
FAR: For residential uses, it means the numerical value obtained by dividing the gross floor area,
excludina aaraaes, of a dwellina unit bv the total net area of the lot.
Lot Coverage: The ratio between the ground floor area of the building and the lot area, excluding
anv covered Datio structure that is used solelv for aeneral ooen use lincludinc caraces).
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 18
PROJECT SUMMARY
Zoninn: Office Mixed Use IOMUl
Site Area: Gross Site Area = 120,825 s.f.
12.77 acres)
Proposed Subdivision: Existing: 1 lot Proposed: 31 lots ranging in size
trom 1,224 to 4,630 s.f.
Buildinn Footorint: 28.208 s.f.
Lot Coverage: Ave.is41% Allowed: 70%
Floor Area Ratio: Ave. is 0.59 (3 lots exceed 1.0l Allowed: 1.0
Number ot units proposed: (21) 3-bed units Maximum density: 42 units (15 du/ac
(9) 2-bed units x 2.77 ac)
Total units: 30 Minimum density: 75%, or 31 units
PlanA: Lower level 631 s.f.
Upper level 1,019 s.f.
Garage 447s.f.
Total 2.097 s.f.
1,650 s.f. (living area)
Plan B: Lower level 551 s.f.
Upper level 974s.f.
Garage 437s.f.
Total 1,962 s.t.
1,525 s.f. (living space)
PlanC: Lower level 477 s.f.
Upper level 885 s.t.
Garage 458s.f.
Total 1,820 s.f.
1,362 s.f. (living space)
PianO: Lower level 400 s.t. (garage)
Middle level 701 s.t.
Upper level 636s.f.
Total 1,737s.f.
1,337 s.f. (living area)
Buildina Heiaht: Maximum allowable: 35' above Maximum proposed: 35' I
averaae arade under buildina
Parkina reauired: . 2 and 3-bed units 2 spaces per unit within an enclosed
garage and 0.5 uncovered space per
unit tor developments over tour units.
Parkina ProDosed: (21) 3-bed units = 52.5 spaces required
(9) 2-bed units = 22.5 spaces required
Total required: 75 spaces
Total provided: 76 spaces
Net difference: 1 soace sum/us
Densitv: 2.77 acres x 15 du/ac- 42 maximum dwellings allowed
75% ot 42 = 31 minimum dwellings allowed
41 dwelli~t~S proposed (density
eauivalent
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14, 2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 19
ODen sDace:
. Private open space: 8,974 s.t. (Ave. = 299 s.t.)
. Common open space: 14,060 s.t. (excludes Lot 31)
. Public open space: 45,631 s.f. (Lot 31)
. Total open space: 68,665 s.f.
. Open space required: 350 s.f. per unit x 30 units =
10,500 s.f.
Net difference - 58, 165 S.t.
sum/us
Phase II.
Richard Castro of Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) submitted a letter dated January 16,
2006 explaining the status of developing a Hospital Facilities Plan (see Attachment 8).
Essentially, they are using the results of a medical needs assessment and have been
working with the medical community and specialists to plan for future hospital facility
needs. Interpretation of the OMU Overlay is necessary to determine if conceptual plans
for a 120,000 square foot medical office complex satisfies the intent of the Overlay. To
'ensure that Phase II is developed pursuant to hospital facility needs, condition no. 11
has been added requiring development of Phase I to be contingent upon an agreement
between Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) and the applicant, as approved by the City
Attorney.
Traffic Impacts and Design of Woodland Drive.
Traffic is not proposed to go through Woodland Drive to South Alpine. A gate with knox
box has replaced the bollards for the emergency access. Phase II development will
require a detailed traffic analysis, including an impact assessment of opening up
Woodland Drive to through traffic.
Parking Requirements.
Although the project provides one' (1) parking space above Development Code
requirements, Planning Commissioners expressed concem about the design of the
driveways and inability to park in front of garages. Several residential projects within
the City have been approved with a similar parking design, including the Stonecrest
PUD on EI Camino Real, Parkside PUD on Farroll Ave., Jasmine PUD on Ash and
Courtland Streets, Wheeler's PUD on Brisco Rd., and the recently approved PUD on
Nelson Street. It should also be noted that even though on-street parking is not included
in the calculations for satisfying City parking requirements, at least eight (8) on-street
parking spaces are provided along the project side of Woodland Drive.
Drainage/Ground Water Recharge
Based on the goal of the City to use best management practices for stormwater runoff
quality and quantity with developments adjacent to creeks, including stormwab:lr
retention methods (such that pre and post project drainage are at least roughly equal),
staff previously recommended installation of underground vaults to recharge the ground
water instead of the bioswales. As proposed, stormwater is discharged to an inline
,
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 14,2006
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT)
PAGE 20
filtered storm drain system, which then drains to the creek. Since the in line fossil filter
system will clean the stormwater from this project and from the above neighborhood.
bioswales become less effective. The bioswales also take up the width between
buildings, leaving no functional access from the units to the pedestrian trail.
The applicant has submitted additional information since the January 31s1 Planning
Commission meeting that rejects the use of vaults and instead advocates the expanded
use of porous pavers (see Attachment 9). Based on storage volume and infiltration
calculations, vaults detain less stormwater than porous pavers (2,400 cubic feet vs.
4,800 cubic feet). In addition, installation of vaults requires excavation depths of at least
six feet (6'), creating additional adverse impacts to cultural resources. Hence, condition
of approval no. 57 has been modified to require porous pavers for all driveway and
parking areas. The condition also eliminates the use of bioswales. Condition no. 12
requires two (2) pathway connections between the lower buildings to the pedestrian trail
easement.
Pedestrian Trail Easement.
Concerns were raised during the Planning Commission public hearings regarding the
potential "tunnel" effect of the section of pedestrian trail located to the north. The
applicant submitted cross sectional exhibits illustrating the distances between the
existing fencing, eight-foot (8') wide trail, and proposed four feet (4') tall fencing (see
Attachment 10). The distance between the proposed and existing fencing is
approximately ten feet (10'). The lower height of the proposed fence allows for better
visibility along the pathway. Proposed residences along the northeast section of the
pathway are at a lower elevation with a six-foot (6') retaining wall. The fence and wall
combination is offset by 18", which avoids the necessity for a Variance application.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A public notice was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project, and
a public notice was placed in The Tribune. Staff has not received any written
correspondence to date.
Attachments:
1. City Council Meeting Minutes of August 23, 2005
2. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 3, 2006
3. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 31, 2006
4. Memorandum to Planning Commission from Kelly Heffernon dated January
31,2006
5. Initial Study with Attachments A-H
6. Outfall Exhibit
7. Evaluation and Recommendation for Agricultural Buffer report, prepared by
Firma, dated January 2006
8. Letter from CHW dated January 16, 2006
9. Storage Volumellnfiltration Calculations by KC Designs Group, Inc. dated
February 28, 2006
10. Pedestrian Trail Cross Section Exhibits
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP CASE NO. 05-003 AND PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 05-007, APPLIED FOR BY
CENTRAL COAST REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE (EAST OF
ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 05-003 and Planned Unit Development 05-007, filed by Central
Coast Real Estate Development, for a mixed-use development proposed in two phases
on a 5.5-acre site including thirty (30) 2-story town homes and up to 120,000 square
feet of medical office space; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on this application in accordance
with City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this project is consistent with the City's General
Plan, Development Code and the environmental documents associated therewith, and
has reviewed the draft Negative Declaration with mitigation measures under the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
Tentative Tract Map Findings:
1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies,
plans, programs, intent, and requirements of the General Plan map and text and
the requirements of the Development Code.
2. The site, as shown on the tentative tract map, is physically suitable for the
proposed density because all necessary easements, parking, open space, and
setbacks can be provided.
3. The design of the tentative tract map or the proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial damage to the natural environment, including fish, wildlife or
their habitat.
4. The design of the subdivision or proposed improvements is not likely to cause
public health problems.
5. The design of the tentative tract map or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed tentative tract map or that alternate easements for
access or for use will be provided, and that these alternative easements will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 2 of 28
6. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community
sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements a prescribed in
Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the California Water Code.
7. Adequate public services and facilities exist or will be provided as the result of the
proposed tentative tract map to support project development.
Planned Unit Development Permit Findings:
1. The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and programs
of the Arroyo Grande General Plan.
2. The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and all
yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls and fences, parking areas, landscaping, and
other features required by the Development Code.
3. The site for the proposed development has adequate access, meaning that the
site design and development plan conditions consider the limitations of existing
streets and highways.
4. Adequate public services exist, or will be provided in accordance with the
conditions of the development plan approval, to serve the proposed development;
and that the approval of the proposed development will not result in a reduction of
public services to properties in the vicinity so as to be a detriment to public health,
safety, and welfare.
5. The proposed development, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse
effect on surrounding property, or the permitted use thereof, and will be compatible
with the existing single-family residential, hospital and medical office uses in the
surrounding area.
6. The improvements required, and the manner of development, adequately address
all natural and man-made hazards associated with the proposed development of
the project site, including, but not limited to, flood, seismic, fire and slope hazards.
7. The proposed development carries out the intent of the Planned Unit Development
Provisions by providing a more efficient use of the land and an excellence of
design greater than that which could be achieved through the application of
conventional development standards.
8. The proposed development complies with all applicable performance standards
listed in Development Code Section 16.32.050.
Required CEQA Findings:
1. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to Section 15063
of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development 05-007.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 3 of 28
2. Based on the initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for
public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related materials
is located at City Hall in the Community Development Department.
3. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering
the record as a whole, the Planning Commission adopts a negative declaration
and finds that there is no substantial evidence of any significant adverse effect,
either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2
of the Fish and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a
result of development of this project. Further, the Planning Commission finds that
said Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and
analysis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit
Development No. 05-007, with the above findings and subject to the conditions as set
forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
On a motion by Council Member
and by the following roll call vote to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 14th day of March 2006.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 4 of 28
TONY M. FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESI
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 5 of 28
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 05-003 &
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 05-007
Central Coast Real Estate Development
Fair Oaks Avenue (east of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital)
COMMUNITY DEVEI OPMFNT nFPARTMENT
GFNFRAI CONnlTIONS
This approval authorizes the subdivision of a 5.5-acre property into thirty-one (31) parcels
for construction of a phased mixed-use project. Phase I includes thirty (30) town homes
and a 45,631square foot open space lot, and Phase II conceptually includes up to
120,000 square feet of medical office floor area with subterranean parking. Phase II will
be subject to separate discretionary and enviro~mental review.
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 05-003 and Planned Unit Development No. 05-007.
3. This Tentative Map and Planned Unit Development shall automatically expire on
March 14, 2008 unless the final map is recorded or an extension is granted
pursuant to Section 16.12.140 of the Development Code.
4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to
the City Council at. the meeting of March 14, 2006 and marked Exhibits "B-1
through B-12".
5. The applicant shall agree to defend at hislher sole expense any action brought
against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of
the issuance of said approval, or in anyway relating to the implementation thereof,
or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the
City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fee's
which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay
as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its
own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not
relieve applicant of hislher obligations under this condition.
6. Development shall conform to the OMU-D-2.20 zoning requirements except as
otherwise approved.
I, __
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 6 of28
SPFCIAI CONDITIONS
7. Similar to MM 1.2, the applicant shall return to the Architectural Review
Committee to consider final colors and materials prior to issuance of building
permit.
8. The north end of Woodland Drive shall be narrowed to a width of twenty feet
(20') for a distance of approximately seventy feet (70') to allow access for
pedestrians and cyclists.
9. The project shall comply with Design Overlay OMU-D-2.20. Total square footage
of residential living area shall not exceed 40,000 square feet.
10. The Final Tract Map shall show an irrevocable offer to dedicate Lot 31 to the
City.
11. The developer shall submit plans for development of Phase II that satisfy all
mixed-use development standards for the OMU district and Design Overlay O-D-
2.20. Said plans must be reviewed and approved by the City Council prior to
issuance of grading or building permit for Phase I.
12. The plans shall show two (2) pathway connections between the lower buildings
to the pedestrian trail easement.
NOISF
13. Similar to MM 8.1, Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 8am and
6pm Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday.
nEVEI OPMENT CODE
14. Development shall conform to the Office Mixed Use (OMU-D-2.20) zoning
requirements except as otherwise approved.
15. All fences andlor walls shall not exceed six feet (6') in height unless otherwise
approved with a Minor Exception or Variance application.
16. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20, "Land
Divisions".
17. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.64, "Dedications,
Fees and Reservations."
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT
18. All walls, including screening and retaining walls, shall be compatible with the
approved architecture and Development Code Standards, and shall be no more
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 7 of 28
than 3 feet in height in the front setback area, subject to the review and approval of
the Community Development Director.
PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL MAP
19. The applicant shall submit final Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's)
that are administered by a subdivision homeowners' association and formed by the
applicant for common areas within the subdivision. The CC&R's shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney and recorded with the final map.
20. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development and
Parks and Recreation Departments. The landscaping plan shall include the
following for all public street frontages and common landscaped areas:
(1) Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail;
(2) The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical
equipment;
(3) The required landscaping and improvements. This includes:
i. Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within
five feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs;
ii. Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads,
drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches
shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan; and
iii. All slopes 2: 1 or greater shall have jute mesh, nylon mesh or
equivalent material.
iv. An automated irrigation system.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
21. All fencing shall be installed.
PARKS ANn RFCREATION DEPARTMFNT CONDITIONS
22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance 521 C.S., the
Community Tree Ordinance.
23. Linear root barriers shall be used at the front of the project to protect the
sidewalks.
24. All street front trees shall be 24-inch box and shall be located a minimum of one
(1) tree for every thirty-five feet (35') of street frontage.
25. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a trail
improvement plan (same as MM 11-2).
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 8 of 28
RIIIIDING AND FIRF DEPARTMFNT CONDITIONS
URC/LJFC
26. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire
and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the
City of Arroyo Grande.
27. The project shall provide complete compliance with State and Federal disabled
access requirements. Per S.B. 1025, 10% of the primary entry levels of
multistoried dwelling units must comply with the HCD's accessibility provisions.
28. The applicant shall show all setback areas for each lot on the tentative tract map
prior to map recordation.
FIRF I ANFS
29. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post
designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code.
30. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire
Department guidelines.
FIRE FI OW/FIRF HYDRANTS
31. Project shall have a fire flow based on the California Fire Code Appendix III-A.
32. Prior to bringing combustibles on site, fire hydrants shall be installed per Fire
Department and Public Works Department standards. Locations shall be
approved by the Fire Chief.
FIRF SPRINKI FRS
33. Prior to Occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire
Department guidelines.
I,
34. The project shall provide Fire Department approved access or sprinkler system per
National Fire Protection Association Standards.
OPTICOM DFVICF
I:
35. An opticom traffic signal pre-emption device shall be installed that meets Building
and Fire Department requirements as determined by the Director of Building & Fire
if a signal is installed.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 9 of 28
ARANOONMFNT/NON-CONFORMING
36. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items
such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions.
OTHFR APPROVAl S
37. The project shall comply with Federal and local flood management policies.
38. Any review costs generated by outside consultants shall be paid by the applicant.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied
with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise.
39. Fees - The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees at the time they are due.
(For your information, the "Procedure for Protesting Fees, Dedications,
Reservations or Exactions" is provided below).
PROCEDURE FOR PROTESTING FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR
EXACTIONS:
(A) Any party may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or
other exactions imposed on a development project, for the purpose of defraying
all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project by
meeting both of the following requirements:
(1) Tendering any required payment in full or providing satisfactory evidence of
arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the
conditions necessary to meet the requirements of the imposition.
(2) Serving written notice on the City Council, which notice shall contain all of
the following information:
(a) A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be tendered
when due, or that any conditions which have been imposed are provided
for or satisfied, under protest.
(b) A statement informing the City Council of the factual elements of the
dispute and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest.
(B) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision (A) shall be filed at the time of the
approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the
date of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to
be imposed on a development project.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 10 of 28
(C) Any party who files a protest pursuant to subdivision (A) may file an action to
attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the imposition of the fees, dedications
reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project by a local
agency within 180 days after the delivery of the notice.
(D) Approval or conditional approval of a development occurs, for the purposes of
this section, when the tentative map, tentative parcel map, or parcel map is
approved or conditionally approved or when the parcel map is recorded if a
tentative map or tentative parcel map is not required.
(E) The imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions occurs, for
the purposes of this section, when they are imposed or levied on a specific
development.
40. Fees to be paid prior to plan approval:
(1) Plan check for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate.
(2) Plan check for improvement plans based on an approved construction cost
estimate.
(3) Permit Fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork estimate.
(4) Inspection fee of subdivision or public works construction plans based on
an approved construction cost estimate.
PUBLIC WORKS DFPARTMFNT SPFCIAI CONDITIONS
All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied
with prior to recording the map, unless specifically noted otherwise.
41. ' The applicant shall revise the sewer main relocation out to the Woodland Drive
Extension and then down to Fair Oaks Avenue.
42. The project will pay the proportionate share to the following wastewater capital
improvement projects:
(1) Woodland Drive Upgrade (2.22%),
43. The project will dedicate the appropriate public water easements for the water
lines and the hydrants.
44. The project will install additional sewer mains as necessary to serve the project.
45. All sewer mains shall be a minimum 8" in diameter with a minimum slope of .5%.
46. All sewer main intersections, grade breaks and directional changes shall occur at
manholes.
47. The applicant shall remove all sanitary sewer manholes to the base and fill all
abandoned mains with grout.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 11 of 28
48. The applicant shall overlay Fair Oaks Avenue across the entire Phase I project
frontage to the centerline with 1 Yo" asphalt. Where utility trenches cross the
centerline, the overlay shall extend to the opposite gutter.
49. The project will run a water main through the site, connecting the water main
underneath Fair Oaks Avenue to the water main underneath Cerro Vista Circle.
50. The project will install water mains on-site as necessary to serve the units and
fire hydrants.
51. The project will install fire hydrants to Public Works and Fire Department
requirements.
52. The applicant shall perform the South Alpine Water Main upgrade as outlined in
the water master plan. The applicant shall enter into a reimbursement
agreement with the City for any amount exceeding their proportional share.
53. All new water mains shall be a minimum 8" in diameter.
54. The applicant shall install wheel chair ramps at the intersection of Woodland
Drive and Fair Oaks Avenue.
55. If feasible, the applicant shall install a drop inlet on the north side of Fair Oaks
east of Woodland Drive. The drop inlet will connect to the existing storm drain
line on the north side of the project site.
56. Similar to MM 6.2, the applicant shall install an inline fossil filter where the project
storm drain line connects to the City storm drain line.
57. The plans shall be revised to eliminate the use of bioswales and show porous
pavers installed for all driveway and parking areas.
58. The applicant shall mitigate erosion at the outlet of the existing 48" storm drain
line.
59. The applicant shall remediate corrosion to the existing 48" corrugated metal pipe
(CMP) storm drain line.
60. The applicant shall install the improvements at the intersection Fair Oaks Avenue
and Woodland Drive per the project traffic study.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 12 of 28
PIJRIIC WORKS DFPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS
GFNFRAI CONDITIONS
61. Clean all streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks at the end of the day's operations or
as directed by the Director of Public Works.
62. Perform construction activities during normal business hours (Monday through
Friday, 7 A.M. to 5 P.M.) for noise and inspection purposes. The developer or
contractor shall refrain from performing any work other than site maintenance
outside of these hours, unless an emergency arises or approved by the Director of
Public Works. The City may hold the developer or contractor responsible for any
expenses incurred by the City due to work outside of these hours.
IMPROVEMENT PI ANS
63. All project improvements shall be designed by a registered civil engineer in the
State of California and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande
Standard Drawings and Specifications.
64. Submit four (4) full-size paper copies, one (1) full-size mylar copy, and one (1)
electronic copy on CD in AutoCAD of approved improvement plans for inspection
purposes during construction.
65. Submit as-built plans at the completion of the project or improvements as directed
by the Director of Public Works. One (1) set of mylar prints and an electronic
version on CD in AutoCAD format shall be required.
66. The following Improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the Public Works Department:
(1) Grading, drainage and erosion control,
(2) Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk,
(3) Public utilities,
(4) Water and sewer,
(5) Landscaping and irrigation,
(6) Any other improvements as required by the Director of Public Works.
67. Landscape and irrigation plans are required for landscaping within the public right
of way, and shall be approved by the Community Development and Parks and
Recreation Departments. In addition, The Director of Public Works shall approve
any landscaping or irrigation within a public right of way or otherwise to be
maintained by the City.
68. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed streets,
utilities and retaining walls.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 13 of 28
69. The site plan shall include the following:
(1) The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm
drainage facilities within the project site and abutting streets or alleys.
(2) The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer laterals.
(3) The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures.
(4) All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the property.
(5) The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved areas.
(6) The location of all existing imd proposed public or private utilities.
WATFR
70. Construction water is available at the corporate yard. The City of Arroyo Grande
does not allow the use of hydrant meters.
71. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped
at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
72. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in
water demand created by the project by either:
(1) Implement an individual water program consisting of retrofitting existing off-
site high-flow plumbing fixtures with low flow devices. The calculations shall
be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The
proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the City Council for
approval prior to implementation; OR,
(2) The applicant may pay an in lieu fee of $2,200 for each new residential unit.
73. All units to be sprinklered shall have individual water services.
SFWER
74. All sewer laterals within the public right of way must have a minimum slope of 2%.
75. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be
constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency standards.
76. Existing sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and capped
at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
77. Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the development's
impact to District facilities prior to final recordation of the map.
PlJRllC IJTIIITIES
78. Underground all new public utilities in accordance with Section 16.68.050 of the
Development Code.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 14 of 28
79. Submit all improvement plans to the public utility companies for approval and
comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for
approval. All utility companies shall sign the improvement plans prior to final
submittal.
80. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public
utilities shall be operational.
STRFFTS
81. All street repairs shall be constructed in accordance with the City Street cut policy.
82. All trenching in City streets shall utilize saw cutting. Any over cuts shall be cleaned
and filled with epoxy.
83. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R-Value soil test, but shall not
be less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class II AB.
CURB, GIJTTFR ANn SlnFWAI K
84. Utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
85. Install tree wells for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and sidewalk to
prevent damage due to root growth.
GRAnlNG
86. Perform all grading in conformance with the City Grading Ordinance.
87. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the Director of
Public Works for walls not constructed per City standards.
88. The applicant shall prepare an erosion control plan for review and approval prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
89. The applicant shall obtain a WDID No. from the Regional Water Quality Control
Board prior to issuance of a grading permit.
nRAINAGF
90. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 1 OO-year storm flow.
91. All drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 15 of 28
92. The applicant shall provide detailed drainage calculations indicating that increased
run-off can be accommodated by existing facilities andlor provide on-site retention
basins, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
93. The grading and drainage plans shall be reviewed by the Coastal San Luis
Obispo Resource Conversation District. The applicant shall reimburse the City
for this review.
OFOICATIONS AND EASEMFNTS
94. All easements, abandonments, or similar documents to be recorded as a
document separate from a map, shall be prepared by the applicant on 8 1/2 x 11
City standard forms, and shall include legal descriptions, sketches, closure
calculations, and a current preliminary title report. The applicant shall be
responsible for all required fees, including any additional required City processing.
95. Street tree planting and maintenance easements shall be dedicated adjacent to all
street right of ways. Street tree easements shall be a minimum of 10 feet beyond
the right of way.
96, A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide
adjacent to all street right of ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for
the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities.
97. A blanket Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated over the project
driveways.
98. Any lots adjacent to the Woodland Drive extension shall be denied direct access to
Woodland Drive.
PFRMITS
99. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following:
(1) Performing work in the City right of way,
(2) Staging work in the City right of way,
(3) Stockpiling material in the City right of way,
(4) Storing equipment in the City right of way.
100. Obtain a grading permit prior to commencement of any grading operations on site.
AGRFFMFNTS
101. Inspection Agreement: Prior to approval of an improvement plan, the applicant
shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required
improvements.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 16 of 28
102. Improvement Agreement: The applicant shall enter into an agreement for the
completion and guarantee of improvements required. The agreement shall be on
a form acceptable to the City.
103. Easement Agreement: The applicant shall enter into an easement agreement
with the City for the relocation of the existing sewer main prior to approval of the
improvement plans.
IMPROVFMFNT SFCLJRITIES
104. All improvement securities shall be of a form as set forth in Development Code
Section 16.68.090, Improvement Securities.
105. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for public improvements for review by
the Director of Public Works.
106. Provide financial security for the following, to be based upon a construction cost
estimate approved by the Director of Public Works:
(1) Faithful Performance: 100% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements,
(2) Labor and Materials: 50% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements,
(3) Monumentation: 100% ofthe approved estimated cost of placement of all
subdivision monuments,
(4) One Year Guarantee: 10% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance of the
subdivision improvements.
OTHER DOCLJMFNTATION
107. Preliminary Title Report: A current preliminary title report shall be submitted to the
Director of Public Works prior to checking the map.
108. Subdivision Guarantee: A current subdivision guarantee shall be submitted to the
Director of Public Works prior to checking the final submittal of the map.
109. CC&R's: The applicant shall submit detailed CC&R's covering the maintenance of
all commonly owned facilities subject to the review and approval of the Director of
Public Works and the City Attorney.
PRIOR TO ISSLJING A BUILDING PFRMIT
110. The Final Map shall be recorded with all pertinent conditions of approval satisfied.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 17 of 28
PRIOR TO ISSIJlNG A CFRTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
111. All utilities shall be operational.
112. All essential project improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Non-
essential improvements, guaranteed by an agreement and financial securities,
may be constructed after occupancy as directed by the Director of Public Works.
113. Prior to the final 10% of occupancies for the project are issued, all improvements
shall be fully constructed and accepted by the City.
MITIGATION MEASIJRFS
A negative declaration with mitigation measures has been adopted for this project. The
following mitigation measures shall be implemented as conditions of approval and shall
be monitored by the appropriate City department or responsible agency. The applicant
shall be responsible for verification in writing by the monitoring department or
agency that the mitigation measures have been implemented.
Mitigation Measures:
MITIGATION MFASLJRFS'
MM 1.1: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan verifying that all exterior lighting
for the development is directed downward and does not create spill or glare to adjacent
properties.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; Police Dept.
Prior to issuance of building permit
MM 1.2: Exterior lighting for the pedestrian trail shall be low intensity, low height
and shielded to prevent illumination of creek habitat and adjacent residents.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; Police Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 1.3: Similar to condition of approval no. 7, the applicant shall submit final
exterior colors and materials of the town homes for Architectural Review Committee
approval. The colors shall blend as much as possible with the surrounding
environment.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to issuance of building permit
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 18 of 28
MM 2.1: All new property owners within the subdivision must sign a Real Estate
Transfer Disclosure indicating that they acknowledge and agree to the provisions
contained in the City's Right-To-Farm Ordinance.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer; Real Estate Agent
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to close of escrow
MM 2.2: The developer and City shall obtain an agricultural buffer and creek
easement on the agricultural parcel located northwest of the creek and offer to the City
(see also MM 4.1). At a minimum, the City Council can interpret that the zoning
designation on the creek setback area for the agricultural parcel located northwest of
the creek should be Public Facilities (PF). (Due to different mapping techniques used
for creating the updated land use and zoning maps, the small portion of land northeast
of the project site inadvertently is shown as Agriculture. Earlier maps show this piece of
land as PF). If this is not acceptable, the City will initiate a Development Code
Amendment to change the zoning designation of said property from Agriculture (AG) to
Public Facilities (PF).
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer and City
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to final tract map recordation
Con~tnJr.tion Pha~e Emi~~ion~
The project shall comply with all applicable Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PMlO) as contained in section 6.5 of
the Air Quality Handbook. All site grading and demolition plans shall list the following
regulations:
MM 3.1: All dust control measures listed below (MM 3.2 - 3.6) shall be followed
during construction of the project and shall be shown on grading and building plans. The
contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control
program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off
site. The name and telephone number of such person(s) shall be provided to the APCD
prior to land use clearance for map recordation and finished grading of the area.
MM 3.2: During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep
all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent airborne dust from leaving the
site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and
after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.
Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
MM 3.3: Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or
treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 19 of 28
MM 3.4: All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114.
MM 3.5: Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to
streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. Vehicle speed for all
construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
MM 3.6: Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried on to
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where
feasible.
MM 3.7: To mitigate the diesel PM generated during the construction phase, all
construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned according to
manufacturer's specifications. The measures below (MM 3.8 - 3.10) shall be clearly
identified in the project bid specifications so the contractors biding on the project can
include the purchase and installation costs in their bids.
MM 3.8: All off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not .
limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets,
compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with California Air
Resources Board (ARB) motor vehicle diesel fuel.
MM 3.9: To the maximum extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment
shall meet the ARB's 1996 certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines.
MM 3.10: Unless otherwise approved by APCD, the developer shall install catalytic
diesel particulate filters or Diesel oxidation catalyst on two (2) pieces of construction
equipment involved in primary earth moving and construction activities and projected to
generate the greatest emissions. APCD staff shall be included in the selection of
candidate equipment along with a representative of the contractor.
MM 3.11: If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation, or building(s) are
removed or renovated, this project may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions,
including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (40CFR61, Subpart M - asbestos NESHAP). These requirements include, but
are not limited to: 1) notification requirements to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey
conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and 3) applicable removal and disposal
requirements of identified asbestos containing material.
MM 3.12: Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure
that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos
(NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an
exemption request must be filed with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant
must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos Air Toxins Control Measure
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 20 of 28
(A TCM) regulated under by the California Air Resources Board (ARB).
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept., Building
and Fire Department; APCD
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
OpemtionFlI PhFlse Fmissions
MM 3.13: To encourage walking within the development and provide a safer
pedestrian environment, the applicant shall use textured andlor colored concrete at
pedestrian crossings.
MM 3.14: Where feasible, provide continuous sidewalks separated from the roadway
by landscaping with adequate lighting, especially at intersections.
MM 3.15: Provide shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to
reduce summer cooling needs.
MM 3.16: Provide sodium streetlights, or equivalent energy efficient lighting
acceptable to APCD.
MM 3.17:
Orient homes to maximize natural heating and cooling.
MM 3.18: Provide outdoor electrical outlets on homes to encourage the use of electric
appliances and tools.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept., and
Building & Fire Dept.; APCD
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 4.1: The developer shall record an open space agreement and twenty-five foot
(25') creek easement on the property measured from top of bank. No development
shall occur within 25' creek setback area.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to Grading Permit
MM 4.2: In addition to native ground covers and perennial grasses, the final
landscape plan shall incorporate native riparian and upland shrubs and trees such as
Sycamore, Coast Live Oak, Coffeeberry, Elderberry and Toyon in the recreational trail
easement to increase habitat cover for wildlife and add forage value and roosting sites.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 21 of 28
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; Parks,
Recreation and Facilities Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 4.3: The applicant shall mitigate erosion at the outlet of the existing 48"
corrugated metal pipe (CMP) storm drain line. In addition, the applicant shall remediate
corrosion to the 48" CMP storm drain line. Should a Streambed Alteration Permit be
required from CDFG to mitigate said erosion at the outlet of the CMP, and where the
permit includes more stringent conditions than the City's erosion control measures, the
more stringent requirements shall be used.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.; CDFG
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
MM 4.4: A qualified biologist shall perform one pre-construction survey for
southwestern pond turtles immediately prior to initiation of site grading and
culvert/outfall structure construction. If southwestern pond turtles are observed within
an area to be disturbed they shall be relocated out of harms way to an appropriate area
immediately upstream or downstream of the project area within Arroyo Grande Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to and during start of construction.
MM 4.5: All tree removal sh~1I be limited to the time period of September 1 sl to
March 1 S\ which is considered to be outside the typical breeding season for birds. If it is
not feasible to avoid the bird-nesting season and trees will be removed between March
1s1 and September 1S\ a pre-construction survey for nesting birds shall be performed by
a qualified biologist. If active birds nests are located during pre-construction surveys
within the project area subject to tree removal or ground disturbance, the nest site shall
be avoided until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site for survival
as determined by a qualified biologist. If determined necessary by a qualified biologist,
a non-disturbance buffer zone shall be established around each nest for the duration of
the breeding season until such time as the adults and young are no longer reliant on
the nest site for survival as determined by the qualified biologist.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 4.6: A Riparian Habitat Restoration Plan (RHRP) shall be prepared by a
qualified landscape architect or restoration biologist experienced in native habitat
restoration for any work performed within the dedicated open space 25-foot creek
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 22 of 28
setback area. The RHRP shall include at a minimum a detailed planting plan for the 25-
foot setback area and for all disturbed areas from repairing the CMP and installing rock
slope protection. The RHRP. shall also include at a minimum the number of other
native trees impacted and location of replacement plantings, specific plant species
palette, a non-native species removal plan, success criteria, a five-year monitoring
program, and contingency measures to ensure meeting the success criteria. The
RHRP shall also include an erosion control plan and Best Management Practices \ .
(BMPs) for all disturbed areas within the 25-foot creek setback and exposed banks. The
erosion control seed mix for the riparian setback area shall be composed exclusively of
native species. Any work performed within the creek channel or creek bank is subject
to an approved Streambed Alteration Agreement with the Ca. Dept. of Fish and Game.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer shall submit the RHRP to the City
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; CDFG
The RHRP shall be submitted and approved prior to
issuance of Grading Permit; duration of monitoring
shall be no less than five (5) years.
MM 4.7: To increase riparian functions and values, the applicant shall submit a
final landscape plan that incorporates native riparian and upland shrubs and trees such
as Sycamore, Coast Live Oak, Coffeeberry, Elderberry and Toyon along the top of
creek bank and within the recreational trail easement. Native ground covers and
perennial grasses shall also be incorporated throughout the project. The CC&Rs shall
include insurances that the landscaping is sufficiently maintained.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, PR&F (Parks,
Recreation and Facilities Dept.)
Prior to issuance of building permit.
Timing:
MM 4.8: Any native trees intentionally or unintentionally killed or removed that are
greater than or equal to four (4) inches diameter at breast height (DBH) and less than
twelve (12) inches DBH shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. Trees removed that are greater
than or equal to twelve (12) inches DBH shall be replaced at a 5:1 ratio. Replacement
trees shall be limited to in-kind replacement of appropriate native tree species as
approved by the City Parks, Facilities and Recreation Department's arborist. All trees to
be removed shall be clearly marked on construction plans and marked in the field with
flagging or paint. All trees to be retained shall be clearly identified on construction plans
and marked in the field for preservation with highly visible construction fencing at a
minimum around the drip line of the trees to be retained.
Native riparian trees intentionally or unintentionally impacted shall be replaced within
the 25-foot riparian setback area. Native trees impacted outside the riparian zone can
be replaced within the riparian setback area or incorporated into the development
landscaping plan.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 23 of 28
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, PR&F
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD and PR&F
During construction
MM 4.9: Fruit trees shall be included in the final landscape plan for use by project
residents to encourage sustainable development.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD and PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 5.1: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor all grading activities.
The monitor shall work closely with construction crews in close proximity to earth
moving equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed materials immediately
upon exposure and prior to disturbance. A daily log shall be maintained by the monitor
to record when and where earth-moving activities take place within the project area, as
well as the presencelabsence of archaeological materials in the monitored matrix.
In the event that prehistoric cultural materials, or historic cultural materials are
encountered, work in the immediate vicinity of the finds shall be suspended and the
archaeologist allowed to quickly record, collect, and analyze any significant resources
encountered. The client and the City shall be notified should resources meeting CEQA
significance standards be discovered. The archaeologist shall work as quickly as
possible to permit resumption of construction activities. It is preferred that location data
of finds be recorded using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) receiver. In the
event that human remains (burials) are found, the County Coroner (781-4513) shall be
contacted immediately. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his
or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the remains to be those of a Native
American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she
will contact by telephone within 24 hours the Native American Heritage Commission.
Following the field analysis work, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare final
monitoringlmitigation report that includes a description of the methods used, materials
recovered, and the results of historic or prehistoric analysis of those materials. The
final archaeological monitoring/mitigation report prepared by the qualified archaeologist
shall be accepted by the Community Development Director prior to submittal to the
repository and issuance of any final occupancy for the project. A copy shall be provided
to the Community Development Director for retention in the project file.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD. Public Works Dept.
During grading and construction activities
(monitoring); prior to issuance of a Building Permit
(final report)
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 24 of 28
MM 6.1: The recommendations provided in the Soils Engineering Report prepared
by GeoSolutions, Inc. dated September 23, 2005 shall be incorporated into the project
plans and specifications (in particular pgs. 5-11 of the Report). Final improvement
plans submitted to the City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil
engineer that the plans are in conformance with the soils report, and the certification
shall confirm that the plans include the following:
. The project shall be designed to withstand ground shaking associated
with a large magnitude earthquake on nearby active faults.
. All proposed structures shall be designed to conform to the most recent
Uniform Building Code (UBC) Zone 4 guidelines.
. The project shall comply with the requirements of. the City's Grading
Ordinance.
. Site-specific specifications regarding clearing, site grading and
preparation, footings, foundations, slabs-on-grade, site drainage, and
pavements or turf block shall be delineated.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 6.2: An inline system shall be installed to clean storm water runoff prior to
entering the creek. The City will maintain the inline system. Porous pavers shall be
included in the project to help recharge the ground water.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 8.1: Similar to condition of approval no. 12, construction activities shall be
restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction
shall occur on Sunday. On-site equipment maintenance and servicing shall be confined
to the same hours.
MM 8.2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be
required to have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be
located at least 300 feet from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine
housing enclosures or noise screens are provided by the contractor.
MM 8.3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas
shall be placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
During construction
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 25 of 28
MM 9.1: Fifteen percent (15%) of new units constructed shall be sold to qualified
families earning a moderate-income (based on the City's affordable housing standards).
The developer shall pay an affordable housing in-lieu fee for any fraction of a unit. An
affordable housing agreement between the City and developer shall be recorded that
stipulates the details of the terms and conditions for producing and selling affordable
ownership housing within the project. Said agreement shall be reviewed and approved
by the Community Development Director and City Attorney, and shall be recorded prior
to recordation of the final tract map.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, City Attorney
Prior to recordation of the Final Tentative Tract Map
MM 10.1: The applicant shall pay Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Lucia
Mar Unified School District
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 11.1:
fees.
The developer shall pay all applicable City park development and impact
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 11.2:
The applicant shall submit a public pedestrian trail improvement plan.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 12.1: The developer shall pay the City's Traffic Signalization and Transportation
Facilities Impact fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Public
Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 13.1: The applicant shall pay the project's proportionate share to the following
wastewater capital improvement project:
. Woodland Drive Upgrade (2.22%)
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 26 of 28
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
MM 13.2:
fees.
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
The developer shall pay the City's sewer hookup and SSLOCSD impact
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Public
Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.1: The applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) and Erosion Control Plan that specifies the implementation of Best
Management Practices to avoid and minimize water quality impacts as required by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). At a minimum, the SWPP and
Erosion Control Plan shall include:
. Designation of equipment and supply staging and storage areas at least 200
feet from the outside edge of the Arroyo Grande Creek 25-foot setback area.
All vehicle parking, routine equipment maintenance, fueling, minor repair,
etc., and soil and material stockpile, shall be done only in the designated
staging area.
. Major vehiclelequipment maintenance, repair, and equipment washing shall
be performed off site.
. A wet and dry spill clean up plan that specifies reporting requirements and
immediate clean up to ensure no residual soil, surface water or groundwater
contamination would remain after clean up.
. Designating concrete mixer washout areas at least 200 feet from outside
edge of Arroyo Grande Creek 25-foot setback with the use of appropriate
containment or reuse practices.
. A temporary and excess fill stockpile and disposal plan that ensures that no
detrimental affects to receiving waters would result.
. Requiring all grading and application of concrete, asphalt, etc. to occur during
the dry season from April 15 to October 15.
. Required site preparation and erosion control BMPs for any work that may
need to be completed after October 15.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.2: To reduce erosion hazards due to construction activities, grading shall be
minimized, and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control structures,
andlor establish a permanent plant cover on side slopes following construction.
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 27 of 28
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.3: Work shall be completed during the dry season (April 15 to October 15) to
reduce active construction erosion to the extent feasible. If construction must extend
into the wet weather season, a qualified hydrogeologist or civil engineer shall prepare a
drainage and erosion control plan that addresses construction measures to prevent
sedimentation and erosion of Arroyo Grande Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit & during construction
MM 14.4: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented for
any work that requires access to the creek, subject to CDFG approval through a
Streambed Alteration Permit.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.; CDFG
During construction
MM 14.5: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at
project completion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
MM 14.6: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the 25' creek
setback area, either directly or indirectly. Stockpiles should be kept far enough from the
banks of the active channel and protected to prevent material from entering the creek
bed.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
During construction
MM 14.7: An inline system shall be. installed to clean storm water runoff prior to
entering the creek. The City will maintain the in line system. Porous pavers shall be
included in the project to help recharge the ground water.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
RESOLUTION NO.
VTTM 05-003; PUD 05-007
PAGE 28 of 28
MM 14.8: The project shall comply with the City's required water conservation
measures including any applicable measures identified in any applicable City Water
Conservation Plans.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.9: The project shall install best available technology for low-flow toilets,
showerheads and hot water recirculation systems.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Building Dept.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
MM 14.10: The final landscape plan shall show low-water useldrought resistant
species and drip irrigation systems rather than spray irrigation systems.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Parks, Recreation and
Facilities Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.11: The project plans shall include methods for collecting surface run-off from
the site for use on landscaped areas to reduce water use and minimize run-off to the
extent feasible.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
'j!
, I
i!
~
"
~I
\ ,\
1111
"'I
I',
;..;1
"
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
"
"~ ~
xo
~o
'" .
~~
Q~
,,0
".
:"
~
EXHIBIT B-1
Z'OI
qF,~;
",
0"0
000
000
000
c Cc
~~~
'0
3
i
\
, '~~:I'
~
-~.-:-.::'~
, "-
\ ~.
, .'
~ \. ~~.-
i
L
", L
,.c,. 'f. ",
'I'C "1')
( , I~!
. ~J ", .
~. ....
"
--i
,. ~':
"- ~. --
I
['i;
"JI"~ I
\1
i
I '
i
I
!
,
j
i
I
LrOO
':1,' () I
I I'V .
!~ 0
~l:j
!-
"
"
.iII rrWI!!!; ~
i .Cl~
~~ ! dU
rn~ . .~Q.
~~ I iQh
n~
Ir:HI1W
, 'l.g,},
. IV-l',-.,l;
'Ii ";"ll'
~ "ff,:
~ J' J~lf!1
~
H
Ii
,0
m
~ii II
~ ~
~I
"
.1
!
~
~
~
II
M I
i I
I
I
I
,
I.
,
,
i
~ I
~ Ii
i II
1"'1 "
'I
II
'I
II
11
il
~~ I ~~ ;
~~ ~iU!l1
~h m! n~
II'
~I il
~~;
!h
i~~
;;1
EXHIBIT B-2
I
I d~
I In
~niff
I
I ~I
In -fft
~h
~~!
I
~
....0'" a
'l>~ I
"
II
~I
~~--
"- "-
"-
, "- ...
, , j~: ... "- II!;
i I "- "- I
"- '- "- ,
ill ; "- --+-
" ,. -B '
I" I :;;; ~ ;
n '- '- ~I
, I" , ~ '
, I ~ ~ I -- ... II
I ~i _'
,-
- cg-,' \ m
, I \ \
f
I '.1
iT~j ~ i [[[J II!' ,. il :H~lIrr il i ~ c i ~~~ ~jl ~,
F! ~l mOO I" ~fl . !Ol~
~~ . ',' Ii ~ 'UaHfl , g
~;;; il" ~hk- ~~ l'r'ln " ~ h h ! Ii ~ !
i~ 0 ' 'j 11ft ;,
>z ~ I:n.; ,I
zl; 1 II ~ i~~ I :~l
, - ~ I' t~U:f I ! ,0 ~
~ 1;1. -< ~ ,. e ~
~----- ---
11
l'
,I
II
II
,I
/;
"
: 111
',"
j
i
i
,
1
I
,
.
'"'00
r~ pi
~~ 0
EXHIBIT B-3
1 '
1
1
I'
1
1
1
1
Il
I:
I,
ill
~~
o
.
,
.
.
.
~
IIlIU~~~~IiIl'III!!1!:m;':ml:!i!III' illl1illl! ~
II i!llll'" i!II'lIlllllldl'II;I.II;IIII," ilil
'! I,!! Ii I
"''''''''.'~'.ODjjl!!lllrto!mjj[jjllW ii I!!
1" .. 1fiiiitiilh:~" III
.
~
.
c~
~~
-m
c~
:<~
~z
s;>
z::!
! rrmrrr' !Hi 11
, ,,' 'I
i kkkk i~
I _I
I 1":"1111
i II! ~~ If'
11 1(1 l'~l
10 I.llg
II' ,h
~ ':i!,
, 1'111,l,
, .,
il ~ ~ ~"fri i ~~~ ~ ~,
r "mZ i ~~~I ilj
" ~ II ~;~ i 1~ll !
,I m~~
~ .~ ~~
! ' c ~m.. ~
~ ~.~
,......n'"
,~"',//~\ ~\ \
/i-\'g,t.~1 ,-'
\ ~~\~:\ pC. 2;:~
\ ~. "" ' ,,'>/ f\
\ .x1;\~'A 'iiJl,{, ',' ~
, b~'" "~~~ ~ a
\ >0'\ Fi ~ \"
\ ,;!" ,\\, ~ \\ ~
\ .~, 1;,! % \ \
\ ;;~l~\~... '
\. \\ \\\ \ IJ
tt - l
\ \i\~ \.\
\~'\ \ \ .
~~~a \ \ ~
..,...1. '
\'" \ '1
~~~ ~
\\\ \'
~~ \ I
\ '. \
\
\
\.....
i 'D4IVD ^--
\ __VI!'
\
\
\
\
,
\
\
\
\
\
\
pER AG_39~423
pA ReEL 1
..,...... ,~,..------.
\
\n\
~;::.l\~
~'t~
",
, O!~j)'
<?~ ~-:JrE-1 3 J_
f)'-\ll'"'" ~ c.A
.A.C~.90~' j~
__ '__ _.0.-----
;tcE!Sj~~--
- -
~,.\'l~~
';.~t:
,;
I '
~rF?J-\Cr NO 230n
\" ",~;l:?,
~\1.. \. ", J",,~~~:l//
'i'?, -.I ~"'.~ ;,..~~
~~ \ <~~~ ~/
r:\L\' ',-,,~'4 ~~
;;\<1 ~ ~~
.. ;':,
~:=-r },
~~,q,~------------
, - \ ~""~ '
. \ I.' ~"',.~
"'. ~"- ? :l.i<_";"'" .
~ l. ""<"'6- ~':'-"l';''';;.~'
"' \ ~ \ -1~~ ~"':.~J$
~ '" ""~<b.o
?, ~~i\ \ \ s. "'.>,''''''q..,., " /
'lh~ \J' ~ ""'-i>~ ""~-~~%..:' .."'
'& 't~l\ ,\ i '::-,~ C'-<:> <f'.,.", ":;'-~",,&/
tl" i.. .""~"'o.,..' If" .,
'" \, ) .......~ "',-:;-*..:./
'.;~~.:;,,;. ", ' /,:_\ ~:'f"J';';
, '.' _ ~'i1J,\-,
\-.....~.., .^'~ l\i~
\\ <'~,,~"'q,,; " ~~l%
\ 1\\, q.c ,'''\. t~
\~ "'Q;>r~ _ ,<'. ~~
1~ ~..,.'" -~,
~; ~""'-':J'
t~
\.
, ,I,' .
.
,\
~
,\
"\
~
~\
,
\
"
,
,
.
..
\ ,"oc"O~\,
,,_l':'''';; ..,>~",e';.,
\,;,0'\ '<,"'0 "
t~;t~\ ,,~~~~~ '
\ .", ,'~ho
.\.';1'6" !o'f,-}, \
~~,: ~ ,":'\1" '
l'" \, ~
\ \ ~ ~
\ '
\
\
\ ~~~
I'l:*,"
i, :,,0\
' 'i!'"
, >
,
\~L
,
i ;J~~:l\&'
,,'~" '
~';\ c~,,~
'. ,'",
~1, ~f;,'-"lo"
o ,~
--'..- -
,
~ "
1......
~~,..,<>
\~~..
~.~~
'oil
\
;:
_.,1....,
<, \
,~.., ,
." ,
-'r\ ,
'~1
.. I-
~',l
,
"
,,,"-'
, -;;'~tJl,AHD DFUve
"~.
_}' 'i,
,t "
r
,~'. :::
~\~'''' ... "'~~"'\.."'h
, ;;,"':;;~~>'
~<"".'~ "
"..'';;;'..''
, ".
" ~~,~.,....~" '"
'I' %' "': ""
\;./ ... "
''i)\
~',~
"';'.';,
'"'
\>O"~"
"
\;
\'
,
\ \ \.
\ I" \,;;.\;s." ~" .- ,~
I"~, "\""c ~ .
".' "\~' ..
\ t~) ::i.J\~ ~ 'Ii
'\'" \"'0'
~1 ;:~,y;:;
',~ \ ,'&
\ '
\~~:
\",
h~l.
\.......
~[ '-ruc.e
I-
I
, .I
, .
1/
.~
~
~
\
\
~
, .t
'"
'"
"
C)
...,
<:
Q
\ \~
" \;
':l \t
"
~ \
\
'-
\ \!
.L
~,
U,
Q
wDo~f!..DJ{I~
,<>.
\ '
\ '
.
--\ ~
\~
\\
.
~
d lA~ ~
~ "
~ ~l ~
'% Thi;. -.
--.\. ~ t<:r'.i ..,
~ 'ti ~;~ ~
\l ~ ~~ ':,
~,. ..., \1 \3~ ~
r.. ~ ~ ~~ ~
'" ~\', Q , ~'>::> v..
~<. n. ~'" ~ ",,"i
~l I.JI. 'l:; -ov~ '"
n\nBn'~~
~~i' '" '< ~
I~ ;;; ~ 'S
) , \\\~ ;; ~ ""\
'i't"'\<; ~ ~
<>,,~~ lI:l ~.
\ -.; ~!
, I ~'-.;
",
" '<,., :", /::\.1 \\
'. v. ~.
'-,~_/ . , ~~
\
\
~.'"
\. --,\." ~
--"'" " ;,,' \
"\ ,~;, ,
. . . .. ~~t ~
.~~): 't
" .
-~'>:'l'i :
\\;.~ '\ .
~ "~\\ t ~ ~\!I
~;;,; ~ \ i
'\'\:;l, \. "",,,",,, '
"",- -"',
Q ~-~-\
\ >;;w .-c~ \~ II
" .. -', ,\ 1/\
"";;, /""",""J...-\}(
\\,'-
,~
II
~
t
"
.
;:
II
~
..
~.
"".
~\
.....
~\1 Z
m~C"l
~. \\\~~ ~~
,. 1 ~ ,f, C"l~Z~
~ ~'1; II-~\;\
l P c'. ';l;
~ ~ ~\~ Z ~ \
, " ,," ""...." \,
-; 1;..;0 ~~~ -......J ~ .
'4 11 'rl ;l~' ~'"
~. 9, ~ ,},,.~ t-..;)
... '!;, ~'i; '-l
% ,_, '-C
, ~,.1,'~ "'" ~~
"{ -,.%"
'I,a
~\~ C"l
'~~ ~
~!
"'e
\ "I~
iI'" / 'l"" " \ i.lh "
)i~ ~~~ J P " I ;0:. '.':~ ~ -.,"!
l;,t': - : /1 \ ,~
~ ~;t" Pel z)_______ ':'- '" \~
'" "- ~ "'..' "'-
, ..~' \j /t;~~' i ,
"0 . (I' !"
t~ ~ it l. , ~ ~' ~
~~ S ~ 1\ 1'" %)!l1
;l~ l> l'il, "l
l'l i '1"9 ~,1' :R
n ~ ,I ~\\
\\, \ ~ "
~
~
'"
~\
.,
\ '",
,
~--l..., %9
a !l ~~
E1. ; t
,\ ' "1
l-l!, . Ii
I '1 \ l
., I,
~",', --....
,i
, ~"'Ob ~~
~~)
" --
I
\
\
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ -
,
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
- ~
~ ~
,
~ ~
~ g
~ ~
.
~
,
~
,
i\
<
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.
,
~
,
~
~
~
"
"I'
~ ).':~
l~
'\
III
,il
" ill
, Ii
, ~~~
II
!
'L~
,
.'
~~
~\
pARCEL j PER AG~8.9-'42J
HOSPfJ'AL EMPLOYEE PARKiNG LOr
ii i~
~" ,,;,' g
,
~ ~
!
t'-~~
I
-:o<J~oor
1,1-
Ii
II
"~I
~'l
,
\(
~ (
-~. ~~-
~ !
,
i
~.
I! l~
,I !~
,0' \'
")
'''I"~,
. ~.\l
i~~li
".~~
"
P/lfr!CEL ::1 FEF
/10_90--158
VAcANT LOT
"
I,
~~
--",'7\ ~'I
'I' i~~;'t.
\!:t::,
, '.
\ I
EXHIBIT B5 '
rRACT NO 2308
SiNGLt 'f'AMIL J' RESIPENC[S
,"%.I
Ii
Ii
~
"
"
0
" :-i
;;: s'l
~
~ ':\
);!
i> '"
~ ,')
---
""""1
I
Ii
a~
!i
.l~
:--\ t~
~
"
:-i
i
!
.
,
!
-'
,..
~~
~
~
Q
~
.
;:
~
g
~
~
~
~~
~~
~~
~~
.....
~;g
~~
~
C")
~
~
,,(
/~'
~
N
\,J
~~
~
~~
f::~
~~
~~
N~
~
!::
~
98 1181HX3
I.
--'l.'~
i'
"
~;-"
~~~
h'
~i~
'i! I
~~" ~
~" ,
H~ ~ ~
ih 0; t.
~~d ~ ~
;~:;: ~ ~
n1i i ~
:;'~~ tl ~
~".~ ~ l::
!11 ~I' I
l"f.l I
!~!t ~ l>
"
ill
,
~
i;'
c(ti)
<')
Cq I
a
t;jrtl
~~~
~'""(
0.:
,
!ii ~~~
~ ~~I
~ ~~~
I ~ll:
i'l;'--~,c.
~
~
~
~
.
~
~
, ,. ~
it "
~ " ,
~ -
~ (: ~
~ . ,
, ~
~ ~ ~
~ ,
i:< ~
" ~ll.. . Iii
0 .
~ .8 ~ 4)
~ o~
~i3 . a
~ ~el ~ <:
.
, ~o ~ '"
~ ,~ - 1..)
h ~ ~
, ~~ ~
, I
'" .'
~ ~~
~ ~~ ~
3AIHD DNnOOOM
a
4,
C,
j;!
'"
U
f}
f.C
90[:2 ON J.:)["lrYJ.
rJ5/~06-Dii-
ClJd C 73::J2!!t'd
~
~
,
4,J/)
0,
."
"'t.>
~,
'",
"
'-"~
,<\.-",:,.2
,'lo.;~ 'l-~~
,'~ ....
''''<i'-..>
.,
,.
:i I
Ii I
!~ I
~
~'1"
. ,
.'
:~
__ _ _SlXJ'27'J9TJ~5.02:'"
""'~
11
!
I ~ ;;
"
I"
i
I'
I
~ ;1
II
I
"
''':,''.'
I',
,d
'1'
i I
,-
~ !
~..t.::.-
~- ;,
""',",
",
~; "
'v
'<;'
I ,
'I',
,'r
L
.-j v'
I
f ,~
1 \,
~ ,\"
l,"
;')
,
o.
1
...1- .,.
~:I i
i
,
.
!
,
I'
I'
...I
!
f
I'
"
~'L
m --
"
.~~~ I
1:1",
~>!e;:
~
~
::.;
"l
~
~
:1 ~
:1 Ii!
--..J i
" ---c.
'-........;,.,~""'UO". "\;~i.!
\ " I ~"'~~
. ~ /11!.!
~~~- - -~/ .
"f^",*:~~.c'"<'''\.
". ~~~;;-
.~.
<"'-....--..
-<>'
'-'>-b"
">",'-.
"'..'-.
<b'-.
o
0'0,"-
""-..
: I ,O~
r"1
~ i ~
I:
~ ! I i
,
1:1 .
':1 ';
:1 f
-+I---l
";.
.,
'\.
!,
I!!
'ari:~
",II
"I
"
'-:'.
.,'
.
"
" ~
;\'
,
-!,
I
I\:;
I~
t
il
';x,'no
:,'!'
,"':':',
"'f':-- 6-.; < ...."
3AIIIO ONtnaOOM
'I
:1
:1
:1
'I
.,
:1
:,
:1
:1
-S(X)~(H~---
tZf7-6B-!) [1" 2f3d ! 73::J(:Jj7d
"
I'
~~ ;!
:~ ;
~~ ~:
Ii
i;i~
"I.
II'
~d:
"""fZ
,",
~,i
~:;ss~ ~
0"0, I'
:I"i!:!.:
: ~~~~ ~~
I..., ,
"ill';.
" iI":!!
~~~I~~~~ . ~
'l!!il"i1 I ~
11~;!I'i~il !ii
,!.l ;l;i I,!
,5..~~ ~8J; ~.....
,
!
,
, ,
II . ~ !
, II,",
I ~i\!~:; ~ :;: ~ ~:
~~J!'~ ~ ~ '" ~
I ~i'J~,~ :;; ;:j~!;'
~~~!~~ ..~~~~~
il-~~~;;~~ I~~'~~
; :'~:l~S;r, ;t"'~:<!.s
..,,,<0:...,,,,-1; "O'..I:~"
~....
""'''>a
,
i
:
,
'll
,\l",~
~~~
~."
I"'
t!,,~~
"'1
1,1,
I"~:
,.a
.
11
~~
l~
h
;;, i!
i" 11
, ,il i~
I &~~ ~'\
f.!i~~ ,,~~~
!:,l i!l~
I,ll "ili
!,'- Ui
!t)> '!!
lq I
I ~ ......
~ I ;il
~'I I!!,I
;1.
I
L
If If
. .
~ ~
. .
."
0;-
::>
lD
~-
,
~~
;JQ
''t;'P
Ill! I
I,,,
1111':
."
0;-
::>
10 !
I ____"
~ ~.- I~
, -
,
c--
!IUH
Iljlll!
i
~
!
.
Fair Oaks Mixed Use
PI,... ,
fair Oaka AVenJ8
AmyoGr..-.do,C.l.
EXHIBIT B7
."
0;-
::>
)>
,-
,
,
i
\i
,il'
;;J
1111 !
:j}
."
0;-
::>
(')
i[~:
, ;;J
~ [--
Iil'_/~,.
,
Ill! ~
f
,~u~i
i
~
"
.
I:
:~ I
,~ I
I!!'I
\ID), '.
" ~ , --
~ ~ ':)
'/
-.......
"~-
".........,.."."..'
... ...,,~..__.............-
'....m'.... ..,..........
co
CIO
I-
iii
J:
><
w
....::;?-,~, "';--""
14'. ..,... _Ol,<<.,"~a$~T:._,~~"(~...,-,:_,-:~>..
' i,Jat, .l;1L " ,
{ ;--- ,~. d, ' - .' cj .,. :
I'!:;m':(: A
\';:;"; lei :.1
---.-.''"""":t
,DO!
~
BUILDING 1 & 8 RIGHT ELEV AllON
~A:"
,/"'r"''''':::~~,'''''',,,,..:, "
f'" ..... ... "'~l;>. ~'..
m I!!', ; ffii [',
i ", elf ~ ~,'~r1! 0_ ;, ~
1 ,,'~_
m 1at difmW'~
',",'.' ,'i-".\
BUILDING 1 & 8 LEFT ELEV AllON
:""';-'''';
'--'- -<~~~ ~-----"--"-----:A----T
BUILDING 1 & 8 REAR ELEV AllON
....
....7..~.~~..."
<..~~ .<~~~="-J[.......:...~'.".,
: I !BP ~ ,ill!:; i
L.;~ !'~: -: " .1,.1- 1
-<; (,.,,-,.
'f'!.m'~'n. -O!
.1, '. '. ,I' ""-
L [\;':';;';' /
m
BUILDING 2. 7 & 11 RIGHT ELEV AllON
~"A:'
.;7' ,~
" ~ .... ~
....~~ ''''-'!>.
~.4'" '" ----::- ...." I ~~"': ~c..
.;1 ]I .P;f):
, m" .",.:mm':~''''!
{ftlCi """"""
:r.JZID jp;;',> ('".;H:1
BUILDING 2. 7. 9.10& 11 LEFrELEVAllON
~c'?-'''''-
~'''''
~ ~.&o,,- _,~_
cup ,
Ji:.,iJ..Jbo-'.:.
BUILDING 2. 7 & 11 REAR ELEV AllON
BUILDING 4 & 6 RIGHT ELEV AllON
,h'fT!1 ;"1 '
i ,;r:;;,;H~l~;'1. ',~";:'
'r.", .""" 'PR. _.":.iL';f",~c"---~,.'.....,".".."I.-=-
~L- !;-- ',::.' '; ~~ltiJt'! if-> t'!.i :,~~J
"mrr-,.",.
J""'~~ "
,_,,',.I::.! "/;-'1,
Hi''''li_'_,' f,,;,'; ,
_~~;,~~", .,'", r
BUILDING 4 & 6 LEFT ELEVAllON
II
l,
'"
~,
I'
BUILDING 4 & 6 REAR ELEV A llON
I"
~,~
~"
":!'
Q,.,
:;!,
.-"
::'
~
i
m
~
~
;;
m
II
" .
~-j~
:::E z..~
~i-:;I
. 0
o ~
~
;f
II
lj
;;1
II
.
A2
0)
al
I-
iii
:i:
x
w
\,
BQILDING 3~8<.lO RIGHT ELEY ATION
~~~
~'''Q
...........~..; -......"'-.:-.
.,r" ,~... '
~~^--' L, .::-!t ~.....,
! JQHl -li" ~.. ;H~ iT
, ~~,l
m-".. . "m...e..,,; ,-
. i'1i .lB~I,I'i' ".:il' "
.Eil '1,;;1 ';j! ,
, ,,' ~,~';H .
BUll.DING 3 !.-EI:T.ELI'YATION
..........
..'..-.--'-----.----1
--..... ~',
,
BUll.DING 3 REAR EU;YATION
,
. !S. ;~tt!l
I:'~ ~frn~~~~~"':-
~~t t\f.;) ,d~ ~ L:,'~~J:l') 'r1;:':
-"~~r:; 1 :.li~EL;;;-;.;_
I!.UJ!JLIN..Q5"LEFT ELEY ATION
,Ao,
BUILDlNG 5 REAR ELEY A TION
BUILDING 9 & 10 FRONT ELEY ATION
--....-,..,..-,--..- ""--"..---1'
A~<-
_,_"'~'"..__.,~o..:, '..,
,". .1R".!BPiiLf'
''Fi~!:l I'
""'U"'
.~l~! \
BUILDING 9 & 10 REAR ELEY ATION
-""-
"--"-"~-~~-'---"-':::C''''--'~;;~ --1
,
:...\
~~
-,
ji
'I
~!
IIi
j
I....
~,:
::i
."
.:1
:-!
~
j
w
E
'5
m
m
=> "
'ii ;~
.~-~f
~ !.=.;
~~ "f
.~o
o ~
" ~
~
A.3
o
...
CO
I-
CO
:I:
X
w
~~~
-~
IL1I
jQ
-~-
-
~
1i
Architectural Materials and Details
120- ~
110'-'~. ,.
loo-~_,;;;.:;__
90-
.~"~ ~-~
,""i< I"'" "'~'"':-":,.,E:~ ,"~ ,
00'-
BUL{)JNGI
~----- (E) GRADE
PROPOSEOGRADE
Site Section B-B
120'-
110'-
,~
~.~.~~~
~. ..'
L.. _ -H'T--
IOO'-~, -
90'-=1
llG'-
-';
"
BUilDING!
------ (E}GRME
f'ROPOSlDGfWl!:
Site Section A-A
BULOINGl
.,~".
." ,-",._..."_':'~
-
.."I,_~:-'
BlJLDNG3
.------
.t:j'
,_~~-",.o.'.C..
ScaIe:V4".r
fi
; ',: -'~_.';,',',l
.'_~ ':' I., l'..,.
',-', .......-.
- """-
:;
Site Section Reference
BUWNGIO
~: =:::
-100'
. -90'
-----
'_80'
I
'~~:~:
8UWN(;6
~,';"-. '::!
j:~: H
""'"
<-
~r.':' ':: ''"':1
.~....,.. .11:.;1.
< 0, -~,.t't:i_.a Or;-'
,..,,,,-', ,~
'-
..
UOING4
BUlLOING7
Scale: 1116"= HT
-120'
-110'
-100'
1==-90'
-:'-~-"::""-~--80'
Scale: 1/16": f.(f
I'.'
."
-,.
::.
:; ~
~
~
,~
~
i
~
~
G"""::;---,.
.;':",:.
"",..""""",,~
.
:"l
>l i~
x- '1
~:g-:;
.....!~
~ll..O~
o ~.i.
.= ...
.
~
...
A4
_"k
---..
ur V\ftI.
Partial Site Section B-B
I
r
""OIn'oV'-CIodo.
Partial Site Section C-C
lrQlc-l<l
Partial Site Section 0-0
I
--
-,
-"
1_-
I~K~'
--
JI".'
-"~
.-.,-
""""'''''-
ScaI6:V16":1.()"
_120'
_110'
_100'
-9(J
-80'
St8Ie;V16':1-fj
-120'
_\I\}'
-100'
_90'
-80'
SCale: 1118": f-(l"
-120'
[===_110'
_100'
___90'
-80'
Sta\<<V16":.W
,
\
I.
\ \
Site Section Reference
$eale:V3Z':f..Q"
J/~~l-- .i,
1 I J I
--~~I '''~: I
~.~
_120'
~.. -\10
I -wo'
r-90
,
1--1
---t
-.-
-80'
Partial Site Section E-E
Scale; 1116": 1.q'
--
-120'
-~
-\ ~ I
e21c.ro~Q'Clol ----
t=t .<~
Partial Site Section F-F
I
I
II r==:
I
..-1/ '~
~H
\~"
_\10'
~-ao'
NOle: Dim"nsion~ are +1_ \'-6" wi\llout ae=illg nc'lghborillg properties
ScaIe:Vl8":1.u
I'.'
:.;:
1m
:,;.
i
i
~
(j),.r:::;",
.""".
'""""",:;';
.
~ ~~
.~-~t
:::i m"A
ifS~
o ~.i
7! ~
~
"""
A.5
-,.,
-"--
N
or-
a:l
I-
ii:i
:E
><
w
Color Scheme
Fair Oaks
Mixed-Use
Ph""," 1
loot'" ~-,_,-""
'~:.';~;'," .
"'::::.<~:,;'~;;:"
..-".'
'-,I,,,,.,,,,..
"t'"''~'''
,.0;.'"''''''
,.'- "..~,,'
....r........,,'
~-,,,..,,.,.,.
..
Color Scheme 2
Fair Oaks
Mix~d-tJse
l'b~>< 1
r I ;;:~: ~~~:'"
-
I
Color Scheme 3
Fair Oaks
Mixed-Use
I'hA'~ ]
.,,,_o.,-,,,",;,~.,
-.."::~,~~.."
,.".,.; ~'..";,,..'
"'~~';,:,:"
"~"" .,.,,,
,."."..
. c ::,~:, ~]:::"
..
Color Scheme 4
Fair Oaks
Mixed-Use
Ph~H I
-
;""k,
i
.
.
j
i
~
~
8
,-;~];-Y%;--
~':.~:y~l')
.
~ ~~
:ii~f
"'!!~~
~a..o~
o ~~
- ~
;f
,
I
,
s"'"
A6
-,..
.....-...
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2005
PAGE 9
.
Commercial - Create architectural design to soften look;
Difficulty with access from Grand, additional driveway and staging of loading dock;
Seeing trend where uses are separated.
.
.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello's comments included the following:
. Acknowledged unique layout of property;
. Opportunity to set new standards;
. No problem with intensity of use; to preserve agricultural, must increase density
elsewhere;
. With high density comes traffic and circulation problems - traffic light at Brisco and Grand
is a must;
. Would like to see better mix of commercial and residential;
. Loading dock - problem with access;
. Acknowledged mixed use trends (separate);
. Seek neighborhood input and involvement.
Mayor Ferrara's comments included the following:
. Project proposal is a good start;
. Addressed mixed use principles and smart growth;
. Commercial design needs work;
. Suggested bringing structures to front and put parking in back;
. Smaller version of commercial;
. Disagreed with notion of increasing density; density proposed is too great;
. Trip generation; traffic impacts need to be studied;
. Does not like three and four residential units in one building;
. Supports space between residential units:
. Reduce commercial, add space for residential, reduce density;
. Commented on tandem parking and need for behavioral change;
. Suggested micro-lot approach - covered space and garage;
. Likes pedestrian feel of commercial portion.
. Concern with size, scale and intensity.
Upon conclusion of Council comments, Mayor Ferrara ensured that the applicant had received
sufficient feedback and direction with regard to the proposed project.
There was no formal action on this,item.
11.b. Consideration of Pre-Application Review Case No. 05-007 for a Mixed-Use
Development; Applicant: Jason Blankenship/Catholic Healthcare West (C.H.W.);
Location: Fair Oaks Avenue (Vacant Property Adjacent To and East of Arroyo
Grande Hospital).
Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the Council review
the project plans and provide suggestions and comments to the applicant. Staff responded to
questions from Council concerning whether there was a Street Master Plan; whether Woodland
Drive was planned to go through, and the project's distance to agricultural uses.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the
matter.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2005
PAGE 10
Garv Youno, applicant, noted that the Code requires the submission of a Hospital Facilities Plan.
They have been working with Arroyo Grande Hospital, which has been struggling to ascertain
their needs to develop a coherent Plan, and they want to utilize the maximum amount of square
footage of property that they can get to build. The project as designed includes an extension of
Woodland and creates a separation from the hospital use. He said conceptual Phase 1 includes
thirty (30) residential units; conceptual Phase 2 includes underground parking. He commented
that the Oak trees are protected; a traffic study has been commissioned but is on hold until
Council input is obtained on square footage for the medical office; commented on the water
availability issue; stated there is a small piece of agricultural land which is located about 140-150
ft from the top of the creek bank, however, there is a small section of land on the west side of the
creek that is not currently being farmed and cannot be accessed (he asked for Council direction
on this issue); and to address archeological issues, there would be monitoring during grading
operations.
Rick Castro, President of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital (Catholic Healthcare West),
confirmed that the hospital is working on a Strategic Pian and stated that the hospitai requires
additional time to determine its long term needs. He indicated they are comfortable with the
amount of space allocated, but commented that it could not be known for sure until a specific
plan is created.
Leonard Grant, architect, responded to a question regarding the parking structure and confirmed
that there would be two stories of subterranean parking for the commercial portion.
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public comment period.
Council Member Arnold's comments included the following:
. Likes proposed plan;
. When traffic study is done; consider mitigation measures if Woodland goes through:
. Trees need to be saved and should be worked around or should be moved;
. Architectural style is appropriate;
. Supports 50-50 split between residential and hospital;
. Allows hospital room to grow.
Council Member Dickens' comments included the following:
. Appropriate land use;
. Allows appropriate expansion of hospital;
. Area is in need of a full service hospital;
. Residential layout is appropriate:
. Must maintain buffers between agricultural and residential uses;
. Likes incorporation of recreational use/pedestrian paths;
. Supports Woodland extension; needs compelling reasons not to put through - will create
better traffic circulation.
Council Member Guthrie's comments included the following:
. Concurred with agricultural buffer requirement;
. Traffic study should include potential for 120,000 sq. ft. of commercial use;
. Supports extension of Woodland Drive;
. Unsure whether 120,000 sq. ft. was buildable: however, acknowledged underground
parking component;
. Likes residential component;
. Likes incorporation of pathway and additional pedestrian access.
I~
i
;
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2005
PAGE 11
Mayor Pro Tem Costello's comments included the following:
. Supports split of proposed uses;
. Traffic mitigation to address additional parking;
. Supports extension of Woodland Drive;
. Research impact to triangular piece of agricultural land that was referred to;
. Acknowledged archeological issues and need for monitoring;
. Good opportunity for hospital to expand and provide additional housing.
Mayor Ferrara's comments included the following:
. Acknowledged CHW and observed improvements made to date;
. Likes layout, site plan;
. Supports amount of green space provided/recreation paths;
. Area can support density;
. Supports Woodland Drive extension/continuation to improve circulation;
. Maintain agricultural buffer.
. Expressed concern about runoff from project and potential impacts to creek; (referred to
Zone 1/A drainage issue). City has heightened duty to responsibly manage its creek
corridors.
. Regarding small agriculture piece of land, suggested contacting LDS Church to suggest a
temporary use for the land to enhance the residential area and also accentuate the
agricultural use of the adjacent agriculture use. He referred to the City of Irvine website
for an idea regarding a community garden project.
Upon conclusion of Council comments, Mayor Ferrara ensured that the applicant had received
sufficient feedback and direction with regard to the proposed project.
There was no formal action on this iiem.
11.c. Consideration of Pre-Application Review Case No. 05-009 to Construct a One-Story
Building with Drive-up Window for a Financial Institution; Applicant: Coast Hills
Federal Credit Union; Location -1570 West Branch Street.
Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the Council review
the project plans and provide suggestions and comments to the applicant.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the
matter.
Jeff York, President, Coast Hills Federal Credit Union, (formerly Vandenberg Air Force Credit
Union) currently located at 1452 E. Grand Avenue, commented that the proposed location is a
more visible location to serve the community.
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the pubiic comment period.
Council Member Dickens' comments included the following:
. Extensive discussion regarding parking and architectural style held for previous project
(The Parable);
. Proposal is consistent with prior proposal; land use is not more intense;
. No problem with design of drive-up window;
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 3, 2006
6:00 P.M.
ATTACHMENT 2
CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with
Chair Brown presiding; also present were Commissioners Fellows, Parker and Ray;
Commissioner Tait was absent. Staff members in attendance were, Community
Development Director, Rob Strong, Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, Assistant Planners,
Jim Bergman and Ryan Foster, and Public Works Engineer, Victor Devens.
ANNOUNCEMENT: Request the public to turn off their cell phones during the meeting.
AGENDA REVIEW: No changes.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Fellows made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Parker to approve the
Minutes of December 6, 2005 with the following corrections:
Commissioner Ray:
· Regarding her previous request to clarify why Items II.A. and II.C. were removed
from the Agenda, she wanted it made clear that the City was not granting time
extensions in these specific cases; time extensions were not required.
· Page 6, first paragraph, should read "...Tract 577 should have no more than 27
lots"....
. Page 7, correct John Reynolds to John Runels (twice on same page).
Commissioner Fellows:
· Page 8, should state, "Commissioner Fellows returned to the meeting".
· Page 10, last line should state, "...he asked what action the City is taking...".
· Page 11, first paragraph, last sentence, remove the word sort just before
parenthesis.
The motion was approved by a 4/0 voice vote, Commissioner Tait being absent.
I.
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
1. Letter re public hearing item II.A. on the Agenda, received December 27, 2005, from
Jim and RayAnn Crouse regarding Tentative Tract Map Case No. 05-003 & Planned
Unit Development Case No. 05-007.
2. Letter re public hearing item II.B. on the Agenda, received January 3, 2006, from
Michael Frederick, regarding Conditional Use Permit Case No. 05-014.
C. REFERRAL ITEMS FOR COMMISSION ACTION
None.
II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
A. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 05-003 AND PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 05-007; APPLICANT - CCRED; REPRESENTATIVE -
JASON BLANKENSHIP; LOCATION - FAIR OAKS AVE (vacant lot east of the
hospital)
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 2
Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report for Commission review of a
mixed-use development proposed in two phases on a 5.5-acre site, located east of Arroyo
Grande Community Hospital on Fair Oaks Avenue. She stated that proposed Phase 1
includes thirty (30) 2-story town homes and a half-acre common open space area. Phase 2
is tentative at this time, but conceptually includes up to 120,000 square feet of medical
office space with underground parking structure. The previous site plan reviewed by the
Planning Commission as a Pre-Application on August 2, 2005, discussion had focused
mainly on:
· Archeological impacts.
. Drainage to the creek.
. Tree removal.
. Pedestrian paths connecting the two uses.
. Agricultural buffer.
. Potential extension of Woodland Drive to the residential neighborhood to the north.
The applicant has made numerous changes to the project plans based on comments from
City Council, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and Staff
Advisory Committee (SAC). .
Ms. Heffernon then described Phase I and Phase 2 of the proposed project; explained that
Phase 2 would be subject to separate discretionary and environmental review as design of
the commercial component (Phase 2) is tentative until the medical office Needs
Assessment can be conducted; Woodland Drive is proposed to be extended through the
site, separating the two uses; the internal private access driveway would be privately
maintained; the existing exercise trail would be enhanced and the City would continue to
maintain it. Ms. Heffernon continued further describing the common and private open
space and stated that the project meets other Planned Unit Development (PUD)
requirements and office mixed-use design standards; the ARC recommended that the
project be approved subject to a condition that the applicant return to the ARC with the final
building colors and materials prior to issuance of a building permit. In addition, Ms.
Heffernon discussed the Initial Study with the recommended mitigation measures and
explained the affordable housing requirement for the project.
In conclusion, Ms. Heffernon stated that staff recommends that the Commission consider
the information and mitigation measures contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Phase 1 only) and if the environmental review is determined adequate, adopt a
Resolution approving the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development for
the project.
The following are highlights of questions asked by the Commission to help clarify their
understanding of information contained in the staff report, and additionally some suggested
changes:
. Will the exercise area remain public open space? Ms. Heffernon: There are two
definitions in the Development Code for Common Open Space and so it is unclear;
staff determined that it was part of the project as the applicant owns the land;
subsequently future residents will be partial owners of the recreational trail; the City
has the public easement over the property. ,
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 3
· According to the map it shows that the open space is owned by individual owners,
but only on the back lot, how does this work? Ms. Heffernan: Staff assumed that
the public and all of the residents would share the recreational benefits; the City will
maintain the trail as the City has the easement.
· Is the creek and the riparian part of the common open space? Ms. Heffernan: The
creek and riparian area is shared open space; this part of the creek is owned by the
property owners; the applicant is required to do implement mitigation for enhancing
the riparian vegetation which would be maintained by the HOA; the City has an
easement for flood control (we are not supposed to get into the creek).
· Asked for clarification on common lot 31, and where it was defined on the map;
commented that it was difficult to define or calculate from the map: Ms. Heffernan
referred this question to the applicant's engineer.
· Lots 9-15 look as if they encompass the road. Ms. Heffernan: They encompass the
private road/common driveway. Mr. Devens explained that an HOA or maintenance
agreement would take care of the maintenance.
· Does any of the drainage go into the sewer system or does it all go into the creek?
Mr. Devens: It is collected along an B" storm drain line that runs parallel to the creek
and actually connects to an existing City line at the northeast corner of the project.
· Who would be responsible for testing the water run off for contamination? Mr.
Devens: It is not typical of a project to sample storm water run off after a
development; this would have to be a mitigation measure.
· How would the bio-swales work and how would they be set up? Mr. Devens: The
vegetation (normal lawn) would filter storm water into the ground.
· Is there parking on Woodland Drive? Mr. Devens: No parking would be allowed
along the western edge of the Woodland Drive extension until Phase 2 is developed
when it would be widened to 52 feet; parking is allowed along the east side; the
private interior road will be a fire lane and parking would not be allowed (the
applicant has proposed some guest spaces for parking).
· What percentage of the Woodland Drive project would go toward the Capital
Improvement Program? Mr. Devens: The applicant will pay a proportional share
toward the sanitation district trunk line upsize, at a later date.
· What are the improvements that the applicant will pay toward the intersection of Fair
Oaks and Woodland Drive? Mr. Devens: The applicant did the analysis for a traffic
signal and a four-way stop sign; however, the intersection did not meet the criteria so
just a stop sign on the north side of Fair Oaks on Woodland Drive extension will be
required; he then explained the criteria for a stop sign.
. There are conflicting times for construction activity in the conditions. Mr. Devens:
Public works limits times of construction activities requiring City inspections to the
City's normal business hours.
· Re Mitigation Measure (MM) 2.2: The Commission commented that this mitigation
may not be achieved and it is not viable to approve a Neg. Dec on something that
may not be achieved. Ms. Heffernan: This mitigation measure could be taken out
and put as a condition of approval and agreed that a buffer would then have to be in
place or eminent domain used.
. MM 3.16, sodium street lights (non glaring lights): Are these the least glaring? Mr.
Devens: These are the typical street lights normally installed throughout the City.
Ms. Heffernan: There will be a lighting plan; there will be low lighting on the
pedestrian walkway.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 4
· MM 4.3, this mitigation talks about grading into the creek; is there actual plans to cut
into the creek? Ms. Heffernon: This mitigation is based on discussions with Fish &
Game and related to the creek bank and the erosion at the outfall and corrugated
pipe.
· Page 20, sentence half way down paragraph, re California Red-legged frog; change
the word only to not, to make sense of this.
· MM 4.6, rock slope protection in the open space, 25-foot setback riparian area,
should specifically refer to creek erosion. Ms. Heffernon: Agreed to add language to
state that, "Any invasion into the 25-foot creek setback should not occur unless it is
to correct an erosion problem".
· MM 4.10, why is a footpath to the creek being proposed? Ms. Heffernon: There is
already an informal path; this proposal is to direct people to an area where they
would not disturb riparian vegetation.
· MM 6.2, how will maintenance for the in line filter system work? Mr. Devens: The
inline filter system requires a check up just twice a year and vacuuming out if
necessary; maintenance would be taken care of by the City.
. MM 10.1, need to add the word pay.
. MM 14.4, need to clarify that the banks will only be stabilized where access to the
creek is designated.
. MM 14.6, re stockpiles of debris not being allowed to enter the creek: Ms.
Heffernon: Agreed that specific language should be added to state that this should
not be allowed in the riparian area (25-foot creek setback).
. Ms. Heffernon confirmed that it was proposed that Woodland Drive would have
bollards at the end, removable only by emergency vehicles.
. Mr. Devens: Re the corrugated pipe, staff was confident that it could either be
repaired or the whole pipe replaced.
. Mr. Devens: The Woodland Drive decision is temporary and would have to be
looked at again with Phase 2.
. What is the City accepting as a Hospital Facilities Plan (Phase 2), and is the
Commission being asked to approve the residential (Phase 1), without knowing what
Phase 2 will consist of, or even if it will be acceptable. Mr. Strong: The Office Mixed
Use (OMU) district included the design overlay and CHW requested that this be
placed to protect future development; CHW have conducted sufficient study of their
hospital needs to co-applicant this proposal to reserve an option to purchase the ,
entire west half of the property on which they estimate 120,000 sq. ft. of medical
related facilities could be built; there is no definition of what a hospital facility plan
was expected to contain.
. Does the City have adequate manpower to carry out all of the mitigation measures
required? Mr. Strong: It is the City's responsibility to monitor most of the mitigation
measures; if there was inadequate staffing we would impose on the developer
sufficient information requirements that he could employ independent consultants
selected by the City to assist them in monitoring.
. Asked for clarification on where the storm drain drop-inlets are located on the plan.
Mr. Devens: Described how the drainage would work; pointed out that the applicant
is proposing some short retaining walls to increase elevations and maintain the
natural drainage pattern of the site while still being able to connect to an existing City
facility.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 5
· Mr. Devens: Fire lines would not be required on Phase 1, but would be required for
Phase 2.
· Clarification was requested on the open space statistics table on the plan. Ms.
Heffernon explained how the calculations were arrived at for common and private
open space.
· Clarification was requested on Table 16.36.020 for OMU Minimum Site Development
Standards. Ms. Heffernon: The density is established at the zoning level; the zoning
allows for 15 units per acre and what is proposed is 11 units per acre; the PUD
process allows deviation from minimum lot width and depth; what is proposed is
consistent with the Development Code and density etc.
· Re the Geo Solutions Report: Mr. Devens: Staff is satisfied that most of the seismic
induced settlements would be addressed by the recommendations; a standard
condition could be added that a soils engineer be present on site, during stripping of
surface materials; staff is satisfied that the sub drains and back drain systems should
not be an issue.
· Asked for clarification on why both bio swales and an in line filtration systems are
recommended and that this condition should clarify that both are proposed. Mr.
Devens: Stated the dimensions of the bio swale and that maintenance would
probably be taken care of by the individual property owners; this requirement could
be added to the CC&R's to make sure no alterations are made.
· Asked for wall height starting from Fair Oaks and up towards the corner cif the
project. Mr. Devens: It is a consistent height of two feet all the way except along the
top of the project which varies in height.
8:00 p.m.
The Commission took a 10-minute break.
Chair Brown opened the public hearing for public comment.
Chair Brown announced that Gary Young, applicant, had requested to speak after the public
comment so he could respond to any questions that would be asked. Chair Brown stated
although this was not the normal order due to the number of public present he would allow
this; if the public wishes to speak again after the applicant they can do so.
Bernard Landsman. 579 Newman Drive, lives near the creek, stated he has great concern
with the traffic issue; during a recent discussion with Chief TerBorch he had been told that
sometimes it is difficult to get emergency vehicles through Brisco; joining Woodland Drive to
Fair Oaks is absolutely dangerous from every point of view; in the past he had discovered
jaw bones near the creek (Chumash remains) and he knows this is an area of burial
grounds for Chumash Indians; he would be interested to find out how sensitive the applicant
is to this.
Bardhvll Nushi. 641 Cerro Vista Circle, stated he was disturbed by discrepancies between
this project and the pre-application project reviewed in August 2005; he represented many
of the neighbors present at the meeting; their main concerns were that the traffic study does
not take Woodland Drive and South Alpine into consideration and is barely noted in the
report; at present at least forty children walk past his house going to school to get to Fair
Oaks and cross the road without too much activity; with this project it could add 240 trips a
day; removable bollards will not work for the community; for safety, Woodland Drive should
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 6
no go through and should not connect to South Alpine; a single swing gate with knox box for
emergency access in place of the bollards is preferred; the open space beyond the gate
could be used for a dog park and it would not be much for the City to maintain. The building
setback with pathway behind it will create a long alleyway; to avoid this it would be better to
increase the building setback to the edge of property line to create a buffer and make the
open space safer, especially for the children who walk through this area on a daily basis; at
the previous meeting the applicant had stated that the buffer between the townhouses and
the current asphalt trail would be 40 feet, now it is 6-7 feet. There is also a concern that the
density of the residential subdivision is based on Phase 2, which does not have a plan;
Catholic Hospital West (CHW) has not indicated how they could use the square footage and
there is no justification at present to show that they could use 120,000 square feet of
medical offices. The applicant is using Woodland Drive as an excuse to split the project.
The parking for the additional square footage has not been addressed. In conclusion, Mr.
Nushi stated that most important for the neighborhood is the safety of the children; any
decision on Woodland Drive and any additional traffic studies should be done now by the
City and not when Phase 2 comes in.
Chair Brown asked for a show of hands from the public present who were in support of Mr.
Nushi's comments; a majority of the public agreed with his comments.
Denise McDade. Cerro Vista Circle, stated concern for the safety of children; there are no
sidewalks on the brand new homes on S. Alpine and half of S. Alpine has no sidewalks so
children are walking on the streets now.
Piper Adleman. 606 Cerro Vista Lane, stated children use the pathway to walk to school
everyday and he would not like to think of this as being enclosed; there were a lot more
neighbors who were present earlier who had to leave due to the late hour; his concerns
were the traffic issue because all the children are directed to go through the "health park"
and up to Halcyon to school; some of the congestion is caused by the fact that homes on
Alpine Street are all red curbed so no one can park; this area is one of the prime Chumash
burial sites in the county.
Paul Wellencamp. 653 Cerro Vista, South Alpine dead-ends into his driveway; when he first
moved in a motorcycle came around the corner and crashed into his garage and there has
also been another accident at the same site since; opening up Woodland Drive will increase
traffic coming from both directions and make the corner even more unsafe.
Robert Chapel. 646 Cerro Vista Circle (Trustee of property), stated concern with timing of
the hearing, it had been difficult to get information from the City due to the holidays; a staff
report for a project of this size should be available at least two weeks before a hearing. His
main concerns were that it is a bad example of City planning to open up Woodland Drive
and allow traffic from a multi family area through a single family neighborhood; a traffic
study should be done that addresses the impact of the cars from and to the development
before this proposal goes further; the view impact of these buildings will be tremendous, but
this could be mitigated if flat roofed buildings were designed; the runoff into the creek needs
to be addressed as there is already a flood issue; runoff from onsite should be contained
onsite; paths on the property always end up being taken over by the adjacent property
owners as they do not like the public walking through their property; this needs to be made
clear in planning process to enforce people from walking through back yards; it is bad
procedure to approve a project without seeing the whole project because the impacts
cannot be properly addressed; when there are so many items in the negative declaration it
should probably not have been so declared.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 7
Robert Berrvhill. 629 Cerro Vista" concern with older homes on Alpine Street that have
single width driveways as they use on-street parking; adding traffic to this by having
Woodland Drive go through would cause Alpine and Cerro Vista Streets to become a traffic
hazard.
Debra West. 159 So. Alpine, stated concern with the loss of open space in an area that at
present is a very beautiful place to walk through; right now there is a separation between
residence and commercial and she is concerned with how this would affect the feel of the
neighborhood and change the nature of it.
Chet Williams. 649 Cerro Vista Circle; concern with children that go to high school that walk
the pathway every day; would like to see access go through the hospital area; like the
proposed area to go for a park and be dedicated to the Chumash and Mr. Greib; workshops
need to be done on projects like this to study it and to make a better community for our
children and for ourselves.
David Butz. 295 Halcvon. stated his concerns were the traffic issue; loss of viewshed and
open space. This is a sensitive area for the Chumash and he would like to see how
developers would be able to do anything without avoiding this. Regarding the light, there is
zero cut-off lighting available.
Jim Crouse. works for utility company, stated presently there is no lighting in the path area
of the proposed project; a gate would be much better to stop traffic going through than
bollards.
Gabe West. neiahborhood child, stated he and his friends use the pathway a lot for biking
and going to the elementary school and with all the extra traffic it would not be safe; he
hoped there would still be a small access to get to the creek.
Gary Young, 2815 Mesa, applicant, spoke at length giving the history of their project and it's
progress through the City. They had made the requested changes to the proposal after the
pre-application had gone through the SAC, ARC, Planning Commission and City Council.
He introduced the experts who were available to answer Commission questions:
. Lenny Grant, LGA, project architect
. Jim Burrows, Firma, landscape plan
. Jeremy Larney, Arborist
. Ken Chicone, Civil Engineer
. Gary Dillinger, Catholic Health Care West (CHW)
. Derek Rap, Penfield & Smith, Traffic Report
. Sherry Gust, CogSource Realty Management (digging and archeology report)
In reply to a question from Commissioner Ray regarding Mr. Nushi's comment on the buffer
between the houses and the asphalt trail, previously stated as 40 feet, he may have been
referring to the area between the townhouses and the wall.
In reply to a question from Chair Brown in regard to the different heights of the wall, Mr.
Young replied that it was probably due to the grading; his engineer could confirm this.
In reply to a question from Commissioner Parker, Mr. Young verified the width of the path
as being 12 feet.
In reply to a question from Commissioner Fellows, Mr. Young agreed that buildings 7-11
would block pedestrian access to the creek.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 8
Lenny Grant, LGA, described recent similar projects the applicants had completed locally.
Chair Brown stated this project does not have enough parking due to the fact that there are
no driveways for parking and that guest parking spaces would be used instead and asked
Mr. Grant if there were any similar projects in the City with this parking. Mr. Grant stated
that the Stonecrest project had similar parking and explained that in order to get the density
and affordable housing it was necessary to design the project in this way. Chair Brown
stated a concern that after this project was developed it might be found that the parking
does not work.
In reply to a question from Chair Brown, Ken Chicone explained the grading of the project
and why there are so many retaining walls and why the height is six-foot in one area.
In reply to a comment from Commissioner Fellows, Mr. Grant said the ARC had not
requested materials samples; Mr. Young stated they could do this.
In reply to a question from Commissioner Ray, Mr. Young explained that one of the reasons
it is better for them to design with PUD's rather than condominiums is due to the high cost
of insurance for the project.
In reply to a request from Chair Brown, Mr. Young pointed out common Lot 31 and the
easement on the site plan.
Sherry Gust, archeologist, stated that the largest archeological site in Arroyo Grande area
(site 393) is situated entirely north of the proposed development; if the site development
does not go below five feet (there are probably artifacts below the five feet) there should be
no impact; there is property just above Newman Drive that is just pure midden (black dirt)
with chip stones, shells etc.
Mr. Landsman spoke again refuting the fact that there is black dirt on Newman Drive and
was concerned that Ms. Gust's comment that unless the ground is disturbed below five feet
there should be no concern.
10:00 p.m.
Commissioner Ray made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fellows to continue the
meeting to 10:30 p.m. The motion passed on a 4/0 voice vote; Commissioner Tait being
absent.
The Commission took a 15-minute break.
Commissioner Fellows made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ray to continue Item
II.C. and III.A. to the meeting of Feb 7,2006; the motion passed by a 4/0 voice vote.
Chair Brown asked for the experts on various aspects of the project that were present, to
speak next.
In reply to a question from Chair Brown, asking about the potential number of trips going
toward Halcyon if bollards were not there, Mr. Rap, Penfield & Smith, stated that this was
not a part of Phase 1, so they had not got into this, but instead the traffic report provided
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 9
figures for traffic projected toward Halcyon and going north; their general observations for
the cut through was that there would not be an extensive number of non-local traffic using it.
In reply to a question from Commissioner Parker, Mr. Rap stated that the analysis for the
build out included Phase 1, and Phase 1 & 2 separately; re Page 38 & 39
(recommendations to bring down LOS), most mitigations deal with Phase 2 and later
focused on Phase 1; Phase I added about 6% cumulative traffic.
In reply to a question from Chair Brown, Mr. Burrows, Firma, explained how they justified
the type and size of the Ag buffer included in their report; they had not yet completed the
mitigation measure 4.6 (riparian habitat and restoration plan). Chair Brown stated he had a
difficult time approving something they had not seen.
In reply to a question from Commissioner Parker, Mr. Burrows replied that the actual Ag
buffer footage between lot 30 and the agricultural land is less than 100 feet. Commissioner
Parker asked about runoff containment on site; stated she had a concern about runoff into
the creek, she did not have a lot of faith in the in line system, bio-swales are not 100%. Mr.
Burrows said the bio-swales for light rains improves water quality before it goes into any
pipe or the creek; for heavy rains the inline system cleans it further and tests it.
Commissioner Fellows stated he would like to see an Ag buffer design based on the
Queensland Report in order to protect the farmers, the agricultural land and the residents of
any new homes. Regarding a letter from David Foot, Firma, re mitigation measures,
Commissioner Fellows asked for clarification re permeable paving for the parking bays,
down drains discharge, additional native ground covers to provide filtration and slow the
runoff; he also stated that there may be some controversy between the ARC's
recommendations for more trees and having a non-combustible fire break along the ag
buffers; use of recycled construction materials where ever possible was recommended.
In reply to Chair Brown, Mr. Young explained that maintenance of the bio-swales included
being mowed maybe twice a year and plant materials need to be kept moist; during summer
it will need to be irrigated.'
Mr. Bardhyll spoke again and stated some of his questions had not been answered,
specifically regarding justification for the density of the housing and clarification of the
rearyard setbacks on the units. Chair Brown stated that the applicant was aware of his
concerns and they would be addressed.
Chair Brown closed the public hearing for public comment.
Commission comments:
Ray:
. Concern with allowing the creative solution for Phase 1 without seeing Phase 2.
. Not satisfied with the Traffic Study.
. Very concerned with the tunnel effect on the walkway and safety for the children.
. Not sure about Woodland Drive; will need a lot more information to make a decision.
. Uncomfortable with the information received from CHW, although they did not have
a chance to speak tonight and she would like to hear from them at the next meeting.
. Open space/common/maintenancelindividual versus community issue is muddy and
needs to be cleared up.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 3, 2006
PAGE 10
Fellows:
. The worst thing you can do to a neighborhood is to dump thru-traffic into streets that
were not built for this and where people have lived for years; Halcyon will become
like a freeway; he would do anything he could to keep traffic off South Alpine.
Brown:
· The staff report and applicant's discussion should include the definitions on this
project and define where the public open space and common open space lies and
how it was calculated, specifically in regards to the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
· Commissioner Fellows's concern on the Ag buffer is a huge issue; how was the
buffer arrived at and how was it determined it to be appropriate; concern with open
space versus trees: there is probably a solution for this.
· Like to see other similar successful projects in Arroyo Grande; is not comfortable
that people will be required park in their garages because there are no driveways;
believes this is not human nature.
· Did not see a specific condition regarding affordable housing.
· Agreed with Commissioner Ray's concerns about being asked to accept a part of the
project on faith.
Parker:
· This project does not look like Office Mixed Use; it looks more like a PUD; would
rather see this coming in as a PUD in two phases.
· She would like to see a map that designates the distance between buildings etc; she
would like to see the wall and heights designated.
. She has concern with the walkway and the safety issue.
. Would like to see Plan B for the ag buffer on the northeast area; does not believe
eminent domain is the answer.
· Hazardous materials and run off into the creek is a big issue although bio-swales
and in line filters are a good start; wants to know for sure if there will be no
contaminants running into the creek.
. Like to see Fish & Game involved with the creek plan and for the walkway that goes
to the creek (to review chemical runoff).
. Does not like private ownership of public open space; also has concern with the
common open space designations.
. Would like to see footprint statistics corrected to show what the true lot coverages
are.
. Would like to know what will be addressed by the HOA and CC&R's.
. Has a problem with the parking; removing the front yard setbacks removes two
possible parking spaces; need to provide adequate parking somewhere.
Commissioner Ray made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Parker, to continue
discussion of the item to a special adjourned meeting, January 31, 2006, at 6:00 p.m.
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 05-014 & MINOR EXCEPTION 05-001;
APPLICANT - CINGULAR WIRELESS; REPRESENTATIVE - GORDON BELL,
STRATEGIC REAL ESTATE SERVICES; LOCATION - 301 TRINITY AVENUE
Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon presented the staff report to consider the proposed
construction of a 53' 11" tall bell tower on an existing church to house panel
telecommunication antennas, and installation of a 12' 0N) x 20' (l) x 10' (H) equipment
shelter. The SAC & ARC recommended approval of this Conditional Use Permit with the
.,; ,<. -,-
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
6:00 P.M.
ATTACHMENT 3
CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with
Chair Brown presiding; also present were Commissioners Fellows, Parker, Ray and Tail.
Staff members in attendance were Community Development Director, Rob Strong,
Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, Assistant Planner, Ryan Foster, and Public Works
Engineer, Victor Devens.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: Request public to turn off their cell phones during the meeting.
AGENDA REVIEW: No requested changes to the agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of January 3,2006 were approved on a motion
by Commissioner Fellows, seconded by Commissioner Parker, with the following requested
changes:
Fellows:
. Page 7, should state ...Mr. Young verified the "width" of the path as being 12 feet.
Ray:
. Page 8, should be, Sherry Gust, Archeologist (not Architect).
Parker:
. Page 10, 3rd paragraph, 1st bullet: Change wording to state, "...would rather see
this coming in as two phases"; 2nd bullet: Change the word "everything" to
"buildings"; yth bullet: Add the word "designations" at the end of the sentence; Add
the word "somewhere" at the end of sentence.
The motion was approved by a 5/0 voice vote.
Commissioner Parker requested the minutes of January 17, 2006, be pulled and considered
at the next regular meeting - February 7, 2006. Commissioner Parker made the motion,
seconded by Chair Brown; the motion was approved on a 5/0 voice vote.
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
B. '. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
1. Memo from Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner, regarding TTM 05-003 & PUD 05-007:
Changes to draft Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures.
C. REFERRAL ITEMS FOR COMMISSION ACTION: None.
II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
A. CONTINUED FROM 01~03-06: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 05-
003 AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 05-007; APPLICANT -
CCRED; REPRESENTATIVE - JASON BLANKENSHIP; LOCATION - FAIR OAKS
AVE (vacant lot east of Arroyo Grande Hospital).
Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report for continued review of a
mixed-use development, proposed in two phases, on a 5.5-acre site. Highlights of the
report focused on the Phase 1 proposed to include thirty (30) town homes and over an acre
of open space to be offered as dedication to the public (14,000 sq. ft. of common open
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 2
space and approximately 9,000 sq. ft. of private open space). Phase 1 is subject to the
Office Mixed Use (OMU) standards and the Design Overlay OMU-D-2.20, general mixed-
use standards, PUD standards, agricultural buffer and creek setback requirements. Phase
2 conceptually consists of a medical office complex with up to 120,000 sq. ft of floor area
and subterranean parking and will go through a separate discretionary and environmental
review once detailed plans have been submitted.
Ms. Heffernon then listed the items of concern that were discussed during the January 3,
2006 meeting; stated that the applicant had submitted additional information based on these
issues; in response to issues raised on the Ag buffer, a report prepared by Firma verifies
that the Ag buffer should be measured from the other side of the creek and not from the
small piece of land located northeast of the property which is not viable for any agricultural
production. Ms. Heffernon stated that modified Mitigation Measure 2.2 explains that the
zoning interpretation on creek setback area for the Ag parcel located northwest of the creek
should be Public Facilities (a small portion of land was inadvertently shown as Ag); lot 31
was conditioned to be dedicated to the City as public open space and would include creek
channel, creek setback area, Ag buffer and pedestrian trail easement.
In conclusion, Ms. Heffernonexplained that after discussion with some Commission
members staff had made some recommended changes to the Conditions of Approval and
Mitigation Measures and these had been handed to the Commission this evening. Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 05-003 and Planned Unit Development 05-007 to the City
Council.
Chair Brown asked for clarification on why they now had to make a recommendation to the
City Council and why the Commission could not make the decision on this.
Mr. Strong explained that City Code states that any action requiring City Council approval
converts final action of the project, by the Planning Commission, to an advisory
recommendation to City Council.
Chair Brown opened the public hearing for public comment.
Gary Young, 28 Mesa Alter, applicant, introduced their consultants who were present to
answer Commission questions.
Jennifer Martin, Architect, LGA, described the changes that had been made to the project to
address the Commission's concerns voiced at the meeting of January 3, 2006.
Gary Boringer, VP for Strategic Planning, Catholic Health Care West, gave the history and
intent of overlay; stated that the 75/25 percent designation was put in place after the initial
recommendation of 50/50 percent designation; they had worked with the developer and
staff during the last nine months to develop this project. In conclusion, he explained that
their goal is to continue to safeguard the area around the hospital and develop a facilities
plan and options for the future. The phased development is based on the 75/25 percent
allocation of uses which gives us flexibility and time to develop. We want to meet the needs
of the hospital and the community and be sensitive to the neighbors.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 3
David Foote, firma, showed the latest landscape plan which included a sketch of the
pathway alongside the units. His discussion focused on concerns raised by the public and
Commission at the last meeting. He stated that they had looked at the Queensland Report
for guidance on the setbacks for the Ag buffer and had addressed the concern regarding
fire hazards by recommending trees that the County recommends for both Ag buffers and
low fuel areas and emphasized that the landscape would be irrigated; he clarified the
proposed plant materials (trees) to be used and showed how they should look when mature.
Barbara Washinaton. 621 Cerro Vista Circle, stated concerns that the development will
impact the natural feel of the creek area; asked if Fish & Game would be monitoring this
area; stated 30 two-story homes will be an intrusion on the creek and existing neighbors;
this is the only open space in the area and natural plant species should be left alone, open
areas kept open (not over-plant).
Bardhvll Nushi. 641 Cerro Vista Circle, spoke at length and stated concern with the change
that the project has taken and with the fact that the Commission could now only recommend
to City Council due to the interpretations required; asked how could this be allowed to
proceed to Council when the whole scope of work for Phase 1 is based on Phase 2 (Phase
2 seems inappropriate and inconceivable).
Chair Brown stated that the general idea behind the overlays is that it is a planning tool to
determine what the ultimate possibilities may be.
Mr. Nushi continued: If Woodland Drive is not going through why is the parcel still being
divided in half; asked that the site be re-Iooked at getting it back to 50/50; still has concerns
that alley (pathway) is a security issue and only having a four foot fence will allow people to
look right into the houses; the real issue is that the pathway goes up to 15 feet because of
height of houses; the buildings are too close to the pathway to create a user-friendly alley;
there is a need to back away from the pathway and lowering the fence does not help; the
path will be in the shade most of the day due to the structures but trees will soften it. In
conclusion, Mr. Nushi stated concern that the decision to not allow Woodland Drive to go
through should be permanent not temporary; he showed a sketch for an alternate design
which included a small park; he requested the applicant revisit the project and set the bike
path further away from the homes.
Scott Washinaton. 61 Cerro Vista Circle, stated he walks to school every day along the
pathway and expressed his concerns that wildlife would be affected; the buildings are too
close to the creek; crime rate in the area will increase; having the fencing along the path is
unsafe; he plays with his friends every day at the health park and this area may not look too
nice with gates.
Darlene Mack. 576 Woodland Drive, stated a concern that even though the applicant said
that Woodland Drive would not go through to S. Alpine, the staff report states that this will
be revisited again with Phase 2; she asked if this would have to go to a public hearing to be
changed? Chair Brown stated there would be additional public hearings.
Robert Berrvhill. 629 Cerro Vista Circle, stated his concern that the new houses will be too
close to existing houses; the walkway/bikepath will be narrower due to the addition of the
landscaping (trees) each side of the path; it would be too narrow for two bikes to pass.
Debra West. 159 S. Alpine Street,stated concern that this project will radically change the
open space area; Arroyo Grande is giving away their open space especially in the central
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 4
area; she understands the need that the hospital may have for the extra space, but the City
needs open space that is natural (not drainage basins and PUD's).
Patrick Kellev. 187 S. Alpine Street, third generation in his house, stated concern with the
future and concern for the safety of children with the potential increase in traffic.
Gabe West. 159 S. Alpine Street, stated concern that he will be walking the path when he
goes to high school and wants it to stay safe; he has concern with walking to school on the
roads due to traffic.
Piper Adleman. 606 Cerro Vista Lane, stated concern that her four children will not be safe
walking to school on the proposed path if it becomes an alley; it will invite graffiti and other
problems; they already have to drive really slowly on the local streets as there are always a
lot of children playing in the streets around her neighborhood.
Chet Williams. 649 Cerro Vista Circle, stated concern with traffic congestion (increasing
every day); asked if they will have parks coming into the area for the children; the open
space is the only area children have to play; with the proposed heights of units he would no
longer be able to see the path with children walking to school; he could see problems in the
futu re.
Christina Coffman. 220 S. Alpine Street, stated concern that the area is changing; other
new projects in the area have built small parks for the children, but this project does not
include a park; he would like to keep the small town atmosphere.
Colleen Nushi. 646 Cerro Vista Circle, asked those in the audience who were there to
support her and her husbands' comments to stand up (approx. 20 people stood up); she
stated her main concerns were that the Woodland Drive decision to not go through was not
a permanent one for the sake of the safety of their children; if it is not stopped now it will
have a dramatic impact on our children.
Ravann Crouse. 637 Cerro Vista Circle, stated concern with loss of safety and agreed with
a lot of the issues addressed by others.
Darlene Mack spoke again, stated concern with traffic issues on Halcyon and Grand Ave; if
Woodland Drive ever did connect to Cerro Vista drivers would be taking a short cut to get to
Fair Oaks for the High School or the freeway; traffic in the morning and afternoon at school
times already backs up to the mortuary and Grand Ave.
In reply to a question from Chair Brown, Mr. Young stated that the Commission would have
to listen to public input and make a decision on Woodland Drive; the trail, riparian corridor
and creek areas will remain the same and the proposed gevelopment will not affect any of
these areas; Woodland Drive will be a political decision.
Commission questions to Mr. Foote:
Brown:
. Asked for clarification on the rendering of the path showing landscaping and lighting.
Mr. Foote described the rendering in detail and explained why they had chosen this
specific line of site, described the view from different directions and from the
proposed units.
Tait:
. Is there a concern that roots from the proposed larger trees will lift the path or the
neighboring property; would having deciduous trees cause a lot of leaf drop? Mr.
Foote: In areas like this we put the trees in a barrel to intercept the roots and get
them to grow down; the trees do not have to be deciduous.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 5
· Why choose the London Plane tree over California Sycamore? Mr. Foote: The
California Sycamore is more irregular, and susceptible to blight at certain times of
the year causing them to drop leaves early, but this does not endanger them.
· In reply to another question, Mr. Foote stated the windows on the second story of the
units are for bedrooms/offices. /
Fellows:
· Since the bio-swales have been removed what will be put in their place? Mr. Foote:
He had not been updated on this change, but there could be a connection from the
interior loop street to the public path.
· The ARC recommended good size fruit trees in the parkway, adjacent to Woodland
Drive, why are the trees small now? Mr. Foote: This comment from the ARC may
have been missed; he would look at the minutes, but they can put larger trees in.
Tait
· Re the public concern with losing open space and the natural feel of the creek; he
thought the plans actually enhance these areas, but asked for a comment on this.
Mr. Foote: Under most zoning codes a pathway would be required along the creek
with enhanced landscaping. In this case, the existing path will be enhanced with
native riparian vegetation, adding to the natural feel of the creek and providing a
more effective buffer.
Brown:
. Is the current vegetation along creek sufficient to create enough vegetation for the
Ag buffer? Mr. Foote: He would definitely say so; it is 100 feet plus wide.
Tait:
. Re the triangle portion of land that is not being zoned Ag land, is this no longer a
concern where the five units are proposed? Mr. Foote: It is not a concern with this
new designation.
. For irrigated row crop the County requires a 200-500 foot Ag buffer; how do you
justify not doing this here with the irrigated row crops? Mr. Foote: Basically because
the creek and the integrity and density of this riparian corridor provide a major
barrier.
. Mr. Foote's reply to another question: The prevailing wind pattern (drift) from the
farmland is towards the other Ag land, to the east, and is not such a big concern.
Fellows:
. The Queensland report recommends a non-combustible edge to both sides of the Ag
buffer and a specific plant make up to protect people who live adjacent to the farms;
what does an Ag buffer do to protect the residents? Mr. Foote: It intercepts dust
and spray and also the trees have some ability to trap particles and airborne spray.
. Had they noticed the gap in the Ag buffer? Mr. Foote: They had noticed it and they
propose to plug the hole with trees on their side.
. Will firma guarantee that the Ag buffer will not burn down? Mr. Foote: No one would
guarantee this, but it will provide protection.
Brown:
. What can be done within the creek easement to improve the long-term vegetative
quality (not in the boundaries of the residential project)? Mr. Foote: The City
manages this area by mowing, but everything in that area could be enhanced by
more native plants.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 6
· What is the time frame for maturity of the proposed trees. Mr. Foote: The trees will
be managed by the City, but with good irrigation oak trees can double their size in 6-
8 years; the sycamores can double their size in about 3 years.
Tait:
· Are the trees (mentioned above) specifically for the Ag buffer to intercept? Mr.
Foote: These trees serve well for Ag buffers and low fuel zones; he would
recommend a mix of both California Sycamore and London Plane trees, especially in
a native environment.
· There are at least three Eucalyptus trees in the area of the creek; should these come
out? Mr. Foote: Unless clearly mandated, it is best not to get into the creek area;
the Eucalyptus in this area are not out of control; the pros outweigh the negatives.
Parker:
. MM 4.7 re enhancement of the pathway: Will there be any creek enhancement in
this area? Mr. Foote: Because of the concern with fire, we are trying to balance this
concern by planting native plants and trees in the area.
Mr. Young stated he was intending to object to this mitigation as it does start a new path
and it would not be desirable to have a path down to the creek due to grafitti and other
public nuisances taking place down there.
Mr. Strong stated that Ms. Heffernon's memo suggests deleting this mitigation measure
(MM 4.10) and replacing with language to state "To combat unwanted creek access and
foot traffic that disturbs riparian vegetation, the applicant shall offer to dedicate a trail
easement to the City, subject CDFG approval".
Parker:
. If the trail were given to the City, would the City have to enhance it? Mr. Strong: It
was not intended to be a trail and the City could determine it unsafe and preclude
access- Fish and Game will be the determining factor.
Tait:
. How can access be prevented? Mr. Strong: Fish & Game or the City can prevent or
restrict access with additional deterring vegetation, such as poison oak.
8:20 p.m.
The Commission took a 10-minute break.
Parker:
. MM 4.6 has been deleted so is there no longer a riparian habitat plan? Mr. Foote:
This measure was primarily related to potential storm drain improvements in the
bank, but a condition can be imposed to widen the enhancement area out to the
riparian edge to get more plants in there and can occur along the whole frontage all
the way down.
Tait:
. He was disappointed that MM 4.6 had been deleted; the developer should submit a
riparian/landscape restoration plan to the City and it should be monitored by Fish &
Game. Ms. Heffernon: This mitigation measure is very specific about doing
improvements to the drainage (the outfall to the creek); we are not clear if the
applicant can obtain permission to do work on property that does not belong to them;
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 7
MM 4.3 (in the mem?) does relate to this, but she would not be opposed to putting
some of the mformatlon (that was struck in 4.6) back in if preferred.
Parker:
· She would like to see MM 4.6 put back in (even if it only applies to restoration after
the erosion mitigation) to ensure that there will be a restoration plan if anything is
done in the creek; she asked Mr. Foote if he could be in charge of a plan? Mr.
Foote: That would be fine, but he explained that the City would be required to
monitor this with the applicant and Fish & Game.
Brown:
· He would also want to see a restoration plan as the City is the responsible party to
see that this is done.
. Asked for clarification on the parking for the project.
Ms. Martin clarified the number of parking spaces and short-term parking in front of the units
plus the distance allowed for maneuvering in and out.
Mr. Strong commented that parallel parking in this project should not be encouraged; there
is ample and safer parking in the garage space; the entire driveway is a fire lane.
Brown:
. He is concerned that residents would not have a way to parallel park in this project.
Parker:
. Why is a handi.cap space required for residential? Mr. Grant, LGA, explained that
10% of town homes are required to have ADA accessibility; near the park is the most
logical, but it can be moved if required.
. The City's t:YD calls for 2-car garages (covered parking) and 11, space per unit;
however, she does not know of any other approved PUD that has no driveway (1/2
space only for guests) and no parking on the street; staff states this is enough
parking, but she does not feel that it is. Mr. Strong: This project meets the City's
minimum standards for both resident and guest parking for this density; (this is a
multi-family PUD); if the parking expectation is to allow parking in front of the garage
or the equivalent to off-street, then the General Plan and mixed-use and multi family
zones will not work; the Community Development Department is in the process of
amending the Development Code; as yet the mixed use and multi family districts and
the PUD standards have not been updated; most of the projects that are pending are
generally higher density, mixed-use projects, and none of them will meet the
expectation of parking in front of the garage; if this is required none of them will be
approved and we will then be back to the conventional single-family subdivision
design. '
Fellows:
. Would the internal streets be open to neighborhood foot traffic (like children going to
school)? Ms. Martin: They will be.
. Will material samples go to ARC. Ms. Martin: They will.
Commission questions to Mr. Young:
. CC&R's should contain a regulation that prohibits the four-foot fence (on the
developer's side) from being raised. Mr. Young agreed.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 8
Tait:
· Re the public comment regarding Woodland Drive, the gate, and putting a park like
area in: Could this be considered given that the emergency access would still need
to go through? Mr. Young: The proposed design for a park that Mr. Nushi
submitted, would not be feasible because Public Works wants the right-of-way, that
the project will dedicate, to align with the existing portions of Woodland Drive.
Mr. Strong stated that the City could require a specific landscape treatment in addition to
the 20-foot wide asphalt path; this could be required of the applicant.
Ray:
· What will happen with the small triangle shaped piece of property, at bottom of the
plan, if access becomes an issue? Mr. Young: In the future this may have to be
dealt with by the City.
Parker:
· Had Mr. Young heard from the Fire Department regarding whether the emergency
access is needed? Mr. Young: The Fire Chief is comfortable with the 20-foot wide
access with either bollards or a gate included; he had not discussed whether it was
needed.
Brown:
· If bio-swales disappear what will happen to those areas? Mr. Young: If we go with
the vaults then the bio-swales will be landscaped; we may take one of those areas
and make a trail that connects the road down to the creek easement for our
residents.
· Special Condo #9: You are already over the total living and work related square
footage totals? Mr. Young: Explained how they arrived at the percentages in the
report.
Ray:
. Expressed concern at the way the percentages were arrived at; at the last meeting
the Commission was told that all the calculations were based on the 120,000 sq. ft.
for the medical offices and now you are stating the opposite. Mr. Young: In
discussions with staff, this is the way we were advised to calculate; he agreed that
they were 5,000 sq. ft. over when considering the 75/25 percent.
Brown:
. Asked for clarification on Condition No. 54: Mr. Young: The way the drainage is
proposed would not work. Mr. Devens: Confirmed that this condition may have to
be amended after it has been reviewed, as it may be infeasible.
. Concern re Condition Nos. 57 & 58: Mr. Young: Explained how the existing 48"
storm water pipe was working; the City is asking us to mitigate the erosion; so as not
to disturb the creek, we are proposing that we slurry the bottom and sides of the pipe
with concrete and on the outfall we are proposing to add language to state that the
developer will contribute up to $10,000 cost towards fixing the current City problem,
thereafter the developer and City shall pay their respective pro-rata shares; where
we tie into the 48" pipe we have agreed to pay for installing a new manhole and
fossil filter (the City will maintain it).
Tait:
. Condition No. 57 what mitigation measure will cover this? Ms. Heffernon: The new
language for MM 4.3.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 9
Parker:
· MM 4.3: The language should be more specific to state a streambed alteration
permit shall be required from Fish & Game to put rip-rap in the creek.
Brown:
· MM 4.6, asked for clarification. Mr. Foote: Recommended that rather than change
4.6, more language could be added to 4.7 that explicitly defines the extent of what
the enhancement and restoration needs are and if the Commission's intent is to have
it on the other side of the path (between the path and the riparian area) to make it
more comprehensive they could recommend this.
Parker:
· 4.6 deals with after the repaired rip-rap is put into the creek; would you be allowed to
go into the creek to increase habitat? Mr. Foote: The applicant does not own the
land and the City does have an easement for drainage, but the landowner may
agree with this. Ms. Parker: 4.6 could be put back in with a sentence to state, "as
long as it is acceptable to the applicant". Ms. Heffernon stated that they would not
require the applicant to do something that is not acceptable.
Ray:
· MM 8.1 conflicts with conditions 61 regarding construction times. Ms. Heffernon:
condition No. 61 is only for purposes of public inspection for Public Works.
Tait:
. Is it typical to have Monday through Saturday for construction times? Ms. Heffernon:
It is what has been done discretionarily in the past.
Commission questions to staff:
Fellows:
. Concern with the bollards; will they keep motorcycles from going through? Mr.
Devens: If pedestrians can get through then so can motorcycles; there are some
ways to install poles in a jogging pattern to stop this. Mr. Strong: He would rather
not see a design where a bicycle would have to be lifted to get through; it could be
signed to warn motorcycles not to go through.
. Why is there a choice between Bio-swales and vaults? Mr. Devens: Staff's ultimate
preference is to have vaults installed, but due to the constraints did not have enough
details to decide this before the meeting.
. MM 3.14, concern with the "where feasible" language. Ms. Heffernon: There are
some instances where this cannot be done in some instances based on the design.
10:00 p.m.
Commissioner Fellows made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ray to continue the
discussion to 10:30 p.m.; the motion was approved on a 5/0 voice vote.
Parker:
. Does there have to be an emergency access through the Ag property. Mr. Strong:
The Fire Chief would want a secondary access and the neighborhood to the north
would also need secondary access.
. Why does the whole project need to go to City Council when there are only two
issues that they need to consider? Mr. Strong: The Development Code states the
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 10
requirement. If any aspect of a project requires City Council approval, then the
whole project must be decided by City Council.
Tait:
· Asked for open space calculations clarification. Mr. Strong: The table does not
contain a description of public open space; the Code shows inconsistency; open
space does not all have to be usable; the PUD standards do not have any reference
to public open space and whether it has to be usable or not.
. Why can't a combination of bio-swales and other methods be used? Mr. Strong: If
other systems were used in conjunction there would no longer be a bio-swale
opportunity; bio swales are not beneficial in some areas; staff wants to come up with
the best management practices for this location.
Brown:
. Is there a successful office mixed-use project with similar density to this that we have
done in the City? Mr. Strong: There are a couple of residential PUD's, but not
without some parking in front of the garages; staff has done research in other areas
(example San Luis Obispo) that has similar mixed use projects that are functioning
well with less parking.
Commission Comments:
Tait:
. From public comment he felt it would be nice if a small park could be provided that
would still allow emergency access.
. He is okay with the pathway; maybe go 'with evergreen trees.
. The public has a major concern with Woodland Drive going through; we need to do
something about this.
. There needs to be a riparian restoration plan.
. He is fine with the parking.
. Open space issues will need to be resolved "down the line".
. Pretty good project.
Parker:
. She supports Woodland Drive not going through; would like to see both ends closed
and have a park on both ends; if it is narrowed down in this area maybe it could have
more greenery on either side.
. The pathway does not look like it will be a problem; re does not know how to make
public concerns on safety resolved; she would be uncomfortable with the privacy
issues (re the fencing) if she were to own one of the units; the pathway could be
removed, but then the public would lose it altogether.
. The Ag issue seems to have been worked out; she would recommend to City
Council to follow through on looking at the rezoning, especially as it is not prime Ag
land.
. The HOA should have some rules enforcing the parking inside the garages;
suggested mitigation to have no oil changeslwashing of cars etc. because of the
impact on the creek.
. She recommends creek dedication to the City Council.
. Supports the project; she is pleased with all the changes and research that has been
done.
. She is glad to see the public area of walkway remain public.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 11
· He the Ag issue: Is comfortable with the setback of 175 feet-plus, and that they
were keeping out of the 25-foot setback all along the creek.
. Would like to see the couple of changes discussed in the mitigation measures
regarding the riparian plan done if possible; agrees that 4.6 should be put back in
with language discussed.
Fellows:
. MM 2.1, transfer disclosure statement: This is not enough warning to a purchaser of
the property; a bold statement to warn potential buyers that they are living close to
farmland.
· Condition No. 23, (one tree every 75 feet is too far apart), change to one tree every
35 feet, and they should be trees of stature like liquid amber or oaks.
· He would like to see the real material samples go to the ARC.
. He would like to see at least one walkway from the internal driveway to the creek
(where the bio-swales were proposed).
· If bioswales are not as effective as vaults then vaults should be used.
. Make-up of the Ag buffer is pretty close; augmentations discussed by Mr. Foote
should be added and fire resistant plants should be used, even in the backyards of
the units that are backing up to the pathway and Ag land and take it back to ARC for
review.
. He has been confused by the public's comments on the pathway; he considers it an
amenity and when lighted it will be safer than it is now; anyone going from S. Alpine
to the elementary or high school can just walk down Woodland Drive and not go
down the path.
. Regarding the design of the five homes that back up to the homes on Cerro Vista
Circle, it is a goofy idea to have a sunken garden where someone can jump over the
fence into the backyard; these five units should be smaller, the back yard larger and
further away from the pathway and have a common sense six foot fence on the
same level; also the units should not be so tall because of the houses behind.
. It is a great idea that the applicant has agreed to put in the new manhole and filter
the water.
. The one tree by the top lot should be saved (native California Walnut).
. He would love to have a park, but the City cannot afford to buy it as a park or afford
to water it.
. He is not sure about the parking; a middle ground would be good and maybe the
project should not be so dense; however, if we don't have dense infill maybe we will
have sprawl.
Ray:
. She is conflicted about the project; Mr. Young presented a very good project with
complex problems and she appreciated the packet that she received this week with
color renderings etc.
. The primary focus needs to be on the future success of the hospital; the hospital has
stated they are happy with this proposal, but the following were her reasons for not
being able to support the proposed project:
If Phase 1 is approved as presented what happens with Phase 2: The merits of a
120,000 sq. ft. project have not been discussed or presented for public comment;
there are two variances being made for this proposal 1) we are going from area of
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 12
land to area of square footage and, 2) we are fudging on this; she has a problem
making a such a huge jump. There are no examples throughout the City showing
that this can be done, no examples of subterranean parking and the costs involved
in doing this. The staff report for Phase 2 will have to include environmental review,
substantial transition areas and subterranean parking; what if this is not financially
viable; for this alone she could not recommend approval of this project to City
Council.
What if the applicant builds out Phase 1 and sells off the land for Phase 2; the profit
margin from Phase 1 to offset the cost in Phase 2 would be lost.
The applicant has done a great job with the residential portion, but in good
conscience for the City she could not approve Phase 1 as it might make Phase 2
infeasible and might even preclude something else being built in Phase 2 if that land
is sold separately.
Brown:
. Agreed with Commissioner Rayon some measure that we are dealing with an
unknown, but looking at this property in it's entirety and City Council's desire to do
the overlay to help the medical facilities; this is a good first step and we cannot
determine the financial future of the hospital; the percentages 75/25 & 50/50 are just
a rough planning tool; the overlay planning tool is not set in stone.
. He has a concern about parking; he is starting to come around to higher density
projects.
. This City has not dealt with office mixed use with a parking element so he has a
concern with this issue; with a reduction of units some additional parking could be
provided.
. He could vote for this project based on Mr. Strong's representation that he can bring
some discussion to Council the successfulness of this project at this location.
. He wants MM 4.6 put back in.
In reply to a question from Chair Brown, Mr. Strong stated that regarding MM 2.2 if the
Commission supports the interpretation, and the Council concurs it would not require a
Development Code Amendment; the preference would be to return to the map in the
Development Code that designates the creek area as Public Facility, then the Ag boundary
would be the east side of the creek.
Chair Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tait to recommend approval to
City Council of the Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development with the following
amendments included:
. The modifications to draft conditions of approval and mitigation measures contained
in the memo from Ms. Heffernon, dated January 31, 2006.
. Amendment to condition of approval No. 23: Change one tree every 75 feet to one
tree every 35 feet.
. Reinsert MM 4.6, amended as discussed.
. Modify MM 4.7. with language that explicitly defines the extent of the enhancement
and restoration needs in the riparian habitat area beside the path.
. Delete MM 4.10.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
and adopt:
PAGE 13
RESOLUTION NO. 06-1989
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 05-003 AND PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 05-007 TO THE CITY COUNCIL, APPLIED FOR
BY CENTRAL COAST REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE (EAST OF ARROYO GRANDE
HOSPITAL)
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Chair Brown, Commissioners Tait and Parker
Commissioner Fellows and Ray
None
Commissioner Fellows stated he could not vote for this motion for three reasons: 1) The
location of the proposed five units next to the path is not fair to the existing homes, 2) The
backyard situation if not acceptable, and 3) The units should be further away from the path
so an alleyway is not being created.
III. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
A. CONTINUED FROM 01-03-06: PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 05-011;
APPLICANT - RICK WHEELER; LOCATION -189 BRISCO ROAD.
Due to the late hour the Commission agreed to move consideration of this item to the next
regular meeting February 7, 2006.
IV.
A. NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE JANUARY 17, 2006
1. MEX 05-016
2. ARCH 05-019
3. TUP 06-001
4. MEX 06-002/
VSR 06-004
5. PPR 05-026 &
VSR 06-001
6. MEX 06-003
7. VSR 06-002
8. MEX 06-004
g. MEX 06-001
Patricia Marr
266 W. Branch
SCHS 134 S. Mason
Amgen Tour of Passing thru Arroyo
CA. Grande
Reece Benson 558 Pasee
Dave Sturges 130 & 132 Short SI.
Nanci Parker 1127 Yard Loomis
Lane
D. & G. Shetler 1575 Chilton Street
Rivera & Son 547 Ladera Place
Excavating
Jerold Berg 555 Palos Secos
Permit existing garage conversion to
Iivin s ace.
New garage/storage building to
match existin house.
Part of the Inaugural Tour of
California.
Minor exception for front yard
setback (18') and retaining walls (up
to 8' .
Mixed use project.
R. Foster
A
R. Foster
A
J. Bergman
A
J. Bergman
A
J. Bergman
Minor exception for front yard fence
hei hI.
A new 2-story residence replacing
an existin sin le-sto residence.
Replacement of failing retaining wall
with a similar concrete block wall
va in from 4-8' in hei hI.
To allow an elevator to encroach
into the setback.
A
J. Bergman
A
B. Soland
A.
J. Bergman
A
T. Ricard
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2006
PAGE 14
The Commission unanimously agreed that they had no concerns with any of the
administrative approval items. Mr. Strong stated the items would be approved after a 10-
day appeal period.
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Mr. Strong asked for a Commission member to volunteer to be a representative on a "Sales
Tax Advisory Committee". Chair Brown volunteered to represent the Commission on this
committee. Mr. Strong stated the first meeting is scheduled for February 15, 2006 at 7:00
p.m.
VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS:
None.
VII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW-UP:
None.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 p.m.
ATTEST:
L YN REARDON-SMITH
SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION
TIM BROWN, CHAIR
AS TO CONTENT:
ROB STRONG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
(Minutes approved at the PC meeting of , 2006)
ATTACHMENT 4
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 05-003 & PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
05-007 (FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT); CHANGES TO DRAFT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES
DATE: JANUARY 31,2006
Below are modifications to specific draft conditions of approval (COA) and mitigation
measures (MM) for the above-referenced project.
. COA #6:
COA #8:
MM 1.2:
MM 2.2:
MM4.1:
MM4.3:
Delete condition (inconsistent with COA #12 and repetitive).
Add at the beginning of the sentence, "Similar to MM 1.2,"
Add at the beginning of the sentence, "Similar to condition of approval no.
8,"
Delete the last sentence and add the following: "At a minimum, the
Planning Commission and City Council can interpret that the zoning
designation on the creek setback area for the agricultural parcel located
northwest of the creek should be Public Facilities (PF). (Due to different
mapping techniques used for creating the updated land use and zoning
maps, the small portion of land northeast of the project site inadvertently is
shown as Agriculture. Earlier maps show this piece of land as PF). If this
is not acceptable, the City will initiate a Development Code Amendment to
change the zoning designation of said property from Agriculture (AG) to
Public Facilities (PF)."
Delete the following language at the end of the sentence "including
portions of the agricultural parcel located northwest of the creek." (This
issue is already addressed in MM 2.2).
Add the following language: "The applicant shall mitigate erosion at the
outlet of the existing 48" corrugated metal pipe (CMP) storm drain line. In
. addition, the applicant shall remediate corrosion to the 48" CMP storm
drain line. Should a Streambed Alteration Permit be required from CDFG
to mitigate said erosion at the outlet of the CMP, and where the permit
includes more stringent conditions than the City's erosion control
measures, the more stringent requirements shall be used."
MM 4.10: Delete and replace with "To combat unwanted creek access and foot
traffic that disturbs riparian vegetation, the applicant shall offer to dedicate
a trail easement to the City, subject to CDFG approval."
MM 6.2: Repeat this MM under Section 14 (Hydrology and Water Quality).
MM 8.1: Add at the beginning of the sentence, "Similar to condition of approval no.
12,... Replace "Friday" with "Saturday" and delete "and between 8 a.m.
and 5 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday".
MM 14.2: Clarification that this is a standard MM for erosion control. Installation of
plant cover is a typical means of stabilizing cut and/or fill slopes.
MM 14.4: Add the following language: "Erosion control and bank stabilization
measures shall be implemented for any work that requires access to the
creek, subject to CDFG approval through a Streambed Alteration Permit."
ATTACHMENT 5
-'
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Project Title & No. VTTM 05-003 and PUD 05-007 - Fair Oaks Mixed Use Proiect
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The proposed project could have a
"Potentially Significant Impact" for at least one of the environmental factors checked below. Please
refer to the attached pages for discussion on mitigation measures or project revisions to either reduce
these impacts to less-than-significant levels or require further study.
~ Aesthetics ~ Geology and Soils o Recreation
~ Agricultural Resources o Hazards/Hazardous Materials ~Transportation/Circulation.
~ Air Quality ~ Noise ~ Wastewater
~ Biological Resources o Population/Housing ~ Water
~ Cultural Resources ~ Public Services/Utilities o Land Use
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation, the Environmental Coordinator finds that:
o The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a'
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
~ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be
a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
o The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
o The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
o
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner
Prepared by (Print)
Signature
12/13/05
Date
Rob Strong, Community Development Director
Reviewed by (Print) Signature
Date
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 1
Proiect Environmental Analvsis
The City's environmental review process incorporates all of the requirements for completing the
Initial Study as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines. The Initial Study includes staffs on-site inspection of the project site and surroundings
and a detailed review of the information in the file for the project. In addition, available background
information is reviewed for each project. Relevant information regarding soil types and
characteristics, geologic information, significant vegetation and/or wildlife resources, water
availability, wastewater disposal services, existing land uses and surrounding land use categories
and other information relevant to the environmental review process are evaluated for each project.
Exhibit A includes the references used, as well as the agencies or groups that were contacted as a
part of the Initial Study. The Community Development Department uses the checklist to summarize
the results of the research accomplished during the initial environmental review of the project.
Persons, agencies or organizations interested in obtaining more information regarding the
environmental review process for a project should contact the City of Arroyo Grande Community
Development Department at 214 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 or call (805) 473-
5420. .
A. PROJECT
DESCRIPTION: Proposal by Central Coast Real Estate Development, Inc. for a Vesting
Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development to construct the first phase of a two-
phased mixed-use project on a 5.5 acre site. The site is located on Fair Oaks Ave. and is
surrounded by medium density residential development to the north and south, Arroyo Grande
Creek to the east, and Arroyo Grande Community Hospital to the west. A City-maintained
recreational path with exercise stations runs along the eastern border of the site adjacent to
the creek and along a portion of the northern border.
Phase I is a 3D-unit single-family residential development in a townhouse configuration with
25,500 square feet of common open space, and Phase II is a medical office complex of up to
120,000 square feet of floor area with underground parking. Approximately one (1) acre of the
Phase I property is in open space or undevelopable due to agricultural setback, creek setback
and easements. The project plans show Woodland Drive extended through the site separating
the two uses and constructed to City standards for future dedication. Design of the commercial
component is tentative and therefore future development of Phase II will be subject to
separate discretionary and environmental review. This Initial Study evaluates potential
environmental impacts primarily for Phase I, although some sections generally address
potential adverse impacts from Phase II as currently described.
The site has varying topographical gradients. The property slopes down gently (6% slope) in
the northwest region, increasing to roughly 14% slope near the central region, and then
decreasing to nearly level in the southeast region. The site then drops down sharply along the
southwest boundary where the property adjoins Fair Oaks Avenue. Site drainage follows the
topography to the southeast towards Arroyo Grande Creek. The site is vegetated with native
and exotic grasses with eucalyptus and remnant walnut orchard trees. Project storm drainage
will mainly be collected in several drop inlets and conveyed in an 18" pipe to the creek. Other
runoff will drain to Fair Oaks Ave.
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S): 006-391-044
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for "Cherry Creek"
Page 2
B. EXISTING SETTING
LAND USE CATEGORY:
ZONING:
EXISTING USES:
TOPOGRAPHY:
Office Professional (0)
Office Mixed-Use (OMU) with a design overlay (D-2.20)
Vacant
Slopes down to creek and Fair Oaks Ave.
VEGETATION:
PARCEL SIZE:
Native and exotic grasses, eucalyptus and remnant walnut orchard trees
5.5 acres
SURROUNDING LAND USE CATEGORIES AND USES:
North: Single-Family Residential- Medium East: Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) and
Density (SFR-MD); single family residences Agriculture (Ag); Arroyo Grande Creek and
cultivated, irrigated field crops
South: Single-Family Residential- Medium West: Office Professional/Medical - Hospital
Density (SFR-MD); single family residences (O/H); Arroyo Grande Community Hospital
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
During the Initial Study process, several issues were identified as having potentially significant
environmental effects (see following Initial Study). Those potentially significant items associated with
the proposed project can be minimized to less-than-significant levels by incorporating the mitigation
measures listed below. All mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study shall be included in the
Conditions of Approval for the project.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
1. AESTHETICS - Will the project: Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Create an aesthetically incompatible D D [gJ D
site open to public view?
b) Introduce a use within a scenic view D D ~ 0
open to public view?
c) Change the visual character of an D ~ 0 0
area?
d) Create glare or night lighting that 0 D [gJ 0
may affect surrounding areas?
e) Impact unique geological or 0 0 [gJ 0
physical features?
f) Other D D D D
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 3
Setting. The project will develop a 5.5-acre site that is currently vacant and partially used for passive
recreation by means of a pedestrian and bicycle trail with exercise stations that runs along the east
side of the property adjacent to the creek. The view from the surrounding residential neighborhood to
the north and along Fair Oaks Avenue will change from vacant land to high-density residential and
medical office uses. The surrounding areas within the same visual context have been similarly
developed with the adjacent Arroyo Grande Hospital and residential units. The City's Architectural
Review Committee considered the project design, colors and materials and recommended approval of
the project with conditions. All of the recommended changes have been incorporated into the project
design.
Impact. Policy C/OS1-1 of the Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element of the General
Plan encourages protection of visually accessible scenic resources. A 'scenic resource' is further
defined as "agricultural land, open spaces, hillsides, ridgelines, canyons, valleys, landmark trees,
woodlands, wetlands, streambeds and banks, and well as aspects of the built environment that are of
a historic nature, unique to the City, or contribute to the rural, small town character of the City."
Although the City has not officially recognized this property as being a sensitive scenic resource, the
site does have an open space quality that is visible to the surrounding neighborhood and the public
traversing Fair Oaks Avenue.
Lighting of the pedestrian trail could create adverse impacts to the adjacent creek habitat and nearby
residents.
Mitigation/Conclusion. Construction of urban features will alter the aesthetic "open space" character
of the project site that is considered an adverse impact. However, the project adequately incorporates
landscaping, open.space, pedestrian paths, widening and enhancement of the existing trail, and an
agricultural buffer that will soften the visual impact of the proposed development from the views of the
surrounding neighborhood. To avoid light "spillage" onto adjacent properties and to further reduce
visual impacts beyond what is already provided in the'project description, the following measures are
required:
MM 1.1: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan verifying that all exterior lighting for
the development is directed downward and does not create spill or glare to adjacent
properties.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; Police Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 1.2: Exterior lighting for the pedestrian trail shall be low intensity, low height and
shielded to prevent illumination of creek habitat and adjacent residents.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing: .
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; Police Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 1.3: The applicant shall submit final exterior colors and materials of the town homes
for Architectural Review Committee approval. The colors shall blend as much as possible with
the surrounding environment.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 4
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
- Will the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact can Insignificant Not
& will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
D ~ D
~ D D
D ~ D
D D D
a) Converl prime agricultural land to D
non-agricultural use?
b) Impair agricultural use of other D
properly or result in conversion to
other uses?
c) Conflict with existing zoning or D
Williamson Act program?
d) Other D
Setting. The subject property is' located across the creek from a 13.15-acre agricultural parcel,
currently in row crop production. The project site has been utilized in the past as a fruit and nut
orchard, evidenced by the remnant orchard consisting of mature and declining English walnut, apricot
and other fruit trees on the upland portion of the site. The existing orchard has exceeded the limits of
its productive life, and has been unmaintained for more than two decades.
The soil type of the property is identified as "Oceano Sand" (Dune Deposits) according to the USDA
Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County, which is Class II "non-irrigated". A Soils Engineering Report
was prepared for the site dated September 23, 2005 (Attachment A) that provides a more detailed
soils classification chart based on multiple borings. The report concludes that the site is suitable for
the proposed development with implementation of recommendations in the report for site preparation,
earthwork, foundations, slabs, retaining walls and pavement sections.
Impact. City Policy Objective Ag1-1 of the Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element of the
General Plan states the following regarding conservation of prime farm/and soils: "Designate prime
farmland soils that are not predominately committed to non-Agricultural development as Agriculture
(Ag) and/or Agriculture Preserve (AgP), whether or not in current agricultural productive use." On
May 24, 2005 the City Council considered an interpretation of Policy Objective Ag1 and determined
that a change in land use or development of properties not already zoned Agriculture, Conservation,
or Open Space does not constitute a loss of prime farmland soils, regardless of soil type.
City records indicate that the property was originally zoned Professional Commercial (PC) in 1972 and
was later zoned Office Commercial (0) in 1991. The property is currently zoned Office Mixed Use
(OMU). Given that the property has historically been committed to non-Agricultural development and
that no impacts to prime soils will occur from the project beyond what was already considered and
addressed in the 2001 General Plan EIR, the loss of prime soils is not SUbject to mitigation under
CEQA. A copy of the City Council Meeting Minutes is included as Attachment B.
The 0.074-acre (or 3,223 square feet) triangular portion of land located northeast of the project site is
designated Agriculture on the current zoning map, but the Land Use Map shows it as
Conservation/Open Space (C/OS). Because of different mapping techniques used for updating the
land use and zoning maps, this small segment of land was incorrectly shown as Agriculture on the
most recent zoning map. The 1991 Zoning Map designated this piece of land Public Facilities (PF).
Therefore, the project meets setback requirements Strict interpretation of Ordinance 550 would have
the residential units setback 100' from this piece of land, effectively losing five (5) units. However, this
piece of land is not viable for Agricultural production because it contains non-prime soils (Class III), is
very small, slopes down to the creek, is awkwardly located across the span of the creek to the
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 5
currently farmed property, is adjacent to existing residential development, and has no access. This
property was given a C/OS designation because most of the land is within the 25' creek setback area.
If the City Council concurs with this interpretation, staff will follow up with a City-initiated Development
Code Amendment to update the C/OS zoning district consistent with the General Plan.
The contrasting land uses of the project site (residential development) and adjacent agricultural
property create conflicting impacts. The source of agricultural-related conflict from the residential
perspective can be noise, light, dust, pollen, smoke, pesticides, odors, traffic, insects or rodents.
From the farmer's perspective, the source of conflict from the proposed residential use can be theft,
vandalism, litter, pest infestation, water drainage, or increased liability. Arroyo Grande Creek acts as a
physical barrier between these two land uses, which considerably reduces most of the potential
adverse impacts listed above. However, an additional buffer distance would further reduce potential
impacts. The project incorporates an agricultural buffer that ranges from one hundred thirty feet (130')
to one hundred and seventy feet (170') wide, which complies with City Ordinance No. 550 (creation of
Agricultural Preservation Overlay District) and serves as adequate mitigation. The proposed buffer
includes the span of Arroyo Grande Creek, dense riparian vegetation, the existing recreational trail,
and additional landscaping. There is a small triangular portion of land designated Agriculture to the
northeast of the project site that cannot be cultivated due to inadequate access. Because of different
mapping techniques used for updating the land use and zoning maps, this small segment of land was
incorrectly shown as Agriculture on the most recent zoning map. The 1991 Zoning Map designated
this piece of land Public Facilities (PF). Therefore, the project meets Agricultural setback
requirements.
Mitigation/Conclusion. The project adequately provides separation of uses that mitigates potential
conflict by means of a 130-170 foot buffer that includes Arroyo Grande Creek, dense riparian
vegetation, a recreational trail, and additional landscaping. The City also has adopted a Right-To-
Farm Ordinance with provisions for farmland preservation and protection, and serves to notify
residents of farmers' rights and clarify agricultural activities. As an added measure, the following
mitigation is required to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level (note that landscaping
requirements for the buffer as well as other areas within the development are addressed in the
Biological Resources section):
MM 2.1: All new property owners within the subdivision must sign a Real Estate Transfer
Disclosure indicating that they acknowledge and agree to the provisions contained in the City's
Right-To-Farm Ordinance.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer; Real Estate Agent
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to close of escrow
MM 2.2: The developer and City shall obtain an agricultural buffer and creek easement
on the agricultural parcel located northwest of the creek and offer to the City (see also MM
4.1). At a minimum, the City Council can interpret that the zoning designation on the creek
setback area for the agricultural parcel located northwest of the creek should be Public
Facilities (PF). (Due to different mapping techniques used for creating the updated land use
and zoning maps, the small portion of land northeast of the project site inadvertently is shown
as Agriculture. Earlier maps show this piece of land as PF). If this is not acceptable, the City
will initiate a Development Code Amendment to change the zoning designation of said
property from Agriculture (AG) to Public Facilities (PF).
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to final tract map recordation
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 6
3. AIR QUALITY - Will the project: Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Violate any state or federal ambient 0 ~ 0 0
air quality standard, or exceed air
quality emission thresholds as
established by County Air Pollution
Control District (APCD)?
b) Expose any sensitive receptor to 0 0 ~ 0
substantial air pollutant
\ concentrations?
c) Create or subject individuals to 0 0 ~ 0
objectionable odors?
d) Be inconsistent with the District's 0 0 ~ 0
Clean Air Plan?
e) Other 0 0 0 0
Setting. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) has developed the CEQA
Air Qualitv Handbook to evaluate project specific impacts and determine if air quality mitigation
measures are needed, or if potentially significant impacts could result. The City refers to this
Handbook for all discretionary projects subject to CEQA.
The project incorporates several site design strategies that are effective in mitigating potential air
quality impacts. These include a pedestrian-friendly streetscape to make walking more comfortable,
providing good access for pedestrians and bicyclists with pathways located throughout the
development, and providing traffic calming devices, such as a narrow driveway design.
Impact. Phase I of the project (30 town homes) is expected to generate roughly 240 average daily
trips (ADT) , with 19 peak hour trips in the AM and 24 peak hour trips in the PM. Phase II will be
subject to separate discretionary and CEQA review. Based on Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality
Handbook ("Screening Criteria for Project Air Quality Impacts"), these cumulative trips would produce
less than ten (10) Ibs.lday of emissions (emissions are defined as ROG, NOx, PM1O, SOx and CO).
Projects having the potential to generate more than ten (10) Ibs.lday of emissions may cause
significant air quality impacts.
As proposed, Phase I of the project will result in the disturbance of approximately 1.77 acres
(approximately 1 acre is not developable and therefore will not be graded). This will result in the
creation of construction dust, as well as short- and long-term vehicle emissions. In San Luis Obispo
County, ozone and PM10 are the pollutants of primary concern, since state health-based standards for
these pollutants are exceeded in portions of the County in most years. For this reason, San Luis
Obispo County is considered to be in non-attainment of the state standards for both ozone and PM1o.
The major sources of PM10 include mineral quarries, grading, demolition, agricultural tilling, road dust
and vehicle exhaust.
Grading and construction of the project would occur over a period of many months. Short-term
impacts related to dust generation from site preparation and grading would result in dust generation
that could affect adjacent properties. Mitigation measures placed on the project would reduce short-
term dust generation during construction of the project to less-than-significant levels. Dust generated
by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site. The
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 7
dust control measures listed below shall be followed during construction of the project, and shall be
shown on grading and building plans.
Mitigation/Conclusion. The following mitigation measures are necessary to reduce air quality
impacts to a less-than-significant level. Air pollution impact assessment is divided into the
construction and operational phases of the project.
Construction Phase Emissions
The project shall comply with all applicable Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regulations \
pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PMlO) as contained in section 6.5 of the Air Quality
Handbook. All site grading and demolition plans shall list the following regulations:
MM 3.1: All dust control measures listed below (MM 3.2 - 3.6) shall be followed during
construction of the project and shall be shown on grading and building plans. The contractor or
builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order
increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. The name and telephone
number of such person(s) shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map
recordation and finished grading of the area.
MM 3.2: During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all
areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. At a
minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is
completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (non-potable)
water should be used whenever possible.
MM 3.3: Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated
with soil binders to prevent dust generation.
MM 3.4: All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load
and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114.
MM 3.5: Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to streets,
or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles
shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site.
MM 3.6: Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried on to
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible.
MM 3.7: To mitigate the diesel PM generated during the construction phase, all
construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's
specifications. The measures below (MM 3.8 - 3.10) shall be clearly identified in the project bid
specifications so the contractors bidding on the project can include the purchase and installation
costs in their bids.
MM 3.8: All off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to
bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary
power units, shall be fueled exclusively with California Air Resources Board (ARB) motor vehicle
diesel fuel.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 8
MM 3.9: To the maximum extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment shall
meet the ARB's 1996 certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines.
MM 3.10: Unless otherwise approved by APCD, the developer shall install catalytic diesel
particulate filters or Diesel oxidation catalyst on two (2) pieces of construction equipment
involved in primary earth moving and construction activities and projected to generate the
greatest emissions. APCD staff shall be included in the selection of candidate equipment along
with a representative of the contractor.
MM 3.11: If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation, or ,building(s) are
removed or renovated, this project may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions, including
the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(40CFR61, Subpart M - asbestos NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to:
1) notification requirements to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Inspector, and 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified asbestos containing
material.
MM 3.12: Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a
geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is present
within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed
with the APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements
outlined in the Asbestos Air Toxins Control Measure (ATCM) regulated under by the California
Air Resources Board (ARB).
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept., Building and
Fire Department
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
Timing:
Operational Phase Emissions
MM 3.13: To encourage walking within the development and provide a safer pedestrian
environment, the applicant shall use textured and/or colored concrete at pedestrian crossings.
MM 3.14: Provide continuous sidewalks separated from the roadway by landscaping with
adequate lighting, especially at intersections.
MM 3.15: Provide shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to reduce
summer cooling needs.
MM 3.16:
Provide sodium streetlights.
MM 3.17:
Orient homes to maximize natural heating and cooling.
MM 3.18: Provide outdoor electrical outlets on homes to encourage the use of electric
appliances and tools.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept., and
Building & Fire Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Timeframe:
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 9
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Result in a loss of unique or special D ~ D D
status species or their habitats?
b) Reduce the extent, diversity or D ~ D D
quality of native or other important
vegetation?
c) Impact wetland or riparian habitat? D ~ D D
d) Introduce barriers to movement of D D ~ D
resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species, or factors that could hinder
the normal activities of wildlife?
e) Other D D D D
Setting. The existing conditions and evaluation of potential project impacts on biological resources is
based on reports prepared by two consultants. Firma consultants, Inc. conducted a biological
assessment of the project site dated August 25, 2005 and October 19, 2005 (Attachments C and D).
Jeremy Lowney prepared an Arborist Report and Tree Protection Plan dated December 7, 2005
(Attachment E). Trees located on the Phase II property are currently proposed to remain, including
the several eucalyptus trees mentioned in the reports. Mitigation for tree removal on Phase II will be
subject to separate environmental review.
The project site mainly consists of a declining tree orchard (English walnut, Plum, Apricot, and Black
walnut) with a stand of eucalyptus on the Phase II property. The under story vegetation is mostly
exotic grasses. Orchard trees and grasslands can support common reptile and mammal species (e.g.
raccoons, skinks, opossum, rodents) and provide habitat for resident and migratory bird species. A
riparian corridor runs along the eastern edge of the property adjacent to Arroyo Grande Creek that
includes native willow, cottonwood and sycamore trees with an under story comprised mostly of
blackberry and poison oak. Several very large eucalyptus trees also exist within the creek bank area.
The banks of the creek are fairly steep and drop about thirty feet (30') to the active creek channel. All
of the trees along the perimeter top of bank area will remain and be protected during construction.
Bird nesting likely occurs in the walnuts, eucalyptus, and riparian vegetation within the project area.
While impacts on an old walnut orchard and grassland habitats are not considered a significant
impact, impacts on nesting bird species is considered to be a potentially significant impact.
The City recently took a video of the inside of the existing 48" corrugated metal pipe (CMP) located on
the northeast portion of the property and determined that about 120' of the CMP must be replaced
with reinforced concrete pipe based on the amount of corrosion. Of this distance, about 40' is within
the creek bank, located on the adjacent agricultural property. This pipe carries water to Arroyo
Grande Creek, where water flows from a 30-inch diameter CMP outlet onto barren soil. Over time, an
erosion gully has formed below the outfall. The gully is approximately 40 feet long, 10 feet wide, and
8 feet deep. Continued outflow at this site would result in additional erosion and deposition of
sediment within Arroyo Grande Creek, which is known to harbor southern steelhead (Oncorhynchus
mykiss irideus), California red-legged frogs (Rana aurora draytonit), and Southwestern pond turtle
(C/emmys marmorata pallida), which are listed as "threatened" under the Federal Endangered
Species Act. Drainage currently sheet flows across the site to Fair Oaks Ave. and to the creek.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 10
Impact. Construction of Phase I of the proposed project will result in the conversion of approximately
2.77 acres of a declining fruit orchard and annual grassland habitats to residential development
including homes, streets and landscaping. Twenty-six (26) non-native trees are proposed to be
removed on the Phase I property that are mostly in decline, and ten (10) trees are to be protected
(refer to spreadsheet of Attachment E for individual tree details). The City's Tree Ordinance does not
include non-native trees as a protected species. However, the applicant has submitted a Preliminary
Planting Plan that shows roughly 155 trees to be planted on the project site in various sizes,
representing a 6:1 replacement ratio. All native trees on the project site, including the four (4) Coast
Live Oaks, will remain.
Impacts on riparian habitat would largely be avoided and minimized by the establishment of a 25-foot
setback from top of bank along Arroyo Grande Creek. Disturbance to the riparian habitat would be
limited to the area necessary to install bank protection measures (riprap, or rock slope protection).
Installation of the reinforced concrete pipe within the creek bank area would require trimming and
removal of vines, poison oak, grasses and other under story vegetation. This riparian vegetation
provides habitat and streamside shading for steelhead and California red-legged frogs that likely
occur along the project reach of the creek during at least some portion of the year. Replacement of
CMP would require impacts on the riparian habitat and banks of Arroyo Grande Creek that may
encroach on the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
Mitigation/Conclusion. The project will involve some disturbance of the upper creek bank area in
order to replace dilapidated CMP and install rock slope protection to reduce further erosion. This will
require replanting of the disturbed area and monitoring. Non-native tree removal will be mitigated at a
6:1 replacement ratio. To facilitate project stormwater drainage issues, several small "bioswale"
detention basins will be installed along the eastern side of the property to decrease the speed of
stormwater flows and allow suspended solids to settle out before the stormwater enters the creek.
Potentially significant impacts to the Arroyo Grande Creek riparian corridor would be mitigated to a
less-than-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s).
MM 4.1: The developer shall record an open space agreement and twenty-five foot (25')
creek easement on the property measured from top of bank. No development shall occur
within 25' creek setback area.
ResponSible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to Grading Permit
MM 4.2: In addition to native ground covers and perennial grasses, the final landscape
plan shall incorporate native riparian and upland shrubs and trees such as Sycamore, Coast
Live Oak, Coffeeberry, Elderberry and Toyon in the recreational trail easement to increase
habitat cover for wildlife and add forage value and roosting sites.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; Parks, Recreation and
Facilities Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Timing:
MM 4.3: The applicant shall mitigate erosion at the outlet of the existing 48" corrugated
metal pipe (CMP) storm drain line. In addition, the applicant shall remediate corrosion to the
48" CMP storm drain line. Should a Streambed Alteration Permit be required from CDFG to
mitigate said erosion at the outlet of the CMP, and where the permit includes more stringent
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 11
conditions than the City's erosion control measures, the more stringent requirements shall be
used.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; CDFG
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
MM 4.4: A qualified biologist shall perform one pre-construction survey for southwestern pond
turtles immediately prior to initiation of site grading and culver/outfall structure construction. If
southwestern pond turtles are observed within an area to be disturbed they shall be relocated
out of harms way to an appropriate area immediately upstream or downstream of the project
area within Arroyo Grande Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to and during start of construction.
MM 4.5: All tree removal shall be limited to the time period of September 1s1 to March 1s1
which is considered to be outside the typical breeding season for birds. If it is not feasible to
avoid the bird-nesting season and trees will be removed between March 1s1 and September
1 SI, a pre-construction survey for nesting birds shall be performed by a qualified biologist. If
active birds nests are located during pre-construction surveys within the project area subject to
tree removal or ground disturbance, the nest site shall be avoided until the adults and young
are no longer reliant on the nest site for survival as determined by a qualified biologist. If
determined necessary by a qualified biologist, a non-disturbance buffer zone shall be
established around each nest for the duration of the breeding season until such time as the
adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site for survival as determined by the
qualified biologist.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 4.6: A Riparian Habitat Restoration Plan (RHRP) shall be prepared by a qualified
landscape architect or restoration biologist experienced in native habitat restoration for any
work performed within the dedicated open space 25-foot creek setback area. The RHRP shall
include at a minimum a detailed planting plan for the 25-foot setback area and for all disturbed
areas from repairing the CMP and installing rock slope protection. The RHRP shall also
include at a minimum the number of other native trees impacted and location of replacement
plantings, specific plant species palette, a non-native species removal plan, success criteria, a
five-year monitoring program, and contingency measures to ensure meeting the success
criteria. The RHRP shall also include an erosion control plan and Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for all disturbed areas within the 25-foot creek setback and exposed banks. The
erosion control seed mix for the riparian setback area shall be composed exclusively of native
species. Any work performed within the creek channel or creek bank is subject to an
approved Streambed Alteration Agreement with the Ca. Dept. of Fish and Game.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer shall submit the plan to the City
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD; CDFG
Restoration Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to
issuance of Grading Permit; duration of monitoring shall
be no less than five (5) years.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 12
MM 4.7: To increase riparian functions and values, the applicant shall submit a final
landscape plan that incorporates native riparian and upland shrubs and trees such as
Sycamore, Coast Live Oak, Coffeeberry, Elderberry and Toyon along the top of creek bank
and within the recreational trail easement. Native ground covers and perennial grasses shall
also be incorporated throughout the project. The CC&Rs shall include assurances that the
landscaping is sufficiently maintained.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, PR&F (Parks, Recreation
and Facilities Dept.)
Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
MM 4.8: Any native trees intentionally or unintentionally killed or removed that are greater
than or equal to four (4) inches diameter at breast height (DBH) and less than twelve (12)
inches DBH shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. Trees removed that are greater than or equal to
twelve (12) inches DBH shall be replaced at a 5:1 ratio. Replacement trees shall be limited to
in-kind replacement of appropriate native tree species as approved by the City Parks, Facilities
and Recreation Department's arborist. All trees to be removed shall be clearly marked on
construction plans and marked in the field with flagging or paint. All trees to be retained shall
be clearly identified on construction plans and marked in the field for preservation with highly
visible construction fencing at a minimum around the drip line of the trees to be retained.
Native riparian trees intentionally or unintentionally impacted shall be replaced within the 25-
foot riparian setback area. Native trees impacted outside the riparian zone can be replaced
within the riparian setback area or incorporated into the development landscaping plan.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, PR&F
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD and PR&F;
During construction
MM 4.9: Fruit trees shall be included in the final landscape plan for use by project residents to
encourage sustainable development.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD and PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Disturb pre-historic resources? 0 ~ 0 0
b) Disturb historic resources? 0 0 ~ 0
c) Disturb paleontological resources? 0 0 ~ 0
d) Other 0 0 0 0
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 13
Setting. The project site is located in an area historically occupied by the Obispeno Chumash and is
situated at the southern edge of CA-SLO-393, a prehistoric habitation site. An archaeological
subsurface testing for the site was conducted in 1990 by Clay Singer and John Atwood that revealed
a variety of disturbed/mixed, redeposited and undisturbed sandy soils. A displaced midden was found
at the northern edge of the property, which contained fragmented shells, burnt rocks, chart flakes, and
a human cranial fragment. The excavated samples indicated that most of the refuse and other
features dated from around 1940. Soil samples indicated that deposits of intact buried prehistoric
features are not likely to exist beneath the surface. However, the report recommended on-site
archaeological monitoring when the orchard trees are uprooted and when construction grading and
excavation are undertaken.
A second cultural resources assessment and subsurface testing was conducted by Cogstone
Resource Management, Inc. (Sherri Gust and April Van Wyke) in September 2005 to update the 1990
study and to prepare a mitigation plan based on current professional standards (Attachment F). Four
(4) trenches were excavated that revealed shell fragments, small mammal bones, ceramic fragments,
glass fragments, and cow bone fragments. Testing conclusions state that three of the trenches have
sparse cultural materials and disturbance indicating that fringe materials or redeposited materials from
archaeological site CA-SLO-393 had been mixed into the sediments during the use of the property as
an orchard. The fourth trench had prehistoric and historic debris.
Impact. Based on results of the 2005 cultural testing, no intact prehistoric deposits are evident on the
subject property, only redeposited fragments from another site. Monitoring, as recommended by the
Mitigation Plan, is determined to be adequate mitigation for the proposed development.
Mitigation/Conclusion. Development of the project could have a potentially signific"nt impact to
cultural and historic resources that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with
implementation of the mitigation measure(s) listed below.
MM 5.1: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor all grading activities. The
monitor shall work closely with construction crews in close proximity to earth moving
equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed materials immediately upon exposure
and prior to disturbance. A daily log shall be maintained by the monitor to record when and
where earth-moving activities take place within the project area, as well as the
presence/absence of archaeological materials in the monitored matrix.
In the event that prehistoric cultural materials, or historic cultural materials are encountered,
work in the immediate vicinity of the finds shall be suspended and the archaeologist allowed to
quickly record, collect, and analyze any significant resources encountered. The client and the
City shall be notified should resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered.
The archaeologist shall work as quickly as possible to permit resumption of construction
activities. It is preferred that location data of finds be recorded using a hand-held global
positioning system (GPS) receiver. In the event that human remains (burials) are found, the
County Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. If the coroner determines that the
remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the remains to be
those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American,
he or she will contact by telephone within 24 hours the Native American Heritage Commission.
Following the field analysis work, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare final
monitoring/mitigation report that includes a description of the methods used, materials
recovered, and the results of historic or prehistoric analysis of those materials. The final
archaeological monitoring/mitigation report prepared by the qualified archaeologist shall be
accepted by the Community Development Director prior to submittal to the repository and
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 14
issuance of any final occupancy for the project. A copy shall be provided to the Community
Development Director for retention in the project file.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
During grading and construction activities (monitoring);
prior to issuance of a Building Permit (final report)
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Result in exposure to or production 0 ~ 0 0
of unstable earth conditions, such
as landslides, earthquakes,
liquefaction, ground failure, land
subsidence or other similar
hazards?
b) Be within a CA Dept. of Mines & 0 0 ~ 0
Geology Earthquake Fault Zone?
c) Result in soil erosion, topographic 0 ~ 0 0
changes, and loss of topsoil or
unstable soil conditions from
project-related improvements, such
as vegetation removal, grading,
excavation, or fill?
d) Change rates of soil absorption, or 0 ~ 0 0
amount or direction of surface
runoff?
e) Include structures located on 0 0 ~ 0
expansive soils?
f) Change the drainage patterns where 0 ~ 0 0
substantial on- or off-site
sedimentation/ erosion or flooding
may occur?
g) Involve activities within the 100-year 0 0 ~ 0
flood zone?
h) Be inconsistent with the goals and 0 0 ~ 0
policies of the County's Safety
Element relating to Geologic and
Seismic Hazards?
i) Preclude the future extraction of 0 0 0 ~
valuable mineral resources?
j) Other 0 0 0 0
,
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 15
Setting. The topography of the project site is varied, descending at a slight slope of 7% towards the
southeast, increasing to approximately 14% slope near the central portion of the site, decreasing to
nearly level in the southeast portion, then dropping sharply to a 40% slope along the southwest
boundary where the property adjoins Fair Oaks Ave. The site drains to the southeast towards Arroyo
Grande Creek. The property is located outside of the 1 DO-year floodplain. The landslide risk potential
and liquefaction potential during a ground-shaking event is considered low. No active faulting is
known to exist on or close to the subject property. The project is not within a known area containing
serpentine or ultramafic rock or soils (Le. low risk for naturally occurring asbestos).
Impact. A major source of potential earthquake damage to Arroyo Grande is from activity along the
regional San Andreas Fault located less than forty (40) miles east along the eastern border of San
Luis Obispo County. The most widespread intensity of ground shaking depends on several factors
including the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance from the earthquake epicenter, and
underlying soil conditions. Other regional faults of significance that could affect the project area in
terms of ground shaking are the Rincondada and Nacimiento faults, located approximately twenty-five
(25) miles east of the City. These faults are considered "potentially active", and could cause
moderate (Magnitude 6.0+) earthquakes in the area. The West Huasna fault is located roughly three
(3) miles east of the City of Arroyo Grande. The project site would be subject to severe ground
shaking in a strong seismic event, which could cause damage to structures and endanger public
safety.
The project site will be subject to soil erosion and downstream sedimentation during construction and
after project completion. Because the project involves more than one acre of disturbance, it will be
subject to preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which focuses on
controlling storm runoff. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is the local extension
that monitors this program. Specific erosion control requirements are specified below under the.
Hydrology and Water Quality section.
A Soils Engineering Report was prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. dated September 23, 2005
(Attachment A). The report concludes that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided
the recommendations in the report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.
Mitigation/Conclusion. Seismic hazard, soil stability, soil erosion and downstream sedimentation are
considered potentially significant impacts that can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with
implementation of the mitigation measures listed below.
MM 6.1: The recommendations provided in the Soils Engineering Report prepared by
GeoSolutions, Inc. dated September 23, 2005 shall be incorporated into the project plans and
specifications (in particular pgs. 5-11 of the Report). Final improvement plans submitted to the
City shall be accompanied by a letter of certification from the civil engineer that the plans are
in conformance with the soils report, and the certification shall confirm that the plans include
the following:
. The project shall be designed to withstand ground shaking associated with a
large magnitude earthquake on nearby active faults.
. All proposed structures shall be designed to conform to the most recent
Uniform Building Code (UBC) Zone 4 guidelines.
. The project shall comply with the requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance.
. Site-specific specifications regarding clearing, site grading and preparation,
footings, foundations, slabs-on-grade, site drainage, and pavements or turf
block shall be delineated.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 16
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.'
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 6.2: An inline system shall be installed to clean storm water runoff prior to entering the
creek. The City will maintain the inline system. Porous pavers shall be included in the project
to help recharge the ground water. .
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Tinieframe:
7.
HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS - Will the project:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Potentially
Significant
Impact can
& will be
mitigated
Insignificant
Impact
Not
Applicable
a)
Result in a risk of explosion or
release of hazardous substances
(e.g. oil, pesticides, chemicals,
radiation) or exposure of people to
hazardous substances?
Interfere with an emergency
response or evacuation plan?
Expose people to safety risk
associated with airport flight
pattern?
Increase fire hazard risk or expose
people or structures to high fire
hazard conditions?
Create any other health hazard or
potential hazard?
Other
D
D
rg]
D
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
D
D
D
D
rg]
D
D
rg]
D
D
D
rg]
D
D
rg]
D
D
D
D
D
Setting. The project is not located in an area of known hazardous material contamination. The
project is not within a high severity risk area for fire. The project is not within an Airport Review area.
Impact. The project does not propose the use of hazardous materials. The project does not present
a significant fire safety risk. The project is not expected to conflict with any regional evacuation plan.
Mitigation/Conclusion. No impacts as a result of hazards or hazardous materials are anticipated,
and no mitigation measures are necessary.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 17
8. NOISE - Will the project: Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Expose people to noise levels that D ~ D D
exceed the City's Noise Element
thresholds?
b) Generate increases in the ambient D ~ D D
noise levels for adjoining areas?
c) Expose people to severe noise or D ~ D D
vibration?
d) Other D D D D
Setting. Existing ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site is primarily generated by vehicular
traffic and adjacent agricultural operations.
Impact. The project is expected to generate loud noise during construction that will impact adjacent
residences. This is considered a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less-than-
significant level with implementation of the below mitigation measures.
Mitigation/Conclusion. The project will generate short-term noise impacts with construction
activities that requires mitigation. Long-term increases in traffic and other operational noise levels are
considered less-than-significant impacts and no mitigation measures are necessary.
MM 8.1: Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday
through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday. On-site equipment maintenance
and servicing shall be confined to the same hours.
MM 8.2: All construction equipment utilizing internal combustion engines shall be required to
have mufflers that are in good condition. Stationary noise sources shall be located at least
300 feet from occupied dwelling units unless noise reducing engine housing enclosures or
noise screens are provided by the contractor.
MM 8.3: Equipment mobilization areas, water tanks, and equipment storage areas shall be
placed in a central location as far from existing residences as feasible.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
During construction
9.
POPULATION/HOUSING -
Will the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact can
& will be
mitigated
Insignificant
Impact
Not
Applicable
a)
Induce substantial growth in an area
either directly or indirectly (e.g.,
through projects in an undeveloped .
area or extension of major
infrastructure) ?
D
~
D
D
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 18
9.
POPULATION/HOUSING - Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
Displace existing housing or people, D D ~ D
requiring construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Create the need for substantial new D D ~ D
housing in the area?
Use substantial amount of fuel or D D ~ D
energy?
Other D D D D
b)
c)
d)
e)
Setting. The project site is bounded by residential development to the north and south, Arroyo
Grande Creek and agricultural land to the east, and Arroyo Grande Hospital to the west. The subject
property was zoned for commercial development in 1972 and the zoning was updated in 2005 for
Office Mixed Use (OMU) for General Plan consistency. The 2001 General Plan and Program EIR
adequately addressed the increase in density for the property, and the project is within the allowable
density; allowed is 15 dwelling units per acre (du/ac), and proposed is 11 du/ac.
The City adopted its Housing Element in 2003 (as amended in March of 2005), which includes goals,
policies and implementing programs for the preservation, improvement and development of affordable
housing. Per the Housing Element, residential subdivisions and mixed-use projects are required to
restrict either 15% of the units to moderate-income households, 10% to low-income households, 6%
to very-low-income households, or an equivalent combination. Any fraction of a unit is required to
either be rounded up, or pay an affordable housing in-lieu fee. Rental projects are generally restricted
to the low and very-low-income category, while subdivisions involving for sale homes are restricted to
the 15% moderate-income level. Phase I of the project will provide 30 additional units, and therefore
4.5 units are subject to the affordable housing provisions of the Housing Element.
Impact. The project will not result in a need for a significant amount of new housing, and will not
displace existing housing. The project will provide an additional 30 dwelling units, which will
accommodate approximately 72 persons, based on the City's average household size of 2.4 persons
per household. This represents a less than 1 % increase in population. The population that would be
accommodated by the project is within regional and local population growth projections, as the
proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan. Phase II of the project could create the need
for additional new housing in the area, which will be addressed in a subsequent environmental review.
Mitigation/Conclusion. To mitigate the deficiency of affordable housing in the City, the following
mitigation measure shall be implemented to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 9.1: Fifteen percent (15%) of new units constructed shall be sold to qualified families
earning a moderate-income (based on the City's affordable housing standards). The
developer shall pay an affordable housing in-lieu fee for any fraction of a unit. An affordable
housing agreement between the City and developer shall be recorded that stipulates the
details of the terms and conditions for producing and selling affordable ownership housing
within the project. Said agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Director and City Attorney, and shall be recorded prior to recordation of the final
tract map.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 19
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, City Attorney
Prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map
10. PUBLIC SERVICES/UTILITIES - Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Will the project have an effect upon, Significant & will be Impact Applicable
or result in the need for new or mitigated
altered public services in any of the
following areas:
a) Fire protection? D D [g] D
b) Police protection? D D [g] D
c) Schools? D [g] D D
d) Roads? D D [g] D
e) Solid Wastes? D D [g] D
g) Other D D D D
Setting. Development of the site with thirty (30) dwelling units would increase demand for fire and
pOlice protection services, but not beyond levels anticipated by the 2001 General Plan for City
buildout. Woodland Drive will be extended through the development and constructed per City
standards. The street is not proposed to go through to the existing neighborhood to the north and will
terminate as an emergency access only. The City's sewer. line system will be extended to
accommodate the project.
Impact. The project is expected to add approximately twenty-one (21) school-aged children to the
Lucia Mar Unified School District based on a student yield factor of 0.7, which will impact the capacity
of local schools. As allowed by State Law, the Lucia Mar Unified School District has a development
fee established by the school district for new residential and commercial construction to finance any
new classrooms. The designated fee is currently $2.24 per square foot for residential development.
Mitigation/Conclusion. Public facility and school fee programs have been adopted to address the
project's direct and cumulative impacts, and will reduce the impacts to less-than-significant levels.
MM 10.1: The applicant shall pay the mandated Lucia Mar Unified School District impact fee.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Lucia Mar
Unified School District
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Timeframe:
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 20
Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Significant & will be Impact Applicable
11. RECREATION - Will the project: mitigated
a) Increase the use or demand for parks D ~ D D
or other recreation opportunities?
b) Affect the access to trails, parks or D D ~ D
other recreation opportunities?
c) Other D D D ~
Setting. The project site contains an existing recreational trail with exercise stations that will be
enhanced with additional landscaping. The project also provides limited recreational opportunities
with pedestrian paths throughout the site and a small park (tot lot). The project will not affect any
existing park or other recreational resource.
Impact. Although the project includes some recreational features, the added residences would
increase demand for City park and recreation facilities. In this case, the Parks and Recreation
Director has indicated that the impact would be mitigated by the City's standard condition requiring
payment of the park development (Quimby) and impact fees for the improvement or development of
neighborhood or community parks.
Mitigation/Conclusion. The City's park development and impact fees will adequately mitigate the
project's impact on recreational facilities, reducing the impact to a less-than-significant level.
MM 11.1: The developer shall pay all applicable City park development and impact fees.
. Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 11.2: The applicant shall submit a trail improvement plan.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - PR&F
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
12. TRANSPORTATIONI Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
CIRCULATION - Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Increase vehicle trips to local or D ~ D D
areawide circulation system?
b) Reduce existing "Levels of Service" D D ~ D
on public roadway(s)?
c) Create unsafe conditions on public D D ~ D
roadways (e.g., limited access,
design features, sight distance)?
d) Provide for adequate emergency D D , ~ D
access?
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 21
12. TRANSPORT A TIONI Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
CIRCULATION - Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
e) Result in inadequate parking D D ~ D
capacity?
f) Result in inadequate internal traffic D D ~ D
circulation?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, D D ~ D
or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., pedestrian
access, bus turnouts, bicycle racks,
etc.)?
h) Result in a change in air traffic D D D ~
patterns that may result in
substantial safety risks?
i) Other D D D D
Setting. A Traffic Impact Study was conducted by Penfield & Smith, dated November 21, 2005 to
study traffic-related impacts resulting from development of Phase I and Phase II (Attachment G).
Proposed mitigation in this Initial Study is for Phase I only; Phase II will be subject to a separate traffic
impact study for a more accurate picture of the traffic impacts and required mitigation. The study
analyzed traffic conditions (intersections and roadway segments) for the following development
scenarios:
. Existing traffic conditions
. Existing plus project traffic conditions
. Cumulative conditions without project
. Cumulative conditions with project
Impact. The trip generation for Phase I is estimated to be 240 new average daily trips, of which 19
will be generated during the AM peak hour, and 24 during the PM peak hour. Existing conditions
show that all twelve of the study intersections operate within acceptable levels of service during the
AM peak hour, and all but the Halcyon Rd.lHwy 101 SB Ramps/EI Camino Real and Halcyon
Rd.lGrand Ave. intersections operate at an acceptable level during the PM peak hour. Conclusions
for Phase I state that the project will not significantly impact intersection or road section traffic
operations (reference Tab/es 11 and 12 of the Traffic Study).
Parking for Phase I of the project is adequately provided in two-car garages and guest parking located
throughout the site.
Woodland Drive currently exists in two sections. The north section terminates at the northern property
boundary and provides access to several residences. The existing lower segment extends from the
south side of Fair Oaks Ave. and terminates in a cul-de-sac. As proposed, Woodland Drive would be
extended from the south through the project site and terminate at the north end of the property as an
emergency access only. The study determined that if Woodland Drive was allowed to go through to
the adjacent neighborhood, an estimated additional 147 AM and 172 PM project peak hour trips would
utilize this extension (estimate for both phases). The study concludes that diversion of trips would
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 22
help alleviate impacts to the intersection of Halcyon Rd.lGrand Ave., but raises neighborhood
compatibility issues and potential operation issues at the intersection of Grand Ave.lS. Alpine Street.
When Phase II moves forward with a separate application, additional study will be required to address
Woodland Drive extension concerns.
Mitigation/Conclusion. Although no significant traffic-related concerns were identified in the traffic
study for Phase I, the project traffic would contribute to the cumulative impact on the backbone
circulation system. These long-range traffic impacts can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level
by the City's standard condition requiring payment of the City's Traffic Impact and Signalization Fees
as adopted by the City Council.
MM 12.1: The developer shall pay the City's Traffic Signalization and Transportation Facilities
Impact fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
'Timeframe:
13. WASTEWATER- Will the
project:
a) Violate waste discharge requirements
for wastewater systems?
b) Change the quality of surface or
ground water (e.g., nitrogen-loading,
daylighting) ?
c) Adversely affect community
wastewater service provider?
d) Other
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Public
Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
D D [gJ D
D D [gJ D
D [gJ D D
D D D D
Setting. Wastewater disposal for the project will be managed by extending the City's wastewater
collection system to the service the project. The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District
(SSLOCSD) provides wastewater collection and treatment services for the Cities of Arroyo Grande,
Grover Beach and the unincorporated community of Oceano, and owns and maintains all of the main
sewer trunk lines. All new developments are required to obtain approval from the SSLOCSD for the
development's impact to District facilities.
Impact: Per the Arroyo Grande Wastewater Master Plan (AGWWMP), the additional flows from the
project will add to peak flows of certain main lines currently close to capacity. Payment of the
project's proportionate share for the Woodland Drive Upgrade, as well as other sewer impact fees, will
reduce impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation/Conclusion. Through sewer hookup fees, SSLOCSD fees, and Woodland Drive Upgrade
fees, the developer will pay the project's proportional share of impact fees to mitigate the additional
demand.
MM 13.1: The applicant shall pay the project's proportionate share to the following
wastewater capital improvement project:
. Woodland Drive Upgrade (2.22%)
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 23
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 13.2: The developer shall pay the City's sewer hookup and SSLOCSD impact fees.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Building & Fire Dept.; Public
Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Timeframe:
14. HYDROLOGY AND WATER Potentially Impact can Insignificant Not
QUALITY - Will the project: Significant & will be Impact Applicable
mitigated
a) Violate any water quality standards? D D ~ D
b) Discharge into surface waters or D ~ D D
otherwise alter surface water quality
(e.g., turbidity, temperature,
dissolved oxygen, etc.)?
c) Change the quality of groundwater D D ~ D
(e.g., saltwater intrusion, nitrogen-
loading, etc.)?
d) Change the quantity or movement of D D ~ D
available surface or ground water?
e) Adversely affect water supply? D ~ D D
f) Other D D D D
Setting. Localized stormwater surface runoff follows the topography of the site to the southeast
towards Arroyo Grande Creek. There is an existing 48" corrugated metal pipe (CMP) that collects
stormwater located at the northeast portion of the property that terminates and outlet into the creek
bank without any end treatment (the outfall size of the pipe is 30"). There is consequently an erosion
gully at the outfall that is estimated to be 120 cubic yards in size (8' deep, 40' in length, 10'wide). A
picture of the outfall is provided below. The outfall is located on the adjacent agricultural property, but
the applicant is willing to improve the current erosion problem with permission of the adjacent property
owner.
The City currently receives its water supply from both surface and groundwater sources. Ground
water extractions are derived from seven (7) wells and two (2) separate basin formulations. Surface
water is obtained from the Lopez Reservoir Project, which was constructed in the late 1960's.
Reclaimed storm water collected by the Soto Sports Complex Storm Water Reclamation Project is
also used as an irrigation supply source.
The City adopted a Water System Master Plan in 1999, which identified water resources as being a
significant issue, and identified methods to increase and diversify water supply to increase long-term
reliability of the City's water service to its residents. The report assessed potential methods to
address the water supply issue and prioritized alternatives.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 24
Existing Outfall to
Arroyo Grande
Creek
Impact. Construction and grading activities and exposed soil could cause erosion during project
development. Post-construction uses on the project would increase impermeable surfaces and
subsequent increase in urban runoff generated from the residential development. As a result of
construction and build out of the site, the proposed project could result in degradation of water quality
in nearby surface and ground water bodies.
As mentioned above in the Biological Resources section, four (4) biofiltration swales (or "bioswales")
are incorporated into the project design. These detention basins will be installed along the eastern
side of the property. A bioswale is defined as a low gradient, open channel possessing a cover of
vegetation through which all surface water is directed. Its purpose is to contribute to decreasing the
amount of stormwater pollutants entering the creek. The bioswale decreases the speed of flows, acts
as a stormwater detention facility, and allows suspended solids to settle out. Use of a bioswale
approach is a widely accepted measure for water quality benefits.
A study was conducted by the KC Design Group dated November 17, 2005 that provides biofiltration
calculations. The calculations show that the proposed bioswales on the project site are adequately
sized for the treatment of storm water runoff per Caltrans guidelines (Attachment H).
Mitigation/Conclusion.
Potentially significant impacts from soil erosion and an increase in sediment and turbidity to Arroyo
Grande Creek could result from project grading and construction. Potentially significant impacts on
hydrology and water quality from construction related activities can be reduced to a less-than-
significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measures:
MM 14.1: The applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and
Erosion Control Plan that specifies the implementation of Best Management Practices to avoid
and minimize water quality impacts as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB). At a minimum, the SWPP and Erosion Control Plan shall include:
o Designation of equipment and supply staging and storage areas at least 200
feet from the outside edge of the Arroyo Grande Creek 25-foot setback area. All
vehicle parking, routine equipment maintenance, fueling, minor repair, etc., and
soil and material stockpile, shall be done only in the designated staging area.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 25
· Major vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and equipment washing shall be
performed off site.
· A wet and dry spill clean up plan that specifies reporting requirements and
immediate clean up to ensure no residual soil, surface water or groundwater
contamination would remain after clean up.
· Designating concrete mixer washout areas at least 200 feet from outside edge
of Arroyo Grande Creek 25-foot setback with the use of appropriate
containment or reuse practices.
· A temporary and excess fill stockpile and disposal plan that ensures that no
detrimental affects to receiving waters would result.
. Requiring all grading and application of concrete, asphalt, etc. to occur during
the dry season from April 15 to October 15.
· Required site preparation and erosion control BMPs for any work that may need
to be completed after October 15.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.2: To reduce erosion hazards due to construction activities, grading shall be
minimized, and project applicants shall use runoff and sediment control structures, and/or
establish a permanent plant cover on side slopes following construction.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
MM 14.3: Work shall be completed during the dry season (April 15 to October 15) to
reduce active construction erosion to the extent feasible. If construction must extend into the
wet weather season, a qualified hydrogeologist or civil engineer shall prepare a drainage and
erosion control plan that addresses construction measures to prevent sedimentation and
erosion of Arroyo Grande Creek.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Grading Permit and during
construction
MM 14.4: Erosion control and bank stabilization measures shall be implemented for any
work that requires access to the creek, subject to CDFG approval through a Streambed
Alteration Permit.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe: .
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.; CDFG
During construction
MM 14.5: All temporary fill placed during project construction shall be removed at project
completion and the area restored to approximate pre-project contours and topography.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 26
MM 14.6: No construction debris or materials shall be allowed to enter the creek bed,
either directly or indirectly. Stockpiles should be kept far enough from the banks of the active
channel and protected to prevent material from entering the creek bed.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
During construction
MM 14.7: An inline system shall be installed to clean storm water runoff prior to entering
the creek. The City will maintain the inline system. Porous pavers shall be included in the
project to help recharge the ground water.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timeframe:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - CDD, Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
Impact. The City used approximately 94% of its available/allocated water supply between December
2004 and November 2005. Per Chapter 13.05.010 of the City's Municipal Code (Water Supply
Conditions), this level of water use is considered a "severely restricted" water supply condition that
has not yet reached a "critical" level. To manage its water supply deficiency, the City adopted a two-
phased strategy in November 2004 that included alternatives to be pursued to meet the City's water
demand over the next 10- year period (phase 1), and identified alternatives that will provide
permanent water supply increases to meet the long-term demand that are most desirable, feasible
and cost effective (phase 2). As part of phase 1, the City adopted a Water Conservation Program in
May 2003 that included:
. Plumbing Retrofit Program;
. Water Shortage Contingency Analysis;
. Public Information and Education;
. Information System Assessment for Top Water Users;
. Enforcement of City's Water Conservation Codes; and
. Optional components, including washing machine rebates, irrigation system or landscaping
rebates, and retrofit of cemetery with non-potable water.
Other components of phase 1 include construction of Well No. 10 (located on Deer Trail Circle),
pursuing oil field water on Price Canyon, implementing a tiered water and sewer rate structure as
financial incentives for water conservation, and a utility retrofit upon-sale program.
Phase 2 provides various permanent water supply options that include:
. Conducting a groundwater study (in process);
. Pursuing water from the Nacimiento Project;
. Implementing a reclaimed water system;
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 27
. Pursuing feasibility of a desalination plant; and
. Pursuing water from the State Water Project.
Mitigation/Conclusion. The City is currently in a severely restricted water supply situation, which is
considered a cumulatively significant impact. The project's contribution, however, is considered di
minimis, meaning that the environmental conditions would be the same whether or not the project is
implemented. The City adopted overriding considerations for cumulative water supply impacts
identified in the Program EIR for the 2001 General Plan Update. However, the project shall
implement the following restrictions and measures to reduce water supply impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
MM 14.8: The project shall comply with the City's required water conservation measures
including any applicable measures identified in any applicable City Water Conservation Plans.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.9: The project shall install best available technology for low-flow toilets,
showerheads and hot water recirculation systems.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Building Dept.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
MM 4.10: The final landscape plan shall show low-water use/drought resistant species
and drip irrigation systems rather than spray irrigation systems.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande - Parks, Recreation and Facilities
Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
MM 14.11: The project plans shall include methods for collecting surface run-off from the
site for use on landscaped areas to reduce water use and minimize run-off to the extent
feasible.
Responsible Party:
Monitoring Agency:
Timing:
Developer
City of Arroyo Grande -Public Works Dept.
Prior to issuance of Building Permit
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 28
15. LAND USE - Will the project:
a) Be potentially inconsistent with land
use, policy/regulation (e.g., General
Plan, Development Code), adopted
to avoid or mitigate for
environmental effects?
b) Be potentially inconsistent with any
habnat or communUy conservation
plan?
c) Be potentially inconsistent with
adopted agency environmental
plans or policies with jurisdiction
over the project?
d) Be potentially incompatible with
surrounding land uses?
e) Other
Inconsistent Potentially Consistent Not
Inconsistent Applicable
D
D
r8J
D
D
D
r8J
D
D
D
r8J
D
D
D
D
D
r8J
D
D
D
Setting/Impact. Surrounding uses are identified on Page 3 of the Initial Study. The proposed project
was reviewed for consistency with policy and/or regulatory documents relating to the environment and
appropriate land use (e.g., City's Land Use Element, Development Code, Zoning Map, etc.).
Referrals were sent to outside agencies to review for policy consistencies and code compliance (e.g.
APCD for Clean Air Plan, CDFG, Army Corps. of Engineers and RWQCB for water quality). The
project was found to be consistent with these documents and codes with implementation of the above
mitigation measures.
Land use and zoning designations for the property are consistent with the proposed uses.
The project is not within or adjacent to a conservation plan area, although is subject to the City's
requirement of a 25-foot creek setback. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses subject
to implementation of the agricultural buffer, included in the project description, and MM 2.1, which
requires adherence to the provisions contained in the City's Right-To-Farm Ordinance.
Mitigation/conclusion. No inconsistencies were identified and therefore no additional measures
above what will already be required was determined necessary.
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 29
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE - Will the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact can
& will be
mitigated
Insignificant
Impact
Not
Applicable
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory? D IZI D D
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects) D IZI
D
D
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
indirectly? D D IZI D
d) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? D D IZI D
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for TTM 05-003; PUD 05-007 (Fair Oaks)
Page 30
Exhibit A - Initial Studv References and A~encv Contacts
The City of Arroyo Grande has contacted various agencies for their comments on the proposed
project. With respect to the subject application, the following have been contacted (marked with an
[81) and when a response was made, it is either attached or in the application file:
Contacted A~encv
D County Public Works Department
D County Environmental Health Division
D County Planning & Building & Fire Dept.
~ County Agricultural Commissioner's Office \
~ Air Pollution Control District
~ Regional Water Quality Control Board
~ CA Department of Fish and Game
D CA Department of Forestry
D CA Department of Transportation
~ US Army Corps of Engineers
~ So. County Sanitation District
The following reference materials have been used in the environmental review for the proposed
project and are hereby incorporated by reference into the Initial Study. The following information is
available at the City Community Development Department.
SOURCE LIST:
1. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan (October 2001)
2. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Map (October 2001)
3. City of Arroyo Grande Development Code
4. City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map
5. City of Arroyo Grande Existing Setting and Community Issues Report
6. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Program EIR (October 2001)
7. Air Pollution Control District Clean Air Plan
8. FEMA - Flood Insurance Rate Map
9. Ordinance No. 521 (Amending Title 10, Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code regarding the
Community Tree Program)
10. Ordinance No. 550 (Amending Title 16 of the Municipal Code to incorporate regulations and
amending the Zoning Map to create an Agricultural Preservation Overlay District)
11. San Diego Council of Governments - Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates
ATTACHMENTS:
A: Soils Engineering Report by GeoSolutions, Inc. dated September 23, 2005
B: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 24, 2005
C: Tree Survey conducted by Firma Consultants, Inc. dated August 25, 2005
D: Biological Assessment by Firma Consultants, Inc. dated October 19, 2005
E: Arborist Report & Tree Protection Plan prepared by Jeremy Lowney dated December 7, 2005
F: Cultural Resources Testing conducted by Cogstone Resource Management, Inc. dated
September 2005 .
G: Traffic Impact Study conducted by Penfield & Smith, dated November 21, 2005
H: KC Design Group dated November 17, 2005
City of Arroyo Grande, Initial Study for "Cherry Creek"
Page 31
B._~ _,.___.'
-0-
j~
ATTACHMENT A
;"6eo!iolu'tiui-ts, INC,_
:'--
220 !lighStre~t, Sl!~ Lids Obi;po, CA 93401
': (805) 543-8539; 5~3-4171 fax
info@GeoSolutions.net
Navember 9, 2005
Project Na.oSL05014-2
Central Coast Real Estate Development R E t:'o~.', E !~r::.,- -.0'-,
c\a Jasan Blankenship , t., ,
Past Office Bax 730 NO
Avila Beach, Califarnia 93424 " V.2 32005
. . " CITY or: .
.Subject: City cif ~rroyo Grande Cemments teSER R~M' ARROYO GR ;.,- ~.
Tract 279'].,-: Fair Oaks Mixed Use,APN: 906-391~'OW4'VITY DEVE/op'A"OE :.
Arreye Grande, Califernia " " " MfNr
References: Sails'Engineering Repert, Fair Oaks'Medical Campus
Fair Oaks Avenue; APN:' 006-391-044, Arroyo. Grahae~,Califernia
_ . .by geeSelutiens, Inc:Praject Ne..SL050 14-1' dated September 23, 2005,...
..- - .
National Center fer Earthquake Engineering R.esearch;:~Pr~c~edings afthe NCEER'
WorKshap 'on Evaluatian af Liquefactia;" kesistanceSails. Technical Repart"NCEER-
97-0022. Buffalo., New Yark: 1997. .
Califernia Department afCenservatien, Divisian efMines and Geelogy.:Special"
Publication 117: GUidelinesfor Evaluating and Mitigating'Seismic Hazard, ih'
Califarnia. Adapte~1997.
Dear Mr. Blankenship: .
As requested, GeaSalutiens, Inc: lias.reviewedcamments~and cencerns fre)ll the Citye~ Arro~o Grande
pertaining to. the 'Seils Enginetlring Repo.rtfar the propesed Tracr2792 Fair Oaks Mixed Use project, -
APN: 006-391-044, in the Cityef Arroyo. Grande,Califarnia. .
The cencerns reperted.in the City af Arreye Grande review surreund)he amaunt af seismic,sej:tlement
anticipated. Accerding to' CDMG SP-I17 and th-e -NCEER simplified pracedure. forestirilating
:liquefactien petential; it is the standard afcare to characterize the- anticipated Design Base . Earthquake
(DBE) using the'prebabiljstic-appreach (10% exceediince in 50 years). The repert also. included.the
analysis using a deterministic approach far estimating the DBE. Geasalutiens uses the determLnistic DBE
infermatian .to. beund' the analysis, but' sheuld net 'necessarily be anticipated to. eccur.' Using' the
probabilistic' DBg,~the anticipated: settl<<mimt wauld be an the ordel' af 2.0 to. 2.5 inches. Since the
praject is everlain-_breelian depasits",hich are pearly cansalidated near the surface, much ef the
anticipated dynamic'settlemel\t wauld be mitigated by the rtlcemmended replacement af the upper faur
feetas engineered fill..Fallawing eur recemrriendaiians; the anticipated dynamiC settlement weuld be en
the erder ef I to. 2 inches which is within an acceptable level af risk. At depth, the sail is interbedded
,
,
November 9, 2005
Project No. SL05014-2
with much ~f the layers below the groundwater interface' containing a fine content of ab~ve 30 percent,
and with d~n~ities generally increasing as well. Therefore, seismic induced settlement at depth are
considered,nominal.-
II! closing,_asstated in the report, we beJievetIie:Site is suitable'for the proposed development provided
the recommendations presented in- the report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.
DC..
Michae Conner
StaffEngineer,-EIT I18756
Principal
.cc: City of Arroyo Grande, AttD:Victor Devens,fax: 473-0386
S:\$oil Engineering Reports\SL05014~ I Fair Oaks Medical Campus\SLOS014-1 fl:sponse to City of AG letter.doc
" ~
.~>)-~
2
-"----
r>'I{~ .
j\~)~ (0'
,..... ..
"C"/ ..
-'or_.
rj'l"
t~ l. I '1 /
.~:~2;:.J:;:;:;',;\(~~;; ,"
SOILS ENGINEERING REPORT
FAIR OAKS MEDICAL CAMPUS
FAIR OAKS AVENUE, APN: 006-391-044
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT SLOS014-1
Prepared for
Central Coast Real Estate Development
c/o Jason Blankenship
Post Office Box 730
A vila Beach, California 93424
Prepared by
GEOSOLUTIONS, INC.
220 HIGH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 934101
(805) 543-8539
(\)
September 23, 2005
(.
Jj
lieD!iDlu~iDn!i, 11\11:.
220 High Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(80S) 543-8539, 543-2171 fax
info@GeoSolutions.net
September 23, 2005
Project No. SL050 14-1
Central Coast Real Estate Development
c\o Jason Blankenship
Post Office Box 730
Avila Beach, California 93424
Subject:
Soils Engineering Report
Fair Oaks Medical Campus
Fair Oaks Avenue, APN: 006-391-044
Arroyo Grande, California
Dear Mr. Blankenship:
This Soils Engineering Report has been prepared for the proposed complex' of medical office buildings
and multi-family residences to be located on Fair Oaks Avenue, APN: 006-391-044, Parcel 2, PM 47-54
in the City of Arroyo Grande, California. Geotechnically, the site is suitable for the proposed
development provided the recommendations in'this report for site preparation,earthwork, .foundations,
slabs, retaining walls, and pavement sections are incorporated into the design.
Given the preliminary site plan and the presence of loose surface material,. it is anticipated that grading
will include the construction of engineered fill building pads for the structures utilizing continuous
footings excavated into engineered fill as observed and approved by a representative of GeoSolutions,
Inc. Over the Site, varieties of surface and near-surface soils were encountered. All foundations are to be
excavated into uniform competent material to limit the potential for distress of the foundation systems
due to differential settlement. If cuts steeper than allowed by State of California Construction Safety
Orders for "Excavations, Trenches, Earthwork" are proposed, a numerical slope stability analysis may be
necessary for temporary construction slopes.
Natural seepage at the interface of two materials with different densities is very common. This interface
occurs at the Site and may require sub-surface drains. Sub-drains should be placed in established
drainage courses and potential seepage areas. The location of sub-drains should be determined during
grading by a representative of GeoSolutions, Inc.
Thank you for the opportunity to' have been of service in preparing this report. If you have any questions
or require additional assistance, please feel free to contact the undersigned at (805) 543-8539.
c
c_
',;'
J nna Louise Otto, CE22056 for Patrick B.
rincipal
5:\5oil Engineering Reports\SLOSOI4.1 Fair Oaks Medical Campus\SL05014 I Fair Oaks Transmillal Letter.doc
i
!
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE................................................................................................................. 2
3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION......................................................................... 2
3.1 Seismic Design Considerations ...................................................................................., ........ 3
3.2 Liquefaction Potential... ..... .... ...... ....................... ....... .... .......................... ........ ................. .... 4
4.0 GENERAL SOIL-FOUNDA nON DISCUSSION ......................................................................... 4
5.0 \ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 5
5.1 Preparation'of Building Pads ............................................................................................... 5
5.2 Preparation of Paved Areas ................................................................................................... 5
5.3 Conventional Foundations ........ ............. ............................. ................................ ........ ... ....... 6
5.4 Slab-On-Grade Construction... .......................... ................... .... ...... .................. ......,.. ......... ,.. 7
5.5 .Retaining Walls ........ .......... .............................................................. ......... ............ ..... ...... ..... S
).6 Pavement Des ign...................................................................... ............................................. 9
6.0 ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ........................................................................... 10
7.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS........................................................... II
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A
Field investigation
Soil Classification Chart
Boring Logs
CPT Log
Classification Data/Soil Behavior Types
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Testing
Soil Test Reports
APPENDIX C
Preliminary Grading Specifications
Key and Bench with Backdrain
APPENDIX D
Seismic Data - Design Base Earthquake
Probability ~f Exceedance
CPT Based Liquefaction Analysis
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I: Site Location Map ....................................,.................................................................................... I
Figure 2: Site Plan ....................................................................................................................................... I
Figure 3: Setback Dimensions ...................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 4: Sub-Slab Detai 1...., ....... .......... .... ...... ........ ............................. .......... ............. ..... .... ......... ................ 7
Figure 5: Retaining Wall Detail....................................................................................................................9
LIST OF TABLES
Table]: Engineering Properties.................................................................................................................... 3
Table 2: 2001 California Building Code, Chapter 16, Structural Design Parameters ...................................4
Table 3: Minimum Footing and Grade Beam Dimension'......................................................................... 6
Table 4: Retaining Wall Design Parameters ........................:.......'.......................................'.....................,.. S
Table 5: Preliminary Pavement Design Sections.....,..........,..........................,........................................... 10
SOILS ENGINEERING REPORT
FAIR OAKS MEDICAL CAMPUS
FAIR OAKS A VENUE, APN: 006-391-044
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT SL05014-1
The topography consists of a gentle descending
slope gradient in the northwest region of the
Site that descends at approximately 15-to-1 (horizontal-to-vertical) towards the southeast and then
~ ."",.11"""_---_' ::J;:s; . ;
."- '._-~.,.".. ,-, ",..,___-.--: "-:;A-~~~ _.--~~.~/ ,.~
.. ...... - ,/,,/ \ - ::;"'/~):-.'.~"-,-_,,/,,,~~Z~:,
....- ~..)' ,/'. ", -:- -~
\ ;-~.._._.f!'!'!~ -.....J. / ~:7,. 8-4 .--./ - --~~;- .... 8-5 ___ ~'>s _........ /
...." ,~I ' /~ :: ~~....,... , ~~~~_j'.-
_tt__c _.v',./ PARC,CL./2PER AG.-8.9,.-42j , /" ) .
.........'y~~,,-:. f
..~- ',K "".-' .8-2' / "-), , _"., - ',,_ __ / .8-6 /1)
. -~~-- -~ . , .... Xl"
1,.",'",: s.,." . -,~.:: I.. ./ /. . /' '''77'
, . II -~:-. ,,>...~~ / / / ' +/1
" ", ----.,i~::;V'.~ ~ i ..~~/Jw.~ 't;~ '//.' ".;.~-;'f , ...~;-... 8-7 ' , /,
"..... ' . /,:-' .'..crT-I...- /<';.';
"H-1-v- . __UH'_ /'",.,,, ...~- /,',~~""-"'. . .',/" ,I 'I.~
;. r ~'j / ( .-.').'" III
. / ~~_'r::_ / ,.( .I\~?,~:..,/~:':": ._m_._ ., /:;:::;2;;$~~
8-3'" . . .... ..;/ - ..,...... /. .". <~
'~/..~..;.... . .... ~ /((.:'/1/ r;.-~......" .,;.?,f~'--' !\t~':' .;.'V~
\ ' 'c/",; ".' 'C",- -" $/ <i!' ...." rJ-~
;..;::~...i'..L './ ii' -~- .' r_jo/ I "I' rJP T ~
-"'\:c . I .' 89~""io'-<<._' ./~;/~".,"i,<?I',,~.1~O opof!'"_-....,.
"~"1.'::r_ .1 ',' / - .-..,.-.'-~~~:.- '/ ~ "
.' _H" ~" "'_ r-- "ii,' /" ,,' /.'/-/ ~" ",. ""
.... -,.... ,-"f ....~._ ...trn..... - ,,':1'- ~ .:t-"
":?'")2"'-"'~f;,iz;f':;!'~i:=,:?~:;"L_._~..~~".~~,.'_~_?,,'~.:.,; /-'{'~::';'~_"'.,~.._~~, "~','"". \I:~'...'-''''";{~~,'~~c~,,. I
~~:~:-;:~c~,..,;."'.~~-'- TJ.r- ~:7-~':,'~ ~,,- 'ibtot;.._ "_~~Jt""l ~..,.- X
-~.<:--' " """"'" .
FAJROAKSAVENUE .UOKIl'iG LOCATIONS
i.o INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the
geotechnical investigation for the proposed
complex of medical office buildings and multi-
family residences to be located on Fair Oaks
Avenue, APN: 006~391-044, Parcel 2, PM
47-54 in the City of Arroyo Grande, California.
See Figure 1: Site Location Map.
The property is approximately rectangular in
shape and 5.5 acres in size. Fair Oaks,Avenue
provides access to the lot along the southern
property boundary. The nearest intersection is
located where Fair Oaks A venue intersects
Halcyon Road approximately 600 feet west of
'the properly. The property will hereafter be
referred to as the "Site." See Figure 2: Site
Plan.
\,..-
\
\..-
,
~".
~. \-. .",,'
,/
",&:,.
-~;-
........;.....
\~':.i-
r:-~ ,.{.....;,"':,~~:,...... ':: 8"' .,,,. <o.~i ; <-" '. ~,. . ,,~, .
<;1..'" - ",/'
~(6N1 . .,' '." '/ '" :;-'; ,
h:,; "J.'~::~tii;l'.!;:~: !L~ "t\~"
\"'L,~"--~-'": ~
'''':":'; ~~.!;,;~;,.'~-;,'~,.
M, AV I!3 E i, ~ .. ~c"",,;.. <.,....~-
:'I 1::0. ~ 'R. "'r '1;,,>-'- :" tJ!I
.. :~~r ; G'~ND"
1,.\. At..
,. ~y l:;:..-'
-!'-.:
"": q' @.
;' \~,'Q~ /
!/!<!~1th /
;;::... -,.-----
;l._"L'K,";~
,;.\':.;:;i.".~;'
Figure I: Site Location Map
,
"
,
~
/
=::::."'fZ,"
Base Map by McMillan Land Surveys
Sl.:ph:mbl.:r 23, 2005
I'rujcct"SLU5U 14-1
gradually increases to approximately 7-to-l (H:V) near thc central portion of the Site. The slope gradient
then decreases to near level in the southeast portion of the Site. There is a sharp drop in grade to
approximately 2.5-to-1 (H:V) along the southwest boundary where the property abuts Fair Oaks Avenue.
Site drainage follows the topography to the southeast towards Arroyo Grande Creek. The Site is currently
vegetated with native grasses with eucalyptus and walnut trees. The Arroyo Grandc Creek runs through the
southeast corner of the Site.
It is anticipated structures will utilize slab-on-grade lower noor sy,kms. Dead and sustained live load, are
currcntly unknown but anticipated to be relatively light with maximum continuous footing and culumn
loads estimated to be on the order of3.0 kips per lineal foot and 25 kips, respectively.
2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this study wa, to explore and evaluate the surfacc and sub-surface soil conditions at t;lC
Site and develop geotechnical information and design criteria. The scope of this study illcludcs the
following items:
I. A review of available published and unpublished geotechnical data pertinent to the project site.
2. A field study consisting-of a site reconnaissance and an exploratOlyboring progranLlo formuiate a
description onhe sub-surface conditions.
3. A laboratory-testing program performed on reprcscntative soil samples collccted from our tield
study.
4. Analysis of the data gathered during our field study and laboratory testing.
5. Development of recommendations for site preparation and 'grading, 'and geotechnical design
criteria for building foundations, retaining walls, pavement sections, underground utilities and
drainage facilities.
3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was conducted on August 3, 2005 using a track-mounted ,CME 55 drill rig and
August 4, 2005 using a Mobile B24 drill rig. Nine exploratory borings and one Cone Penetration Test
(CPT) sounding to a maximum depth of 50.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) were placed at the
approximate locations indicated on the Site Plan.
Due to the size of the Site, the surface and sub-surface materials varied throughout. In general, thc Site
soils consists of alluvial deposits in the east/southeast portion, with the overlying aeolian deposits mure
prevalent at the northwest portion.
Over the northwest portion of the Site, the surface materials consisted of yellowish brown poorly gradcd
SAND with silt (SP-SM) and yellowish brown silty SAND (SM) encountered in a dry to slightly moist and
loose to medium dense condition to depths of 12.0 to 15.0 feet bgs. This material is commonly referred to
as Dune Deposits. The subsurface material in this area consisted of interbedded layers of yellowish brown
clayey SAND (sq, olive brown sandy CLAY (CL), and yellowish brown well-graded SAND with silt
(SW-SM) encountered in a very moist to saturated condition to termination at 50.5 feet bgs. Groundwater
was encountered in boring B-1 at approximately 18 feet bebw ground surface. Borings B-2, B:3, B-4, and
B-5 did not encounter ground water.
2
S~ptl':lllb~r 23. 2005
Project' SL050 14-1
On the eastern portion of the Site near the existing creek, the surface materials consisted of variable
interbedded layers of dark brown silty SAND (SM), clayey SAND (SC), sandy CLAY (eL), and poorly-
graded SAND (SP-SM) encountered in a slightly moist and loose condition becoming dense/very stiff with
depth. This material is consistent with alluvial deposits. Borings B-6 through B-9 were terminated at 15.0
feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered in B-9 at approximately 12.0 feet bgs and at approximately 25.0 n
bg, in CPTI, but was not encountered in borings B-6, B-7, or B-8.
During the boring operations the soils encountered were continuously examined, visually classitied, and
sampled for general laboratory testing. A project engineer has reviewed a 'continuouslog. of the soils
encountered at the time of field investigation. The Boring and CPT Logs are, attached in Appendix A.
, The results of the laboratory tests performed on the soils sampled from the Site during boring operations
are listed below. A detailed explanation of each laboratory test performed is provided in Appendix B,
along with the laboratory data reports.
Table 1: Engineering Properties
c
-;, ~ .5l
~ t: ~
- 0 u
] .;;; ~ ';:
I = " "- :;w.:
" ..
" " Q .: c::- =
Sample Description '" ~~
I " " .... ~ = ~
" '0 0 .. '0 .. Co - ~
E ! = = "- Q :E " ~ 0:>
.5l - <J ~~
'" =
! = = E I -
z ";j ,0 0 ." E -~ C ~""
" I <J .;;; .;;; EC::- " o . 0 ":: i::'Ji
i5.. '" = = E ~ 'if .;;; I - "
.<:; " " .- ~ <J " .-
E ! Co Co ~- - OJ) '0 .c <J ~.
" .. ~
" Co " '" Co c:~ 0 ~. ~
(fJ (fJ "" "" :E,,.:: .0 oo(-e- U "-I>-
A Yellowish Brown Poorly Graded SP-SM 0 Very 109.6 11.3 - - 41.8
SAND with SILT Low
C Yellowish Brown Clayey SAND SC - - - - - - 43.7
B-I@4.0ft. Yellowish Brown Silty SAND SM - - - - 28.80 332 -
B-I@19.0ft. Yellowish Brown Clayey SAND SC - - - - - - 31.2
B-1 @ 29.0 ft. Olive Brown Sandy CLAY CL - - - - - - 50.0
B-1 @ 39.0 ft. Yellowish Brown Clayey SAND SC - - - - - - 48.6
B-1 @49.0 ft. Yellowish' Brown Well Graded SAND SW-SM 8,4
with SILT - - - - - -
8-5 @ 8.5 ft. Brown Sandy CLAY CL - - - - - - 55.5
B-8 @ 3.5 ft. Yellowish Brown Poorly Graded SP-SM - - - - - - 11.0
SAND with SILT
B-9 @ 13.5 ft. Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY CL - - - - 5.00 1297 -
3.1 Seismic Desil!n Considerations
Structural building design parameters within the 2001 California Building Code (CBe) are
dependent upon several factors including site soil characteristics and faults near the Site. This data
is presented in tabular form in Table 2.
3
S..:ptl:mb..:r 2). 2005
I'rojcci SLU5U 14-1
Table 2: 2001 California Building Code, Chapter 16, Structural Design Parameters
Soil Profile Type So - Stiff Soil
Seismic Source Type Greater than 15 kilometers from an A fault
Within 2 kilometers of a B fault.
Seism ic Zone Seismic Zone 4
Z= 0.4
Near Source Factor N, = 1.3
N,~ 1.6
Seismic Coefficient C, = 0.44N, = 0.44 (1.3) - 0.57
C, = 0.64N, ~ 0.64 (1.6) = 1.02
3.2 LiQuefaction Potential
]. Liquefaction occurs when saturated, cohesionlcss soils lose shear strength due to
earthquake shaking. Liquefaction potential of soil deposits during earthquake activity
depends on soil type, void ratio, groundwater. conditions, the duration of shaking, and
confining pressures on the potentially liquefiable soil unit. Ground motion from an
earthquake may induce cyclic reversals of shear stresses.of large amplitude. Lateral and
vertical movement of the soil mass combined with the loss of. bearing strength usually
results from this phenomenon.
2. ' Liquefaction potential of soil deposits during earthquake activity ,depends on soil type,
void ratio, groundwater conditions,.the duration of:shaking, and confini'lg pressures on the
potentially liquefiable soil unit. Fine, poorly graded loose sand; shallow groundwater, high
intensity earthquakes, and long duration of ground shaking are the principal factors
leading to liquefaction.
3. Based on the layered nature of the site soils, the relative density of the in-situ soils, the
depth to groundwater, the high fine content, and the expected ground acceleration caused
by the Design Base Earthquake (DB E), the potential for seismic liquefaction of Site soils
appears to be low. Assuming the recommendations of the Soils Engineering Report are
implemented, the potential for seismically induced settlement and differential settlement is
considered to be low.
4.0 GENERAL SOIL-FOUNDATION DISCUSSION
Given the preliminary Site plan and the presence of loose surface material, it is anticipated that grading
will include the construction of engineered fill building pads for the structures utilizing continuous
footings excavated into engineered fill as observed and approved by a representative of GeoSolutions, Inc.
Over the Site, various surface and near-surface soils were encountered. Lenses of material unsuitable for
use as fill were encountered during the site investigation. All foundations are to be excavated into uniform
competent material to limit the potential for distress of the foundation systems due to differential
settlement. If cuts steeper than allowed by State of California Construction Safety Orders for "Excavations,
Trenches, Earthwork" are proposed, a numerical slope stability analysis may be necessary for temporary
construction slopes.
Natural seepage at the interface of two materials with different densities is very common. This interface
occurs at the Site and may require sub-surface drains. Sub-drains should be placed in established drainage
courses nd potential seepage areas. The location of sub-drains should be determined during grading by a
represe tive of GeoSolutions, Inc.
,', J
_.:.l
4
Sl.:pt.;1llb.;1" ?J. 2005
Projoot'SUi50 1.\-1
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented in this report
are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.
The primary geotechnical concerns at the Site are:
I. The presence of loose material within the upper five feet of the soil.
2. The potential for differential settlement occurring between foundations supported on two suil
materials havmg different settlement characteristics, such as native soil anu engineered fill.
Therefore, it is important that all of the foundations are' founded in.equally competent uniform
material in accordance with this report.
5.1 Preparation of Building Pads
I. Given the topography and the nature of the site soils, it is anticipated that graded pads will
be developed for the proposed structures with the foundations excavated into engineered
fill.
2. For the development of engineered fill pads, the native material ,should be over-excavakd
at least 48 inches below existing grade, 24 inches below the bottom of the tUPling', to
competent native material, or one-half the depth of the de~pest fill for fills less than 10
feet deep, or twu-thirus the depth of the deepest fill f()f tills greater than 10 feet in depth:
whichever is greatest. The limits of over-excavation should extend a minimum uf 5 I~et
beyond thc perit;leter foundations. The exposed surface shuuldthen be scarified tu a depth
of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and 'compacted to a
minimum'relative density of 90 percent (ASTM 01557-91 ).'Refer to ,Figure, 4: Sub-Slab
Detail for under-slab drainage material and Appendix C for more details on fill
placement.
3. If fill areas are constructed on slopes greater than 10 to I (horizontal to vertical), we
recommend that benches be cut every 4 feet as fill is placed. Each bench shall be a
minimum of 10 feet wide with a minimum of2 percent gradient into the slope. If fill areas
are constructed on slopes greater than 5 to I, we recommend that the toe of all areas to
receive fill be keyed a minimum of 24 inches into underlying dense material. Sub-drains
shall be placed in the keyway and benches as required. See Appendix C, Detail A, Key
and Bench with Backdrain.
5.2 Preparation of Paved' Areas
I. Pavement areas should be over-excavated 12 inches below existing grade or finished sub-
grade; whichever is deeper. The exposed surface should be scarified an additional depth of
12 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted tu a
minimum relative density of 90 percent (ASTM Dl557-91). The 'over-excavated SOli
should then be moisture conditioned to produce a water-content of at least I to 2 percent
above optimum value and then compacted to a minimum relative density of 90 percent.
The top 12 inches of sub-grade soil under all pavement sections should be compacted to a
minimum relative density of 95 percent based on the ASTM 01557-91 test method at
slightly above optimum.
5
S~ptl::mbl:r 23. 2005
Proj~~t"SL050! 4-1
2.
Sub-grade soils should not be allowed to dry out or have excessive construction traffic
between moisture conditioning and compaction, and placement ofthe pavement structural
section.
5.3
Conventional Foundations
J.
Conventional continuous and spread footings with grade beams may be used for support
of the proposed structures. Isolated pad footings are permitted for single ,floor loads ollly.
~
Minimum footing and grade beam sizes and depths in engineered fill should,contorm '0
the following table, as observed and approved by a representative ofGeoSolutions, Ine,
Table 3: Minimum Footing and Grade Beam Dimensions
Bnilding Type
One-Story.'
Two-Story
Three-Story
Excavated in Engincercd Fill
Dcpth Bclow Lowcst Adjaccnt Grade
12 inches
18 inches
24 inches
Width
Bearing
12 inches 2,000 psf
I 5 inches 2,200 psf
, 18 inch~,500 psf
3. Minimum reinforcing for footings should be two No.4 bars, placed one at tllC"top and olle
at the bottom, or as directed by the project Structural Engineer.
4. A representative of this firm should observe and.approve'aILf<Jumiution excavallons for
required embedment depth prior to the placement of reinforcing. steel and/or concrete.
Concrete should be placed only in excavations that have becn prc-moist'oned with 110
associated testing required and are free of loose soft soil; or debris.
5. Allowable dead plus live load bearing pressure of 2,200 psf may be used for design for
engineered fill. A total settlement of less than Y. inch and a differential settiement of less
than Y, inch are anticipated.
6. Lateral forces on structures may be resisted by passive pressure acting against the sides of
shallow footings and/or friction between the engineered fill and the bottom of the footings.
For resistance to lateral loads, a friction factor of 0.50 may be utilized for sliding
resistance at the base of footings extending a minimum of 12 inches into engineered fill. A
passive resistance of 350-pcf equivalent fluid weight may be used against the side of
shallow footings in engineered fill. If friction and passive pressures are combined, the
lesser value should be reduced by 50 percent. Foundation excavations should be observed
and approved by a representative of this finn prior to the placement of reinforcing steel
and/or concrete.
7. Foundation design should conform to the requirements of Chapter 18 of the latest edition
of the California Building Code.
8. The minimum footing setback distance from a descending slope must be maintained see
Figure 3: Setback Dimensions. The base of all grade beams and footings should be level
and step as required accommodating any slope of the grade while maintaining the
minimum required footing embcdment and slope setback distance.
z J~
6
S~pt~ll1bl.;r 23. 2U05
Pruj~d SL050 14-1
FACE OF
FOOT! NG
TOP OF
SLOPE
. IA"E 01' STRUCTURE
TOEDI'
,LOPE
/
H
1113 IlUT NEED NOT
EXCFED 4() I'T,
(12 192111111) r-.IAX.
H/2 BUT NlI]J NUl EXCEED 15 FT. (4571 111m) MAX.
Figure 3: Setback Dimensions
5.4 Slab-On-Grade Construction
I. Concretc slabs-on-grade and tlatwork should not be placed directly on ullprepared native
. materials. Preparation of sub-grade to receive concrete slabs-oil-grade and tlatwork should
be processed as discussed in the preceding ,ectiuns of this report.. COllcrele ,labs should
be placed ollly over sub-grade that has becn pre-moistened with no associated testillg
required.
...--lo.M1L
v lSVUEEN
11:_ il
I 'II
-' i -.
~ ..1~ 4" CONCRETE SLAB <;
i ~r
~/ r CLEAN SAND , "- I
, / I ! . ... . ~ i
: 6". FREE DRAINING fI.'IAIERIAL I
" ' < <
;
cJ ,
.1 ; "
" f
IlL.
DEPTH
VARIES
Figure 4: Sub~Slab Detail
2. Where concrete slabs-on-grade are to be constructed, the slabs should be underlain by a
minimum of 6 inches of clean free-draining material, such as a coarse aggregate mix to
serve as a cushion and a capillary break. Where moisture susceptible storage or floor
coverings are anticipated, a ] O-mil Visqueen-type membrane should be placed between
the free-draining material and the slab to minimize moisture condensation under the floor
covering. See Figure 4: Sub-Slab Detail. It is suggested that a 2-inch thick sand layer be
placed on top of the membrane to assist in the curing of the concrete, increasing the depth
of the under-slab material to a total of8 inciles. The sand should be lightly moistelled prior
to placing concrete.
7
S~plclllb~r 23. 2fjU5 Project SL050 l-i-I
3. Concrete slabs-on-grade should be,a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced
with No.3 reinforcing bars placed at 24 inches on-center both ways at or slightly above
the center of the structural section. Reinforcing bars should have a minimum clear cover
of 1.5 inches. The aforementioned reinforcement may be used for anticipated uniform
floor loads not exceeding 200 psf. If floor loads greater than 200 psI' are anticipated, a
Structural Engineer should evaluate the slab design.
4. Moisture condensation under floor coverings has become critical due to the use of wakl-
soluble adhesives; therefore it IS suggested that moisture,sensitive slabs not be constructed
during inclement weather conditions.
5. Concrete for all slabs should be placed at a maximum slump of 'less, than 5 inches.
Excessive water content is the major cause of concrete cracking. If fibers ale used to aid in
the control of cracking, a water-reducing admixture may ,be added to the .concrete to
increase slump while maintaiiling a water/cement ratio, which will limit excessive
shrinkage. Control joints should be constructed as required to control cracking.
5.5 Retainin!! Walls
1. Retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral. pressures fronF adjacent soils and
surcharge loads applied behind the walls. We recommend using the following latci"al
pressures for design of retaining walls at the Site. See Table 4: Retaining Wall Design
Parameters and Figure 5: Retaining Wall Detail.
Table 4: Retaining Wall Desigu Parameters,
Lateral Pressure and Condition Equivalent Fluid
Pressure, pcf
Active Case, Engineered Fill or Native, Drained (K.) 35
At-Rest Case, Engineered Fill or Native, Drained (K,) 50
Passive Case, Engineered Fill (Kp) 350
2. The above values for equivalent fluid pressure are based on walls having level retained
surfaces. Walls having a retained surface that slopes upward from the top of the wall
should be designed for an additional equivalent fluid pressure of 1 pcf for the active case
and 1.5 pcf for the at-rest case, for every two degrees of slope inclination.
3. Retaining wall foundations should be founded a minimum of 12 inches below lowest
adjacent grade in engineered fill. A coefficient of friction of 0.50 may be used between
engineered fill and concrete footings. Project designers may use a maximum toe pressure
of2,650 psf for engineered fill.
4. In addition to the lateral soil pressure given above, the retaining \yalls should be designed
to support any design live load, such as from vehicle and construction surcharges, etc., to
be supported by the wall backfill. If construction vehicles are required to operate within 10
feet of a wall, supplemental pressures will be induced and should be taken into account
through design.
8
Scrt~IIlbcl' 23, 2005
" J~
Projcd SL05014-1
5.
The recommended pressurcs
drainage will be provided
behind the walls to prevent
the build-up of hydrostatic
pressure. To achieve this we
recommend that a filter
material be placed bchind all
proposed walls. The blanket
of filter material should be a
minimum of] 2 inches thick
and should extend from the
bottom of the wall to 12
inches from the ground
surface. The top i 2 inches
should consist of moisture
conditioned, compacted,
clayey soil.
are based on thc assumption that sufficienl sub-surfacc
- 12"minillllllll
~~r-:--u
~:J
----- Mimfi l.JONor
equivalent
~
K3=35 pel
Ko = 50 pcf
Kp -350 pel'
,
..
... .. PCllllc..bleDI;,::l R.:;k
-I" Oja Perf Or:llll Pipe
i
I
.J_'--'
i
I
I
I
Max Toe Pres~ure = 2,640 p:,f
6. A 4-inch diameter perforated Figure 5: Retaining Wall Detail
or slotted drainpipe (ASTM
D 1785 PYC) should be installed near the, bottom of the filter blanket with periorations
facing down. The drainpipe should be underlain by at least 4 inches of filter type material.
The ,filter material should consist of a clean free-draining aggregate, such as a coarse
aggregate mix.
7. The filter material should be encapsulated in a pernieable geotextile, fabric. A suitablc
permeable geotextile fabric, such as non-woven needle-punched Mirafi, 140N or equal,
may be utilized to encapsulate the retaining wall'drain material and should .conform to
Caltrans Standard Specification 88-1.03 for underdrains.
8. For hydrostatic loading conditions (i.e. no free drainage behind retatn1l1g wall), an
additional loading of 45-pcf equivalent fluid weight should be added to the above soil
pressures. If it is necessary to design retaining structures for submerged conditions, the
allowed bearing and passive pressures should be reduced by 50 percent. In addition, soil
friction beneath the base of the foundations should be neglected.
9. Precautions should be taken to ensure that heavy compaction equipment is not used
adjacent to walls, so as to prevent undue pressure against, and movement of the walls.
] O. The use of water-stops/impermeable barriers should be used for any basement
construction, and for building walls that retain earth.
5.6
Pavement Desil!n
1.
All paving construction and materials used should conform to applicable sections of the
latest edition of the State of California Department of TranspOltation Standard
Specifications.
2.
As indicated previously, the top 12 inches of sub-grade soil under pavement sections
should, be compacted to a minimum relative density of 95 percent based on the ASTM
D1557-9I test method at slightly above optimum moisture content. Aggregate bases and
9
Sl.:pll.:mbl.:r 23. 20U5
Projl..'d SL05014-1
sub-bases should also be compacted to a minimum relative density 01'95 percent based on
the aforementioned test method.
3. The following table provides the recommended pavement section based on an assumed
R-Value of 30, various traffic indexes, and specifications of the City of Arroyo Grande.
Our analysis was based on the CaltransHighway Design Manual with a safety, factor
applied. Final design pavement section will be 'determined, after ,preliminary grading is
complete and the California Test Method No. 301-F test is performed on a representative
pavement sub-grade soil sample encountered at the Site.
Table 5: Preliminary P'lVement Design Sections
Recommended Minimum Asphalt Concrete Pavement Sections
Design Thickness
T.!. A.C. (in.) A.B(in.)
5.5 3.25 7.0
-
6.0 3.25 8.0
---
6.5 3.75 9.0
-_.
7.0 4.00 , 10.0._.______
--
T.!. = Traffic Index
A.C = Asphaltic Concrete meeting Caltrans Specification for
Class II Asphalt Concrete
A.B. = Aggregate, Base,meeting Caltrans Specification for,Class'lI'Aggregate Base
(R-Value = 78 Minimum)
4. A minimum of 6 inches of Class Il Aggregate Base is recommended for all pavement
sections. All pavement sections should be crowned for good drainage. All pavement
construction and materials used should conform to Sections 25, 26 and 39 of the latest
edition ofthe State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications.
6.0 ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
The recommendations contained in this report are based on a limited number of borings and on the
continuity of the sub-surface conditions encountered. It is assumed that GeoSolutions, Inc. will be retained
to perform the following services:
1. Consultation during plan development.
2. Plan review of grading and foundation documents prior to construction.
3, Construction inspections and testing as required including, but not limited to, stripping, grading,
over-excavating, backfill placement, imported materials, foundation excavation observations and
compaction.
to
Scpt~ll1bcr 23. 200j
I'rojoct SL050 14-1
7.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
I. The recommendations of this repOlt are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not
deviate from those disclosed during our study. Should any ,variations or undesirable conditions be
encountered during the development of the Site, GeoSolutions, Inc.' should be notified
immediately and GeoSolutions, Inc. will provide supplementalTecommendations as dictated by the
tield conditions.
2. This repOlt is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility oflhe owner or his/her
representative to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to
the attention of the architect and engineer for the project, and incorporated into the project plans
and specifications. The owner or his/her representative is responsible to ensure that the necessary
steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such ,recommendations in the
field.
3. As of the present date, the findings of this report are valid for the property, studied. With the
passage of time, changes in the conditions of a property can occur whether they are due to natural
processes or to the works of man on this or adjacent properties. Therefore, this report should not
be relied upon after a period of3'years without our review, nor should it.be'used'of<iscitapplicable
for any properties other than those studied. However many events such 'as floods, earth4uakcs,
grading of the adjacent properties and building and municipal code changes could render ;,ections
of this report invalid in less than 3 years.
S;\Soil Engineering Rcports\SL05014-1 Fair Oaks Medical C<lmpus\SL05014-1 Fair O<lJ..s SEltdoc
11
c..
,
'.
\~
REfERENCES
REFERENCES
2001 CaIijumia Building Code. California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2. Whittier,
California: International Conference of Building Officials, 2002.
Bowles, Joseph E. Foundation Ana/ysis and Design. 5'" cd. New York: MeGraw-lIill, 1996.
Ca/ifomia Code of Regu/atiollS, 2001 Edition. Title 8. Division i: Department of Industrial Relations.
Chapter 4: Division of Industrial Safety. Subchapter 4, Construction Safety Orders. Article 6:
Excavations. <http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sub4.html>
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. Maps of Known Active Fault
Near-Source Zones in Califomia and Adjacent Portions of Nevada. Whittier, California:
International Conference of Building Officials, i 998.
CaIifomia Code of Regulations. 200 I Edition. Title 14. Division 2: Depmtment of Conservation. Chapter
8: Mining and Geology. Article 10: Seismic Haza~ds Mapping.
<http://www.consrv.ca.gov/SMGB/Regulations/regulations.htm>
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. Special Publication 117:
Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards'in Culifomia., Adopted 1997.
<http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/webdocs/spI17.pdf>
Day, Robert W. Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering: Design unci ConsTructioll. New York:
McGraw-Hili, 1999.
Holzer, T.L., Noce, T.E., Bennett,MJ., Di Alessandro, c., Boatwright, J, Tinsley, J.C." Sell, R.W., and
Rosenberg, L.I., 2004, Liquefaction-Inducted Lateral Spreading in Oceano, California, During the
2003 San Simeon Emthquake, U. S. Geological Survey Open File Report 2004-1269.
Kramer, Steven L. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996.
Macnab, Alan. Earth Retention Systems Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hili, 2002.
National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research. Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on
Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance Soils. Technical Report NCEER-97-0022. Buffalo, New
York: 1997.
J~
APPENDIX A
Field Investigation
Soil Classification Chart
Boring Logs
CPT Logs
Classification Data/Soil Behavior Types
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was conducted on August 3 and 4, 2005 using a track-mountcd CME 55 and
Mobile B24 drill rigs. The surface and sub-surface conditions were studied by drilling nine exploratory
borings to a maximum depth of 50.5 feet below ground surface (bgs), and further characterized by
advancing one Cone Pendration Test (CPT) sounding to a maximum depth of 49, feet bgs. This
exploration was conducted in accordance with presently accepted geotechnical engmeering procedures
consistent with the scopc of the services authorized to GeoSolutions, Inc.
_ The CME 55 drill rig with an 8-incll diameter hollow-stem continuous flight auger bored two exploratory
borings (B-1 and B-2) and advanced one CPT sounding near the' approximate locations indicated on the
Site Plan. The Mobile B24 drill rig with a 4-inch solid-stem auger bored seven additional borings (B-3
through B-8) at the approximate locations indicated on the Site Plan. The drilling and field observation
was performed under the direction of the project engineer. A representative of GeoSolutions, Inc.
maintained a log of the soil conditions and obtained soil samples suitable for laboratory testing. The soils
were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. See Soil Classification Churt,
Appendix A.
Standard Penetration Tests with a 2-inch outside diameter standard (SPT) split tube,sampler,and with a 3-
inch outside diameter Modified California (CA) split tube s~mpler wcre performed to,obtain an indication,
in the field, oUhe density of the soil and to allow visual observation of at least a portion of the soil colullln.
SoH samples obtained with the sampler are retained for further observation and tcsting. A 140-pound
hammer free falling 30 inches drives the sampler. The sampler is initially seated 6 inches to penetrate any
loose cuttings and is then driven an additional 12 inches with the'rcsults (N-values)xecorded in 'he boring
logs as ihe number of blows per foot required to advance the sample the 12 inches.
The CA sampler is a larger diameter sampler than SPT sampler and provides additional material for normal
geotechnical testing such as in-situ shear and consolidation testing. Either sampler may be used in the field
investigation, but the N-values obtained from using the CA sampler will be greater than that of the SPT.
The N-values for samples collected using the CA can be roughly correlated to SPT N-values using a
conversion factor that may vary from about 0.5 to 0.7 with the average conversion factor approximately
0.63 (I.;. 1.6). More information about standardized samplers can be found in the California Geological
Survey Special Publication 117 (DMG SPI 17), updated May 28,2002.
Disturbed bulk samples are obtained from cuttings developed during boring operations. The bulk samples
are selected for Classification and testing purposes and may represent a mixture of soils within the noted
depths. Recovered samples are placed in transport containers and returned to the laboratory for fmiher
classification and testing.
Logs of the borings showing the depths and descriptions of the soils encountered, geologic structure where
applicable, penetration resistance, and results of in-place density and moisture content tests are presented
in this appendix. The logs represent the interpretation of field logs and tests, the interpolation of soil
conditions between samples and the results of laboratory observations and tests. The noted stratification
lines represent the approximate boundaries between the surface soil types, The actual transition between
soil types may be gradual. .
~l
"<::",: . ,"r. """', ..~:. ".._"" GROl'P PR.lMARY D1V!SIO:'\S
MAJOR DIVISIONS ,",' ::\J~,~?RA~ORY<:,~~~~FI~!.I.~X C~.l:~~RrA,. '.
SYMBOLS
Cu~reatcrtllan4andCzbctwcen 1 and) CW \Vcll-Gradtdgn\~lsandGra~'eI-sand
Clean gravels (Icu miJtlllTe5,liuJeornofincs
ORA VELS than S% l1ncs.) Poorly graded gravels and j;raVt:I's~nd
Not meeting both criteriil ror OW GP mixtures, little or no fines
Moretban50%ofcoarse Atlerbcrg limits plot below MA" line or plasticity
fraction retainined on No. Gnve\ with fincs index less than 4 G~d Siltyg~vels.gra\'el.sand-5iltmixtures
4 (4.7Smm) sieve (more than 12%
COARSE GRAINED SOILS fines") Attcrbcrg linlitsplotbelow "A" line and plasticity GC Clayey gravels,gravel-sand-cby mixluTcS
More than 50%.rclaincd on No. indcllOgrCilte.fthan7
:!OOsicyc We\l padcdsands,llravclysands, lialcol
c..greatertIJan6andCzbetwecn I and3 SW
. Clcansand(less nofincs
SANDS than 5% fincs-) PoorlYl:raded sands and gravclly and
Xol meeting bolll criteria for SW SP sands,littlcornofincs
More than 50% of coarse ArteTberg limits plot below" A "line or plasticity 51\1 Silrysands.sand-silcmixtures
fraction passcsNo. 4 Sand with fines mdexlesstban4
(4.75mm) sieve (more than 12% Attcrberg limits plot above "A" line and plasticity
fines") indexgrcaterthan7 SC Clayey sands, sand-c1ay mixcures
In~rganicsoil PI <4 or plots below "A".line ML Jnor~anic silts, very fine sands, rock nour,
sillyorela)'Cy fine sands
SIL TS A..~D eLA YS IriorganicctaysofJowtomcdium
(liquid limitless than SO) Inorganic soil PI>7andplotsonorabovc.A"line.... CL plasticity. gravelly eJays. sandy c1ays, silty
eJays, lean clays
FI:\E GRAINED SOILS Organic Soil LL (O\-eJl dried)/LL (not dried) < O.iS OL Organic silcs md organic siltyc1a)'S of low
50% or more passes No. 200. plaSlicity
sieve
Inorganic soil Plols below "A" line MIt lnofganicsilts, micaceous or diatomace<ll.ls
finesandsOfsilts.'ela.sticsi1CS
SILTS A."D CLAYS
(lH{uidlimiISOormore) Illorganicsoil Plots on or above "A"linc CH Inorganicclaysofhigl1plasticity,fatclays
OrganicS(lil LL (oven dricd)/Ll (nol dried) < 0.75 OH Organic ssllS and oryanic clays of high
plasticity
P~, HighlyOrginic Primari\y orginic matter, dark in color, and orgallic odor ,H Peat,muckandothcrhighIyorgallics~ils
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
tFines are Ulose soil particles that pass the No. 200 sieve. For gravels and sands with
between 5 and 12% fines, use of dual symbols is required
(I.e. GW.GM. GW-GC, GP-OM, 0/' OP-GC).
"If the plasticity index is between 4 and 7 and it plots above
~he "A ".line, Ibm duul symbols (I.e. CL-ML) arc: required.
CLASSIFICATIONS BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF FINES
Less than 5%. Pass No. 200 (75mm)sieve)
More than 12% Pass N. 200 (75 mm) sieve
5%.12% Pass No. 200 (75 mm) sieve
GW,GP, SW, SP
GM, GC, SM, SC
Borderline Classification
requiring use of dual symbols
CONSISTENCY
:l~l~~, ~~!~
0.t/4 0.2
)/4-112 2-4
tl2.1 4-8
)-2 8.16.
2.4 16-32
..
Ovc.r4
Ova3Z
j
~..
.
l
Alt&ttIers1umrtplottJllg
~dolftxJfjneJare
bor<t$rlJneeJaulllution$
teqlkitlgfMolduafsymbc:Js.
..
~
..
PLASTICITY CHART
ForclaQ/fkaUOllof~ItHl.liolf$~
liIl.f~QJOf/ofl:OafDogr.fn.dlfo1/:1
VERY SOFT
SOFT
fUt.VI
~'TIFF
VERY STlFF
~lARD
"
"
Equation 01 A.Uoe;
Pl~O.13(U.20)
-r--
I
RELATIVE DENSITY
~
. '.;;;:;'~~:;.'~1'h.!:~"\~ ,l),D:l';l
':S.\NDS;.CRAVECS'AND"
:);~~?&::~lt~jtt~~fut~1~~
VF.RY LOOSE
. LOOSE
MEDIUM DENSE
OE~E
\!fRY DENSE
..~..aoI
0-'
4-10
10.30
30-50
Over SO
.t~""'~ - . . ..
..~;~.. ....
"t...0\,.
,
,
" "
..
" "
LlquldL\lnIl
..
"
"
"
'00
Drilling Notes:
+ Number uf blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30-
inches 10 drive a 2-inch 0.0. (1-3/S-inch J.D.) split
spoon (ASTM 01586).
++ Unconfined compressive strength in tonslsq.ft. .as
determined by laboratory testing or approximated by
the s~andard penetration test (ASTM D1586), pocket
penetrometer, lorvane, or visual observation.
I. Sampling and blow counts
a. California Modified - number of blows per foot
ofa 140 pound hanuner falling 30 inches
b: Standard Penetration Test - number of blows per
q inches .of a ]40 pound hammer falling 30
inches
Types of Samples:
X - In-Situ
SPT. Standard Penetration
CA - California Modified
N - Nuclear Gauge
PO - Pocket Penetrometer (ton.slsq.ft.)
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
BORING NO. B..,.l
JOB NO. SLOS014-1
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: August 3, 2005
LOGGED BY: MC
::..: Depth of Groundwater: 18 feet
DRILLING INFORMATION
DRILL RIG: CME 55
HOLE DIAMETER: 8 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: CA and SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
Boring Terminated At: 50.5 feet
Page I of]O
~
~
13
:g
>-
g
@
::;
;;,
o,.
'"
'"
t::
<:
iS~
g~
CI).f-;.
""&
-u
>-
'"
Qo,.
::;,i5.
t: >-A
,?i-
~@
i!f
f;J >-
!< is'!;
~* ::E ':
::Zi-' ::;,i:;
:::. Z ~....
~,~ R~
~8 ii!f
~Q
-fE
~I;j
;;:;Q
fJ~
"
eff'
"'~
t;jt:
t:~
<:-i
SOIL DESCRIPTION
"I
~
;J
!:!
:>c-
"I.
..
t;;
ij
~
~
o
-i
'"
o
-
POORLY GRADED SAND: yellowish brown, with SP-SM.
- silt, dry, medium dense
A 11.3 109,6 0
- ,
-
-
CA 20 2.8 96.3
-
-
-
-
-
SILTY SAND: yelowish brown. slighttly moist, SM .~~. CA 36
- medium dense
-
':-r.:T:
- :~~.
-
eLA YEY SAND: yellowish brown, very dense to SC _.....- -'< B
- medium dense with depth ~-S
- ~-S
CA 5015"
- ~-S
...
- ~-~
......
- ~-~
.....
-1'1': ~-S
,..
- ~-S
- ..
- ~-S CA 35
- ....
~-S
- .. ..
~-S
- ......
~-~
......
- ~-S
- ~~
..... SPT 20
- ~-S
......
-I
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
-II
-12
-13
-14
-15
-16
-17
-18
-t9
-20
-21
-22
-23
-24
-25
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
BORING NO. B-1
JOB NO. SL05014-1
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
"" Depth of Groundwater: 18 feet Boring Terminated At: 50.5 feet Page 2 of! 0
... '" ;.. t:: ;..
!!I OJ
;.. ~ I- '" '" :z:g ~
i5 :z;' "" 0'" "" 0'" ;;;
co OJ ~ It! i$~ ",Ii s* ;;; It co~
~ SOIL DESCRJPTJON 13 0 ;;; t: >-~ 9~ ",I-
is iil I- "'~ ;;;...: ~~. OJ~
!3 ;;; i$ '" t:;:z; ':'1- ",:z; 'Eo "'-
i5 ~ 0 I] '?j:: :z;;;; ;;;t:: -;;; <:~ [ij-J
::; -J :Z;:Z; -;;,; ;:::z; '<;;,; "- ~
'" ~ '" ;f!i [;j
-0 0 "-0
u Ou ""
-26
-27
.28
.29
-30
-31
-32
-33
-34
-35
-36
-37
-38
-39
-40
-41
-42
-43
-44
-45
-46
-47
-48
-49
-50
:::;::-::;::
::;::-::;::
::;::-::;::
::;::-::;::
SANDY-eLA Y: olive brown, with gravel, stiff CL -y- SPT 16
:S::'
f-' -
- -
:S::'
-' -
- -
:S::'
-' -
- -
:S::'
f- -
- - SPT 12
:S::'
f-' -
- -
:S::'
f-' -
- -
etA YEY SAND: yellowish brown, saturated, SC 1-::;::-::;::
medium. dense
1-::;::-::;::
1-::;::-::;:: SPT 18
f-::;::-::;::
f-::;::"'::;::
f-::;::-::;:: -
...
~-::;::
~-::;:: SPT 25
::;::-:::;::
..,
~-:::;::
...
~-::;::
~-::;::
::;::~:::;::
WELL-GRADED SAND: yellowish brown, with SW-S ... . SPT 40
... .
.... .
... .
silt. saturated, dense .... .
... .
. .
... .
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
220 High Street
Sari Luis Obispo, CA 93401
_ BORING NO. B-2
JOB NO. SL050 14-1
DRILLING INFORMATION
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: August 3, 2005
LOGGED BY: LTZ
::'I!:: Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered
DRILL RIG: CME 55
HOLE DIAMETER: 8 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
Boring Terminated At: 15 feet Page 3 of 10
... '" '" '"
" '" {:! '"
'" ~ {:! '" ~~ Be;.
'" '" z- 0'" '" "''''"
!:! '" ::oiL ~~ "'..
13 0 ;;: Ii: :< ~ ~?:- -<:! "'-
@ :0 ;;; r-. ::0 ;; t::>-.- ~r-.- !2k ",r-.
[g ~ :< 6 r-.~ ,?r-. :o~ :0- ~fS t:i
- 0 -r-. ~@ {::r-. ><~ tJ~ ",'-'
'-' '-' ~ '?z "''''
'" ~8 ~ 58 :00
-
{::
8
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
POORLY GRADED SAND: brownish yellow, SP-SM
Dune Deposit, with silt. dry, loose
X 9
,
SM fi''' ,
SILTY SAND: dark yellowish brown, Dune 1i-::r.:I.:
Deposit, slightly moist, medium dense becoming ~-r::T..
loose witb depth ~~~. X 12
r0"",'
r~:T.'
r:~:T:'
r::r.:-r."
r:r:.,-:
i-::::r.:r
~:r.'
~~~:
':-r.:T.
.~~. X 6
":r:T:
:-r.:r."
.1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
-11
-12
-13
-14
-15
-16
-17
-18
-19
-20
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
220 High Street
, Sim Luis Obispo, CA 93401
BORING NO. B-3
JOB NO. SL05014-1
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: August 4, 2005
LOGGED BY: MC
DRILLING INFORMATION
D'RILL RIG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
"'" Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered
Boring Tenninated At: 15 feet Page 4 of 10
.... ;,. '" >-
" '" "' '-'
>- i?i ~A t=! ~..... .... "'.... 2; ~&
'-' "' -<: 08, 0'"
i3 0 o! ~ -<: ;:,8, :: * ~ A ~t;!
is ~~ ~~- !@fS
:< 05 .... 2~ :<!f ;:,>- "'....
[g ~ ~ ~ "' 2:e;; ;:) ::zc ~o "'!i
0 a ~!i It=! ~& t::~
::J ""' -2; ~~ -<:""'
'" 0 i !!S 158 :'0
"- ~ 0
(,)
f
"'
o
SOIL DESCRlPTlON
o
POORLY GRADED SAND: brownish yellow, with SP-S~
silt, dry to slightly moist, medium dense
X 13
SILTY SAND: dark yellowish brown, slightly SM ~;;:
moist, medium dense ';'::1.:1..
.;.::-rT. X 14
';'::T'" .
';'::r =i.
~2;:
(,,'"
':r.:T:
j~ ,
";'::r.:T..
..;.::-r.:T:,
";'::r.:I..
.;.:;;:
eLA YEY SAND; mottled brown, slightly moist, SC ~-~ X 28
medium dense .....
s:..:s:
I I
I
-I
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
.8
-9
.10
-11
-12
-13
-14
-t5
-t6
-t7
-18
-19
-20
BORING LOG
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING NO. B-4
JOB NO, SL05014-1
220 High Street
. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
DRILLING INFORMATION
DRlLL RIG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AC
DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRlLLED: August 4, 2005
LOGGED BY: MC
~ Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered
Boring Tenninated At: 15 feet Page 5 of 10
o,. :>. '" ,.
'" '" t:!
~ t:! '" [So,. ~o D
"' iE' qo,. -<( "'c-
!:! -<( .::J !I. ::~ !I. "'''-
;;! "- ~ '~ ... ' ~j:;' Gi;!S "'~
::; ~ ... ::J~ ;;;j:; ~~- :Z:f;j gt::
~ Ii c~ ;it;; ~Gi; ~q ~
0 ::Et:! ,<:z: tJ~ -<(-J
-J '-' ;g~ -:z: r:: ~8
'" ~ "' 68
-8 q
~
"-
"'
q
:>.
D
o
@
::;
SOIL DESCRIPTION
tJ
[g
o
POORLY GRADED SAND: dark brown, with silt, SP.SM: '
slightly moist, loose
I
X 10
.
SILTY SAND: light brown, mottled brown in SM
sampler, slightly moist, medium dense
X 20
;... T.:r..
;...-r.:T:.
:.:~;.
~;'::r.:
~;~:
;..::r.:r.
~;;: X 21
;"::1.:1..
;"::0.:0:.
;..::r.:T:.
;..::r.:r..
":r.:T:.
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-1
-8
-9
,10
-11
-12
-13
-14
-15
-16
-11
-\8
-19
-20
-10
-ll
-12
-13
-14
-15
-16
-17
-18
-19
-20
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
BORING NO. B-5
JOB NO. SL05014-1
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRlLLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: August 4, 2005
LOGGED BY: MC
~ Depth ofGroundwaler: Not E~countered
DRILLING INFORMA nON
DRILL RlG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
Boring Tenninated At: 15 feet
Page 60fl0
i5
~
,.,
"
o
..0
o
i5
:J
?E
....
'"
(ti ,.,
~ ~'t;
.2:~ ~~';:
~~. ~ t:
j~ ~~
o 8 ~Q
60
C;;~
ZGJ
;;;Q
fS~
"
f3ff'
"'~
tift:
~;g
""..0
,.,
IS....
,~~~
"'~
~W
~z
~
'"
t::
""
~i3
g~
'" f-,.
'2;
?Eo
u
:::!
2;-
It!
f-,
&
~
'"
~
;%
i3
!3
SOIL DESCRIPTION
~
o
..0
'"
o
sP-srv ..-
POORLY GRADED SAND: dark brown, with silt,
dry
CLAYEY SAND: light brown, slightly moist, SC ~-~
medium dense X 12
yS:
~-s:
..,
~-s:
.. ...
~-s:
~-s:
~-s:
SANDY CLAY: brown, slightly moist, medium CL X 17
~'
dense -' -
- -
~'
-' -
- -
~,
-' -
- , -
~~
-' -
- ,-
~~
-' -
-, - X 23
~'
1--' -
-, -
-,~......
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
BORING NO. B-6
JOB NO. SL05014~ 1
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: . August 4, 2005
LOGGED BY: MC
DRILLING INFORMATION
DRILL RIG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
:..: Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered
Boring Terminated At: 15 feet Page 7 of 10
... t;J >- t;J >-
3 I!i '" .... ~'t; ~::::- "
'" ~- .... 0'" <( eJ==-
;;; !::! It! <( ::011. ~* ~i::": -I:! cJ&
~ '"
::;: ~ .... ::0 ?: c:;...~ ::;:..: ~fii "'....
~ f2 ....2: "'.... ::02:, ~t;; &~ ~~
'i- '::;: '" 1::::;
0 r..,~ ~~ i~
ai u '~ r:;.... <(
It ;;So 0 ~8
u
15
e:,
o
>-
"
o
15
15
::;
SOIL DESCRIPTION
E3
;g
o
POORLY GRADED SAND: dark brown, with silt, SP-S~ I
dry .
, SIL'TY SAND: Hght br~)Wn, with rounded gravel, SM, i~;' X 7
alluvial deposits, slightly moist, loose ';'TT
';"':-T<~
';';:T:-r=, ,
':'r.:-.:,
~;-i.:T.
h-:TT"
h.-:;- .
h-"""T. .
T"
CLAYEY SAND: dark brown. some light brown, SC I-~-::>;
alluvial deposits, slightly moist, loose to dense with s;-~
depth
s;-::>; X 7
s;-::>;
......
s;-::>;
.....
s;-::>;
.....
s;-::>;
..
s;-::>;
...
I-S:-::>;
.....
-s:-::>; X 31
......
s;-::>;
-I
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
-11
-12-
-13
-14
-IS
-16
-17
-18
-19
-20
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LO(;
BORING NO. B-7
JOB NO. SL05014-1
220 High Street
.' .-. '
. San Luis Obispo, CA 9340\
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRILLING LOCA nON: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: August 4, 2005
LOGGED BY: MC
DRILLING INFORMA nON.
DRILL RIG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
~ Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered
Boring Tenninated At: 15 feet
~
'"
Cl.,l,...
::>g,
t: ,,:
"'!- .
?t~
~
Page 8 ofl0
f;j >-
~ ~'7J
i$ * ::E ~
~ . ::>t
;:, ~ '~i;;
~.... ~:z:
~8 ;:,f':I
i5
"-
f':I
>-
"
:3
g
::;
~
:;,
f;j
....
~~
t:
, ::>:z:
.t: [JJ
;gfi
~ 0
CJ
:z:
oQ
~!::!.
~><
<"'
"-~
f;i~
"
~~
"'~
"'....
i:~
",""'
::
:z:"
If!
....
S
o
"-
:.:t
~
Ji
i3
!8
~
o
""'
to
SOtL DESCRIPTION
o
, POORLY GRADED SAND: dark brown. with silt, SP-SM'
slightly moist
CLAYEY SAND: dark brown, slightly moist, loose SC -' - X 6
~-~
..'
~-~ ,
~-~
..
I-~-~
...
.I-~-~
..,
~-~
eLA YEY SAND: light brown, thin layer of alluvial SC - - X 10
deposit. slightly moist, medium dense ~-~
......
~-~
.....
~-~
I-~-~
...
I-~-~
~-~
.... t6
X~ X
~-~
-1
-2
-,
-4
-s
-6
.,
-8
-9
.to
-11
-t2
-13
-14
-tS
.16
.17
-t8
-19
-20
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
BORING NO. B-8
JOB NO. SL050l4-1
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRJLLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRJLLED: August 4, 200S
LOGGED BY: MC
DRJLLING INFORMATION
DRJLL RJG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: CA and SPT
HOLE ELEVATION:
x Depth of Groundwater: Not Encountered
,Boring Tenninated At: IS feet
Page 9 of 10
fii >-
!< 2f~
~.~ ~::-
;,...- ::J 1'::
~~ ~@
tiS ii!i
0,-,
f
i!i
>-
8
""
,0
is
~
""
3;
[:!
~
o
""
'"
....
J!!
>-
'"
0....
::>It
~i'::'
:t~
~~
!:5
'"
!:!
'"
ii<'"
g~
",...
:tiS
-'-'
Z
0':::-
c;;l!:!
zi;j
;Eo
kiiE
'"
o
[JjC-
",eo
",...
"'~
t:~
",""
SOIL DESCRIPTION
13
~
'"
;;;
;;;:
~
z'
g:
...
!:I
'-'
~
o
SANDY eLA Y: dark grayish brown, slightly moist CL f--~-
- -
becoming moist with depth, stiff f--~-'
- -
S:'
- -
- -
~-'
- - CA 20 20.3 94.8
-~-'
- -
-~-'
- -
~'
,--' -
- -
f-~-'
-. -
~-' CA 23
- -
~-'
- -
eLA YEY SAND: light brown, with gravel. allu.vial SC .:' ..
deposits s:-~
.. ,..
s:-~
s:-~
....
1-5-~
SAND: light brown, with chert, coarse, slightly SP . . SPT 30
.
moist, dense . .
. .
. .
. . .
,
.1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
-11
-12
-Il
-14
-15
-16
.17
-18
.t9
-20
GeoSolutions, Inc.
BORING LOG
BORING NO. B-9
JOB NO. SLOS014-1
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT: Fair Oaks Medical Campus, AG
DRILLING LOCATION: See Figure 2, Site Plan
DATE DRILLED: August 4, 2005
. LOGGED BY: MC
DRILLING INFORMATION
DRILL RIG: Mobile B24
HOLE DIAMETER: 4 inches
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT
, HOLE ELEVATION:
:lI!O Depth of Groundwater: 12 feet
Boring Terminated At: 15 feet
Page 10 of 10
~
~
,.,
"
o
c5
~
~
""'
?E
!::!
;
o
""'
ill
'-
"
Iii ,.,
~ g--
. ~ ~ ~ ~
~f--'. ""~
~l ~g
0.. 0 ~Q
<..>,
2:"0'
0",
~k
~tg
i4~
"
"'R
:8&
",f--
r::g
...,""'
,.,
'"
Q'-
"" 8.,
1:;}..-
'Of--
~@
~
Iii
f--
...,
:::~
[2!<
~12
'?
2:15
~<..>
SOIL DESCRIPTION
13
!g
'"
o.J
:g
~
;<:'
'"
..
&;
i1
o
..
o
- ~T;' ",
SILTY SAND: dark brown, slightly moist, loose SM ~-r:T
fT':::
- h-:T,
f.r:T,
f-T-=:T
h-=:T.:T
- 22
- ",T
~~~. X 8
-
- ..;:1."
r.:"":T:"
1.:"::1.'
- r:.r.~:-
POORLY GRADED SAND: yelowish brown, with sP-srv
- silt. becoming saturated with depth, medium dense
-
-
X 14
-
-
-
- !I!:
-
X 10
-
-
-
-
-
-
"
I-
I-
.1
.2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
-II
-12
-13
-14
-15
-16
-17
-18
-19
-20
GeoSolutions, Inc.
Operator. Dan
Sounding: cpt1
Cone Used: DSA0860
Classification Data:
Robertson and Campanella UBC-1983
1000 ,
, ....n ......ni
I i
"-J ;--
~.~~-'r--------j-- -
100
Tip (Ot)
(Bars)
10
. !
.._~-
--"l--
=------]..--
I
---Tl~"--
I
CPT Date/Time: 813/20059:43:07 AM
Location: Fair Oaks
Job Number: SL05014-1
o
2
4
10
3
:]1 sensitive fine grained
112 organic material
. 3 clay
5 6
FslOt (%)
.4 silty clay to clay
1115 clayey silt to silty clay
. 6 sandy silt to clayey silt
7
8
9
filII7 silty sand to sandy silt
8 sand to silty sand
CC 9 sand
Depth
(ft)
Soil Behavior Type-
Zone: UBC-1983
o 0
12
5
10
15
1"['1
': ;.;~ :~. -..c;
I
..~::LI
I :
~'-1
I
I
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1110 gravelly sand to sand
\::;111 very stiff fine 9ralned (0)
1112 sand to clayey sand (0)
GeoSolutions, Inc"
CPT DatelTime: 8/3/2005 9:43:07 AM
Location: Fair Oaks
Job Number: SL050t4-1
Operator: Dan
Sounding: cpt1
Cone Used: DSA0860
SPTN"
60% Hammer
o 60
Soil Behavior Type.
Zone: UBC-1983
o 12
Friction Ratio Pore Pressure
Local Friction
Fs TSF
350 0 4
Tip Resistance
Qc TSF
FslQc (%) Pw PSI
o 10 -10 30
o
o
::
;,.
5
10
15
20
25
Depth
(ll)
30
I
35 ._~L
I
I
I
40
i,: :
:! II
II
il,
,i 1 I
-niT
i i 'I' '
Ii,
II i i
i_I_l_'
i I II
II1I
1m
Iii I'
I, i I
45
50
Depth Increment = 0.164 feet
117 silty sand to sandy sm II 10 gravelly sand to sand
IilI 8 sand to silty sand 11111 very stiff fine grained (")
119 ,sand 11112 sand to clayey sand (")
Maximum Depth = 49.05 feet
II 4 silty clay to clay
115 clayey sift to silty clay
116 sandy sift to clayey sift
1lI1 sensitive fine grained
. 2 organic material
113 clay
l:.
i" ~i1 behavior type and SPTbased on data from UBC~1983
APPENDlX B
Laboratory Testing
Soil Test Rep0l1s
LABORA TORY TESTING
This appendix includes a discussion of test procedures and results of the laboratory-testing program
performed. The purposed of the laboratory testing is to assess the soil engineering properties of the soil
materials underlying the Site. The program is carried out employing, wherever practical, currently accepted
test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTlVl).
Undisturbed and disturbed bulk samples uscd in the laboratory-1esting program are obtained ti'om various
.Iocations during ,the course of the field exploration as discussed in Appendix A of this report.
Identificalion of each sample is by sample letter and depth. The method ofidentifyillg and,c1assitying soils
according to their engineering properties paralic Is the Unified Soils Classification System. The various
laboratory tests performed are described below.
Expansion Index Tests (ASTM 04829-95) are conducted in accordance witlUhe,ASTM test method and
the California Building Code Standard, a/ld are performed on representative bulk and undisturbed soil
samples. The purpose of this test Is to evaluate expansion potential of the site soils due to fluctuations in
moisture content. The sample specimens are placed in a consolidometer, surcharged under a 144-psf
. vertical confining pressure, and then inundated with water. The amount of expansion is recorded over a 24-
houLperiod with a dial indicator. The expansion index is calculated bydeterminingthe'differencc,between
final and .initial height of the specimen divided by the initial height.
Moisture Density Relations CUIYes (ASTM 01557-91) are performed ,to determine the relationship
between the. moisture content and density of soils and soil-aggregate mixtures when 'compacted in a
standard size mold with a 10-lbf haIllIner from a height of 18 inches. The test is" performcd on a
representative bulk sample of bearing soil near the estimated footing ,depth.. The procedure .is "repealed on
,the same soil sample at various moisture contents sofficient to ,establish a; relationship between the
maximum dry unit weight and the optimum water content for the soil. The data; when plotted,',represents a
curvilinear relationship known as the moisture density relations curve. The values of optimum water
content and modified l1]aximum dry unit weight can be determined from the plotted curve.
Sieve Analysis (ASTM C136-96a) is used to determine the partiCle-size distribution of fine and coarse
aggregates. In the test method the sample is separated through a series of sieves of progressively smaller
openings for determination of particle size distribution. The total percentage passing each sieve is reported
and used to determine the distribution offine and coarse aggregates in the sample.
Direet Shear Tests (ASTM 03080-90) are performed on undisturbed and remolded samples
representative of the foundation material. The samples are loaded with a predetermined normal stress and
submerged in water until saturation is achieved. The samples are then sheared horizontally at a controlled
strain rate allowing partial drainage. The shear stress on the sample is recorded at regular strain intervals.
This test determines the resistance to deformation, which is shear strength, inter-particle attraction or
cohesion c, andresistance to interparticle slip called the angle of internal friction <1>.
'...'.~ "':-'" J< ,,' ,'." ,C1 ','....;'::
" . lite: ':i;~;i "'~:>
",,<,,':':':n-iA":',~ ,l-ij':;
Proiect:
Client:
Sal1101e:
I 1/2"
I"
3/4"
No.4 100
No.8 100
No. 16 100
No.30 100
No. 50 96
No. 100 25
No. 200 11.0
~,':,t:,h:'~1:'~:::'i_:':',:;:;~ ;'Sand:'EQlIlvaleDf;C~h2;17tiiftl~~~L~~tt)i
m"~l ~M"ID
';:;:i::~~::"':.i::~j~'!''''~"l "a."mi"".I~''''':i,,~~'Iil:~ ~~: ~~~:::
,,'&."'%".i!~i,%!(~",_j.r,t-~'I:.,j~)..!~Jt;,l~J>, n eX,;<:n'n - 11-' '-~-:-"""iWF~m
!."J~fr:'\\'l!(!;~\;;"~~'2:.i~:fl;l--:1j\'i1~"'S]TM"':':"'D,4~3'1.8/9'~5- ,~:<"' Pii?' ~t;].J';~!tw.~_
""-s'i''''J..."l:~:,;",,,4~h-J':\ ."1' T ,. - ~ - a;'f,::,;m~lj;<:tw., _'l1!b;.~b()t;
Li,~~~:~i~.~~t:':~:,t~~!t'~,I!lFf,~,:,,,,-~~,!,:,,!-:1~i~~,,,:..~. Es~imated Soecific Gravity for 100% Saturation Curve 2.25
P.lashc!I:.lmlt::~~ifiJ~}t;{i;;1~n~~~;~~~~ TrIal # 1 2 3
PIMtiCity~'Iflde:l(':'t;J:~jng~;~~~.:;}M~#&~~ Water Content: 8.6 to.3 12.1
Expansion Index Dry Density: 107.5 109.2 109.2
ASTM D4829-95 Maximum Dry Density, pef: 109.6
o Optimum Water Content, %: 11.3
Very Low
50
Moisture-Densilv ASTM D2937-94, ASTM D2216-92
Water Content (%) Drv Density (pct) Relative Densitv Samnle Descrintion
2.8 96.3 1 Yellowish Brown Poorly Graded SAND w/Silt (SP.SM)
20.3 94.8 - Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY (CL)
Location:
Result:
Specification:
Sieve
Size
3"
2"
~,(t~i~' ;~',t~ ~~~~H~~'~~':I!
;: ': "~;:\;?;' :'}'-- .. ' ;t
:},":...;<", :'}~!~::::' ii;:C:.:.,\y
Fair Oaks Avenue, Arrovo Grande
Date Tested:
Proiect #:
Lab #:
Samnle Date:
Sampled By:
8/1 0/2005
SL05014-1
5161
8/3/2005
MC
A
B-1
Denth: 1.0 ft
Soil Classification
ASTM D2487-93. D2488-93
Yellowish Brown Poorly Graded SAND
with Silt
Laboratory Maximum Density
ASTM D1557-91
SP-SM
Sieve Analysis
ASTM C136-96a
110.0
I I ------T-------;-I~ .,
j i Ii,
'1 I i I
--7" 109.2199.2~ , 1 ~m_
c--7 -- ~~_!_mm: ~r--
I i --L-_
, : i
_ J__
I
!
109.0
Percent
Passine:
Project
Snecifications
~
o
0.
is 108.0
.~
c
o
~ 107.0
Cl
1---1{)~
106.0
-- ---1 I
i 105.7 I
105,0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13,0
14.0
15.0
Water Content, %
nla
5
25
I
I
4.00
]0.00
Mold Diameter, ins.
Wei.ht ofRammer,lbs.
4
14.3
105.7
Expansion Index:
Expansion Potential:
Initial Saturation, %:
Samn!e
B-1
B-8
Denthlft1
4.0
3.5
~_"X!t..,-
""~""",,.,,:F":~;"r.@"l
~~""1C1ir,rn:R':")i~ijj;I1j...1t1",i4:..:. .
-lI'.l~~~:m, w~
IRenort By: Darren Harrold
B]
",pe~~i~'~~if:~~:,:I~~i~~ii(~~~~~1if~f~;)M;:~~~\t:f~~~~;;~;?i~~~~~~~t-f'~~~[~W~j,~;];~\i~i'~;:.,: ,., "';,':i:,#~r};;~}}t~~~~:;~":'i'
Pro'ect:
Client:
Sam le:
Location:
FaIr Oaks Avenue, Arro 0 Grande
8
8-1
De th: 12.0 ft
Date Tested:
Pro'eet #:
Lab #:
Sam Ie Date:
Sampled 8y:
8/10/2005
SL05014-1
5161
8/3/2005
MC
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM 02487-93, 02488-93
Yellowish Brown Clayey SAND
~~;~rf~~Mj1f1~E~~li~1~t~t~f~~~~11~tWB1~fl;~~0~i!~li~~?d~~~~l:t!n:t~l~~N,~lti~~~
Sieve
SIze
3"
2"
SC
Sieve Analysis
ASTM CI36-96a
Percent
Passin
Project
S ecifications
It~I,~it1;~~~~l~;~!ttJ
.~,~'i~!g~f~r&1~~j1;~~::';~~i
SpecificatIOn:
100
99
99
98
95
57
~t'..:r),i;'~J(
82
<';?~OS~I~}~~~~;;ft~~;~'~~%~i:!r;~~~i~:~~~;'f~~ii~~ll~~~;~!~$~l~~~r1~i1~;~f~i:~;/J~Ui;;::'
~ ~"::. i1.~::.: ;\~ ..:~~' ~;:-l'~;!V I;' ::,: :";:l':Z, ;~
; (805) S4j~8Sj9;:;~::
.~',:';: :,;~~~~f~~~b~'~~~fi}:~;/ ~ ."
Pro'ect:
Client:
Sam Ie:
Location:
Fair Oaks A venue, Arro 0 Grande
B-1
B-1
19'
De th: 19.0 ft
Date Tested:
Pro. eet #:
Lab#:
Sam le Date:
Sampled By:
8/1 0/2005
SL05014-1
5161
8/312005
MC
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM D2487-93, D2488-93
Yellowish Brown Clayey SAND
Specification:
SC
Sieve Analysis
ASTM CI36-96a
Sieve
Size
3"
2"
I 1/2"
I"
3/4"
No.4
No.8
No. 16
No. 30
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
B3
, . ". _ :~~~'; 1: 1 "<:>;{.~:;~~t;:~~;;{r~}'i{:~;: .~. ,~. ~ "J~- - ';':~' ~ '5,;~ T::;~: ,:_,: 'I :.:. ::;.'.'; J,"!':': 'i '
GeoSolutions, Inc."'! : - ,. ,;:" '~~';;"'~:'l,!~\r~;.N,~;I."<;~':: '... 'SOILS;REPORT, :;)"?~~~,.-.~,~.',~i1,:,~.,(~,';,~.'~,:':";'
:f!::~'<, ;,::~ _" ;::'~',"' :~p~~;,~~~';-;~t~~~:,~ \"~~~.:'J.:~r:\ . ~;~':',.' .~~.~~~;~ iji,~~~~~~~: y,,, : ,. ,~. ,~,.,
Pro'eet:
Client:
Sam Ie.
Location.
Fair Oaks A venue, Arro 0 Grande
B-1 ~ 29'
B-1
De th: 29.0 ft
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM D2487-93. D2488-93
Olive Brown Sandy CLAY
Specification:
CL
'Sieve Analysis
ASTM C136-96a
Percent
Passm
Project
ecifications
Sieve
Size
93
90
78
86
83
72
~:< ~:~~,
;,~ ::.1
"II."""
~'.I;i:I' +: .;2;~d~~t~t ~'V~~1:~;;jtlL*~;1:1ki~:~ <
"'l'''fffi,'.r ~'3 .;J,~i'lf!-l. :,'.~--::~;:,,','L"o:Il'J~~r1"r..r'{N~'!};~ ~
"!i~..,,~. .~"~~.,, ,...,.", ~""'-'ll[,f,:;Uft.~ii1It
~j!f~~~f.i~~~~~[w' ~~~~"TW~lffW~iffiW
Re ort By: Darren Harrold
...)~J:
{;~'!'i-:
: { ~:;~:',1 ;::;:-.\ G~-;, ' "'..,
., :, : ; (~05)'543;85'j9'
'''- :'t;:,:~~1~[~~/;i1:~_'~',:
'.'. "
'::,
-:.~,
Date Tested:
Pro'eet #:
Lab#:
Sam Ie Date:
Sampled By:
8/10/2005
SL05014-1
5161
8/3/2005
MC
{it~i:
B4,.
-<;' ,< J~'.. h_:)~:: j. ~:~i~~\;: ~X~0~;~'~. ~~~~ ~~f\~J; ~~~':~'l:~\ 't,V~~1~,r.~\.~ !~~~;:: ~":~iL~;~ ~ ;~:I ~ :'i'-'~f,;:~" ~' ' ::j!, . ! ,lJ ;.',; :;f~~;r~ . >~';:li'~.::'.: . ,
": Ge~~OIU~l~n~, ~n~.!" ,'.:f!;;;<~;;~"iY.~..:";~(;.. ;.r::,Spm~Jffi!"ORT: ,~;~'" 'J-;'" :..,':."'1 ":-", ,," .:(80.5),543"l!53';.j~;::
. " ~ ,~" I ,t:~~.,: i~~~ .~.; , , :: ~IJ ~ r';\'~E%; ;!~t~' ',..{:~iW :t~j.{~"~-1~' ~' '~~~,,~"-~rt~~., },J:t,."~' ";~t,~~:. ,;:_;J~,. ~ ~;!f'; , f, " Yi~'1f:~:.::tF5I}~;~,~.~~t~~::;V
Pro"eet: Fair Oaks Avenue, Arro 0 Grande Date Tested: 8/10/2005
Client: Pro'ect #: SL05014-1
Sam Ie: B-1 39' De tho 39.0ft Lab#: 5161
Location: B-\ Sam Ie Date: 8/3/2005
Sampled By: MC
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM D2487-93, D2488-93
YeJlowish Brown Clayey.sAND
~;..::~.:.:'i!l~~~j!:i!1nw'~r:;;1P:.rrij!.~:'LaI)oratoa1MamnuDfDeiisity;'::~,~~.tl;.~.'t~,~~:;~::'t. ~ : i(';;i\l/.rg,~
\'c.;:.;.!l.;'it~-g,.;.r:{~ 'l~l!lt!" jH?:1........~t~r!l~'lI1!t!F'l'1 ..I;; ~,~, ...""l~. "'" ",,",,;..;,- r''''''i ,."",:tt,,:I~::sll;! Dd :i;'~~;: :!I;T~'ti~!r.;;.'
,;:~~!1;::~!t13't~:::l:~~11~f:~~,:.t.~\~~1:i:f.:'t1i:'!~'ASThf',D 1557;91fMt~:j"~;;;-~~':~'~;~l;1".J:;';:~~~-SiYJ1~i!.'t~;~~:,~
Specification:
Sieve
Size
SC
Sieve Analysis
ASTM C 136-96a
Percent
Passin
Project
S ecifications
3"
100
100
100
99
96
75
B5
, '"' ': '.' ':~, . ,~,~:~)t)l~?< ;<~~",:";:,i:!~:~~i}~l;j;.tj~,~~~;p~~~~~C:: ~,~,:~~~t~~~ii&;?F~;::;:!i~ir;'\'~::: ~1i'~;{V;T}:?,'-
GeoSolubons ,IDe "'''H, ,..,,,,.,,'.........,,,.,..,.,' .." --SOIl:;S REPORT ''',1",:". , "'..,, '.," ,.,',. ..
:. '. '~'~\:'>:;:~, " .,>'~;'~'~\ ~!,;. ~ ::~~}f.:~t,~ti~~~~~~~~f;:}:,~;::~:;E.~:fiI~~;~~~~tt\:r:t'f;J:~~~\;..:!i~<.;;t~;~~?: '?i rEi;:::t:::,~~,.
" ~":',
, "'"
_~)f::,~t;f~~~~ ./:: l~;:i..~ l; ;"
.:".' 'i..:'(80~t?43-8?39;;
~~:d~ ::.~ :"::~~'A~~l~'~: ~.. :,t~.~~~,.:':-~;: . .
Pro' eel:
Client:
Sam Ie:
Location:
B-1 a.49'
8-1
o th: 49.0 ft
Date Tested:
Pro'eet #:
Lab#:
Sam le Date:
Sampled By:
8/1 0/2005
SL05014-1
5161
8/3/2005
MC
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM 02487-93, 02488-93
Yellowish Brown Well Graded SAND
wi Slit
SIeve
Size
3"
2"
I 1/2"
SW-SM
Sieve Analysis
ASTM CI36-96a
Percent
Passin
:~):f[~~f~i~~~jr~~tr~rlJ,~j~~~~t~~~f~~~~'J~j~;~: }:~,
=!... J~lf.(..,; < '1'l~1r.1'" l~'" fi,~~1'~ '.tI(,l~t~, ~,';,t~~it'! ';':s.:)"!.,:;.,...'..
Specification:
~} .'~~',
.:~ r'
.,
.;.-
'~.'::i.~~fl:~r~>: ~.
,:~<~~;;{: 2 ~.~~;~;;~~: ;,~~:~~~':i;:~.!),~~~1?~~J:~.1r:7
:J~;;. :'>'I:3'~'il~!, :~r.;.~~~~~f:~~~%-rrF:.~
B6
B-5 ,8.5'
B-5
De th: 8.5 ft
Date Tested:
Pro'eel #:
Lab#:
Sam Ie Date:
Sampled By:
:.'
~. :.'.
":h ,i:;,I~::';"X~. ":;;'~~~ ;~,:: .
(805)~.4~,;lf539)::; ,
... :'~:~~'~~~r~/ :"'}.'~:'[~,',~;'~':!
8/10/2005
SL05014.1
5161
8/312005
MC
..t~e~~~!~i~~\~~\~~i;~~~~~~1~:;itfl~~ri~~~f?,~~iii~~~;r:~!~'~!J'JiMJ" '-'
Pro'eet:
Client:
Sam Ie:
Location:
Fair Oaks A venue, Arro 0 Grande
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM D2487-93, D2488-93
Brown Sandy CLAY
;it1~~~~i(:j~~;"~.:~~~~~~'~;&:~Iia~orato~iYi~axijijiim DensitY ,':'_J::i~~-"JWl~i,~~~;~~:t; ~~'":rt'fi:
.~(~.?,.f:l''f.":r....c:'''h~dF~~~\i;,r;,,,,.~t.,.a''''l':!4~1',...'l..;:. h~'.,~....t~"t. OJ." '''''~;''!''!'~..:' '? . "'+. t. .,til:m)";'.I "':,.,." ; .,,~~'.';:' r....:,;,,:
:~;-;.l-f,.~iJ;rk'L :.l,:~~:Jf~:t::;;1 if;':~'l '{~\J~':,;ASTrvfD 1557':9 Etl'!' >~'~:~-'- {~':i~:f~'~h~ff"T . ',;2:~g;~;;;;,~::i.
Specification:
CL
Sieve Analysis
ASTM C136-96a
Sieve
Size
3"
2"
I 1/2"
I"
B7
:,. ~~,~~~!~:~ffff:t~~;~~~'~~~t!~~~tr;'1i:*);~1~~H~~~~~~~ii;~~11i~lf; -~~~;~f.~~~~',[-}'-[_:ir~j'~~M~~~l~r.!t~1i11~
',f"
Pro'eet:
Client:
Sam Ie:
Location:
Fair Oaks A venue, Arro 0 Grande
B-9
B-9
13.5'
De th: 13.5 ft
Date Tested:
Pro. eet #:
Lab#:
Sam Ie Date:
Sampled By:
8/10/2005
SL05014-1
5161
8/3/2005
MC
Result:
Soil Classification
ASTM D2487-93, D2488-93
Yellowish Brown Poorly Graded SAND
with Silt
Specification:
SP-SM
Sieve Analysis
ASTM C136-96a
Sieve
Size
3"
2"
1 1/2"
I"
3/4"
No,4
No, 8
No. 16
No. 30
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
B8
Pro' ect:
Client:
Sam Ie #:
Location:
Material:
B-1 ,4'
B-1
Yellowish Brown Poorly Graded SAND w/Silt (SP-SM)
De tho 4.0 ft
, :?j;J,l~~:~~:!~~~tf:t~I~~~~'\I;i:~~:~,t'~:;~,':)~:~~~i?liri~~~ir:~i~~~
Date Tested: 8/1112005
Pro'ect #: SL050l4-1
Lab #: 5161
Sam Ie Date: ' 8/3/2005
Sampled By: Me '
Saturation, %
Test Data
Normal Max Shear
Load, sf Stress, sf
1000 966
2000 1266
3000 2067
Specimen
Number
Void Ratio
Water
Content, %
,22.1
22.2
25.3
Dry
Densi ,
2500
~ 2000
0..
~
'"
'"
<l)
....
en 1500
I
_ -.--t __"__._n____.n
I
I
I i
--~-i---T-
-I
I
I
,
I
--T---
I
--I-
I
l
....
os
<l)
..<::
<:Il
E 1000
::l
E
.~
~ 500-
,
i-----
I
l
I
I
'-"1'- --~
I
I
I
o
o
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Normal Load (pst)
The test specimens were in~~~tu samples.
Angle of Internal Friction (In-Sitn), Phi:
Cohesion (In-Sitn), C:
28.8 0
332 psf
Report By: Darren Harrold
B9
GeoSolutIODs,.Inc.'''o... ..,' ",..., "_..l",, _'.", .. '.. ...1, ...,... ,I..,.. ""__",, ...... -"....-;>.1.... ",.. -,..' , .'", (805)-543-8539 ,"
Pro' ect:
Client:
Sam Ie #:
Location:
Material:
Specimen
Number
1
2
3
4
2500
c 2000
Ul
-=
Ul
Ul
Q)
....
~ 1500
C/l
....
'"
Q)
..c:
C/l
8 1000
::l
8
.~
::;s 500
Fair Oaks Avenue, ArTO 0 Grande
B-8
B-8
Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY (CL)
Void Ratio
Test Data
Normal Max Shear
Load, sf Stress, sf
1000 1634
2000 1963
2500 2139
3000 1683
lW $,:",,~';';);J"lrnl;,,~::i"'" ~~"~l::[~'''~;'tf' ':H~.'l~jj:~'~;
:;:;;;;;~!.i,'il1frk..~.mW '~fl~:!?i:...,,;~~'i~.;!t~~~;~I';ll'Wi~
Saturation, %
I
I
I
--I
1
,
I
I
+---+
I
I
I In----'
I I
_____ _______L___ I ___~
I
__ _ __J
I
T-
o
o
1500
Normal Load (pst)
500
1000
The test specimens were in-situ samples.
Angle ofIntemal Friction (In-Situ), Phi:
Cohesion (In-Situ), C:
Report By: Darren Harrold
B 10
Date Tested:
Pro'ect #:
Lab #:
Sa Ie Date:
Sampled By:
Water
Content, %
30.0
30.6
41.8
'39.4
I
,I
,
I
- - -~---------
,
I
2000
5.0
1297 psf
8/22/2005
SL050 14-1
5161
8/3/2005
MC
Dry
Densi ,
96.8
88.9
91.2
97.9
,%
:1 ... -_...__._.~_.-
1
I
I
i
r--
2500
3000
APPENDIX C
Preliminary Grading Specifications
Key and Bench with Backdrain
PRELIMINARY GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
A. General
1. These preliminary specifications have been prepared for the subject site; GeoSolutions, Inc.
should' be consulted prior to the commencemcnt of site work associated with site development to
ensure compliance with these specifications.
II. GeoSolutions, Inc. should be notified at least 2 working days prior to" ,ite clearing or grading
operations on the property in order to observc the stripping of surface materials and to coordinate
the work with the grading contractor in the field.
iii. These grading specifications may be modified and/or'superseded by rccommendations contained
in the text of this report and/or subsequent repOlts.
IV. If disputes arise out of the interpretation of these grading specifications, the Soils Engineer shall
provide the governing interpretation.
B. Obligation of Parties
I. The Soils Engineer should provide observation and testing servicesand.should'make,evaluations
to advise the client on geotechnical matters. The Soils Engineer should report the findings and
rccommendations to the client or the authorized representative.
II. The client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. The client or authorized
representative has the responsibil ity of reviewing the findings, and 'recommendations of the Soils
Engineer. During grading the client or the authorized represel1lative'should remain on-site or
should remain reasonably accessible to all concerned parties' in ordertomakc decisions necessary
to maintain the flow of the project.
iii. The contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all
grading and other operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to, earthwork in
accordance with project plans, specifications, and controlling agency requirements.
C. Site Preparation
I. The client, prior to any site preparation or grading, should arrange and attend a meeting which
includes the grading contractor, the design Structural Engineer, the Soils Engineer,
representatives of the local building department, as well as any other concerned parties. All
parties should be given at least 48 hours notice.
ii. All surface and sub-surface deleterious materials should be removed from the proposed building
and pavement areas and disposed of off-site or as approved by the Soils Engineer. This includes,
but is not limited to, any debris, organic materials, construction spoils, buried utility line, septic
systems, building materials, and any other surface and subsurface structures within the proposed
building areas. Trees designated for removal on the construction plans should be removed and
their primary root systems grubbed under the observations of a representative of GeoSolutions,
Inc. Voids left from site clearing should be cleaned and backfilled as recommended for structural
fill.
JJ
111. Once the Site has bee 11 cleared, the exposed ground surface should be stripped to remove surt~lce
vegetation and organic soil. A representative of GeoSolutions, Inc. should determine the required
depth of stripping at the time of work being completed. Strippings may either be disposed of 01'1'-
site or stockpiled for future use in landscape areas, if approved by the landscape architect.
D. Site Pl'Oteetion
I. Protection of the Site during the period of grading and construction should be the responsibility of
the contractor,
II. The. contractor should be responsible for the stability of all tcmporary excavations.
111. During periods, of rainfall, plastic sheeting should be kept reasonably:accessible to prevent
unprotected slopes from becoming saturated. Where necessary during periodsoCrainfall, the
contractor should install check-dams, de-silting basins, sand bags, or other devices or methods
necessary to control erosion and provide safe conditions.
E. Excavations
I. Materials that are unsuitable should be excavated under the, observation and recommendations of
the Soils Engineer. Unsuitable materials include, ,but may nGLbe limited .to: I) dry,.loose, soft,
wet, organic, or compressible natural soils; 2) fractured, weathered" or soft bedrock; J) non-
, engineered till; 4) other deleterious materials; and 5) materials identified by the, Soils Engineer or
Engineering Geologist.
11. Unless otherwise recommended by the Soils Engineer and'approved'by the,locaLbuilding ollicial,
permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2: I, (horizontal to vertical). Final slope
configurations should contorm to California Building Cude Chapter JJ unle,s specifically
modified by the Soil Engineer/Engineering Geologist.
iii. The Soil Engineer/Engineer Geologist should review cut slopes during excavations. The
contractor should notify the Soils Engineer/Engineer Geologist prior to beginning slope
excavations.
F. Structural Fill
i. Structural fill should not contain rocks larger than 3 inches in greatest dimension, and should
have no more than 15 percent larger than 2.5 inches in greatest dimension.
ii. Imported fill should be free of organic and other deleterious material and should have very low
expansion potential, with a plasticity index of 12 or less. Before delivery to the Site, a sample of
the proposed import should be tested in our laboratory to determine its suitability for use as
structural fill.
G. Compacted Fill
I. Structural fill using approved import or native should be placed in horizontal layers, each
approximately 8 inches in thickness before compaction. On-site inorganic soil or approved
imported fill should be conditioned with water to produce a soil water content near optimum
moisture and compacted to a minimum relative density 01'90 percent based on ASTM D1557-91.
II. Fill slopes should not be constructcd at gradients greater than 2 to I (horizontal to vertical). The
contractor should notify the Soils Engineer/Engineer Geologist prior to beginning slope
excavations.
III. If till areas are constructed on 'slopes greaterthan 10 to I (horizontal to vertical), we recommend
that benches ,be cut every 4 feet as fill is placed. Each bench shalLbe'a minimum,of 10 feet wide
with a minimum of2 percent gradient into the slope.
IV. If fi II areas are constructed on slopes greater than 5 to I ,we recommend that. thc toe of all areas to
receive fill be keyed a minimum of24 inches into underlying dense material. Xey,depths 3re to be
observed and approved by a representative of GeoSolutions, Inc. Sub,drainsshaILbe.placed in the
keyway and benches as required. See Detail A: Key and Bench with Backdraill.
H. Drainage
I. During grading, a representative ofGeoSolutions, Inc. should evaluate the need for a sub-drain or
back-drain system. Areas of observed seepage should be provided with sub-surface drains to
release the hydrostatic pressures. Sub-surface drainage facilities may include gravel blankets,
rock tilled trenches or Multi-Flow systems or equal. The drain system should ,discharge in a non-
erosive manner into an approved drainage area.
II. All tinal grades should be provided with a positive drainage"gradient away from foundations.
Final grades should provide for rapid removal of surface water.runoff. Punding of water should
not be allowed on building pads or adjacent to' foundations. Final. grading should be the
responsibility of the contractor, general Civil Engil~eer, or architect.
III. Concentrated surface water runoff within or iillmediately.adjacenttotheSite should be conveyed
in pipes or in lined channels to discharge areas that are relatively level or that'are adequately
protected against erosion.
iv. Water from roof downspouts should be conveyed in solid pipes that discharge in controlled
drainage localities. Surface drainage gradients should be planned to prevent ponding and promote
drainage of surface water away from building foundations, edges of pavements and sidewalks.
For soil. areas we recommend that a minimum of 4 percent gradient be maintained.
v. Attention should be paid by the contractor to erosion protection of soil surfaces adjacent to the
edges of roads, curbs and sidewalks, and in other areas where hard edges of structures may cause
concentrated flow of surface water runoff. Erosion resistant matting such as Miramat, or other
similar products, may be considered for lining drainage channels.
VI. Sub-drains should be placed in established drainage courses and potential seepage areas. The
location of sub-drains should be determined after a review of the grading plan. The sub-drain
outlets should extend into suitable facilities or connect to the proposed storm drain system or
existing drainage control facilities. The outlet pipe should consist of a non-perforated pipe the
same diameter as the perforated pipe.
I. Maintenance
i. Maintenance of slopes is important to their long-term performance. Precautions that can be taken
include planting with appropriate drought-resistant vegetation as recommended by a landscape
chitect, and not over-irrigating, a primary source of surficial failures.
11. Propel1y owners should be made aware that over-watering of slopes is detrimental to long term
stability of slopes.
J. Undcrground Faeilitics Construction
!. rhc.attention of contractur:;, particularly thc underground , contractors; should be drawn to thc
"tate of California Construction Safety Orders for "E"cavations, 'frenches, Earthwork." Trenchcs
or excavations greater than 5 feet in depth should be shored or ,sloped back in ,accordance with
OSHA Regulations prior to entry.
ii. Bedding is defined as material placed in a trench up to 1 footabove.a utility pipe,andbackfili is
all material placed in the trench above the bedding. Unless, concrete bedding is, required around
utility pipes, free-draining sand should be used as bedding. Sand to be used' as bedding.should be
te,ted in our laboratory to verify its suitability and to measure 'itscompaction ,characteristics.
Sand bedding should be compacted by mechanicai means to ,achieve at least 90 percent relative
density based on ASTM 01557-91.
111. On-site inorganic soils, or approved import, may be used as utility trench backfill. Proper
compaction of trench backfill will be necessary under and adjacent to structural, fill, building
foundations,concrete,slabs, and vehicle pavements. In these areas,backfiILshould:be conditioncd
with water (or allowed to dry); to produce a soil water content ,of about 2 to J 'percmtabovc the
optimum value and placed in horizontal layers, each not exceeding.8 'inches .in' thickness bdore
compaction. Each layer should be, compacted to at least 90 perccnt relativcdensity. based on
ASTM 01557-91. The top lift of trench backfill under vehicle,pavements should bccompacted to
the requirements given in report under Preparation of Paved Areas'lor vehicle'pavement sub-
grades. Trench walls must be kept moist prior to and during'backfill placement.
K. Completion of Work
I. After the completion of work, a report should be prepared by the Soils Engineer retained to
provide such services in accordance with Section 3317 of the California Building Code (CBC).
The report should including locations and elevations of field density tests, summaries of field and
laboratory tests, other substantiating data, and comments on any changes made during grading
and their effect on the recommendations made in the approved Soils Engineering Report.
ii. Soils Engineers shall submit a statement that, to the best of their knowledge, the work within their
area of responsibilities is in accordance with the approved soils engineering report and applicable
provisions within Chapter 33 of the CBC.
FILL OVER NATURAL SLOPE
RECONTOUR, SL.OPE TO DRAIN
OR PROVIDE PAVED DRAINAGE
SWALES AND DOWN DRAINS
H
-
-
-
-
-
-
~\.OY'E.
,,,,,,,,,,",,
-
--
-
-
--
-_..11t.'L _-
--x:,lA1-'[l:.l'-"---
_-_n"\"pJ)t. _
-- N~~~v'. -- 0
-- -- ~lAc;... -/I ::-)' BENCH:VSRTICAL4FT.MINIMUM
__ -- /. HORIZONTAI.: 6 FT. MINIMUM
- /
"/. BACKCUT NOT STEEPER
THAN 1:1 SEE DRAIN
- DETAIL BELOW
-
-
-
--
-
-
-
*
/
~ HaORIS rrMm1
, FILL OVER CUTSLOPE
H
~..,p~"'i- ..-
~'\Yv ..-_
_........~ ..-
........ _p:P\..~.,w.. ,:_
_- ~s\}{t ..-
........ ~~o-.J'f.. :..,......--::
....... ~'t't'........._
-;/
- /
- /
-- /
,,-
" "
.--/ "
- "
"
.2 FT. MIN. KEY
DEPTH AT TOE;
TIP KEY I FT. NOMINAL
OR 4% INTO SLOPE
--
SEE DR4lN
DET AIL,1lELO\l
BENCH: VERTICAL 4 FT. MnID.ruM
HORIZONTAL 6 FT. MINIMUM
/
*
/
/
c,s<
r- HaOR IS FT. Mm. 1
BACXa.rr NOT
STEEPER THAN 1:1
NOTES:
1 .1F OVERFILLING AND ClTITD'lO BACK. TO GRADE IS
ADOFTED, IS FT. MIN. FILL WIDlH MAY BE REDUCED TO 12
FT. MIN. IN NO CASE SHOULD 1HE Fn.J. WIDlH BE LESS THAN
112 THE HEIGHT OF FILL IlEMAD'lING.
1 - BACKDRAIN AS RECOMMEDNED BY GEOTECHNICAL
CONSULTANT PER BUTTRESS BACKDRAIN DETAlL.
DRAIN DETAIL
GEOFABRJC: MINlMUM
IS% OPEN AREA 005-40-70;
1 fT. MnmruM OVERLAP
-L
".
TYPICAL~
XEY
OEPTIl
GeoSolutions, Inc.
220 High Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 543-8539 Fax: (805) 543-2171
KEY AND BENCH WITH BACKDRAIN
DETAIL
A
SL05014-1 EQFau1t output
***********************
* )*
* EQFAULT *
* *
* version 3.00 *
>. *
***********************
11hquake
ce
DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM'DIGITIZED FAULTS
.alysis
1
DATE: 09-08-2005
Mixed Use
!st Run Ana1ysi s
:: CGSFLTE.DAT
15.1130
120.5892
) mi
~: 3) Boore et a1. (1997) Horiz. -'NEHRP D (250)
!dian, s=sigma): M 'Number of sigmas: 0.0
: cd_2drp
5.00 km campbell SSR : campbell SHR:
[ZONTAL ACCELERATION
): CGSFLTLDAT
(km): 0.0
page 1
I
,
,
I
[
I
I
I
I
I
!I
SL05014-1 EQFault output
EQFAULT SUMMARY
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IESTIMATED'MAX; EARTHQUAKE EVENT
1-------------------------------
I MAXIMUM I PEAK lEST. SITE
!EARTHQUAKEI SITE IINTENSITY
I MAG.(Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC.
================================ ============== ========== ==========1=========
LOS 0505 O.O( 0.0) 7.0 0.750 I XI
SAN LUIS RANGE (5. Margin) 0.4( 0.6) 7.2 0.829 I XI
CAS MALIA (orcutt Frontal Fault) 12.9( 20.7) 6.5 0.202 I VIII
RINCONADA 14.2( 22.8) 7.5 0.262 I IX
HOSGRI 14.8( 23.8) 7.5 0.254 I IX
LIONS HEAD 15.5( 24.9) 6.60.186 I VIII
LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE , 28.8( 46.4) 6.9 0.136 VIII
SAN JUAN 29.4( 47.3) 7.1 0.122 VII
NORTH CHANNEL SLOPE 34.6( 55.7) 7.4 0.154 VIII
SAN ANDREAS Cho-Moj M-1b-1 40.3( 64.9) 7.8 0.139 VIII
SAN ANDREAS - Whole M-1a 40.3( 64.9) 8.0 0.154 'VIII
SAN ANDREAS - cho 1 ame M-1c-1 40.3 ( 64.9) 7.3 0.107 VII
SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture M-2a 40.3( 64.9) 7.8 0.139 VIII
SANTA YNEZ (west) 43.1( 69.3) 7.1 0:091 VII
SAN ANDREAS - carrizo M-1c-2 43.2( 69.5) 7.4 0.107 VII
SAN ANDREAS - Parkfield 47.1( 75.8) 6.5 0.062 VI
M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA 58.5( 94.1) 7.2 0.092 VII
SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) 61.5( 98.9) 6.2 0.043 VI
GREAT VALLEY 14 64.8( 104.3) 6.4 0.056 VI
CHANNEL IS. THRUST (Eastern) 68.5( 110.2) 7.5 0.096 VII
SANTA YNEZ (East) 69.1( 111.2) 7.1 0.063 VI
GREAT VALLEY 13 69.8( 112.3) 6.5 0.056 VI
RED MOUNTAIN 70.7( 113.8) 7.0 0.072 VI
BIG PINE 73.9( 118.9) 6.9 0.054 VI
PLEITO THRUST 74.1( 119.2) 7.0 0.069 VI
OAK RIDGE MID-CHANNEL STRUCTURE 74.8( 120.3)6.6 0.056 VI
SANTA ROSA ISLAND 74.8( 120.4) 7.1 0.072 VII
SANTA CRUZ ISLAND 76.8( 123.6) 7.0 0.067 VI
VENTURA - PITAS POINT 79.2( 127.4) 6.9 0.062 VI
GREAT VALLEY 12 82.4( 132.6) 6.3 0.044 VI
OAK RIDGE(Blind Thrust Offshore) 82.9( 133.4) 7.1 0.067 VI
WHITE WOLF 84.3( 135.7) 7.3 0.073 VII
ANACAPA-DUME 90.5( 145.7) 7.5 0.077 VII
GREAT VALLEY 11 91.0( 146.5) 6.4 0.043 VI
SAN CAYETANO 92.3( 148.6) 7.0 0.058 VI
GARLOCK (west) 96.6( 155.4) 7.3 0.054 VI
OAK RIDGE (onshore) 98.4( 158.4) 7.0 0.055 VI
*******************************************************************************
ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
APPROXIMATE
DISTANCE
mi (km)
page 2
SL05014-1 EQFault output
-END OF SEARCH-
37 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
THE LOS OSOS FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
IT IS ABOUT 0.0 MILES (0.0 km) AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.8294 g
page 3
PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE
BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP D (250) 1
I . II A I
25Yffi 50Yffi
I · I .1 ... I
75 rs .100 rs
100
90
.--.... 80
~
0
......... 70
>-
:t:::
.0 60
co
.0
0 50
l-
n.
Q) 40
()
c
co 30
"0
Q)
Q)
() 20
x
ill
10
0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50
Acceleration (g)
Job Name SL05014-1
SAMPLE 11
SOil TYPE (UCSC)
UNIT WEIGHT (pel)
TOP DEPTH (8)
ENDING DEPTH (ft)
GROUNDWATER 1ft)
FAULT
MAGNITUDE
I\wtfg -
CPT-l Determinlsti~ Analysis
SOIL PROFILE
2 3
4
8M CL 8M CL SP-SM
100 ',~ 'l7.ij ;J.~~;"~~:;.;, 100 110 115
';;:3;'{o ..H' ;;~:'15.::~; .'.,<,. 24::Ti; :';{42.;,:
13.5 15 24 42 48
14.5
GROUND MOTION STUDY
los 050$ Delerministic DBE
7
0.83
Import from Cone Plot
Depth
(ft)
0.16
0.33
0.49
0,66
0.82
0.98
1.15
1.31
1.48
1.64
1,8
1.97
2.13
2.3
2.46
2.62
2.79
2.95
3.12
3.28
3.44
3.61
3.77
3.94
4,1
4.27
4.43
4.59
4.76
4.92
5.09
5.25
5.41
5.58
5.74
5.91
6.07
6.23
6,4
8.56
6.73
6.89
7.05
..
(taf)
11.25
8,34
9.83
14.44
19.77
27.26
31.36
35.19
36,35
33,63
34.27
37.93
40.50
42.47
45.13
47.82
51.54
51.43
48.11
45.56
45.23
46.84
46.99
45.27
44.28
45.21
43.47
41.29
43.80
45.06
45.93
48.91
53.60
59.72
66.39
73.59
BO.57
85.92
87.98
8M9
80.17
67.76
61.14
f,
(tsn
0.074
0.068
0,068
0.124
0.168
0.206
0.228
0.257
0.263
0.259
0.266
0.288'
0,306
0,334
0.375
0.441
0.459
0.456
0.415
0.296
0.267
0.237
0.289
0.299
0.312
0.319
0.297
0.260
0.299
0.340
0.368
0.405
0.452
0.506
0.567
0.633
0.704
0.760
0.605
0.701
0.678
0.577
0.553
Normalized
. 'i.Co;';,
5
Soil Profile
~ 00 NOT ENTERI
GeoSolutions, Inc.
LiquiratflonAnalysis-CPT
TOTAL
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
(in)
5,06
Behavior sis,
.. (CklHk. eRR,.. F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
(tsr) . SETTLEMENT
2.24 47.56 0,0896 1.19 0.9996 0.5393 0.20 0.08
2.97 46.66 0.0890 1.19 0.9992 0.5391 0,20 0,09
2.74 SO.88 0.0922 1.19 0.9989 0.5369 0.20 0,08
2.08 56.74 0.0970 1.19 0.9985 0.5367 0.21 0,08
1.71 64.02 0.1044 1.19 0.9981 0.5385 0.23 0.06
1.41 72.52 0.1155 1.19 0.9977 0.5383 0.26 0.06
1.32 78.11 0.1243 1.19 0.9973 0.5381 0.28 0,06
1,26 84.14 0.1354 1.19 0.9969 0.5379 0.30 0.05
1.25 65.83 0.1366 1.19 0,9965 0.5376 0.31 0.05
1,30 62.70 0.1326 1.19 0.9962 0.5374 0.29 0.05
1,30 83.93 0.1350 1.19 0.9958 0.5372 0,30 0.05
1.25 69.27 0.1462 1.19 0.9954 0.5370 0.32 0.05
1,22 93.37 0.1557 1.19 0.9950 0.5368 0,35 0.05
1.21 97.25 0.1655 1.19 0.9946 0.5366 0.37 0,Q5
1,20 102.69 0.1607 1.19 0.9943 0.5364 0.40 004
1.21 109.51 0.2021 1.19 0.9939 0.5362 0.45 0,04
1.18 114.77 0.2206 1.19 0.9935 0.5360 0.49 0,04
~.16 114.46 0.2195 1.19 0.9931 0.5358 0.49 0,04
1.19 108.40 0.1985 1.19 0.9927 0.5356 0.44 0,04
1.15 98.69 0.1694 1.19 0.9924 0.5354 0.38 0.05
1.13 96.55 0.1637 1.19 0.9920 0.5352 0,36 0.05
1.09 96,86 0.1645 1.19 0.9916 0.5350 0.37 0.05
1.13 100.06 0.1732 1.19 0.9912 0.5348 0.39 0,04
1.15 98.49 0.1688 1.19 0.9908 0.5345. 0.38 0.05
1.17 98.05 0.1677 1.19 0,9904 0.5343 0.37 0.05
1.17 99,62 0.1719 1.19 0,9900 0.5341 0.38 0.05
1.17 96.22 0.1628 1.19 0.9897 0.5339 0.36 0.05
1.17 91.34 0.1509 1.19 0.9893 0.5337 0.34 0,05
1,11 96.73 0.1642 1.19 0.9669 05335 0.37 0.05
1.18 100.63 0.1748 1.19 0.9665 0.5333 0.39 0.04
1.19 103.27 0.1824 1.19 0.9881 0.5331 0.41 0.05
1.18 108.85 0.1999 1.19 0.9876 0.5329 0.45 0,04
1.16 115.92 0.2249 1.19 0.9874 0.5327 050 0,04
1.13 124.49 0.2594 1.19 0.9870 0.5325 0.58 0,04
1.11 133.80 0.3026 1.19 0.9866 0.5323 0,68 0.03
1,09 143.58 0.3553 1.19 0.9862 0.5321 0,80 0,02
1,08 153.06 0.4135 1.19 0.98se 0.5319 6.93 0.01
1.07 159.77 0.4593 1.19 0.9855 0.5317 1.03 001
1.07 162.09 1.19 0.9851 0,5314 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.05 155.31 0.4284 1.19 0.9847 0.5312 0,96 0.01
1,08 145.49 0,3664 1.19 0.9643 0.5310 0.62 0.02
1.13 126.65 0.2689 1.19 0.9839 0.5308 0.60 0.03
1.17 117.52 0.2309 1.19 0.9836 0.5306 0.52 0,04
Page 1 of6
:;,."
~~\~\'~~ ~
;~._; 4,02i2:':';:,.66.52',;::.:;j 131.0
r~i.'t:i,:;~}('i,;fE:~i};~~j ~~:~
~if~~'~~,',ii:~~i ~!I
t;,.:.2..15,~"'l:<i.-78.05'!;;4 459.0
~!1~'~
1.'.:'1"..1.92 ::.~'" ~,".120.48.,j 574.0
:':,'~ 1.89:\::"'1::1131.61'1;~~ 591.0
!:~;t~:~~;~~::(;?~:~::}j ~:g
!-';"'162':'~;""r"151'20'f;1 6400
I;~',: ,;.~~'r:::' . iA~ .
:'.r:1.60,~':;;.,.,)..147.49 '11 656.0'
i::,:f;'t~i:l\;~ii/~E:~f~ E:g
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
'0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,
16.0
33.0
49.0
56.0
82.0
98.0
115.0
131.0
148.0
164.0
180.0
197.0
213.0
230.0
246.0
262.0
279.0
295.0
312.0
328.0
344,0
361.0
377.0
394.0
410.0
427.0
443.0
459.0
476.0
492.0
509.0
525.0
541.0
556.0
574.0
591.0
607.0
623.0
640.0
656.0
673.0
689.0
705.0
2.3810
2.5388
2.4940
2,3386
2.2185
2.0727
2.0133
1.9719
1.9563
2.0008
1.9966
1.9547
1.9312
1.9231
1.9156
1.9232
1.8684
1.8877
1.9034
1.8511
1.8302
1.7624
1.8266
1.8572
1.8810
1.8745
1,8605
1.8797
1.8775
1.8921
1.9007
1.6676
1._
1.6344
1.8054
1.7781
1.7573
1.7441
1.7507
1.7225
1.7664
1.6287
1.8837
GcoSolutioos.loc.
Liquir.cdoll An.ly,i,. CPT
1m art from Cone Plot Normalized Soil Profile Behavior
Depth q. f. ;,Ca./ K, (q~lNk. CRRu F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
Cft) (tsl) clan .'....;-. ( (tst) SETTLEMENT
7.22 5743 0.516 ;,!;,_1.7,1 ,92.92::.. 722.0 0 722.0 1,9084 1.20 11122 0.2079 1.19 0.9832 0.5304 0.47 0.04
7.36 54.65 0.496 '.1.69: i::~ 67.78 736.0 0 736.0 1.9291 1.22 10667 0.1935 1.19 0.9628 0.5302 0,44 0.04
7,55 53.04 0.473 !.~.1.6F . 83.92 ,,(.; 755.0 0 755.0 1.9407 1.23 103.21 0.1822 1.19 0.9824 O,s:lOO 0.41 0.05
7.71 52.23 0.459 1.66 .i',:, ::'.:81.78,;;:,~ 771.0 0 771.0 1.9460 1.24 101.04 0.1759 1.19 0.9820 0.5298 0.40 0,04
7.87 53.84 0.471 : .~-1.64 '.83.44 "::j 787.0 0 787.0 1.9379 1.23 102.36 0.1797 1.19 0.9616 0.5296 0,<0 0,04
'.04 57.50 0.493 i, '1.62~:: . ..~.. 86.16.":;_': 604,0 0 604,0 1.9134 1.20 105.95 0.1906 1.19 0.9813 0.5294 0.43 0.05
',2 63.51 0.552 ,,_1.61', ," 96:42~' .1 820.0 0 620.0 1.6660 1.16 113.39 0.2156 1.19 0.9809 0.5292 0.49 0,04
',.'
6.37 74.56 0.665 c,1.59' ...~' 112.08,/;~ 837.0 0 837.0 1.8418 1.14 127.59 0.2732 1.19 0.9805 0.5290 0,62 0,04
'.53 84.61 0.796 ,;~1:58 ,::::,:125.95~'--:~1 653.0 0 853.0 1.6182 1.12 141.08 0.3412 1.19 0.9801 0.5288 0.77 0.02
8.69 92.69 0.918 \!," '~:: (~:',:;~-' :~~:~.\; :::g 0 869.0 1.8052 1.11 152.13 0.4074 1.19 0.9797 0.5286 0.92 0.01
',B6 98.94 1.012 0 886.0 1.7982 1.11 159.74 0.4591 1.19 0.9793 0.5284 1.04 0.01
',02 103.73 1.073 ':'>:_-1.53: _".~ 150.16.,c' 902.0 0 902.0 1.7895 1.10 165.04 1.19 0.9790 0.5282 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.19 108.40 1.136 "':'~'1.52e:'..155.46;) 919.0 0 919.0 1.7824 1.09 170,09 1.19 0.9786 0.5279 NO LIQUEFACTION
'.35 113.44 1.241 ~,)~~;~'~;_~;,:;: ~;~ ~:~:: :'~1 :;;:g 0 935.0 1.7842 1.10 176,66 1.19 0.9782 0.5277 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.51 117.69 1.329 0 951.0 1.7853 1.10 181.87 1.19 0.9778 0.5275 NO LIQUEFACTION
'.68 121.31 1.226 ,'.1:48 ;',,;~ '189.52'_", 968.0 0 968.0 1.7445 1.07 181.02 1.19 0.9774 0.5273 NO LIQUEFACTION
',84 124.63 1.247 ;~i;t'-'~::~<:L:~.~~:~';;;'11:1~0 0 984.0 1.7356 1,06 183.41 1.19 0.9771 0.5271 NO liQUEFACTION
10.01 120.44 1.321 0 1001.0 1.7770 1,09 180.43 1.19 0.9767 0.5269 NO liQUEFACTION
10.17 129.06 1.467 '1A4 -,','/. -175.95 ,:; 1017.0 0 1017.0 1.7696 1,09 190.92 1.19 0.9763 0.5267 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.33 134.00 1.651 ..;:',';,1A3, ,,-;'~.; )81.26 ~~:i 1033.0 0 1033.0 1.7861 1.10 198.78 1.19 0.9759 0.5265 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.5 136.57 1.744 ~ir~jg"l..,j*:E;~ jE~ 0 1050.0 1.7855 1.10 203.82 1.19 0.9755 0.5263 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.66 143.92 1.828 0 1066.0 1.7796 1,09 209.29 1.19 0.9751 0.5261 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.83 148.53 1.913 0 10B3.0 1.7773 1,09 213.98 1.19 0.9747 0.5259 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.99 150.25 1.986 0 1099.0 1.7846 1.10 215.88 1.19 0.9744 0.5257 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.15 153.22 2.060 ;fy~:~;,;~,:'::):: ~~:~~ 2~ ~~~:g 0 1115.0 1.7866 1.10 218.84 1.19 0.9740 0.5255 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.32 156.52 2.103 0 1132.0 1.7825 1,09 221.29 1.19 0.9736 0.5253 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.48 157.57 2.195 ~,,:..1.36 ".::> 202.19 ~I.: ,1148.0 0 1148.0 1.7945 1.10 222.95 1.19 0.9732 0.5251 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.65 162.90 2.338 i1;!.F.:'J:(,..~~:~:;1 ji~~ 0 1165.0 1.7969 1.10 229.15 1.19 0.9728 0.5248 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.81 165.49 2.437 0 1181.0 1.8032 1.11 232.19 1.19 0.9725 0.5246 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.98 169.09 2.473 0 119B.0 1.7969 1.10 234.56 1.19 0,9721 0.5244 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.14 177.37 2.682 0 1214.0 1.7969 1.10 244.42 1.19 0.9717 0.5242 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.3 191.28 2.877 !..} 1.31" ,\'.,. ,237.12:"} 1230.0 0 1230.0 1.7763 1,09 258.40 1.19 0.9713 0.5240 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.47 190.79 2.947 ;:.'1.30,;;,:: :234.90J 1247.0 0 1247.0 1.7680 1.10 257.92 1.19 0.9709 0.5236 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.63 182.82 2.808 ~. :_1.29 , 223.~ ~'; 1263.0 0 1263.0 1.7992 1.11 247.38 1.19 0.9706 0.5236 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.8 169.90 2.409 ,J, 0 1280.0 1.7945 1.10 227.66 1.19 0.9702 0.5234 NO LIQUEFACTION
~,:':1.29.', '" 206.46"'-'~: 1280.0
12.96 139.80 1.813 \'~'.i:'1.28 ';;' '-;'. ,169.83 ;~.~ 1296.0 0 1296.0 1.8236 1.12 189.83 1.19 0.9698 0.5232 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.12 84.70 2.039 \,.-~.,1.27 :~.}.', ,,101.66 '..~ 1312.0 0 1312.0 2.1716 1.60 162.65 1.19 09694 0.5230 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.29 47.61 1.938 (~'::,1.28:;' 56.78i::; 1329.0 0 1329.0 2.5127 2.83 160.89 1.19 0.9690 0.5228 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.45 33.69 1.606 i.:_:-. .~,1.25' "'I~' . :39.94 :~'; 1345.0 0 1345.0 2.6454 3.62 144.44 0.36D2 1.19 0,9686 0,5226 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.62 31.37 1.405 ,,-:: 1~25 ..,':: , ,36.93.':,:; 1363.7 0 1363.7 2.6149 3.42 126.29 0.2673 1.19 0.9682 0,5224 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.78 32.15 1,068 ~'<:1.24,:.',.'" 37.61,,:'(t 1361.3 0 1381.3 2.5797 3.20 120.53 0.2428 1.19 0.9679 0.5222 0.55 0.04
13.94 32.89 0.863 : ,;~'1.23, :::; ;:38.23-)'; 1398.9 0 1398.9 2.5060 2.80 10J.91 0.1940 1.19 0.9675 0.5220 0.44 0,04
14.11 30.34 0.645 ~.'Hr::;, ...~~:::;~ i:~! 0 1417.6 2.4769 2.65 92.~ 0.1548 1.19 0.9671 0.5218 0.35 0.05
14.27 28.74 0.458 0 1435.2 2.4213 2:.40 79.21 0_1262 1.19 0.9667 0.5215 0.29 0.05
14.44 27.89 0.420 0 1453,9 2.4200 2.40 76.18 0,1211 1.19 0,9663 0.5213 0.28 0,06
14.8 29.71 0.553 i:;:'::1.20}-::)" 33.74(;"~ 1471.5 6 1465.3 2.4542 2.55 85.96 0.13~1 1.19 0,9660 0.5234 0.32 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
14.76 33.36 0.657 !~j~~~~it~ 16 1472.9 2.4298 2,44 92.15 0.1528 1.19 0.9656 0.5267 0,35 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
14.93 51.-'12 0,862 27 1481.0 2.2456 1.79 103.77 0.1839 1.19 0.9652 0.5302 0.41 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
15.09 111.47 1.079 37 1487.0 1.8276 1.13 141.68 0.3445 1.19 0.9648 0.5334 0.77 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
15.26 145.35 0.982 47 1493.4 1.6386 100 163.52 1.19 0.9644 0.5368 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.42 175.56 1.341 57 1499.4 ,1.6131 1,00 197.14 1.19 0.9640 0.5400 NO L1aUEFACTION
15.58 185.84 1.425 67 1505.4 1.5970 1,00 208.24 1.19 0.9637 0.5432 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.75 194.98 1.516 7B 1511.8 1.5868 1,00 218.02 1.19 0.9633 0,5465 NO L1aUEFACTION
15.91 219.64 1.877 ',<..1.16._'",.:..,245.11; :11605.8 .. 1517.8 1,5805 1,00 245.11 1.19 0.9629 0.5496 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.08 236.51 1.822 ;~:::1.18\V':':"263~3a):"!11622.8 99 1524.2 1.5263 1,00 263.36 1.19 0.9625 0.5529 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.24 216.02 0.206 ;,:.;:1.18' :_';~ 240.09;) 1638.8 109 1530.2 1.1080 1,00 240.09 1.19 0,9621 0.5559 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.4 185.77 1,556 ~:\.1.17 }:~:. 206.06' ; 1654.8 11. 1536.2 1.6274 1.00 206.06 1.19 0.9618 0.5589 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.57 17.79 1.232 i;:~.1.H":< 19.69 d_ 1671.8 12. 1542.6 2.9766 6.49 127.74 0.2739 1.19 0.9614 0.5621 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page2of6
Depth
In}
16.73
16.9
17.06
17.22
17.39
17.55
17.72
17.88
18.04
18.21
18.37
18.54
18.7
18.86
19.03
19.19
19.36
19.52
19.69
19.85
20.01
20.18
20.34
20.51
20.67
20.83
21
21.16
21.33
21.49
21.65
21.82
21.98
22.15
22.31
220417
22,64
22.'
22.97
23.13
23.29
23.46
23.62
23.79
23.95
24.11
24.28
24.44
24.61
24.77
24.93
25.1
25.26
25.43
25.59
25.75
25.92
28.08
art from Cone Pial
..
(tsf)
161.22
144.11
140.10
119.73
210.22
216.25
207.14
172.54
154.13
139.29
142.88
124.28
110.88
105.87
114.95
06,50
74.92
90.01
112.62
110.60
00.04
79.74
64.36
78.31
81.56
82.80
109.81
105.35
109.65
113.01
93.38
91.20
65.69
59.15
53.47
80.81
83.51
88.05
.....
86.53
81.95
64.64
102.25
82.54
55.47
81.20
73.29
63.77
70.85'
59.28
61.83
107.52
94.81
44.95
27.69
21.35
16.67
16.70
f,
(tsf)
0.918
1.576
2.072
2.526
3.078
1.877
1.317
1.153
1.228
1.150
1.104
0.890
0,929
0.633
0.956
0.675
1.003
0.609
0.765
0.671
0.480
0.<63
0.606
0.816
0.757
1.057
1.362
0.930
0.835
0,'"
0.763
0.813
0.532
0,350
0.973
1.451
0,904
0.496
0.363
0.626
0.703
0.719
1.019
1.060
1.224
1.298
1.467
0.532
0,650
0.701
1.175
2.504
1.931
1.427
0.891
0.802
0.733
0.950
Normalized
cQ >.QC1N
Soil Profile
GeoSolutions, Inc.
Liquiratllon Analysis. CPT
Behavior
Kc (lk1H}cs
I".
1.00 178.11
1.10 174.60
1.18 182.24
1.38 181.20
1.09 250.91
1.00 236.57
1.00 226.14
1.00 186.Q1
1.02 171.43
1.05 159.11
1.03 160.14
1.05 141.38
1.11 132.74
1.06 120.78
1.10 135.95
1.16 108.02
1.40 112.41
1.12 108.15
1.07 126.44
1.05 124.12
1.06 107.93
1.13 95.72
1.16 103.43
1.29 106.45
1.23 106.18
1.34 116.72
1.22 140.99
1.14 126.19
1.10 126.47
1.10 130.00
1.16 113.06
1.19 112.94
1.29 86.07
1.25 76.61
1.89 104.51
1.54 . 128.40
1.28 110.55
1.11 100.50
1.00 92.08
1.16 103.26
1.22 102.63
1.21 104.75
1.19 124.08
1.36 1;~.41
2.05 115.69
1.48 121.87
1.70 126.15
p3 85.63
1.31 93.65
1.52 91.12
1.81 112.65
1.54 166.42
1.53 145.68
2.83 127.20
3.82 105.65
4.92 104.62
iU8 103.57
7.08 117.20
;-< -.(:
..~o.... .
..~;;1.17;-.,-".,. .178.11, ;11687.8
i';( '.t;i'~158.88<~ 1704.8
f1.16" '154.16-:;:~ 1720.8
:.:. 'U6 ':'i' '131.50"C,~ 1736.8
..1.16r',-.., 230.41.~:J 1753.8
~"<~'~,..' ~':5":':":.;".'-':"( ~~:~~'~\~'~1 ~~:::
1ea.01 ,.) 1802.8
':1:15~~.:'.. ," 167.63'::11818.8
i;'~: 1;15'.ih~f;1_51.19).~ 1835.8
';"~:1.15,. "..-: ':'; 154.80 ',~j 1851.8
:..;":~:~:j;.;~~~V~~~f::~rc:i ~=::
;~'::,U4"-'\;" '114:05::;'! 1900.8
:",Iji;']\~~~~ jE~
'. ,- U3 120.18 ;,',j 1983.8
~,;~1.13,::,...., 117.81.:,< 1999.8
'~:"'1~ 13-: -L)_.r 102.11';-';~ 2015.8
~jj!~":~~l~!
/:,::1.1 { :.-V~,'.114.89;.\,j 2147.8
. 1.11 ,:--:1.18.21':-:,-,2163.8
,/,:-1.10~'/tC":: 97.50,/:'~~ 2179.8
~.~_..1.10 """,95.05..,_,2196.8
::.\:1:10'..,;:' 68.35,::,;i 2212.8
:;:/~: ~~':~;l~.::,:..:~:~~\&{ ~~::
.-1.10 ':-"""-"83.64,,/2261.8
:1!~J'~!~
>:':;~:g:;?;: t.:' ~::_~~~J ;~::
:,1,07. .:.:.:;'.-74~37'r::; 2446.1
:~'.);~:~~.~~~{}t~..~::~;;'.-'A ;=:~
r~j;~t';)i:~~Ji: I~I
, .'~'1~05 : ;,. '~2(26~i/; 2607.8
'.:i: 1.05 ". '16.77 -',~ 2626.5
";{05':,.~.:'.",:16.56 iL:: 2644.1
G,
I-
139
150
100
170
100
190
201
211
221
232
241
2.2
262
272
203
293
303
313
324
334
344
354
364
37.
36.
39.
406
410
4"
436
...
457
467
477
407
497
50.
610
629
639
54'
559
569
500
690
BOO
610
620
631
641
051
061
671
602
692
702
713
723
1548.6
1555.0
1561.1
1587.1
1573.5
1579.5
1585.9
1591.9
1597.9
1604.3
1610.3
1616.7
1622.7
1628.7
1635.1
1641.1
1647.5
1653.6
1659.9
1666.0
1672.0
1678.4
1684.4
1690.8
1696.8
1702.8
1709.2
1715.2
1721.6
1727.6
1733.6
1740.0
1746.0
1752.4
1758.5
1764.5
1770.9
1776.9
1783.3
1789.3
1795.3
1801.7
1807.7
1814.1
1820.1
1827.7
1835.8
1843.4
1851.5
1859.2
1866.8
1874.9
1882.5
1890.6
1898.2
1905.8
1913.9
1921.5
1.5630
1.7693
1.6926
2.0545
1.7752
1.5961
1.5151
1.5895
1.6777
1.7216
1.6951
1.7212
1.8035
1.7313
1.7908
1.8721
2.0687
1.6230
1.7456
1.7233
1.7284
1.8325
1.8647
1.9888
1.9442
2.0277
1.9323
1.8450
1.7919
1.7904
1.8673
1.8993
1.9911
1,9565
2.2797
2.1416
1.9854
1,0000
1.7212
1.8691
1.9320
1.9171
1.6977
2~0414
2.3294
2.1114
2.2118
2.0194
2.0062
2.1363
2.2544
2.1446
2.1407
2.5121
2.6758
2.8158
2.9475
3.0293
Page3of6
CRRu
0.4546
o 3428
0.2975
0.2438
0.3137
0.1972
0.2121
0.1976
0.2770
0.2578
0.1969
0.1616
0.1829
0.1922
0.1913
0.2279
0.3406
0.2669
0.2681
0.2843
0.2144
0.2140
0.1435
0.1218
0.1861
0.2769
0.2057
0.ii44
0.1526
0.182:4
0.1805
0.1869
0.2577
0.2193
0.2240
0.2483
0.2667
0.1384
0.1564
0.1504
0.2130
0.3675
0.2714
0.1897
0.1665
0.1833
0.2297
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19.
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
0.9610 0.5650
0.9606 0.5682
0.9602 0.5711
0.9598 0.5739
0.9595 0.5769
0.9591 0.5798
0.9587 0.5827
0.9583 0.5855
0.9579 0.5883
0.9575 0.5911
0.9572 0.5938
0.9568 0.5967
0.9564 0.5993
0.9560 0.6019
0.9556 0.6047
0.9553 0.6073
0.9549 0.6100
0.9545 0.6125
0.9541 0.6152
0.9537 0.6176
0.9533 0.6201
0.9529 0.6227
0.9526 0.6251
0.9522 0.6276
0.9518 0.6300
0.9514 0.6324
0.9510 06346
0.9507 0.6371
0.9503 0.6396
0.9499 0.6418
0.9495 0.6441
0.9491 0.6465
0.9487 0.6487
0.9464 0.6510
0.9480 0.6532
0.9476 0.6553
0.9472 0.6576
0.9468 0.6597
0.9464 0.6619
0.9461 0.6640
0.9457 0.6661
0.9453 0.6682
0.9449 0.6703
0.9445 0.6724
0.9442 0.6744
0.9438 0.6762
0.9434 0.6761
0.9430 0.6799
0.9426 0.6818
0.9422 0.6836
0.9419 0.6853
0.9415 0.6871
0.9411 0.6888
0.9407 0.6906
0.9403 0.6923
0.9400 0.6939
0.9396 0.6956
0.9392 0.6972
F.S. LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO lIaUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.92 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.69 LIQUEFACTION
0.59 LIQUEFACTION
0.48 LIQUEFACTION
0.62 LIQUEFACTION
0.39 LIQUEFACTION
0.41 LIQUEFACTION
0.38 LIQUEFACTION
0.54 LIQUEFACTION
0.50 LIQUEFACTION
0.38 LIQUEFACTION
0.31 LIQUEFACTION
0.35 LIQUEFACTION
0.37 LIQUEFACTION
0.36 LIQUEFACTION
0.43 LIQUEFACTION
0.64 LIQUEFACTION
0.50 LIQUEFACTION
0.50 LIQUEFACTION
0.53 LIQUEFACTION
0.40 LIQUEFACTION
0.39 LIQUEFACTION
0.26 LIQUEFACTION
0.22 LIQUEFACTION
o 34 LIQUEFACTION
0.50 LiQUEFACTION
0.37 LIQUEFACTION
0.32 LIQUEFACTION
0.27 LIQUEFACTION
0.33 LIQUEFACTION
0.32 LIQUEFACTION
0.33 LIQUEFACTION
0.46 LIQUEFACTION
0.39 LIQUEFACTION
0.40 LIQUEFACTION
0.44 LIQUEFACTION
0.47 LIQUEFACTION
0.24 LIQUEFACTION
0.27 LIQUEFACTION
0.26 LIQUEFACTION
0.37 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.64 LIQUEFACTION
0.47 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
0.01
0.03
0,04
0,04
0.03
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.05
0,04
0.05
0,04
0,04
0.03
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.05
0,06
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.05
0,05
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.04
Depth
(ft.
26.25
26.41
26.57
26.74
26.9
27.07
27.23
27.4
27.56
27.72
27.89
28.05
28.22
28.38
28.54
28.71
28.87
29.04
29.2
29.38
29.53
29.69
29,86
30.02
30.18
30.35
30.51
30.86
30....
31
31.17
31.33
31.5
31.66
31.82
31.99
32.15
32.32
32.48
32.64
32.81
32.97
33.14
33.3
33.Jl6
33.63
33.79
33."
34.12
34.28
34.45
34.61
34.78
34.94
35.1
35.27
35.43
35.6
..
(tst)
20.28
17.03
18.28
19.37
19.10
19.49
21.12
28.28
30,80
37.32
25.85
28.86'
28.43
30.14
28.65
6Q.63
70.25
65.66
62.96
61.63
75.21
".n
61.46
62.60
61.49
55.22
51.40
55.41
57.76
58.44
57.92
56.49
57.48
56.81
56.42
56.72
55.71
54.91
52.95
48.16
45.31
42.86
43.64
42.23
42.90
49.71
43.97
36.15
31.17
26.10
24.72
25.61
22.79
20.91
18.17
18.99
18.97
19.06
f.
(tst)
0.691
0.563
0......
0.804
0.542
0.497
0.565
0.774
1.134
1.512
1.403
0.866
0.514
0.598
0.771
1.235
1.4...
1.995
1.915
2.827
2.890
2.963
2.749
2.016
1.709
1.917
2.023
2.423
2.514
2.866
2.601
2.441
2.541
2.420
2.381
2.555
2.529
2,630
3.224
2.987
2.435
1,930
1.986
1.805
1.667
1.371
1.305
1.301
1.319
1.182
0.978
0.950
0.969
0.847
0.704
0.755
0.730
1.045
" 1.05 '.y~:~ 20.07.~;:; 2662.8
;'.i~,1:,;'".~,:,i,:..,:'.' ,lHfH ~:~
U"t .18:75'~"": 2734.3
.'; 1.04.'. " .~ ..19.10\~,~; 2753.0
}1.03/f ~.! '20.65 :~:~.,:; 2770.6
:/",'0033'.,;:.:,: :';:27,60 ','.:; 2789.3
_ ~.3O,00:'"t,; 2806.9
L.':i.,.~:~~<;;::i::;.:::~ f~i ~~~:;
i>'1.02:.s." 27,95:'~\ 2860.8
. ':;~,1.02:,;>;/. '27.48:f.:~:i 2879.5
:."j:l~m'~:~11 ~:~
" .1.01 .:/: :"58.78~'~~ 3004.9
'. 1.01 __._ ;.7{60~::i3023.6
1.01. -/~. ;61.55'~ ;]3041.2
.: ~:'~:~',~f~~::';.~:~h;~ ~~~:~
'x~:~r'!;':~~:~:~ ~!
i,.: .. ~:: :.:'~;;~-;;:i'::: ~~.~):~~) ~::~
"~~~~~~
f"'~:: g::r;{i~t1:;M::~"::!1;1 :1:~
,~~U\:~"g'E,i~ ~.~
o 96.:'J"',:"'~',39.12,\",'i 34559
O:96:~t;,'45:25.~~j 3474:6
dE~,~~c~.~;~:j! ~.~
~rni~~~j
u
(.
733
743
753
764
774
784
794
805
815
825
B36
646
B56
888
87.
887
807
907
017
027
938
940
05B
..0
970
9B9
999
1010
1020
1030
1040
10SO
1061
1071
1081
1091
1101
1112
1122
1132
1143
1153
1163
1173'
1183
1194
1204
1214
1224
1234
1245
1255
1265
1275
1285
1296
1306
1317
1929.6
1937.2
19014.8
1952.9
1960.5
1968.6
1976.2
1984.3
1992.0
1999.6
2007.7
2015.3
2023.4
2031.0
2038.6
2046.7
2054.3
2062.4
2070.0
2077.6
2085.7
2093.3
2101.4
2109.1
2116.7
2124.8
2132.4
2140.5
2148.1
2155.7
2163.8
2171.4
2179.5
2187.1
2194.7
2202.8
2210.4
2218.5
2226.1
2233.6
2241.9
2249.5
2257.6
2265.2
2272.8
2260.9
2288.5
2296.6
2304.2
2311.8
2319.9
2327.5
2335.6
2343.2
2350.9
2359.0
2366.6
2374.7
2.8132
2.8742
2.8197
2.8113
2.7932
2.7589
2.7418
2.6400
2.6949
2.6585
2.8738
2.6705
2.5246
2.5287
2.6409
2.2971
2.2564
2.3931
2.4072
2.5443
2.4284
2.5298
2.5387
2.4297
2.3906
2.4934
2.5554
2.5658
2.5523
2.5667
2.5626
2.5585
2.5610
2.5534
2.5505
2.5729
2.5813
2.6195
2.7088
2.7455
2.7207
2.6854
2.6839
2.6769
2.6439
2.4700
2.5327
2.6845
2.7856
2.8712
2.8543
2.8242
2.9082
2.9296
2.9750
2.9657
2.9584
3.0565
GeoSolutions.lnc.
LiquiractionAnilYlia-CPT
Behavior
K.: (qclNIc.
(tsO
4.90 98.30
5.45 91.68
4.95 89.29
4.88 93.02
4.73 88.64
4.45 84.89
4.31 89.04
3.58 98.82
3.96 118.79
3.70 134.42
5.45 136.60
3.79 105.84
2.90 79.57
2.92 ~.84
3.59 98.94
1.94 113.00
1.62 122.40
2.28 143.60
2.34 140.91
3.00 176.49
2.43 174.12
2.92 179.94
2.97 173.22
2.44 144.46
2.27 132.17
2.74 142.46
3.06 148.29
3.12 162.66
3.05 165.10
3.13 171.21
3.11 168.12
3.08 162.43
3.10 165.75
3.05 161.26
3.04 159.00
3.16 166.27
3.21 165.59
3.45 174.77
4.06 19fU3
4.34 192.26
4,15 172.64
3.89 152.89
3.B8 154.96
3.83 147.78
3.61 141.10
:2.62 118.62
2.94 117.45
3.88 127.40
4.66 131.66
5.42 127.95
5.26 117.47
4.99 115.24
5.78 118.49
5.99 112.57
6.47 105.41
6.37 108.29
6.29 106.68
7.39 125.75
Page4of6
eRR,..
0.1683
0.1517
0.1462
0.1549
0.1448
0.1369
0.1456
0.1698
0.2359
0.3059
0.3171
0.1903
0.1269
0.1368
0.1701
0.2142
0.2505
0.3554
0.3402
0,3604
0.2947
0.3489
0.3833
0.4539
0.4124
0.4260
0.3802
0.3412
0.2352
0.2307
0.2723
0.2922
0.2748
0..2308
0.2223
0.2347
0.2127
0.1889
0.1981
0.1929
0.2649
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
0.9388 0.6989
0.9384 0.7005
0.9380 0.7021
0.9376 0.7037
0.9373 0.7052
0.9369 0.7068
0.9385 0.7083
0.9361 0.7099
0.9357 0.7114
0.9354 0.7128
0.9350 0.7143
0.9346 0.7158
0.9342 0.7173
0.9338 0.7186
0.9335 0.7200
0.9331 0.7215
0.9327 0.7228
0.9323 0.7242
0.9319 0.7256
0.9315 0.7269
0.9311 0.7282
0.9308 0.7295
0.9304 0.7309
0.9297 0.7319
0.9284 0.7324
0.9270' 0.7329
0.9257 0.7334
0.9243 0.7339
0.9230 0.7343
0.9217 0.7348
0.9203 0.7352
0.9190 0.7356
0.9176 0.7360
0.9163 0.7364
0.9150 0.7368
0.9137 0,7371
0.9124 0.7375
0.9110 0.7378
0.9097 0.7381
0.9084 0.7384
0.9070 0.7387
0.9057 0.7390
0.9043 0.7392
0.9030 0.7395
0.9017 0.7397
0.9003 0.7399
0.8990 0.7401
0.8976 0.7403
0.8963 0.7405
0.8950 0.7407
0.8936 0.7408
0.8923 0.7410
0.8910 0.7411
0.8897 0.7412
0.8884 0.7413
0.8870 0.7414
0.8857 0.7415
0.8843 0.7416
sis
F.5. LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.21 LIQUEFACTION
0.23 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.35 LIQUEFACTION
0.41 LIQUEFACTION
0.59 LIQUEFACTION
0.56 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.59 LIQUEFACTION
0..018 LIQUEFACTION
0.57 LIQUEFACTION
0.62 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.73 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTiON
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTioN
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LiQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0:38 LIQUEFACTION
0.37 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
0,06
0,05
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.02
0,04
0,04
1m
Depth
(')
35.76
35.93
36.09
36.25
36.42
.36.58
36.75
36.91
37.07
37.24
37.4
37.57
37.73
37.89
38.06
38.22
38.39
38.55
38.71
38,88
39.04
39.21
39.37
39.53
39.7
39.86
40.03
40.19
40.35
40.52
.40.66
40.85
41.01
41.17
41.34
41.5
41.67
41.83
41.99
42.16
42.32
42,49
42.65
42.81
42.98
43.14
43.31
43.47
43.64
413.8
43.96
44.13
44.29
44.46
44.62
44.78
...,95
45.11
art from Cone Plot
q; fs
(tsf) (tsf)
25.20 1.608
45.49 1.976
49.52 1.744
62.60 1.764
72.08 1.567
77.24 1.479
76.23 1.410
78.31" 1.901
62.07 2.098
88.42 2.421
70.33 1.724
42.86 1.024
27.07 0.840
17.10 0.530
15.44 0.405
15.87 0.410
16.24 0.420
16.58 0.432
18.46 0.641
20.56 1.814
22.12 1.701
30.62 1.539
21.44 1.514
22.64 2.099
41.18 2.040
43.03 1.845
29.91 1.117
16.01 0.792
16.14 0.445
12.38 0.404
12.05 0.'107
13.56 0.430
13.46 0.632
16.72 0.933
31.65 1.500
69.40 1.436
131.21 1.575
181.84 1.471
180.15 1.107
196.32 1.499
208.67 1.979
245.57 2.068
236.92 1.705
226.40 1.659
227.82 2.148
232.92 1.539
217.18 1.880
212.89 0.972
182.88 2.321
223.33 2.167
242.07 2.n6
265.51 2.155
239.25 2.148
241.77 1.441
243.95 2.040
250.20 1.833
290.80 1.032
340.78 2.226
Normalized
Soil Profile
GeoSolutions, inc.
Liquifution An.ly,... CPT
Behavior
K.. (q.llllc,
(tsf)
150,49
154.59
134.16
130.76
122.61
118.68
115.98
133.57
140.15
150.47
127.38
102.46
95.59
95.10
86.27
86.44
67.05
67.69
102.64
162.69
157.49
145.23
149.62
173.64
161.57
151.95
124.44
115.15
90.31
90.23
90,88
91,55
106.96
123.49
144.03
114.50
135.19
160.15
150.83
167.82
163.43
205.27
197.74
188.66
195.53
193.48
184.57
176.28
173.43
192.35
212.02
218.49
199.25
198.33
199.82
204.64
23747
277.87
i.' O.94..~:~'_::;,.22.45::;":j 3708.9
~.:~:;~:E::~;J:;~~~::~.',~.l~; ~f~:i
:"/0.94":"~"::63.79 ;;,i 3781.5
r.:-H~';;r, :H~f'j; E!H
~~~~'!~,~;:~~j ~H
v: 0.93", ,...37.5L/!: 3908.0
;.' '; 0.92- :_;~';'-:23.65:~~:j 3925.6
;:;~:~~:!:Bt'.j;;*;~; lEI
!':"TO.92:1':,':i; "14.36.~'~-i 4015.8
i:;';:~:E"f'f.,~~f{1 ~~!~
':.;0.91::;/:L.':18:.w';q 4106.0
:0.91',,~:V: ,19.62,':': 4123.6
;.;:,,~:;n::~~~:~;::i(~ :~;~::
:':0.90..;:n'i;25.57,~;: 4178.6
~mii~lii
''- ,0.89 ',;'? , 58 55 ,'" 43403
0.89 ~;' 110.53 ';i 4359.0
"0.89 ~'~i:;i:' 152.96;:;,: 4376.6
I::' ,,~:=;~.,;~@t~~:~:;;~i :~:~
i' --
',' 0.69':-,'~: 174:12',:: 4432.1
~!~I~~~~
1;,,0.87 _.,_, :184.35.<.~ 4602.3
~~I~i~
u
( .~
1327
1337
1347
1357
,_
1378
1388
1398
1408
1419
1429
,...0
14SO
1460
1470
1490
1491
lS01
1511
1521
1531
1542
1552
1562
1572
1562
1593
1603
1613
1624
1634
,....
1654
1564
1675
1685
1695
1705
1715
1726
1736
1747
1757
1767
1m
1787
1796
1606
1818
1626
1636
1649
1859
1670
1879
1689
1900
1910
2382.3
2390.4
2398.0
2405.6
2413.7
2421.3
2429.4
2437.0
2444.6
2452.7
2460.3
2468.4
2476.0
2463.7
2491.8
2499.4
2507.5
2515.1
2522.7
2530.8
2538.4
2546.5
2554.1
2561.7
2569.8
2577.4
2585.5
2593.1
260o.a
2608.9
2616.5
2624.6
2632.2
2639.8
2647.9
2655.5
2663.6
267.1.2
2678.8
2687.8
2696.2
2705.1
2713.5
2722.0
2730.9
2739.3
2748.3
2756.7
2765.6
2774.0
2782.4
2791.4
2799.8
2608.7
2817.2
2825.6
2834.5
2842.9
2.9964
2.6755
.2.5531
2.4107
2.2916
2.2283
2.:2230
2.2963
2.2979
2.2968
2.3351
2.4927
2.7002
2.9662
2.9699
2.9556
2.9471
2.9421
2.9707
3.1933
3.1255
2.8762
3.1147
3.1710
2.n49
2.7173
2.8095
3.1389
2.9836
3.1494
3.1727
3.1023
3.2092
3.1619
2.8674
2.3021
1.9344
1.7135
1.6408
1.6728
1.7178
1.6314
1.5959
1.6164
1.6908
1.5783
1.6808
1,5098
1.8524
1.7082
1.7368
1.6007
1.6645
1.5408
1.6376
1.5904
1.3402
1.4597
6.70
3.82
3.05
2,"
1.92
.1.74
1.72
1,94
1,94
1.94
2.07
2.73
4.04
6.36
6.42
6.26
6.17
6.12
6.42
9.16
8.25
5.47
8.11
8.85
4.57
4.12
4.87
8.42
6,56
8,56
8.87
796
9,38
8.73
5.39
1,96
1.22
1.05
1.00
1.02
1.05
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.03
1.00
1.02
1,00
1.15
1,04
1,06
1.00
1.01
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
Pag&5of6
CRR,..
0.3970
0.4236
0.3046
0.2879
0.2514
0.2355
0.2251
0.3016
0.3360
0.3968
0.2722
0.1600
0.1612
0.1600
0.1397
0.1401
0.1414
0.1431
0.1806.
0.4433
0.3649
0.3915
0.4063
0.2592
0.2220
0.1485
0.1483
0.1496
0.1514
0.1938
0.2552
0.3579
0.2196
0.3098
0.3991
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
0.8830 0.7416
0.8816 0.7417
0.8803 0.7417
0.6790 0.7418
0.8776 0.7416
0.8763 0.7418
0.8749 0.7418
0.8736 0.70118
0.8723 0.7417
0.8709 0.7417
0.6696 0.7417
0.8682 0.7416
0.8669 0.7415
0.8656 0.7415
0.8643 0.7414
0.8630 0.7413
0.6616 0.70112'
0.8603 0.7411
0,8590 0.7409
0.8576 0.7408
0.8563 0.7406
0.8549 0.7405
0.8536 0.7403
0.8523 0.7402
0.8509 0.7400
0.8496 0.7398
0.8482 0.7396
0.8469 0.7394
0.8456 0.7392
0.8442 0.7389
0.8429 0.7387
0,8416 0.7385
0.8403 0.7382
0.8390 0.7380
0.8376 0.7377
0:8363 0.7374
0.8349 0.7371
0.8336 0.7368
0.8323 0.7365
0.8309 0.7361
0.8296 0.7357
0,8282 0.7353
0.8269 0.7349
0,8256 0.7345
.0.6242 0.7340
0.8229 0.7336
0.8215 0.7331
0.8202 0.7327
0.8189 0.7322
0.8175 0.7318
0.8162 0.7313
0.8149 0.7308
0.8136 0.7303
0.8122 0.7296
0.8109 0.7293
0.8096 0.7286
0.8082 0.7283
0.8069 0.7278
F.S. LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.49 LIQUEFACTION
0.46 lI0UEFACTION
0.40 LIQUEFACTION
0.38 LIQUEFACTION
0.36 LIQUEFACTION
6.49 LIQUEFACTION
0.54 LIQUEFACTION
0.64 LIQUEFACTION
0.44 LIQUEFACTION
0.29 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEfACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.36 LIQUEFACTION
0.50 LIQUEFACTION
NO lIQUEfACTIO~
..: _ " 0.65 ',. LIQUEFACTION
NO lIQUEFACi"lON
NO liQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTioN
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
0.04
0,04
0.04
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.04
0,04
0.03
GeoSolutions. Inc.
LiqulrlctklnAnllY5is-CPT
1m ort from Cone Plot Nonnalized Soil Profile Behavior sis
Depth .. f. ':Ji.~~l~:.;;' G, u K, (QclNlcs CRR7.I F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
(ft) (tilt) (tsf) ( . (tsf) SETTLEMENT
45.28 220.99 2.104 0.B6~\',,}:~...119.91 )'.: 4n2.5 1921 2651.9 1.7883 1.10 197.59 1.19 0.6055 0.7272 NO LIQUEFACTION
45.44 324.66 2.949 1931 2860,3 1.5796 1,00 263.92 1.19 0.8042 0.7267 NO LIQUEFACTION
45.6 270.80 2.696 1941 2868.7 1.6629 1.01 222.55 1.19 0.8029 0.7262 NO LIQUEFACTION
45.77 235.54 1.954 1951 2871.7 1.6497 1,00 191.49 1.19 0.8015 0.7256 NO LIQUEFACTION
45.93 240.67 2.411 1961 2886.1 1.7013 1.04 202.32 1.19 0.8002 0.7251 NO LIQUEFACTION
<6.1 233.47 1.826 1972 2895.0 1.6359 1,00 188.65 1.19 0.79BB 0.7245 NO LIQUEFACTION
<6,," 191.50 2.586 1982 2903.4 1.8654 1.16 178,91 1.19 0.7975 0.7240 NO LIQUEFACTION
48.42 161.21 1.832 1992 2911.8 1."" 1.16 150.53 0.3972 1.19 0.7962 0.7234 0.65 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
46.59 loa22 2,538 2002 2920.8 1.9406 1.23 166.40 1.19 0.794B 0.722B NO liQUEFACTION
48.75 169.61 l,oee 2012 2929.2 1.6827 1.03 139.97 0.3350 1.19 0.7935 0.7222 0,55 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
48.92 168.79 1.055 2023 2938.1 1.6843 1.03 139.07 0.3301 1.19 0.7922 0.1216 0.55 liQUEFACTION 0,04
47.06 165.34 2.233 ','::- 0.85_~-:,:_:<-,; ,132:43.':" 4979.5 2033 2946.6 1.9129 1.20 159.07 0.4543 1.19 0.7909 0.7210 0.75 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
47.24 262.28 O.B23 r",:~g~;I~~~J1 [H:~ 2043 2955.0 1.3556 1,00 209.77 1.19 0.7696 0.7205 NO LIQUEFACTION
47.41 266.53 2.376 2054 2963.9 1.6379 1,00 212.85 1.19 0.7682 0.7198 NO liQUEFACTION
47.57 91.87 2.395 2064 2972.3 2.3007 1.95 142.92 0.3515 1.19 0.7869 0.7192 0.58 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
47.74 261.87 2.695 2074 2981.3 1.6669 1.02 227.85 1.19 0.7855 0.7185 NO LIQUEFACTION
47.9 275.66 2.352 f;::~~;t,!;;m.~$l ~~i 2064 2989.7 1.6153 1,00 219.19 1.19 0.7642 0.7180 NO LIQUEFACTION
48.06 254.37 1.916 2094 2979.7 1.6020 1.00 202.60 1,19 0.7829 0.7192 NO LIQUEFACTION
48.23 214.15 1.424 2105 2969.1 1.6216 1,00 170.87 1.19 0.7815 0.7205 NO LIQUEFACTION
48.39 234.21 1.907 2115 2959.1 1.6504 1,00 187.86 1.19 0.7802 0.7217 NO LIQUEFACTION
48.56 232.49 2.233 "c.- oa5',;.:':.'.'8615!:~ 50738 2125 2948.5 1.7023 1,04 193.48 1.19 0.7788 0.7230 NO LIQUEFACTION
48.72 216.25 2.023 L~~0:85.}.;:2,:',173:44~:.J 5073:8 2135 2938.5 1.7163 1.05 181.91 1.19 0.7775 0.7243 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page6of6
Job Name SLOSOl4-1 CPT~l Probabilistic Analysis
SOIL PROFILE
SAMPLE # 2 3
SOIl. TYPE (UCSC)
UNIT WEIGHT (PC!)
TOP DEPTH (ft)
ENDING DEPTH (ft)
GROUNDWATER (It) 14.5
GROUND 'MOTION STUDY
Los Osos Probabilistic DBE
FAULT
MAGNITUDE
......
Depth
1ft)
0.16
0,33
0.49
0.66
0.82
0,98
US
1.31
1."
1.64
1,'
1.97
2.13
2,3
2."
2.82
2.79
2.95
3.12
3.28
3.44
3.61
3.n
3.94
4.1
4.27
4,43
4.59
4.76
4,92
5,09
5.25
5.41
5,58
5.74
5.91
6.07
6.23
6.4
6.58
6.73
6.89
7.05
4
OM CL 8M CL BP.aM
100 110 100 110 115
d:,~,: o':::3X ~;:~)3.5)~ : ,:_15 ".. i~:_':24 ',: '..:42 ,
,., ,
13.5 15 24 42 4'
..
(..~
11.25
',34
9,83
14.44
19.77
27.26
31.36
35.19
36.35
33.63
34.27
37.93
40.50
42.47
45.13
47.82
51.54
51.43.
48.11
45.56
45.23
46,64
46.99
45.27
44.28
45.21
43.47
41.29
43.80
45.06
45.93
48.91
53.60
59.72
66.39
13.59
80.57
85.92
87.98
86.89
80.17
67.78
61.14
7
0.33
I,
(tsf)
0.074
0.068
0.088
0.124
0.168
0.206
0.228
0.257
0.263
0.259
0.266
0.288
0,306
0,334
0.375
0.441
0.459
0,456
0,415
0.296
0.267
0.237
0.269
0,299
0.312
0.319
0.297
0.260
0.299
0.340
0.368
0.405
0.452
0.506
0.567
0.633
0.704
0.760
0.805
0.701
0.678
0.577
0.553
,
i'i,iE'~;l;\;@Ei~~ g~
_ 508 ,~_37.37_~~ 82.0
.,~ 465~1;.51.53 " 98.0
~~I~I ~
l;~i~~ ~
)::i~:2.46;;:,:--~~.._,!85.49;;11 ~:~
377.0
394.0
410.0
427.0
443.0
459.0
476'.0
492.0
509,0
525.0
541.0
559,0
574.0
591.0
607.0
623.0
640.0
656.0
>-,1.77.-::::'11(.134:36'."1673.0
r~}-_~:;~:;~i?;i~.~:;~L~ ~~:~
5
GeoSolutions, IDe.
Liquifaclion Anllysb - CPT
(lI DO NOT ENTERI
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,
16.0
33.0
49.0
66,0
82,0
98.0
115.0
131.0
148.0
164.0
180.0
197.0
213.0
230.0
246.0
262.0
279.0
295.0
312.0
328.0
344.0
361.0
377.0
394.0
410.0
427.0
443.0
459.0
476.0
492.0
509,0
525.0
541.0
558.0
574.0
591.0
607.0
623.0
640.0
656.0
673.0
689.0
705.0
2.3810
2.5386
2.4940
2.3386
2.2185
2.0727
2.0133
1.9719
1.9583
2.0008
1.9966
1.9547
1.9312
1.9231
1.9156
1.9232
1.8884
1.8877
1.9034
1.8511
1.8302
1.7824
1.8266
1.8572
1.8810
1.8745
1.8805
1.8797
1.8775
1.8921
1.9007
1.8876
1.B644
1.8344
1.8054
1.7781
1.7573
1.7441
1.7507
1.7225
1.7664
1.8287
1.8837
2.24
2.97
2.74
2.08
1.71
1,41
1.32
1.26
1.25
1,30
1.30
1.25
1.22
1.21
1.20
1.21
1.18
1.18
1.19
1.15
1.13
1,09
1.13
1.15
1.17
1.17
1.17
1.17
1.17
1.16
1.19
1.18
1.16
1.13
1.11
1,09
1,06
1.07
1.07
1.05
1.06
1.13
1.17
(qc1Nlcs
I"~
47.56
46.86
SO.88
56.74
64.02
72.52
78.11
84.14
85.83
82.70
83.93
89.27
93.37
97.25
102.69
109.51
114.77
114,46
108.40
98.69
96.55
96,86
100.06
98.49
98.05
99.62
96.22
9134
96.73
100.63
;03.27
108.85
115.92
124,49
133.80
143.58
153.06
159.77
162.09
155.31
145.49
126.65
117.52
Page 1 016
CRRu
0.0896
0.0890
0.0922
0.0970
0.1044
0.1155
0.1243
0.1354
0.1388
0.1326
0.1350
0.1462
0.1557
0.1655
0.1807
0.2021
0.2206
0.2195
0.1985
0.1694
0.1637
0.1645
0.1732
0.1688
0.1677
0.1719
0.1628
01509
0.1642
0.1748
0.1824
0.1999
0.2249
0.2594
0.3026
0.3553
0.4135
0.4593
0.4284
0,3664
0.2689
0.2309
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
'1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
0.9996 0.2144
0.9992 0.2143
0.9989 0.2143
0.9985 0.2142
0.9981 0.2141
0.9977 0.2140
0.9973 0.2139
0.9969 0.2138
0.9965 0.2138
0.9962 0.2137
0.9958 0.2136
0.9954 0.2135
0.9950 0.2134
0.99<16 0.2133
0.9943 0.2133
0.9939 0.2132
0.9935 0.2131
0.9931 0.2130
0.9927 0.2129
0.9924 0.2129
0.9920 0.2128
0.9916 0.2127
0.9912 0.2126
0.9908 0.2125
0.9904 0.2124
0.9900 0.2124
0.9897 0.2123
0.9893 0.2122
0.9889 0.2121
0.9885 0.2120
0.9881 0.2120
0.9878 0.2119
0.9874 0.2118
0.9870 0.2117
0.9866 0.2116
0.9862 0.2115
0.9858 0.2115
0.9855 0.2114.
0.9851 0.2113
0.9847 0.2112
0.9843 0.2111
0.9839 0.2111
0.9836 0.2110
F.S.
0,50
0.50
0.51
0,64
0.58
0,64
0.69
0.76
0.77
0.74
0.75
0.82
0.87
0.93
1.01
1.13
1.23
1.23
1.11
0.95
0.92
0.92
0.97
0.95
0.94
0.97
0.91
0.85
0.92
0.98
1.03
1.13
1.27
1.46
1.71
2.00
2.33
2.59
NO LIQUEFACTION
2,42
2.07
1.52
1.31
LIQUEFACTION
TOTAL
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
(In)
2.37
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
0,06
0,09
0,06
0.08
0,06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0,04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
"0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
000
GeoSolutions, Inc.
Liquir.rtion An.lysis - CPT
1m ort from Cone Plot
Depth .. t, Iq.INlc. CRRu F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
(ft) (tsl) (Isf) (Isf) SETTLEMENT
7.22 57.43 0.518 i~'~,;,~:~~\11/~:~:~~'~'~1 ~~:g 0 722.0 1.9084 1.20 111.22 0.2079 1.19 0.9832 0.2109 1.18 0.01
7.38 54.85 0.496 0 738.0 1.9291 1.22 106.87 0.1935 1.19 0.9828 0.2108 1.09 0.01
7.55 53.04 0.473 ;~<.1.67-':"r' .. 83.92..,,_ 755.0 0 755.0 1.9407 1.23 103.21 0.1822 1.19 0.9824 0.2107 1,03 0.01
7.71 52.23 0.4S9 0 711.0 1.9460 1.24 101.04 0.1759 1.19 0.9620 0.2106 1,00 0.02
7.87 53,84 0.471 0 787.0 1.9379 1.23 102.36 0.1797 1.19 0.9816 0.2106 1,02 0.01
'.04 57.50 0.493 0 804.0 1.9134 1,20 105.95 0.1906 1.19 0.9813 0.2105 1,09 0.01
',2 63.51 0.552 0 820.0 1,8660 1.16 113.39 0.2156 1.19 0.9609 0.2104 1.22 0.01
6.37 74.58 0.665 0 837.0 1.8418 1.14 127.59 0.2732 1.19 0.9805 0.2103 1.55
8.53 84.61 0.796 0 853.0 1.8182 1.12 141.08 0.3412 1.19 0.9801 0.2102 1,94
8.69 92.89 0.918 0 869.0 1.8052 1.11 152.13 0.4074 1.19 0.9797 0.2102 2.31
'.86 98.94 1.012 0 886.0 1.7982 1.11 159.74 0.4591 1.19 0.9793 0.2101 2.61
9.02 103.73 1.073 0 902.0 1.7895 1.10 165.04 1.19 0.9790 0.2100 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.19 108.40 1.136 0 919.0 1.7824 1,09 170.09 1.19 0.9786 0.2099 NO LIQUEFACTION
9,35 113.44 1.241 0 935.0 1.7842 1.10 176.66 1.19 0.9782 0.2098 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.51 117.69 1.329 0 951.0 1.7853 1.10 181.87 1.19 0.9778 0.2097 NO LIQUEFACTION
9,69 121.31 1.226 0 ...,0 1.7445 1.07 181.02 1.19 0.9774 0.2097 NO LIQUEFACTION
9,84 124.63 1.247 0 984,0 1.7356 U16 183.41 1.19 0.9771 0.2096 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.01 120.44 1.321 0 1001.0 1.7770 1.09 180.43 1.19 0.9767 0.2095 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.17 129.06 1.467 0 1017.0 1.7696 1,09 190.92 1.19 0.9763 0,2094 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.33 134.00 1.651 0 1033.0 1.7861 1.10 198.78 1.19 0.9759 0.2093 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.5 138.57 1.744 ~:f.~::~'{:~Y~:~:~'f~ ~g::g 0 1050.0 1.7855 1.10 203.82 1.19 0.9755 0.2092 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.66 143.92 1.828 0 1066.0 1.7796 1,09 209.29 1.19 0.9751 0.2092 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.83 148.53 1.913 j~;~~1:40};~;;:/196.22(!: 1083.0 0 1083.0 1.7773 1,09 213.98 1.19 0.9747 0.2091 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.99 150.25 1.986 ~.:.~1.39-<:t;i197.05-;:'i 1099.0 0' 1099.0 1.7846 1.10 215.88 1.19 0.9744 0.2090 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.15 153.22 2.060 ~!~Iil~~ 0 1115.0 1.7866 1.10 218.84 1.19 0.9740 0,2089 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.32 156.52 2.103 0 1132.0 1.7825 1,09 221.29 1.19 0.9736 0.2088 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.48 157.57 2.195 0 1148.0 1.7945 1.10 222.95 1.19 0.9732 0.2068 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.65 162.90 2,338 0 1165.0 1.7969 1.10 229.15 1.19 0.9728 0.2087 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.81 165.49 2.437 0 1181.0 1.8032 1.11 232.19 1.19 0.9725 O,2O<l6 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.98 169.09 2.473 0 1198.0 1.7969 1.10 234.58 1.19 0.9721 0.2085 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.14 177.37 2.692 0 1214.0 1.7969 1.10 244.42 1.19 0.9717 0,2094 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.3 191.28 2.877 ;' .;::~:31.-J~?:' 237.12~,.~ 1230.0 0 1230.0 1.7763 109 258.40 1.19 0.9713 0.2083 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.47 190.79 2.947 \~~j~'Blf.f~'~i~ jf~~ 0 1247.0 1.7880 1.10 257.92 1.19 0.9709 0.2083 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.63 182.82 2,809 0 1263.0 1.7992 1.11 247.38 1.19 0.9706 0.2082 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.8 169.90 2.409 0 1280.0 1.7945 1.10 227.66 1.19 0.9702 0.2081 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.96 139.80 1.813 0 1296.0 1.8238 1.12 169.83 1.19 0.9698 0.2080 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.12 84.70 2.039 ):/~1.27,'.',';}::"101.66:.~; 1312.0 0 1312.0 2.1716 1.60 162.65 1.19 0.9694 0.2079 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.29 47.61 1,939 0 1329.0 2.5127 2.83 160.89 1.19 0.9690 0.2079 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.45 33.69 1.806 0 1345.0 2.6454 3.62 144.44 0.3602 1.19 0.9696 0.2078 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.62 31.37 1.405 0 1363.7 2.6149 3.42 126.29 0.i673 1.19 0.9682 0.2077 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.78 32.15 1.069 0 1381.3 2.5797 3.20 120.53 0.2428 1.19 0.9679 0.2076 1.~0
13.94 32.89 0.693 0 1398.9 2,5060 2,80 107.01 0.1940 1.19 0.9675 0.2075 1.11 0.01
14.11 30.34 0.645 0 1417.6 2.4769 2.65 92.99 0.1548 1.19 0.9671 0.2074 0.89 0,04
14.27 28.74 0.458 0 1435.2 2.4213 2.40 79.21 0.1262 1.19 0.9667 0.2074 0.73 0.05
14.44 27.89 0.420 0 1453.9 2.4200 2.40 76.18 0.1211 1.19 0.9663 0.2073 0.70 0,06
14.6 29.71 0.553 6 1465.3 2.4542' 2.55 85.96 0.1391 1.19 0.9660 0.2081 0.80 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
14.76 33.36 0.657 16 1472.9 2.4298 2.44 92.15 0.1528 1.19 0,9656 0.2094 0.S7 LIQUEFACTION 0,03
14.93 51.42 0.882 27 1481.0 2.2456 1.79 103.77 0.1839 1.19 0.9652 0.2108 {Q4 0.01
15.09 111.47 1.079 37 1487.0 1.8276 1.13 141.68 0.3445 1.19 0.9648 0.2121 1.94
15.26 145.35 0.982 47 1493.4 1,5306 1.00 163.52 1.19 0.9644 0.2134 NO L1QUEFACT"ION
15.42 175.58 1.341 i:.:'-19>"'<20824\~'~ 15728 57 1499.4 1.6131 1.00 197.14 1.19 0.9640 0.2147 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.58 185.84 1.425 67 1505.4 1.5970 1.00 208.24 1.19 0.9637 0.2160 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.75 194.98 1.516 l';fj}~:~::{~~'f:!~~::~;J~ ~~~:: 78 1511.8 1.5868 1,00 218.02 1.19 0.9633 0.2173 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.91 219.64 1.877 .. 1517.8 1.5805 1,00 245.11 1.19 0.9629 0.2185 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.08 236.51 1.822 -' ":118!-;r,.": 263 38,,:l 1622 8 99 1524.2 1.5263 1,00 263.38 1.19 0.9625 0.2198 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.24 216.02 0.206 ;~,nHti\~6~~ i~~: 109 1530.2 1.1080 1,00 240.09 1.19 0.9621 0.2210 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.4 185.77 1.556 118 1536.2 1.6274 1,00 206.06 1.19 0.9618 0.2222 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.57 17.79 1.232 12. 1542.6 2.9766 6.49 127.74 0.2739 1.19 0.9614 0.2235 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page2016
GeoSolutioRS. IDe.
Uqulraclion Analysis - CrT
1m ort from Cone Plot Behavior sis
Depth .. f. K, (QclNk. CRR,.. F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
1ft) (ts" (ts" , (tsf) SEnLEMENT
16.13 161.22 0.918 l;!lj:ji:~~B~j~i~~! lfEi 13. 1548.6 1.5630 1.00 178.11 1.19 0.9610 0.2241 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.9 144.11 1.576 150 1555.0 1.7893 1.10 174.60 1.19 0.9606 0.2259 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.06 140.10 2.0n 160 1561.1 1.6928 1.18 182.24 1.19 0.9602 0.2270 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.22 119.73 2.528 170 1567.1 2.0545 1.38 181.20 1.19 0.9598 0.2262 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.39 210.22 3.078 "'.,1.16, .:',' -230.41..,. 1753.8 180 1573.5 1.7752 1.09 250.91 1.19 0.9595 0.2294 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.55 216.25 1.8n :.~ ~ '1.16:;~"'t"236.57.'~~ 1769.8 190 1579.5 1.5961 1.00 236,57 1.19 0.9591 0.2305 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.72 207.14 1.317 201 1585.9 1.5151 1.00 226.14 1.19 0.9567 0.2317 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.86 172.54 1.153 211 1591.9 1.5895 1.00 188.01 1.19 0.9563 0.2328 NO LIQUEFACTION
18.04 154.13 1.228 221 1597.9 1.6777 1.02 171.43 1.19 0.9579 0.2339 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.21 139.29 1.150 232 1604.3 1.n16 1.05 159.11 0.4546 1.19 0.9575 0.2350 2.31
18.37 142.86 1.104 241 1610.3 1.6951 1.03 160.14 1.19 0.9572 0.2351 NO LIQUEFACTION
18.54 124.28 0.890 252 1616.7 1.7212 1.05 141.36 0.3428 1.19 0.9568 0.2372 1.72
18.7 110.88 0.929 252 1622.7 1.8035 1.11 132.74 0.2975 1.19 0.9564 0.2383 1.49
18.86 165.87 0.633 272 1628.7 1.7313 1.06 120.78 0.2438 1.19 0.9560 0.2393 1.22 0.00
19.03 114.95 0.956 283 1635.1 1.7908 1.10 135.95 0.3137 1.19 0.9556 0.2404 1.58
19.19 86.50 0.675 2.3 1641.1 1.8721 1.16 108.02 0.19n 1.19 0.9553 0.2414 0.97 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
19.36 74.92 1.003 303 1647.5 2.0687 1.40 112.41 0.2121 1.19 0.9549 0.2425 1.04 0,01
19.52 90.01 0.609 313 1653.6 1.8230 1.12 108.15 0.1976 1.19 0.9545 0.2435 0.97 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
19.69 112.62 0.765 ., ;'j.13::~~~;/, :120~18'-(~ 1963.8 324 1659.9 1.7458 1.07 128.44 0.2770 1.19 0.9541 0.2446 1.35
19.85 110.60 0.671 ~:~!I~~ 334 1666.0 1.7233 1.05 124.12 0.2578 1.19 0.9537 0.2456 1.25 0.00
20.01 96.04 0.480 344 1672.0 1.7284 1.06 107.93 0.1969 1.19 0.9533 0.2465 0.95 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
20.18 79.74 0.463 354 1676.4 1.6325 1.13 95.72 0.1616 1.19 0.9529 0.2476 0.78 LIQUEFACTION 0.04
20.34 84.36 0.606 364 1684.4 1.8647 1.16 103.43 0.1829 1.19 0.9526 0.2485 0.86 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
20.51 78.31 0.816 375 1690.8 1.9888 1.29 106.45 0.1922 1.19 0.9522 0.2495 0.92 LIQUEFACTION 0,02
20.67 61.56 0.757 3B5 1696.8 1.9442 1.23 106.18 0.1913 1.19 0.9516 0.2505 0.91 LIQUEFACTION 0,02
20.83 82.BO 1.057 395 1702.8 2.0277 1.34 116.72 0.2279 1.19 0.9514 0.2514 1.09 0,01
21 109.81 1.382 406 1709.2 1.9323 1.22 140.99 0.3406 1.19 0.9510 0.2524 1.61
21.16 105.35 0.930 [_'.-'1.11';;'~-i.',110.59,~~ 2130.8 418 1715.2 1,6450 1.14 126.19 0.2669 1.19 0.9507 0.2533 1.28 0.00
21.33 109.65 0.835 ~,r:,1l11'.l~.t:~'114.89r12147.8 428 1721.6 1.7919 1.10 126.47 0,2681 1.19. 0."9503 0.2543 1.26 0.00
21.49 113.01 0.'" ''':1J1 :;~~'::':':118.2C'~12163.8 436 1727.6 1.7904 1.10 130.00 0.2643 1.19 0.9499 0.2552 1.33
0.763 .. :':~:~g ::r~~f~::_::~l4 ~~~:: 113,06 1.19 LIQUEFACTION
21.65 93.36 446 1733.6 1.6673 1.16 0.2144 0.9495 0.2561 1.00 0.02
21.82 91.20 0.813 457 1740.0 1.8993 1.19 112.94 0.2140 1.19 0.9491 0.2570 0." LIQUEFACTION 0,02
21.98 65.69 0.532 , 467 1746.0 1.9911 1.29 as.07 0.1435 1.19 0.9<187 0.2579 0.66 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
22.15 59.15 0.350 477 1752.4 1.9565 1.25 76.61 0,1218 1.19 0.9484 0.2568 0.56 LIQUEFACTION 0.06
22.31 53.47 0.973 487 1758.5 2.2797 1.89 104.51 0.1861 1.19 0.9480 0.2597 0.85 LIQUEFACTI9N 0.03
22.47 80.81 1,451 4.7 1764.5 2.1416 1.54 128.40 0.2769 1.19 0.9476 0.2606 ~.27 0.00
22.64 83.51 0.904 508 1770.9 1.9854 1.28 110.55 0.2057 1.19 0.9472 0.2615 0.94 LIQUEFAcTION 0,02
22.6 ae.os 0.496 518 1776.9 1.8000 1.1j 100.50 0.1744 1.19 0.9468 0.2623 0.79 LIQUEFACTION 0.04
22.97 89.44 0.363 52. 1783.3 1.7212 1.00 92.08 0.1526 1.19 0.9464 0.2632 0.69 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
23.13 86.53 0.628 53. 1789.3 1.8691 1.16 103.26 0.1824 1.19 0.9461 0.2640 0.82 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
23.29 81.95 0.703 548 1795.3 1.9320 1.22 102.63 0.1805 1.19 0.9457 0.2648 0.81 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
23,46 84.84 0.719 ss. 1801.7 1.9171 1.21 104,75 0.1869 1.19 0.9453 0.2657 084 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
23.62 102.25 1.019 ~,'~J1~08-,',;\;i 104.56_;,"~ 2376.8 56. 1807.7 1.8977 1.19 124.08 0.2577 1.19 0.9449 0.2665 1.15 0,01
23.79 82.54 1.060 580 1814.1 2.0414 1.36 114.41 0.2193 1.19 0.9445 0.2673 0.98 liQUEFAcTION 0.02
23.95 55.47 1.224 590 1820.1 2.3294 2.05 115.69 0.2240 1.19 0.9442 0.2681 1.00 LIQUEFACTION 0.01
24.11 81.20 1.298 600 1827.7 2.1114 1.46 121.97 0.2483 1.19 0.9<138 0.2689 1.19 0.01
24.28 73.29 1.467 610 1835.8 2.2118 1.70 126.15 0.2667 1.19 0.9434 0.2696 1.16 LIQUEFACTION 0.01
24.44 63.77 0.532 820 1843.4 2.0194 1.33 85.63 0.1384 1.19 0.9430 0.2703 0.61 0.05
24.61 70.85 0.650 631 1851.5 2.0062 1.31 93.65 0.1564 1.19 0.9426 0.2711 0.69 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
24.77 59.26 0.701 841 1859.2 2.1363 1.52 91.12 0.1504 1.19 0.9422 0.2718 0.66 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
24.93 81.83 1.175 651 1866.8 2.2544 1.61 112.65 0.2qO 1.19 0.9419 0.2725 0.93 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
25.1 107.52 2.504 661 1874.9 2.1446 1.54 166.42 1.19 0.9415 0.2732 NO LIQUEFACTION
25.26 94.81 1.931 871 1882.5 2.1407 1.53 145.68 0.3675 1.19 0.9411 0.2739 1.60
25.43 44.95 1.427 682 1690.6 2.5121 2.83 127.20 0.2714 1.19 0.9407 0.2746 1.18 0.01
25.59 27.69 0.891 6.2 1896.2 2.6758 3.82 105.65 0.1897 1.19 0.9403 0.2752 NO LIQUEFACTION
25.75 21.35 0.802 702 1905.8 2,8158 4.92 104,62 0.1865 1.19 0.9400 0.2759 NO LIQUEFACTION
25.92 16.87 0.733 713 1913.9 2.9475 6.18 103,57 0.1833 1.19 0.9396 0.2766 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.06 .. 16.70 0.950 723 1921.5 3.0293 7.08 117.20 0.2297 1.19 0.9392 0.2772 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page3of6
GeoSolutions,IDC.
Liquir8('lioD Analysis- CrT
1m ort from Cone Plot Normalized Soil Profile Behavior sis
Depth q, f, Co 0 K, (q."N)c. eRR,.. F.B. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
1ft) (tsf) lis" ( '" ItsO SETTLEMENT
26.25 20.26 0.691 i(;j;~]~;?~;~;!;~~ ~;~ 733 1929.6 2.8132 4.90 98.30 0.1683 1.19 0.9368 0.2779 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.41 17.03 0.563 743 1937.2 2.8742 5.45 91.68 0.1517 1.19 0.9384 0.2785 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.57 18.28 0.544 753 1944.8 2.8197 4.95 89.29 0.1462 1.19 0.9380 0.2791 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.74 19.37 0.604 784 1952.9 2.6113 4.66 93.02 0.1649 1.19 0.9376 0.2796 NO LIQUEFACTION
2.... 19.10 0.542 774 1960.5 2.7932 4.73 88.84 0.1448 1.19 0.9373 0.2604 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.07 19.49 0.497 784 1966.6 2.7589 4.45 84.89 0.1369 1.19 0.9369 0.2810 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.23 21.12 0.585 i~"l:~~'\~;,;>'g~~~ ~~.~ 794 1976.2 2.7418 4.31 89.04 0.1456 1.19 0.9365 0.2816 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.4 28.26 0.774 805 1984.3 2.6400 3.58 98.82 0.1698 1.19 0,9361 0.2822 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.56 30.80 1.134 815 1992.0 2.6949 396 118.79 0.2359 1.19 0.9357 0.2828 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.72 37.32 1.512 825 1999.6 2.B5B5 3.70 134.42 0.3059 1.19 0.9354 0.2834 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.89 25.85 1.403 ~. '!-1.03' ,i ;,'__: '25.08'~~;~ 2843.2 83B 2007.7 2.8736 5.45 136.60 0.3171 1.19 0.9350 0.2840 NO LIQUEFACTION
28.05 28.86 0.896 i!1Iij~l~i B46 2015.3 2.6705 3.79 105.84 0.1903 1.19 0.9346 0.2846 NO LIQUEFACTION
28.22 28.43 0.514 858 2023.4 2.5246 2.90 79.57 0.1269 1.19 0.9342 0.2852 0.53 LIQUEFACTION 0.06
28.36 30.14 0.598 BBB 2031.0 2.5287 2.92 84.84 0.1368 1.19 0.9338 0.2657 0.57 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
26.54 28.65 0.771 876 2036.6 2.8409 3.59 98.94 0.1701 1.19 0.9335 0.2863 NO LIQUEFACTION
28.71 60.63 1.235 887 2046.7 2.2971 1.94 113.00 0.2142 1.19 0.9331 0.2868 0,89 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
28.87 70.25 1.484 8.7 2054.3 2.2564 1.82 122.40 0.2505 1.19 0.9327 0.2874 1.04 0.01
29.04 as." 1.llllS 907 2062.4 2.3931 2.28 143.60 0.3554 1.19 0.9323 0.2879 1.47
29.2 62.96 1.915 i> .1.01~\~<:~,60.16 r.~j 2987.3 .17 2070.0 2.4072 2.34 140.91 0.3402 1.19 0.9319 0.2885 1.41
29.36 61.63 2.827 ~.:,\~:~~ ;,;~~t~_~;)~:~ ~~~! =:~ "" 2077.6 2.5443 3.00 176.49 1.19 0.9315 0.2890 NO LIQUEFACTION
29.53 75.21 2.890 938 2085.7 2.4264 2.43 174.12 1.19 0.9311 0.2895 NO LIQUEFACTION
29.69 64.77 2.963 1[,11 948 2093.3 2.5298 2.92 179.94 1.19 0.9308 0.2901 NO LIQUEFACTION
29.66 61.48 2.749 .58 2101.4 2.5387 2.97 173.22 1.19 0.9304 0.2906 NO LIQUEFACTION
30.02 62.60 2.016 ... 2109.1 2.4297 2.44 144.46 0.3604 1.19 0.9297 0,2910 1.48
30.18 61.49 1.709 .7. 2116.7 2.3906 2.27 132.17 0.2947 1.19 0.9284 0.2912' 1.21 0.00
30.35 55.22 1.917 ... 2124.8 2.4934 2.74 142.46 0.3489 1.19 0.9270 0.2914 - 1.43
30.51 51.40 2.023 ... 2132.4 2.5554 3.06 148.29 0.3633 1.19 0.9251 0.2916 1.57
30.68 55.41 2.423 1010 2140.5 2.5B5B 3.12 162,68 1.19 0.9243 0.2918 NO LIQUEFACTION
30.84 57.76 2.514 1020 2148.1 2.5523 3.05 165.10 1.19 0.9230 0.2920 NO LIQUEFACTION
3' 58.44 2.896 1030 2155.7 2.5667 3.13 171.21 1.19 0.9217 0.2921 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.17 57.92 2.601 1040 2163.8 2.5626 3.11 168.12 1.19 0.9203 0.2923 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.33 56.49 2.441 f:H5::#;,~\~;~~~ ~~~.~ 1060 2171.4 2.5585 3.08 162.43 1.19 0.9190 0.2925 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.5 57.48 2.541 1061 2179.5 2.5610 3.10 165.75 1.19 0.9176 0.2926 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.66 56.61 2.420 1071 2187.1 2.5534 3.05 161.26 1.19 0.9163 0.2928 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.82 56.42 2.361 1081 2194.7 2.5505 3.04 159.00 0.4539 1.19 0.9150 0.2929 ' .1,85
31.99 56.72 2.555 1111111 1091 2202.8 2.5729 3.16 166.27 1.19 0,9137 0.2931 NO LIQUEFACTioN
32.15 55.71 2.529 1101 2210.4 2.5813 3.21 16559 1.19 0.9124 0.2932 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.32 54.91 2.630 1112 2218.5 2.6195 3.45 174.77 1.19 0.9110 0.2933 NO LiQUEFACTION
32.48 52.95 3.224 1122 2226.1 2.7088 4.06 198.13 1.19 0.9097 0.2935 NO iJQUEFACTlON
32.64 48.16 2.987 1132 2233.8 2.7455 4.34 192.26 1.19 0.9084 0.2936 NO iJQUEFACTION
32.61 45.31 2.435 1143 2241.9 2.7207 4.15 1'72.64 1.19 0.9070 0.2937 NO liQUEFACTION
32.97 42.86 1.930 1153 2249.5 2.6854 3.89 152.89 0.4124 1.19 0.9057 0.2936 NO LIQUEFACTioN
33.14 43.64 1.... 1163 2257.6 2.6639 3.68 154.96 0.4260 1.19 0.9043 0.2939 Np LIQUEFACTION
33.3 42.23 1.805 1173 2265.2 2.6769 3.83 147.78 0.3802 1.19 0.9030 0.2940 NO LIQUEFACTION
33.46 42.90 1.687 \., 0.96:,,-,:,.,,39,12:,,( 3455.9 1183 2272.8 2.6439 3.61 141.10 0.3412 1.19 0.9017 0.2941 NO LIQUEFACTION
33.63 49.71 1.371 L->~' p.96 .~:;_f~,:~ 45.25it:) 3474.6 1194 2280.9 2.4700 2.62 118.62 0.2352 1.19 0.9003 0.2942 '0.95 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
33.79 43.97 1.305 ':'i 0,96_~i(,:>,,39._96,.;.:~ 3492.2 1204 2288.5 2.5327 2.94 117.45 0.2307 1.19 0.8990 0.2943 '0.94 LIQUEFACTION 0.01
33.96 36.15 1.301 ;:S-'O.96/:~~::;,~,:32.eo:;~~~ 3510.Q 1214 2296.6 2.6645 3.88 127.40 0.2723 1.19 0.8976 0.2943 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.12 31.17 1.319 t"i:~ji[';;~:~l~j ~.~ 1224 2304.2 2.7856 4.68 131.68 0.2922 1.19 0.8963 0.2944 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.28 28.10 1,182 1234 2311.8 2.6712 5.42 127.95 0.2746 1.19 0.8950 0.2945 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.45 24.72 0.978 1245 2319.9 2.8543 5.26 117.47 0.2306 1,19 0.8936 0.2945. NO LIQUEFACTION
34.61 25.61 0.950 1255 2327.5 2.8242 4.99 115.24 0.2223 1.19 0.8923 0.2946 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.78 22.79 0._ 1285 2335.6 2.9082 5.78 118.49 0.2347 1.19 0.8910 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.94 20.91 0.847 '~:,'0.95 :1;,:;"'(16.76 ':.;:; 3616.7 1275 2343.2 2.9296 5." 112.51 0.2127 1.19 0.6897 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.1 18.17 0.704 't 0.95~:i'~b'~)6,29_:Y:j 3636.3 1285 2350.9 2.9750 6.47 105.41 0.1689 1.19 0.8884 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.27 18.99 0.755 ~~?'~::t};~';:~j~:E.!11 :~:~ 1296 2359.0 2.9657 6.37 106.29 0.1981 1.19 0.8870 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.43 1a.97 0.730 1306 2366.6 2.9564 6.29 106.68 0.1929 1,19 0.8857 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.6 19.06 1.045 1317 2374.7 3.0565 7.39 125.75 0.2649 1.19 0.8843 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page 4 of6
GeoSoJutiODS, Ine.
Uquiratlion Analysis ~ CPT
Import from Cone Plot Normalized Soil Profile Behavior
Depth .. f. .:~~ :~'.clM','f: u K, (CIc'lNlcl CRRu
(ft) (ts" (tsij ......n;'.i.~i ( . Itsf)
35.76 25.20 1.608 [']E;;ti!:,:~:~rt~ ~~~.~ 1327 2382.3 2.9964 6.70 150.49 0.3970
35.93 45.49 1.976 1337 2390.4 2.6755 3.82 154.59 0.4238
36.09 49.52 1.744 1347 2398.0 2.5531 3.05 134.16 0.3046
36.25 62.60 1.764 1357 2405.6 2.4107 2.36 130.76 0.2879
36.42 72.08 1.587 1388 2413.7 2.2916 1.92 122.61 0.2514
36.58 77.24 1.479 j,::' 0.93i:\"j ,J68.24:'Q 3799.1 1378 2421.3 2.2283 1.74 116.66 0.2355
36.75 76.23 1.410 ~1~li~l~i 1388 2429.4 2.2230 1.72 115.98 0.2251
36.91 78.31 1.901 1398 2437.0 2.2963 1." 133.57 0.3016
37.07 82.07 2.098 1408 2444.6 2.2979 1." 140.15 0.3360
37.24 88.42 2.421 1419 2452.7 2.2968 .1.94 150.47 0.3966
'37.4 70.33 1.724 1429 2460.3 2.3351 2.07. 127.38 0.2722
37.57 42.86 1.024 1440 2468.4 2.4927 2.73 102.46 0.1800
37.73 27.07 0.640 1450 2476.0 2.7062 4.04 95.59 0.1612
37.89 17.10 0.530 1460 2483.7 2.9662 6.38 95.10 0.1600
38.06 15.44 0.405 '.c- 092: :<., 13,45 ~::! 3961.9 1470 2491.8 2.9699 6,42 86.27 0.1397
38.22 15.87 0.410 ~l~t~~~i 1480 2499.4 2.9556 6.26 86.44 0.1401
38.39 16.24 0.420 1491 2507.5 2.9471 6.17 87.05 0.1414
38.55 16..56 0.432 1501 2515.1 2.9421 6.12 87.89 0.1431
38.71 18,46 0.641 1511 2522.7 2.9707 6.42 102.64 0.1806
38." 20.56 1.814 1521 2530.8 3.1933 9.16 162.69
39.04 22.12 1.701 1531 2538.4 3.1255 8.25 157.49 0.4433
39.21 30.82 1.539 1542 2546.5 2.8762 5.47 145.23 o ....
39.37 21.44 1.514 ", 0.91;...;".", 18.44'f~1 4106.0 1552 2554.1 3.1147 6.11 149.62 0.3915
39.53 22.84 2.... :;~~1l;!:;;::E:E;1* :m! 1582 2561.7 3.1710 8.85 173.64
39.7 41.18 2.040 1572 2569.8 2.7749 4.57 161.57
39.86 43.03 1.845 1582 2577.4 2.7173 4.12 151.95 0.4063
40.03 29.91 1..117 ',"... 0.90 '>;'~"~:' 2~.57 ~~ ~'I 4178.6 1593 2585.5 2.a095 4.a7 124.44 0.2592
40.19 16.01 0.792 ~:~:: O.90':~ ~::.;c:,'13.67/f 4196.2 1603 2593.1 3.1389 8.42 115.15 0.2220
40.35 16.14 0.445 ~.. O.90.,:t~/.13?6;\~ 4213.8 1813 2600.8 2.9836 8.58 90.31 0.1485
40.52 12.38 0.404 " :;;:0.900,,: ';, ,'.10.54~;;-l4232.5 1624 2608.9 3.1494 8.56 90.23 0.1483
40.68 12.05 0.407 ~~~~~~~ 1634 2616.5 3.1727 8.87 90.86 0.1498
40.85 13.56 0.430 1644 2624.6 3.1023 7.96 91.55 0.1514
41.01 13.46 0.632 1654 2632.2 3.2092 ..38 106.96 0.1938
41.17 16.72 0.933 1BB4 2639.6 3.1619 8.73 123.49 0.2552
41.34 31.65 1.506 1675 2647.9 2.8674 5.39 144.03 0.3579
41.5 69,40 1.436 1685 2655.5 2.3021 1.96 114.50 0.2196
41.67 131.21 1.575 )','1. 0.69 ~.~""(110~53JJ 4359.0 1695 2683.8 1.9344 1.22 135.19 0.3098
41.83 181.84 1.471 r":~E"'f:l!'j~g~j ~g~ 1705 2671.2 1.7135 1.05 160.15
41.99 180.15 1.107 1715 2678.8 1.8408 1.00 150,83 0.3991
42.16 196.32 1.499 1726 2687.8 1.en8 1.02 167.82
42.32 208.67 1.979 1736 2696.2 1.7178 1.05 183.43
42.49 245.57 2.06B 1747 2705.1 1.6314 1.00 205.27
42.65 236.92 1.705 1757 2713.5 1.5959 1.00 197.74
42.81 226.40 1.659 1767 2722.0 1.6164 1.00 188.66
42.98 227.82 2.148 1777 2730.9 1.6908 1.03 195.53
43.14 232.92 1.539 1787 2739.3 1.5783 1.00 193.48
43.31 217.18 1.880 1798 2748.3 1.6808 1.02 184.57
43.47 212.89 0.972 1809 2756.7 1.6098 1.00 176.28
43.64 182.88 2.321 1818 2765.6 1.8524 1.15 173.43
43.8 223.33 2,167 1828 2774.0 1.7062 1.04 192.35
43.96 242.07 2.776 1836 2762.4 1.7368 1.00 212.02
44.13 265.51 2.155 184. 2791.4 1.6007 1.00 216.49
44.29 239.25 2.148 1859 2799.8 1.6645 1.01 199.25
44.46 241.77 1.441 1870 2808.7 1.5408 1.00 198.33
44.62 243.95 2.040 1879 2817.2 1.6376 1.00 199.82
44.78 250.20 1.633 188. 2825.6 1.5904 1.00 204.64
44.95 290.60 1.032 ;"'. 0.86~b)~237.47:;",j 4734.6 1900 2834.5 1.3402 1.00 237.4''-
45.11 340.78 2.226 ~~;';..o.66i;.~~'\~: 277.8~,~:'~ 4753.0 1910 2842.9 1.4597 1.00 277.87
Page 5016
.,~_~___~~ __L,_~___
1.19 0.8830 0.2949
1.19 0.8816 0.2949
1.19 0.6803 0.2949
1.1 9 0.8790 0.2949
1.19 0.8776 0.2949
1.19 0.8763 0.2949
1.19 0.8749 0.2949
1.19 0.8736 0.2949
1.19 0.6723 0.2949
1.19 0.8709 0.2949
1.19 0.8696 0.~9
1.19 0.8682 0.2949
1.19 0.8669 0.2946
1.19 0.6656 0.2948
1.19 0.8643 0.2948
1.19 0.6630 0.2947
1.19 0.8616 0.2947
1.19 0.8603 0.2946
1.19 0.8590 0.2946
1.19 0.8576 0.2945
'1.19 0.6563 0.2945
1.19 0.8549 0.2944
1.19 0.8536 0.2943
1.19 0.8523 0.2943
1.19 0.8509 0.2942
1.19 0.8496 0.2941
1.19 0.8482 0.2941
1.19 0.8469 0.2940
1.19 0.8456 0.2939
1.19 0.8442 0.2938
1.19 0.6429 0.2937
1.19 0.8416 0.2936
1.19 0.8403 0.2935
1.19 0.8390 0.2934
1.19 0.8376 0.2933
1.19 '0.8363 0.2932
1.19 0.8349 0.2931
1.19 0.8336 0.2930
1.19 0.8323 0.2928
1.19 0.6309 0.2927
1.19 0.8296 0.2925
1.19 0.8282 0.2924
1.19 0.8269 0.2922
1.19 0.8256 0.2920
1.19 0.8242 0.2918
1.19 0.8229 0.2917
1.19 0.8215 0.2915
1.19 0.8202 0.2913
1.19 0.8189 0.2911
1.19 0.8175 0.2909
1.19 0.8162 0.2908
1.19 0.8149 0.2906
1.19 0,8136 0.2904
1.19 0.8122 0.2902
1.19 0.8109 0.2900
1.19 0.8096 0.2698
1.19 0.8062 0.2896
1.19 0.8069 0.2894
F.S. LIQUEFACnON LIQUEFACTION
, SETTLEMENT
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
1.23
1.16
1.02
0.95 LIQUEFACTION
0.91 LIQUEFACTION
1.22
1.36
1.60
1.10
0.73 LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.89 LIQUEFACTION
. ." 1.26
NO lIaUEFACTION
. _:1.63-
NO LiQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO liQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
NO LIQUEFACTION
0.00
0,01
0,01
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.04
0.02
0.00
Depth
(II)
45.28
45.44
45.6
45.77
45.93
46.1
46.26
46.42
46.59
46.75
46.92
47.08
47.24
47.41
47.57
47.74
47.9
48.06
48.23
48.39
48.56
48.72
1m ort from Cone Plot
..
(ts"
220.99
324.66
270.80
235.54
240.67
233.47
191.50
161.21
168.22
169.81
168.79
165.34
262.28
266.53
91.87
281.87
275.66
254.37
214.15
234.21
232.49
216.25
f.
(1St)
2.704
2.949
2.696
1.954
2,411
1.826
2.586
1.832
2.538
1.068
1,055
2.233
0.823
2.376
2.395
2.895
2.352
.I 1.916
1.424
1.907
2.233
2.023
GeoSolutions,IDc..
Llqulractlon An.lysls - CPT
t-~~,0.66 :1'~-,~i:-179.9t~;;:I4772.5
~,"::,-;0,86:S"~~\2e3.92:\>~: 4790.9
:,'. :0.86,:f,;Jr219.81'::,1 4809.3
it~ix-g:: ~~JF.;. ~::~:}i :::~::
~~~j~~~
;.' -0.85:,.', '~\',132,43: 4979.5
;;.>g:::;~~t;\;:~:~;.::~: ::~:~
~)~E!tji~^f.:~I~J EH
t::fg:::f1~::~~;'~~:~,;)1 ;g~~::
~'-,:085:.':~~';' 18719--:,50738
~f;g::'i~i'~v~~:~J ;g~~::
1921
1931
1941
1951
1961
1972
1982
1992
2002
2012
2023
2033
2043
2054
2064
2074
2OB4
2094
2105
2115
2125
2135
2851.9
2860.3
2868.7
2877.7
2866.1
2895.0
2903.4
2911.8
2920.8
2929.2
2938.1
2946.6
2955.0
2963.9
2972.3
2981.3
2989.7
2979.7
2969.1
2959.1
2946.5
2938.5
1.7883
1.5796
1.6629
1.6497
1.7013
1.6359
1.8654
1.....
1.9406
1.6827
1.6843
1.9129
1.3556
1.6379
2.3007
1.6669
1.6153
1.6020
1.6216
1.6504
1.7023
1.7163
Behavior
ICe (crc,Nk.
(Isf)
1.10 197.59
1.00 263.92
1.01 222.55
1.00 191.49
1.04 202.32
1.00 168.65
1.16 178.91
1.16 150.53
1.23 166.40
1.03 139.97
1.03 139.07
1.20 159.07
1.00 209.77
1.00 212.85
1.95 142.92
1.02 227.85
1.00 219.19
1.00 202.60
1.00 170.87
1.00 187.86
1.04 193.48
1.05 181.91
PageGof6
eRR,.. F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
SEnLEMENT
1.19 0.8055 0.2891 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8042 0.2689 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8029 0.2887 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8015 0.2885 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8002 0.2883 NO LlaUEFACTION
1.19 0.7968 0.2681 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7975 0.2878 NO LIQUEFACTION
0.3972 1.19 0.7962 0.2676 1.65
1.19 0.7948 0.2874 NO LIQUEFACTION
0,3350 1.19 0.7935 0.2872 1.39
0.3301 1.19 0.7922 0.2869 1.37
0.4543 1.19 0.7909 0.2867 1,69
1.19 0.7896 0.2864 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7682 0,2862 NO LIQUEFACTION
0.3515 1.19 0.7669 0.2860 1.47
1.19 0.7855 0.2857 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7842 0.2855 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7829 0.2859 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7815 0.2865 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7802 0.2869 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7786 0.2875 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7775 0.2880 NO LIQUEFACTION
GeoSolufions, Inc.
Liquiraction Analysis - CrT
Job Name SLOSOl4-1
CPT.l Probabilistic ADalysis with top 5 ft removed
SOIL PROFILE
2
3
4
5
SAMPLE #
SOIL TYPE (UCSC)
UNIT WEIGHT (pel)
TOP DEPTH (ft)
ENOING OEPTH (ft)
GROUNDWATER eft)
SM
",'....~OO
,,',' ,,0,
135
CL
110
':::;--;J3.5.7 ."
15
5M
100 ."
_,15 ,
24
CL
110
24';'~
42
Sp.SM
115
.\ 42
. 48
eo 00 NOT ENTERI
14.5
FAULT
MAGNITUDE
.""",
GROUND MOTION STUDY-
Los 0505 Probablllstic DBE
7
0.33
TOTAL
LIQUEFACTION
SETTLEMENT
(In)
1.34
1m
Behavior
~ (Qo1Nlc. F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
s (tsf) SETTLEMENT
,o;~. .3810;,,~2.~4 ., "'47_56;..' - tl>0,Oa96~1.19fn"Q.$99a~O.2144'; ,1Y'<;."VO. t.. ',"'. !."..w~~;;;. ^. ';1":' .....1..~1 -, .
'0' -~';'d;:'''.'''-:~~''97- as '0'08 ~ir.n'~'~ ^' ^ if-'" 43~ "~,.. ~ .."''''' ^ -' ,~. :<';,,'..' "'1A' I ~F:i
'''..}! .gQOO,~,!,;", "", 9Or':;;;..,:19 ,!KI92(v.,c;'t ';'.;"r",:0.50.:,_:';:t::;'.!..~"::l"/.~:''f?'<:"~1,l;:i''''''''-'-^'''''''-'__'
.Ot.,t2:4940'q;f'2.74 :88 .0922" ";J<1'19 O.we~'O,2143~"l.;$\"",..;(0 511'" ~.-t.. ;<-"_'<1 'I "~~"'-1~,h',J""! ~~ ;,:l
O~r;;'2'3366*t'~208 5a74 0970"rt.;"":19~"'O:99a5~"02142 3'-~";i,,;0's4:- 'J.""""_: "1';.'': ;"t-;,.......s...~.\..._, ;:'",,_.~i
.u~, "'.'." . . . ':'<-~ '>'. ""~ ,." .,." '';'.,.1.. ",'" ,...."h.,,''''..,,'"~>i'.^','- . 1,10' :1
.^i~~~:l1a51i"'"l.'11,?1 64; ~1..Q44 ,19~^; ,O:9981.rO.2141t,""'>t'~O.S8\"~~-:;:':-.i nc":;' 'l';fr}~'*.:, ':.t. /..;'" ~.~ I
a;O~O]~7.ftr~:41 2\ 1155 9~9.~T~:;tt214tt:f~~.j;.~~o.64;z.~.~-:--~V1fftf;;U~S't:t:::..;3.~ '_::,'j
'S,Q,\~-!..~,0133:~~1i32 , It 'ci124 9J~0.99731o-"213~f'!l1...,,,,,,0,69","l!iL_''''"'"''''i'4;V;ioC~~",';': ',.c'.:. .,^ "','t, 1
~~f.:O.<~1,9719{$~1j26 :t~ li<:84J1 O~ '.354 9\"O.99S9r,O,213Ihlf"# '>'.,.t"~ 0 78'l!.'L~F 'r'.......~..:..... )~" o}.!--':!:> ~I.I, ," '~" 1":; ..~ ,;I
^~^t4fJ,O'" ~\1.9583,. 1:1'.25 .~:t~ 1>"65.83 0.1366 t;19i"",cr099M:JO.21ae.~"-'l~r7 0.17:t""'::I';M,..h ..,;'-.\ ll''0 ,,~,-..' -"""~~., :-} ~- ~ !.. I
1:r- -~64.ot.,!'t2 oooe'l.~t...I1 sot:" "lB2.'10 0 1S25 " 1"19l!;oO 996".....02137:"''''''.-:...''....0 741:, "'; ."'" "_,,,1. '''''.....'''.'..,. '.. ;>,{.,\ He:".t: ~",
i}"""'" J,M,' /.10' .......,"'. . t.,"f" "'~.' .c.,lt' It' ")~,.... ,~"" "I"(t''''''~'~''heo~''''''''O" ,~,
m.,.~. ~iOj:i" '1.30tt'T.:..n;.t'83-.93....\"'1, o-13501:t.:,..,1,1.9*O,9958,tt;2jsa"';.~;.,~ ~!.0,750~". ...... '.~~'i;'^'1 h., '-' '''1;,'I/~, l<'.;~ 0 ."
. ~,l9-r.~r~ ~~:9547 .25~J6 0.1"'''' '''1;t91''O.~~,};002135'1jl'l~{~'k>o062tl\j "'I .M.>j .1".f.i':.~rl."J't>;;';..,.~,~ '. ,.",-,t'.,; ....1
~i:"'fs!01 g~12 ~2jiJ"'J. A -1 19~b'995OT02134 :<i--;. M.';o 81-""''l:' ,dl...." ....r.,,':.~....~.,..~.J I.,~>.:"
l'...;~,.-t' itt1ll .~, 0 tJ'I'~1~~ '0 -~~ ~.' {!.~~'j'" ;r',%>i:"'f~~l""YJ., ,:.,-...t..,.,.,J't,:......,...,...,., I
f<:~^~~Ol!f J;I,~~1 21 r< , :1 ~9 :!:-....0:~j(J,2133~-j<il"tV,...7:\"'0.93 ,:P\'&~ .-".....1 ~', 'l:IIf:<*'i""" A .^'" ,"1'; ., ..
~2~Q~ltfi;:11'9'5$t,~1 j i19l?O.~:50.2133"":-:'~}.wl1.0"'.M)P:'-: ':.'1' ,;;:iit!:;1JY.,'..'o/ ~J.' r!~"o.
tp:~~2l52.0\~1,9232,(::r;-~. i. 1}19~0.9939r(l.~1~~r~: ..-:;~ 13 f::"'- :,~: .~L~'It " ;:+~i~ ti:'.; -. ,,."".~ ..,
) ~""O.,\\,,~"~rl9:0j." ,'1,i1884f'7"-<;:11 -77 0 ^~7"'1A9~.Io.9935'~O.2131;,~ ,!.c..: 1 23~:." '~: ~ :':'::J: j ~",~t",~:\,l~:?~. :,,,;~ , .:
~~..41lt?::!~?0~~..8E!77.'!Cl~,;j. 'f!;'!t~--;' '. 14:46:\>:1,. j...1J'21_SS'-fu"': 1:19.>A:q.9931.1o.2~30!':'_' ~~\1123'J '; :_bZ' .;'':: I -: "~;' .:,;,......-} t "., .,,' j
t'^0kO.~~"",,,,,~12l'l-,b.',9034~yf1.t9i<-;AA,'"'''''110B:4 w',:..:J,::"70.1965 4:\';1:19:~0.9927'rO.2129:..,...., ';~..,1:11'./l"';';W ::J:';;::.x,...'.,.., l' ,'-~. ..0: " .
,,~ .. :"tv"'" -'"~. 'l!! r~l~ ;Jl ~-.,.,^t.f'o'or ~- ...' '" ....'\.r ....'~ .~", .'l ~;" "~>l0~ .<
~....;.O.m"<32!J.0f1~e~11)Vli 1.1E;; t'i~jti9S \aO~16~-2'.~.1,19-0,09924.~~O.,d29, r --; -,~" 0.95f"-:-{~ ~;'''~' \.,,;; ,:~" !. .;"-; y .::,: '
at~O r.;t~;Q3.v~1.B~"l:E* 1: ~o ":t"" 00, ot..Q,1657it. ltf:19,;.JQ.9920...:.0.212e: ....'.: ~ 092.-, - ""',w tJ T-.-,~:- ~"A' .....-- ':~'
IO~st'U36J;6.f;:;.1~1~824~.A;!. ~ ~O 164,5'r'0~1:19~o.9916~o.21~'t;:/~"~\.~0.92,~J"i~1":\'~'i~~f~~i~~-:!:,"J,;',"~' :,':'J.'; '~' ,'~
9 .""",~;.e'''''3n.O'~t,e266'':~~~,1. 00 {O,'732i,'~';"1:19;-tO,9912!.::002126J\: )'_' 0,91;"!:~ ;-...:v;",..~;..-t" l<:..f....iinj<';..~.\-, ~". ':;'
ili'Fi':~. "-O;1lf"j^51''''JI' -"" 0''''- . '" " -,., - ,..- - '"", , ',' . - ',"
o ". ) , j$. t."l ~,4':~1i1 ~4"M~f ~~.1 ri.~~1.19~'P9908:;'!I\.2125:~~",,:. 0.~5, ~% '~,:~~~:;,,;"'ib~ >-! '~>';<,:;;;,,:., : '. ~
OJ' :W:~1b.-O~j;>.1,6S10'''.1:1:'1 '(._ _,9a.05":'v':N~Q.1E117',e"1,19'l0,9904.0.:Z124;;'i"'" 094, '-~-., ,,. ::~. o~"",q~^~"'( . .i
~~}~~~l~k1427.0~~?t.8745j'", }.17 :;0"'>;;~99~6:l,.;tt~ ~~~1),1719~1,\~1.'19;":Q.9900:,'O 2124<':~ ;.~ ~0:97~'..:; ~:. ~.. .:; ~.< 6it~-7, ~o-";1 .' , .' ", ~ ;
~~I'.:!1'\~~3:0f';;1~a605'~jf,;'1~7:,~,,~M.r,"96.22~;l,;j.;O!1628 ~r~~ '1;19~~~0.989~l.l).2123;.~,.' .\.~ 0?1 \ -.: _k ; '* -.~ Z, " -. "_ '0
~~.iP~?j59~O;!~ 1~e791'/;";>'l'~)7....;;,~~g1,~f. ':;;L~.O~15Q.S-~~T.,1;19" q9~93"002122^""'iM"'_:~.0.85. ~~. ::" '.:' ':' ", I'f ,'-; "~r .. ..
. ~. o..a:t.:'tQ~~m.Ollit1.a7,75. ~j.11;7L::;,:t,96,73.;.~~,;..lo,1642.:lin1;19~"O.9aa9~0~121~t.:.i......092:,:: t..": "..'" ..: ,":; -:~""'.;-', '.:--":" .
0340 1':",2.07 ..";:,'.;,,85.17.::.:14920 0 492.0 1.6921 1.18 1qo.63 0174~ 1.19 0.9885 02120 0,98 002
0.368 p'2.04:<,;.~~.:,136.82~'~i] 5090 0 509.0 1.9007 1.19 10327 0.1824 1.19 0.9881 0.2120 103 0,01
0405 :-::"2.01':' ,.~.~l.92.45!:i>'1 525.0 0 525.0 1.8878 1.18 108.85 0.1999 1.19 09878 02119 1.13 0.01
0.452 ~:\1.98.:.,:~::.L100.191:.~ 541.0 0 541.0 1.8644 1.16 11592 0.2249 1.19 0.9874 02118 1.27 000
0.506 ~ '''':1.95'''~I:-r,:; 109.91'):1 556 0 0 558.0 1.8344 1.13 12449 0.2594 1.19 0.9870 0.2117 1.46
0.567 1>-'.1.92'", ,~,."120.48,;'.N 574.0 0 574.0 1.8054 111 13380 0.3028 1.19 0.9866 02116 1.71
0633 :.-:'.1,89~:~.,.,1;_~31.61"::1 591.0 0 591.0 17781 1 ~ 14358 0.3553 119 09862 02115 200
0.704 ::i 1.87,:;~~;'(;,142.18':~l 607.0 0 607.0 17573 1 08 153~ 0.4135 1.19 0.9858 02115 233
0.760 '.1.84<~-.149.66::"l 623.0 0 623.0 1.7441 1.07 15977 0.4593 119 09855 0.2114 2.59
0.805 ;',':1.82,?~~!(151.20l~j 640.0 0 640.0 1.7507 107 162.09 1.19 098510.2113 NOllQUEFACT10N
0701 ~~~":1.ao)!\/~147:49}~ 656.0 0 6560 17225 105 15531 04284 1.19 09847 0.2112 2.42
0878 :;.t,.1.77.:,},:i,::134.38:,:j673.0 0 873.0 1.7664 108 145.49 03664 119 0964302111 207
0577 . "1.75~1~,l':112.26':'" 669,0 0 689.0 18287 113 126,65 02689 119 0983902111 152
0.553 :;".1.73"~::!100.~~;::,: 705.0 0 7050 1.8837 1.17 11752 02309 119 09836 02110 131
Page 1 of6
GeoSolutioDS. Inc.
Liquiractiolt Anlllysis. CPT
1m ort from Cone Plot Behavior sis
Depth .. f, . K, ('k1N)CS CRR7.I F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
(ft) (ts" (Isf) ( '" (tsf) SETTLEMENT
7.22 57.43 0.518 0 722.0 1.9084 1.20 111.22 0.2079 1.19 0.9832 0.2109 1.18 0.01
7.38 54.85 0.496 0 738.0 1.9291 1.22 106.87 0.1935 1.19 0.9828 0.2106 1.09 0.01
7." 53.04 0.473 0 755.0 1.9407 1.23 103.21 0.1822 1.19 0.9824 0.2107 1.03 0.01
7.71 52.23 0.459 ". 0 771.0 1.9460 1.24 101.04 0.1759 1.19 0.9820 0.2106 1.00 0.02
7.87 53.84 0.471 0 787.0 1.9379 1.23 102.36 0,1797 1.19 0.9816 0.2106 1.02 0.01
8.04 57.50 0.493 0 804.0 1.9134 1.20 105.95 0.1906 1.19 0,9813 0.2105 1.08 0.01
8.2 63.51 0.552 0 820.0 1.8660 1.16 113.39 0.2156 1.19 0.9809 0.2104 1.22 0.01
8.37 74.58 0.865 0 837.0 1.8418 1.14 127.59 0.2732 1.19 0.9805 0.2103 1.55
8.53 84.61 0.796 0 853.0 1.8182 1.12 141.08 0.3412 1.19 0.9801 0.2102 1.94
8.69 92.89 0.918 0 869.0 1.8052 1.11 152.13 0.4074 1.19 0.9797 0.2102 2.31
8." ".94 1.012 0 886.0 1.7962 1.11 159,74 0.4591 1.19 0.9793 0.2101 2.61
..02 103.73 1.073 0 902.0 1.7895 1.10 165.04 1.19 0.9790 0.2100 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.19 108.40 1.136 ',0;; ,.:1.52 ;;,'~;..:.155:46},;j 919.0 0 919.0 1.7824 1.09 170.09 1.19 0.9786 0.2099 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.35 113.44 1.241 i;;G'1.:;~~\1{1?:~it! EH 0 935.0 1.7842 1.10 176.66 1.19 0.9762 0.2098 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.51 117.69 1.329 0 951.0 1.7653 1.10 181.87 1.19 0.9778 0.2097 NO LIQUEFACTION
.... 121.31 1.226 0 86B.O 1.7445 1.07 181.02 1.19 0.9774 0.2097 NO LIQUEFACTION
9.84 124.63 1.247 ',:",; 1,47....f',~.."'i.'.172,73.,.() 984.0 0 984.0 1.7356 1.06 163.41 1.19 0.9771 0.2096 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.01 120.44 1.321 0 1001.0 1.7770 1.09 180.43 1.19 0.9767 0.2095 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.17 129.06 1.467 0 1017.0 1.7696 1.09 190.92 1.19 0.9763 0.2094 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.33 134.00 1.651 0 1033.0 1.7861 1.10 198.76 1.19 0.9759 0.2093 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.5 138.57 1.744 0 1050.0 1.7855 1.10 203.82 1.19 0.9755 0.2092 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.66 143.92 1.828 0 1066.0 1.7796 1.09 209.29 1.19 0.9751 0.2092 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.63 148.53 1.913 0 1083.0 1.7773 1.09 213.98 1.19 0.9747 0.2091 NO LIQUEFACTION
10.99 150.25 1.986 0 1099.0 1.7846 1.10 215.88 1.19 0.9744 0.2090 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.15 153.22 2.060 0 1115.0 1.7866 1.10 218.84 1.19 0.9740 0.2089 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.32 156.52 2.103 0 1132.0 1.7825 1.09 221.29 1.19 0.9736 0.2088 NO UQUEFACTION
11.48 151.57 2.195 0 1148.0 1.7945 1.10 222.95 1.19 0.9732 0.2088 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.65 182.90 2.336 0 1165.0 1.7969 1.10 229.15 1.19 0.9128 0.2087 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.61 165,49 2.437 0 1161.0 1.8032 1.11 232.19 1.19 0.9725 0.2088 NO LIQUEFACTION
11.96 169.09 2.473 I,; ~;(33-"F+212.39'~::'; 1198.0 0 1198.0 1.7969 1.10 234.58 1.19 0,9721 0.2085 NO liQUEFACTION
12.14 177.37 2.662 ~i~l~i i~ 0 1214.0 1.7969 1.10 244.42 1.19 0.9717 0.2084 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.3 191.28 2.877 0 1230.0 1.7763 1.09 258.40 1.19 0.9713 0.2083 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.47 190.79 2.947 0 1247.0 1.7880 1.10 257.92 1.19 0.9709 0.2063 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.63 182.62 2.608 0 1263.0 1.7992 1.11 247.38 1.19 0.9706 0.2062 NO lIaUEFACTION
12.8 169.90 2.409 0 1280.0 1.7945 1.10 227.66 1.19 0.9702 0.2061 NO LIQUEFACTION
12.96 139.60 1.813 0 1296.0 1.8238 1.1i 189.63 1.19 0.9698 0.2080 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.12 84.70 2.039 ~~~I!li~ 0 1312.0 2.1716 1.60 162.65 1.19 0.9694 0.2079 NO L1aUEFACTION
13.29 47.61 1.936 0 1329.0 2.5127 2.83 160.89 1.19 0.9690 0.2079 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.45 33.69 1.806 0 1345.0 2.6454 3.62 144.44 0.3602 1.19 0.9686 0.2078 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.62 31.37 1.405 0 1363.7 2.6149 3.42 126,29 0.2673 1.19 0.9682 0.2077 NO LIQUEFACTION
13.76 32.15 1.068 0 1381.3 2.5797 3.20 120.53 0.2428 1.19 0.9679 0.2076 1.40
13.94 32." 0.863 0 1398.9 2.5060 2.60 107.01 0.1940 1.19 0.9675 0.2075 1.11 0.01
14.11 30.34 0.645 0 1417.6 2.4769 2.65 92." 0.1548 1.19 0.9671 0.2074 0.89 0.04
14.27 26.74 0,458 0 1435.2 2.4213 2.40 79.21 0.1262 1.19 0.9667 0.2074 0.73 0.05
14.44 27.89 0.420 :.' '1.21;' 'tf:;: 31.80 ::~:.:: 1453.9 0 1453.9 2.4200 2.40 76.18 0.1211 1.19 0.9663 0,2073 0.70 006
14.6 29.71 0.553 . j!;;U~~~ti~;E~:! l~H 6 1465.3 2.4542 2.55 85.96 0.1391 119 0.9660 0.2061 0.80 UQUEFACTION 0.05
14.76 33.38 0.657 16 1472.9 2.4298 2.44 92.15 0.1528 1.19 0.9658 0.2094 0.87 liQUEFACTION 0.03
14.93 51.42 0.882 27 1481.0 2.2458 1.79 103.77 0.1839 1.19 0.9852 0.2106 1.04 0.01
15.09 111.47 1.079 ':~:'.1.19.!:t'.'':.;.~125.66::,:.~ 1523.8 37 1487.0 1.8276 1.13 141.66 0.3445 1.19 0.!l64B 0.2121 1.94
15.26 145.35 0.882 :"\~~U9?:,~.~:.:,163.52\':'! 1540.8 47 1493.4 1.6389 1.00 163.52 1.19 0.9644 0.2134 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.42 175.58 1.341 .""'f19'"'' - 19714'<;:' 1556 8 57 1499.4 1.6131 1.00 197.14 1.19 0.9640 0.2147 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.58 185.84 1.425 ;:,;,,': :.":;i':;~e: " ,;;;'j . 87 1505.4 1.5970 1.00 206.24 1.19 0.9637 0.2160 NO UQUEFACTION
15.75 194.98 1.516 ~'ij'ji;~ii"{E.n~! j~ii 78 1511.6 1.5868 1.00 218.02 1.19 0.9633 0.2173 NO LIQUEFACTION
15.91 219.64 1.877 .. 1517.8 1.5865 1.00 245.11 1.19 0.9629 0.2185 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.06 236.51 1.822 .. 1524,2 1.5263 1.00 263.38 1.19 0.9625 0.2198 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.24 216.02 0.206 I"; ,1.18 ;!,::,\~;240.09;~(;\ 1638.8 109 1530.2 1.1080 1.00 240.09 1.19 0.9621 0.2210 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.4 185.77 1.558 t';':;:~: ~tErJ,~~1':.:,fj~ ~~~:: 11. 1536.2 1.6274 1.00 206.06 1.19 0.9618 0.2222 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.57 17.79 1.232 129 1542.6 2.9766 6.49 127.74 0.2739 1.19 0.9614 0.2235 NO LIQUEFACTION
Paga2of6
GeoSolutions, Inc.
L1qulracllonAnalysis-CPT
Behavior
Depth .. f, E~~~f~~;:'~ a, u K, (q.,1N)cS CRR7.I F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
(ft) (tsf) ('01) ( . (ts" SETTLEMENT
16.73 161.22 0.918 f;)'j:li~l~lj~.i~~ lfEi' 13. 1548.6 1.6630 1.00 178.11 1.19 0.9610 0.2247 NO LIQUEFACTION
16.9 144.11 1.576 150 1555.0 1.7893 1.10 174.60 1.19 0.9606 0.2259 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.06 140.10 2.072 160 1561.1 1.8928 1.18 182.24 1.19 0.9602 0.2270 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.22 119.73 2.528 170 1567.1 2.0545 1.38 181.20 1.19 0.9598 0.2282 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.39 210.22 3.078 ;i:ill~1 180 1573.5 1.7752 1.09 250,91 1.19 0.9595 0.2294 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.55 216.25 1.877 190 1579.5 1.5961 HlO 236.57 1.19 0.9591 0.2305 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.72 207.14 1.317 201 1585.9 1.5151 1.00 226.14 1.19 0.9587 0.2317 NO LIQUEFACTION
17.88 172.54 1.153 211 1591.9 1.5895 1.00 188.01 1.19 0.9583 0.2328 NO LIQUEFACTION
18.04 154.13 1.228 221 1597.9 1.6777 1.02 171.43 1.19 0.9579 0.2339 NO LIQUEFACTION
18.21 139.29 1.150 232 1604.3 1.7216 1.05 159.11 0.4546 1.19 0.9575 0.2350 2.31
18.37 142.88 1.104 241 1610.3 1.6951 1.03 160.14 1.19 0.9572 0.2361 NO LIQUEFACTION
18.54 124.28 .0.890 252 1616.7 1.7212 1.05 141.38 0.3428 1.19 0.956B 0.2372 1.72
18.7 110.88 0.929 262 1622.7 1.8035 1.11 132.74 0.2975 1.19 0.9564 0.2383 1.49
18.86 . '105.87 0.633 272 1628.7 1.7313 1.06 120.78 0.2438 1.19 0.9560 0.2393 1.22 0.00
19.03 114.95 0.956 ;:::r1:14':'5!~".';123.59'~:i: 1917.8 283 1635.1 1.7908 1.10 135.95 0.3137 1.19 0.9556 0.2404 1.58
19.19 86.50 0.675 293 1841.1 1.8721 1.16 108.02 0.1972 1.19 0.9553 0.2414 0.97 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
19.36 74.92 1.003 303 1647.5 2.0687 1.40 112.41 0.2121 1.19 0.9549 0.2425 1.04 0.01
19.52 90.01 0.609 313 1653.6 1.8230 1.12. 106.15 0.1976 1.19 0.9545 . 0.2435 0.97 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
19.69 112.62 0.765 324 1659.9 1.7458 1.07 128.44 0.2770 1.19 0.9541 0.2446 1.35
19.85 110.60 0.671 334 1666.0 1.7233 1.05 124.12 0,2578 1.19 0.9537 0.2456 1.25 0.00
20.01 ".04 0.480 344 1672.0 1.7284 1.06 107.93 0.1969 1.19 0.9533 0.2465 0.95 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
20.18 79.74 0.463 354 1678.4 1.6325 1.13 95.72 0.1616 1.19 0.9529 0.2476 0.78 LIQUEFACTION 0.04
20.34 84.36 0.606 364 1684.4 1.8647 1.16 103.43 0.1829 1.19 0.9526 0.2485 0.86 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
20.51 78.31 0.816 375 1690.8 1.9See 1.29 106.45 0.1922 1.19 0.9522 0.2495 0.92 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
20.67 81.56 0.757 3B5 1696.8 1.9442 1.23 106.18 0.1913 1.19 0.9518 0.2505 0.91 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
20.83 82.BO 1.057 395 1702.8 2.0277 1.34 116.72 0.2279 1.19 0.9514 0.2514 1.08 0.01
21 109.81 1,382 406 1709.2 1.9323 1.22 140.99 0.3406 1.19 0.9510 0.2524 1.61
21.16 105.35 0.930 416 1715.2 1.8450 1.14 126.19 0.2669 1.19 0.9507 0.2533 1.26 0.00
21.33 109.65 0.835 428 1721.6 1.7919 1.10 126.47 0.2681 1.19 0.9503 0.2543 1.26 0.00
21.49 113.01 0.888 !' ,:;',1:11';\;/.-;, 118.21.\;:; 2163.8 436 1727.6 1.7904 1.10 130.00 0.2843 1.19 0.9499 0.2552 1.33
21.65 93.36 0.763 ~;~i:l~'1~li~1::~;j~1 !iH~ 44B 1733.6 1.8673 1.16 113.06 0.2144 1.19 0.9495 0.2561 1.00 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
21.82 91.20 0.813 457 1740.0 1.6993 1.19 112.94 0,2140 1.19 0.9491 0.2570 0." LIQUEFACTION 0.02
21.98 65.69 0.532 487 1746.0 1.9911 1.29 88.07 0.1435 1.19 0.9487 0.2579 0.86 LIQUEFACTION 0,05
22.15 59.15 0.350 477 1752.4 1.9565 1.25 76.61 0.1218 1.19 0._ 0.2588 0.56 LIQUEFACTION 0.06
22.31 .53.47 0.973 487 1758.5 2.2797 1.89 104.51 0.1861 1.19 0.9480 0.2597 0.85 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
22.47 eo.81 1.451 4.7 1764.5 2.1416 1.54 128.40 0.2769 1.19 0.9476 0.2606 1.27 0.00
22.64 83.51 0.904 SOB 1770.9 1.9854 1.28 110.55 0.2057 1.19 0.9472 0.2615 0.94 LIQUEFACTiON 0.02
22.8 ".05 0.496 518 1n6.9 1.8000 1.11 100.50 0.17:44 1.19 0.9488 0.2623 0.79 LIQUEFACTION 0.04
22.97 89.44 0.363 52. 1763.3 1.7212 1.00 ".OS 0.1526 1.19 0._ 0.2632 0.69 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
23.13 86.53 0.628 53. 1789.3 1.8691 1.16 103.26 0.1624 1.19 0.9461 0.2640 0.62 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
23.29 81.95 0.703 548 1795.3 1.9320 1.22 102.63 0.1805 1.19 0.9457 0.2648 0.81 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
23.46 84.84 0.719 55. 1801.7 1.9171 1.21 104.75 0.1869 1.19 0.9453 0.2657 0.64 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
23.62 102.25 1.019 569 1807.7 1.8977 1.19 124.06 0.2577 1.19 0.9449 0.2665 1.15 0.01
23.79 82.54 1.060 5BO 1614.1 2.0414 1.36 114.41 0.2193 1.19 0.9445 0.2673 0.98 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
23.95 55.47 1.224 590 1820.1 2.3294 2.05 115.69 0.2240 1.19 0.9442 0.268~ 1.00 LIQUEFACTION 0.01
24.11 81.20 1.298 600 1827.7 2.1114 1.48 121.87 0.2483 1.19 0.9438 0.2689 -UO 0.01
24.28 73.29 1.467 610 1835.6 2.2118 1.70 126.15 0.2667 1.19 0.9434 0.2696 1.18 0.01
24.44 63.77 0.532 820 1643.4 2.0194 1.33 8!?63 0.1364 1.19 0.9430 0.2703 0.61 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
24.61 70.85 0.650 631 1851.5 2.0062 1.31 '93.65 0.1564 1.19 0.9426 0.2711 0.69 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
24.77 59.28 0.701 &41 1859.2 2.1363 1.52 91.12 0.1504 1.19 0.9422 0.2718 0." LIQUEFACTION 0.05
24.93 .61.83 1.175 651 1886.8 2.2544 1.81 112.65 0.2130 1.19 0.9419 0.2725 0.93 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
25.1 107.52 2.504 861 1674.9 2.1446 1.54 166.42 ~.19 0.9415 0.2732 NO LIQUEFACTION
25.26 94.81 1.931 . :..::1.06, .!{".!l-.,95~OO.J 2553.9 871 1862.5 2.1407 1.53 145.68 0.3675 1.19 0.9411 0.2739 1.80
25.43 44.95 1.427 (0~j:~}wm~~ E~ BB2 1890.6 2.5121 2.83 127.20 0.2714 1.19 0.9407 0.2746 1.18 0,01
25.59 27.69 0.891 8.2 1898.2 2.6758 3.82 105.65 0.1897 1.19 0.9403 0.2752 NO LIQUEFACTION
25.75 21.35 0.802 702 1905.8 2.8158 4.92 104.62 0.1865 1.19 0.9400 0.2759 NO LIQUEFACTION
25.92 16.87 0.733 713 1913.9 2.9475 6.18 103.57 0.1833 1.19 0.9396 0.2766 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.08 16.70 0.950 723 1921.5 3.0293 7.08 117.20 0.2297 1.19 0.9392 0.2712 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page3of6
"
GeoSolutioDS. Inc.
LiquiraclionAnlllysis-CPT
1m ort from Cone Plot Behavior
Depth .. f. u K, (q."Nk. CRR,.. F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
Iftl Its" (tst) ( '" . (tst) SEnLEMENT
26.25 20.26 0.691 iU,j.~~;;0~:!~:~;.t1 ~~.~ 733 1929.6 2.8132 4." 96.30 0.1683 1.19 0.9388 0.2779 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.41 17.03 0.563 743 1937.2 2.6742 5.45 91.68 0.1517 1.19 0.9384 0.2185 NO LIQUEFACTION
.26.57 18.28 0.544 753 1944.8 2.8197 4.95 89.29 0.1462 1.19 0.9380 0.2791 NO LIQUE~ACTION
26.74 19.37 0.804 184 1952.9 2.8113 4.86 93.02 0.1549 1.19 0.9376 0.2798 NO LIQUEFACTION
26.9 19.10 0.542 . .1.04A::.,";;:':.18.75~'! 2734.3 774 1960.5 2.7932 4,73 86.84 0.1446 1.19 0.9373 0.2604 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.07 19.49 0.497 {~:~i~;j.i;;'~:~.:i~~:{ ;~;~:~ 784 1968.6 2.7589 4.45 84.89 0.1369 1.19 0.9369 0.2810 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.23 21.12 0.565 784 1976.2 2.7418 4.31 89.04 0.1456 1.19 0.9365 0.2616 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.4 28.26 0.774 :.1.031>;,;~27.60,',lJ 2789.3 80S 1964.3 2.6400 3,58 98.62 0.1698 119 0.9361 0.2822 NO liqUEFACTION
27.56 30.80 1.134 ,1.03 '.:..,,' ,30.00,:'., 2806.9 81S 1992.0 2.6949 3.96 118.79 0.2359 1.19 0.9357 0.2828 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.72 37.32 1.512 ',"! ~::~.;'~:{Wi:::,~~,'::i ;~~:~ 82S 1999.6 2.6585 3.70 134.42 0.3059 1.19 0.9354 0.2834 NO LIQUEFACTION
27.89 25.85 1.403 836 2007.7 2.8736 5.45 136.60 0.3171 1.19 0.9350 0.2840 NO LIQUEFACTION
28.05 28.86 0.886 1 02:'''''\;'~~;27 95,;'~) 2860 8 846 2015.3 2.6705 3.79 105.64 0.1903 1.19 0.9346 0.2846 NO LIQUEFACTION
28.22 28,43 0.514 ;',: . ~::'~~~~;~'~~:.~~:,~;j ;:~~:; 856 2023.4 2.5246 2." 79.57 0.1269 1.19 0.9342 0.2852 0.53 LIQUEFACTION 006
28.38 30.14 0.598 BBB 2031.0 2.5287 2.92 84.B4 0.1368 1.19 0.9338 0.2857 0.57 LIQUEFACTION 0.05
28.54 28.65 0.711 \:,~,~~:~;~/:';:]~;:~:;;,t~.j ~~;:~ 876 2038.6 2.6409 3.59 98.94 0.1701 1.19 0.933~ 0.2863 NO LIQUEFACTION
28.71 60.63 1.235 887 2046.7 2.2971 1.94 113.00 0.2142 1.19 0.9331 0.2868 0,89 LIQUEFACTION 0.03
28.67 70.25 1.464 .,1.01...,.. ..67.39 .,' ~ 2951.0 897 2054.3 2.2564 1.82 122.40 0.2505 1.19 0.9327 0.2874 1.04 0,01
29.04 65.66 1.995 ~1~liii 907 2062.4 2.3931 2.28 143.60 0.3554 1.19 0.9323 0.2879 1.47
29.2 62.96 1.915 .17 2070.0 2.4072 2.34 140.91 0.3402 1.19 0.9319 0.2885 1.41
29.36 61.63 2.627 .27 2071.G 2.5443 3.00 176.49 1.19 0.9315 0.2890 NO LIQUEFACTION
29.53 75.21 2.890 938 2085.7 2.4284 2.43 174.12 1.19 0.9311 0.2695 NO LIQUEFACTION
29.69 64.77 2.963 .48 2093.3 2.5298 2,92 179.94 1.19 0.9308 0.2901 NO LIQUEFACTION
29.66 61.46 2.749 958 2101.4 2.5387 2.97 173.22 1.19 0.9304 0.2906 NO LIQUEFACTION
30.02 82.60 2.016 B6B 2109.1 2.4297 2.44 144.46 0.3604 1.19 0.9297 0.2910 1.48
30.18 61.49 1.709 978 2116.7 2.3906 2.27 132.17 0.2947 1.19 0.9284 0.2912 1.21 0.00
30.35 55.22 1.917 :-'>,1.00"\,"",- 52.08 ~,",'13113.8 ... 2124.8 2.4934 2.74 142.46 0.3489 1.19 0.9270 0.2914 1.43
30.51 51.40 2.023 ~1~i~~~ 999 2132.4 2.5554 3.06 148.29 0.3633 1.19 0.9257 0.2916 1.57
30.88 55.41 2.423 1010 2140.5 2.5858 3.12 162.66 1.19 0.9243 0.2918 NO LIQUEFACTION
30.84 57.76 2.514 1020 2148.1 2.5523 3.05 165.10 1.19 0.9230 0.2920 NO LIQUEFACTION
31 58." 2.... 1030 2155.7 2.5667 3.13 171.:'1 1.19 0.9217 0.2921 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.17 57.92 2.601 1040 2163.8 2.5626 3.11 168.12 1.19 0.9203 0.2923 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.33 56.49 2.441 1050 2171.4 2.5585 3.08 162.43 1.19 0.9190 0.2925 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.5 57.48 2.541 1061 2179.5 2.5610 3.10 165.75 1.19 0.9176 0.2926 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.66 56.81 2.420 ',' -' 0.98 ~"':'c, ',;:52.81. ':;~ 3257.9 1071 2187.1 2.5534 3.05 161.26 1.19 0.9163 0.2928 NO LIQUEFACTION
31.82 56.42 2.361 b;~:::iliktl~,~:~;~i~ ~~:~ 1081 2194.7 2.5505 3.04 159.00 0.4539 1.19 0.9150 0.2929 1.85
31.99 56,72 2.555 1091 2202.8 2.5729 3.16 166.27 1.19 0.9137 0.2931 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.15 55.71 2.529 ;.' 0.98,L,,';51.52~'~. 3311 8 1101 2210.4 2.5813 3.21 165.59 1.19 0.9124 0.2932 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.32 54.91 2.630 l~lgf~ff~:i~~ ~.~ 1112 2218.5 2.6195 3.45 1"74.77 1.19 0.9110 0.2933 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.48 52.95 3.224 1122 2226.1 2.7088 4.06 198.13 1.19 0.9097 0.2935 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.64 48.16 2.987 1132 2233.6 2.7455 4.34 192.26 1.19 0.9084 0.2936 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.81 45.31 2.435 1143 2241.9 _ 2.7207 4.15 172.64 1.19 0.9070 0.2937 NO LIQUEFACTION
32.97 42.66 1.830 1153 2249.5 2.8854 3.89 152.89 0.4124 1.19 0.9057 0.2938 NO LIQUEFACTION
33.14 43.64 1.... 1183 2257.6 2.6639 3,88 154.96 0.4260 1.19 0.9043 0.2939 NO LIQUEFACTION
33.3 42.23 1.805 1173 2265.2 2.6769 3.83 147.78 0.3602 ",,9 0.9030 0.2940 NO LIQUEFACTION
33.46 42.90 1.667 1183 2272.8 2.6439 361 141.10 0.3412 1.19 0.9017 0.2941 NO LIQUEFACTION
33.63 49.71 1.371 1194 2280.9 2.4700 2.62 118.62 0.2352 1.19 0.9003 0.2942 0.95 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
33.79 43.97 1.305 1204 2288.5 2.5327 2.94 117.45 0.2307 1.19 0.8990 0.2943 0.94 LIQUEFACTION 0.01
33.96 36.15 1.301 1214 2296.6 2.6845 3.88 127.40 0.2723 1.19 0.8976 0.2943 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.12 31.17 1.319 1224 2304.2 2.7856 4.88 13;'66 0.2922 1.19 0.8963 0.2944 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.28 26.10 1.182 1234 2311.8 2.8712 5.42 127.95 0.2748 1.19 0.8950 0.2945 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.45 24.72 0.978 1245 2319.9 2.6543 5.26 ~17.47 0.2308 1.19 0.8936 0.2945 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.61 25.61 0.950 1255 2327.5 2.6242 4." 115.24 0.2223 1.19 0.8923 0.2946 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.76 22.79 0.969 1265 2335.6 2.9082 5.78 118.49- 0.2347 1.19 0.8910 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
34.84 20.91 0.847 1275 2343.2 2.9298 5." 112.57 0.2127 1.19 0.8897 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.1 18.17 0.704 1285 2350.9 2.9750 6.47 105.41 0.1889 1.19 0.8884 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.27 18.99 0.755 1296 2359.0 2.9657 6.37 108.29 0.1981 1.19 0.6870 0.2946 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.43 18.97 0.730 1306 2366.6 2.9584 6.29 106.68 0.1929 1.19 0.8857 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.6 19.06 1.045 1317 2374.7 3.0565 7.39 125.75 0.2649 1.19 0.8843 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
Page4of6
GeoSolutioos; loc.
Uquirnlion Analysis. CrT
1m ort from Cone Plot Nonnalized Soil Profile Behavior
Depth II< f. u K, (qcINk. CRRu F.S. LIQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
1ft) (t.t) (tsf) '" (Isf) SETTLEMENT
35.76 25.20 1.608 !1!~i~l~ 1327 2362.3 2.9964 6.70 150.49 0.3970 1.19 0.6830 0.2949 NO LIQUEFACTION
35.93 45.49 1.976 1337 2390.4 2.6755 3.82 154.59 0.4236 1.19 0.8816 0.2949 NO LIQUEFACTION
38.09 49.52 1.744 1347 2398.0 2.5531 3." 134.16 0.3046 1.19 0.8803 0.2949 1.23 0.00
36.25 52.60 '1.764 1357 2405.6 2.4107 2.36 130.76 0.2579 1.19 0.8790 0.2949 1.16 0,01
36.42 72.08 1.567 1388 2413.7 2.2916 1.92 122.61 0.2514 1.19 0.8776 0.2949 1.02 0.01
36.58 77.24 1.479 1378 2421.3 2.2283 1.74 118.68 0.2355 1.19 0.8763 0.2949 0.95 LIQUEFACTION 0.01
36.75 76.23 1.410 1388 2429.4 2.2230 1.72 115.9B 0.2251 1.19 0.B749 0.2949 0.91 LIQUEFACTION 0.02
36.91 78.31 1.901 1398 2437.0 2.2963 1.94 133.57 0.3016 1.19 0.8736 0.2949 1.22 0.00
"37.07 82.07 2.098 1408 2444.6 2.2979 1.94 140.15 0.3360 1.19 0.8723 0.2949 1.36
37.24 88.42 2.421 1419 2452.7 2.2968 1.94 150.47 0.3966 1.19 0.8709 0.2949 1.60
37.4 70.33 1.724 1429 2460.3 2.3351 2.07 127.38 0.2722 1.19 0.8696 0.2949 1.10 0.01
37.57 42.86 1.024 1440 2468.4 2.4927 2.73 102.46 . 0.1800 1.19 0.8682 0.2949 0.73 LIQUEFACTION 0.04
37.73 V.07 0.640 1450 2476.0 2.7062 4.04 95.59 0.1612 1.19 0.B669 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
37.89 17.10 0.530 1460 2483.7 2.9662 5.38 95.10 0,1600 1.19 0.0056 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
3B.06 15.44 0.405 1470 2491.6 2.9699 6.42 86.27 0.1397 1.19 0.8643 0.2948 NO LIQUEFACTION
38.22 15.87 0.410 1480 2499.4 2.9556 6.26 86.44 0.1401 1.19 0.6630 0.2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
38.39 16.24 0.420 1491 2507.5 2.9471 6.17 87.05 0.1414 1.19 0.8616 0,2947 NO LIQUEFACTION
38.55 16.56 0.432 1501 2515.1 2.9421 6.12 87.89 0.1431 1.19 0.8603 0.2946 NO LIQUEFACTION
38.71 18.46 0.641 1511 2522.7 2.9707 6.42 102.64 0.1606 1.19 0.8590 0.2946 NO LIQUEFACTION
38.86 20.58 1.614 1521 2530.8 3.1933 9.16 162.69 1.19 0.8576 0.2945 NO LIQUEFACTION
39.04 22.12 1.701 1531 2536.4 3.1255 8.25 157.49 0.4433 1.19 0.8563 0.2945 NO LIQUEFACTION
39.21 30.82 1.539 1542 2546.5 2.8762 5.47 145.23 0.3649 1.19 0.6549 0.2944 NO LIQUEFACTION
39.37 21.44 1.514 1552 2554.1 3.1147 8,11 149.62 0.3915 1.19 0.8536 0.2943 NO LIQUEFACTION
39.53 22.84 2.... 1582 2561.7 3.1710 8.65 173.64 1.19 0.8523 0.2943 NO LlQUEFAOTION
39.7 41.18 2.040 1572 2569.8 2.7749 4,57 161.57 1.19 0.6509 0.2942 NO LIQUEFACTION
39.86 43.03 1.845 1582 2577.4 2.7173 4.12 151.95 0.4063 1.19 0.8496 0.2941 NO LIQUEFACTION
40.03 29.91 1.117 1693 25aS.5 2.8095 ~,8? 124.44 0.2592 1.19 0.8482 0.2941 NO LIQUEFACTION
40.19 16.01 0.792 1603 2593.1 3.1389 8.42 115.15 0.2220 1.19 0.8469 0.2940 NO LIQUEFACTION
40.35 16.14 0.445 1613 2600.8 2.9836 5.58 90.31 0.1485 1.19 0.6456 0.2939 NO LIQUEFACTION
40.52 12.38 0.404 1624 2608.9 3.1494 8.58 90.23 0.1483' 1.19 0.8442 0.2938 NO LIQUEFACTION
40.68 12.05 0.407 1834 2616.5 3.1727 6.87 90." 0,1498 1.19 0.8429 0.2937 NO LIQUEFACTION
40.85 13.56 0.430 1"..0.~,.;';~..,,11.51,<',14268.8 1844 2624.6 3.1023 7.86 91.55 0.1514 1.19 0.8416 0.2936 NO LIQUEFACTION
41.01 13.46 0.632 1654 2632.2 3.2092 9.38 106,96 0,1936 1.19 0.8403 0,2935 NO LIQUEFACTION
41.17 16.72 0.933 1684 2639.8 3.1619 8.73 123.49 0.2552 1.19 0.8390 0.2934 NO LIQUEFACTION
41.34 31.65 1.506 1675 2647.9 2.8674 5.39 1~.03 0.3579 1.19 0.8376 0.2~3 NO LIQUEFACTION
41.5 69.40 1.436 1685 2655.S 2.3021 1.96 114.50 0.2196 1.19 0.6363 0.2932 . 0.89' LIQUEFACTION 0.02
41.67 131.21 1.575 1695 2663.6 1.9344 1.22 135.19 0.3098 1.19 0.8349 0.2931 1.26 : 0.00
41.83 161.84 1.471 1705. 2671.2 1.7135 1.05 160.15 1.19 0.8336 0.2930 NO ~IQUEFACTION
41.99 180.15 1.107 1715 2676.6 1.8406 1.00 1sO.83 0.3991 1.19 0.8323 0.2928 ..1.6,3.
42.16 196.32 1.499 1726 2687.8 1.6728 1.02 167.82 1.19 0.8309 0.2927 NO LIQUEFAcTION
42.32 208.87 1.979 1738 2696.2 1.7176 1.05 1lp.43 1.19 0.8296 0.2925 NO LIQUEFACTION'
42.49 245.57 2.068 1747 2705.1 1.6314 1.00 205.27 1.19 0.8282 0.2924 NO LiQUEFACi"lON
42.65 236.92 1.705 1757 2713.5 1.5959 1.cia 197.74 1.19 0.8269 0.2922 NO LIQUEFACTION
42.81 226.40 1.659 1767 2722.0 1.6164 1.00 188.66 1.19 0.8256 0.2920 NO LIQUEFACTION
42.98 227.82 2.148 I,,",' 0.88 t.::;,;,5;~189,54 '~;l 4508.0 1777 2730.9 1.6906 1.03 195.53 1.19 0.8242 0.2918 NO LiQUEFACTION
43.14 232.92 1.539 :i:\~~~"i!fj~g11 ;E~ 1787 2739.3 1.5783 1.00 193.48 1.19 0.6229 0.2917 NO LIQUEFACTION
. 43.31 217.18 1.880 1798 2748.3 1.6808 1.02 184.57 1.19 0.8215 0.2915 NO LiQUEFACTION
43.47 212.89 0.972 1808 2756.7 1.609B 1.00 176.28 1.19 0.8202 0.2913 NO LIQUEFACTION
43.64 182.88 2.321 1816 2765.6 1.8524 1:15 173.43 1.19 0.6189 0.2911 NO LIQUEFACTION
43.6 223.33 2.167 . " 0.e7 nC""H.184.35 .l~ 4602.3 1B28 2774.0 1.7082 1.04 192.35 1.19 0.8175 0.2909 NO LIQUEFACTION
43.96 242.07 2.776 ~:i,g::~}!;~ff-~:::~:~~l :g:~ 1838 2782.4 1.7368 i06 212.02 1.19 0.8162 0.2908 NO LIQUEFACTION
44.13 265.51 2.155 184. 2791.4 1.6007 1.00 218.49 1.19 0.8149 0.2906 NO LIQUEFACTION
44.29 239.25 2.148 ,0.87:. '..,.196.58",4658.7 185. 2799.8 1.6645 1.01 199.25 1.19 0.8136 0.2904 NO LIQUEFACTION
44.46 241.77 1.441 :',~f;(S;i\j;E~:~1 ;~~ 1870 2808.7 1.5408 1.00 198.33 1.19 0.8122 0,2902 NO LIQUEFACTION
44.62 243.95 2.040 1879 2817.2 1.6378 1.00 199.62 1.19 0.8109 0.2900 NO LIQUEFACTION
44.78 250.20 1.833 ,,,. 2825.6 1.5904 1.00 204.64 1,19 0.8096 0.2898 NO LIQUEFACTION
44.95 290.80 1.032 ,. 0.86' ::':,:~:237.47;'~:': 4734.6 1900 283i1.5 1.3402 1.00 237.47 1.19 0.8082 0.2896 NO LIQUEFACTION
45.11 340.78 2.226 '. 0.86:./:(~:~277.8(:::: 4753.0 1910 2842.9 1.4597 1.00 277.87 1.19 0.8069 0.2894 NO L1aUEFACTION
Page5of6
Depth
(ft)
45.28
. 45.44
45.6
45.77
45.93
46.1
46.26
46.42
46.59
46.75
46.92
47.08
47.24
47.41
47.57
47.74
47.9
48.06
48.23
48.39
46."
48.72
\
'""
1m ort from Cone Plot
..
Its"
220.99
324.66
270.80
235.54
240.67
233.47
191.50
161.21
168.22
169.81
168.79
165.34
262.28
266.53
91.87
281.67
275.66
254.37
214.15
234.21 I
232.49
216.25
f,
(tsf)
2.704
2.949
2.696
1.954
2.411
1.826
2.586
1.832
2.538
1.066
1.055
2.233
0.623
2.376
2.395
2.895
2.352
1.916
1.424
1.907
2.233
2.023
Nonnalized
,\7'::;
:..".0.86; :-;,"~~179.91"~ 4772.5
ffII~'i~'.f~:~i{J Ei
1:-->' 0,85.",;.:"", 154,5t:;-'~;14885.2
~i~:E~~ljg~{!~ ~E!;
\>.',,'i085"'~K':\132 43~'~ 49795
~1,1~~i~~~l ~.~
~,....0.84-,;,.f:"', 202.60.,J, 5073.8
!~:/; ,0:84. ;.,:r~, 170.87{i 5073.8
m~::'lIIS:E;~~ ~;H
Soil Profile
1921
1931
1941
1951
1961
1912
1982
,.92
2002
2012
2023
2033
2043
2054
2064
2074
2OB4
2094
2105
2115
2125
2135
2851.9
2860.3
2868.7
2877.7
2886.1
2695.0
2903.4
2911.6
2920.6
2929.2
2936.1
2946.6
2955.0
2963.9
2972.3
2981.3
2989.7
2979.7
2969.1
2959.1
2948.5
2938.5
1.7683
1.5796
1.6629
1.6497
1.7013
1.6359
1.BS54
1.8666
1.9406
1.6827
1.6843
1.9129
1.3556
1.6379
2.3007
1.6669
1.6153
1.6020
1.6216
1.8604
1.7023
1.7163
GeoSolutioDS, IDC.
Uquirac:fion Analy.is - CPT
Behavior
K. (Q.,mlca
Its"
1.10 197.59
1.00 263.92
1.01 222.55
1.00 191.49
1.04 202.32
1.00 188.65
1.16 178.91
1.16 150.53
1.23 166.40
1.03 139.97
1.03 139.07
1.20 159.07
1.00 209.77
1.00 212.85
1.95 142.92
1.02 227.85
1.00 219.19
1.00 202.60
1.00 170.87
1.00 187.86
1.04 193.48
1.05 181.91
Page60fS
sis
CRR7.I F.S. UQUEFACTION LIQUEFACTION
SEnLEMENT
1.19 0.6055 0.2691 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8042 0.2689 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8029 0.2687 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8015 0.2'385 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.8002 0.2883 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7988 0.2681 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7975 0.2878 NO LIQUEFACTION
0.3972 1.19 0.7962 0.2876 1.65
1.19 0.7948 0.2874 NO LIQUEFACTION
0.3350 1.19 0.7935 0.2812 1.39
0.3301 1.19 0.7922 0.2869 1.37
0.4543 1.19 0.7909 0.2867 1.89
1.19 0.7896 0.2884 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7882 0.2862 NO LIQUEFACTION
0.3515 1.19 0.7669 0.2660 1.47
1.19 0.7855 0.2857 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7842 0.2855 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7629 0.2859 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7815 0.2865 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7802 0.2869 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7786 0.2675 NO LIQUEFACTION
1.19 0.7775 0.2880 NO LIQUEFACTION
[
I
!
I
,'1
-~--j-
r--
ATTACHMENT B
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 4
l2.l6.040.A. The public works director may, Hem time te time, will neriodicallv prepare a list of
particular street trees that have created a present and immediate danger to pedestrian travel, by causing
damage to public improvements, sidewalks, or have interfered with drainage flow in gutters, or
resulted in traffic hazards in adjacent streets. The list shall be submitted to the director of parks,
recreation and facilities for comment or revision.
Council and staff concurred with the modifications to the Ordinance.
Council Member Guthrie moved to introduce an Ordinance, as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE REPEALING, AMENDING, AND
ADDING PROVISIONS TO TITLES 8, 9, 12 & 15 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL
CODE", as amended (Sections 12.16.040.A. and 12.16.060.G.). Council Member Arnold
seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Guthrie, Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara
None
None
Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council concurred, to move Agenda Item 11.a. up on the
Agenda for consideration prior to Agenda Item 10.a.
11. NEW BUSINESS
11.a. Consideration of Fiscal Year 2004-05 Third Quarter Budget Status Report.
[COUNCIURDA]
Financial Services Director Pillow presented the staff report and recommended the City
Council/RDA: 1) Approve detailed budget adjustments and recommendations as shown in
Schedule B; and 2) Approve Schedules A through E included in the Third Quarter Budget Status
Report. Director Pillow responded to questions from the Council/RDA Board.
Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on
the matter. No public comments were received and the Mayor/Chair closed the public comment
period.
Council/Board Member Arnold moved to approve detailed budget adjustments and
recommendations as shown in Schedule B; and to approve Schedules A through E inciuded in
the Third Quarter Budget Status Report. Council/Board Member Dickens seconded, and the
motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Dickens, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara
None
None
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS
10.a. Consideration of Interpretation of Objective Ag1 of the Agriculture, Conservation
and Open Space Element of the General Plan Regarding Conservation of Prime
Farmland Soils; Applicant - City of Arroyo Grande; Location Citywide.
~.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 5
Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the City Council: 1)
Consider an interpretation of General Plan policies under Objective Ag 1 of the Agriculture,
Conservation and Open Space Element regarding conservation of prime farmland soils and
determine if a General Plan Amendment or other action is necessary; and 2) If the Council
determines that a General Plan Amendment or other action is necessary, direct staff to return to
Council with an appropriate Resolution. Associate Planner Heffernon responded to questions
and comments from Council regarding the General Plan Amendment process; clarification
regarding areas in the Village Districts that have urban developments on prime farmland soils;
and clarification regarding soil definitions as noted in the Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County
issued by the United States Department of Agriculture.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to speak on the matter.
Otis Paqe, Arroyo Grande, acknowledged that the issue tonight was confined to a policy
interpretation as opposed to any specific project. He stated that in his analysis of the staff report,
it did not address specific issues relating to revisions made by the Council to the 2001 General
Plan that took place between December 2002 and March 2004. He commented that the issue
being considered tonight was not a clarification of the policy; it was whether the policy should be
changed. He suggested that the policy should not be changed at this time. He then addressed
concerns he had with the staff report including the analysis of existing definitions in the
Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element. He stated that the staff report did not
consider the four principles in the Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element.
John Kniqht, RRM Design, stated that although he was not here to talk about a specific project,
this policy interpretation affects a project he is working on. He commented that City staff is
asking for confirmation of the existing policies and objectives, which have been in place and
acted upon by the Planning Commission arid City Council for the past five years. He suggested
that the agricultural policies in the General Plan do not apply to non-agricultural zoned property.
He encouraged the Council to confirm that Objective Ag1 does not apply to non-agricultural
zoned properties.
Nanci Parker, Arroyo Grande, stated she had studied this issue and she addressed two main
issues: 1) agricultural zoning versus prime soils, and 2) CEQA review. She referred to and read
existing General Plan agricultural policies; referred to parcels in the City that consist of prime
farmland soils, and stated that there can be environmental impacts to the soil on a parcel
regardless of the zoning. She stated that just because a parcel is zoned residential does not give
it entitlements that override the environmental constraints. She commented on various
classification of soils as it relates to required mitigation. She stated that the primary issue to
consider is the fact that prime soils are considered to be a natural resource by the General Plan
and by CEQA. She stated that the City must determine the significance of loss of natural
resources and determine whether mitigation, if any, is required.
Colleen Martin, Arroyo Grande, referred back to the 2001 General Plan update, stated that the
City should follow the General Plan, and objected to the policies being negotiable. She said that
loss of prime farmland soil as a significant adverse environmental impact needs to be avoided,
not mitigated. She stated that the City needs to decide not only what the definition of farmland is,
but also what the definition of a Neighborhood Plan is. She supported the preservation of prime
soils regardless of the zoning designation.
No further public comments were received and the Mayor closed the public comment period.
~--.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 6
Council Member Guthrie stated he had asked for this item to be on the Agenda for clarification
because he was not on the Council when the policies were adopted; however, he was on the
Planning Commission during the General Plan update process and the intent seemed clear at
that time that the policy issues in the Agriculture Element included only those areas that were
zoned Agriculture. He acknowledged concerns expressed about the interpretation of the existing
policies and the need to clarify the policies.
Council Member Arnold agreed that there was some question about how and when the policies
are applied. He also agreed that while serving on the Planning Commission, he believed the
intent was to mitigate the properties that were zoned agriculture, not residential. He stated he
would have a problem with applying the policies to properties that were zoned residential. He
also agreed that there was a need to determine how CEQA is applied. He believed that the
policy applies to farmlands and that staff had provided an accurate interpretation.
Council Member Dickens stated that the agricultural objectives and policies are consistent as
currently written and a distinction needed to be made between a couple of the definitions. First,
he stated that the definition of prime farmland soils are those that are naturally occurring non-
renewable resources suited for growing agricultural products. He referred to the classifications in
the General Plan and other resources that define prime soils. He spoke about the differences
between prime farmland soils (as a natural resource) and agricultural lands or farmlands, which
are properties that have been zoned agriculture for agricultural purposes or are in agricultural
production. He spoke about good land use planning which was done through the Generai Plan
update process and that the Council identified those parcels that would be best served for
agricultural purposes. He said he thought that was the intent whim the Land Use Map was
created and that the policies were then developed. He then referred to CEQA review, which was
about reviewing all of the aspects of a particular proposal as it relates to potential environmental
impacts. He said that review includes aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards, hazardous materials, noise,
population, housing, public services and utilities, recreations, transportation and circulation,
wastewater, water, and land use. He said all of the areas are identified through the CEQA
review process as areas that need to be reviewed for their potential environmental impacts and
this was done regardless of zoning. He commented that when the Council is looking at parcels
that are not identified in the General Plan as being zoned either agriculture or agriculture-
preserve and there is a potential for having prime farmland soils, this is just a part of the CEQA
process. He stated, for example, that it would be unreasonable to require mitigation on a 7,200
square foot lot in the Village and that was not the intent of the General Plan. He suggested it
was reasonable to require mitigation on a four-acre parcel meeting the prime soils definition as
related to Ag1-1.2. He emphasized that deveiopment needs to address all potential impacts
through the CEQA process. He concluded that when reading the General Plan objectives, he
did not believe there were any inconsistencies. He said he believed that the current position that
these policies do not apply to non-agricultural is not correct. He said they needed to be applied
across the board in a reasonable way.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello stated he was also on the Planning Commission when this issue came
forward and he recalled dealing specifically with the conversion of agriculture land that was in
active production. He referred to policies and objectives in the Agriculture, Conservation and
Open Space Element and stated that if property is not designated as Agriculture or Agriculture
Preserve it does not matter if the soils are prime or not because It is not available for agricultural
use. He said to put anything other than agricultural use on the land is not a loss of prime soils.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 7
He commented that the intent was to preserve the use of agricuitural resources and he did not
think we wanted to convert non-agricultural uses back to agricultural. He stated that the
interpretation was clear that any prime soils that exist on non-agricultural uses are not in the
City's inventory of agriculture lands; therefore, there is no loss of those soils.
Mayor Ferrara referred back to the update of the General Plan and stated there were issues with
regard to the approval of the Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element. He stated the
Ag Element was revisited to tighten up some of the policy language (Ag1). He stated that while
the interpretation can be confusing, the City does not have a track record established yet, or
substantive evidence that related issues that have come forward are going to be difficult to
interpret. He agreed with using the standard of reasonableness when evaluating. proposed
projects. On the issue of CEOA, he commented that the CEOA process includes tools to
evaluate individual projects as they come forth reiative to the General Plan which includes
criteria for determining whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration,
environmental impact report, or statement of overriding considerations is required. He stated he
was not convinced at this point that there is a problem, and he did not support changing anything
in the Agricultural, Open Space and Conservation Element at this time. He said he believed
there was enough information in the policies to make the kinds of interpretation that needs to be
made based on the test of reasonableness.
Council Member Guthrie stated that since the policies have not yet been applied, he was
comfortable with moving forward and seeing how it works. He stated, however, that he was
uncomfortable with the issues pertaining to CEOA review.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello referred to Policy Ag1-4 (Establish and apply a significance criterion for
CEOA analysis, as provided by CEOA Guidelines, that considers loss of prime farmland soils as
a significant adverse environmental impact); referred to the definition which indicates that a loss
of prime farmland soils shall refer to their unavailability for agricultural use; and stated that if they
are not zoned for agricultural, conservation, or open space, they are not available for agricultural
use. He commented that there is no loss and that loss only occurs when there is a property that
is designated for agricultural use and it is being converted to something else. He said the
conversion constitutes the loss of prime farmland soils.
Mayor Ferrara asked the Council if there were any objections to the interpretation of the policies
as presented.
Council Member Dickens stated he had no objections; however, he suggested it would be
appropriate to get additional feedback from other cities on similar policies, and/or get an
interpretation from CEOA in regard to the idea of whether or not a parcel is considered
unavailable if the zoning has been changed. He commented that the City Council has discretion
to rezone properties. He believed that the language in the General Plan is adequate; however,
he disagreed with some of the comments made because he believed that properties that are
currently zoned non-agriculture do apply to the CEOA review process.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello requested that the City Attorney research the CEOA issue.
The City Council concurred and no formal action was taken.
19/93/2995 14:19
S957S19n
ATTACHMENT C
()
PAGE 91/91
firms
Jafldscape 8tchilecture
Q""ning
environmental studies
ecologica'l&srcration
August 25, 2005
RECflllED
OCr
CITY 0 <I 2005
COM OF ARRoI1
MUNrrv Df~ GRA.NDE
. LOPMENr
Jason Blankenship
Central Coast Real Estate Oevelopment
PO Sox 730
Avila Beach 93424
RE: Tree Survey. FaIr Oaks Mixed Use Project, Arroyo Grande
Dear Jeson.
AS you requested. I have reviewed the sne uSing the topographic survey prepared by McMillan Land
Surveys and confirmed the top of creek bank and edge of fiparian vegetation line on that survey as
lWCurate. In addition, I walked the site to identify nativa trees and shrubs on the site. Apart for the well
defrned riparian vegetation confined to the creek backs, several plantecl native trees elells within the area
between the lOP of bank and the recreatlonal trail. These include Coast and Valley Oak. California
Sycamore and Coast RedWOOd. All the native lrBlls IdentlfIed on the Site are east of the recreBllonal trail.
The upland area of the sile has a remnant orchard consisting of mature and declining walnut, aprfcot and
other slone frufl trees. The original walnut species appear to be English walnut (Juglans regia) that were
grafted on to Black Walnut (Juglans nigra) rOOI stock. It Is common for Engnsh walnut to be grafted to
Black Walnut (8 native Americ:an walnut from the eastern United Stetes) tor orchard production. As the
trees have aged and declined due to neglect, the vigorous root stock has sprouted and developed into
large triles. often with no remnant English oak and sometimes as a rnuIti trunk tree jOined fo the EngrlSh
walnut. A single Elderlleny (SambUQl$ mexicana) has sprouted at the base of one walnlll. It's condition
is poor. The general condition of these trees ranges from poor to good. Generally the apricot trees are in
poor condition. A Single mass of Coyote Bush (Bacchal'i$ pi/lllal'i$l. a natIVe scrub species exists in the
northwest quadrant Of the site.
other exotic trees and shrubs inClIICIe 8 mass Of scrubby Acacia and Bush Mallow. a mass of Aeon/um
(an omamental succulent) and stand of BlUe Gum (EucaJyplUS gfobll/IIS). In my opinion, Blue Gum trees
are highly unsuitable as urban trees due to the risk or breakage or falling. Similar trees along South Oak
Park adjoining the Belly Gardens projecl were found to be rotted and cfl$88$ed and posed a substantial
safely hazard prior to removal. The site Blue Gum trees are of similar siZe and age. Generally the site is
covered with lyplcal ruderal. ellOtic grasses and weeds. This survey does not constitute a complete
botanical survey or artlOrisl evaluation of tree condition and pathology.
FInna Con_rs '""""""sred Principal: David W. FOGre AS~A. AEP
RegiStration No. 2777
849 Monterey Slreel Suit. 205
San ~uls OtJispo. CA 93401
805.781.9800 fax 805.781.9803
7
firma
A IT ACHMENT 0
fandscape architecture
planning
environmental studies
ecological restoration
R~~ r,. <,,,. .
'..I.' !._~' ", . /1,\, ,rr'c, ,,"..
'J" .--. f.<'-. f,;' ! f . .,
"" 1 \ . ',. ,..: .>f p'
,~ ~~~ L--..:;,;; IJ \.; t... tf /
"""''t'. ~!J'..
October 19, 2005
Kelly Heffernon
Community Development
PO Box 550
214E Branch Street
Arroyo Grande CA 93421
OCT 2 0 2005
C/1Y (,r. . ..n. ""
q It':l':UYtJ C':p~ ldr~', ~
:,....,.O~~Ii:\.:..,.:~-. ~ ;..1 "',"wI:
., 'd"li)",I'r D,.lf;:l' C'j'" ..... ,..
F _Ii.... f Jto'ILhii
RE: Fair Oaks Mixed Use Project
, Dear Kelly,
The following are mitigation measures and project features that should be highlighted in the Project
Description as mitigation various potential environmental effects:
Water Quality and Biological mitigation measures incorporated in to the Project Description:
To reduce storm water runoff volume and velocity and improve water quality discharged to the Creek:
. All parking bays shall be permeable pavement to reduce runoff.
. Roof downdrains shall discharge, wherever feasible in a non-erosive manner, into site
landscape areas rather than discharging to pavement.
. Project paving shall be conveyed to bioswales between buildings 7 through 11, as shown on
plan submittal sheet C1.0. Bioswales shall be low-gradient engineered swales vegetated with
perennial grasses and sedges that will act to trap and dissipate silt and chemical pollutants
found in pavement runoff.
. Additional native ground cover shall be introduced into the recreational path easement to slow
runoff and provide filtering of runoff.
To increase riparian functions and values:
. In addition to native ground covers and perennial grasses, the recreational trail easement shall
incorporate native riparian and upland shrubs and trees such as Sycamore, Coast Live Oak,
Coffeeberry, Elderberry and Toyon to increase habitat cover for wildlife and add forage value
and roosting sites.
Other Project aspects related to sustainable development:
. The project landscape shall incorporate fruit trees for use by the residents.
Firma Consuilants Incorporated
Principal: David W. Foote ASLA, AEP
Registration No. 2117
849 Monterey Street Suite 205
San Luis Obispo. CA 93401
805.781.9800 fax 805.781.9803
. Where feasible the project shall incorporate recycled construction materials such as recycled
concrete and asphaltic concrete for aggregate base under roads and recycled plastics for site
benches, lawn edgings, etc
c: Jason Blankenship
Ken Chacon
Jennifer Martin LGA
ATTACHMENT E
,
"
J
ARBORIST REPORT
&
TREE PROTECTION PLAN
FOR
FAIR OAKS MIXED USE PROJECT
CENTRAL COAST REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
APN: 006-391-044
REVISED DECEMBER 7,2005
BY
JEREMY LOWNEY, CERTIFIED ARBORIST #3718
"olid .Ak
Tree Management
p.o. BOX 13521, SLO CA 93406
(805) 431-0708
FAX 805-541-9453
TITLE PAGE
SUMMARY
OBSERVATIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS I MITIGATIONS
GENERAL TREE PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS
SPREADSHEET
Pg.
3
3-4
4
6
7
2
SUMMARY:
This report outlines the tree protection measures for the Fair Oaks project located on Woodland
Drive in the City of Arroyo Grande. Observations and recommendations are given regarding each
tree as numbered on the topographic map included.
In general, the location consists of a number of declining orchard trees (English walnut, Plum,
Apricot, and Black walnut). English walnuts have a short life span due to their low tolerance to
root and heart rot fungus that is indigenous to California. They are grafted onto native Black
walnut (Juglans Hindsii) root stock to improve their tolerance. Most of the English walnut trees
on site are dying or nearly dead and rotting out from the center due to Annilleria, a heart rot
fungus common to the area. As a result of decline, the Black walnut stumps have sprouted and
formed several juvenile, and even a few mature trees, that have taken over or are growing in
conjunction with the remaining English walnuts.
Around the perimeter are native species mixed with other planted non-indigenous trees such as
London plane (Sycamore). The perimeter trees will be protected during the development, as well
as the trees on the West side of the proposed Woodland drive extension.
One specimen Black walnut located in the South/West comer of the development area (Tree #17)
will be protected. Tree #22 (tagged with a numbered metal tag at eye level) is another candidate
for saving. It is a healthy Black walnut that has grown from stump sprouts into a mature tree. It
has a dead English walnut in the middle that should be pruned out. Removal of this tree may still
be necessary depending upon grading requirements, utilities, and construction. Protection
measures are given for each of these trees.
Twenty-Six trees, all of which are non-native to the site (but maybe native to the region), and are
mostly in decline, are marked for removal to accommodate grading and development of the
proposed units. Ten trees are to be protected.
OBSERVATIONS:
See Spreadsheet for Details on each tree.
I. The orchard trees are mostly in poor condition due to age and root rot or heart rot fungus
(Phytophthera, Armaleria). Several are declining fruit trees such as plum and apricot.
2. As described previously, the English walnut are dying, and the Black walnut root stock
have sprouted up through the canopies of the English walnuts and have formed new trees.
In some cases, the English walnut tree has been totally replaced by Black walnut
coppicing, forming trunks as large as 12 inches in diameter.
3. Existing oak, pine, and London plane (Sycamore) near the existing path are in good
condition, and will be protected using orange construction fencing. The grading will have
little impact to these trees.
3
4. Some of the trees on the West side of the proposed Woodland Drive extension will
require removal to accommodate the road construction. They are old fruit trees of various
types. Others can be protected using construction fencing.
5. Tree #21 is on the North end of the development near the perimeter. Depending upon the
construction, this tree may need to be removed to accommodate grading, and also to
prevent long-term decline and future mortality.
6. The specimen Black walnut tree (#17) on the South West side of the Woodland Drive
Extension is to be saved, and will require construction fencing around the dripline. The
retaining wall that is to be installed within the dripline of the tree will require careful
digging and root maintenance.
7. Trees #18,19,21,22 are tagged with metal tags at eye level.
8. Tree #18 is dead, but is sprouting Black walnut suckers from the base.
RECOMMENDATIONS / MITIGATIONS:
Twenty-six orchard trees are proposed for removal. Ten trees are proposed for protection.
Construction fencing is drawn in RED on the Topographic Survey map included. The fencing is
to be built using steel t-posts and orange plastic fencing. The purpose of the fencing is to keep
construction equipment and materials out of the driplines of the trees to be protected. It is also
imperative that no fill soil is pushed into these root zones.
Excavation within the dripline of protected trees (#17 and #21) will require construction
fencing near the edge of the work area rather than at the dripline. Approximately 10% or more of
the roots will be impacted during the excavation. It is advised that the tree be pruned prior to the
excavation to increase vigor in the tree and reduce the water requirement of the tree (root to shoot
ratio). Also, hand digging near large roots is advised wherever possible. When roots are cut, they
should be dug back a ways and cut cleanly with a reciprocating saw to make a clean cut that will
heal properly (better compartmentalization of decay). I suggest that an arborist be on site during
the excavation within protected driplines. Some maintenance will be required. The proposed
sewer system line next to the dripline tree #17 will also require careful excavation and an arborist
on site to monitor root cutting.
Replanting will be accomplished in the proposed landscape plan. In effect, the parcel will have
more trees growing than are currently established. The landscape plan includes appropriate trees
for the site and climate.
General tree protection guidelines are provided on the following pages.
4
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 431-0708
Jeremy Lowney
Solid Oak Tree Management
QUALIFICATIONS:
Owner - Solid Oak Tree Management since 1998
California Stale Landscape and Tree Service Contractor (C27) #757086
Certified Arborist WC-3718
Fonner Hazardous Tree Inspector, County of San Luis Obispo
Fonner Member of the California Stale Pitch Canker Task Force
Bachelors of Science in Forestry and Natural Resource Management,
California Polytechnic State University, SLO
Lecturer - Urban Forestry, Forestry and Natural Resources, Cal Poly, SLO
5
GENERAL TREE PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
Avoidance of Mechanical Damage
1. Fence off root zones 6 feet away from the base for trees 10 inches or less in
diameter, and 8 feet away for trees over 11 inches in diameter, or to edge of
dripline wherever possible.
Root Cutting
2. Retaining walls / borders should be dug by hand where possible, and installed
carefully to avoid damage to roots.
3. Ifpossible, do trenching during dormant periods (winter) while trees are less
active.
4. When cutting roots over 1" in diameter, cut them cleanly with a hand saw or
sawzall, and not ripping or tearing them. Wherever possible, dig them out by
hand and keep them wet while uncovered, then quickly cover after root
pruning. This will help promote the healing process and close wounds quicker
to avoid harmful fungus and insects. Wound dressings may be helpful to avoid
fungal infection.
5. Keep soil away from root systems in fill areas by using retaining walls. In cut
areas install retaining walls to retain soil around the root ball.
Soil Compaction
1. Delineate places for equipment, supplies, etc. to be stored, piled, or parked
away from tree root zones.
2. Excess soil and rock should be disposed outside of rooted areas. Avoid fill over
root systems of oaks.
Tree Pruning and Removal
3. Pruning of fringe trees should be done by a licensed certified arborist.
Suggested pruning: deadwood and hazard limb removal only. Leave the trees
as natural as possible. Pruning cuts should be made outside the branch bark
collar to promote quick healing of cuts.
4. Prune trees to compensate for root loss as needed. Additional water may also
be necessary for heavily impacted trees.
5. Trees in cut areas should be removed ifmore than 40% ofthe root system will
be disturbed. This is also for safety because of less anchoring of the tree.
6
TREE INVENTORY: FAIR OAKS MIXED USE, ARROYO GRANDE
Species: CLO - Coast live oak, EW = English walnut, BW = Black Walnut. LP = London plane, MP - Monterey pine Date: 1217/05
Condition: Poor (declining or dead), Moderate (Unhealthy or suppressed), Go<Xl (Healthy, vigorous)
Within the drlpllne: Yes or No Location:
% Impact to the root zone: <10% little to none, 10% - 30% moderate, > 30% high Woodland Drive, A.G.
Removal: Yes or No APN: OOfl.391.()44
Protection Measures: Construction fencing, retention, trunk protection, extra watering, root treatment, etc.
Within
Tree # SDleles Diameter Condition OriDlln. % Imnact Removal Protection Measures
1 Plum 4MMulti Dead Y Removal Y None
2 Aplicot 5 Poor y Removal Y None
3 Plum 4" Multi Good Y Removal Y None
4 Plum 5-Multi Good y Removal Y None
5 BW Multi Good y Removal Y None
6 Plum 4 Good y Removal Y None
7 EW 6 Poor Y Removal y None
6 BW Multi Good y Removal Y None
9 BW Multi Good y Removal Y None
10 BW,EW 6,16 Good y Removal Y None
11 EW,BW 16,10 Poor Y Removal Y None
12 EW 16 Poor Y Removal Y None
13 EW 12 Dead y Removal Y None
14 BW 3" Multi Poor Y Removal Y None
15 EW 14 Dying Y Removal y None
16 EW 14 Poor y Removal y None
17 BW 12" Multi Good Slightly 0-10% N Protection fencing, monitoring.
~-'f6";; BW,EW 3,12 Poor Y Removal Y Tagged, None
.~ 19.-J Elderberry,EW 6,10 Moderate y Removal Y Tagged, None
20 EW 10 Good y Removal y None
~--iC-' BW a"Multi Good y 0-10% Y Protection fencing, monitoring.
. , Moderate Y , Removal Y Tagged, None
.__~__i EW 12
23 EW,BW 12,10 Moderate Y Removal Y None
24 EW 12 Good y Removal y None
25 EW 16 Good y Removal y None
26 BW a"Multi Good y Removal y None
27 CLO 6 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
26 CLO 17 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
29 ? 20 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
30 ? Multi Good N 0% N Protection fencing
31 LP 9 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
32 MP 11 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
33 CLO 1 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
34 LP 10 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
35 CLO 2 Good N 0% N Protection fencing
36 Plum Multi Good y Removal I y I None
26 Removals, 11 Protected
'\
",
ATTACHMENT F
\
)
2005
CULTURAL RESOURCES TESTING
FOR THE
FAffi OAKS MIXED-USE PROJECT,
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:
Central Coast Real Estate Development
PO Box 730
Avila Beach, CA 93424
Prepared by:
Cogstone Resource Management Inc,
www.cogstone.com
Main Office: 1801 ParkcourtPlace, Bldg. B, Suite 102, Santa Ana, 92701
Central Coast Office Morro Bay, Northern California Office San Francisco
Authors:
Sherri Gust and April Van Wyke
Principle Investigator:
Sherri Gust,
San Luis Obispo County Qualified Archaeologist and Paleontologist
September 2005
RE r r: In fit:: ~J)
'~"'!...:;;QI(J \,: -"l';-.._>'
en 0 1 2005
CI~. OF ARf<OYO GRr.r\JE
("O',.".,'....."'D-
",.. IWh'~IU;\;li r n.~r;l.OfJ~'j'':f\'T
.......... ,j~.i_.~
NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA BASE (NADB)
INFORMATION SHEET
2005
CULTURAL RESOURCES TESTING
FOR THE
FAIR OAKS MIXED-USE PROJECT,
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:
Central Coast Real Estate Development
PO Box 730
Avila Beach, CA 93424
Prepared by:
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
www.cogstone.com
Main Office: 1801 Parkcouri Place, Bldg. B, Suite 102, Santa Ana, 92701
Central Coast Office Morro Bay, Northern California Office' San Francisco
Authors:
Sherri Gust and April Van Wyke
Principle Investigator:
Sherri Gust, ,
San Luis Obispo County Qualified Archaeologist and Paleontologist
September 2005
Type of Study: Cultural Resources Testing
Sites: CA-SLO-393
USGS Quadrangle: Oceano. Calif. 7.5 minute (1987; revised 1994)
Area: approximately 5.5 acres
Key Words: Arroyo Grande Valley, Halcyon Bay, northern Chumash, central coast
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUl\WARY ..................................................................................................................IV
INTRODUCfION.........................................................................................................................1
PuRPOSE OF STUDy.... ........ ....... ..... ... ........ .............. ................ ....... .......... ..... ........... ......... ... ..... ... 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION.... ........ .... ... ......... ....... .................. .... ........ ....:.. ..... ... ....... .... ...... ...... ....... ... 2
PROJECT PERSONNEL .... ........ ............... .............................. ........ ........ ......... ........ ..... ..... ... ......... ... 4
LAWS AND REGULATIONS.....................................................................................................4
BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................7
NATURAL SETTING .... ........ ...... .... ..... ............... ......:. ............. ..... .... ......... .......... .... ........ ...... .... ...... 7
PREmsTORIC SETTING .... .................. ..... ........ ....... ........ ..... .......... .................. ..... ....... ........... ....... 7
Ethnography/Ethnohistory...................................................................................................... 7
Chronology ...............:;............................................................................................................ 7
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES .........................................................................9
l'ESTIN'G METHODS ................................................................................................................ 10
INTRODUCTION .... .............................. ........ ....................... ....... ............... .......... ...... ....... ............ 10
MECHANICAL TESTING .... ............................................................. ....................... ....................... 10
CONTROLLED MANUAL ExCA V A nON......................................................................................... 12
lEST RESULTS .........................................................._............................................................13
TRENCH A... ........ ....... .............. ................. ....... ........ ....... ........ ....... ................ ....... .... .... ........ ..... 13
TRENCH B... ........... .... ................ ............... ....... ........ ....... .... .... ....... ........ .... ..... ...... .... .... ......... .... 14
TRENCH C... ............... ............................... ....... ........ ........ ........ ....... ....................... ..... ... ......... .... 15
TRENCH D... ........ ...................................... ........................................................................... ...... 16
TRENCH D, UNIT 1............................................................................................ ............... .......... 17
TESTIN"G CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................23
REFERENCES CITED ..............................................................................................................24
APPENDIX A:................................................._.._....._............................................................ 25
11
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. REGIONAL LOCATION MAP ...........................................................................................................................1
FIGURE 2. PROJECT A1u!A MAP.................... .... ..... ...... .......... ..... ............ .... ..... ... ..... ... .......... .......................................... 2
FIGURE 3. CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF PROPOSED PROJECT........ ........... .......... ................ ..... ........................... ..... .........:>
FIGURE 4. ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PROJECT A1u!A... ..... ...... ...... ........... ............... ...... ........................... .......... ..... ...........9
FIGURE 5. LOCATION OF TEST EXCAVATIONS........ ........... ..... ..... ...... ............... ...... ............... ...... ............ ...................... 11
FIGURE6. PROFILE OF UNIT 1, TRENCHD ...................................................................................................................19
FIGURE 7. HUMAN VERSUS cow INCISORS ...................................................................................................................22
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE I. CENTRAL COAST CULTURE SEQUENCE (JONES AND WAUGH 1995) ...............................................................8
TABLE 2. TRENCH A SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................13
TABLE 3. TRENCHB SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................14
TABLE 4. TRENCH C SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................15
TABLE 5. TRENCHD SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................16
TABLE 6. TRENCHD, UNIT I SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................17
KEY TO FIGURE 6 .........................................................................................................................................................20
III
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A mixed-use development project is proposed on Fair Oaks Avenue, east of the Arroyo Grande
Community Hospital in Arroyo Grande, California. Testing on the western portion of the
property was performed in 1990. This study tested the eastern portion of the property which lies
immediately south of the known boundaries of prehistoric village site CA-SLO-393. In
particular, trenches were mechanically excavated in four locations parallel to the project's
northern boundary east of Woodland Drive. A concentration of charcoal, ash and burned earth
was discovered in the trench nearest the creek and was further investigated by manual excavation
of a one meter square unit.
Trenches A-C have sparse cultural materials and disturbance indicating that fringe materials or
redeposited materials from CA-SLO-393 were been mixed into the sediments during the use of
the property for farming/orchards. Trench D and Unit 1 have prehistoric debris plus historic
debris including ceramics and metal overlying a layer containing' charcoal, ash and burned earth
overlying a gravel layer containing a partial cow skeleton. The gravel layer clearly represents
stream deposited gravel and sands with a stream transported partial skeleton. Above that, the
charcoal, ash and burned earth "feature" does not reflect any prehistoric function such as a
hearth. Instead, the irregular outline and mixture of charcoal, ash and burned earth indicate a
historic pit from the orchard period of the property where trimmed tree limbs may have been
burned creating charcoal and ash and burning the soil of the pit. The upper layers are similar to
the other trenches in containing fringe materials or redeposited materials from CA-SLO-393
mixed into the sediments during the use of the property for fanning/orchards.
No intact prehistoric deposits are evident on the Fair Oaks project site. Monitoring, as
recommended by the Mitigation Plan (Gust and Van Wyke 2005) is a more than adequate
mitigation for any potential effects of this development project
IV
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF STUDY
A mixed-use development project is proposed on Fair Oaks Avenue, ~st of the Arroyo Grande
Community Hospital in Arroyo Grande, California (Figure 1). The City has requested an
assessment of the project's potential impacts on cultural reSources to meet its responsibilities as
the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of the
present study is to determine if the prehistoric northern Chumash site of CA-SLO-393 extends
onto the project parcel.
"
.,
:0
'-,,;,;
.,':.
.:"<'.
.,',..".
. :':~~': .
;~'>:>~.;--,
j
,
. 'i/'"
:~<:~'
,
.,':':' ,\~"'"L:,::
"'\,','..
::'>.'-';
":':
" " . .. 'I ,,:.~ . ;,',
..;: ;',".'...,:
,",\"
I.....'.'
,1".
\,,' .
o 5 10 15 20 25 mile.
I ~ . I .' . " .'. } . " ,'. : . '1 . I . I .' I / . '0 . I I : . \ .' I I . I. / I " .'. .. I I
o 5 ill U 20 ~ ~ ~ ~~
Ma created with TOPO!~ @2003 National Geo hie (www.natiohie.comlto 0
TNi/MN
V 14"
Figure 1. Regional Location Map
1
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of a mixed commercial-and-residential development located on a
5.5-acre parcel on Fair Oaks Avenue immediately east of the Arroyo Grande Community
Hospital, Arroyo Grande (Figure 2). The project area is located in an un-sectioned portion of the
Oceano, California USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle. Previous land-use had been
agricultural. The project is proposed with residential units nearest the creek and commercial
units nearest the existing hospital (Figure 3). Note that the current cuI de sac of Woodland Drive
(immediately north of project) is removed and Woodland becomes a through street to Fair Oaks.
TN
MN
140
o Irr..o fHl 0
- - , -
M8 created with TOPO!@ @2003 National Ge
1 Mll~
lIXXl//HfRS
Figure 2. Project Area Map
2
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
.,
~_. ~
~r~."""""-_i.:C~:" ..,f:fi!!'(j"t.'-<.i;;:;;;,.;.;..... 't"~f.' . I
m-....,......... ""'-'''I.!:t'-'L<I i!!!l::~"""" .
'.':~:\', . ~ .:~,'~.'"~:".j> '~j ":~1r
.- ~ i~;'
~~~.
1,:~
.' .....
1'" ',.'
Figure 3. Conceptual Drawing of Proposed Project
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
". J,. ~ .
;t-..,...
.,'.
,. ...."...,..~t... ,.. .. AC':~ (7. .:-~O.-'
". .'.,"",....., ..._ . "I"o..iU"'-i......' . I.. ._, . :-.:1,. . ~
~tl~-=J-. ',! r.it~"'f:" !::.' " ::~:rl::)T!~Ck~~1
~f~' -.... ~,I,J; j'.;r / .. ~ ~':t',:-l' .1;~.:...
~:'I . :':1.- 'IL' 'I' '''",; 'Z/ )~~~., Jf:.?-:"~'j'lil i
'\.: 't'.)..; i: .1; :~1,' :J"!......<~~.,., : .).. ~"....'. ;~..FJ.l,::
,:.' , '. ... ,.' '>'1o '....~, ~-"~, ,. . :./)'. .
. ., . .!'j'/ . ..."'::~. ;;l)ij'-
I~'I'-:';"r-'"' If!>; .~,. '":-"... - ';::: j'jrty ill'li:
~ . t) ,..."t., .'l"^'~'" J . ........>1."......,. Ci,:' ' ;//lj
4tl ' ('S .. ... 'r. "~\ ":'. ',' '{: '~.' -;<' " t
i<" ti I . . ,-'.',:<.... "~_<:'" .. . 1'. ':> .-' .!,,// " i .
"'il 1. - ! '/lR'-. '0;. ..r /'.~" [..,>.. -'. ",; rN. Ii .
"t:;.. I ~ ';J:1-1it''' .., ,;{....\., , ")!t;'; (r.', /~/ ,.li
l.."~~~,f"~l'~. "<<\ .: \~.:.., r<::::"-" ',.~/" l/ ,;./ . ~.
-...... I . . .., ~.. ...'::.. -"<." ".' .. ~ ." ~ ;
~T,' I_,,~; >".~ "'t~:-"''',.".i'.,..,.......,. ,,'.,,:.1/ :/1\"'> '!
't'., "....!.." ,', l..:, ,. ..~. ........io..~'\.\. "~.' I' "'''''_// .' "
i"'1('" .It.." /";,,,.\,). .,,<i;~,\: "I.".,"". J.aj i~~,':'!
c. , ' ~,. /'-::"'~-:~~::" " ~,:... "~~( ".1.-'1/
..,' ~."~:;.':--,' ""'".~,. ';~'\"">':;-1':}" -1/
.. "..", ..:::~, 'yr~ ,_~""" " .,....t .,,-1, .
. . . .'f (t'.;.: .,~,,~ )., ;,,,-~t..-- .r/'~""v .../ I
. '.. " "\ ~ '~""" '.~'''.~',~~ -'~ ... .,.......
'I'\, ~" .r. \;' Y..,'r' /;1"'/,.; .
l (\ ,/j' ','1. ,.....~.....~~ ' '....
, . <t:':f ~<\; . .'~;'.,~"~(i:' . ' ,r,.~'
;h) .'.. . 't\," {I '.' t,,~
~ '. ,. , ~,/ '~ . ,} ~ '
" #
~ :r-'--M'I . ~ . >~, ,'. ~: ~ : ~ll ',' ~ .> "'1
:11;j .'. " . ";;r:: ,," ,;,,,",,,, , ...1'
'" '" bf; /' " "'I",-'n..."" ,. ~
i l'~ ,~"'f: ,,' ' ~11.~1',:" .f"..- I' .
r ! ('_A~ "c k/.':.......t,:.;. JI,., ~
~ ~ ' ~.;.t:0, A~ ". 0<' y,~'~.". 1, rl/..,.
.,. ~-I, ~l 'l4t!n~- " i~.:t"""; J" ~. l,lk., .> , '?~,~ i,)....l'
",\ Jlj~ ' l<iJrP<""'" !...f'j.. ~":" " '1 \l<~" "I')
'~',b!~~, .:. ~: ~.K.; :.~}t~<&;::t~~'-O;;~~~~~~~~:,; _..;..~
.'
.'
,.
.'
",,_0'"
.' ,.'.
)~"7'
i
3
PROJECT PERSONNEL
Cogstone Resource Management Inc. conducted the assessment. Sherri Gust served as principal
investigator. She is a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a San Luis Obispo County
Qualified Archaeologist. She has aM S. in Anatomy (Evolutionary Morphology), a B. S. in
Anthropology, and more than 28 years of experience in California. April Van Wyke supervised
the testing and wrote the testing results. She has a B.A. in Anthropology (Archaeology) and
more than nine years of experience in California archaeology. Barbara Loren-Webb assisted
with the trench screening and provided geoarchaeological perspective. She has aM S. in
geoarchaeology and more than five years of California experience. Edgar Jackson assisted with
unit excavation and screening. He has a B. A. in Anthropology and over fifteen years of
experience in California archaeology. Personnel qualifications are detailed elsewhere (Appendix
A). Peggy Odom provided Native American monitoring services.
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
The following discussion of applicable state laws has been excerpted and reordered from the
California Department of Transportation's (CALTRANS) on-line Environmental Handbook,
Exhibit 3 of Volume 2, Cultural Resources (2001). The Fair Oaks Project is subject to state and
local legislation regarding cultural resources. The City of Arroyo Grande has Rules and
Procedures to Implement CEQA.
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) (PRC ~ Section 21000 et seq.)
CEQA declares that it is state policy to "take all action necessary to provide the people of this
. state with...historic environmental qualities." It further states that public or private projects
financed or approved by the state are subject to environmental review by the state. All such
projects, unless entitled to an exemption, may proceed only after this requirement has been
satisfied. CEQA requires detailed studies that analyze the environmental effects of a proposed
project. In the event that a project is determined to have a potential significant environmental
effect, the act requires that alternative plans and mitigation measures be considered.
4
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
CEQA includes historic and archaeological resources as integral features of the environment If
paleontological resources are identified as being within the proposed project area, the sponsoring
agency (Caltrans or local) must take those resources into consideration when evaluating project
effects. The level of consideration may vary with the importance of the resource.
California Register of HistoricaI Resources (pRe ~ 5024.1)
Public Resources Code ~ 5024. I establishes the California Re~ster of Historical ResourceS. The
register is listing of all properties considered to be significant historical resources in the state.
The California Register includes all properties listed or determined eligible for listing on the
National Register, including properties evaluated under Section 106, and State Historical
Landmarks from No. 770 OIL The criteria for listing are the same as those of the National
Register. The California Register statute specifically provides that historical resources listed,
determined eligible for listing on the California Register by the State Historical Resources
Commission, or resources that meet the California Register criteria are resources which must be
given consideration under CEQA (see above). Other resources, such as resources listed on local
registers of historic registers or in local surveys, may be listed if they are determined by the State
Historic Resources Commission to be significant in accordance with criteria and procedures to
be adopted by the Commission and are nominated; their listing in the California Register, is not
automatic.
,
Resources eligible for listing include buildings, sites, structures, objects, or historic districts that
retain historic integrity and are historically significant at the local, state or national level under
one or more of the following four criteria:
It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States;
It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history;
5
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or
represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or
It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of
the local area, California. or the nation.
In addition to having significance, resources must have integrity for the period of significance.
The period of significance is the date or span of time within which significant events transpired,
or significant individuals made their important contributions. Integrity is the authenticity of a
historical resource's physical identity as evidenced by the survival of characteristics or historic
fabric that existed during the resource's period of significance. Alterations to a resource or
changes in its use over time may have historical, cultural, or architectural significance. Simply,
resources must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as
historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. A resource that has lost its
historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the California Register, if,
under Criterion 4, it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical
information or specific data.
6
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
BACKGROUND
NATURAL SETI1NG
The project area is located in the Arroyo Grande Valley immediately west of Arroyo Grande
Creek and approximately 4 km (2.5 mi) east of the Pacific Ocean. Access to fresh water from
Arroyo Grande Creek was probably important to prehistoric inhabitatanls.. This area is adjacent
to the ancient shoreline of extinct Halcyon Bay (parker 2002:2). During mid-Holocene times,
when sea-levels were higher, Halcyon Bay covered much of the Cienega and Arroyo Grande
Valleys. As sea levels lowered, various types of littoral environments, from bay to estuarine and
salt marsh, would have succeeded and been available to prehistoric peoples as the bay gradually
silted in (parker 2002:2-3).
PREHISTORIC SETTING
EthnographylEthnohistory
The Arroyo Grande region was occupied by Northern (Obispeiio) Chumash peoples at the time
of historic contact. Population estimates for the Chumash in San Luis Obispo County, based on
mission baptismal records, indicate that perhaps 1,400 to 2,000 people resided there at the time
of Spanish assimilation. Coastal areas such as the project vicinity are thought to have supported
significantly higher population densities than inland areas.
Chronology
The development of an accurate and widely accepted cultural chronology for the central coast
region is still in progress. The Central Coast culture sequence (Table 2) proposed by Jones and
Waugh (1995) has gained support by recent research in San Luis Obispo County (Woodman and
Bertrando 1995; Roper et af. 1997).
7
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
Table 1. Central Coast Culture Sequence (Jones and Wangb 1995)
Early Helocenel This includes aU occupations prior to 8500 BP and follows the description of Late
Paleoceastal PleistocenelEarly Holocene sites described earlier.
???-8500 BP
(Before Present)
Millingstone This cultural period extends from 8500 to 5500 BP, although discoveries near San Luis
8500-5500 BP Obispo may significantly push back the dates in the future (Fitzgerald 1998; Greenwood
1972). This period roughly coincides with Rogers' (1929) Oak Grove tradition and the Ex
Period of the Santa Barbara Channel Sequence (Roper et 01. 1991).
Early Period & Apparent shifts in importance from seed processing to hunting and fIShing usher in this
EarIylMiddle cultural phase. From 5500 to 2600 BP rising sea levels and corresponding environmental
Period Transition changes appear to have drastically altered adaptive strategies of the indigenous inhabitants.
5500-2600 BP Occupations become more sedentary but not necessarily permanent As noted elsewhere,
long distance trade appears to increase during this time.
Middle Peried Social complexity and technology experienced further development during this period as
2600-1000 BP discussed above. An important occurrence of this period along the coast was the climatic
ameliorization resulting in gradual siltation of estuaries along the coast, including Mono
Bay (Gallegos 1987; Jones etal. 1994; in Roper etal. 1991).
MiddlelLate As noted above, the period from 1000 to approximately 750 BP was one of climatic
Transition instability, triggering adaptive responses that eventually led, in some areas, to increased
1000-750 BP social complexity and political control.
Late Peried In response to climatic fluctuations, settlement at this time appean; to shift from the
750-450 BP coastline to interior. This apparently reflects decreasing reliance on coastal resources,
which were drastically affected by events such as El Nino, and a growing dependence on
more reliable, storable commodities such as acorns (Jones and Waugh 1995).
Protohistoric For about a two-hundred year period ending in 1769, coastal Native Californians
Period maintained intermittent contact with :t;:uropean traders and pirates involved in the trans.
450-150 BP Pacific trade. This had little effect tecbnologically, although native economies were altered
by the introduction of glass trade beads. The most detrimental result of this contact was the
introduction of Old World diseases leading to the decimation of the majority of the native
population.
8
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES
The mapped extent of site CA-SLO-393 was east of Woodland Drive and for a considerable
extent northward (Figure 4). Since this area is almost entirely developed, most of the site bas
probably been impacted. The potential of the site to extend onto the current project property has
been tested in the western portion of the site (Singer and Atwood 1989). The subsurface testing
in the form of ten backhoe trenches revealed prehistoric and/or historic cultural material,
including one human cranial fragment, to a maximum depth of 80 em below surface, with a
maximum trench depth of250 cm (Singer and Atwood 1990: 1 0-12, 22-25). The investigator
interpreted the prehistoric cultural material as re-deposited material (presumably from adjacent
areas of site CA-SLO-393 to the northeast) based on the stratigraphic sequence observed in the
. trench profiles (Singer and Atwood 1990: 14).
-
L 'OCOf,U 9 !CO
PriD1ed fiom TOPOl 02001 Naticmal hi: Ho
(www.to .rom)
Figure 4. Archaeology of the Project Area
9
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
TESTING METHODS
INTRODUCTION
Test excavations were conducted in the area immediately south of the known boundaries of CA-
SLO-393. Testing consisted of four mechanically excavated two meter (six foot) long trenches
(A-D), 1 meter wide (3 feet), placed parallel to the northern project boundary east of Woodland
Drive about 20 meters apart (Figure 5). The trenches were excavated in approximately 15
centimeter (6 inch) levels with dirt from each level of each trench placed in a separate and well
labeled location. Two five gallon buckets of dirt, randomly selected. were screened from each
level of each trench to determine if cultural materials were present Vertical excavation
continued until two consecutive levels were negative for cultural materials. Levels positive for
cultural materials were wholly or partially screened based on a sampling strategy.
In addition, a manually-excavated 1 x 1 meter (3 feet) test unit was placed in the north wall of
Trench D (Figure 5) directly above a portion of a charcoal/ashlbumed earth concentration
(Feature A). The controlled manual excavation was performed to explore the observed feature
and determine whether it represented intact prehistoric deposits. Vertical excavation continued
until two consecutive levels were negative for cultural materials. All levels were completely
screened.
MECHANICAL TESTING
The trenches were placed parallel to the northern property boundary at approximately 20 meter
intervals varying according to vegetation and surface disturbance. Approximately 2 x 1 meter
trenches were excavated by backhoe in approximately 20-centimeter levels to a maximum depth
of 280 centimeters below surface. Due to sandy soils and trench wall slumping during
excavation, the trenches were enlarged as necessary and mixed spoils were removed and
stockpiled separately from the controlled trench levels. Vertical excavation was continued for a
,
minimum of two consecutive sterile levels.
10
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
"
w
~^
.."It
uj~.
~~
"
\.
I
((~:l'~~\
."...51...,....,
\':'l33:'.!:;J
"-:';;'.'!;/
F'\'IROAI<S-"VE~lUE
Flgure 5. Location of lest excavations
Cogstonc Resource Management Inc.
..,.,.--.-",-...-
-_.__._-~-~ ---
----- -.--
...,....... ......
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
A"
'-~r
(.
r.l'~h'; "'""";~.ll
-""r
!
LEe.flle.
TRolCTNOSS)
8E~l':lir~!",,-"-
1l
~
,
.'i
~J''''.r'''''':''U'
"'~:.-". ~~. '~\', /'.......
rt'; / . f
.( t' ,'/
./ ,1 "
~ ,,'
.~
"'----,-,.,
G~~~,t~~~~,,-""l
11
A minimum of two five-gallon buckets of sediment, randomly selected from each level, was dry-
screened through \4-inch mesh for cultural materials. One-hundred percent of Trench A level
soil was screened as a control sample for artifact-density comparison. A ten-percent (0.04 m3)
sample of each level in the remaining trenches was screened if artifact density observed during
initial sampling was at or below the maximum artifact density observed in Trench A (10
artifacts/m3). One-hundred percent of soil from levels with artifact densities exceeding 10
artifacts/m' was screened. In addition, one-hundred percent of Trench D level soils below 80 cm
was screened due to the presence of possible human remains.
All recovered artifacts were bagged and labeled by provenience. One wall of each trench was
profiled and photographed by a geoarchaeologist to characterize stratigraphy. The trenches were
mapped by compass and measuring tape onto the parcel topographic map and UTM coordinates
of each trench were obtained using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) unit.
CONTROLLED MANUAL EXCAVATION
A 1 x 1 meter test excavation unit was placed adjacent and perpendicular to the north wall of
Trench D, directly above a portion of a charcoaI/ash/bumed earth concentration (Feature A) and
adjacent large mammal bone in order to characterize this deposit and recover any associated
cultural materials. The unit was manually excavated in 20 centimeter levels above and below
Feature A and adjacent large mammal bone strata. Feature A and the adjacent large mammal
bone strata were excavated in 10 centimeter level increments. In addition, soils from within
Feature A were recovered and screened separately from surrounding matrix for comparative
purpose. One-hundred percent of sediments were dry-screened through \4-inch mesh.
All recovered artifacts were bagged and labeled by provenience. A soil sample and radiocarbon
samples were taken from the feature for potential further analysis. The feature and adjacent
large mammal bone were mapped in planview, described, and photographed. One unit wall was
profiled in supplement to the trench profile.
12
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
TEST RESULTS
TRENCH A
The NEcomer of this trench was located atUlM 071 9897E, 3888114 N. A total of5.2 m3 was
excavated from Trench A to a depth of 260 em below surface. One hundred percent of the
sediments were screened. Sparse cultural material consisting of marine shell (pismo and
undifferentiated clam) fragments, chert debitage, and one burned small mamnllil bone fragment
was recovered to a depth of 160 em. A single chert flake was recovered from the bottom (240-
260 cm) level; lack of other cultural material in this and surrounding levels and degree of rodent
disturbance throughout suggest that this flake was re-deposited from above strata. A fragment of
modem brown bottle glass observed in the 140-160 em level provides further evidence of rodent
disturbance. Debitage consisted of Monterey chert and one Franciscan chert specimen from all
reduction stages. One small (< I-em) piece of charcoal (not collected) was observed in the 100-
120 cm level.
Table 2. renc snmmarv .
Depth (em) Cultural Material Amount Screened
0"20 1 debit3l!e 3 shell 100% (0.4 m~)
20-40 1 shell 100"/0 (0.4 m3)
40-60 1 shell 100% (0.4 m')
60-80 1 debital!e 100% (o.4m')
80-100 3 debilal1.e , 100% (0.4 m3)
100-120 1 burned small mammal bone 1 charcoal fuw.. 100% (0.4 m3)
120-140 none 100% (0.4 m')
140-160 1 Fran. Chert debital!e 1 bottle gJass fral(. 100% (0.4 m3)
160-180 none 100% (0.4 m')
180-200 none 100% (0.4 m')
200-220 none 100% (0.4 m')
220-240 none 100% lO.4 m')
240-260 1 debilal1.e 100% (0.4 m')
T hA
The trench profile revealed a top layer of approximately 20 centimeters of dark, highly organic
topsoil. Beneath the topsoil i~ a layer of dark sandy silt (10YR 4/2). This layer is between 60 -
70 centimeters thick and is full of rootlets and roots up to 1 - 2 centimeters in diameter. Below
13
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
this layer appears a transition layer - a very mottled area that mixes the materials above and
below. In trench A this layer is approximately 30 centimeters thick. Several krotavina
(abandoned rodent tunnels and burrows) appear in this layer.
TRENCH B
The NE corner of this trench was located at 071 9927E, 38881 ION. A total of 4.0 m3 was
excavated from Trench B to a depth of 200 centimeters below surface. Ten percent of the
sediment recovered was screened. Sparse cultural material consisting of marine shell (pismo and
undifferentiated clam) fragments, debitage, and burned and unburned small mammal bone and
charcoal was recovered to a depth of 180 em. Debitage consisted of Monterey. chert specimens
from all reduction stages.
Table 3. Trench B summa
De th cm
0-20
20-40
40-60
60-80
80-100
Cultural Material
2 debi e 2 shell 4 charcoal
1 debita e 1 ss. burned bone fra .
2 shell
1 uartzite debita e I whitcware vessel fra .
1 debitage, 3 shell, 3 burned bone undif. frags., 1
charcoal 1 rodent bone unburned
I shell
2 shell 1 charcoal
100-120
120-140
140-160
160-180
180-200
none
1 shell
none
The profile of Trench B was very similar to Trench A. There is a top layer of approximately 20
centimeters of dark, organic topsoil. Beneath the topsoil is a layer of dark sandy silt material
(IOYR 4/2). This layer is between 60 - 70 centimeters thick and is full of rootlets and roots up to
1 -.2 centimeters in diameter. Below this layer appears a transition layer about 60 centimeters
thick. This is a very mottled area that mixes the materials above and below. Several krotavina
(abandoned rodent tunnels and burrows) appear in this layer.
Trench B h~ a small concentration of broken shell fragments in the top 20 centimeters of the
western corner. It also has a faintly detectable layer 1 - 2 em thick about 15 centimeters from the
14
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
bottom of the layer that exhibits more compaction than the material above or below. This may
be evidence of brief surface. At the bottom is a layer of fine sand that gets lighter in color as it
increases in depth. The Munsell color chart readings range from yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) toU
light yellowish brown (1 OYR 5/6) in Trench B.
TRENCH C
The NE corner of this trench was located at UTM0719943E, 3888123N. A total of 4.0 m' was
excavated from Trench B to a depth of 200 em below surface. Ten percent of the sediment
recovered was screened. Sparse cultural material consisting of marine shell (pismo and
undifferentiated clam) fragments and debitage was recovered to a depth of 180 cm. Debitage
consisted of Monterey chert specimens from all reduction stages.
Table 4. Treoc sommarv
Depth (cm) Cultural Material Amount Screened
0-20 4 shell 10% (0.04 m'
20-40 5 shell '10% 0.04m'
40-60 I debilal(e I shell 10% 0.04 m'
60-80 I debilal(e. 4 shell 10% 0.04 m'
80-100 2 debita..e 2 shell 10% 0.04 m')
100-120 none 10% 10.04 m')
120-140 I shell 10% 10.04 m')
140-160 I debitaJ!.e. I shell 10% 10.04 m')
160-180 I shell 10"10(0.04 m')
180-200 none 10"10 10.04 m')
200-220 none 10% (0.04 m')
220-240 none 10% (0.04 m')
hC
TrenchC began collapsing from the time it was excavated and continued to do so throughout the
following days. No realistic profile was possible although the topsoil appeared to have more
depth in C than in trenches A and B. A large (10-15 cm) diameter tree root extended from the
south wall into the north wall at approximately 1 meter in depth in the western half of the trench.
A number of small rootlets were also present
15
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
TRENCHD
The NE corner of this trench was located at UTM 071 9983E, 3888116N. A total of 4.0 m3 was
control-excavated from Trench B to a depth of 200 em below sUlface. A ten percent sample of
the recovered sediments were screened to 100 centimeters. Below that, all sediment was
screened due to the possible presence of human bone. Sparse cultural material consisting of
marine shell (pismo and undifferentiated clam) fragments, debitage, and burned small mammal
bone, historic ceramics. metal and cow bone was recovered to a depth of 200 em. Debitage
consisted of Monterey chert specimens from all reduction stages.
Table 5. Trene summarv
Depth (cm) Cultural Material Amount Screened
0-20 I debiwe 10% (0.04 m')
20-40 2 debital!e I shell I whiteware alate fral!.. I metal fral!. 10% (0.04m')
40-60 none 10% (O.04m')
60-80 none 10% (0.04m')
80-100 4 charcoal 100% (0. 4 m')
100-120 I cow incisor, I burned small mammal bone Crag, II shell, 100% (0. 4 m')
charcoal burned earth I fossilized shell
120-140 I each cow mandible, rib, third phalanx and cervical vertebra; 100% (0. 4 m')
3 debital!e 22 shell charcoal burned earth
140-160 I debiwe 24 shell I burned rodent bone. charcoal 100% (0. 4 m')
160-180 6 shell I burned rodent bone. 2 charcoal 100% (0.4 m')
180-200 3 shell I cow cervical vertebra f"t-a2.. charcoal 100% (0.4 m')
hD
The stratigraphy for Trench D was strikingly different from the other trenches. The upper two
stratigraphic units were essentially the same as those for A-C. There was approximately 20 cm of
topsoil with high organic content followed by a layer of sandy silt colored grayish brown (1 OYR
5/3) to brown (10YR 4/3). This layer was approximately 100 centimeters thick. Below this
depth a markedly different profile was revealed. A layer of coarse poorly sorted large gravel
interfingered with a layer of fine sand and moderately well-sorted smaller angular gravel was
present. Bone and shell were present in the gravel layer. Charcoal also appeared in several
lenses throughout this layer. Coarse, poorly sorted gravels are consistent with high-energy water
transport of heavy sediment loads while small, sorted gravels are consistent with low-energy
water transport over long distances (the larger gravel drops outs as the water speed declines).
16
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
The charcoal-laden region of the trench was designated as Feature A. A decision was made to
explore Feature A using a manually excavated unit in an attempt to determine the nature of
Feature A.
TRENCH D, UNIT 1
The NE corner of this unit was located atUm 071 9984E, 3888117N. A total of 1.8 m3 was
excavated from Unit I. All sediment was screened. Sparse cultural material consisting of
marine shell (pismo and undifferentiated clam) fragments, debitage, small mammal bone,
, historic nails and bolts and cow bone was recovered to a depth of 180 em. Debitage consisted of
Monterey chert specimens from all reduction stages.
Table 6. Trenc . nit snmmarv
Depth (em) Cultural Material Amount
Screened
0-20 2 debitage 8 shell 2 mammal bones 100% (0.2 m'
20-40 4 debitage 7 shell 100% 0.2m'
40-60 I debitage I shell I wire nail 100% O.2m'
60-80 I debital!:e 9 shell 2 burned mammal bones I boll. 2 charcoal 100% 0.2m'
80-100 3 shell 10 charcoal 100% (0.2 m')
100-110 I debital!:e 4 shell charcoal burned earth 100%(0.1 m')
110-120: 5 shell, 2 rodent bones, charcoal, burned earth
Feat. A 100% (0.1 m')
11 0-120 (outside 7 shell, charcoal, burned earth
feature)
120-130: 7 shell, charcoal, ~urned earth
Feat. A. 100%(0.1 m')
120-130 (outside I debitage, 2 shell, I bone, charcoal
feature)
130-140: 2 debitage (inc!. I fife-affected), 6 shell, charcoal, burned earth
Feat. A 100% (0.1 m')
13 0-140 (outside I debitage, 10 shell, I cow tooth, charcoal
feature)
140-150 Cow tibia (I), thoracic vertebrae (3), caudal vertebrae (2); I 100%(0.1 m')
debitMe 37 shell, charcoal
150-160 15 shell 100% (0.1 m')
160-180 14 shell I bone undif. I charcoal 100% (0.2 m')
hD U . 1
17
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
A profile of the unit wall reveals the same stratigraphy described for Trench D (Figure 6).
Feature A is revealed as a concentration of charcoal, ash, and burned earth exposed in Unit 1 at
approximately 110 em below surface. It consisted of a 5 to 15 em-thick deposit of dark gray
very fine sandy silt mottled with discontinuous thin (1-3 cm thick) lenses of charcoal, ash, and
reddish-yellow burned earth. The feature has an undulating surface and diffuse margins.
Frequent visible kfotavina observed within and surrounding the feature indicate that it is highly
rodent-disturbed.
In addition to the charcoal, ash, and burned earth, sparse cultural material consisting of marine
shell and chert debitage was recovered from within and surrounding the feature. Two small (< 5
cm) fire-affected cobbles were observed within and in the level directly above the feature. No
burned bone was observed within or surrounding the feature, and one piece of fITe-affected
Monterey chert debitage was recovered from within the feature. No significant variation in
diversity or density of the sparse artifacts recovered from within and outside the feature is
apparent.
The feature lies immediately above a concentration of large mammal bone. The bone has now
been analysed and all elements are part of one female cow (Bas taurus). The identified skeletal
elements include a right lower second incisor, a right mandible, portions of two cervical
vertebrae, portions of three thoracic vertebrae, two caudal vertebrae, a right femur, a right tibia
and a distal phalanx (toe bone). The femur was embedded in the wall of the trench and was left
in place. All other elements were collected. The mandible and postcranial elements were
transported to Cogstone's Santa Ana laboratory for identification. The elements were
differentiated from bison using Balkwill and Cumbaa (1992) and from elk and horse using
Brown and Gustafson (1979) in addition to a complete cow skeleton in Cogstone's comparative
faunal collection. The animal was determined to be a subadult (-2 year old) female cow based
on epiphyseal fusion status, presence of the deciduous (baby) fourth premolar and size by
comparison to known age and sex individuals.
18
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
Trench D
~_V' \lj~ ~NorthWall
--~~
tJll"" I.
-_____ ..... __ .1
-,:~:; ----.'. ---~..--------
"'!,!.. ~' ~ tjf.J.t~J~l!i1
~, 'lil'''' l~i!il, 'i r;::: ~,.r~
t ,",,,; ""., '1'
7l~ '::. ''\.-.J
kro(~l\'ina J'" .' krot~lvina
t"
, ,
. n)\.)\
o
em
20
40
II',
60
80
\--, /,/'/
j,; \'\ (Ie
~--------- .)
K (Ib) --____~ -------..
_ Klb)
----._----)j~ (
Ie I
::.-:""----. '
.....,.. .'_ / Ie
'.' ,"i'" -----......------..........
''';.:>,...'.. K(lb)/ r
~, ( .....-/F
-_._----------~ I"~ .:
<. /. ~:. >'. /,
.. .. -,->/: I' .'..n-,
_ nJ ...,>:-~//,.,
@CJfr-...
---...:::
~~
100
120
140
[\'
-----.
--------------------
"'-- ~---
160 "'--'::::.::- -,
-~ ~
Vb Va ....VI
180
,.m
\'11
--
Figure 6. Profile of Unit 1, Trench D
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
FAIR OAKS
Feature A (Stral I. V)
Trench D, Unil1
Easl Wall Profile
0.180cm
09/26/2005
A. Van Wyke
r
I, Ib, VI, ele. Roman numerals
denole unique
strata/layers
if'
SUlface Vegetation
II
~
~
'lZl
Krotavina
Charcoal
Charcoal Fealure: Slral U
Cow Femur
r1i
o 10 20cm
Botlol11 of Trench 0
19
Key to Figure 6
I - dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2 dry) very fine silty sand, moderately compacted, friable.
Ia - small component of gravels, many krotavina and roots
Ib - many krotavina and some small rootlets
Ic -light grayish brown (IOYR 6/2 dry)
IT - Charcoa1!ashlburned earth concentration with very dark gray (10 YR dry) very fine silty
sand with discontinuous thin lenses of charcoal and ash and reddish brown (7.5 YR 6/6 dry)
burned earth with frequent krotavina, and loose to loosely compacted texture.
ill -light gray (10YR 7/2 dry) very fine to fme sand, loosely compacted.
IV -light gray (1 OYR 7/1 dry) very fine to very coarse sand with 40-50"fo subangular gravels,
poorly sorted, loosely compacted.
v - brown (lOYR 5/3 dry) medium to coarse sands
Va - medium to coarse sand
Vb - medium to coarse sand with 60"fo very rounded to subangular gravels
VI - very pale brown (10YR 7/3 dry) very fine sand
vn - pale brown (1 OYR 6/3 dry) fmd sand
20
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
Field personnel initially identified the cow incisor as a possible human incisor and notified the
coroner. The coroner's representative notified the Native American Heritage Commission who
assigned Lei Lynn Odom as the Most Likely Descendent. .
Osteologist Sherri Gust examined the tooth approximately a week later in Cogstone's Morro Bay
. office and determined that it was not a human tooth, but a right lower second cow incisor. The
tooth has a spatulate crown, has wear across the entire crown on a diagonal from the outer to
inner surfaces, has a distinctly curved root and is too large for a human tooth - especially in
crown width (Hillson 1992, Steele and Bramblett 1988). Thus this tooth is part of the partial
cow skeleton, not a prehistoric human burial remnant.
. All incisors have a superficially similar appearance but there are many differences (Figure 7;
note that cows do not have upper incisors). Human incisor roots are straight but may have a
slight flexure at the tip. Cow incisor roots are distinctly curved. Cow incisor crowns are much
more spatulate than human teeth and the wear pattern is entirely different. Cow incisors wear
diagonally across the entire crown while normal hwnan incisors wear at the "top" of the crown
only.
The only cut mark on any of the bones is a small knife score on the inner surface of the anterior
mandible. Under the microscope, the knife score has a V-shaped profile consistent with a metal
knife (stone tools leave a U-shaped profile). The knife score is typical of marks left when the
tongue is removed for use as a food item. The lack of butchering marks on the other skeletal
elements may indicate that the cow skeleton dates to Californio times (pre-1848). Californio
butchering did not involve cutting through bones, the meat was stripped off of the bones instead
(Gust 1982).
21
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
upper
n 12
Adult human permanent incisors
lower
n 12
.....
Adult cow permanent incisors
lower
nUB
Figure 7. Human versus cow incisors (Hillson 1992)
22
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
TESTING CONCLUSIONS
Trenches A-C have sparse cultural materials and disturbance indicating that fringe materials or
redeposited materials from CA-SLO-393 were been mixed into the sediments during the use of
the property for farming/orchards. Trench D and Unit 1 have prehistoric debris plus historic
debris including ceramics and metal overlying a layer containing charcoal, ash and burned earth
overlying a gravel layer containing a partial cow skeleton. The gravel layer clearly represents
stream deposited gravel and sands with a stream transported partial skeleton. Above that, the
charcoal, ash and burned earth "feature" does not reflect any prehistoric function such as a
hearth. Instead, the irregular outline and mixture of charcoal, ash and burned earth indicate a
historic pit from the orchard period of the property where trimmed tree limbs may have been
burned creating charcoal and ash and burning the soil of the pit The upper layers are similar to
the other trenches in containing fringe materials or redeposited materials from CA-SLO-393
mixed into the sediments during the use of the property for farming/orchards.
No intact prehistoric deposits are evident on the Fair Oaks project site. Monitoring, as
recommended by the Mitigation Plan (Gust and Van Wyke 2005) is a more than adequate
mitigation for any potential effects of this development project.
23
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
REFERENCES CITED
Balkwill, D. and S. Cumbaa
1992 A Guide to the Identification of Post cranial Elements of Bos taurus and Bison bison. Canadian Museum of
Nature, Ottawa.
Brown, C. and C. Gustafson
1979 A Key to Postcranial Skeletal Remains ofCaule/Bison, Elk and Horse. Washington State University
Reports ofInvestigations 57.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation)
2001 Exhibit 3. In Environmental Handbook, Vol. 2. Cultural Resources. Website:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/envhand.htm
2003 Laws, Regulations and Guidelines. In Environmental Handbook, Vol. 1. General Guidance for
Compliance, Chapter 8 -Paleontology. Website:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/serlvoll/sec3/physicaIlCh08Paleo/cbap08paleo.htm
Gust, S. and A. Van Wyke
2005 Updated Cultural Resources Assessment and Mitigation Plan for the Fair Oaks Mixed-Use Project, City of
Arroyo Grande, California. On file, Cogstone Resource Management Inc., City of Arroyo Grande and Central
Coastal Information Center.
Hillson, Simon
1992 Mammal Bones and Teeth. Institute of Archaeology, University College of London.
Jones, Terry and Georgie Waugh
1995 Central California Coastal Prehistory: A View from Little Pico Creek~ In Perspectives in California
Archaeology, Volume 3. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.
Parker, J.
2002 Cultural Resource Investigation of Proposed Additions to the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Parking
Area. Report prepared for RRM Design Group.
Singer, C. and J. Atwood
1990 Archaeological Testing for the Eastward Expansion of the Arroyo Grande Connnunity Hospital, San Luis
Obispo County, California. Report prepared for AMI, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA
Steele, D. and C. Bramblett
1988 The Anatomy and Biology of the Human Skeleton. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.
Woodman, C. and E. Bertrando
1995 Archaeological Survey Report for Segment 2, Chono Valley Water Transmission Pipeline Project San Luis
Obispo County, California: Local Distribntion Lines and Facilites of the State Water Project Coastal Branch, Phase
II. Report Prepard for San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Planning and
Building Department, Environmental Division and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District,
Prepared by Scientific Applications International Corporation, Santa Barbara, CA.
24
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
APPENDIX A:
QUALIFICA nONS
.
25
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
SHERRI GUST
Relristered Professional Archaeologist
Oualified PaleontolOlrist
EDUCATION
1994 M. S., Anatomy and Cell Biology (Evolutionmy Morphology), University of Southern
California, Los Angeles
1979 B. S., Anthropology (physical), University of California, Davis
SELECfED ANALYSIS PROJECfS
Identification, analysis and report on over 10 thousand fossils recovered from the Inland Empire Utilities
Plant Number 5 project.
Analysis and report on more than a dozen Native American burials from the Alameda Corridor Project.
Analysis and report on archaeological animal bone from Mission San Luis Obispo's neophyte village.
SELECfED ASSESSMENT PROJECfS
Research, survey and report on cultural resources from a property with a prehistoric site and historic
ranching in San Juan Capistrano.
Literature review, survey and report on paleontological resources from a housing development project in
Arroyo Grande.
Research, testing and report on the Zanja Madre, the original water sources of Los Angeles for MfA.
SELECfED MONITORING PROJECfS
Mitigation plan and archaeo/paleo monitoring of the Eastside Gold Line Subway Extension Project for
MTA.
Archaeo/paleo monitoring and final report for the Grand Avenue Realignment Project in downtown Los
Angeles.
Archaeo/paleo monitoring and final report for the Farmer's Market Expansion Project in the Fairfax
District of Los Angeles.
26
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
REPoRlS AND PuBUCATIONS
2005 Gust, S. and A. Van Wyke. Updated Cultural Resource Assessment and Mitigation Plan for the
Fair Oaks Mixed use Project, City of Arroyo Grande, California. On file, Cogstone Resource
Management Inc. and Central Coastal Information Center.
2005 Gust, S. Paleontological Evaluation Report for the Shandon Community Plan Update Constraints
Analysis Project, San Luis Obispo County, California On fIle, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2005 Scott, K. and S. Gust. Archaeological and Paleontological Resource Assessment Report for the
Rich Haven Project, Ontario, California. On me, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.. Eastern
Information Center and San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center.
2005 Scott, K. and S. Gust. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for the First Street Trunk
Line Project, City of Los Angeles, California. On fIle, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2005 Knight, A. and S. Gust. Advisory Report on Pacific Pipeline Systems Line 63 and Line 2000
Permanent Repair Project, Angeles National Forest, California. On me, Cogstone Resource Management
Inc. and Angeles National Forest.
2005 Scott, K. and S. Gust. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report and Mitigation Plan for the
Tustin MCAS Project, Tustin, California. On fIle. Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2005 Knight, A. and S. Gust. Combined [Construction] Phase I and Phase II Report on Pacific Pipeline
Systems 2005 Emergency Repair Project, Angeles National Forest, California. On me, Cogstone
Resource Management Inc. and Angeles National Forest.
2005 Gust, S. and A. Van Wyke. Archaeological Assessment Report for Certificate Parcels 1-4 of the
Heritage Ranch Project, San Lnis Obispo County, California On fIle, Cogstone Resource Management
Inc. and Central Coastal Information Center.
2005 Van Wyke, A. and S. Gust. Archaeological Test Excavations (Phase II) of a possible portion of
CA-SLO-808 for the Nipomo Commons Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. On file, Cogstone
Resource Management Inc. and Central Coastal hlformation Center.
2005 Scott, K. and S. Gust. Paleontological Survey and Evaluation of Camp Roberts and Camp San
Luis Obispo, California Army National Guard Facilities, Central California. On file, Cogstone Resource
Management Inc. and California Army National Guard Environmental Division.
2005 Van Wyke, A., K. Scott and S. Gust. Archaeological and Paleontological Resource Assessment
and Monitoring Report for the Fox Digital Lot B Project, City of Los Angeles, California. On file,
Cogstone Resource Management Inc. and South Central Coastal Information Center.
2005 Gust, S. History and Archaeology of the Zanja Madre, City of Los Angeles, California. On fIle,
Cogstone Resource Management Inc. and South Central Coastal Information Center.
2005 Puckett, H., S. Gust and M. Parker. Cultural Resources Evaluation and Mitigation Plan for the
Hidden Creek Estates Project, City of San Juan Capistrano, California On file, Cogstone Resource
Management Inc.
2005 Gust, S., K. Scott and B. Glenn. Cultural Resources Evaluation and Mitigation Plan for the Live
Oak Canyon Estates Project, Orangc County, California plus Monitoring Report for the Geotechnical
Survey Only. On fIle, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
27
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2005 Gust, S., K. Scott and B. Glenn. Cultural Resources Evaluation and Mitigation Plan for the
Mountain Shadows Estates Project, Orange County, California plus Monitoring Report for the
Geotechnical Survey Only. On file, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2004 Glenn, B. and S. Gust. Cultural Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan for the Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Eastside Gold Line Transit Corridor, Los Angeles, Los
Angeles County, California On fIle, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2004 Glenn, B., K. Scott and S. Gust. Cultural Resources Assessment and Monitoring Report for the
. Shinnyo-en Project, City ofYorba Linda, California. On fIle, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2004 Gust, S., K. Scott and S. McCormick. Archaeological & Paleontological Evaluation Report and
Mitigation Plan, Indio-78 Parcel, Indio, Riverside County, California On me, Cogstone Resource
Management Inc.
2004 Gust, S. Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment Report and Mitigation Plan for the EMR
Project, Rubidoux. On file, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2004 Gust, S. and V. Mirro. Archaeological and Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Grand
Avenue Realignment Project, Los Angeles, California. Sapphos Environmental Inc.
2004 Gust, S. and V. Mirro. Archaeological Assessment Report and Mitigation Plan, Planning Area 6
of Quinta Do Lago, Winchester, Riverside County, California, Barratt American Incorporated.
2004 Gust, S. Archaeological Evaluation Report and Mitigation Plan for the Tapo Street Office Project,
City of Simi Valley, California, The William Fox Group, Inc.
2004 Gust, S., S. Pentney and S. McCormick. Archaeological Literature Review for the Los Serranos
Hills Project, Chino Hills, California. On file, Cogstone Resource Management, Inc.
2004 Gust, S. and V. Mirro. Cultural Resource Assessment Report for the Seal Beach Bike Path
Project, City of Seal Beach, County of Orange, California
2004 Scott, K., S. Gust and Cogstone Resource Management Inc. Paleontological Evaluation Report
and Mitigation Plan for the Indio-12 Parcel, Riverside County, California. Applied Earthworks.
2004 Gust, S. and K. Scott. Phase I Archaeological & Paleontological Resources Survey & Assessment
of Assessors Parcel Number 467-160-016: 4.35 acres ofland near the city of Murrieta, Riverside County,
California, USGS Bachelor Mountain, California Quadrangle 7.5' series. UltraSystems Environmental.
2004 Gust, S. Phase I Archaeological & Paleontological Resources Survey & Assessment of Tentative
Tract #32171: 9.04 acres of land near the city of Murrieta, Riverside County, California, USGS Bachelor
Mountain, California quadrangle 7.5' series. UltraSystems Environmental.
2004 Gust, S. Phase I Archaeological & Paleontological Resources Survey & Assessment of Tentative
Traet Map # 32171, Murrieta, California. UltraSystems Environmental.
2004 Gust, S. and M. P. Parker. Relationship of the Zanja Madre to MTA's Gold Line Property in
River Station, City of Los Angeles, California, M. P. Parker. UltraSystems Environmental, Inc and
Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
2003 Gust, S. and E. BeItrando. Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment and Mitigation Plan
28
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
for the Charnley Tract, Templeton, San Luis Obispo. On file, Morro Group, Inc. and the County of San
Luis Obispo, SLO.
2003 Gust, S. and S. Alarcon. Archaeological and Paleontological Evaluation Report and Mitigation
Plan for the Interstate 605 Soundwall Project, From Whittier to Baldwin Park, Los Angeles County,
California. On me, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglass Inc., Caltrans, and the County of Los
Angeles.
2003 Gust, S. Faunal Analysis. In Exploring a Cosmopolitan Neighborhood in Sacramento, California.
Appendix E, W. Nettles, M. C. Hamilton and K. Warren. Applied Earthworks for CalPERS, Sacramento.
2003 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment for tile Southwest Reservoir of the City of Paso Pobles,
County of San Luis Obispo, California The Morro Group, Inc.
2003 Gust, S. and K. Scott. Paleontological Assessment of a 2.5-Acre Development Parcel, Templeton,
San Luis Obispo County. California. Bateman, Semmes, et al.
2003 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment of a 36-Acre Development Parcel, Templeton, San Luis
Obispo County, California. Boneso Bros. Construction Inc.
2003 Gust, S. and K. Scott. Paleontological Assessment of a small parcel south of Vineyard Drive and
east of Rossi Road, Templeton, San Luis Obispo County, California. Hastings Enterprises.
2003 Gust, S. and K. Scott. Paleontological Assessment Report and Mitigation Plan for the Biddle
Ranch West Cluster, San Luis Obispo County, California. Talley Farms.
2003 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report and Mitigation Plan for the Owens Valley Project,
Inyo County, California Sapphos Environmental, Inc.
2003 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report for the Proposed Southwest Reservoir, City of Paso
Robles, San Luis Obispo County. On file, Morro Group and City of Paso Robles.
2003 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report for the Templeton Medical Plaza, Templeton, San
Luis Obispo County. On me, Pults & Associates and the County of San Luis Obispo.
2003 Gust, S., M. P. Hickson and R Turner. Palmdale 93 Project: AIchaeological & Paleontological
Assessment Report and Mitigation Plan, Palmdale, California On File, Cogstone Resource Management,
Inc.
2003 Gust, S. Santa Ysabel Fossils: Phase I Paleontological Monitoring Report, Santa Ysabel Ranch,
Paso Robles, San Luis Obispo County, California. On file, Weyrick Development and the County of San
Luis Obispo..
2002 Gust, S. Animal Bones Recovered from CA-RIV-399. Appendix C. In Archaeological
Investigations at CA-RIV-399, Inland Feeder Project, 1. Greenwood & Associates. MWD and County of
Riverside.
2002 Gust, S. and S. Dietler. Archaeological and Paleontological Monitoring Report, July to October
2002, for EI Morro School Expansion Project, Laguna Beach, Orange County, California Laguna Beach
School District.
2002 Gust, S. Cultural and Paleontological Resources. In AT&T Fiber Optic Cable Project, San Luis
Obispo to Los Angeles. On me, Morro Group, Inc. and the County of San Luis Obispo.
29
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2002 Gust, S., S. Alarcon and S. DietIer. Final Archaeological and Paleontological Monitoring Report
for the Grove at Farmer's Mmket, Phases I, II, and Ill, and the Gilmore Adobe Landscaping
Project, Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. On file, A.F. Gilmore Company, City of Los
Angeles, and South Central Coastal Information Center.
2002 Gust, S. Inland Feeder Project Human Remains. In Archaeological Investigations at CA-RIV-
399, Appendix D, I. Greenwood & Associates. On file, MWD and County of Riverside.'
2002 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report Twin cities Hospital Expansion Project, Templeton,
San Luis Obispo County, California. Tenet Health Systems.
2002 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report. In Initial Study: Annexation, Detachment, Sphere of
Influence, Amendment, Redevelopment Area Expansion, General Plan Update, and Automotive Test
Course Project, California City, Kern County, S. E. Inc. On file, California City and County of Kern.
2002 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report, Twin Cities Hospital Expansion Project, Templeton,
San Luis Obispo, California On file, Tenet Health Systems and the County of San Luis Obispo.
2001 Gust, S. Faunal Remains. In The Excavation of the Woolen Mills Chinatown (CA-SCL-807H), R.
Allen, S. Baxter, A. Medin, J. Costello and C. Young Yu. California Department of Transportation,
Oakland, San Jose, California.
2001 Gust, S. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the A.J. West Ran~h Project, Lake Forest,
Orange County, California. On me, Turner Development CoIp. 'and City of Lake Forest.
2001 Gust,S., R. Raschke, M. Phillips and G. L. Aron. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the
AJ. West Ranch Project, Lake Forest, Orange County, California Turner Development COIporation.
2001 Gust, S., C. Corsetti and M. Phillips. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Great
Indoor Sport Center Project, Chino Hills. San Bernardino County, California. Advanced Project
Management.
2001 Gust, S. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the John Laing Homes Project at 900 Sea
Lane, Corona Del Mar, Orange County, California Jolm Laing Homes.
2001 Gust, S. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Planning Area I, Planning Area 3, and
Community Park Segments of the Foster Ranch Highlands Project, San Clemente, Orange County,
California. On me, Foster Ranch Highlands LLC and County of Orange.
2001 Gust, S. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Project on Eucalyptus Avenue, Chino,
San Bernardino County, California. Crestwood Corporation.
2001 Gust, S., P. Alms, T. Matson and M. Phillips. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the
Warmington Development, Chino Hills, San Bernardino County, California. Warmington Homes
California
2001 Gust, S. and C. Corsetti. Paleontological Assessment Report for Hitch Ranch Specific Plan,
MooIpark, Ventura County, California. On file, Impact Sciences Inc. and County of Ventura
2001 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report for Tcayawa Energy Center Project, Coachella
Valley, Riverside County, California On me, CH2MHill and the County of Riverside.
30
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2001 Gust, S. and R. Raschke. Paleontological Monitoring Report for Carlsbad Corporate Center Phase
II Project, Carlsbad, California. Gale and Wentworth CA, L.L.C.
2001 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment Report for the Broadwing Fiber Optic Long Haul Project,
Los Angeles to Ontario to San Diego. On file, North State Resources Inc. and Counties of Los Angeles,
Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego.
2001 Gust, S. and R. Raschke. Paleontological Monitoring Report of Carlsbad Corporate Center Phase
II Project. On file, Gale and Wentworth CA, LLC and City of Carlsbad.
2001 Gust, S. and C. Corsetti. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for Broadwing Fiber
Optic Long Haul Project, Los Angeles to Ontario to San Diego. North State Resources Inc. .
2000 Gust, S. and R. Bissel. Emergency RecoveIy Actions at CA-LAN-2828, Los Angeles, Los
Angeles County, California. On file, Camp Dresser and McKee and County of Los Angeles.
2000 Gust, S. and E. Bragado. Environmental Quality Assurance Plan, Paleontological Monitoring
Technical Plan for the New Millennium Homes Project, Calabasas, California. On file, New Millennium
Homes and City ofCalabasas.
2000 Gust, S. and E. Bragado. Environmental Quality Assurance Plan, Paleontological Monitoring
Technical Report for the New Millennium Homes Project, Calabasas, California October-December 1999.
City of Calabasas.
2000 Gust, S., G. L. Aron and T. Matson. Final Paleontological and Archaeological Monitoring Report
for the Olinda Landfill Center Ridgc Expansion Project, Brea, Orange County, California. TRC
Environmental Solutions, Inc.
2000 Gust, S., G. L. Aron and R. Raschke. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Lake
Forest Corridor Project, Lake Forest, California, Project Number: 99-14344. Steadfast Properties.
2000 Gust, S., C. Burres-Jones, E. Bragado and M. X. Kirby. Final Paleontological Monitoring Report
for the Planning Area 1, Planning Area 3, and commnnity Park Segments of the Forster Ranch Highlands
Project, San Clemente, Orange county, California Forster Ranch Highlands LLC.
2000 Gust, S. and G. Aron. Lake Forest Corridor Project Final Paleontological Monitoring Report. On
me, RMW Paleo Associates and City of Lake Forest.
2000 Gust, S. Negative Paleontological Survey Report for New Bicycle Trail/Pcdestrian Bridge
Overcrossing ofI-405. William Frost and Associates.
2000 Gust, S. Negative Paleontological Survey Report of Railway Undercrossing east of Jeffery Road.
William Frost and Associates.
2000 Weir, D. and S. Gust. Paleontological Monitoring Report for Planning Areas 1 & 2 and Army
Corps of Engineers Property, Fullerton, Orange County, California Unocal Land and Development
Company.
2000 Gust, S. and D. Weir. Paleontological Monitoring Report for Planning Areas 1 and 2 and Army
Corps of Engineers Property, Fullerton, Orange County, California. On file, Unocal Land and
Development Company and County of Orange.
31
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
2000 Gust, S. and C. L. Burres. Paleontological Monitoring Report for the City of Laguna Hills
Community Center and Sports Complex. On file, City of Laguna Hills.
2000 Gust, S. Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Garden of Champions Tennis Facility Project,
Riverside County, California. On file, County of Riverside.
2000 Phillips, M. and S. Gust. Paleontological Moritoring Report for The Oaks and Trabuco, Orange
County, California. Goren Financial.
2000 Morgan, M. and S. Gust. Paleontological Resources Assessmcnt Report for HoneymanlRomarco
Tract Project, San Juan Capistrano, Orange County, California. William Lyon Homes, Inc.
2000 Gust, S. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for Lost Canyons Residential Estates
Project, Simi Valley, California. Landmad< National.
1999 Gust, S. Archaeological and Paleontological Monitoring Report for Serrano Creek Business
Center, Lake Forest, California. On file, City of Lake Forest.
1999 Gust, S., J. Costello, A. Praetzellis, M. Prnetzellis, E. Gibson, J. Marvin, M. Meyer, G. Ziesing,
M. Him, B. Mason, E.-M. Solari and S. Stewart. Historical Archaeology at the Headquarters Facility
Project Site. In The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Volume 2, Interpretive Report.
On file, MWD and City of Los Angeles.
1999 Gust, S. Paleontological Assessment of the Cadiz DIy-Year Storage and Pumping Facility. On
me, Metropolitan Waier District.
1999 Gust, S. Paleontological Monitoring Report for South Coast Metro Center, 24-Hour Fibless
Center, Costa Mesa, California. On file, RMW Paleo Associates.
1998 Gust, S., J. Costello, A. Praetzellis, M. Praetzellis, E. Gibson, 1. Marvin, M. Meyer and G.
Ziesing. Historical Archaeology at the Headquarters Facility Project Site, The Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California, Volume I, Data Report: Recovered Data, Stratigraphy, Artifacts, and Documents.
On file, MWD and City of Los Angeles.
1997 Gust, S. Analysis of Animal Bones. In Historical Archaeology of an Overseas Chinese
Community in Sacramento, California, M. Praetzellis and A. Praetzellis. Anthropological Sbldies Center,
Sonoma Stale University, Rohnert Park.
1997 Gust, S. Faunal Material. In Archaeological Investigations of the Vasco Adobe Site, CA-CCO-
470H, for the Los Vaqueros Project, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California, G. Ziesing.
Anthropological Sbldies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park.
1997 Gust, S. Size and Sexual Dimorphism in Smilodon from Rancho La Brea. PaleoBios 15(4).
1996 Gust, S. Analysis of Animal Bones from Block 3. In Working Class Homes From Nineteerith
Centwy Oakland: Cypress Replacement Project, Block 3, M. Meyer. Anthropological Sbldies Center.
Sonoma Stale University, Rohnert Pad<.
1993 Gust, S. Animal Bones from Historic Urban Chinese Sites: A Comparison of Sacramento,
Woodland, Tucson, Ventura, and Lovelock. In Hidden Heritage: Historical Archaeology of the Overseas
Chinese, P: Wegars, pp. 117-212. Baywood Press, Amityville, New York.
32
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
1993 Gust, S. Bison latiforns and Bison antiqus at Rancho La Brea. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology
13(3, Supplement): lOA.
1992 Gust, S. taphonomy and Chronology at Rancho La Brea. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology
12(3, Supplement).
1991 Gust, S. Age and Sex Distribution of the Rancho La Brea Horse based on Pelvic Characters.
Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 11(3; Supplement):33A.
1991 Gust, S. and H. Howard. Change in Representation of Bird Species Through Time at Rancho La
Brea: Ecological or Taphonomic Causes? Southern California Academy of Sciences Annual Meeting
Abstracts:6.
1990 Gust, S. Mammalian Fauna. In Junk: Archaeology of the Pioneer Junk Store, 1877-1908, M.
Praetzellis and A. Praetzellis. Papers in Northern California Archaeology, No.4.
1990 Gust, S. Mammalian Fauna. In Archaeological and Historical Studies at San Fong Chang
Laundty, 8141 Street, Sacramento, California, M. Praetzellis and A. Praetzellis. Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park.
1990 Gust, S. Mammalian Fauna. In The Mmy Collins Assemblage: Mass Marketing and the
Archaeology of a Sacramento Family, M. Praetzellis and A. Praetzellis. Anthropological Studies Center,
Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park.
1990 Gust, S. Mammalian Fauna. In For a Good Boy: Victorians on J Street, M. Praetzellis and A.
Praetzellis. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park.
1990 Gust, S. Osteological Materials from CA-MAD-1531.1n Phase II Archaeological Investigations
at CA-MAD-153I, a Prehistoric Occupation Site located in the Lower Foothills of the Southern Sierra
Nevada, Madera County, California, M. Maniel}'. CalTrans, Sacramento.
1990 Gust, S. and E. Scott. Sexual Dimorphism in Fossil Populations: The Rancho La Brea Horse
Through Time. PaleoBios 13(49, supplement):8.
1989 Gust, S. and C. Oxnard. Bone Biomechanics: Insights from the Giant Ground Sloth of Forty
Thousand Years Ago. In Proc. Australasian Soc. for Human Biology, pp. 12-13.
1989 Gust, S. The Fauna from Whittier Narrows. In Whittier Narrows Cultural Resource Mitigation, R.
Greenwood and J. Foster, pp. 121-124. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles.
1989 Gust, S. Faunal Remains from Excavations at CA-BUT -612 and CA-BUT-882. In Data RecoveIy
at Two Chinese Mining Sites in Butte County, California, Appendix B, 1. Tordoff and M. ManicI}'. US
Forest Service, Lassen National Forest, Snsanville.
1989 Gust, S. and E. Scott. Morphological Indicators of Paleonenvironment: The Rancho La Brea
Horse Through Time. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 9(supplement):24A.
1988 Gust, S. Animal Bones from the Late Nineteenth Century Wod< Camp at Seven Oaks (SBR-
5500H). In Wod< Camps in the Santa Ana River Canyon, J. Foster, R. Greenwood and A. Duffield, pp.
131-138. US Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles.
1988 Gust, S. Faunal Remains. In Almaden Tower Project: archaeological mitigation of the Southeast
Comer, section 8, pp. section 8. Archaeological Consulting, Salinas, CA.
33
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
1987 Gust, S. Analysis of the Faunal Materials from Aros-Serrano Adobe. In Historical and
Archaeological Investigation at the Aros-Serrano Adobe. Prado Basin, R. Greenwood, J. Foster and A.
Duffield, US Army Corps of Engineers, pp. 119-127. Los Angeles.
1987 Gust, S. Analysis of the Faunal Remains from the Town of Rincon. In The Rincon Townsite:
Cultural Resource Investigation, R. Greenwood and J. Foster, pp. 149-153. US Army Corps of Engineers,
Los Angeles.
1987 Gust, S. Analysis of the Vertebrate Fauna from CA-VEN-I68. In Phase II Test Excavation and
Mitigation ofImpacts on CA-VEN-168, Ventura County, R. Greenwood and J. Foster. Concrete Express.
1987 Gust, S. Cottonwood Creek Fauna. In Cottonwood Creek Project Shasta and Tehama Counties,
California: Excavations of 13 Historic Sites in the Cottonwood Mining District; Appendix E, J. Tordoff
and D. Seidner. US Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento.
1987 Gust, S. The Drytown Fauna. In Test Excavations at the Block Eight Site CA-AMA-305/H Locus
A, Drytown, Amador County, California, J. Tordoff, pp. 129-139. California Department of
Transportation, Sacramento.
1986 Gust, S. Analysis of Faunal Materials from Olivas Adobe. In Architectural and Archaeological
Investigation of the Olivas Small Adobe, G. Sanchez and R. Greenwood, pp. II: 50-53. Department of
Parks and Recreation, City of San Buenaventura.
1986 Gust, S. Faunal Remains from CA-BUT-882 and CA-BUT-612.1n Analysis, Evaluation, Effect
Determination, and Mitigation Plan for Two Chinese Mining Sites in Butte County, California; Appendix
D, J. Tordoff and M. Maniel}'. US Forest Service, Lassen National Forest, Susanville, CA.
1984 Gust, S. Mammalian Fauna from the Woodland Opera House Site. California Archaeological
Reports (24):181-192.
1983 Gust, S. and P. Schulz. Faunal Remains and Social Status in 19th CentuIy Sacramento. Historical
Archaeology 17(1):44-53.
1983 Gust, S. Problems and Prospects in 19th CentuIy Zooarchaeology. In Forgotten Places and
Things, A. Ward, pp. 341-348. Center for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque, NM.
1983 Gust, S. and P. Schulz. Relative Beef Cut Prices in the Late 19th CentuIy. Pacific Coast
Archaeological Review 19(1):12-18.
1982 Gust, S. Faunal Analysis and Butchering. In The Ontiveros Adobe: Early Ranch Life in Alta
California, 1. Frierman, pp. 101-144. The Ontiveros Adobe: Early Rancho Life in Alta California; pages
101-144. City of Santa Fe Springs, Santa Fe Springs, CA.
1982 Gust, S. Mammalian Remains. In Archaeological and Historical Studies of the IJ56 Block,
Sacramento, California: An Early Chinese Community, M. Praetzellis and A. PraetzelIis, pp. 87-112.
Anthropological Studies Center, Rohnert Park. CA.
1980 Gust, S. Historic Faunal Remains. In Warm Springs Cultural Resources Study, Historic
Archaeological Sites Investigation, Phase III, R. Greenwood, J. Frierman, M. McIntyre, 1. Foster and S.
Guedon, pp. 109-119. US Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco.
34
Cogstone Resource Management InC.
PROFESSIONAL ExPERIENCE
200 I-pres. Principal Investigator, Cogstone Resource Management Inc. Responsible for supervision
of all projects, writing of proposals, assessments, and reports, bone identification, manage
business.
1999-2001 Principal Investigator for Paleontology, RMW Paleo Associates, Inc. Responsible for
proposal preparation, supervision of all paleontology jobs, supervision of all
paleontologists, supervision of paleontology lab including preparation of specimens,
obtaining specimen identifications, writing assessment and data recovery reports, and
serving as liaison to local museums.
1994-98 Visiting Professor and Consultant, Sonoma Stale University, Department of
Anthropology and Anthropological Studies Center. Taught workshops in faunal analysis
and directed identification and analysis of faunal material from the Cypress Freeway
Replacement Project (CaITrans).
1993-99 Research Associate, George C. Page Museum, Natural History Museum oflos Angeles
County. Curated fossils and continued research on alpha taxonomy and population
biology of large mammals from Rancho La Brea
1990-91 Museum Technician II, Earth Sciences, San Bernardino County Museum. Supervised
weekend fossil wash and lab crews, supervised volunteers, separated fossils from matrix,
identified fossils, and curated fossils.
1984-93 Museum Associate, George C. Page Museum, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles
County. Studied change through time (11,000 to 35,000 years ago) of the horses, bison,
wolves and. sabercats from Rancho La Brea consisting of alpha taxonomy, measurement,
statistical analysis, and ecological reconstruction.
1982-84 Museum Associate, George C. Page Museum, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles
County. Researched variation in the giant ground sloth from Rancho La Brea consisting of
measurement and statistical analysis of bone parameters.
1980-1999 Principal Investigator and Registered Professional Archaeologist, Gust Osteological
Analysis. Identification, analysis and reporting on archaeological animal bone and human
bone. Projects include: Los Vaqueros Reservoir Project, Sacramento H156 Block, Morro
Bay Highway widening Project, Metropolitan Water District Headquarters Project, Storke
Road Highway Project, San Lnis Obispo Chinatown, Inland Feeder Project, Folsom
Chinatown, Woolen Mills Chinatown and others. .
1980-86 Field archaeologist, various employers. Survey: Tahoe National Forest. Field Lab: Warm
Springs Dam, Aros-Serrano Adobe. Excavation: Buck's Lake, Cyprus Mines, Ontiveros
Adobe, DullY Springs.
1978-80 State Park Interpretive Specialist, State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation.
Faunal analyst working on archaeological materials recovered in stale paIks, particularly Old
Sacramento.
PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION
Qualified Paleontologist, Bureau of Land Management
QuaIified/Certified Paleontologist, Counties of Orange, los Angeles, San Lnis Obispo, Ventura
35
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
Qualified/Certified Paleontologist, Cities of San Diego, San Luis Obispo
Research Associate, Vertebrate Paleontology Section, LA County Museum of Natural Histol)'
Research Associate, Rancho La Brea Section, Los Angeles County Museum ofNatnral Histol)'
Member, Register of Professional Archaeologists
Qualified/Certified Archaeologist, Connties of Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis
Obispo
Qualified/Certified Archaeologist, Cities of San Luis Obispo, San Diego
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists
Society for California Archaeology
Society for Historical Archaeology
Pacific Coast Archaeological Society
Society for Archaeological Science
Chinese Historical Society of Southem California
San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society
36
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
April J. Van Wyke
Archaeologist and Field Supervisor
EMPLOYMENT AND RESEARCH POSI110NS
2005
Archaeologist and Field Supervisor, Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
1999.2003
Associate Archaeologist, Field Director; Ancient Enterprises, Inc., Santa Monica,
California.
1999
Assistant Project Osteologist; Woodward and Clyde, Oakland, California'
1998-1999
Field and Laboratory Technician, Sonoma State University Anthropological Research
Center, Rohnert Park, California.
1998
Field Technician, Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis,
California
1998
Crew Chief, Garcia and Associates, Santa Cruz, California
1996-1998
Field and Laboratory Technician, Applied EarthwOIks, Lompoc, California.
EDUCATION
.MA., Anthropology, University of Kentucky, anticipated September 2005. Dr. Thomas Dillehay,
chair.
.B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1994
.University of Nevada, Reno, Ruby Valley Archaeology Field School, 1992
Sample Reports and publications
2003 Cultural Resource Testing and Phase II Evaluation for the Protection of Six Sites at
, Edwards Air Force Base, California. Ancient Enterprises, Inc., Santa Monica, California.
Submitted to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Sacramento District, Contract No. DACA05-96-
004. On file, Base Historic Preservation Office, Edwards Air Force Base, California. (With T.
M Green, M R Walsh, and C. W. Clewlow, Jr.)
2000 The Archaeology of Lang Ranch, Ventura County, California. Ancient Enterprises, Inc.,
Santa Monica, California. Submitted to County of Ventura, California. On file, Ventura County
Flood Control District Office, Ventura, California
1996 . Phase One Cultural Resource Investigation for the Lower East Side Improvement
Project, Santa Barbara, California. Science Applications International Corporation, Santa
Barbara, California. Subrnitted to the City of Santa Barbara, California. On file, Cultural
Preservation Office, Santa Barbara
1993 Three Early Shipwrecks in California Waters. In California Shipwrecks: Historical
Profiles, edited by M A. Pelkofer. . California State Lands Commission, Sacramento.
37
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
BARBARA ANN LoREN-WEBB, M.A.
Registered Professional Archaeologist
EDUCATION
2003 M.A., Geoarchaeology (Interdisciplinary), California State University, San Bernardino.
1975 B.A., ANTHROPOLOGY, CALIFORNIA STATE UNNERSITY, LONG BEACH.
SELECTED PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
07/05-pres. Archaeologist, Cogstone Resource Management Inc., Santa Ana, CA. Monitors for
cultural resources on construction/excavation projects. Performs associates research,
reporting and lab work.
08/04-06/05 Archaeologist, PCR, Santa Monica, California. Monitors for cultural resources on
construction/excavation projects. Performs associates research, reporting and lab work.
04/04-08/04 Archaeologist, Applied Earthworks, Hemet, California. Monitored road reconstruction being
done by Caltrans on the Rim of the World Highway in the San Bernardino Mountains- with
sections eligible for the National Register.
08/02-05/04 Archaeological Lab Director and Curation Assistant, JT3/CH2MHill for the Department of
Defense at Edwards Air Force Base. Co-authored regional cultural management report for
the base. Conducted investigations of historical buildings for HABSIHARE project on base
and did some ARPA fieldwork. Also responsible for homestead site well closure mitigation
and monitoring and involved in the "Range Rider" Program which involves ARPA site
protection and damage assessment.
11l01-07/02 Archaeologist, Earth Tech. Colton, California. Worked on various Edwards Air Force Base
projects. Tasks involved researching records, determining appropriate mitigation methods,
keeping BHPO infonned, writing reports, completing and filing site reports and assisting in
the lab.
1O/00-1l/01 ArchaeoIPaleo Monitor, Archaeological Consulting Services, Lytle Creek, Ca., Conducted
monitoring and excavation work (primarily historical) in early downtown Riverside and
Victorville. Performed associated lab work and jointly authored the report for ACS.
AFFILIATIONS
Member, Register of Professional Archaeologists
Member, Society for California Archaeology
Member, Society for American Archaeology
38
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
.'
"
ANDY JACKSON
Archaeologist
EDUCATION
In progress
M.A., Anthropology (Interdisciplinary), California State University, Fullerton
1972 BA, ANTHROPOLOGY, CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FULLERTON
SELECTED PROFESSIONAL & PROJECf EXPERIENCE- EXCA VA TIONS
Proiect Manlll!erlField Director. VTN ConsolidatedIHarmsworth Associates
-Painted Rock Reservoir
-Nashua-Hudson Circumferential Highway
-Star Lake Railroad
-Tongue River Coal Mine (MT)
Field Director C.E Drover Ph.D.
- Seven Palms Ranch 6 sites (palm Desert CA)
- CA-RIV-365 Temeku
- CA-RIV-3410
- CA-RIV-2189 Mc Gee's Store
- CA-RIV-1522 Vail Ranch Adobes
- CA-RIV-1521 (Temecula CA)
- CA-RIV-364 Old Temecula
- CA-RIV-1520 Apis Adobe
- CA-RIV -3390 The Willows
- CA-ORA-64 Newport Beach CA
Centennial Archaeological Services
-10 prehistoric sites S. Cent. NM to W. TX
Chambers Group
- Olivera Adobe Vandenberg AFB CA
California State University. Bakersfield
- CA-SBDl913 & -6580
Kokooeli Exoeditions
- AIta Loma BB:14:1O
Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services
- Tse-Wit-Sen Village 45-CA-523
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
39
MITIGATION PLAN
QUALIFICATIONS
A qualified archaeological principal investigator will be retained to conduct testing, supervise
monitoring and determine the need for possible subsequent data recovery studies. The principal
investigator will be responsible to insure current professional standards are met, to prepare a
monthly letter report for submission to the client and the City of Arroyo Grande and to prepare a
final report for submission to the client, the City of Arroyo Grande and the California Historic
Resource Information System (at UC Santa Barbara).
I
The principal investigator will select only archaeologists meeting the State Office of Historic
Preservation's requirement of possession of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in anthropology
or archaeology and two years oflocal archaeological experience. The principal investigator will
retain, on call, a Native American monitor of Obispeno Chumash heritage to minimize delays
should resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered.
TESTING V jl"t-
The principal investigator and qualified archaeologists will conduct test excavations in the area
immediately south of the known boundaries ofCA-SLO-393. Testing should consist ofa
minimum of four mechanically excavated six foot long trenches (using a backhoe with a three
foot bucket for one day) placed parallel to the northern project boundary east of Woodland
Drive. The trenches should be excavated in approximately 15 centimeter (6 inch) levels with dirt
from each level of each trench placed in a separate and well labeled location. Two five gallon
buckets of dirt, randomly selected, should be screened from each level of each trench to
determine if cultural materials are present. Vertical excavation should continue until two
consecutive levels are negative for cultural materials. All trenches should be profiled by a
geoarchaeologist using current professional standards to determine if the deposits are intact or
disturbed. If positive cultural materials are encountered in intact deposits, then all of the dirt
from those levels should be screened and evaluated. The principal investigator will determine if
any intact deposits meet significance criteria under CEQA and make further recommendations as
17
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
necessary.
MONITORING
Monitoring of construction activities associated with excavation of native soils functions to
ensure that subsurface archaeological materials will be identified and recovered. Monitoring
thus functions to mitigate impacts of construction excavation in order to preserve and/or extract
the maximum scientific value of the resources per the intent of CEQA.
Construction monitoring entails the presence of a qualified archaeological monitor during
excavation of native sediments. The monitor works closely with construction crews in close
proximity to earth moving equipment in order to investigate and evaluate exposed materials
immediately upon exposure and prior to disturbance. A daily log is maintained by the monitor to
record when and where earth moving activities take place within the project area, as well as the
presence/absence of archaeological materials in the monitored matrix.
DISCOVERIES
Isolated archaeological materials are evaluated and removed by the monitor with a minimum
amount of delay to the machine operators. Evaluation of features or other more substantive
deposits may require temporary diversion of equipment and presence of a Native American
monitor of Obispeno Chumash heritage. The client and the City will be notified should
resources meeting CEQA significance standards be discovered. The archaeologist will work as
quickly as possible to permit resumption of construction activities. Location data of finds is
recorded using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) receiver.
The presence of human remains requires compliance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and
Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982,
Senate Bill 297), and SB 447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 1987). Section 7050.5 (c) states: "If the
coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner
recognizes the remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are
18
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
those of a Native American, he or she will contact by telephone within 24 hours the Native
American Heritage Commission."
Under typical circumstances, the Native American Heritage Commission will determine the
Most Likely Descendent (MLD) of the discovered remains and will then contact that person.
The MLD has 24 hours to make recommendations to the project owner regarding treatment and
disposition of the identified remains.
In the ever.t that significant resources are discovered, additional scope of work including
controlled excavation, cleaning, identification, cataloging, reporting and repository fees may be
necessary. The San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society is recommended as the
appropriate repository. Artifacts or other materials not meeting significance criteria will be
donated to local schools for educational purposes.
19
Cogstone Resource Management Inc.
ATTACHMENT G
I
\
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
Fair Oaks Mixed-Use Development
City of Arroyo Grande
November 21, 2005
Prepared By:
Derek Rapp, T.E.
Penfield & Smith
Engineers, Surveyors, Planners
w.o. 16811.01
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Fair Oaks Development is a two-phase project, consisting of 30 Planned Unit Development units
(phase I) and up to 120,000 square feet of medical office. (phase II) to be located near the corner of Fair
Oaks Avenue and Halcyon Road in the City of Arroyo Grande. The following Traffic Impact Study
evaluates the existing and forecasted cumulative traffic conditions within the vicinity of the project;
determines the project trip generation and distribution and identifies the potential project traffic impacts for
each phase of the project.
A level of service (LOS) analysis was completed for the Existing, Existing Plus Project, Cumulative, and
Cumulative Plus Project traffic conditions for the AM and PM peak hours at twelve intersections in the
vicinity of the project. The level of service analysis is summarized in the table below.
The residential units (phase I) will add 19 morning peak hour trips and 24 afternoon peak hour trips. Phase
I traffic creates a significant impact at the intersection of Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB Ramps/EI Camino
Real in the afternoon peak hour, under cumulative plus project conditions, will remain LOS F. Phase I
adds 10 trips to the intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic 'Impact Thresholds. All other project
traffic impacts, identified in this study are associated with the trips generated by the medical office portion
(phase II) of the project. However, because Phase II may not be built for many years, it is conceivable that
traffic conditions could change in such a way that could affect the conclusions contained in this report. As
such, it is recommended that Phase II of the project be re-studied prior to construction to obtain a more
accurate picture of the traffic impacts and required mitigations.
Summary of Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Peak T raffle Scenarios
No. Intersection Hour Existing + Cumulative +
Existing Project Cumulative Proiect
1. Brisco Rd./W. AM 22.2/LOS C 22.3/LOS C 25.4/LOS C 27.0/LOS C
Branch St. PM 30.8/LOS C 31.0/LOS C 74.1jLOS E 87.2/LOS F
Brisco Rd./ AM 27.7/LOS C 28.4/LOS C 41.9/LOS D 44.8/LOS D
2. Hwy 101 NB PM 29.2/LOS C 30.6/LOS C 36.8/LOS D 40.9/LOS D
Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./ AM 24.9/LOS C 24.9/LOS C 29.4/LOS C 30.0/LOS C
EI Camino Real PM 32.7/LOS C 33.2/LOS C 32.9/LOS C 33.1jLOS C
Halcyon Rd./Hwy AM 29.0/LOS C 33.3/LOS C 37.8/LOS D 47.6/LOS D
4. 101 SB R3mps/EI PM 30.4/LOS C 45.0/LOS D 85.2/LOS F 110.6/LOS F
Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./ Grand AM 30.7/LOS C 33.1jLOS C 30.8/LOS C 34.6/LOS C
Ave. PM 36.2/LOS D 37.9/LOS D 42.3/LOS D 48.9/LOS D
Fair Oaks AM 11.5/LOSB 11.7 /LOS B 12.3/LOS B 12.6/LOS B
6. Ave./Elm St. PM 13.0/LOS B 13.7/LOS B 14.6/LOS B 15.5 / LOS B
7. Halcyon Rd./ AM l1.1/LOS B 16.3/LOS B 11.2/LOS B 15.QjLOS B
Fair Oaks Ave. PM 12.7/LOS B 19.6/LOS B 12.8/LOS B 46.2 / LOS D
8. Fair Oaks AM 15.4/LOS B 17.5/LOS B No Change No Change
A ve./Valley Rd. PM 13.7/LOS B 14.6/LOS B No Change 14.8/ LOS B
9. Fair 03ks Ave./ AM 22.2/LOS C 22.7/LOS C No Change No Change
Hwy SB Ramps PM 16.7/LOS C 19.9/LOSC 17.3/LOS C 25.9 LOS D
10. Fair Oaks Ave./ AM 24.4/LOS C 26.8/LOS D No Change 27.0/LOS D
Traffic Way PM 20.4/LOS C 30.6/LOS D 21.4 / LOS C 34.4 / LOS D
11. Tr3ffic Way/E. AM 27.4/LOS C 28.4/LOS C 28.9 /LOS C 29.7/ LOS C
Branch St. PM 30.7/LOS C 34.3/LOS C 39.7/LOS D 40.2/LOS D
12. Grand Ave. / AM 19.3/LOS B 26.4/LOS C 22.3/LOS C 29.7/LOS C
Hwv 101 NB Ramp PM 11.5/LOS B 13.6/LOS B 12.3/LOS B 14.5/LOS B
The twelve study intersections currendy operate within the City's acceptable level of service range
during the morning peak hour. During the afternoon peak hour, the intersection of Halcyon
Road/Grand Avenue currendy operates at LOS D. All other intersections operate within the City's
acceptable level of service range. Phase II of the project is anticipated to contribute a significant
impact to ten intersections:
· During the afternoon peak hour, under cumulative plus project traffic conditions, the
intersection of Brisco Rd./W. Branch St. degzades from LOS E to LOS F.
. During the afternoon peak hour, under existing plus project conditions the Brisco Rd./Hwy
101 NB Ramps intersection remains at LOS C. Phase II of the project adds 102 trips to the
intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds. Under cumulative plus project
traffic conditions, the intersection will continue to operate at LOS D for both morning and
afternoon peak hours, with project-added traffic. Phase II of the project will add 30 AM peak
hour trips and 102 PM peak hour trip to this intersection, both of which exceed the City's
Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
· During the afternoon peak hours, under existing plus project and cumulative plus project traffic
conditions, the Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real intersection will continue to operate at LOS C
with project-added traffic. Phase II of the project will add 102 trips to this intersection, which
exceed the City's Traffic Impact Threshold, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
. During the morning peak hour the intersection at Halcyon Road/Highway 101 SB
Ramps/EI Camino Real will remain LOS C under existing plus project conditions. Under
cumulative plus project traffic conditions, the intersection will remain at LOS D. Phase II of the
project adds 116 trips to this intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thtesholds.
During the afternoon peak hour, the intersection will degrade from LOS C to LOS D under the
existing plus project conditions and remain LOS F under cumulative plus project conditions.
. During the morning peak hour under the existing plus project conditions, the Halcyon
Road/Grand Avenue intersection will continue to operate at LOS C With project-added traffic.
However, Phase II of the project will add 112 net new trips to this intersection which exceeds
the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting in a significant traffic impact. During the
afternoon peak hour under the existing plus project and cumulative .plus project traffic
conditions, this intersection will continue to operate at LOS D with project-added traffic. Phase
II of the project will add 398 net new trips to this intersection which exceeds the City's Traffic
Impact Thresholds, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
. During the afternoon peak hour, under cumulative plus project traffic conditions, the
Halcyon/Fair Oaks Ave. intersection will degrade from LOS B to LOS D with project-added
traffic, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
. During the afternoon peak hour, under existing plus project traffic conditions, the Fair Oaks
Ave./Hwy SB Ramps intersection will remain at LOS C. Phase II of the project will add 197
trips to the intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting in a
significant traffic impact. During the afternoon peak hour, under cumulative plus project traffic
conditions, this intersection will degrade from LOS C to LOS D with project-added traffic,
resulting in a significant traffic impact.
. The intersection of Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Way will degrade from LOS C to LOS D
during the morning peak and afternoon peak hour under the existing plus project conditions.
. During the afternoon peak hour, the Traffic Way/Eo Branch Street intersection will remain
LOS C under existing plus project traffic conditions and remain LOS D under cumulative plus
project conditions. Phase II of the project would add 99 trips PM peak hour trips to this
intersection, both of which exceed the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds.
. During the morning peak hour under existing and cumulative plus project conditions, the
intersection of Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps remains at LOS C. Phase II of the project
adds 130 trips to the intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds.
~
I'
II
Several inrersection improvements have been suggested to mitigate the projects impacts and return
the intersections to acceptable operating conditions. A summary of mitigations follows below:
Proiect Peak Hour Impacts and Mitill:ation
No. Intersection Project Impact Mitigation Resulting
LOS
Brisco Rd./W. . Pay traffic impact fees as N/A
1. Branch Sr. Cumulative- PM Peak Hour determined bv the City.
Brisco Rd./ Existing - PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees as
2. Hwy 101 NB Cumulative- AM Peak Hour derermined by the City. N/A
Ramps Cumulative- PM Peak Hour
Brisco Rd./ Existing - PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impacr fees as N/A
3. El Camino Real Cumulative- PM Peak Hour determined bv rhe City.
I
Halcyon Rd./ Existing- AM Peak Hour
Hwy 101 SB Existing- PM Peak Hour . Add additional LOSC
4. Ramps/ Cumulative- AM Peak Hour southbound thm lane
El Camino Real Cumulative- PM Peak Hour (Ph I/m
. Add additional
southbound through lane.
. Convert existing
Existing- AM Peak Hour southbound combination
5. Halcyon Rd./ Existing- PM Peak Hour through-left turn lane into LOSC
Grand Ave. * Cumulative- AM Peak Hour an exclusive left-turn lane.
Cumulative- PM Peak Hour . Upgrade the Halcyon
Road approach traffic -
signals to allow for
orotected left turns.
Halcyon Rd./ Cumulative- PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees as N/A
7. Fair Oaks Ave. determined bv the City.
Fair Oaks Ave./ Existing - PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees as N/A
9. Hwy SB Ramps Cumulative- PM Peak Hour determined bv the City.
Existing- AM Peak Hour
10. Fair Oaks A ve./ Existing- PM Peak Hour . Add exclusive EB right- LOSC
Traffic Way* Cumulative- AM Peak Hour turn lane.
Cumulative- PM Peak Hour
. Reconfigure intersection
Traffic Way/E. Existing- PM Peak Hour . to provide 2 exclusive NB
11. Cumulative- PM Peak Hour left turn lanes and 1 LOSC
Branch St. shared NB through/right
turn lane
Grand Ave./ Existing - AM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees as
12. Hwy 101 NB N/A
Ramp Cumulative- AM Peak Hour determined by the City.
* Recommended intersection improvements obtained from the Citywide Traffic Monitoring Program- Traffic
Model Update Draft Technical Report (November 2004)
The levels of service for the roadway segments of Fair Oaks Avenue, Halcyon Road, and Traffic
Way within the vicinity of the project site were also evaluated. All three roadways will continue to
operate at LOS B or better under the Existing and Existing Plus Project Conditions. Therefore the
project is not anticipated to contribute any significant roadway impacts. Based on the Citywide
Traffic Monitoring Program- Traffic Model Update (Draft Technical Report (November 2004), by
2025, the two-lane section of Halcyon Road, between East Grand A venue and Fair Oak Avenue will
degrade to LOS E. Phase II of the project will add 3,900 average daily trips to this roadway and may
be required to pay its fair share of the cost of any improvements constructed on this roadway.
Access to the project will be provided via a new 24-foot driveway on Fair Oaks Avenue to be
aligned with Woodland Drive. Visibility at the proposed driveway is unobstructed in both directions
and exceeds all minimum visibility requirements. As proposed, the driveway would safely
accommodate ingress and egress to the site. The project's internal street design should be designed
to adequately accommodate moving vans/trucks, emergency vehicle access and trash pick-up. The
parking requirements for the project will be provided entirely on-site.
The City and project applicant have discussed the potential to connect Woodland Drive through the
project site. A preliminary review of the potential Woodland Drive extension indicates that this
connection would provide a more efficient traffic circulation system for local traffic. The new
roadway would provide a direct route to Grande Avenue from the project site. From a circulation
perspective, it is recommended that Woodland Drive be extended. However, the potential for an
estimated additional 147 AM project peak hour trips and 172 PM project peak hour trips using this
roadway extension does exist. This diversion of trips would help alleviate impacts to the intersection
of Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave., but raises neighborhood compatibility issues and potential operational
issues at the intersection of Grand Ave./ Alpine St. More analysis as a part of the future Phase II
traffic analysis will be needed to address these concerns.
Penfield & Smith conducted a cursory review of the traffic signal warrants for the proposed access
location. A traffic signal would not be warranted with the traffic generated by the residential portion
of the project. However, the current daily volumes on Fair Oaks Avenue and the trips associated
with the medical office are approaching signal warrant volumes for this type of facility. If and when
the medical office is constructed, it is recommended that a signal warrant analysis be completed
prior to and/or following occupancy of the medical office to determine the need for and timing of
traffic signal improvements at the project intersection.
An all-way stop analysis was also conducted for this intersection. The Manual of Uniform traffic
control devices contains essentially three major criteria for the installation of stop signs:
1. A crash problem, as indicated by 5 or more reported crashes in a 12-month period.
2. Major street volume of at leasr 300 vehicles per hour (both directions) for 8 hours and at
least 100 of a combination of vehicles, bikes and pedestrians from the minor street for
each of those eight hours.
3. Delay to minor street traffic exceeds 30 seconds per vehicle.
While Phase I will not generate the minimum volumes required for the consideration of an all-way
stop at the project entrance, it is anticipated that the project driveway would meet the minimum
volume criteria upon build out (phases I and II) of the project. However, meeting the minimum
volume criteria is not always a justification for installing an all-way stop. Because all-way stop signs
result in additional delay on the major roadway, it is important that there be some evidence
(increased minor street delays or collisions) that the minor street traffic would benefit significandy
-,
from an installation. Therefore, 'jt is recommended that the intersection be monitored following
throughout construction of this site to detennine whether the other warrants are met and an all-way
stop is necessary:
'-
"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction .'
Laod Use, Site and Study Area Boundaries
Existing and P~oposed Site Uses
Existing and Proposed Uses in Vicinity of Site and Site Access
Existing aod Proposed Roa,hvays aod Inters~ctions .
1
1
1
1
2
2. Project Trip Generation
Proposed Project
Cumulative Projects
8
8
8
3. Project Trip Distribution
,
11
,
4. Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes
15
5. Levels of Service
Ci,ty of Arroyo Grande Traffic Impact Thresholds
26
27
6. CapacityAnalysis
Existing Roadway Segment Operations
Existing Intersection Operations
Cumulative Intersection Operations
Existing + Project Analysis
Cumulative + Project Analysis
28
28
29
29
30
34
7. Parking & Access Analysis
37
8. Recommendations
38
LIST OF EXHIBITS
,:
"
Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map
Exhibit 2: Site Plao
Exhibit 3: Existing Traffic Volumes
Exhibit 4: Existing Lane Geometry
Exhibit 5: AM Peak Project Trip Distribution
Exhibit 6: PM Peak Project Trip Distribution
Exhibit 7: Cuinulative Project Trip Distribution
Exhibit 8: AM Peak Hour Site Traffic
Exhibit 9: PM Peak Hour Site Traffic
Exhibit 10: AM Existing Traffic Volumes
Exhibit 11: PM Existing Tr:lffic Volumes
Exhibit 12: AM Future Conditions Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 13: PM Future Conditions Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 14: AM Existing + Project Peak Hour Trips
Exhibit 15: PM Existing + Project .Peak Hour Trips
Exhibit 16: AM Future'+ Project Peak Hour Trips.
Exhibit 17: PM Future + Project Peak Hour Trips
4
5
6
7
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
"
'I
I'
i:
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Project Trip Generation Rates
Table 2: Project Trip Generation
Table 3: Cumulative Project List Trip Generation
Table 4: Project Trip Distribution
Table 5: Siinalized and Uns;g.,alized Intersection Level of Service Criteria
Table 6: Level of Service Thresbold Volumes by Urban/Suburban Roadway Type
Table 7: Signalized Intersection ThreshoWs of Significance for Traffic Impact Studies
Table 8: Roadway Segment Levels of Service
Table 9: Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service
Table 10: Cumulative Peak Hour Levels of Service
Table 11: AM Peak Hour Existing + Project Intersection Level of Service
Table 12: PM Peak Hour Existing + Project Intersection Level of Service
Table 13, Roadway Segment Levels of Service with Project Traffic
Table 14' AM Peak Hour CumUlative Plus Project Intersection Level of Service
Table 15: PM Peak Hour CumUlative Plus Project Intersection Level of Service
8
8
9
'11
26
27
27
28
29
30
33
33
34
35
36
APPENDICES OF TECHNICAL APPENDIX
Appendix 1- Existing (2005) Intersection Turning Movement Counts and ADT
Appendix 2- City of Arroyo Grande CumUlative Project List (September 2005)
Appendix' 3- Cumulative Project Trip Generation Rates
Appendix 4- Existing (2003-2005) Peak Hour Intersection Levels Of Service
Appendix 5- Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Levels Of Service
Appendix 6- Existing + Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels Of Service
Appendix 7- Cumulative + project Peak Hour.Intersection Levels Of Service
I
Traffic Impact Study- Pair Oaks Development
.'
1. INTRODUCTION
The following Traffic Impact Study evaluates a proposed residential and commercial project to be
located near the comer. of Fair Oaks Avenue and Halcyon Road in the City of Arroyo Grande. The
study has been prepared using the City of Arroyo Grande Traffic Impact Study Policy guidelines and
evaluates the existing and cumulative traffic conditions within the vicinity of the project; determines
the project trip generation and distribution; identifies the potential project traffic impacts; and
provides guidelines for the design of the project site. Penfield & Smith reviewed the Citywide
Traffic Monitoring Program- Traffic Model Update Draft Technical Report (November 2004) to
obtain general information about the project study area". This document is incorporated by
reference.
J
Land Use, Site and Study Area Boundaries
, .
The site is located adjacent'(o the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, near the comer of Fair
Oaks Avenue ard Halcyon Road. . The site is surrounded by the Hospital to the west, W oodl_nd
Drive and residences to the north, Arroyo Grande Creek to the east, and Fair Oaks Avenue to the
south. The majority of the site is undeveloped, however a paved trail begins at the terminus of
Woodland Drive (on the north side of the property), traverses east on the property toward Arroyo
Grande Creek and then south towards Fair Oaks Avenue. The trail ends at a tot lot located at the
southeast comer of the site. .Access to the project will be provided via a 24-foot wide driveway on
Fair Oiks Avenue to be aligned ~th Woodland Drive (to the south). Woodland Drive is currendy.
divided by the project site. As part of the proposed project, Woodland Drive (north of the site) may
be connected with Wo~dland Drive on the south.
The project study area is bounded by West Branch Street to the north, Fair Oaks Avenue to the .
south, South Elm Street to the' west, ~nd Traffic Way to the east. The study area has been
coordinated with the City's Public Works Department. A vicituty'map is presented as Exhibit 1.
Existing and Proposed Site Uses
The proposed project consists of 30 Planned Unit Development units and up to 120,000 square feet
of medical office. The project will be built in two phases with the residential built first, and the
medical office built on a demand/n!"ed basis. The site is currendy zoned mixed-use. The City's
parking requirements for the project will be met on-site. The proposed site plan is presented as
Exhibit 2. .
Existing and Proposed Uses in Vicinity of Site and Site Access
The major traffic generators located on Fair Oaks Avenue near the site include the Community
Hospital, an elementary school; two high schools, and a sports complex. Margaret Harloe
Elementary is located to the west of the site, between' Halcyon Road and Alder St. The Soto Sports
Complex and Community Center' and Coastal Christian High School are located at the west end of
Fair O~s Avenue at the intersection of South Elni Street, and Arroyo Grande High School is
located'to the east on the ~'omer of Fair Oaks Avenue and Valley Road. "
Penfield & Smith
~ovember21,2005
1
Traffic Impact Study- - Fair Oaks Development
,
Penfield & Smith obtained the most current list of unbuilt but approved development projects from
the City's Community Developm~nt Department (October 2005). The "Cumulative" project'list is
included in the Appendix to this report. A map of the Cumulative project locations is provided as
Exhibit 3.
Existing and Proposed Roadways and Intersections
The primary transportation corridors within the project study area consist of highways, arterials, and
collectors, and include U.S. Highway 101, Halcyon Road, East Grand Avenue, Fair Oaks Avenue,
. Woodland Drive, and Traffic Way. The City's roadway classifications are provided in Table.l and a
written description of the roadways is provided below. Roadway descriptions were obtained from
the Traffic Model Update Draft T~chnical Report. '
U.S. Highway 101 is a major freeway facility that traverses north-south along coastal California
connecting San Luis Obispo County with the San Francisco Bay area to the north and the Los
. Angeles, basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, U.S. Highway 101 provides a major
connection between and'through'the "Five Cities Area",. including Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach,
Shell Beach, Grover Beach, and Oceano. Within Arroyo Grande, U.S. 101 is a typical four-lane
divided highway and carries approximately 49,000 to 56,000 average daily trips (ADT). Within the
City, U.S. 101 provides full access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road, and EastGrand Avenue/Branch Street as well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way
and Fair Oaks Avenue. .
Halcyon Road is a two to four lane arterial running north-south between' U.S. 101 to the north and
- .
State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the CitY. Halcyon Road, in
conjunction with Brisco Road and El Cainino Real, forms a full-access interchange with U.S. 101,
just north of the U.S. 101 /East Grand interchange. Based on average daily traffic counts collected
by Penfield & Smith on'Sep,tember 6, 2005, Halcyon Road carries 21,000'1\DT north of Fm Oaks
Avenue. The roadway is operating at LOS A near the project site. '
East Grand Avenue is a major'.> east-west arterial traversing through and within the City. East
Grand Avenue has four lanes With a center two-way left turn lane. . East of the full access
-interchange with U.S. 101, East Grand Avenue becomes East Branch Street, which extends further
east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR 227. Grand Avenue has 19,175 ADT, east of Halcyon Road
and is operating at LOS A. .
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-lane arterial that provides an east-west connection across U.S. 101;
between Traffic Way to the east and Elm Street to the north. Near the projec~ site, Fair Oaks
Avenue has a posted speed limit of 40 MPH and provides left turn lanes, shoulders,-parking, and
sidewalks on both sides of the street. The proposed project will be located across from Woodland
Drive on the north side of this street. Fair Oaks carries 8,900 ADT east of Woodland Drive and'
8,745 ADT west of Woodland Drive. The roadway is currendy ';perating at LOS A.
. ~ '
Woodland Drive is a residentiai"street divided into tWo segments, north and south of the project
site. South of the project site, Woodland Drive extends from Fair Oaks Avenue to the south where'
it tenninates into a cul-de-sac. To the north, Woodland Dr. extends between Cerra Vista Circle and
(.
Penfield & Smith
November 21, 2005
2
Traffic Impact Study- Fair O'aks Development
"
the northemproperry boundary,. where it provides access to'a few residences. As part of the
proposed project, Woodland Drive may be extended through the project site to connect the north
and south segments of the road.
Traffic Way is a two to four-lane arterial serving local commercial development. Traffic Way
extends between East Branch Street to the north and the Highway 101 ramps to the south. North
of Fair Oaks Avenue, Traffic Way carries 12,090:ADT and is operating at LOS B. .
Based on the Citywide Traffic Monitoring Program- Traffic Model Update (Draft TechnicalReport
(November 2004), by 2025, the two-lane section of Halcyon Road, between East Grand Avenue and
Fair Oak A venue will degrade to LOS E.. According to the report, substantial delay along this
segment of Halcyon Road is problematic because this roadway serves as the primary north-south
link to the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, which needs immediate access for emergency
medical transport. A planned capit~l improvement for the Halcyon Road- East Grand Avenue
intersection (which is forecast to degrade to LOS D) consists of replacing an existing traffic signal.
It is not known whether the intersection will be widened to accommodate additional turning
movements. The report recommends:
'. Widening the southbound Halcyon Road approach to provide an additional southbound
through lane.
. Converting the existing southbound combination through-left turn lane into an exclusive
left-turn lane to allow for protected left-turn traffic, phasing.
With these improvements, acceptable LOS C will be achieved for both peak hours under existing
conditions. Given that development exists adjacent to the southbound approach on both sides of
Halcyon Road, such an improvement may not be feasible due to right-of-way limitations. .
The City of Arroyo Grande 'has requested that the following intersections be evaluated for the AM
and PM peak hours. A map of the intersection locations and the intersection lane .geometry and
traffic control are provided in Exhibit 4.
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./El Camino Real .
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB Ramps/E1Carnino R'eal
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave. /Eltri SI.
7. Halcyon Rd'/Fair Oaks AVe.
8. Fair Oaks A ve./Valley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave./Traffic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch SI.
12. Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
Penfield & Smith
~oveD1ber21,2005
3
Vicinity Map
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.rw. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd.lEI Camino Real .
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd.lGrand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks Ave.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair OaksAve./Hwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave./Traffic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St. .
12. Grand Ave.lH 101 NB Ramps
Grand Avenue
CD
N
Not to Scale
Penfield~~'SriliIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8/18/05 NottO$we
-g
iii
-I:
Co
.,.
..
o
Iii
SOTO E
Sports W
Complex en
6
Fair Oaks Ave
Margaret
Harloe ~
Elementary I0Io
School "
~
"
ii
:J:
'5
o
~
Coastal
Chrisitan
High Schoof
1
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
~ ,.
\
,
,.
1.,,;
:"
--.
-^
~.
Cumulative Projects- Location Map
Map
Location
,.
2. .
3.
4.
5.
6.
.7.
~ 8.
9.
10.
11.'
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Land Use Square FootageJ
Size
Senior Condominiums
Townhomes
Townhomes
Estates
Affordable Units
Single Family Homes
Single Family Homes
Senior Condominiums
Commercial Office
Single Tenant Office
Mixed-use Development
Single Family Homes
Single Family Homes
.Single Family Homes
Mixed use
Aparatmenls
Single Family Homes
Hotel
Neighborhood Shopping
Single Family Homes
Single Family Homes
Mixed Use "
Single Family Home
Single Family Home
Planned Unit Development
OIlice
Single Family Homes/office
Expansion of Assisted Uving
Spedally Retail
MedicallRetail
Expansion of Pet Clinic
Planned Unit Development
Single Family Homes
40 units
Bunits
12 units
15 units
4 units
65 units
47 units
-60 units
20,000 SF
1,545 SF
24 units/12,OOO SF office
21 units
9uoits
39 units
2 unitsf1,415 SF office
22units .".-
11 units
103 rooms
33,200 SF
11 units
3 units
81 unitsl30.000 SF com.
1 unit (net)
1 unit
2 units
1,746 SF
9 units
24 beds
11,000 SF
3,600 SF
3.900 SF
4 units
3 units
.,;
>
iii
i!
..
a..
.'....
Grand Avenue ~
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB Ramps!
EI Camino Real .
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand AVe.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks Ave.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.fTraffic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave./H 101 NB Ram s
CD
N
Nolto Scale
Penfield~SmiIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.o. 16811.01 a{l8/0S NotloS~'
-.
@
@
@@
Iii
E
w
ui@
Fair Oaks Ave.
@
@
SOTO
Sports
eo<<ex
@
Coastal Margaret ,;
Chrisftan Harloe
High School Elementary It:
<:
@ School <: ..
~ 'C.
1 ii ~
:<:
o
3
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
Existing Intersection Geometry ,
LEGEND
L
Exclusive Right-Tum Lane
Through Lane
Exclusive Left- Turn ~ane
Opt. Through/Right/Left Lane
Opt. Through/Right Lane
Opt. Through/Left Lane'
+-
.--
+
.L
..
o /'Ji-Way Stop Control
. Signalized
"-.- Stop-sign
Grand Avenue
'-
Study Intereections
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd.lHwy 101 SB Ram
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd.lGrand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave.lElm St.
7. Halcyon Rd.lFair Oaks Ave.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.fTraffic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave.lH 101 NB Ram s
Q)
N
Not to Scale
Penlieldi~SmiIh
ENGINEE~S SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.o.16811.Ql 8/18105 NottosQle
'-
~
.iii'//'
SOTe)./'"' E
S(IJ>f!s iij
...:J;~mPle~ (uj ... .
/ . ."....". .".,".. 6 Fai ..Oaks Ave.! 7
.......Coastal ./ ..../ Margaret ii ..-.........: '
Chrisitan"" .., Harloe Ie
HighSch9lit.../ ontary !d
/////,' ~ ~ ~ /~
::;itr
--
4
+r- }-
Jf.
+-
~+l .--
Jitf.
..
,
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
.Traffic Impact Study
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oak8 Development
2. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Proposed Project
The project trip generation has been determined using trip generation rates contained in San Diego . .
Traffic Generators, April 2002,' published by the San Diego Association of Governments~'
(SANDA G). The trip generation ~ates are presented in Table 1.
. Table 1
Project. Trip Generation Rates
Land Use Code [1] Daily AM Peak Hour Rates [21 . PM Peak Hour Rates [21
Rate In Out Total In , Out Total
Planned Unit SANDAG 8/unit :O.13/unit 0.51/unit O.64/unit 0.56/unit 0.24/unit 0.8/unit
Development
Medical SANDAG 50/KSF 2.40/KSF 0.6/KSF 3/KSF 1.65/KSF 3.85/KSF 5.5/KSF
Office
[1] Rates from San Diego Traffib Generainrs, SANDAG
[2] Trips are one-way traffic movements, entering or leaving
Based on the above rates, the proposed development could generate 6,240 average daily trips; with
379 occurring during the AM peak hour and 684 trips occurring during the PM peak hour. This is
summarized in Table 2 below. .
Table 2
Project Trip Generation
Land Use Size AD'f., AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
In Out Total In Out Total
Planned Unit 30 wiits 240 4 15 19 17 7 24
Development
. Medical Office 120,000 SF 6000 288 72 360 198 '462 660
TOTAL - 6240 .292 87 379 215 469 684
"
Cumulative Projects
Based on the City's Cumulative Project list; 32 projects are proposed within the project study area.
The cumulative. project trip generation is presented in Table.3. The City's Cumulative Project list
and the project trip generation rates used are provided in the Apperidix of this report.
. The cumulative projects combined would generate 9,608 daily average trips, 666 morning peak hour
trips and 951 afternoon peak hour trips. This is a worst case scenario, as the cumulative trip
generation does not account for pass-by or linked trips within the study area. '
Penfield & Smith
~ovennber2t,2005
8
~ -~
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oaks Devdopment
Table 3
Cumulative Project List
Trip Generation
TriDs
No. City Project Land Use Size Rate AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No. Unit Daily
Total In Out Total In Out
1 TIM 03-005 Condominiums (Senior) 40 D.U. 160 8 2 6 11 8 3
'2 TIM 03-002 Condominiums 8 D.U. 64 5 1 .4 6 4 2
3 TIM 03-001 . Condominiums 12 D.U. 96 8 2 6 10 7 3
Estates 15 D.U. 180 14 4 10 18 13 5
4 TIM 02~005 Single FamilvResidences ~ 4 D.U. 40 . 3 1 2 4 3 1
5 TIM 02-002 Single Family Residences 65 D.U. 650 52 16 36 65 46 20
6 TIM 02-001 Single Family Residences 47 D.U. 470 38 11 26 47 33 14
7 TIM 04-001 Condominiums (Senior) 60 D.U. 240 12 2 10 17 12 5
8 CUP 04-004 Commercial Office 20 . KSF 400 56 50 6 52 . 10 42
9 CUP 04-003 Single Tenant Office 1.545 KSF 22 3 3 0 3 1 2
TIM 04-004 Condominiums 24 D.U. 192 15 3 12 19 13 6
10 PUD 04-001 Specialty Retail 12 KSF 480 14 9 6 43 22 22
VTTM 01- ,
11 001 Condominiums -. 21 D.U. 168 13 3 11 17 12 5
TIM 04-003
12 PUD 04-003 Condominiums 9 D.U. 72 6 ~.1 5 7 5 2
TIM 04-002
PUD 04-002
13 NP 04-001 Single Family Residences 39 D.U. 390 31 9 22 39 27 12
CUP 04-008 Specialty Retail 1.415 KSF 57 2 1 1 5 3 3
14 Apartments 2 D.U. 12 1 0 1 1 1 0
TIM 04-005
15 PUD 04-005 Apartments 22 D.U. 132 11 2 8 12 8 4
TIM 04-004 Single Family Residences 11 D.U. 110 3 6 11 8 3
16 PUD 04-004 - 9
Penfield & Smith
November 21, 2005
9
c
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oaks Development
17 PRE 04-018 Hotel (w / restaurant) , 103 Rooms 1030 62 37 25 82 49 33
Neighborhood Shopping
18 PRE 04-017 Center 33.2 KSF 2390 96 57 38 239 120 120
1TM 05-001 Single Family Residences 11 D.U. 110 3 6 11 8 3
19 PUD 05-001 9
20 TPM 05-001 Single Family Residences 3 D.U. 30 2 1 2 3 2 1
Single Family Residences 81 D.U. 810 65 19 45 81 57 24
21 PRE 05-004 Commercial Office 30 KSF 600 84 76 8 78 16 62
22 PPR 05-004 Single Familv Residences 1 D.U. 10 1 0 .1 1 1 0
TPM 05-004 . Condominiums 1 D.U. 8 0 0 1 1 0
23 PUD 05-003 1
TPM 05-005 Condominiums (Demo) -2 D.U. -16 -1 0 -1 -2 -1 0
24 PUD 05-004 Planned Unit Development 4 D.U. 32 3 1 2 3 2 1
25 CUP 05-012 Commercial Office 1.746 KSF 35 5 4 0 5 1 4
26 PRE 05-008 Sincl.e Familv Residences 9 D.U. 90 7 2 5 9 6 3
27 CUP 05-006 Comrrewte Care Facilitv 24 D.U. 48 1 1 1 4 2 2
28 CUP 05-007 Soecialtv Retail 11 KSF 440. 13 8 5 40 20 20
29 CUP 05-008 Commercial Office 3.6 KSF 72- 10 9 1 9 2 7
Pet Clinic 3.9 KSF 78 7 5 2 8 2 5
30 CUP 05-010 Specialty Retail (Demo) -3.9 KSF -156 -5 -3 -2 -14 -7 -7
31 PRE 05-010 Planned Unit Development 4 D.U. 32 3 1 2 3 2 1
32 PUD 05-005 Single Familv Residences 3 D.U. 30 2 1 2 3 2 1
TOTALS
%08
666
344
321
951
518
433
Penfield & Smith
Novernber 21, 2005
10
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oak. Development
3. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The project related traffic for the AM peak hour (379 trips) and the PM peak hour (684 'trips) were
distributed and assigned to the local street network based on the type of existing and proposed land
uses and current traffic flO\ys in Arroyo Grande. The project trip distribution has been coordinated
. with the.Public Works Department: . The percentage of project traffic distributed on the road system
is illustrated in Exhibits 5 and 6. In general, the project traffic was dis~buted as follows:
Table 4 ,
Project Trip Distribution
, AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Direction , Residential Office Residential Office
Trios 0 Trips Trips Trips
~st Branch St. 5% 5% 5% 5%
East Branch St'/Old Town . 5% 15% 5% 15%
Hwy 101- north of Oak Park Blvd. 45% 30% 45% 30%
Hwy 101- south of Traffic Way . 25% 30% 25% 30%
Grand Ave.- west of Brisco Road . 20% 10% 20% 10%
Halcyon Rd.- south of Fair Oaks Ave. 0% 5% 0% 5%
Fair Oaks Ave.- west of Halcyon Rd. 0% 5% 0% 5%
trOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
The cumulative project trips. were manually distributed and assigned to the local street network
based on the type of existing and proposed land uses and current traffic flows in Arroyo Grande.
Exhibit i illustrates the general trip distribution for the cumulative traffic conditions. The I
cumulative trip distribution repr~sents a worst-c~se scenario as it does not acc9unt for the re-
distribution of certain trips due t? congested traffic conditions. These assumptions result in the'
following approximate assignment of project related trips to the street network:
AM peak hour
Fair Oaks Ave. - west of project
Fair Oaks Ave.- east of project ".
Halcyon Rd. - south of Grand Ave. .'
U.S. Hwy 101/Brisco Rd.
U.S. Hwy 101/Branch St.
U.S. Hwy lOl/Traffic Way
90%
10%
80%
<10%
25%
10%
PM peak hour.
Fair Oaks Ave. - west of project
Fair Oaks Ave. - east of project
,
Halcyon Rd. - south of Grand Ave.
u.s. Hwy lOl/Brisco Rd.
U.S. Hwy 101/Branch St.
U.S. Hwy lOI/Traffic Way
70%
30%
60%
15%
25%
30%
Penfield & Smith
November 21, 2005
11
AM Peak Hour Project Trip Distribution
AM PEAK HOUR SITE TRIPS
LAND USE
30 PUDunits
Medical office (120 KSFI
TOTAL
IN
3
288
291
OUT
12
72
84
TOTAL
15
360
375
4'<<' St.
~.
'1.1'
Residential Trip Distribution +@+-
Medical Office Trip Distribution ~
NOTES
25% of the residential related traffic and 30% of the office related traffIC is assumed
to travel toIfrom the south on Hwy 101. It is assumed that the high school traWleon as
Fair Oaks Avenue will deter some people from using the ramps at Traffic Way.
Therefore the following assumptions have been made:
ReSIdential Trips ,
15% of the outgoing trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Traffic Way
10% of the outgoing tripswitl travel southbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue .
25% of.the incoming trips will ~vel northbound using the ramps at Traffic Way
Office Trips
10% of the outgoing trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Traffic Way
20% of the outgoing trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue
10% of the incoming trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Traffic Way
20% of the incoming trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue
45% of the residential related traffic and 30% of the office related traffic is assumed
to travel toIfrom the north on Hwy 101. The assumptions are: .
Residential Trips
45% of the outgoing trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue
45% of the incoming trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Brisco Rd.
OffIce Trips
15% of the outgoing trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue
15% of the outgoing trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Brisco Road
3~ of the incoming trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Brisco Road
tiS
'E
[j
a:i
~6
Coastal
Chrisitan
High School
SOTO
Sports
Complex
Fair Oaks Ave. 7
Margaret
Harloe
Elementary
School
.,;
Ill:
c
o
~
'ii
:c
'5
~
CD
N
5
5%
Not to Scale
Penfield~Smilh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.o. 16811.01 8f18/0S Not to salll!
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
.-",-
PM Peak Hour Project Trip Distribution
PM PEAK HOUR SITE TRIPS
LAND USE
30 PUD units
Medical office (120 KSF)
. TOTAL
Residential Trip Distribution ~
Medical Office Trip Distribution +@]+
IN
12
198
210
OUT
7
462
469
TOTAL
19
660
679
4'<<' St.
N.
Grand Avenue
!:!2ill
25% of the residential related traffic and 30% of the office related traffic is assumed
to travel toIfrom the south on Hwy 101. It is assumed that all of the traffIC travelling
tolfrom the south will use the ramps at Traffic Way. .
45% of the residential related traffic and 30% of the office related traffic is assumed
to travel toIfrom the north on Hwy 101. The assumptions are:
Residential Trips
45% of the outgoing trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue
45% of the incoming trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Brisco Road
Office Trips
15% of the outgoing trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Grand Avenue
15% of the outgoing trips will travel northbound using the ramps at Brisco Road
30% of the incoming trips will travel southbound using the ramps at Brisco Road
ill
SOTO E
Sports W
Complex . ai
~6
Coastel
Chrisitan
High School
Fair Oaks Ave. 7
Margaret
Harloe
Elementary
School
6
Not to Scale
Penfield<i.~' Smith
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.Q.16811.01 a{l8/0S N0110scale
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
Cumulative Project Trip Distribution
Grand Avenue
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd.lHwy 101 SB RampsJ
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd.lGrand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave.lElm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./FairOaksAve.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd. .
9. Fair Oaks AvelHwy 101 SBRamps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.fTraffic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave.lH 101 NB Ramps
Penfield(,vSmiIh
ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS . PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8fl8105 N01to~1
r
20%
SOTO
sports
Complex
Ii5
E
~
ui.
6 Fair Oaks Ave. 7
Margaret -d
Harloe rt:
Elementary 6
School >.
...
iii
:z:
7
Coastal
Chrisitan
High School
CD
N
'6
~
Not to Scale
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic 'Impact Study
Traffic Impacr Study- Fair Oaks Development
4. EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The project is anticipated to add 379 trips in the morning peak hour and 684 trips in the afternoon
peak hour. The peak hour site turning movements(in and out) are summarized in Exhibits 8 and9,
and are based on the project traffic distribution depicted in Exhibits 5 and 6.
P~nfield & Smith collected turning movement counts at the study intersections on September 8,
2005 and September 13, 2005 from 7 AM to 9 AM and from 4 PM to 6 PM. Due to the proximity
of Margaret Harloe Elementary S~hool and Arroyo Grande High School, additional traffic counts
were collected from 2 PM to 4 PM at Fair Oaks Avenue/Halcyon Road; Fair Oaks Avenue/Valley
Road; Fair Oaks Avenue/SB 101 Ramps; and Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Way. The morning and
afternoon peak hours were determined based on the high~st consecutive hour of counts for each'
peak period. The existing AM peak hour counts are illustrated in Exhibit 10 and the PM peak hour
counts are illustrated in Exhibit 11. .
The cumulative projects are anticipated to add 666 trips in the morning peak hour and 951 trips in
the afternoon peak hour. The cumulative volumes are summarized in Exhibits 12 and 13, and are
based on the project traffic distribution depicted in Exhibit 7.
The project traffic was added to the existing peak hour traffic volumes and' the cumulative peak
hour traffic volumes. The resulting volumes are illusttated in Exhibits 14 through 17.
The exhibits are as follows:
Exhibit 8- AM Peak Hour SiteTraffic
Exhibit 9- PM Peak Hour Site Traffic
Exhibit 10- Existing AM, Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 11- Existing PM Peak Hour V olnnies
Exhibit 12- Cumulative AM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 13- Cumulative PM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 14- Existing + Project AM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 15- Existing + Project PM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 16- C;umulative + Project AM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit '17- Cumulative + Project PM Peak Hour Volumes
Penfield & Smith
~oveEnber21,2005
15
AM Peak Hour Project Traffic
AM PEAK HOUR SITE TRIPS
LAND USE
30 PUD units
120't000 SF Medical office
TO AL
IN OUT TOTAL
15 19
72 360
87 379
4W. $\.
~.
Grand Avenue
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd.lEI Camino Real ,
4. Halcyon Rd.lHwy 101 SB Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave.lElm St.
7. Halcyon Rd.lFairOaksAve.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. FairOaksAve./Hwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.fTraffic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave./H 101 NB Ramps
CD
N
Not to Scale
Penfieldiil',/Smith
ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.Q.16811.01 8{l8f~5 Not to sale
..
r
15,
i
it;
... L2
l. ,2 S1 ~
~
r ~ ,'01 N
l.
~ 30-'1 t r
14_ r
:;:
8
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
PM Peak Hour Project Traffic
PM PEAK HOUR SITE TRIPS
LAND USE
IN OUT TOTAL
30 PUD units 17
12~000 SF'Medical office 198
TO AL ' 215
~. 4\\\ St.
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
. 3. Brisco Rd.lEI Camino Real,,'
4. Halcyon Rd.lHwy 101 SB RampsJ
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd.lGrand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave.lElm St.
7. Halcyon Rd.lFairOaksAve.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. FairOaksAve.JHwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.lTraflic Way
11..TraflicWay/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave.lH 101 NB Ram s
CD
N
Not to Scale
Penfi8ld{~Smith
ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS . PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8f18{05 NottoSCille
7
462
469
~
'"
~
11-,.
T i
'"
~
~ L12'
l,11
r
~
10--+ r,
.,
'9
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
i
I,
Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
Study Intersections
1. Brisco'Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon RdJGrand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon RdJFair Oaks Ave. ~,,~S.~
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.fTraffic Way'
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St. .
12. Grand Ave.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
l-I.4\\\
Grand Avenue
CD
N
Not to Scale
Penfield~'S..lIiill.
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.o. 16811.01 8/18105 Not to $Gle
- '"
~:!: L135
.~ l ,54
t i
L37
+-468
,178
.. 81 -1 it i
418 -+ CIO 2 f'o.
64, :: M g
L125
+-138
,78
69Jit i
84-+ N~1t)
23 N in en
,
~
"",~
<oN '"
.J ~ l
N_
M<O
M
10
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande,CA
Traffic Impact Study
Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon RdJHwy 101 SB Rampal
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon RdJGrand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St. !\.!
7. Halcyon RdJFair Oaks Ave. ~alll'!S
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.lTraffic Way
11. TrafficWay/E. Branch St.
12. Grand AveJHwy 101 NB Ramps
l-l.4~
Grand A~enue
L.22
--67
rll
2:~:=: i t r
210,
CD
N
~
;:Ii!:
! l
L,8,
rSO
t r
~ ~
~ ~
~
Not to Scale
Penlield~'i'SmiIh
ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS . PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8I1810S Nol to sale
c;i........
SOTO........E
S/!I>f!s w
....CcJmplex cri .' !
...... Falr..Oaks Ave.! 7
....._..._.._...-c~~~~.....>..6 ..........Margaret ~!
Chrisitan./ ." " Harloe i:i
High Sch.ri>t...... ntal)' i~
.../ L34" i~
/// ..J! l ;=:' IT
82~ i t r
613 --+ 10 I'D ~
182 ---. .... N ....
N.... L197
N N N
J Jr. ;=~~
60J it r
118 -+ ~ ~ iZ
18. (")......
,~
11
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
Cumulative AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.fIN. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 5B Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks Ave.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 5B Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave./Traflic Way
11. Traffic WaylE. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
tl.4'
Grand Avenue
CD
N
Not to Scale
Penfield&SmiIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8{18fOS Not to SQ/e
~ m
~;!
~ l.
i;J...........
SOTO........i:;
spprtS iii
.....COinptex cri .. ,
.. ..... . ..... ........... ... e Falr..Oaks Ave.' 7
.-- . ..-....... Coastal /" ,.,/ Margaret
- Chrisitan"" ." Harloe
High scll<}6l....... entary
...-
,.
/"
.../
....
.... L125
i1; ~ ~
.J ~ l. ;=;:'
82:-titt
84_
23,
1..
,
L'35
,62
t r
;;;$
~
fD""; L37
~~gJ +-494'
.J ~ l. ,178
83-1i t r
456~lD~O
_ N
64~.... M
12
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA.
Traffic Impact Study
Cumulative PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.fIN. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 N8 Ramps
3. Brisco Rd.lEI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 58 Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./FalrOaksAve. Ja",es W"
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 10158 Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.fTraffic~Way
11. TrafficWay/E. Branch St.
.12. Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
tl.4~
Grand Avenue
CD
N
Not to Scale
Penfield,,-"'...Snlilh
ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS . PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8/18/05 Not to scale
IN '<t 0) L22
.J ~ t --67
r11
~;:=: i t r
~~~
210-.. ~ Q)
.,,-
...
uj //
SOTO.......ti
SflPrls iii ..../
...complex. ,,/ i
. en . .
.,/ Fair..Oaks Ave.! 7
..._....................c~~~;.....:~/6 ...... 'Margaret .
Chrisitan ,/ .' " Harloe
High S~.~f]6I../ en~ry
..,/ ~ ~ 0 L34
./ j r t ;=~~~
12.J i t r
633--+ to:Oi1;
182, ..... N.....
13
m
~ w
~ m
~ l.
L'6'
,'01
t r
L'97
.......230
.J ~ l. ,'53
6' -1i t r
129--+ ~~CZ:
18, (')....
~..
~ ..
~
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study.
Existing + Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.fIN. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd.lEI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 5B Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Haicyon Rd./Falr Oaks Ave. Ja~s !l!
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 5B Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave./Traflic Way
11. Traflic Way/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
\"l.bi
CD
N
Grand Avenue
Plill
~
oj..."'''''
sOTO........E
SpPrtS iii
...COmplex cri . .
...... Falr-.Oaks Ave' 7
................. 6 ... .
.. . . ....--' Coastal ...' .,/ Margaret
Chrisitan ,/ _... Harloe
High Sch.r>6I.../ ntary
...,..... L37
./ +-468
/,. .J ~ l. ,279
8'--.i i t r
418 -+ ~ (fj ~
94. .... M (f)
~ g L'95
;lI.; lEI ['I,l +-140
.J ~ l. ,82
69-1itr
98-+ ~8g
23 --:-1- it) ......
14
~-~
~ l.
L'37
,56
t r
Not to Scale
PenlieldJ?SmiIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS. PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8(18(05 Not to scale
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
./
Existing + Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.fIN. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB RampS
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 5B Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks AVe.
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 5BRamps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.frraflic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St. .
12. Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
\"l.A
CD
N
Grand Avenue
ori_
;! ~
~ l.
L173
,71
t r
uj...........
SOTO........e.
SflPrls iii
....COinplex cri . .
'<t ."..- Fair:.Oaks Ave,! 7
..:.............:.:.C;;;;;;;-..::... 6 ......... Margaret .
Chrisitan./ ,," Harloe
High S"'.'.-r>6I../ ntary
...
...-
...
...-
...
,.
~ :2(0
...... ..,. II) "-534
.J ~ l. ,'50
82J it r
. 613~ ;g, rn m
204, N(")N
L..,
-+-239
.J ~ l. ,178
60-1itr
'28_
'6,
15
~ N
~..
~
Not to Scale
)
Penneld~+SnliIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.O. 1681l.Ql 8/18105 NottosCille
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
, .
Cumulative + Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
Study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.fIN. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
3. ,Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 5B Ramps!
EI Camino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks Ave. Ja",es !1!
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 5B Rsmps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.lTraflic Way
11. Traffic Way/E. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
\"l.A\\\
Grand Avenue
;
CD
N
_ w
o ~
N _
~ l.
L'37
r84
t r
uj ./......
SOTO........E.
SflPrls iii
.....COinp/ex cri . ,
.. .......... ...................... e Fa.i...Oaks Ave.' 7
...................... Coastal ../ ....... Margaret
Chrisitan"" ..- Harloe
High Sch<jil....... entary
../
.../
...-
...
....
L37
ll3:! (<)
.- c; N +-491
.J ~ l. ,279
81-1itr
456~~~:z:
94, .'r'"(f) (')
--,... L192
NWal
cc N N +-140
.J ~ l. ,82
82-1itr
98_
23"""
16
N _
<'>~
~
Not to Scale
Penfleld~SnliIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
W.O. 16811.01 8(18(05 Nottoswe
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
Cumulative + Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
study Intersections
1. Brisco Rd.fIN. Branch St.
2. Brisco Rd.lHwy 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 5B Ramps!
EI Camino Real .
'5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave.
6. Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St.
7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks Ave. Jal\"les !1.!
8. Fair Oaks AveNalley Rd.
9. Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy 101 5B Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave.rrraflic Way
11. Traflic WaylE. Branch St.
12. Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps
\"l.A\\\
Grand Avenue
- m t.....
.~ ~ 0) 22
.J ~ t --67
.11
~;:=: i t r
22',
CD
N
m _
'" 0
fC.
L173
."2
t r
:Z~
~
_554
,'50
,SJ.J i t r
576~C'!t;:;~
34,N(t)N
L48'
-253
.J ~ l. ,176
6,-1itr
139 -+ en N ..,.
.'6, -l!l:::
17
Not to Scale
Penfield~fSnliIh
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
-W.O.16811.01 8/18/05 Not to scale
FAIR OAKS DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Grande, CA
Traffic Impact Study
, .
Traffic Impact Study~ Fairqaks Development
5. . LEVELS OF SERVICE.
To identify the operating condition at the stUdy'roadways and intersections, a level of service (LOS)
ranking scale was used. . This scale identifies impacts of traffic volillpes verses roadway/intersection
capacity and assigns a letter value to this relationship. The letter scale ranges from A to F with LOS
A representing free flow conditions and LOS F representing congested conditions.
(
The intersections' LOS ,was determined using the Highway Capacity S~ftware' (HCS-2000) and is
based on the criteria presented.in Table 5. The results of the intersection analyses are shown as
seconds of delay. The techillcallevel of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix to this
report. ' .
,-
Table 5
Intersection Level of Service Criteria
,
Signalized .' ,Unsignalized
LOS intersections intersections Definition
(Sec. of delay) (Sec. of deiav)
Conditions of free unobstructed flow, no
A .:':...to .:':...10 delays and all signal phas~s sufficient In
duration to clear all approaching vehicles.
, Conditions of stable flow, very litde delay, a
B > to. and S 20 ' >:10 andS 15',' few.' phases are .. unabl~. to handle all
, aooroachin" vehicles.
Conditions of stable flow, delays are low to
C > 20 and S 35 ;>'.15 and S 25 moderate, full use of peak direction signal
, . phases is experienced.
Conditions. approaching unstable flow,
delays are moderate to heavy, significant
D > 35 and S 55 . >..25 and S 35 signal time deficiencies are experienced for
. 'short duritions during the peak traffic
. oeriod.
. Conditions of unstable flow, delays are
E > 55 and S 80 > 35 and S 50 sigruficant, . signal phase timing is generally
insufficient, congestion exists for extended
.- duration throughout' the oeak period.
Conditions of "forced flow, travel speeds are
low and volumes are well above capacity. .
, This condition is often caused when vehicles
F > 80 > 50 . released by an upstream signal are unable to
proceed because of' back-ups' from a
. . . downstream signal
Roadway segment levels of service were estiffiated utilizing the average daily traffic (AD1) counts
collected by Penfield & Smith on September 9, 2005. The City's level of serVice thresholds by
roadway type are presented inTable 6, as follows:'
Penfield & Smith
.November 21, ~5
26
.\..
,.
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oaks Development
. Table 6
Level of Service Thre~hold Volumesby U~ban/Suburban Roadway Type
Total Avera!!'e Dail Trins (ADT) in Both Directions
Roadway Type Le~e1 of . Level-of Level of Level of Level of
Service A Service B . Service C ServiceD Service E
4-Lane Divided Freeway 28,000 43,200 61,600 74,400 80,000
6- Lane Divided Arterial 32,000 38,000 43,000 49,00 54,000
(with left turn lane)
4-Lane Divided Arterial 22,000 25,000 29,000 32,500 36,000
(with left turn lane) ,
4-Lane Undivided Arterial 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000 .
(no left turn lane)
2- Lane Collector 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,000 18,000
(with left turn lane)
2- Lane Collector ,. .
(no left turn lane) . 8,0,00, 9,500 10,500 12,000 13,500
. City of Arroyo Grande Traffic ImpactThresholds
Based on City policy, level of service :'C" will be the Peak Hour design objective for all movements,
including cumulative traffic at build-out of the study area. Where deficiencies exist, mitigate. to a
LOS D at a minimum and plan improvement to achieve LOS C.
Significant Impact at Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections
A project has signific~nt traffic impacts when:
"
1. The addition of project traffic to a .signalized intersection exceeds the thresholds
provided in the following table.
Table 7
Signalized Intersection Thresholds of Significance
For Traffic Impact Studies
THRESHOLDS GUIDEUNES BASED ON PROJECTED TRIPS
CRITERIA . GENERATED FROM PROTECT
Level ofSemce (Los) Per Lane Peak Hour Trips Total Project Peak Hour Project Peak Hours Trips
Added. To Critical Trip Generation Entering A Critical
Movements Intersection
C >45 150C54O trips 90-180 trips
D >15 50-180 trips 30-60 trips
E >10 30-120 trips 20-40 trips
F >5 15-60 trips 10-20 trips
2. The Project's access to a major street requires an access that would create an unsafe
situation or a new traffic signal, and/ or major revisions to an existing traffic signal.
Penfield & SmiTh
November 21, 2005
27
T~affic Impact Study- Fair Oaks I?evelopment'
3. The Project adds .traffic to a street with design features (e.g., narrow width, roadside
ditches, sharp curves, poor sight distance, and ifiadequate pavement structure) that.
may cause potential safety problems with the addition of project .traffic.
4. . The addition of project plus cumulative. traffic to. a signalized intersection increases
. the' delay by 2 or more levels, of service if the iritersection is currently operating at
LOS A or B, or contributes traffic to an intersection operating below LOS C and
meets thresholds defined in Table 7. .
If the above thresholds are exceeded, the Developer will be required to construct
improvements or . implement other methods. to .reduce the level of impact to
insignificance except where mitigation measures. have already been identified in the
. City's ClP' and funded as part of the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee Program. Th~
thresholds of..significance identified above assume full contribution to the Traffic
Mitigation Fee Furid.
Th~ addition of project, or project plus cumulative, traffic to an unsignaliz,d intersection
increases the level of service.to an unacceptable level ~essthan LOS C). Level of Service
shall be determined by the "Highway Capacity Manual.
6. CAP ACITY ANALYSIS
Per the City's .request, the traffic scenarios analyzed include Existing Conditions; Existing Plus
Project Conditions; CinnUlative C~nditions; and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The operating
conditions at the study .intersections were determined using the analysis methods described in the
Level of Service section of this rep!"rt. The technical level of service worksheets are provided in the
Appendix to this report.
Existing Roadway SegmeniOperations
_ Penfield & Smith collected 24-hour hose counts.on September ?, 2005 at the roadway segments
presented in Table 8. As shown below, the roadways are currently operating at LOS.B or better.
Table 8
Roadway Segment Levels of Service .
Roadway Segment Capacity Configuration Average Daily Traffic LOS
Fair Oaks A venue- east of Two-lane Minor Arterial . 8,900 ADT A
Woodland Drive
Fair Oaks A venue- west of .
Woodland Drive Two-lane Minor Arterial 8,745 ADT A
Grand Avenue- east.of Four-lane Major Arterial 19,175ADT A
. Halcvon Road .
Halcyon Road- north of Fair Four-lane Major Arterial 21,000 ADT A
Oaks Avenue ,.
Traffic Way- north of Fair Two-lane Minor arterial . 12,090 ADT B
Oaks Avenue.. ,
,
Penfield & Smith
~ovember21,2005
28
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oaks Development
Existing Intersection Operations
As shown in Table.9, the twelve study intersecuons currendy operat~ withincthe eity's acceptable
level of service range during the morning peak hour. During the. afternoon peak hour, the
intersections of Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue currendy operates at LOS D.
Table 9
Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service
No. Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour PM PeakHour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St. Signal 22.2 . LOSe 30.8 Lose
2. Brisco Rd./ Signal 27.7 J Lose 29.2 Lose
Hwv 101 NB Ramps
3. Brisco Rd./ Signal 24.9 LOSe 32.7 Lose
E.l eamino Real
4. Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB Signal 29.0 LOSe 30.4 Lose
Ramps/El eamino Real
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave. Signal 30.7 Lose 36.2 LOSD
6. ~air Oaks A ve./EIffi St. All-Way Stop 11.5 LOSB 13.0 LOSB
7. Halcyon Rd./ . Signal 11.1 LOSB 12.7 LOSB
~air Oaks Ave.
8. ~air Oaks Ave./Valley R& "
Signal . 15.4 J LOSB 13.7 LOSB
9. lFair Oaks A ve./ All-Way Stop 22.2 LOSe 16.7 Lose
tHwv SB Ramps
lFair Oaks Ave./ -.
10. [-r~ffic Way All-Way Stop. .24.4 LOSe 20.4 Lose
11. ~raffic Way/E. Branch St. Signal 27.4 LOSe 30.7 Lose
12. ~rand A ve./ . Signal. 19.3 . LOSB 11.5 LOSB
tHwv 101 NB Ramps
Cumulative Interse~tion Oper<ltions
Based on the cumulative project trip distribution depicted in Exhibit 7, the cumulative volumes were
added to the existing peak hour trafflc voluines and the intersection analyses were recalculated. The
results of these calculations are sumrriarized in Table 10. .
With the cumulative project trips, the intersections of Traffic Way/E. Branch St. and Halcyon
Rd./Hwy 101 SB Ramps/El eamino Real are forecast to operate at illS D during both peak hours.
During the afternoon peak hour, the intersections of Brisco Rd./W. Branch St, Brisco Rd./
Hwy 101 NB Ramps, Halcyon Rd./Highway 101 SBRamps/El eamino Real, Halcyon Rd./Grande
Ave. and Traffic Way/E. Branch St. are forecast, to operate at LOS D or worse. .
Penfield & Smith
November 21, 2005 .
29
Traffic Impacr Study- FairOak~ Development. .
Table 10
Cumulative Peak Hour Levels of Service.
1N0. AM Peak Hour .. PM Peak Hour
Intersection Traffic Control
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1". Brisco Rd.jW. Branch St. Signal 25.4 LOSC 74.1 LOSE
2. Brisco Rd./ . - . Signal . 41.9 LPSD 36.8 LOSD
Hwv 101 NB Ramos
3. Brisco Rd./ Signal 29.4 ,
EI Camino Real LOSC 32.9 LOSC
4. Halcyon Rd./HWy 101 SB . Signal 37.8 LOSD .85.2 LOSF
Ramps/EI Camino Real .
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave. Signal 30.8 LOSC .42.3 LOSD
6. Fair Oaks Ave./EIm St. . . All-Way Stop .-
12.3LOS B LOSB .14.6 LOSB
Halcyon Rd./ . . .
7. Fair Oaks Ave. Signal l1.~OS B LOSB 12.8 LOSB
8. Fair Oaks Ave./Valley Rd. Signal No Change No change 13.7 LOSB
9. Fair Oaks Ave./ All-Way Stop No Change No change. 17.3 LOSC
Hwv SB Ramps
10. Fair Oaks Ave./ All-Way Stop No Change No change 21.4 LOSC
rraffic Wav
11. rraffi~ Way/E. Branch St. . Signal 28.9 LOSC 39.7 LOSD
12. :;rand A ve./ . Signal . 22.3 LOS.C 12.3 LOSB
HWV 101 NB Ramos
Existing Plus Project An:ilysis
The project is anticipated to add 379 'trips in the morning peak hour and 684 trips in the afternoon
. peak hour. Based on the project traffic distribution depicted in Exhibits 5 and 6, the project traffic
was added to the existing peak hour traffic ..volumes and the intersection analyses were recalculated.
The results of these calculations are summarized in Tables 11 and 12. '
As shown in the following tables; .Phase n of the .project is anticipated to generate a significant
impact at eight intersections:
. D.uring .the afternoon peak hour, under existing plus project conditions the Brisco Rd./Hwy
101 NB Ramps intersection remains at LOS C. However; Phase n of the project adds 102 trips
to the infersection, which exceeds the city's Traffic Impact Thresholds.
. D~ring the afternoon peak hours, unde~ existing plus proje~t and ~umulative plus project traffic
conditions, the Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real intersection will continue to operate at LOS C
with project-added traffic. Phase.n of the project.will add 102 trips to this intersection, which
exceed the City's Traffic Impact Threshold, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
, :.
Penfield & Smith
~oveD1her21,2005
30
Traffic Impact Study- Fair OakS Development.
· During the morning peak hour, the intersecrion. at Halqon Road/Highway 101 SB
Ramps/EI Camino Real will remain LOS C under existing plus project conditions. Phase II
of the project adds 112 trip~ to this intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact
Thresholds. During the afternoon peak hour, this.int!,rsection degrades from LOS C to LOS D.
· During the morning peak hour under the eXisting plus project conditions, the Halcyon
Road/Grand Avenue intersection will continue to operate at LOS C with project-added traffic.
However, Phase II of the project will add 288 net new trips to this intersection which exceeds
the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting' in a significant traffic impact. During the
afternoon peak ho';r, this inter~ection remains at LOS D. Phase II of the project adds 398 peak
hour trips, which exceeds City's Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting in a significant traffic
impact. ,
· During the afternoon peak hour, under existing plus project traffic conditions, the Fair Oaks
Ave./Hwy SB Ramps intersection will remain at LOS C. However Phase II of the project will
add 197 trips to the intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting'
in a significant traffic impact.
· The intersection of Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Way will degrade from LOS C to LOS D
during the morning peak hour ;'nder the existing plus project conditions.
· During the afternwn. peak hour, the Traffic Way/E. Branch Street intersection will remain
LOS C under existing pl~s project traffic conditions: Phase II of the project would add 99 trips
. PM peak hour trips to this intersection, which exceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds.
· During the morning peak houithe Grand Ave./ Hwy 101 NB Ramps intersection will degrade
from LOS B to LOS C. PhaselI of the project would add 130. trips to this intersection, which
eXceeds the City's Traffic Impact Thresholds.
. ,
. ,
Penfield & Smith
~oveD1ber21,2005
31
/
f
Traffic Impact Study- Fair. Oaks Development
. ,Table 11
AM Pe'ak Hour .
Existing Plus ProjectIntetsection Level of Service
,
Existing Existing + Existing +
~ Phase I Phase II Proiect-Added Trips
AM Peak AM Peak -,
.AM Peak PUD Office Impact Impact
No. Intersection LOS LOS LOS (phase I) (Phase II) (Phase I) . (Phase II)
,
I ' Brisco Rd./W. Branch S1. 22.2/LOS C No Chan"" 22.3/LOS C I trio 18 trios No No
Brisco Rd./ Hwy 101 NB NoChan.. '
2 Ramos , 27.7/LOS C 28.4/LOS C . I trio 29 trios No No
3 Brisco Rd./El Camino Real 24.9/LOS C. No Chan.. 24.9/LOS C {trin 29 trips No No
Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB No Chan""
4 Ramns/EI Camino Real 29.0/LOS C 33.3/LOS C, 6 trios 112 trips No Yes
,
5 Halcvon ReI./ Grand Ave. 30.7/LOS C No Chan"" . 33.I/LOS C 16 trios 288 mna No Yes
6 Fair Oaks A ve./Elm Sr. 11.5/LOS B NoChan"" ,11.7/LOS B. '0 trips 18 trios No No ,
7 Halcvon Rd'/Fair Oaks Ave. 11.1/LOS B No Chan"" 16.3/LOS B 16 trins 322 trins No No
.. .,
8 . Fair Oaks Ave./VaIleu ReI. 15.4/LOS B No Chanae' 175/LOS B 5trins 36 trips. No No
Fair Oaks Ave./ Hwy SB NoChan"" 36 trips:
9 Ramns ' 22.2/LOS C 22.7/LOS C 5 trios No No
, -
10 Fair Oaks Ave./Traffic Wav 24.4/LOS C NoChan"" 26.8/LOS D . 5 trios 36 trios No Yes
11 Traffic Wav /E. Branch St. 27.4/LOS C No Chao"" 28.4/LOS C I trip .54 trips No No
Grand Ave./ Hwy 101 NB
12 . Ramns 19.3/LOS B No Chan"" 26.4/LOS C I trio BOtrios No Yes
Penfield & Smith
. -November 2~, 2005
32
J
. Traffic Impact Srudy- Fait OakaDevelopmenr
Table 12
PM. Peak Hour
Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service
.."
Existing + Existing +
Existing Phase I Phase II Pro;ect-Added Tr;;'s
PM Peak, PM Peak PM Peak PUD Office Impact Impact
No. Intersection ' LOS . LOS . LOS Whase I) (phase II) (Phase I) (phase II)
1 Btisco Rd./W. Btanch St. 30.8/LOS C No Chin2e 31.0/LOS C 1 trin 33 trios No No
Btisco Rd./ Hwy 101 NB 4 trios
2 Ramos 29.2/LOS C No Chan.e 30.6/LOS C 102 trios No Yes
3 .Brisco Rd./EI Camino Real 32.7/LOS C No Cham", 33.2/LOS C 4 trio 102 trios No Yes
Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB
.4 Ramos/EI Camino Real 30A/LOS C NoChan"". . 45.0jLOS D IOtrins 164 trios . No Yes
5 Halcvon Rd./ Grand Ave. 36.2/LOS D No Chat1l<. 37.9/LOS D ., 17 trins 398 tt;ns No Yes
6 Fait Oaks Ave./EIm St. 13.0/LOS B NoChanie 13.7/LOS B Otrins 33 trins No No
7 Halcvon Rd./F;.u, Oaks Ave. 12.7/LOS.B . No Chan"" 19.6/LOS B 17 trios 463 trins No No
8 Fait Oaks Ave./Vallev Rd. 13.7/LOS B No Chanie 14.6/LOS B ".6 trios 197 trios No No
Fait Oaks Ave./ Hwy SB ,
9 Ramos . 16.7/LOSC NoChanj(e 19.9/LOS C 6 trios 197 trios No Yes
\
10 Fait Oaks Ave./Ttaffic Wav 2M/LOS C NoChanj(e 3O.6/LOS D 6 trios 197 trios No , Yes
, 2 trios 99 trios
11 Traffic Way/E. Branch St. 30.7/LOS C NoChanj(e 34.3/LOS C No Yes
Grand AveIHwy 101 NB ..
12 . Ramns I1.S/LOS B NoChan"" 13.6/LOS B 4trins 168 trins No No
Penfield & Smith
Novernber21,2005
33
1--'-'
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oaks Development
Fair Oaks Avenue, Halcyon Road,' and Traffic Way cocld easily accommodate the increase in traffic
.. _ associated with the project. . Th,erefore the project is not anticipated to contribute any significant
. roadway impacts. The projeCt added daily traffic and resulting roadway levels of service are
summarized in Table 13.
Table 13
Roadway Segtnent Levels of Service with Project Traffic
Capacity Existing Existing Project-Added Trips Resulting
Roadway Segment Residential Office
Configuration ADT LOS (Phase I) (Phase II) Total LOS
Fair Oaks Ave.- west Two-lane Minor ,
of Woodland Dr. Arterial 8,"(45ADT A 60 ADT 1500ADT .1555ADT A
Fair Oaks Ave.- east Two-lane Minor .'
of Woodland Dr. Arterial 8,900 ADT A lOADT 300 ADT 310 ADT A
,
Grand Ave.- east of Four-lane Major .. .19175 ADT A 50 ADT 1200 ADT 1245ADT A
Halcvon Rd. Arterial . " . ,
Halcyon.Rd,- north Four-lane Major ... ..
of Fair Oaks Ave. . Arterial 21,000 ADT A 160ADT 3900 ADT 4050 ADT B
Traffic Way- north Two-lane Minor ,-,,-
of Fair Oaks Ave. arterial 12,090 ADT B . >10 ADT >50ADT > 150 ADT B
Cumulative Plus Project Analysis
The project traffic was added to .the cumulative peak hour traffic volumes. and the intersecti()n
analyses were recalculated. The results of the LOS calruJations are summarizedin Tables 14 and 15.
As shown in the following tables, Phase II of the project is anticipated .to generate a significant
.impact at ten intersections:
, .
· During the rttorning and. afterttoon peak hour, under cumulative plus project traffic conditions,
the intersection of Brisco Rd.(W. Branch St. degrades from LOS E to. LOS F.
· During the afternoon peak hour, the Brisco Rd./Hwy 101 NB Ramps intersection will
continue to operate at LOS D, with project-added traffic. Phase II of the project will add 29
AM peak hour trips and 102 PM peak hour trip to. this intersection, both of which exceed the
City's Traffic Impact Thresholds, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
· During the afternoon peak hour, under cumulative plus project traffic conditions, the Brisco
Rd./El Camino Real intersectton will continue to operate atLOS:C with project-added traffic.
Phase II of the project will add 102 ,trips to this intersection, which exceed the City's Traffic
Impact Threshold, resulting in a significant traffic unpact.
· During. the morning and afternoon peak hours, the intersection at Halcyon Road/Highway.
101 SB Ramps/El Camino Real will remain LOS D and LOS F respectively. Phase II of the
project adds 112 AM and 16~ PM peak hour trips, both of which exceed the City's Traffic
Impact Thresholds, resulting in a significant traffic impact.
· During the morning peak hour, the Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue intersection. will degrade
from LOS C to LOS D under cumulaJive plus project traffic conditions. During the afternoon
peak hour, this intersection will continue to operate at LOS D with project-added traffic. Phase
- Penfield & Smith
Novembe~ 21, 2005
34
-.------ ~~------------
Traffic Impact Srudy- FairOaka Developmenr.
II of the project will add 398 tiet new trips to this intersection, which excc;eds the City's Traffic
Impact Thresholds, resulting iti a significant traffic impact. , .
.. During the afternoon peak' hour, under cumulative plus . project traffic. conditions, the
Halcyon/Fair O!,ks Ave. intersection will degrade from LOS B to LOS D with project-added
traffic, resulting in a significant traffic impact.. .
· During the afternoon peak hour, the Fair Oaks Ave./Hwy SB Ramps. intersection. will
degrade from LQS C to LOS D.under cumulative plus project traffic conditions.
· The intersection of Fair Oaks Avenue/Traffic Way will degrade from LOS C to LOS D
during the momitig peak a~d afternoon peak hour under cumulative plus project" conditions.
.. During the afternoon peak hour, the Traffic Way/E. Branch Street intersection will remain at
LOS D. However, Phase II cif the project adds 99 trips to the intersection, which exceeds the
City's Traffic Impact Thresholds. .
· During the morning peak hour under cLimulative plus project conditions, the intersection of
Grand Ave./Hwy 101 NB Ramps remains at LOS C. However, Phase II of the project adds
130 trips to the intersection, ~hich exceeds the City's Traffic. Impact Thresholds.
Table 14
AM Peak Hour
Cumulative Plus Project Intetsection Level of Service
Cu~uJative Cumulative + Project-Added Trips
No. Intersection Project PUD Office Impact. .. Impact
AM Peak LOS AM Peak LOS (Phase I) (Phase II) (Phase I) I (Phase II
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St. 25.4/,LOS C 27.0/LOS C , 1 trip 18 trips No No.
2. Brisco Rd./ 41.9/LOS D 44.8/LOS D 1 trip 29 trips No Yes
'1wv 101 NB Ramos
3. Brisco Rd./El Camino Real 29.4 /LOS C 30.0/LOS C . 1 trip 29 trips No No
'1alcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB . Yes
4. 37.8/LOS D 47.6/LOS D 6 trips . 112 trips No
K.amos/El Camino Real .
5. !Halcyon Rd./ Grand Ave. 30.8/LOS C 34.6iLOS D 16 trips 288 trips No Yes
6. !Fair Oaks Ave./Elm St. 12.3/LOS B '12.6/ LOS B o trips 18 trips No No
7. lHalcy';n Rd./F air Oaks Ave. 1l.2/LOS B 15.0 /LOS B 16 trips 322 trips No No
8. !Fair Oaks Ave./Valley Rd.. No Change No'Change 5 trips 36 trips N/A N/A
!Fair Oaks Ave.! No Change . No Change 5 trips 36 trips i N/A N/A
9. IHwv SB Ramos
10. !Fair Oaks Ave./Traffic Way 24.4 / LOS C 27.0/LOS D 5 trips 36 trips No Yes
11. ~raffic Way/E. Branch St. 28.9 /LOS C 29.7/ LOS C 1 trip 54 trips No No
12. iGrand Ave.! 22.3/LOS C 29.7/LOS C 1 trip 130 trips No Yes
IHwv 101 NB Ramos
Penfield & Smith
November 21, 2005
35
\
Traffic Impact Study- Fair Oaks Development
Table 15
PM Peak Hour
Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Level of Service
Cumulative Cumulative + Project-Added Trios
No. Intersection PM Peak LOS Project Residential Office Impact Impact
PM Peak LOS (Phase J) iPhase II) . (Phase I) I (Phase II)
1. Brisco Rd./W. Branch St. 74.1/LO~ E 87.2/LOS F 1 trip 33 trips No Yes
2. Brisco Rd./ 36.8/LOS D' 40.9/LoS ti 4 trips 102 trips No Yes
Hwv 101 NB Ramns
3. Brisco Rd./El Camino Real 32.9/LOS C 33.1jLOS C 4. trips 102 trips No Yes
Halcyon Rd./Hwy 101 SB J
4. K.amos/El Camino Real 85.2/LOS F 110.6/LOS F 10 trips 164 trips Yes Yes
5. Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave. 42.3/LOS D . 48.9/LOS D 17 trips 398 trips. No Yes
6. ;::-air Oaks Ave./Elm SI. 14.6 /illS B 15.5 /LOS B 9 trips 33 trips No No
'7. Halcyon Rd./Fair Oaks Ave. 12.8/ LOS B. 46.2/ LOS D 17 trips 463 trips No Yes
8. ~ air Oaks A ve./Valley Rd, 13.7 / LcJS B 14.8/ LOS B 6 trips 197 trips No No
9. air Oaks Ave./ 17.3/ LOS C . 25.9/ LOS D 6 trips 197 trips No Yes
Hwv SB Ramns
10. ~air Oaks Ave./Traffic Way 21.4 / LOS C .34.4/LOSD. 6 trips 197 trips No Yes
11. ~raffic Way/E. Branch St. 39.7/LOS D 40.2 /LOS D 2 trips 99 trips No Yes
12. Grand A ve./ . 123jLOS B 14.5 / LOS B 4 trips 168 trips No No
Hwv 101 NB Ramns
.,
. .'
Penfield & Smith
~oveD1ber2t,2005
36
-......,.
Traffic Impact Smdy- Fair Oak8 Development
7. PARKING & ACCE~S ANALYSIS
The project is proposing to provid~ a two-story parking structure with 480 parking spaces to
accommodate parking for the medical offic~ portion of the project. The residential units will have 2
car garages, as well as visitor parking provided tliroughout the site. 'The parking demand for the
project is anticipated to be met entirely on-site. .
Access to the project is p~oposed via a new driveway on Fair Oak Avenue. The access drive is
proposed to be 24 feet wide and Will be designed in accordance with criteria presented in the CitY's
Standards and Specifications. As proposed, the driveway, would adequately accommodate ingress
and egress to the site. Visibility at the proposed driveway is unobstructed in both directions and
exceeds' all minimum visibilitY requirements. The City's wall, fence, and vegetation and setback
regulations along the project's frontage will be met to ensure appropriate sight distances from the
project driveway. The internal site circulation shall be designed to adequately accommodate moving
vans/trucks, emergency vehicle ac~ess and trash pick'up.
Woodland Drive Extension
Woodlalld Dri:"'e, near the project site, currendy exists in two sections. The north section tenninates
at the northern property boundary and provides; access to several r.esidences. Currendy, the
northerly segment of .Wo~dland Drive gains access to the City street network via Cerra Vista Lane,-
Dodson Way, and South Alpine Street., The existing lower segment extends from the south side of
Fair Oaks Avenue (across Fair Oaks from the project site) and continues to the southerly City limits
where it terminates into a cul-de-sac. Access to this segment of Woodland Drive is provided from
Fair Oaks Avenue and Olive Street, Willow Lane, Virginia Drive via: Halcyon Road. Both sections
of Woodland Drive are local resid~ntiaJ. streets.
A preliminary review of the potential Woodland Drive extension indicates that this connection
would provide a more efficient circulation system for local traffic. However, the potential for an
estimated additional 147 AM project peak hour trips and 172 PM project peak hour trips using this
roadway extension does exist. This diversion of trips would help alleviate impacts to the intersection
of Halcyon Rd./Grand Ave., but wses,neighborhood compatibility issues and potential operational
issues at the intersection of Grand Ave./ Alpine St. More analysis as a part of the future Phase II
traffic analysis will be needed to address these concerns. .
Traffic Signal/All-Way Stop Warrant
Penfield & Smith conducted a cursory review of the traffic signal warrants for the proposed access
location. A traffic signal would not be warranted with the traffic generated by the residential portion
of the project, However, the current daily volumes on Fair Oaks Avenue (8,900 ADT) and the trips
associated with t:\1e medical office (6,240 AD1) are approaching signal warrant volumes for'this type
of facility. If and when the medical office is constructed, it is recommended that a signal warrant
analysis be completed prior. to andJollowing occupancy of the medical office to detennine the need
for and timing of triffic sighal imp~ove~ents at the project intersection.
An all-way stop analysis was also conducted for this intersection. The Manual of Uniform traffic
control devices .contains essentially, three major criteria for the installation of stop signs:
Penfield & Smith
November 21, 2005 -
37
~
-.........
1_"'''' u
-.
Traffic Impacr Study- Fair Oaks Developmenr
\
1. A crash problem, ~s iridicated by5 or m':'re report~d crashes in a 12-month period.
2. Major street volume of'at least 300 vehicles per hour (both directions) for 8 hours and at
least 100 of a combination of vehicles,'bikes and pedestrians fr';in the minor street for
each of those eight hours. . . {
3. Delay to minor street tr~ffic e~ceeds 30 seconds per vehicle.
While Phase I will not ge'nerate the miniinum ~olumes requir~d for the consideration of an all-way
stop at the project entrance~. it is anticipated that the project driveway would meet the minimum
volume criteria upon build out (phases I and II) of the project. . However; meeting the minimum
" volume criteria is not always a justification for installing an all-way stop.. Because all-way stop signs
result in additional delay o.n tile' major roadway,. it is important. that there be some evidence
(increased minor street delays or ~?llisions) thai .the.minor street traffic would b~nefit significantly
from an installation. Therefore, it -is recommended that the intersection be monitored following
throughout construction of/this site to determine whether the other warrants are met 'and an all-way
stop is necessary. . \ '
8. RECOMMENDATIONS,
. /
The project will contribute a significant unpact to' ten of the. twelve study area intersections. The
following intersection improvements are recommended to ,mitigate. the project impacts. All impacts
are attributed to Phase II o(the project, unless. otherwise noted.
, Proiect Peak Hour Impacts and MUj".ation
No. Intersection Project Impa~t .Mitigarion Resulting
, .' LOS
Brisco Rd./W. '. . Pay traffic impact fees as
1. Branch St. CumUlative- PM Peak Hour determined bv the Citv. N/A
Brisco Rd./ Existing - PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees as
2. Hwy 101 NB Cumulative- AM Peak Hour . detennined by the City. N/A
Ramos Cumulative- PM Peak Hour -
Brisco Rd./ EXisting- PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees as N/A
3. ElCamino Real Cumulative- PM Peak Hour. deterinined bv the Citv.
Halcyon Rd./ Exi~ting- AM Peak Hour
Hwy 101SB Existing- PM Peak HoUr . Add additional southbound LOSC
4. Ramps/ . Cumulative- AM Peak Hour thro lane
El cariuno Real Cumulative- PM Peak Hour IPh III!)
. Add additional southbound
through lane. .\-
. Convert existing
EXistipg- AM Peak Hour southbound combination -
5. Halcyon Rd./ EXisting- PM Peak Hour through-left turn lane into LOSC
Grand Ave. * Cumulative- AM Peak Hour an exclusive left-turn lane.
Cumulative- PM Peak Hour . Upgude the Halcyon Road
approach traffic signals to
allow for protected left
.tums. ,
Penfield & Smith
~oveEnber21,2005
38
~
._J
I
T rafflc Impact Study- Fair Oaks Development
7. Halcyon Rd./ Cumularlve- PM Peak Hour ~ . Pay traffic impact fees as
Fair Oaks Ave. determined by the City. N/A
9. Fair Oaks Ave./ Existing - PM Peak Hour . Pay traffic impact fees lIS
Hwy SB Ramps Cumulative- PM Peak Hour determined by the City. N/A
Existing- AM Peak Hour
10. Fair Oaks Ave./ Existing~ PM Peak Hour . Add exclusive EB right-turn
Traffic Way* . Cumulative- AM Peak Hour lane. LOSC
Cumulative- PM Peak Hour
Existing- PM Peak Hour . Reconfigure intersection to
II.' TrafficWay/E. Cumulative- PM Peak Hour provide 2 exclusive NB -Ieft. LOSC
Branch St. tUrn.lanes and 1 shared NB
through/ right turn lane
Grand Ave./ Existing - AM Peak Hour .. Pay traffic impact fees as
12. Hwy 101 NB Ciunulative- AM Peak Hour determined by the City. N/A
Ramp -
* Recommended intersection improvementl:! ohrafued. from the Citywide Traffic - Monitoring Program- Traffic
Model Update Draft Technical Report (November 2004) . .
With the above improvements, acteptable LOS C will be achieved for both peak houls under the.
existing plus project and cllmulative plus project traffic conditions.
> ,.J
. (
~,- ,
39
Penfield & Smith
,~ove~ber21,2005
",.
..
. .
i
I
. ([)esign roup, Inc.
Civif'ErigineeritI{J / <PlAnning / <Project ~anagement
i
i
l
ATTACHMENT H
.'-
December 13,2005
Kelly Heffernon
City of Arroyo Grande
214 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93422
RE: ' Fair Oaks Mixed Use P~jtd - Biofiltration Calculations
Dear Kelly:
In accordance with Federa!.and State Regulations for controlling pollutants from storm water
runoff, this project has incorporated the use of Biofiltration Swales as a permanentBMP. In
order to determine the appropriate design for the swales, our office references the Caltrans Storm
Water Quality Handbook - Project Planning and Design Guide I April 2003 printing.
The PPDG is a representation of the design procedures Caltrans uses to determine ifa~treatment
BMP is sized correctly to treat the estimated storm water runoff. The calculations, as prepared
by this office on November 17, 2005, show that the proposed Biofiltration swales are adequately
sized for the treatment of the storm water runoff per Caltrans guidelines. .
Should you have any questions please give me a call at (805) 462-5960.
~_."..
7050 ;4tascaiero flvenile, fltascaaero, CaCifomia 93422 (805) 462-5960 / 462-8191 'f~
'>~ ':'
-
_~ __M.__.______.__._____.._~ _ _____~__
..
BIOFILTRATION
CALCULATIONS
Fair Oaks Mixed Use Project,
Arroyo . Grande, CA
Rt;c~
. - ~IVtSD
No/; 2
CITy 32a
Co/l.1, Of:.<l~ '05
'll4UtvITy'ROyo .
Dfvp, GR.<ltvD,..
"<OPA. ".
. 'V1ftvr-
CDesiEJns roup, Inc. .
November 17,2005
By:
,7050 )f.tascad'ero )f.venue
)f.tasCadero, CJl 93422
805~462-5960, PaJ(805-462-8191
for:
Mr. Jason Blankenship
Pismo Beach
" ".
!I,
.,
11'
.~,?_.....~~~~-,~"~, ~'. ,. .-",..,.,.,.."-~" ~'."'-' ,~-,.,"' """~"~,,,,,---~' ",,,.,.,~ '-~""""""~''''.I,'.,,,.'''~--'.
;
~
r
.~\,.,
.t
I
I~ 0
, '
J
,
f
INCH = 50 FEET
"'~-
~-.
50
f
1--- SUBBA.SIN
(TYP.)
, '..,-.~.-
SWALE
.."'~.
"_l
/
l
j
,
/
,,,,oJ,,.
..^
~
.f"
... : v /
z=4 ~ ~ .~
I b=4.1' (1.25m) I
B=b+2yz
'3
/'
~,,,,,,T
,~
~"
/"
.1"'"
z=4
v../'
./'/ \ BIOFIL TRA nON SWALE
J
,/ L=32.8' (10m)
./
TYPICAl.. 610FIL TRA TION SWAl..E
NOT TO SCALE
/J"
j;
BIOFIL TRA TION SWALE
L=36' (11m)
..
./
EXHIBIT "Au
<1YES[(;:N~ me.
7050 jf!I)I.SCJl'lJ'E~ jf'IAE.
jf'VISCJl'lJ'E~, CJl 93422
(S05) 462-5960
. J: \Eng2005\05-028\dwg\exhibi\s\Bio-colcs.dwg 11/17/2005 10: 18: 55 AM PST
BIOFIL TRA TION CALCULATIONS
'r- ..
if'.,.
~;.r; ~-
'frr
~-~, ~,
--'I
..
Rational Equation;
Q=0.28*C*j"A
Assumptions; C=0.9 (pavement)
. i(25)=2:5.in/hr=63.5 mm/hr (per slo county std. 0-6)
i(WQF)=O.46 cmlhr= 4.6.mmlhr (per Caltrans PPOG Section 2.4.2.2, pg 2-17)
A in square kilometers.
Q(25yr)= 0.28 * (0.9) * (63.5) " (Area)
Q(WQF)= 1.1 * 0.28 * (0.9) * (4.6) "(Area)
HOM Section 819 requires a 1.1 multiplier for 25-yr storm and above
Subbasin Area QI201 QrWQFI
(km^2) (m^3/seC\ (m^31sec)
1 0.003 0.048 0.004
2 0.0006 0.010 0.001
3 0.001 0.016 0.001
4 0.0006 0.010 0.001
Manning's Equation. Trapezoidal Channel: V=(R^O.67)*(S^O.5)/n
Q25: Manning's "n"=0.05
z side slo
4
n
0.05
S meters/meter
0.01
Q=WQF
(m^3/sec)
0:001
0.004
0.007
p
(meters)
1.33
1.41
1.50
0.061 100 0.37 0.1650 2.07
0.072 110 0.39 0.1859 2.16
0.084 120 0.41 0.2076 2.24
0.098 130 0.42 0.2301 2.32
0.112 140 0.44 0.2534 2.40
0.128 150 0.46 0.2775 2.49
,
_____.__L__._m___..._._ _
Manning's Equation - Trapezoidal Channel: V=(R^O.67)*(S^O.5)/n
WQF: Manning's 0.20<"n"<0.24
'Z side slo
4
n
0.24
S meters/meter
0.01
0.005 60 0.057 0.0894 1.74 0.051
0.007 70 0.062 0.1071 1.83 0.059
0.008 80 0.067 0.1256 1.91 0.066
0.010 90 0.072 0.1449 1.99 0.073
0.013 100 0.076 0.1650 2.07 0.080
0:015 110 0.081 0.1859 2.16 0.086
0.018 120 0.085 0.2076 2.24 0.093
0.020 130 0.089 0.2301 2.32 0.099
0.023 140 0.092 0.2534 2.40 0.105
0.027 150 0.096 0.2775 2.49 0.112
'"'
Summarv ,
Area 1 2 3 4
25--year flow (ems) WQF 25..year flow lems) WQF 25- ear flow (ans) WQF 25..year flow (ems WQF
Qlems) 0.048 0.004 0.010 0.001 0.016 0.001 0.000 0.001
n 0.05 0.24 0.05 0.24 0.05 0.24 0.05 0.24
Z side SIOO8) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
base width (meter'! 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25
Slooe 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ,% 1% 1%
v in mm (calculated) 90 . 50 40 20 50 20 40 20
Velocitv mIs lcaiculaledl 0.345 0.051 0.2'4 0.029 0.245 0.029 0.214 0.029
Checks
V. of .~_or Vel of Dass or thof ass or
intermlttent flow (m/s fall WQF Im/s\ fall WQF (mm) fail
Max .Allowable 25 1.2 0.3 150
Area 1 0.345 pass 0.051 nass 50 Dass
Area 2 0.214 ss 0.029 DBSS 20 Dass
Area 3 0.245 pass 0.029 Dass 20 pass
Area 4 0.214 pass 0.029 ss 20 pass
Deleonine Hydraulic Residence time (HRT) ~or
La Ih of swele Ve Q HRT* Minimum HRT ass or
(meter) m1S) {min reauired fail HRT /(O"V) fail
0.22 min. value
-Area 1 15 0.051 5 5 Dass 1.96 ass
Area 2 10 0.029 6 5 ss 9.66 Dass
Area 3 11 0.029 6 5 pass '0.65 Dass
Area 4 11 0.029 6 5 Dass 10.65 pass
-tor HRT: Time. Length I VelOCIty
.
I
I
\, i
i
I
I
!I
I
I
I
I-
I
i
I
,
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
!
I
[
I
I
i
I
i
i
I
SEenONTWO
Best Management Practice Selection
Table 2-4: Design POllution Prevention BMPs
Consideration of Downstream Effects Related to Potentially
Increased Flow .
Preservation of Existing Vegetation
. Concentrated Flow Conveyance Systems.
Ditches, Berms, Dikes and Swales
Overside Drains
Flared Culvert End Sections
Outlet ProtectionNelocily Dissipation Devices
SlopelSurface Protection Systems
Vegetated Surfaces
Hard Surfaces"
For all Caltrans projects, Caltrans will moomize veg7tation-covered soil areas of a project.
A flow chart illustrating the Design Pollution Prevention BMP selection process for projects is
shown in Figure 2-2.
2.4.2 Treatment Best Management Practices
The Treatment BMPs listed in Table 2-5 will be considered for all projects identified pursuant to
Section 4 of this PPDG. These BMPs have been approved for statewide use. Appendix B
provides a general description' and design. guidelines for the approved Treatment BMPs.
Appendix E includes an Evaluation Documentation Form for Treatment BMPs that designers are
to use to determine if a project is required to consider incorporating Treatment BMPs (see
discussion of evaluation process in Section 4).
Table 2-5: Approved Treatment BMPs
Biofillration: Strips/Swales
Infiltration Devices
. Detention Devices
Traction Sand Traps
Dry Weather Flow Diversion
Gross Solids Removal Devices (GSRDs)
Media Filters
. Multi-Chamber Treatment Trairi
Wet Basins
A flowchart i1histrating the Treatment BMP selection process for projects required to consider
Treatment BMPs is shown in Figure 2-3 and in Figure 2-3(D7) for those projects in District 7.
Designers are encouraged to consider combining approved BMPs (e.g., overflow from a
detention basin may be discharged to a bioswale or an infiltration basin could be preceded by a
traction sand trap). These considerations shall be utilized at all phases of the project delivery
process (PID, PAED, and PSE). .
"'Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks
fI" Project Planning and Design Guide
September 2002lApri12003 Printing
2-11
2004 Lawsuit Settlement
SEGnONTWO
Best Management Practice Selection
Figure 2.2: Decision Process for Selecting Design Pollution Prevention BMPs
NO
COMPLETE COST ESTIMATE
FOR SELECTED BMPs
AND DOCUMENT DECISIONS
STABiliZE REMAINING
DISTURBED AREAS:
PERMANENT SeeOfNG
ANO PLANTING
ASSESS DOWNSTEAM EFFECTS AND CONSIDER:
ENERGY DISSIPATION DEVICES AT OUTLETS
MODIFICATIONS TO CHANNEL LINING MATERIALS
SMOOTH DRAINAGE CHANEL TRANSITIONS
INCORPORATE DETENTION FACILITIES TO
REDUCE PEAK DJSCI:IARGE
MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE, STABILIZE SLOPE, AND
CONTROL RONOFF, CONSIDER:
SLOPE/SURFAce PROTECTION SYSTEMS
PRESERVE EXISTING VEGETATION
CONCENTRATED FLOW CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS
MINIMIZE GULLYING AND SCOUR, CONSIDER:
CONCENTRATED FLOW CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS
(OlTCHES,"BERMS. DIKES, SWALES AND
OVERSIDE DRAINS)"
MINIMIZE SCOUR AND EROSION AT TRANSITIONS,
CONSIDER:
CONCENTRATED FLOW CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS
'(FLARED CULVERT END SECTIONS, OUTLET
,PROTECT1ONNELOCITY DISSIPATION DEVICES)
C+caltrans Storm Water Quality HandbOOks
"., Project Planning and Design Guide '
. September 2002lApri12003 Printing
2.12
2004 Lawsuit Sc;u!cment
SECTIONTW 0 Best Management Practice Selection
Biofiltration strips and swales are vegetated surfaces that remove pollutants by filtration
through grass, sedimentation, sorption to soil or grass, and infiltration through the soil. Strips
and swales are mainly effective at removing debris and' solid. particles, although some
constituents are removed by sorption to the soil. Biofiltration swales are vegetated channels that
. receive directed flow and convey storm water. Biofiltration strips, also known as vegetated
buffer strips, are vegetated sections of land over which storm water flows as overland sheet flow.
Biofiltration strips and swales are to be implemented at all sites to the extent that implementation
is consistent with existil)g Caltrans policies, as described herein. In practice, this means.
maximizing the use of vegetation in the right-of-way wherever. site conditions and climate allow
vegetation to establish and where flow velocities are not high enough to cause scour.
Infiltration devices store runoff and allow it to infiltrate into the ground. Infiltration prevents
pollutants in the captured runoff from reaching surface waters. In areas of high sediment loads,
pretreatment may, be required. Infiltration devices are required to meet the criteria in Appendix
B. Infiltration devices should be considered wherever site conditions allow and the design water
quality volume exceeds 123 cubic meters (0.1 acre-foot).
Detention devices are basins or tanks that temporarily detain runoff under quiescent conditions
to allow particles to settle out. Detention devices should be considered when the design water
quality volume is at least 123 cubic meters (0.1 acre-foot).
Tradion saod traps should be considered at sites where traction sand or other traction-
enhancing substances are commonly applied (at least once or twice a year) to the roadway.
Dry weather flow diversions to treat non-storm water flow may be feasible. They should only
be considered if diy weather flow from Caltrans activities is persistent, or the result of an
ongoing Caltrans activity. Additionally, dry weather diversions' should only be considered if
connection to a nearby sanitary sewer would not involve excessive measures to implement, and
provided the local health department and the sanitary sewer authority are willing to allow the
Department to connect to a nearby sanitary sewer.
Gross Solids Remoyal Devices .(GSRDs) should be considered for areas where receiving waters
are on the 303(d) list for'trash or areas where TMDLs that require trash removal have been
adopted.
Media Filters remove fine sediment, particulate-associated pollutants, and sometimes dissolved
pollutants. The normal configuration of such a device consists of an initial sedimentation basin
or vault followed by a filtering vault that is lined with a media.
Multi-Chamber Treatment Trains (MCTT) use three treatment mechanisms in three different
chambers. These include a catch basin with a sump, a sedimentation chamber with tube settlers
and sorbent pads, and a filtering chamber lined with media.
Wet Basins (constructed wetlands) are permanent pools of water designed to mimic naturally
occurring wetlands. The main distinction between construction and natural wetlands is that
construcied wetlands are placed in upland areas and are not subject to wetland protection
regulations.
I I!I-Caltrons 8tonn Water Quality Handboo~s
.., Project Planning and Design Guide .
September 2002/ApriI2003 Printing
2-13
2004 lawsuit Settlement
t.
SECTII_TWO .. Best Management Practice Selection
Wet basins should be considered when the site is located in a location where the visual aesthetics
of the pennanent pool is considered a benefit' (such as a roadside rest area or vista point). Site
must have a high water table or other source of water must be present to provide base flow
sufficient to maintain the plant community year-round.
Total wet basin volume shall be at least four times the water quality volume. Permanent pool
volume shall have a 3: I pernianent pool to water quality volume ratio, and an additional
temporary storage capacity greater than or equal to.the water quality volume. For wet basins to
be considered, the design water quality volume must exceed 123 cubic meters (O.I acre-foot).
The sizing of this treatment BMP is based on Water Quality Volume (WQV). The WQV is
determined by the 85"' percentile runoff capture ratio. This method is. described in the Urban
Runoff Management WEF Manual of Practice No. 23, J998 (WEF and ASCE, 1998). .
,
2.4.2.1 Site-Specific Detennination of Feasibility
General criteria used during the evaluation of Treatment BMPs. include relative effectiveness,
technical feasibility, costs and benefits, and legal and institutional consiraints.
. ,
Relative Effectiveness: A recommended BMP should generally demonstrate equal or greater
pollution control benefits than a design without any BMP. Effectiveness may be assessed in'
terms of specific pollutants of concern. For further information, see Section 15 of the BMP
Retrofit Pilot Project Final Report, California Department of Transportation, January 2004, and
con~ult with your District NPDES Coordinator, .
Technical Feasibility: A recommended BMP must be technically feasible. Caltrans must be
able to implement the BMP within the context of the state highway system. Feasibility also
includes health and safety concerns. BMPs that substantially increase the risk to Caltrans
workers or the public will be considered not feasible.
. .
Costs and Benefits: The pollution control benefits must have a reasonable relationship to the
costs. The costs and benefits analysis will consider the impacts to the receiving waters that are
being reduced or eliminated through implementing the BMP. '
Legal and Institutional Constraints: The recommended BMp. cannot compromise Caltrans
compliance with other laws. For example, Caltrans must provide drainage under roadways at
regular intervals to prevent water from accumulating up-gradient and threatening the integrity of
the roadbed and to limit encroachment of captured water on the traveled way. Caltrans cannot
legally block historic drainage patterns or systems (e.g., runoff from farmland).
Feasibility Assessment: The first step.in assessing the feasibility of incorporating a potential
BMP into a project is to gather the dilla needed to both determine the size and to estimate the
cost of that specific BMP. In addition, it should be determined whether the site characteristics,
particularly the soil characteristics, are appropriate (checklists are provided in Appendix E for
this purpose).
The second step is to determine the Water Quality Volume (WQv) that must be treated. (See
Section 2.4.2.2 for guidance.)
~ t:'+Caltrons Storm Water Quality Handbooks
.--. Project Planning and Design Guide
September 2002/April2003 Printi~g ,;
2-14
2004 Lawsuit Settlement
SECTID.TWO Best Management Practice Selection
Next, for all BMPs :-except GSRDsand traction sand traps, calculate the size of the proposed
BMP needed to treat the water quality volume (or flow). Use the procedures defined in Appendix
B under Infiltration Basins and Detention Basins to evaluate the appropriate BMP, giving proper
consideration to recovery zones, setbacks from structures, hydraulic head, and maintenance
access roads and ramps. In very small drainage areas; it.may be impractical to construct a BMP
to treat the resulting small WQV (or flow). For projects where the WQV for a specific BMP is
less than 123 cubic meters (m') '(0.1 acre-foot), infiltration devices and detention devices are not
cost effective, and should not be considered further.
Fo'r siting and evaluation criteria for all of the approved treatment BMPs, see Appendix B.
During the planning and design process, multiple project alternatives may be evaluated. If a
project requires the consideration of Treatment BMPs, yet the preferred alternative cannot
incorporate Treatment BMPs, then the designer should re-evaluate the other alternatives that may
provide greater opportunities for incorporating Treatment BMPs and reducing impacts to
receiving waters. This consideration of project alternatives shall be documented in the Storm
Water Data Report. If iUs ultimately found not feasible to incorporate Treatment BMPs within
the project, then the designer shall document the reasons in a technical report submitted to the.
RWQCB. This technical report must be submitted at a minimum of 30 days prior to
advertisem~nt of the project.
Sites requiring extraordinary plUmbing to collect and treat runoff (e.g., jacking operations under
a.highway, bridge deck collection systems, etc.) are considered infeasible due to their associated
costs and need not be considered. Sites requiring extraordinary features or construction
practices, such as retaining walls and shoring, may also be infeasible due to their associated costs !
relative to the cost of the BMP itself. Extraordinary plumbing, features, or construction practices
should be brought to the attention of the District/Regional NPDES Storm Water Coordinator for
consideration on a project-by-project basis.
If a BMP is too large to fit at a site, several options should be considered: (I) cooperation with
another jurisdiction contributing drainage to obtain sufficient additional space; (2), purchase of
additional land; and (3) installing a BMP that is smaller than what normal sizing procedures
would dictate, if agreeable .to .the R WQCB. Again, these are issues to be brought to the attention
of the District/Regional NPDES Storm Water Coordinator so that decisions can be made on a
project-by-project basis. .
2.4.2.2 Treatment BMP Use and Placement Considerations
Several factors must be considered to determine which BMPs are suitable for a given
application. Site-specific conditions can affect operations, maintenance, construction costs,
safety and aesthetics. The designer must determine if sufficient right-of-way is available for the
desired BMP, or if the benefits associated with a potential BMP justify the consideration of
acquiring additional right-of-way. '
The physical dimensions of a BMP may have an important bearing on the factors identified in
this section. The size of many BMPs is determiried by the amount of runoff the system will be
required to treat. The amount of, runoff is affected by the location, land use, drainage area, storm
I!I-caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks
r., Project Planning and Design Guide
September 2002lApril2003 Printing
2-15
2004.Lawsuit Settlement
\
\
\
\
\
i
r>=\
1
H
,e.
~ II '
~ \"'\ .
.i ~
~ 1"'
-':"1 ..\
-;''"
t"ll
"! lot
"""t
\ ,.
~
Q
:!'.
l
co
(
. I
, I
\\
~\
\-
~
,
.
'" \
~ 1
\
~
. \\
~
\\
\'
. ,\\\1
- \\\\
t'\' .
- \\\\
\~i
\1~
u\
Ui
n\
"
,
------ -
\\
\\ 1,\
\\\
i .l~ ; ;
\,\
\~i ~~ 1 \
\\\i l \\\ ;\ \\ '
'" \\\ t\~\\\\i ~ \ ..
t ~ \
" t
'l '" .
\ \
,)\
.~ ~
:t r
l ~\ \\\
, \\
If ;eS
i \~ M . tn\
~~. 'i' t! \\h
.il ..t \\\ .. \\ \\\\
IQ at ' \
\'
r )
~ ; ; ;
;;
...
e \~. , r
i ~l
.. Hi
0 ill
. , ll~
. . !'i\
. I
t
.-- . . .' .-. . ..' ..-
SEcnONTW 0 ' Best Management Practice Selection
intensity, topography, soil characteristics and the extent of impervious areas.' For the design of
infiltration or detention basins, the District's hydraulics staff should be consulted.
.Both storm volume and peak flow conditions must be considered in the' evaluation of runoff
conditions.. The "Design Storm" is the particular event that generates runoff rates or volumes
that the drainage facilities are designed to handle. Unlike flood control measures that are
typically designed to store or convey the peak volumes or flows of infrequent storm events;
Treatment BMPs are designed to treat the lower volume or flow of more frequent storm events.
The :-,olume or flows associatedwith the frequent events are commonly.referred to as the WQV
for BMPs designed based on volume, and Water Quality Flow (WQF) for BMPs designed based
on flow. Treatment BMPs are sized to accommodate" the WQF or WQV from the contributing
drainage area. Flows in excess of these values are diverted around or through the treatment
BMP. Methods for determining the WQV are generally tied to an analysis of rainfall depths
generated over 24-hour periods.
The WQV of Treatment BMPs is based on using anyone of the following methods:
. Where they are established, sizing criteria from the RWQCB or lobal agency (whichever
is more stringent) will be used; and \
. Where the RWQCB or. local agency does not have an established sizing criterion,
Caltrans will use one of the following methods:
Option I: The maximized detention volume determined by the 85'h percentile runoff
capture ratio. :rhis method is described in Chapter 5 . of the Urban Runoff
Management WEF Manual of Practice No. 23, 1998, published jointly by the Water
Environment Federation (WEF) and the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE). Designers should note,however, that the information presented in the WEF
manual cannot be directly, applied to Caltrans facilities because it is based on large
watersheds and oversimplified hydrologic data for' California. This method requires
the designer to assume a drawdown time. Any drawdown time between 24 and 72
hours can be used (the 24-hour limit provides adequate. settling and the 72-hour
maximum addresses vector concerns). A design tool (Basin Sizer) that uses data from
more than 700. California rainfall stations, has been created for Caltrans use. It is
available at htto://stormwater.water-orol!fams.com., A detailed description of the
method can also be found in: Guo, C.Y., and B.R. Urbonas (1996); "Maximized
Detention Volume Determined by Runoff Capture Ratio," Journat' of Water
Resources Planning and Management, v. 122, n. I, pp. 33-39.
Option 2: The volume of annual runoff based on unit basin storage WQV to achieve
80 percent or more volume of treatment based on the sizing methods provided in the
California Storm Water Municipal Best Management Practice Handbooks, published
by the California Storm Water Quality Task Force, March '1993. This method requires
the assumption of a' 40-hour drawdown time. A design tool has been created for
Caltrans use. It is available at htto://stormwater.water-orograms.com.
Alternatively, a WQV may be established by Caltrans subject to the review and approval of the
RWQCB if one of the following situations applies:
I!I-C~ltrans Stonn WalcrQuality Ilandbooks
.. Project Planning nnd Design Guide
September 2002lAprj] 2003 Printing
2-18
2004 L~wsuit Setticment
SEcnOITW 0 'r Best Management Practice Selection
. The site area is limited and cannot accommodate a Treatment BMP sized according to
the methods described in Options I or 2; or
. Sizing a Treatment BMP, using Options lor' 2 in areas of the State with significant
. annual precipitation results in excessively large treatment units.
The WQF is the primary design criteria used for various types of filtrati9n treatment control
devices under development. Caltrans, the SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs worked cooperatively
to establish these values. '
The following WQFs negotiated with the SWRCB and RWQCBs should be used as the basis for
designing the approved filtration-type treatment BMPs. Where there. are special circumstances or
conditions, the PE, the DistrictlRegional NPDES Storm Water Coordinator and the related
R WQCB should discuss the potential need for modification of the criteria on a case-by-case
basis.
In addition to designing for the WQF, the designer must also insure that the filtration treatment
device includes a bypass or an. overflow device to convey peak discharges from larger design
storms consistent with Section 861.3 of the Highway Design Manual.
. f(
The listed values of rainfall intensity would be used in the Rational Formula (Q=CiA) to estimate
runoff from areas that would discharge flow to the filtration treatment device. The resulting
runoff rate would be the design WQF to be used at any specific site., '. !
I. Region I (North Coast) - 0.56 centimeters/hour (cm/hr) (0.22 incheslhour ["/hr]) for
Siskiyou and Modoc Counties, 0.69 cm/hr (0.27 "/hr) for Trinity and, Mendocino
Counties and 0.91 crnlhr (0.36 "/ht) for Del Norte, Humboldt and Sonoma Counties.
2. Region 2 (San 'Francisco) - 0.51 cm/hr (0.20 "/hr) regionwide.
. I
3. Region 3 (Central Coast) - 0.56cm/hr (0.22 "/hr) for Santa Cruz County, 0.51 crnlhr
(0.20 "/hr) for Santa'Clara County, 0.46 cm/hr (0.18 "/hr) for San Benito, Monterey
and San Luis Obispo Counties and 0.66cm/hr (0.26 "/hr) for Santa Barbara County.
4. Region 4 (Los Angeles) - 0.51 cm/hr (0.20 "/hr) regionwide.
5. Region 5 (Central Valley) - 0.41 cm/hr (0.16 "/hr) for portions of Lassen and Modoc
Counties within the Region, all areas of Region below 305 meters (m) (1,000')
elevation north of and including Sacramento and Amador Counties and below 610 m
(2,000') elevation south of Sacramento and Amador Counties, and all elevations on
the west side of the Region (rain shadow side of the Coast Range). 0.51 cm/hr (0.20
"/hr) for elevations.in the Sierra Nevadas between 305 m (1,000') and 1,219 m
(4,000') in the north and between 610 m (2,000') and 1,219 m (4,000') in the south.
0.61 cm/hr (0.24 "/hr) for all elevations above 1,219 m (4,000') in the Sierra Nevadas.
6. Region 6 (Lahontan)':'
.a) Where there are.Iocation-specific requirements (Truckee River, East and We.st
Forks Carson River, Mammoth Creek, and Lake Tahoe), the WQF will conform
C+caltrans Stonn Water Quality Handbooks
.., Project Planning and Design Guide :
September 2002JApriI2003 Printing ~
2-19
2004 Lawsuit Settlement
SECTIOITW 0 Best Management Practice Selection
to the Basin Plan requirement for runoff from impervious areas. Where runoff
from pervious aieas contributes to the flow, to the treatment device, the WQF
value to be used will be' as specified in the following two items.
!.. .
. b) Other than as stated in item a), above, the WQF to be used for that portion of the
Lahontan Region including InyoCountY and areas southward will be 0.41 cm/hr
(0.16 "/hr). They.lQF to be used for pervious surface areas ~ithin the Mammoth
Creek watershed above 2,133 m (7,000) feet will be 0.41 cm/hr (0.16 "lhr).
.c) For all other areas of the Lahontan Region other than as' indicated in item a)
above, the WQF 'to be used will be 0.51 cmlhr (0.20 "/hr.) This includes pervious
surface areas of the Truckee River, Carson River East and West Forks and Lake
Tahoe Hydrologic units.
7. Region 7 (Colorado River) - 0.41 cm/hr (0.16 "/hr) regionwide.
8. Region 8 (Santa AnaRiver) -0.51 cm/hr (0.20 "/hr) regionwide.
9. Region 9 (San Diego) - 0.51 cmlhr (0.20 "/hr) regionwide.
2.4.3 Construction Site Best Management Practices
Construction Site BMPs are deployed during construction activities to reduce pollutants in storm
water discharges. Table C-I irt Appendix C is a matrix of approved Construction Site BMPs.
Additional information on design, placement, and applicability of Construction Site BMPs can
also be.found in Appendix C of this document, the Construction Site BMP manual, and Section 4
of the Guidelines. .
2.4.4 Mal.ntenance Best Management Practices
The Department currently stencils messages at storm' drain inlets located at highway facilities
such as park and ride lots, rest areas and vista points to assist in educating the public about storm
water runoff pollution. Additionally, all new inlets located within cities, towns, and
communities with populations of 10,000 or more, or within designated MS4 areas, shall be
stenciled when cOnstructed. Design Engineers should contact the District Maintenance Storm .
Water Coordinator to identify st!lncil types, specifications and details for projectS falling within
these areas.
-, I!I-caltrans 510nn Water Quality Handbooks
'If" Project Planning and Design Guide
September 2002/Apri1200J Printing
2-20
2004 Lawsuit Settlement
-~.;..
I.
f-
I
I
i
"
, ..
":':, ;
.">';
. .
') .
.,.
:"
:':!"l: .'
"
>, .,;'
, -,. ~
" " . ,
: ,I ,~i
,~'" ' .
.' "
.,
"
.'" ~
..,
>"'.
'I:'
>",'
,;.'.
.;. ".
" .,
"',,
'-1 :' ~': , :
:
'"1",-
~.,- :
I ATTACHMENT 6
I -
."
",",
"'. "'.\.
'>.
'EXISTINGOUTFALl. .
ERODING CHANNEL
EXISTING CONCRETE PIPE (ON END)
, ',< .. i " '
~-- . .
",/', "~"" ,'--:---:-'--'-" -;---...: -,..--- -
.(/" /I;;::'''~ - - , ........., '_
, '.'-'",'C'"....,, ., ., ""., r -"71 :.:. ""-'.__. :'
+l '/-.:%;~~ ''''>''1,;' "'I ,,,.0._.........
~ ~;).~)> ' " '."j." ~~~ ".' "
..'''/' "~:</""\~ f:'1.. .....
''i:<(; / // .~/':<<,<~<7-?:':J:.<(:/~?:-<J:0~ ol/ts
;/,~ / y. y/:;< 0:?\%';'~>t:: "7 .:J /~''>~-)>A~, 10 a
.. - . '0 '>.'- >0>~"" 1i'<-<-1(
. - - '''",'c/'. ~
CROSS SECTION'-"'> .
, .
APPROX, LIMITS OF EROSION
, , ',EXlSriNG.CONCRETEPji>doN ,END) ,
PLAN VIEW
EXISTING CONDITION
. ,EXISTING OUTF:~LL, '
ROCK:.RIP,-RAP. .
(SIZE BASED ON . FLOW) ,
,,',,' ~<~ ::"~;;:~ ~>.' <
, +I /",.f ~....>// '>/
, b - "~~.~'~
1.0' - ,- ~<<<<::<'" <':
, <///,. / ..
: "</--;,/'-:::""
,." ?; '~~');;:,~
CROSS SECTION
APPROX. LIMITS OF EROSION.
EXISTING CONCRETE PIPE
TO REMAIN (LESS DISTURBANCE)
1.1
, '.
. .', 'r:. .. ..PLAN, VIEW, "
.PROPOSED':'CONDITI'ON .
F"{o .. .
~l;'..'
o ^ .,
. .. " . ,~1i'<-<-k.:
: -',,"
.. .
NOTE: "'..'
'FINAL DESiGN'. SUBJECT TO
.APPROVAL ~TH,US DEPARTMENT
. OF FISH AND GAME.
, , ,.
OLJTF ALL.EXHIBIT:
UN.T.S..
ATTACHMENT 7
Evaluation and Recommendation for AariculturalBuffer for the Fair Oaks PUD
Prepared by firma
1.1 Purpose Statement and Range of Issues
The purpose of this report is to identify the appropriate agricultural buffer width and
characteristics to mitigate any potential impacts resulting from the juxtaposition of
residential dwellings on property adjacent to farmed land.
The basic responsibility of the lead agency (City) under CEQA is to ensure that the
approval and development of the proposed Fair Oaks residential project would not
create adverse impacts on either the residents, i.e noise, pesticide drift and dust
from farming activities, or on the long-term viability of the farming activity.
To determine if a potential is significant and would require mitigation significance
thresholds are typically used as follows:
. The impact would be significant if the effect of the project would result in
agricultural activities would be impaired to the extent that the farmland is removed
from agricultural production. .
. The impact would be significant if the proposed project does not meet the
normally accepted standards for agricultural buffers, which are intended to control
the following effects of farming activities to acceptable levels:
. Noise from farm machinery
. Dust from cultivation'practices
. Drift from pesticide application
The effects of the constituents, ofresidential runoff on farmland is not an issue in
this case because the residential runoff does not drain to farmland.
1.2 Consultant Experience
The consultant has, 25 years of experience in preparation of CEQA documents.
Environmental Impact Reports prepared by the consultant for projects adjacent to
farmland include agricultural impact analysis. and agricultural buffer evaluation .in
Nipomo, the Santa Maria Valley and the Santa Ynez Valley. '.
1.3 Regulatory Setting
The Role of the County Agricultural Commissioner
The San Luis. Obispo County Agricultural Commissioner has two functions
pertinent to this discussion: the formulation of agricultural buffer policy.for various
types of agricultural activities and the regulation of pesticide application in the
County. In the case of projects within incorporated boundarie5,the purview of the
Ag Commissioner is limited to pesticide regulation and not land use policy.
However, policy guidelines and standards formulated by the Ag Commissioner are
often applied to situations within or next to cities,
Fair Oaks Ag Buffer
January 2006
Page 1
Because the potential impact issues are generally similar in a variety of locales,
and even regions or nations, there is a high degree of similarity among these, and
not surprisingly even the Queensland,. Australia standards referenced in the
January 3 Planning Commission hearing for this project. This is because, local
factors notwithstanding, all such policies seek to deal with the same basic set of
issues: controlling noise, dust and pesticide drift so that the presence of urban
uses next to farmed land does not lead to a disincentive to continue to farm, due to
perceived or real health and safety hazards.
Pesticide ~egulation
The Agricultural Commissioner's Office regulates the use of pesticides within San
Luis Obispo County, primarily as the local enforcement agency of state laws and
regulations under the auspices of California Department of Pesticide Regulations.
The program includes the permitting and monitoring of pesticide and herbicide
applications on agricultural lands. .
The regulatory framework for pesticide use requires that the applicator contain drift
of pesticides and not create a health safety hazard, both on the agricultural land on
which the pesticides are applied and on surrounding properties. At the County
( Health Commission meeting of March 9, 1998, the San Luis Obispo Farm Bureau
presented data to show that 55 pesticide illness investigations were completed by
the County AgricultUl'al Commissioner from 1994 to 1997. Of these, 34 incidents
were from non-agricultural settings (landscape lise, etc.). Considering .that
agricultural operations have a significantly higher frequency and intensity of
applicatio[l than activities such as landscape maintenance, the relative incidence
of reported violations in the agricultural sector was shown to be low. At the Health
Commission hearing referenced above, the County Agricultural Commissioner
indicated that physicians who diagnose pestiCide exposure are required to notify
the County Health Departmenf for referral to the Agricultural Commissioner for
investigation. .
City of Arroyo Grande Ordinance 550
The City adopted Ordinance No. 550 amending the City Zoning Map and Municipal
Code to Create an Agricultural Overlay District of 1 00 foot in width around
agriculturally zoned properties in the City. The purpose of the 100 foot zone is to
establish agricultural buffers. The primary intent of this action is to preserve farm
and avoid land use conflicts that might lead to conversion of farm land to urban
use.
Section 16.12.170-E.2 of the Ordinance indicates that a buffer wider than 100 feet
is encouraged "but a decreased width may be allowed if it can be demonstrated
that a physical buffer exits (e.g. Arroyo Grande Creek)" that is adequate. Section
E.3 stipulates that the buffer must contain a 20 foot landscaped transition area
contiguous to an 80 foot buffer, totaling 100 feet, and that pedestrian access may
be incorporated in the 20 foot zone, implying that the zone is not intended to
exclude people for reasons of safety.
'Fair Oaks Ag Buffer
January 2006
. i
Page 2
1.4 Project Setbacks from Ag zone and Ag activities
The attached Exhibit shows the setback distances proposed from the residences
to both agricultural zoning and to actually farming activities.
. Setback from land zoned for agriculture
The Exhibit shows the ag buffer setback line stipulated by City zoning 100 feet
from residences to the property line of land zoned for agriculture. This setback
applies whether the ag zoned land is farmed or not. Five proposed residential units
are within the 100 foot setback line. However, in this case, the actual land that is,
or might be, farmed is 175 to 185 feet from the proposed units. This is due to the
intervening creek corridor and the orientation of the creek relative to the property
line from which the 100 foot setback is measured.
At the northeast corner of the proposed project a small area of 0.074 acres exists
on a piece of land between the project and the west bank of the creek. This small
area of land zoned for agriculture (because it is part of a larger parcel on both
sides of the creek) is highly unlikely to be considered an economically viable
agricultural unit because of its small size, the fact that it cannot be readily
accessed by agricultural equipment, and the fact that, unlike the east side of the
creek, soils on the west side are not prime agricultural soils. While it is remotely
conceivable that a "niche" crop farming operation could occur on this small piece
of land, the trend in niche crops is toward organically produced food crops or other
products such as flowers or lavender, both of which have very low pesticide needs.
Therefore, it appears the application of the. 100 foot setback on the' project
property in this area is not appropriate especially since the setback from actual
agricultural activities is over 175 feet in that area.
. Setback from agricultural activities to mitigate noise, dust and potential
pesticide exposure
The Exhibit shows that the project achieves a residential setback from the actual
area where farming activities occur of 175 to 185 feet. The County typically
requires a setback over 200 feet from irrigated row crops, with reductions for
buffer characteristics considered on a case-by-case .basis. The County policy
considers noise, dust and pesticide drift and recognizes that these factors vary by
type of crop, e.g. row crop, orchard, vineyard, range land.
The Queensland (Australia) Department of Natural Resources and Mines has
published guidelines for planning related to agricultural buffers. It is not known
from these materials what the regulatory framework is for licensing and monitoring
pesticide and controlling drift, however, we may assume they are similar to the
USA as the resulting setbacks are similar. The Queensland guidelines recommend
a site specific assessment that looks at the type of activity, the characteristics of
the residential lots, trees, etc, much the same as the ca5e-by-ca5e evaluation
noted above in this County.
Fair Oaks Ag Buffer
January 2006
Page 3
The guidelines identify a 130 foot setback to address dust and pesticide drift when
this setback is vegetated with trees and shrubs. The vegetation functions to
intercept dust and spray particles.
The vegetation has little capacity to absorb sound so the guidelines extend the
buffer to 200 feet for sound attenuation. The noise attenuation thresholds in the
guidelines are different than those used typically in CEQA documents. Seasonal
and short duration I episodic noise is typically not found to be a significant impact
in CEQA documents using the adopted noise standards such as those in the City
of Arroyo Grande Noise Element. These standards focus on daily day I night
averages or maximum intensity noise in a given time frame such as an hour or
less. Therefore, it is not certain that the noise levels from farm equipment would
warrant a 200 foot setback mitigation fo"r noise under CEQA in this case.
1.5 Proposed Agricultural Buffer Characteristics
The proposed project has a setback from agricultural activities and lands where
such activities might occur of 175 to 185 feet from 'the residences. This setback
distance appears to functionally exceed the 100 buffer requirement of City
Ordinance 550.
The effectiveness of this setback distance as a buffer is increased by the
intervening riparian corridor that has a width of about 100 feet of dense vegetation.
With the addition of landscape plantings in the existing path easement as
proposed, the width of vegetated buffer meets the Queensland guideline of 130 .
feet for a vegetated buffer.
The question was raised about the potential for project activities to start a fire that
would eliminate the vegetated buffer by burning the riparian vegetation, and if this
happened would the lack of a vegetated buffer lead to eventual disincentives to
farm lands across the creek. This scenario seems unlikely for a number of
reasons. First, the area is not in what would be considered a high hazard area,
prone to wildfires. In other words the hypothetical case of a resident igniting
irrigated landscape is unlikely. Second, in this urban setting with the fire station
less than a mile away it is unlikely that a fire would consume substantial areas of
riparian vegetation, nor is there a history of such incidents occurring. Third, the fire
would be unlikely to completely burn trees on both sides of the creek before being
controlled. The time it would take for a fire to consume trees on the west bank and
ignite fires on the east bank is well beyond the fire department response time.
Last, even if the vegetation were removed the hazard to the residences is not
automatic or immediate since the pesticide applicator is required by law to contain
drift. In any case, the vegetation would grow back and the effect is not permanent.
In the consultant's opinion, it is not likely that this scenario would lead directly to a
substantial disincentive to farm or a substantial public health hazard.
However, this notwithstanding, the landscape planting within the area between the
residences and the riparian vegetation could be designed using principles
Fair Oaks Ag Buffer
January 2006
Page 4
J
recommended by fire agencies to create low fuel zones. A low fuel zone is
intended to provide a reduction in vegetative'fuel between wildland vegetation and
residences. Typically this zone is 30 feet wide and has the following
characteristics:
~ Irrigation
. Low ground covers and clumps or widely separated taller shrubs
. Tree with canopies maintained at 6 feet above the ground.
These characteristics are generally inherent in the proposed landscape plan and
could be refined in the final plan to meet the parameters of a low fuel zone. The
County has an approved plant list to encourage use of drought tolerant plants. It
also identifies plants that resist fire and are suitable for ag buffers. Trees that have
a fire resistant characteristic include Coast Live 9ak and London Plan sycamore,
which are proposed on the project landscape plan. Coast Live Oak are identified
by the County as suitable for ag buffers also.
.I
1.6 Conclusion
The proposed project functionally exceeds City Ordinance 550 and closely
approximates the typical agricultural buffer requirements of the County and the
Queensland report. The presence of Arroyo Grande creek gre.atly increases the
effectiveness of the horizontal setback as a buffer and will be increased by the
project landscape ih the path easement. This factor appears to allow for
exceptions to the 100 foot rule provided in Ordinance section 16.12.170-E.2,
however the project exceeds the buffer requirement of the Ordinance.
Fair Oaks Ag Buffer
January 2006
Page 5
. ~,"
-.,
I I.
I _
!ATTACHMENT 8 I
. I ['
';,\
Arroyo Grande Comnitinity Hospital
+ "
CHW . .
,. , ~ '.
; ,,'
345 South Hakyon Road
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
(805) 489-4261 Telephone.
(805)473-7603 !ax ,.
" '.
Rob Strong, Plannhtg Director ';,.
do The City of Arroyo Grande,CA.
214 East Branch. '.
, . Arroyo Grande, CA. 93420 .
. RE:' Arroyo Grande Community Hospital future expansion .
J"
.
.R' ~c'r~".6~D".
~ ,_f~ ' ....~:!I!~ \'!:' .c"'.. , .
"" a.. ' (.. G ./ ,-", '
. { ,
, January 16,.2006
JAN ;, 7 2006. .'
CITY OF AR;(OYOG2.~.N::Jl:
COM"U"'1Y D~"~' 0-"-"-
I It' l'\l -~ ;;:v':... t'IYI~...d
.. -.
,. Dear Rob,
. '
Mr~ Gary Young, of Central Coast Real Estate Development Company (CCRED) has
, ,. requested that this follow up letter be sent to the City Planning Department regarding our
"Hospital Facilities Pl~" with additiorial information as it relates to the "Vesting Tract
"Map" application as submitted by the joint applicants.
- ,-'
. .
.. '
Over the past nine months we h~ve beenworkmg ~ith CCRED to~certain the future
.needs of our surrounding community and how Arroyo Grande Community Hospital can .
, better serve our medical staff and other related medical specialties at our Arroyo Grande
facility. Prior to the purchase by Catholic Healthcare West, a conimunity needs. .."
assessment was performed. Results from this assessment are being used to plan our
. futUre, both as it relates to the South County and the Central Coast.. Additionally, during. . .
this time period, the staff of Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and Catholic ,',
.. Healthcare West have been working with the local medical community and other specific
specialists and related support facilities operators to directly target those medical
. specialties which have been identified as a need in our community. This phase of our
planning is continuing and is still a work in process, Time is neededto ensure we plan
appropriately. . ,
, Currently the hospital facility, mclusive of all building and temporary structures, is
approximately 40,000 square feet. . In our initial meetings for the development of a future
.site plan we estimate our facility size needs to be approximately 80,000 square feet. As
we proceeded on the site plan through the development process we realized that the'
. , opportunity was available for additional square footage, due to the overlay zoning. .
granted to us by the City two years ago, and we. then started the revisions to the site plan
which now give us the flexibility to increase the current size of our facility by 300%. .
"Throughout the process we have constantly had 100% support of Mr. Young and his staff
.'. . which have dedicated hundreds of hours of time for site plan revisions, including
,.. coordination with all necessary sub-consultants on our behalf.
. .,::,
;'1
~"'."
'j'
,,;
,,_J,.
..:'
,
;"
,"i,. -
,,'
, " ; - ~
. A Member of Catholic Healthcare'West.
,..1
. :'
''',- I
. .....-.,
U' ,
..
, ,,-;,. ~.
. .
,.
"
__'.~L~' . ;.
.{
'.
.,\::'-," '.,,~.'
"",
~;
,. ~'
,.
.i. ,-
" )~
"-,'
,: During the pl;mningprocesswe have attended~taif Advisory Committ~iri~ting~ (2)", i
, Architectural Review Committee meetings (2), Planning Ccmmission meetings and a "
pre-application hearing with the City Council. At these meetings we affrrffiedthat the
proposed potential of 120,000 'square feet of Medical Officespace in this vesting tract .
map provides for the future of our healthcare center here in Arrcyo Grande:.' Jointly:'!'"
'. .> develcping the property withCCRED and Mr. Ycung' will allow us toccntinue tc plan '.
for the future while keeping otir needed fmancial rescurces directed at cur primary goal. ., .
.of fmancially stabilizing .the medical center today; Althqughthe '.'Hcspital Facility Plan';
for our site is conceptual at this point in time, it does provide us with theniaximum' ...
flexibility tc assess our community medical needs and build accordingly i1l the future:
.,
.' ~'
~"" ,
"
We appreciate the City's concern about our future and the assistance in the acquisition .of
. this potential expansion site; respectfully we request that the Vesting Tentative Tract Map ...,
be approved as. soon as .possibletcallow us to continue cur planning process with . " ,
CC~D. . ....
""
'J;:
, ~, .
. Bestregards, .~~.
. /l;J, ~.' CA::J
"
Richard A: Castro
President
""t
>:'
...!'
<,..,
" ".'.'
" ~..'-.:- ,;'
", ~
,;,
.'
'-;':
.,'
.f ,.,
"-. '
;j,:',);-:;..
i,
1\
,'"
"
./,
".,>"
""'-1
,
,,"
-t",. ...'. ,_
, S.',
..,....
"
-, ,
", "
-, ,::
'.~- .e'
':'.;'
,.
<,Co,
. ,~
:. >.
. ~- .
\~-' .
"'.^ .,'
, ~.
,yo
;". -
"
;'.
"",
.. .
,.,
~,,-; ,
','
.,
.'~ ,,;
/
,
, .'..
" ",-
..'..,
o. ,.
. ".
:~
-j.
.'./
,""
~.;,,":"
"-'I '". '.
ATTACHMENT 9
;
I
, I
/ I
,
STORAGE VOLUME /
INFILTRATION
CALCULATIONS
Fair Oaks Mixed Use Project,
Arroyo Grance, CA
February 28, 2006
By:
(])esigns group, Inc.
7050 jltascad"ero jlvenue
jltascaaero, C;t 93422
805462-5960, Pa:(805462-8191
Storage Volume I Infiltration Calculations:
~aults:
Size: 10 feet wide x 20 feet long
Depth: Assume 6 feet
Volume Detained: Length X Width X Depth
1,200 cubic feel
Number of Vaults: 2
Total Volume Detained: 2,400 cubic feet
Infilltation occurs over 800 SQuare feet (4 vaults!
Porous Pavers:
Size: All of driveway and parking areas. = 20,000 sf
Depth: 9 inches (0.75 feet)
Porosity: Use n=O.32
Volume Detained: Area X Depth X n
4,800 cubic feet
tnfilt1ation 'occurs over 20,000 square feet
It is the opinion of this office that the porous paver system is the superior design.
3.3.8 Modular Porous Pav.er Systems
, Umited Application
StructuralSlonnwats, Control
'-"i:::;':;
'" '-:"C-'
· . RWONHOR UMITED USE. ..
DescriPtion: A pavement surface
composed of structural units with void
areas that are filled.with pervious
materials such as sand or grass turf.
Porous pavers are installed over a
gravel base course that provides
storage as runoff infiltrates through the
porous paver system into underlying
permeable soils.
. :::,!.,.;.;;;;-'
<";',
, ,,-,,-.":".' ...'-.'..' ..,........'.....'....,-....' "'"''"'':'''''-'''
-Intended for low trafflC'areas, or for residential oroverllow
parking applications ,'... ' ..
- Higli:maintenanee requirements
;','-;;-:'"';.:''',.,.'''
: ',:';:C:C:',"-;,,-
.,..,. ... ......... ................,,-.
~:' SOil'iriiiltration.i'ale of 0.5 inlhr or greater required, ,.
- Hi9h'IeveI.Of pollutant removal .' .:' .,'
.. ProVidesreductkiri.in runoff volume ".. . .
- .High:<:osl.compared toco!iventional pavementS. .:..
- . pOlentiarf!lr high failu~,f!ltll;ifnol adequately!l'liintained or
used'in unstabllized areas. , .; .,. .
. POtentiarror groundwaterconlamination
,- AVailatlle.frOm conimeicial'yendors
KEY CONSIDERATIQNS.
'0, ",. .~;.\. ,
,...._, ',';
,-,,, ...-'-......,_.._,
.Ll-ffljtJ:P~j{,'i~::j,
: ~:~i!::t1:~::~1f,;:,~'t;::i;" i ". .,"
i;"
3.3.8.1 General Description
Modular porous pavers are structural units, such as concrete blocks, bricks, or reinforced plastic
mats, with regularly interdispersed void areas used to create a load-bearing pavement surface.
The void areas are filled with pervious materia.ls (gravel, sand, or grass turf) to create a system
that allows for the Infiltration of stormwater runoff. Porous paver systems provide water quality ,
benefits in addi~on to groundwater recharge and a ,eduction in stormwate, volume. The use of
porous paver systems results in a reduction of the effective impervious area on a site.
There are many different types of modular porous pavers available from different manufacturers.
including both pre-cast and mold in-place concrete blocks, concrete grids, interlocking bricks, and
plastic mats with hollow rings or hexagonal cells (see Figure 3.3.8-1).
Modular porous pavers a,e typically placed on a gravel.cstone aggregate) base course. Runoff
infiltrates through the porous paver surface into the gravel base course, which acts as a storage
reservoir as it exfiltrates 10 the underlying soil. The infiltration rate of the Soils in the subgrade
must be adequate to support drawdown of the en~re runoff capture volume within 24 to 48 hours.
Special care must be laken during construction 10 avoid undue compaction of the underlying
soils, which could affect the soils' infiltration capability.
Volume 2 (Technical Handbook)
.""....---.-
Stormwoter N\anagernent IIAOnual 3.3-41
Modular porous paver systems are typically used in low-traffic areas such as the folfowjng types
of applications:
· Parking pads in parking . lots
. Overflow parking areas
. Residential driveways
. Residential street parking lanes
. Recreational trails
. Golf cart and pedestrian paths
. Emergency vehicle and fire access lanes
A major drawback is the cost and complexity of modular porous paver systems compared to
conventional pavements. Porous paver systems require a very high level of construction
workmanship to ensure that they function as designed. In addrtion, there is the difficulty and cost
of rehabilitating the surfaces should they become clogged. Therefore, consideration of porous
paver systems should include the construction and maintenance requirements and costs.
3.3.8.2 Pollutant Removal Capabilities
As they provide for the infiltration of stormwater runoff, porous paver systems have a high
removal of both soluble and particuiate pollutants, where they become trapped, absorbed or
broken down in the underlying soil layers. Due to the potential for clogging, porous paver
surfaces should not be used for the removal of sediment or other coarse particulate pollutants.
The following design pollutant removal rates are conservative average pollutant reduction
percentages for design purposes derived from sampling data, modeling and professional
judgment.
. Total Suspended Solids- not applicable
. Total Phosphorus - 80%
. Total Nitrogen - 80%
. Fecal Coll10nn - Insufflclent date
. Heavy Metals - 90%
3.3.8.3 Design Criteria and Specifications
-
.. Porous paver systems can be used where the. underlying in-situ subsoils have an infiltration
rate of between 0.5 and 3.0 inches per hour. Therefore, porous paver systems are not
suitable on sites with hydrologic.groupO or most group C soils, or soils with a high (>30%)
claY,content. During construction and preparation of the subgrade, special care must be
taken to avoid compaction of the soils. '
. Porous paver systems should typically be used in applications where the pavement receives
tributary runoff only from imperviOUS areas. The ratio of the contributing impervious area to
the porous paver surface area should be no greater than 3:1.
. If runoff is coming from adjacent pervious areas, it is important that those areas be fully
stabilized to reduce sediment loads and prevent clogging of the porous paver surface.
. Porous paver systems are not recommended on sites with a slope greater than 2%.
. A minimum of 2 feet of clearance is required between the bottom of the gravel base course
and underlying bedrock or the seasonally high groundwater table.
. Porous paver systems should be sited at least 1 0 feet downgradient from buildings and
100 feet /May from drinking water wells. .
Vofume2 (Technical Handbook)
3.3-42
~tormwoter Management MOl1ual
· An appropriate modular porous paver should beselecled for the intended appUcation, A
minimum of 40% of the surface area should consist of open void space. If it is a load bearing
surface; then the pavers should be able to support the maximum load.
. The porous paver infill is selected based upo,n the intended appUcation and required
infiltration rate. Masonry sand (such as ASTM C-33 concrete sand or GAOOT Fine
Aggregate Size No. 10) has a high. infiltration rate (8 inlhr) and should be u~ in appUcations
where no vegetation is desired. A sandy loam soil has a substantially lower infiltration rate
(1 in/hr), but will provide for growth of a grass ground cover. .
. A 1-inch top course (filter layer) of sand (ASTM C-33 concrete sand or GAOOT Fine
Aggregate Size No. 10) underlain by filter fabric is placed under the porous pavers and above
the gravel base course.
. The gravel base .course should be designed to store at a minimum the water quality volume
(WQ,). The stone aggregate used.should be wast\ed, bank-run gravel,1.5to 2,5 inches in
diameter with a void space. of about 40% (GAOOT NO.3 Stone). Aggregate contaminated
with soil shall not be used. A porosity value (iIoid spaceJtolal volume)of 0.32 shOuld be used
in calculations.
. The gravel base course must have a minimum depth of 9 inches. The following equation can
be used to determine if the depth of the storage layer (gravel base course) needs to be
greater than the minimum depth:
d=V/.A.n
Where:
d = Gravel layer pepth (feet)
V = Water Quality Volume -or- Total Volume to be Infiltrated
A = Surface Area (square feet)
n = Porosity (use n=0.32)
. The surface of the subgrade should be Uned with filler fabric or an 8'inch layer of sand
(ASTMC-33 concrete sand or GAOOT Fine Aggregate Size No. 10) and.be completely flat to
promote infiltration across the entire surface.
. Porous paver system designs must use some method to convey larger. storm event flows to
the conveyance system, One option is to use storm drain inlets set slightly above the
elevation of the pavement. This would allow for some ponding above the surface, but would
accept bypass flows that are too large to be infiltrated by the porous paver system, or if the
surface clogs.
. For the purpose of sizing downstream conveyance and structural control system, porous
paver surface areas can be assumed to be 35% impervious. In addition, credit can taken for
the runoff volume infiltrated frOm other impervious areas using the methodology in
SeCtion 3.1.
Volume 2 (Technical Handbook)
. Sformwafet Management Manual 3.3.43
3.3.8.4 Inspection and Maintenance Requirements
Table 3.3.11-1 Typical Ma.intenance Ac1Ivltiesfor Modular Porous. Paver Systems
., . Ensure that the porous paver surface is free of sediment.
. Check to make sure that the s stem dewaters between storms.
. Ensure that contributing area and porous paver surface are clear of
debris.
. Ensure lhatlhe contributing and adjacent aree is stabilized and mowed,
with clippings removed. .
Monthly
As needed, based on
inspection
. Vacuum sweep porous paver surface to keep free of sediment.
Typically three to four
times a year
. Inspect the surface for deterioration or spelling.
. Totally rehabilitate the porous paver system, including the top and base
course, as needed.
Annually
Upon failure
3.3.8.5 Example Schematic~
Figure 3.3.8-1 Examples of Modular Porous Pavers
Concrete Paver Block
Lattice Block .
3.3-44
Stormwater Management Manual
i,,-
Castellated Block
Grass I Gravel Paver Mat
Volume 2 (Technical Handbook)
Modular Porous Pavers
(81lea8l4O% void space)
~~!~.~.~.~.~u~.~.~
~:W;.% :i~~~~:~;~.t~:~~~:.~~;~~r~f~~.f:~~t~~.~~~~;~~~;;.~f;~;~;~;III;m;~;~~:.~~;~t;
'd:'l.1.."'tt....~"t...~~~~~..~~":t~..,~~~,'
~ t'~~~;::n:-.::.!UJ:.f~1:flj~1:f:f;ttnn.fu::rn;;fn;l1',;H}~1t~)f}f~
!"~~ ~,~.:" .:".:".'='.!, ~ '='.. '=',,:" ~ ~;:"~:"~:";!' ~:"'~!'~ '='.!, ~ :".:"~!'~!';.!' ~!' ~'.!'~!'..!'.!' .:"~ ~~.!' ~!' ~ '! ..:"~!' ~- -'
.-...'.'.-.'-..'.-'..-.-...-.',-.--'.-'.-..'-'.-....',,--.-.'..'.'.'.'-..'....'-'.-.-.'.'.'...-'.-'.'-...'..
".-'.'.".".'.'.'.-'.-.'.".-'.-'.".'-'.,,'.'-'.".'.'..'..'.'.'........-'.-.'.""-'.'.'..'.'......."'-'.'
~ ~ ~'~ ~~!':;~-~!~'!'_~!'~-!' ~!,;!' ~ !'~!'; !'~!':;~-~~:~!"~! ~ ~ ~:!':; '!' ~:!~ !; !'~!',~!";!';~~-~;!' ~ ."~ !' ~!' ~! ~ ~'; !'~-
!'; ~'~ ~ ~ ~,~!; !,~ !',~ !'-~!' ~ ~;~; !:;!' ;!; ~~!; !';!,~!' ;!~.!'~ ~;.!' ;!~!~.!'~!'; !'~!';.!' ~!';.!';!' ;!;!'~.!'~!:~-
...'..-.'......-.....:-...'.-,..-.....,.'.'.,.,',.".:""'.'.'....'..','...'..'-:.:-.'..:...,.-.'.:..'.'....'.'
-...-...-..-...-.-.......-...-.-.-...-..."'...'...'-...'.--'.'...-......'.-.'..-'.'.'.'.'..'.'.
.....-..'...."'.'-.'....'-.'-'.'-'.'..'-'....'..-.-.:-,.:.:....'...,.'-.'"....:..'..'"'..'..'.','..-.'..-..'..
~!';!' ~ !' ~-!' ~'!'~ '!"; !' ~!';!; ~; '..-~.!';.!' ; !;!"; !';..!'~ !' ~!'; ~;,~;:!'~ '!'~!' ;!"~,!'~!'; ~'~ :~~-~;~--~:!,;'!,;~;!,~!,--;:.!"
..'.....-.-'.'-.-.'-.-'.-.'..'..-.-...'.'-.-....-'.'-.-'...-..'.-'..'..-'..."....'+'.-.-'..'.'-.-'.'.....-..
....'...,.:-..,...'.',............-..'...'..'..:-,....'.:-,...',...:.....-...'-'.,...'.'-,.:.,.-.:....'-'.-..'..-'...'.
:. !':~;:.!':!":;.!':!"-:!':.-";:.~:.-!:!":-"::!':!":.!':.!":.:-":.!":!':~.:!':!.:.-!':!"':'!':!':!'':'!'':'!,:-''::'~:!:'!:-''':'!':'!''
Top Course
(sand, 1 Inch thick)
FIIlar Fabric
Base Course
(gravel, minimum
9 Inchss thlclc)
.:<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
"~<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~.
v.::~ ;,;;: ~ :.z.~...... ~~. <<..z 'V:: v. .;t......
FIIlar Fabric
UndlsturlJed
. Soil
Figure 3.3.8-2 Modular Porous Paver Systllm Section
r
S
ModularIllGck
PawSP_.
_Lene
SwaIe
\ V
~.
=
,,:. / Y'="
-~~Ik>Kd "~..,_ V
Pa1ierilenl . PawS Pawaoeod
SECTIONA.A' .
S'
-_.
PGnlusPa-.w
SECTION 8 - 8'
PARI<lNO LOT
--
~~Stope{optlanal) 1:\ ~
\ -....- ,
PGnlusPawmenl
SECTION C. C'
PARI<lNO LOT
Figure 3.3.8-3 Typical Modular Porous Paver System Applications
(Source: UOFCO, '999)
Volume 2 (Technical Handbook)
~ lormwater Management Manual 3.3-45
Figure 3.3;8-4 Examples of Porous Paver Surfaces
(Sou,ces: Invisible Structures. Inc.; EP Henl)' Corp.)
3.3-46
Stormwoter Management Manual
Volume 2 (Technlcol Handbook)
StOrmTrapiAl
bttp:Ilwww.slOlm1lllp.oom/prodiIds.h1
lofl
2/2812006 3:52 PM
...~ ",,-,
;
,
;;<
or.,-
:;.Os..::I. :...
., .,.-",<.
.,:..s.:6
.,.-;c:: "
".'Z )>
, :::l ';,r
.:~:.<~
::;'1'.0 .
m",OO<
..;?liO
r:--tcn
:,0'~
"";~t
i'S_
m,.",
~'~m
-<",
""
.1;:-
"
"'- ~
,
,
i
:.1.'
~, ,..,
~,'""
i.
l"
.,
I,
r.,"
r
(,
i,
, ,
,
r
r..
I'
.\
[
.i.
~.
j.<'
"i,.
.r.....
<;"''''''';
.,
< ~1
't......
:1>.
"2
jo>~'
~"
",.
=.
.=
CT,)'
.j
,. .:
l'tI'
.~~'~~.
'0.10
m ",: _
U\ '-JI'
5 il.:t .
-0 'i> m
7'. z '0.
Z"'C
G\'-~o
,~~
., U\ },::,
'-1'71
'z.
o
.~'
I
(p
()
.C'
Z
I;)
)>
...~
'.
'._,.
~l.,
. or-
i~~'~-~ ..---"------.1
ATTACHMENT 10 J
:
.1'
.,
.;\~'-,
:/,
."
.1
,'j
}
,
.j
I
'-::I
:!
'I
I
'.
:.
",
\
~. -
.'
""
~l'
.;'
.. -
I
'I
1
\.J
'.'."l
:'t'~~1
';"~
,
"',Co
..,
.!
.,!
.j
,~'
.,
'.1
.....,,::.;.j
';1
."',." l
'.i~
~"J
11
.: '-1
~~:. '<~
~ .'.
''.''...
'J,;
.,'
.~" .
:~
"
l
';1
.'1
j
,;
" ,~~
.;.:;
.j
r
"
,
-,
".,'
"e,.
-'0:
"''''
,.
.,
.,""-
~'. .. ---.. .
"... :<:.~. ',.rit". '..,...
.,", ,.. '.~
;., <~:\T}'~
.'2~:!
lL~ ro
,z':uc
G)')>~l,
,:~,:i!
.ID.""-'
",-"..r...
:-t': '"'-';.
z.
G
:~~.
OJ
G
E
Z
e
~.'
\[r;"....~~~
, I" _. _~..
-~'--.....
.~ "~,..'"':..,~,,r_"",
i:,.,' ':"-';;'--:~'("<'
I; Yi-;~ "
t.~
\, 'O"m:.'
.!" '. 9~1
I ,$;;,
t:.:. ~;~.I~..
I ';.", '::;'r~.
t' ":~bo'
i'. t7iO
i "m~."-<
';;;\9
.5Gl
.'l~
.me
Zm
:-t
,~ "
< ~ , ~-
1..--'),
"
k
I:
! '.
k'
):"
'.
,..
1"'
'?-\,,'
>:"
.,
,},
r
i
t'..,:
t .~
I"
j'
, .,....
'..
'<-
l>r
.Z.' ,
~
~"'
~N
'(:::)
.-c."
<,0')
,_.y
''''ow;
..~iT,...-:-:-
;:b..
m
0"
nTIt
::<
,m
"lI"'=9I.'
'~
.'
"'~""<,
-~.< ::
..-
.~
",'.
".
~ .'
.,
~" .
"
V.
;It
ji1:,
CIl.
'~~-
{}.
,.
'''."
, .
~ .~'
-.
. .
,.,
'J,'
,;1!;~,~~};~~; "_
\ ',i/i-r1! :l~' t.
~:t">~i.;H' i:'t'i:
l..~ t . '!, '
il:'I';\lI';
.i'Et+";;OL '
~.Ci\~'-~~;~ .
t".,.~ j..i~'r".
~;,."ll;'.,
t~'3.i-ni;G
~~/, ~;,h"~,~
'I' rt~ ;~.;,i5~'
I..",
: i:~i<j
"'.,
. '.",'~
.
'-'.':,,,
,'.
. ,~
"-'
.
'..
......
';
,
, ,,: ~".l,
"i~ .
.:.;1),'
.,"-'
.;
:. r
'....
,.
",:,\
,.~.
,
.,
:.,
'",.,
'""'. ;[-1
, .j
,~".... '.1 ..
",.~'::-:.'., .
i
:,:;,.-,
" "I'
e;,
J1:
~"
('\
Ul
0.,
'~i'.
.'.
.'.;
-:",'J
i
,I
J
.'j
!
..
.,.
,.".,
,
..J
" j
i
"'I
,.
.,
,:1
'."ii
-,,-i'l
,.~. S 0"
:J
. ~..I
,p . I
. ~~c-~-..?~~.,~'~~;;~
.\ '" - ,.,'->".:!'
';- - '-', ,. ' ~,.;,.
>>.."..'.1.1
',~. . .
-'\}
,
,.
~'
"
..
.,
...
...,...'
, '~'.
, ,
"
',,;-
" <I'
,
-
. ,
'-:'~--'-'-~-~'~i^'~'-'~~-.~.
"1,
.,"
,. . ~e ..
'>
_.:'
_._~.......;..~--
,.......;L~.'
'~-"
.'
"'
e>._
9.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: lU ,KELLY HEFFERNON, ACTING COMMUNITY
DIRECTOR
RYAN FOSTER, ASSISTANT PLANNER~
DEVELOPMENT
BY:
SUBJECT: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF
PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF PLOT PLAN REVIEW 05-008; 230
STATION WAY
DATE: MARCH 14,2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution, denying the appeal
and upholding the Planning Commission's denial of Plot Plan Review 05-008.
FUNDING:
No fiscal impact.
DISCUSSION:
Backoround
The Community Development Director tentatively approved Plot Plan Review 05-008 on
August 9, 2005. This approval was reported to the Planning Commission at its meeting
of August 16, 2005, at which time the Commission determined that approval of the
project should be considered at a public hearing.
The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting of October 4, 2005
(Attachment 1), at which time the project was denied due to the Planning Commission's
inability to make the findings required to approve a plot plan review (these findings are
reflected in the attached Resolution).
The applicant then filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Plot Plan
Review 05-008 on October 14, 2006. The appeal was scheduled for City Council review
on January 24, 2006 and continued to this date at the request of the appellant.
Proiect Location
The project site is the Village Creek Promenade, which is adjacent to the Village Creek
Plaza. Both developments are within the Village Mixed-Use (VMU) zoning district, which
allows residential uses in conjunction with allowed office/commercial uses through
approval of a minor use permit.
5:ICOMMUNITY _ DEVELOPMENTlPROJ ECT5IAPLI05-006IAPL_05-006_ CC _RPT _2.doc
CITY COUNCIL
APPEAL 05-006
MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 2 OF 4
Proposed Proiect
The proposed project consists of adding two (2) second-floor apartments in an existing
two-story building located at 230 Station Way. The building was originally approved for
office/commercial use on the ground floor only, with a second-floor storage area as part
of the Village Creek Promenade. The conversion of this storage space into apartments
would not affect the exterior of the building; however, there are several interior
improvements that would have to be made in order for the project to comply with the
Uniform Building Code (UBC).
Due to the nature of the intended use of the ground floor (dialysis center), the project
would have to meet strict occupancy separation standards. This separation can be
accomplished with modification of the ceiling/second-floor assembly and therefore this
requirement would not in and of itself preclude the addition of two second-floor
apartments to the existing building.
Parkinq
The Village Creek Promenade and Village Creek Plaza share a reciprocal access and
parking agreement that has been in place since 1986. At that time, the Village Creek
Plaza, consisting of two (2) parcels (Parcel 1 - Video Choice/Post Office, Parcel 2 -
Miner's Ace Hardware) was developed with a total of 29,595 square-feet of floor space-
Parcel 1 included 9,995 square-feet of floor space and sixty-nine (69) parking spaces
while Parcel 2 was developed with 19,600 square-feet of floor space and fifty (50) parking
spaces. An additional thirty (30) parking spaces were provided on Parcel 3, but no
buildings were constructed at that time.
It is important to note that in 1986, the Development Code required 1 parking space for
every 200 square-feet of office/commercial space, whereas in 1991, the Development
Code was amended to require 1 parking space for every 250 square-feet of
office/commercial space. When the Village Creek Promenade was approved in 1998
with a total of 27,350 square-feet of office/commercial space, an additional eighty-two
(82) parking spaces were added to the existing thirty (30) spaces for a total of 112
spaces. At that time, the City determined that although the two developments were
required to share access and parking, there is nothing that requires any parcel to allocate
a specific number of parking spaces to any other parcel. The following table illustrates
the current parking requirement for each parcel:
Parcel Building Size Existina Parkina Reauired Parkina Difference
Video Choice/Post Office 9,995 69 40 + 29
Miner's Ace Hardware 19,600 50 78 - 28
Anderson 27,350 112 110 +2
Total 56,945 231 228 +3
The proposed project would require an additional four (4) parking spaces, resulting in a
deficiency of two (2) parking spaces in the Village Creek Promenade (Anderson). The
Development Code does allow for up to a 20% parking reduction for mixed-use projects;
5:\COMMUNITY _DEVELOPMENT\PROJECT5IAPLI05-006IAPL _05-006_ CC_RPT _2.doc
CITY COUNCIL
APPEAL 05-006
MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 3 OF 4
the proposed project would require a 1.75% parking reduction. Staff has received a letter
from Mr. Mike Miner opposing any such parking reduction (Attachment 2).
Community Development Director Approval
The Community Development Director tentatively approved Plot Plan Review 05-008
based on the following required findings for approval:
Mixed-Use Projects
1. The mixed uses are consistent with the general plan and are compatible with their
surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with each other.
Mixed-use is aI/owed in the Village Core (VC) as described in the Land Use
Element of the General Plan. The proposed residential use is compatible with the
surrounding office/commercial uses - neither use is anticipated to have a negative
impact on the other; in fact, their peak hours of use tend to compliment each other,
with the office/commercial portion utilized primarily during weekdays and the
residential portion utilized primarily during nights and weekends.
2. The design protects the public health, safety, and welfare.
The design will comply with aI/ uac requirements for separation of occupancy,
thereby protecting the public health, safety and welfare.
3. The mixed uses provide greater public benefits than single-use development of the
site. This finding must enumerate those benefits, such as proximity of workplaces
and housing, automobile trip reduction, provision of affordable housing, or other
benefits consistent with the purposes of this section.
The site is currently developed with only office/commercial uses, adding a
residential component would provide a greater public benefit than the existing
uses by adding rental units to the City's housing stock, which the Housing Element
seeks to encourage. Additional/y, the residential use would be in close proximity
to numerous services in both the Village and surrounding areas, which may
reduce the use of automobiles by the residents.
Plot Plan Review
1. The proposed project is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and
programs of the Arroyo Grande general plan;
The proposed project site is located in the Village Mixed Use (VMU) zoning district
and designated as Village Core in the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
Several policies contained within the General Plan promote mixed use, such as
5:\COMMUNITY _DEVELOPMENTIPROJECT5IAPL \05-006IAPL_ 05-006_ CC _ RPT _2.doc
CITY COUNCIL
APPEAL 05-006
MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 4 OF 4
LU6-4 (Village Core), which states, "...upstairs apartments are encouraged in
conjunction with ground-floor commercial uses. "
2. The proposed project conforms to applicable performance standards and will not
be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare;
While the development was not designed to include residential uses, it does
include adequate open space and parking (with allowed reduction), and the
proposed units will not be adversely affected by existing lighting or ambient noise
levels beyond what other residential developments are exposed to.
3. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood.
The physical location of the use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood
and will have access to adequate amenities and public selVices.
Plannina Commission Denial
When the Planning Commission reviewed Plot Plan Review 05-008, it focused on two
main issues:
. Incompatibility of uses; and
. Parking impacts
These two issues precluded the Commission from making all of the required findings for
approval, as outlined in the attached Resolution.
Although the final vote was 4-1 for denial, Commissioner Ray has submitted a letter
explaining that she mistakenly voted with the majority to deny the project, and although
her vote cannot be changed, the record should reflect this error (Attachment 3).
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration:
1. Adopt the attached Resolution, denying the appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission's denial of Plot Plan Review 05-008; or
,2. Do not adopt the attached Resolution, tentatively uphold the appeal and direct
staff to return with a supporting Resolution; or
3. Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission minutes from October 4, 2005 meeting
2. Letter from Mr. Mike Miner
3. Letter from Commissioner Ray
S:ICOMMUNiTY _DEVELOPMENnPROJECT5IAPLI05-006IAPL_05-006 _ cc _RPT _2.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE DENYING APPEAL 05-006 AND
UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
PLOT PLAN REVIEW 05-008; 230 STATION WAY
WHERAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande adopted a Resolution
denying the application for Plot Plan Review 05-008 at a hearing on October 4, 2005 in
accordance with the Municipal Code of the City of Arroyo Grande; and
WHERAS, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny
the application for Plot Plan Review 05-008 on October 14, 2005; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered this appeal at a
public hearing on March 14, 2006 in accordance with the Municipal Code of the City of
Arroyo Grande; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study and deliberation, that the following
circumstances exist:
Mixed-Use Projects
1. The mixed uses are consistent with the general plan and are compatible
with their surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with each other.
While the proposed mix of uses are compatible with the General Plan,
they are not compatible with each other. Specifically, the site was
developed exclusively for commercial and office use, and there are no
provisions for residential amenities, such as usable open space. The
existing open space areas were designed for decorative purposes only,
and would be unlikely to be utilized by residents. Furthermore, there is no
opportunity to add other forms of open space, such as balconies or roof
decks due to the design of the existing building, in which the proposed
residences are to be located.
Plot Plan Review
2. The proposed project conforms to applicable performance standards
and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare;
The proposed project would not conform to applicable performance
standards regarding lighting and noise. The proposed project would be
located on the second-floor of and existing two-story office buildiilg
surrounded by a parking lot on one side and US Highway 101 on the
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
other. The parking lot contains lighting standards for the existing
commercial use, which would interfere with the proposed residential
use. Additionally, the building's proximity to the US Highway 101
would expose residents to excessive noise levels.
Although the Development Code allows a reduction of parking
standards for mixed-use projects, the Planning Commission has
received public comment indicating that the development (consisting
of both Village Creek Promenade and Village Creek Plaza) is currently
underparked based on existing demand. The proposed project, along
with the relocation of the Post Office, which the City does not control
and can not condition, will further impact and exacerbate the existing
parking demand. Therefore, the proposed project will be detrimental
to the public health, safety and general welfare.
3. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
The physical placement of the proposed residential use on the site is
not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, which, along with
the site itself, is exclusively commercial in nature. While the site is
suitable for a number of office and commercial uses, it is not suitable
for residential use due to its development as an exclusively commercial
center. This includes the overall site design, which placed the buildings
at the rear of the property, adjacent to US Highway 101 and behind a
large, continuous parking lot. Furthermore, the center has a distinctly
commercial architectural character and there is no opportunity to
visually distinguish the proposed residential use from the existing
office and commercial uses, as is required for mixed-use projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission's decision to
deny the application for Plot Plan Review 05-008.
On motion by Council Member
following roll call vote, to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
. and by the
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 14th day of March, 2006.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
TONYFERRARA,MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESI
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL. CITY ATTORNEY
ATTACHMENT 1
III. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
A. (CONTINUED FROM MEETING OF 9/6/05) MINOR USE PERMIT - PLOT PLAN
REVIEW CASE NO. 05-008; APPLICANT "'- VILLAGE CREEK PROMENADE
LLC; LOCATION -230 STATION WAY.
Mr. Foster presented the staff report for consideration of a proposal for the addition of
two (2) second-floor apartments. in an existing two-story office building in the Village
Creek Promenade; the ground floor contains medical offices. Mr. Fpster gave the
background on the proposal; described the land use; ,described. the parking and
explained that the proposed project if approved it would constitute a parking reduction of
less than 1% but that the Development Code allows up to 20% for mixed use projects;
. discussed the issue of concern with the parking if the Post Office is relocated to the
Village Creek Promenade; described the open space. In conclusion, Mr. Foster stated
that staff recommends that the Commission adopt the Resolution and approve the Plot
Plan Review.
Staff answered the Commissioner's questions.
Chair Brown opened the public hearing for public comment.
Rob Anderson, applicant, answered Commission questions.
Chair Brown closed the public hearing to public comment.
Commission comments:
Tait:
. Finding NO.3: The physical location of these apartments is not compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood; they are right in the middle of medical offices and
businesses, riot friendly to children - no u5eable green space or open space for
them to play; it's also close to the freeway - not good for children
. If it were possible to exclude children from these units he might be able to
consider approval.
. It is not in line with Development Code performance standards as there would be
lighting from the parking lot and business signs, noise from the promenade and
the freeway (people would be living right above highway 101).
. He agreed with Mike Miner's letter that parking will become more of a serious
issue in the future when all the buildings are occupied and the post office moves
in.
. He believes mixed-use is good, but he is not in favor of this Resolution the way it
stands.
Parker:
. . Thinks mixed-use is good, but agrees with Mike Minor's letter that parking could
become a problem when the post office moves in.
. Believes mixed-use is good, but agrees with Commissioner Tait that the
proposal is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood so cannot make
Finding No.3. .
. Agrees with Mike Minbr's comments regarding the parking issue.
. The look back provision would not work if tenants had to move out after a year.
. Agrees that shared parking could work if tenants were away during the day, but
does not agree that this is a good use in this area.
Fellows:
. Agrees with Commissioner's Tait and Parker on the parking issue; Mike Minor is
doing his part in paying for parking off site for his employees.
. This specific site is not a nice place to live for anyone; suggested that residential
not be allowed here.
. He has problem with both Findings No.2 & 3.
Ray:
. Regarding compatibility, it does meet the standards as written.
. There is a legitimate segment of the community that can benefit from this type of
housing.
. Concern regarding the parking, because there is a 24-35% vacancy at this time
and future tenants and their parking requirements not known.
Brown:
. He agreed that the other Commissioners concerns were important, but did not
believe that these two units would be the tipping point.
. Agreed with Commissioner Ray that the market will determine who would use the
space and that there may be people who could put up with the lighting and noise.
. Most of the mixed-use projects that have come forward have been horizontal
rather than vertical; when they are horizontal there is room to put in open space
and add amenities that should be there. .
. He could support the Resolution if there was a look back provision that
addressed the compatibility of the residential units.
Fellows:
. Not sure if the community is ready for mixed-use without open space and
amenities for children.
Parker:
. Suggested that some changes could be made and then it could be brought back
to the Commission again for re-con5ideration; maybe make the horizontal use
more compatible by having some green space or waiting until the post office
comes in to see how it would affect the parking.
Tait:
. He did not agree that changes could be made to make it compatible and there is
no room to make it more livable.
Further discussion took place between the applicant and the Commission on mixed-use
zoning and whether it should be vertical or horizontal, in which areas it would be
acceptable, and the friction between residential and commercial uses.
Commissioner Fellows made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tait, to deny the
project based on the inability to make required findings 2 & 3 for Plot Plan Review
approval.
The motion was passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Fellows, Tait, Parker and Ray
Chair Brown
None
Ms. McClish informed the applicant that the Commission decision could be appealed to
the City Council within ten days.
.
ATTACHMENT 2
Mi'ner's
~1tE.
Hanlware
Arroyo Grande Atascllcler9.. ,...~G.rO:"er Be~ch~
\
1056 Grand Ave
Grover Beach, CA 93433
TEL: 805489-2931
FAX: 805-489-2971
.
,\~~$9~()s' ";.l\IIorro~~y.:
January 20, 2006
Planning Commission
City Of Arroyo Grande
PO Box 550
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
RE: Anderson Addition
Dear Planning Commissioners:
As I have stated before, I support the concept of mixed use development, but onlv if the
required narking is nrovided. Anderson's proposed addition is short by 2 spaces, and staff's
attempts at "rounding" and suggested "look-back" conditions can not change that fact. (The
"look-back" condition is so unrealistic it's embarrassing.)
The shortage of parking spaces is a more serious problem than staff's report would
suggest for the following reasons:
· When a previous City Council approved Anderson's original 27,350 sq. ft. project, they
did so by lowering the number of parking spaces previously required. (It changed from 1
space per 200 sq. ft. to 1 space per 250 sq. ft.) The effect of that change reduced Miner's
available parking by 19 spaces. This benefit to Anderson has meant that Miner's has
been forced to rent spaces from Valley Auto on a month-to-month basis for employee
parking.
. There is NO unused on-street parking on Station Way. (Employees from surrounding
business, including Miner's, use every available space every workday.)
. If the Post Office acquires the Video Choice site, which appears likely, parking will
immediately become impacted in the Village Creek Plaza.
. Parking is already a severe problem in and around Station Way. The City has worked to
secure a permanent solution without success.
. Although parking in the Village Creek Promenade is not currently impacted, neither is it
fully leased. More tenants and/or a different tenant mix can quickly change that.
To summarize: I'd like to see the project go forward, but ONLY if Anderson acquires the
necessary parking spaces BEFORE the project is approved;
Sincerely,
RECEI\/E[J
11M 1I~
JAN 2 0 2006
Mike Miner
CIlV OF A!<ROYO GRANDE
COMMUNiTY D::VELOPMENT
,<
.~_t:~~_ A~~1!l_s.:~~:_0.?_-008- 230 Station Way
ATTACHMENT 3
\
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Ed Arnold" n _ ..___.___ _ _
"'Steve Adams'" <SAdams@arroyogrande.org>
10/10/20059:25:23 AM
FW: 05-008- 230 Station Way
Steve,
Please see that this email is distributed to all the council members if the
item is appealed to us.
Thanks, Ed
From: Caren Ray [mailto:carenray@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 8:17 AM
To: Ed Arnold
Subject: 05-008- 230 Station Way
Councilman Arnold-
I wanted to clarify my argument regarding 230 Station Way, as I'm sure it
will be appealed to the Council. The Planning Commission voted 4 t01 to
deny the addition of two apartments above what will be a kidney center in
the near future.
The main issue for Commissioners Tait, Parker and Fellows was the perceived
unsuitability of the site for family use. They noted a lack of common area,
noise from the freeway, lighting incompatibility, and other general items of
what I'll call "distaste." Parking was also discussed by all five
Commissioners.
My argument is that why have a mixed-use designation, which the applicant
seems to clearly be complying with, if we aren't going to allow it?
Commissioner Parker stated that although we have mixed-use designations,
they are not clear, and we're still feeling our way through it. I believe
that if the applicant has met the criteria, whether I would want to live
there really isn't an issue. Let's let the market decide.
I also agree with Commissioner Brown, that although parking is indeed an
issue in the complex, it is already an issue, and adding two apartments will
not be the breaking point. The coming Post Office will, and four spaces
used in a mixed use complex will not change much either way. Daily customer
variance will be more of a factor than this project.
When we voted on Commissioner Fellows' motion, I made a "rookie mistake" and
voted for it: I thought we were voting to continue the discussion, not that
the project should be denied. I realized too late that if I'd just spoken
up right away, my vote on the record could be changed. So the denial of the
Planning Commission looks like it's 4-1 when it really should have been 3-2.
I feel a reversal of the Planning Commission's motion to deny 05-008 is in
order.
If you feel it necessary, please feel free to share this correspondence with
. Stev~_ p,~~~~_- !,.-"'t.05-008- 230 Station Way
Page 2 .
the Council.
Sincerely,
Caren Ray
g.e.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL
DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER oS1(
SUBJECT: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF THE 2005
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
DATE:
MARCH 14, 2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Council adopt the attached resolution approving the 2005 Urban
Water Management Plan (UWMP).
FUNDING:
Urban water suppliers need to adopt and submit to the Department of Water Resources
(DWR) an Urban Water Management Plan to comply with the California Water Code
and to be eligible to receive drought assistance or financial assistance from the DWR.
The City is in process of applying for a DWR grant for a desalination funding study
allocated from Proposition 50. This grant program would fund 50% of the cost to
prepare the desalination study up to $250,000.
DISCUSSION:
The Urban Water Management Planning Act states that Urban Water Management
Plans are to be submitted from urban water suppliers delivering more than 3,000 acre
feet of water or having more than 3,000 connections. Each urban water supplier should
update its plan at least every five years. The 2000 plan was adopted by the Council in
2001 and amended in 2003 based on comments received from DWR.
An UWMP serves as:
. A long-range planning document for water supply,
. Source data for development of a regional water plan, and
. A source document for cities and counties as they prepare their General Plans.
. A key component to Integrated Regional Water Management Plans.
The 2005 UWMP includes updating the water supply and demand projection, population
and land use information and a description of water conservation efforts. The plan also
has been reformatted to include service area characteristics, water supply reliability and
potential water quality impacts. Population projections and land use information was
based on the City's General Plan, as amended by the 2003 Housing Element and 2005
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF THE 2005 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 2
Housing Element update. The Urban Water Management Act requires the draft 2005
UWMP include projections of water demand and supply to the year 2025. Current
development, including projects under construction, is factored into the overall growth
rate.
The water supply section of the plan focuses on ground water, surface water, recycled
water, supplemental water, and supply projections to the year 2025 including a 3-year
worst-case water supply estimate. The water use section focuses on past, current, and
projected water use to the year 2025. In the water conservation section, the plan
describes the City's adherence to the 14 Demand Management Measures (DMM)
established by the Department of Water Resources. The draft UWMP also includes all
other information necessary to meet the requirements of the California Urban Water
Management Planning Act.
Current water supply is projected to meet the immediate and long-term needs of the
City according to a build-out population of just over 20,000. However, adequate long-
term supply is dependent upon securing water through desalination or the Nacimiento
pipeline project. Water demand depends upon implementation of each of the Demand
Management Measures, including the City's water conservation retrofit program and
implementation of Phase 2 of the Water Conservation Program in order to reduce per
capita consumption.
The Price Canyon Oil Field recycled water included in the water projections presented
to the City Council in August 2005 has not been incorporated into the Urban Water
Management Plan due to the current unknown timeline and feasibility. As a result,
projections indicate that during drought conditions, mandatory conservation measures
established in the Municipal Code will likely be necessary for a period of time for supply
to meet demand. This is not projected to be necessary during normal rainfall years.
Therefore, the proposed Plan is based upon the most accurate data available at this
time. However, the groundwater study being developed will likely impact the City's
projections. Therefore, staff is recommending the Plan be approved at this time to
proceed with grant funding efforts, but will be updated again within the next few months
when the groundwater study is completed.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF THE 2005 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 3
The Department of Water Resources will review each plan in the order that they are
received from each urban water supplier. The Plan is also required to apply for DWR
grant funding. Currently, the City in conjunction with the City of Grover Beach and the
Oceano Community Services District is applying for a Proposition 50 grant to assist with
the cost of preparing a desalination funding study. The grant will provide for 50% of the
cost to prepare the study up to $250,000. The proposed study is not anticipated to
require the full amount of funding available from Proposition 50.
Applications for Proposition 50 grant funds allocated by DWR are due by March 24,
2006. It is recommended the Council adopt the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan to
be submitted to DWR for Proposition 50 grant funding.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
Approve staffs recommendation and adopt the resolution;
Do not approve staffs recommendation;
Modify as appropriate and approve staffs recommendation; or
Provide direction to staff.
Attachment: Urban Water Management Plan
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING AND DIRECTING THE FILING AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
2005 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 797 (Water Code Section
10610 et. seq.), known as the Urban Water Management Planning Act, which mandates
that every urban supplier of water providing water for municipal purposes to rnore than
3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre feet of water annually, prepare an
Urban Water Management Plan, the primary objective of which is to plan for the
conservation and efficient use of water; and
WHEREAS, AB 797 required that an initial Plan be adopted by December 31,1985, after
public review and hearing, and filed with the California Department of Water Resources
within thirty days of adoption; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande did prepare and file an Urban Water Management
Plan (Plan) with the California Department of Water Resources after adoption in
December, 1985 and last updated the Plan in 2000; and
WHEREAS, AB 797 requires that the Plan be periodically reviewed at least once every five
years, and that the City shall make any amendments or changes to the Plan, which are
indicated as necessary by the review; and
WHEREAS, the City has therefore prepared and advertised for public review the 2005
Urban Water Management Plan, in compliance with the requirements of AB 797, and a
duly noticed public hearing regarding the Plan was held by the City Council on March 14,
2006. .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
as follows:
1. The 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (Plan), a copy of which is on file in the
Administrative Services Department, and incorporated herein by this reference as
though set forth in full, is hereby adopted and ordered filed with the Director of
Administrative Services;
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to file the Plan with the
California Department of Water Resources within 30 days of the effective date of
this Resolution, as set forth below, in accordance with AB 797;
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
3. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to implement the programs as
detailed in the adopted 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, including
development of recommendations to the City Council regarding necessary
procedures, rules, and regulations to carry out effective and equitable water
conservation programs.
On motion of Council Member
and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
. seconded by Council Member
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2006.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
TONYFERRARA,MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
. URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN
2005 UPDATE
TABLE OF CONTENTS - DRAFT
2005 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose of Urban Water Management Plan
1.2 Plan Development and Adoption
1.2.1 Agency Coordination
1.2.2 Public Participation
1.2.3 City Council Meetings and Adoption
1.3 Relationship of the UWMP to Other Planning Effort
1.4 UWMP Organization
CHAPTER 2 - SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS
,~ 2.1 Description of Service Area
2.2 Population and Demographics
2.3 Climate
CHAPTER 3 - WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
3.1 Surface Water - Lopez Reservoir
3.2 Groundwater
3.2.1 Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin
3.2.2 Pismo Formation Groundwater Basin
3.3 Supplemental Water Supply Sources
3.3.1 Transfers/Exchanges
3.3.2 Groundwater Basin Study
3.3.3 Nacimiento Pipeline Extension
3.3.4 Desalination
CHAPTER 4 - WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY
4.1 Lopez Reservoir
4.2 Groundwater
4.3 Arroyo Grande Safe Yield Analysis
CHAPTER 5 - WATER USE
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Customer Types
5.2.1 Residential Sector
5.2.2 Commercial Sector
5.2.3 Industrial Sector
5.2.4 Institutional/Government Sector
5.2.5 Agricultural Sector
5.3 Projected Water Use
5.4 Water Shortage Contingency Plan
5.4.1 City of Arroyo Grande Water Conservation Plan
5.4.2 Lopez Drought Contingency Plan
5.4;3 Groundwater
CHAPTER 6 - WATER CONSERVATION
6.1 Water Audits for Residential Use
6.2 Plumbing Retrofit
6.3 Distribution System Water Audits
6.4 Tiered Water Rate Structure
6.5 Landscape Water. Conservation
6.6 Public Information
6.7 School Education
6.8 Commercial and Industrial Conservation
6.9 Water Waste Prohibition
6.10 Water Conservation Coordinator
6.11 Financiallncentives
~. 6.12 Recycled Water Plan
6.12.1 Current Recycling System
6.12.2 Proposed Water Reclamation
CHAPTER 7 - WATER QUALITY IMPACTS AND WATER RELIABILITY
7.1 Surface Water
7.2 Groundwater
7.3 Water Service Reliability
CHAPTER 8 - ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 9 - References and Acronyms
LIST OF TABLES
~
,
1. Population - Current and Projected
2. Climate
3. Historical Water Supply
4. Current and Projected Water. Supply
5. Lopez Treatment and Distribution System Contract Entitlements
6. Groundwater Pumping Rights
7. Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin Entitlements
8. Lopez Reservoir Drought Reserve
9. Arroyo Grande Safe Yield Analysis
10. Minimum Available Water Supply
11. Historical Water Demand
12. Historical Water Use; By Category
13. Water Demand Factors
14. Projected Water Demand; By Customer Type
15. Water Supply Conditions
16. Minimum Available Water Supply
1.0
INTRODUCTION & AGENCY COORDINATION
Water Code section 10620
. 10620. (a) Every urban water supplier shall prepare and adopt an urban water
management plan in the manner set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section
10640).
(b) Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban
water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.
(c) An urban water supplier indirectly providing water shall not include
planning elements in its water management plan as provided in Article 2
(commencing with Section 10630) that would be applicable to urban water suppliers
or public agencies directly providing water, or to their customers, without the consent
of those suppliers or public agencies.
(d) (1) An urban water supplier may satisfy the requirements of this part by
participation in area wide, regional, watershed, or basin wide urban water
management planning where those plans will reduce preparation costs and contribute
to the achievement of conservation and efficient water use.
(2) Each urban. water supplier shall coordinate the preparation of its plan
with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share
a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the
extent practicable.
(e) The urban water supplier may prepare the plan with its own staff, by
contract, or in cooperation with other govemmental agencies.
(f) An urban water supplier shall describe in the plan water management tools
and operations used by that entity that will maximize resources and minimize the
need to import water from other regions.
,;'
Water Code section 10621
10621. (a) Each urban water supplier shall update its plan at least once every five
years on or before December 31, in years ending in five and zero.
(b) Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan pursuant to this part
shall notify any city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies that
the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or
changes to the plan. The urban water supplier may consult with, and obtain
comments from, any city or county that receives notice pursuant to this subdivision.
(c) The amendments to, or changes in, the plan shall be adopted and filed in
the manner set forth in Article 3 (commencing in Section 10640).
This report describes the 2005 update of the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)
for the City of Arroyo Grande (City). The City is located in the Southern portion of San
Luis Obispo County. The City supplies its customers with domestic water service and fire
protection and currently serves a population of 16,637.
The City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department prepared an Urban Water
Management Plan in May 2001 for submittal to the California Department of Water
Resources (DWR) under the California Urban Water Management Planning Act (Water
Code Section 10610, et 5eq.). The 2001 UWMP was amended in January 2003 based
on comments from DWR in the Urban Water Management Plan Review Summary. The
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 1: Introduction & Agency Coordination
1-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
following 2005 UWMP update has been prepared to include information that has
changed since the May 2001 UWMP, and to format the report according to the
"Guidebook to Assist Water Suppliers in the Preparation of a 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan". Information used to complete this report was compiled from a
variety of sources, including:
· Arroyo Grande Urban Water Management Plan, May 2001
. City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department
· Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin Groundwater Management Agreement
· Arroyo Grande Water Supply Alternatives, August 24, 2004
. City of Arroyo Grande Water Conservation Program, May 13, 2003
. City of Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan, July 1999
1.1 PURPOSE OF URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The State of California requires all urban water suppliers serving more than 3,000
customers or providing more than 3,000 acre-fee of water annually to develop an
UWMP, and to submit a plan to the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) every
fixe years. The purpose of this document is to satisfy the requirements of the California
Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act), to be a reliable tool for future City water
use planning, to provide guidance when discussing regional water and land use planning
with local agencies, including the County of San Luis Obispo, to ensure the City's
eligibility for California DWR grants and drought assistance and to report strategies to
meet water supply needs to the state government and community members.
The UWMP includes a description and evaluation of existing and potentially available
sources of water supply, projected population and future water demand, demand
management measures, and strategies for responding to water shortages.
1.2 PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND ADOPTION
The 2005 UWMP, update has been prepared to include information that has changed
since the May 2001 UWMP, as amended, and to format the report according to the
"Guidebook to Assist Water Suppliers in the Preparation of. a 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan".
The City of Arroyo Grande prepared this update of its Urban Water Management Plan
(UWMP) during the Fall of 2005. The updated plan will be presented at a public hearing
conducted by the City Council in March 2006 and will be submitted to the DWR within 30
days of Council adoption. This plan includes all information necessary to meet the
requirements of the California Water Code, Division 6, Part 2.6 (Urban Water
Management Planning).
1.2.1 Agency Coordination
Coordination within the City of Arroyo Grande included valuable input from the
Community Development, Building and Public Works Departments. The Community
Development Department assisted with long-range land use predictions and future
service needs. The Public Works Department provided past and current water use data,
billing structures, and leak audit information.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 1: Introduction & Agency Coordination
1-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
As required by the Act, the City of Arroyo Grande has coordinated development of the
UWMP with nearby water and governing agencies. The City receives a portion of its'
water resources from the Lopez Reservoir Project as described in Chapter 3. A number
of other agencies in south San Luis Obispo County also receive water from the project.
These agencies include the City of Pi5mo Beach, the City of Grover Beach, Avila Beach
Community Services District, Port San Luis Harbor District, and the Oceano Community
Services District.
Agency coordination is ongoing regarding use of the Arroyo Grande Groundwater basin
according to the Groundwater Management Agreement for the purposes of sharing
information and discussing water usage and impacts of pumping activity in the basin.
Agencies that participate include the City of Arroyo Grande, City of Pismo Beach, the
City of Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District.
1.2.2 Public Participation
The City has involved the public in the conservation planning process since the
development of its first UWMP in 1985. Since the last update of the UWMP in 2001, the
city has distributed information, including the City's Conservation Program, Mandatory
Retrofit Program, as well as annual water quality reports on the City's web5ite in
customer utility bills and by general mail. During the past two years, the City Council
has held eight public meetings that involved discussion on issues, such as water supply
alternatives, water rate studies, updates on the City's water use and supply, water
conservation, the County of San Luis' Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, and
supplemental water supply studies for the Nacimiento Pipeline extension study and
Desalination study prepared for the City and the neighboring City of Grover Beach and
the Oceano Community Services District. Preparation of the UWMP includes
information developed during these public discussions.
1.2.3 City Council Meetings and Adoption
A public hearing was held at a regular City Council meeting on March 14, 2006 for the
2005 UWMP. Legal public notices were published in the local (The Tribune) newspaper
at least ten days prior to the hearing, and copies of the draft plan were made available
on the City's web5ite www.arrovoqrande.com and posted at the City Hall.
1.3 RELATIONSHIP OF THE UWMP TO OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS
The City has identified the need to obtain additional water availability to meet the
projected water demands of the City. A Water Supply Alternative report was prepared in
August 2004 to identify one or more short, intermediate and long term supply
alternatives that meet the City's objectives for water quantity, quality and reliability.
Other supplemental water supply reports evaluating alternative water supplies, including
desalination and participation in the Nacimiento Water Project, have also recently been
prepared. On October 11, 2005, at the City Council at its public meeting, the City
reviewed the San Luis Obispo County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan of
which the City is a participant. The City is coordinating the preparation of the UWMP
with this regional water planning effort.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 1: Introduction & Agency Coordination
1.3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
The Community Development Department is beginning an update of the Conservation
Element of the General Plan, which will include goals and pOlicies for the City's water
resources. The UWMP will provide information and background for this planning
process.
1.4 UWMP ORGANIZATION
This UWMP update has been prepared according to the Guidebook to Assist Water
Suppliers in the Preparation of a 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. Information from
the 2001 UWMP has been incorporated and reformatted to comply with the specific
format described in the 2005 Guidebook.
"
"
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 1: Introduction & Agency Coordination
1-4
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
2.0 SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Water Code Section 10630
10630. It is the intention of/he Legislature, in enacting this part, to permit levels of water
management planning commensurate with the members of customers served and the volume of
water supplied.
Water Code Section 10631
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of/he following:
(a) Describe the service area of the supplier; including current and projected population, climate,
and other demographic factors affecting the supplier's water management planning. The projected
population estimates shall be based upon data from the state, regional, or local service agency
population projections within the service area of/he urban water supplier and shall be in five-year
increments to 20 years or as far as data is available.
The following sections describe the service area of the City, including the current
and projected climate, population, and demographics
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA
The City of Arroyo Grande is located
in the southern portion of San Luis
Obispo County along the banks of
the Arroyo Grande Creek. The City,
a general law. entity, currently
incorporates 5.45 square miles of
land with primarily residential and
agricultural land uses. The City's
distinctive character derives from its
traditional ties to agriculture, physical
diversity, unique village, small town
atmosphere, and rural settings. The
current population of Arroyo Grande
is 16,537 according to the California
Department of Finance, however the
City currently serves a population of
16,637 residents with 13 service
connections adjacent to the City
limits. All connections to the City's
water system are metered, and there
are no agricultural or industrial
connections. In 2005, the City
purchased and produced a total of
3,415 acre-feet of water. Water
supply sources for the City are
described in Chapter 3, Water
Supply Sources.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 2: Service Area
;;'-":[:1
"'};ijih.
'.e,.,. .
(~...-,.;:::~~
~'_'_i I
'~,:' .\)---.- --i
\~~l'=-S
.....---..
-- :....==~;"..-..
City lifArr,~,." (i'rundc
Ulf:ntion ,\[ lip
.~, N,~I"s.:~I~
...---
Figure 1 Arroyo Grande Vicinity on California Central Coast
2-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
c:;:::;J ='-"--.
...~-......,..
----.-
Cj _.----~
;a:..;-=n:::........
n...."~'........,. ......~I
_m.._'.'......
..'..~I!.OJ"!"l(.fl'" ,,,,,_..,, ............
_.......,...-
City o/Arroyo Grande
Sen.ice Area Jfap
.. Not to Scale
WfQ~~~
Figure 2
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 2: Service Area
2.2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
The City delivers both surface water and groundwater through its pressurized
distribution system. The distribution system is composed of 65 miles of
distribution mains, five storage reservoirs, six pumping stations, and 6,200
service connections. The City's well system consists of seven wells, chlorination
facilities, and a blending facility. Well NO.9 in the City system extracts water from
the Pismo Formation, a different aquifer from the other six wells. Raw water from
Well No.9 receives iron/manganese filtration treatment prior to entering into the
system. Lopez Project water receives treatment at the Lopez Water Treatment
Facility and enters the City's system at two metering stations. All City potable
water is treated to meet drinking water standards, regardless of the source of
supply. Wastewater treatment is conducted by the South San Luis Obispo
County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) at their Regional Treatment Facility.
2.2 POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS
The City of Arroyo Grande is largely built-out and is expected to experience only
modest growth over the next 25 years. The land use development policies within
the City are established in the City's General Plan, principally by the Land Use
Element (LUE) (Figure 3). This last comprehensive update to the General Plan
occurred in October 2001, with Housing Element amendments certified by the
state in 2005. The build-out population prediction for the City is approximately
20,000 persons in 2023, and may be slightly more depending upon the potential
for an annexation of approximately 185 acres of land that lies southeast of the
City within the Sphere of Influence. Table 1 shows the population total for the
City of Arroyo Grande with projections to 2025 based on projections that there
will be a continuation of the 1 % annual growth rate that the City has experienced
since the 1990's.
Table 1. Population - Current and Projected
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
Service Area 16,637 17,469 18,344 19,261 20,224
PODulation
Existing zoning districts within the City are shown in Figure 4 below. The future
land use area allocated for residential development is estimated to be 78 percent
Residential Single Family, 18 percent Residential Multi-Family and 4 percent
Mobile Home Parks at build-out. Historically, most of the City's residential growth
has occurred on large lots and at low densities. However, it is anticipated that
future growth will be redistributed to the City's mixed-use and higher density
residential areas. Based on project submittals over the past two years, as well as
projected development, the recent and foreseeable trend for new residential
development is in the form of clustered subdivision, small-lot planned unit
development and condominiums.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 2: Service Area
2-3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
2.3 CLIMATE
The climate of Arroyo Grande has a Mediterranean coastal climate with mild, dry
summers and cool, moist winters. The annual precipitation is 17 inches, with the
majority of the rain occurring during the months of January through March. Table
2, below, outlines the climate characteristics for the Arroyo Grande area based
on average climate data from the last 30 years. The normal year
evapotranspiration rate (Eto) for the City is approximately 52 inches.
. . Table 2. Climate
.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dee Annual
Standard
Monthly 2.21 2.50 3.80 5.08 5.7 6.19 6.43 6.09 4.87 4.09 2.89 2.28 52.13
Avera~e
ETo
Average
Rainfall 3.55 3.51 2.79 1.39 0.34 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.26 0.74 1.94 2.54 17.16
(inches )2
Average
Temp 63.3 64.8 66.0 68.1 68.9 70.3 70.2 71.0 72.3 72.0 68.5 64.4 68.31
(F)
1
ETo data from CIMIS
2Average rainfall data from SLO County Public Works Volunteer Precipitation
Gauge Station (AG Corp Yard #177.1) www.slocountvwater.orq/weather(yrs
1987 -2005)
3Average temperature data from Western Regional Climate Center wrcc@dri.edu
(yr5 1949-2005)
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 2: Service Area
2-4
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
. ~
II) .a ~
~ l
GI ~
';: [ ~ [
0
01 11 00 .
GI 00 . ... ... ~ ~ c j
i . ..
- " .~ !
CO E ... ~ ... . .
<- . c 0 ~
(.) . 0 .. 0 ... . 0 E
. " ~ c . c j E ~ .~
>; ~ .
m ~ ... E c m ~ . 0
GI . ~ E ~ ~ ~ .. , . " . 0 m " Q
. ~ ~ . ~ "i 0 ~ ~ 0 e ~ n:
II) il " ~ . ~ ~ ~ m ~ " ~ ~
::l ~ ~ ... 00 .0 ~ ~ " 1 . 0 ~ i .
c E , ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <- F B .~ 1
~ <3 . ~ " . ~ <3
'tl " " ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ > ~ " ~ 00 u
c III F:n:ODi iliflOOllonnlD I ~
co
...J ~ld.L _'___ _L .
(I) Q.
'0 III
s:::~
ca CI)
... 1/1
C):)
o'tl
>.t::
ej
...
<(
-
o
>.
~
(J
!!
/ ;r'
. )/
""-,,-
.t.
r
.,
""
,.-,'.
!
(.
/,
'.
i
u
u--~,
v:/~.:
Figure 3 City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Map
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 2: Service Area
2-5
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
U>() ...,
lIq' as'
S:g c
~> ..
"'11 CD
U>o.< ".
"'0 0
s.Gl ;:;:
SOl '<
>5. 0
il'" ...
" ~
Cl
'<
0
CO)
..
III
::l
C.
CD
N
0 C';, "'","",10...",
::l
S'
(0
;=
III
"g
'"
<I>
'"
o
o
'"
c
a-
"
~
~
~
;:
"
~
"
'"
'"
3
og
~:;;
~~
a";::::-
City of Arroyo Grande
Zoning Map
"'--.
Lasr Updated 09 Aug 2005
",,,,,"",',",e=-~,
<,_""""""..",..c.:.u,,,,-
".~
.
.
"
/,"'-'
y
.~ "
..
~..
""'CIlyUmlb
-""''''
.,...,.,.
,'....--.--
",,'--
--
_Agriculture
. Agncultul1lPreserve
m Fair Oaks Mixed-Use
o Gateway Mixed-Use
. Highway MIxed-Use
DlndustrialMiKed-use
DMu~t-FamiIY
CJ MultJ-FamilyApartment
. Mobile Home Park
gOlliceMIl<ed-Use
U Planned DeveIopmenl
D Public Facilily
llim Patio Home Resldendal
. Regional Commercial
o Resldentlal Estate
o Residf.tratiaIHill$ide
o ResidenlialRura!
DRe$ldenllalSuborban
~Single-Family
82l Single Family Resldel'llial
. Senlol'R&sidential
o Trallic; Way Mixed.Use
. Village COre Downtown
. Vlllage Mixed-Use
~ViIlitgaResidBntilll
MAgicullufillButrer
3.0 WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
Water Code Section 10631
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the following:
10631. (b) Identify and quantify, 10 the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of
water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments [to 20 years or as far as data
is available.] If groundwater is identified as an existing or planned source of water available to
the supplier, all of the following information shall be included in the plan:
(1) A copy of any groundwater management plan adopted by the urban water supplier,
including plans adopted pursuant to Part 2.75 (commencing with Section 10750), or any
other specific authorization for groundwater management.
(2) A description of any groundwater basin or basins from which the urban water supplier
pumps groundwater. For those basins for which a court or the board has adjudicated
the rights to pump groundwater, a copy of the order or decree adopted by the court or
the board and a description of the amount of groundwater the urban water supplier has
the legal right to pump under the order or decree. For basins that have not been
adjudicated, information as to whether the department has identified the management
conditions continue, in the most current official departmental bulletin that characterizes
the condition of the groundwater basin, and a detailed description of the efforts being
.\ undertaken by the urban water supplier to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition.
(3) A detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of
groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years. The
description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available,
including, but not limited to, historic use records.
(4) A detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is
projected to be pumped by the urban water supplier. The description and analysis shall
be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to,
historic use records.
The City of Arroyo Grande has a variety of water sources including ground water, local
surface water, and ponded storm water used for irrigation and construction water. The
City has potential additional supplies from desalination and water from the Nacimiento
Pipeline extension project, for which the City, in a joint effort with the City of Grover
Beach and the Oceano Community Services District recently commissioned water
supply studies. These studies were presented during a City Council public meeting in
January 2006 and are discussed further below. Other potential sources of water include
water transfer agreements. The following tables outline the City's current and planned
water supplies for the next 20 years.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
". ..... ..... " ...\,;.. ....... "Cc...':/.x.). .....
T~bIEl3.Historl~~IWaterSupp,y'":AFlY . ".. :...... ..,.':;: :,.....y.'. .
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Groundwater AGP-TCM 1,200
Sub Basin 1,200 1202 1202 1202
Groundwater Pismo 0 0
Formation 0 70 70
Lopez Reservoir Project 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290
Surplus Lopez Project 600 700 910 500
Water
TOTAL 3,490 4,090 4,192 4,472 4,062
.' . ...' .. ..., .... .':.;,..,i... '..
Table 4. .ClIm~ntandProjected.Water Supply '":.AF/Y" .'. "
Wflter Supply Sources 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
County of San Luis Obispo 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290
Lopez Reservoir Proiect
Oceano CSD 100 0 0 0 0
Groundwater 1,368 1468' 1468 1468 1468
Desalination' or Naciemento 0 0 750 750 750
Water Project
TOTAL 3,758 3758 4,508 4,508 4,508
,
Groundwater from Well 10 (Plsmo Formalion.)
2 Based on City Council direction, January 2006 (Dependant upon Proposition 50 grant
funding).
3.1 SURFACE WATER - LOPEZ RESERVOIR
Lopez Dam and Reservoir was planned, designed, and constructed under the auspices
of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(SLOFCWCD). The Dam and Reservoir was completed in 1970 and important benefits
of the project include recreation, flood control, regulated release for Arroyo Grande
Basin groundwater recharge, and water supply for contracting communities within the
County Flood Control Zone NO.3. The Lopez Reservoir has a capacity of 49,388 acre-
feet, covering approximately 164,000 acres within the Arroyo Grande Creek drainage
area. The Lopez Dam is 1,120 feet in length and has a vertical height of 166 feet. A 20-
inch diameter steel transmission main carries water from the dam to the 844 acre-foot
Lopez terminal reservoir; and from the 6 MGD water treatment plant to water contractors
in the Five Cities area (Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Oceano, Pi5mo Beach, and Avila
Beach).
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
eno
'" -.
0';;-
=0
0_
"~
w~
~~
Ol 0
mG>
~ta
C"
-00.
-0'"
-<
en
o
C
il
'"
en
w
W
'"
o
o
()1
C
~
0-
Ol
"
~
Ol
~
s::
Ol
"
Ol
<0
'"
3
O~
$!i
"'Ol
-j"
"
cE'
.t:
...
CD
.!"
r-
o
"
CD
N
;0
CD
..
CD
<
o
:;'
"....~~
ZONE 3 WATER SYSTEM
Lopez LaJ(e
AVILA
~
III
-
CD
...
c
iii'
-
~
C'
c:
-
0'
::J
en
'<
..
-
CD
3
...
CITY OF PISMO BEACH""-
TURNOUT
TURNO/.lT
,
,
,
'.
,
OCEANO}URNOUT
,- -'"
,
,
.
,
."
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, ,
. ,
. ,
. ,
, .
o 0
_______1
o 5,000 10,000
Feet
20,000
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY J i
SAN LUISOBtSPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL I
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT ~~_~_~~~~_~.i
\---'-->"~-._-----
\ I'a~" Rul.>l~s I r
~\ L ~
~AN LUIS ,--":lISP'J 1,. I
, ~-\ .\l,,~'adcrll '':....._ N. t5.
Mllrnllla\-k "___-:....~--:--:--~I
. . /' Sun Luis OlJi_wJ "FL.ooO c:ONlRCIL Z(WE J
'~--'~~-~~y-[~.
Pi"'l\lnmhY":"}'<l~~ L:
'-'''0 ........-..J
,
,
_ 0
. ......1
, -
,
"
Nipomo
Legend
- LOPEZ W\TER TRANSMISSION LINE
C.- _- _-: ZONE 3 BOUNDARY
=,rc,r:,., ""., "!''I'''''''.''''''''' """ ~:HNr""':~U,,"~.n.';.o nr.1':"
Safe Yield
The Safe Yield of Lopez Reservoir is 8,730 acre-feet per year, which reflects the
sustainable water supply during a drought. The Safe Yield is derived from two historical
studies: Lopez Project Hydroiogy Review, conducted in June 1962, and the Hydrologic
Balance of Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin, conducted in November 1962. The
reservoir is operated to stay within the Safe Yield. As previously noted, over half of the
project's Safe Yield (4,530 acre-feet per year) has been apportioned by agreements to
contract agencies (see Table 5). The remaining 4,220 acre-feet per year is reserved for
downstream releases to maintain stream flows and groundwater recharge.
Looez Treatment Plant
Because of the bodily-contact recreation use, public health officials required the
installation of a terminal reservoir between Lopez Dam and the Lopez Water Treatment
Plant. This reservoir provides a theoretical detention time of over 30 days for 844 acre-ft
of storage. Water is drawn from the intake tower of the terminal dam and passed
through a 36-inch influent pipeline to the 6 MGD treatment plant.
The Lopez Water Treatment Plant currently serves a population of approximately 45,000
reliidence5 and operates at an average flow rate of 3.0 MGD. The water treatment plant
consists of primary disinfection with chlorine Dioxide, flocculation, sedimentation,
filtration and post chloramination. Chioramine5 are generated on site for disinfection
with the chlorine to ammonia ratio of 4: 1. Coagulation is accomplished with alum and an
ionic polymer. Powdered activated carbon can be added for taste and odor control.
In April 2004, Black & Veatch Engineering prepared a Basis of Design Report (BDR) for
an upgrade to the Lopez WTP. The upgrade under construction is designed for
improvements to the treatment process to ensure a reliable supply in response to
changing regulations while meeting the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District's (District) baseline needs to participating agencies. The
plant upgrade will include the addition of chemical pretreatment, a new membrane
filtration system, and disinfection to produce water that meets or exceeds current state
and national standards. A dissolved air flotation (OAF) unit will be constructed for
pretreatment while an encased pressurized membrane system will be used for primary
filtration. In addition to the process upgrade, the new layout includes necessary facilities
for a complete operational facility including chemical storage and pump facilities along
with a light maintenance facility.
While the upgrade will ensure that product water meets the appropriate standards, an
upgrade in hydraulic capacity is not antiCipated. Currently, the maximum capacity of the
plant is 6.0 MGD. Major infrastructure for the upgrade is designed for 6.7 MGD;
however, the new membrane filters will be installed with an operating capacity of 6.0
MGD.
Lopez Distribution SV5tem
Water is distributed to the various agencies through the Lopez Distribution System,
which extends from the treatment facility to Port San Luis. The distribution system
conveys a blend of treated water from the Lopez Reservoir and the State Water Project
to the communities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pi5mo Beach, Oceano, and County
Service Area (CSA) 12. The pipeline is approximately 17.6 miles long with various
turnouts to the contracting agencies. The turnouts are sized to meet various contract
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-4
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
reQ.uirement5.. The distribution line consists of concrete lined steel cylinder pipe which is
33 Inche5.1n diameter from the Lopez Treatment Plant to Edna Road, 30 inches to Brisco
Road, 18 Inches from Grover Beach to Vista Del Mar, and 14 inches to EI Portal.
The operation and maintenance of the dam, treatment plant, and water conveyance
system are the responsibility of San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District.
Table 5. Lopez Treatment and Distribution System Contract Entitlements
Water Contractor Lopez WTP Water Supply Annual
Entitlement IAFVi
Arroyo Grande 2290
Oceano CSD 303
Grover Beach 800
Pi5mo Beach 896
,~
Avila Valley MWC 12
San Miguelito MWC 0
Avila Beach CSD 68
Port San Luis 100
Other CSA 12 Customers 61
Total 4530
Ooeratina Aareement5
Several agreements establish policy for the operation of the Lopez system and actions
of the member agencies. A brief description of the existing agreements follows:
1. Agreement for the construction and operation of the Lopez Reservoir, 1969, set forth
the project's capital cost distribution to the member agencies.
2. Downstream water rights agreement, 1983, established water entitlements for
adjacent and downstream water users (See Table 3).
Arrovo Grande Looez Entitlement
The City of Arroyo Grande is contracted to receive 2290 acre-feet of water per year from
the Lopez Reservoir. The City's allocation accounts for approximately 50.55 percent of
the available purchased water from Lopez.
3.2 GROUNDWATER
Prior to 1970, the City's water supply was derived solely from groundwater pumping from
the Arroyo Grande Plain of the Tri-Citie5 Mesa (AGP-TCM) groundwater sub-basin of
the Santa Maria Ground Water Basin (Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin). In 1966, the
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-5
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
City entered into an agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo Flood Control District
to receive a yearly allocation of 2,290 acre-feet of additional water from the Lopez
Reservoir Project, as described above. Since then, groundwater has been used as a
secondary source of supply. Currently, the City pumps from two different groundwater
basins: the Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin and the Pi5mo Formation Groundwater
Basin.
Five of the City's wells (Well NO.'5 1,3,4,5, & 8) pump water at a casing depth of 200 to
251 feet. Nitrate levels in the raw water from Well No.5 exceeds Maximum Contaminant
Level. As a result, the raw water is blended with Lopez Project water or other well water
to dilute the nitrates. City Well NO.7 (1,000 gpm) extracts water from a casing depth of
580 feet, and has no nitrates.
Figure 6, below, shows the well system for pumping groundwater from the Arroyo
Grande Groundwater Basin.
,j,
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-6
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
000
'" _.
0':;:-
::::0
0_
::>)>
"'~
~a
.,'Ci
roC)
~ ~
00'"
c"
"00.
"0'"
.:;:-
00
o
c
Cl
"
'"
'"
o
""
'"
o
o
'"
c
a-
'"
::>
:E
'"
<D
~
s:
'"
"
'"
to
'"
3
og:
$::2
,,'"
-l::>
"Tl,'
ce"1
1::1
...'
CII[
en!
9!
-,
'<I
~i
CII'
=i
01
n,
~!
en
::J!
Ut)
=i
fIIi
0,
n
;"]
-
!i
~i
-.,
-
::r
-;
~i
2;'1
...'
01
~!
G>i
...
~i
a.:
CII'
G>l
01
1:'
::I'
a.'
~'
",I
-'
CII,
...
Dl
'"
III
5'
',;c
ATTACH B-t
I
I
I
I
I
MATCHLINE I
FIGURE 7-1A [
i
i
I
I
e.,.f
c::l;n"'!/O
r:::::I-2i~~i'BFf.."."~.
~-'- .~
EXISTING WELL
LOCATIONS
;-{,d_
',:,"
!
,
i
i
I
I
I
I
,
i
I
I
i
I
i
,
John L. Wallace & Associates IL I
-...---...-....--..-...--..----..-.-.-- WA I
. _ .. 'm '___m J
ASH ST.
IL
CITY
CORPORA nON
YARD
sora
SPORTS
COUPlEX
WELL #7 WELL #3_
WELL ,.
~___ElM To
CONTROL ,uP"A K 3
ROOM~ w
WEU '4-- c
\\Ell #5.
"
'"
WELL FIELD ~I
DETAIL (US)
.....'..f:LL,*'..
1" = 2-l001
-______-.J"'1-:
o ij,'~, 'LeG ;4(18
~,'!;</;'O.;>>.
4r"'~*,$-h:
td ~i
cr.;;. Wi;)
W. > 'f!J
~~ //
t~
Water used for agriculture within the City limits is produced from privately-owned wells
and from riparian diversions. The City does not have any agricultural connections to the
public water system. According to the 2002 DWR report on Water Resources of the
Arroyo Grande - Nipomo Mesa Area,the owners of these private agricultural water wells
produce approximately 40 percent of the water extracted from the AGP-TCM sub-basin.
The major diversions of surface water occur during irrigation of lands adjoining Arroyo
Grande Creek. The Lopez Project is obligated to discharge up to 4,200 acre-feet of
untreated surface water into Arroyo Grande Creek during non-spill periods. The purpose
of this release is to maintain groundwater levels in the wells downstream of the dam and
to satisfy downstream vested water rights. Agricultural groundwater pumping rates are
expected to remain relatively constant in the future.
,T~bi~'6. .Currf!ntGro";ndwater~~pply-. AFIY
Basin Name
AFIY
1,298
70
1,368
Arroyo Grande GW Basin
Pi5mo Formation
T eltal
3.2.1 Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin
Four urban agencies currently extract water from the Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin
including the City of Arroyo Grande, the City of Grover Beach, the City of Pi5mo Beach,
and the Oceano Community Services District. Additional basin uses include agriculture
and subsurface flow to the Pacific Ocean. The above referenced urban entities entered
into an informal understanding in 1983 regarding safe well extractions from the basin.
This understanding is often referred to as the "Gentleman's Agreemenf. Each entity was
allocated a yearly basin extraction based on a 1979 Groundwater Study performed by
the Department of Water Resources and groundwater use proceeding the Lopez Project.
According to the 1979 Groundwater Study, the Safe Yield of the Arroyo Grande
Groundwater Basin is 9,500 acre-feet per year. Entitlements to groundwater from the
Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin according to the "Gentlemen's Agreement" can be
found in Table 7.
In 2002, a formal agreement was reached by the four urban agencies and an Agreement
Regarding Management of the Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin (Groundwater
Management Agreement) was adopted (Appendix B). The Groundwater Management
Agreement specifies division of safe yield of the basin. In 2005, the Groundwater
Management agreement was reaffirmed by the stipulation of Santa Maria Valley Water
Conservation District v. City of Santa Maria et al. (Appendix A).
The City's entitlement is established at 1,202 AFY. Per the Groundwater Management
Agreement, this entitlement has been increased to 1,298 AFY based on the conversion
of irrigated agricultural lands the urban use. Recently, the four agencies have jointly
authorized a study by Todd Engineers to analyze and update the safe yield for the
Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin. The study is scheduled to be completed by June
2006.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-8
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
.,' "'" ~i.',", , , ' , ' '_ '., _ , ___,_..' , ,,;-, : _ _" '" _'-,","~
!1I~,Ie.,7'Afroyo .13r!'~~II,Groundw~..er~asln DI"I~i~npf~~,feYI;I~ .....'/;ii.i\... ,..,........;:!::'
Applied Irrigation 5,300
Subsurface flow to Ocean 200
City of Arroyo Grande 1202
City of Grover Beach 1198
City of Pismo Beach 700
Oceano CSD 900
Total 9,502
3.2.2 Pismo Formation Groundwater Basin
The Pismo Formation is a distinct deep aquifer at the northeastern section of the City,
idEmtified in water wells along Oak Park Boulevard on the south, at Pa5eo Ladera Lane
to the west, and along James Way to the east. Currently, the City pumps groundwater
from Well No.9 which is capable of extracting approximately 70 AFY. The casing depth
for this well is 389 feet, and the well water receives iron/manganese treatment prior to
discharge into the system. Water supply from the Pi5mo Formation is not subject to the
Groundwater Management Agreement for the Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin.
Completion of Well No. 10 is scheduled to be complete by June 2007 for an additional
estimated 100 AFY groundwater from the Pi5mo Formation Groundwater Basin.
Similarly, water from Well No. 10, will receive treatment for iron/manganese prior to
discharge into the system.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-9
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
~_._._..- -.---------..--.
1
~
~
ii
;~
...:l
...:l
~z
o
c,:,....
z~
....u
~o
><...:l
~
w
~CD
..Jw
:1:0::
<J::)
!;eel
::!!ii:
'Hil'-l''1~
V""""
"
L~}-
I
;i ":..:.....:1. f~
~ i~.~" l
~ ~~,
o
~"
.0
'0
I
-0>
Qj.
s:~
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-10
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
#
001
~I
'u
o
00
00
<
o<J
"
u
~
OJ
~
~I
..c.
~I
~~
(1ft! wv \1l
~" !I
,.
\ ~%'\.~
\\"\,,.~ \'"
..\'t~~;~.' ,
[2 ~
o C>
~]@
N
C
" [C
.c
;..... <='
3.3 SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
Water Code Section 10631 (h)
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the
following:
(h) Include a description of all water supply projects and water supply programs that
may be undertaken by the urban water supplier to meet the total projected water use
as established pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 10635. The urban water supplier
shall include a detailed description of expected future projects and programs, other
than the demand management programs identified pursuant to paragraph (1) of
subdivision (f), that the urban water supplier may implement to increase the amount
of the water supply available to the urban water supplier in average, single-dry, and
multiple-dry water years. The description shall identify specific projects and include a
description of the increase in water supply that is expected to be available from each
project. The description shall include an estimate with regard to the implementation
timeline for each project or program.
In" order to meet total projected water use, as well as offset potential future water
shortages due to drought or disaster, the City is considering the following supplemental
water supplies:
3.3.1 TransferslExchanges
Oceano Community Service District (OCSD): In 2005, the City entered into a two-year
agreement with the OCSD to procure 100 AFY of water until July 2007. The City may
pursue an extension of this water transfer agreement.
Surplus water from Lopez: Historically, the City, and other contracted agencies, have
received surplus water from Lopez depending upon yearly requirements for downstream
release. The SLOFWCD - Zone 3 monitors the potential for surplus water availability
consistent with needs identified in the Arroyo Grande creek Habitat Conservation Plan.
State Water: Several entities in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties are
contractors to the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project. State water is delivered
through the existing Lopez Project pipeline which also serves the City of Arroyo Grande.
State Water Contractors may sell a portion of their water allocation for emergency or
stand-by water. A special vote by the people of Arroyo Grande would be required should
the City elect to purchase State Water.
3.3.2 Groundwater Basin Study
As previously discussed, four jurisdictions including the City, OCSD, Grover Beach and
Pismo Beach have contracted with Todd Engineers to complete an updated analysis of
the safe yield for the Arroyo Grande Groundwater basin consistent with the requirements
of the groundwater settlement agreement for the basin. According to the groundwater
management agreement, any increase in the determined safe yield of the basin, will be
divided between the urban parties and applied irrigation on a pro rata basis using a
formula from the 1983 Gentlemen's Agreement, fifty-seven percent (57%) to applied
irrigation and forty-three percent (43%) to the urban parties. Thereafter, the first 378
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3.11
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
acre feet per year of any increase of safe yield allocated to the urban parties will be
di,vided on a pro rata basis b~tween the City of Arroyo Grande (95%) and the City of
Plsmo Beach (5%). Depending upon the outcome of the study, the City may have an
increase in water supply.
3.3.3 Nacimiento Pipeline Extension
Forty five years ago, San Luis Obispo County secured entitlement to 17,500 acre-feet
per year from Lake Nacimiento, near Paso Robles, California. Plans are in place to build
a 45 mile pipeline to deliver that water to water agencies in northern San Luis Obispo
County. Current participants include Paso Robles, Templeton, Atascadero, and San
Luis Obispo, In December 2003, San Luis Obispo County completed a final draft
environmental impact report (EIR) for the 45 mile pipeline project. The entitlements that
have committed to the project are as follows:
"
. City of Paso Robles -
. City of San Luis Obispo -
. Atascadero MWC -
. Temoleton CSD -
TOTAL
4,000 AFY
3,380 AFY
2,000 AFY
250 AFY
9,630 AFY
The current NWP includes an intake and pump station at Lake Nacimiento; a corridor of
approximately 45 miles of water transmission pipeline ranging in diameter from 20-36
inches, traversing Camp Roberts, along Highway 101 through Paso Robles, Templeton,
Atascadero, through the Cuesta tunnel, and terminating at the San Luis Obispo water
treatment plant.
In January 2006, a draft feasibility study was prepared to evaluate the possibility of
extending the proposed Nacimiento pipeline from its current termination location (the
San Luis Obispo Water Treatment Plant) to the Lopez Water Treatment Plant for
utilization by South SLO County water agencies. Extending the proposed pipeline to the
Lopez treatment plant would require a supplemental EIR, construction of approximately
18 additional miles of 12 inch steel pipe, installation of an additional booster pump, and
possible upgrades to the existing Lopez treatment and distribution system.
The January 2006 feasibility study was prepared under the assumption that the City of
Arroyo Grande would be requesting approximately 750 AFY of supplemental water. The
estimated cost of water for extending the Nacimiento pipeline to South County is
currently $2800 per AF of water. At this time, it is undecided whether the City of Arroyo
Grande will pursue the Nacimiento extension for supplemental water.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3.12
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
3.3.4 Desalination
Water Code Section 10631
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the
following:
(i) Describe the opportunities for development of desalination water, including, but not
limited to, ocean water, brackish water, and groundwater, as a long-term supply.
A parallel study was prepared in January 2006 to evaluate the feasibility of obtaining an
additional 750 AFY of potable water for the City of Arroyo Grande from seawater
desalination. The report was prepared with the assumption that two neighboring water
agencies, the City of Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District, would
collaborate efforts to determine if a seawater desalination plant would best suit the
supplemental water needs of each community, The following is a brief summary of the
report and its findings,
The most logical location for a desalination facility is the existing South San Luis Obispo
C9unty Sanitation District Wastewater Treatment Plant (SSLOCSO WWTP). The
SSLOCSD WWTP is located directly on the coastline, adjacent to all three communities
(AG, Grover Beach, and Oceano). Because the WWTP site is directly adjacent to the
ocean, sources for feed water and possible brine disposal locations are more abundant
than other locations farther from the coast. In addition, the SSLOCSD WWTP maintains
an ocean outfall for disposal of treated wastewater effluent from the plant. Currently, the
SSLOCSO WWTP shares an ocean outfall with the City of Pismo Beach for disposal of
treated wastewater. The ocean outfall extends approximately 4,000 feet offshore into
about 60 feet of water depth. By agreement, the SSLOCSO owns 60% (or 10 MGO) of
the total 16 million gallons per day flow rate through the outfall, while Pismo owns the
remaining 40% (6 MGO),
Reverse osmosis is the most common technology used for desalination of seawater in
California. Therefore, it was assumed that the design and construction of a RO plant as
opposed to a thermal ,distillation plant will be utilized for the South County agencies. It is
also assumed that a South County desalination facility will consist of a subsurface intake
structure of some kind. Subsurface intake structures may consist of horizontal or vertical
beach wells, infiltration galleries, or seabed filtration systems. In each of these
situations, open seawater is separated from the intake by a geologic unit (such as sand
or rock). In addition to providing natural filtration, this design is capable of separating
most marine organisms from the water intake, minimizing environmental impacts. Beach
wells typically consist of a non-metallic casing, well screen, and vertical turbine pump. It
is preferable to locate beach wells as close to the coastline as possible. Maximum yield
from beach wells range from 0.1 to 1.0 MGD. Therefore, several wells would be
necessary to yield 2 MGO product water from a South SLO County desalination facility.
Distribution of product water to the individual agencies must be accomplished with a
booster pump at the SSLOCSD site. Because the RO membranes supply product water
at close to atmospheric pressure, additional head will be required to distribute water to
each agency's system. Depending on the design, product water can be delivered to
either the distribution system, matching existing system pressure, or to one of the
agency's water storage reservoirs. It is assumed that supplying product water to the
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-13
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
storage reservoirs would be beneficial since the booster pump would only need to supply
water at atmospheric pressure as opposed to a high-head pump to meet existing
distribution system pressure.
Based on the 20-year life cycle cost analysis, the cost per acre foot of desalination water
would be approximately $2675/AF. This value includes a 20% contingency, and all
capital costs were multiplied by a factor of 1.4 to account for soft costs. While a
desalination facility would most likely involve a more complicated permitting process
than other supplemental water sources, it is one of the few water supply sources that is
completely drought-proof. A desalination facility has the benefit of being able to run
continuously, twenty four hours per day, seven days per week for constant supply
regardless of water shortages throughout the area.
Based on this information, the City of Arroyo Grande is planning on submitting an
application for Prop 50 desalination grant funding to further the process of planning for a
seawater desalination plant. Grant applications are due by March 24, 2006 and award
of funding is anticipated June 1, 2006. In the event the City of Arroyo Grande is
awarded grant funding from the Prop 50 desalination program, preparation of preliminary
dElsign and a corresponding cost analysis will begin.
,~
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 3: Water Supply Sources
3-14
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
4.0 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY
Water Code Section 10631 (c)
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the
following:
(c) Describe the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or ciimatic
shortage, to the extent practicable, and provide data for each of the following:
(1) An average water year
(2) A single dry water year
(3) Multiple dry water years
For any water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, given
specific legal, environmental, water quality, or climatic factors, describe plans to
supplement or replace that source with alternative sources or water demand
management measures, to the extent practicable.
4.1 Lopez Reservoir
Water from the Lopez Reservoir is considered a very reliable source. The annual safe
yii\lld of the reservoir is 4,200 acre-feet per year greater than the combined total
entitlements to contracting agencies. Therefore, in years when less water is required to
be released to the Arroyo Grande Creek, additional water (known as surplus water) may
be available for sale to contracting agencies.
In a year of average precipitation, the "normal" inflow into the reservoir is 10,730 acre-
feet, evaporation is 2,000 acre-feet, and therefore safe yield is 8,730 AFY, During the
drought years of 1986 through 1990, the average yearly inflow was only 4,500 AFY.
Table 8 outlines the net yearly reduction in reservoir storage based on this information.
~
F. . . '. '" ''', "::" \, ," ;':;>"\;":\-~-,:,;:" . .",:',...;....
.:. . Table.S. Lopez ~eservolr .Drought..Rlt~ervlt,;';"" . "'<"C.:..,:'~' .'.;': ",
j'-;."",,-,- ,
':-C_',": ;;.:.> ,_~ ,. ". ,
Inflow to Reservoir:
Normal Year 10730
Drought Year 4500
Demand from Reservoir
Evaporation 2000
Downstream Release 4200
Urban Users 4530
Total Yearly Demand 10730
Net Yearly Deficiency in Extended Drought (4500-10730) = 6230 AFY
According to the County of San Luis Obispo the minimum pool of the reservoir is 4,000
AF. If the minimum pool for the reservoir is reached and a drought continues, the City of
Arroyo Grande will not receive its full entitlement from the Lopez Reservoir. Currently,
the Lopez Reservoir is at 72% of capacity, Therefore, if an extended drought begins this
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 4: Supply Reliability
4-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
year, and all contracting agencies accept their full entitlement of reservoir water, the
reservoir will reach a minimum pool after approximately five years of drought.
4.2 Groundwater
According to the Department of Water Resources report prepared in 2002, the Arroyo
Grande Groundwater Basin is a stable and reliable supply through the year 2020. As
previously discussed, an updated analysis of the safe yield of the basin is underway and
will provide additional information regarding the long-term reliability of the basin.
The Pismo Formation Groundwater Basin utilized by the City of Arroyo Grande is
thought to be relatively large; however, the actual safe yield of the basin is unknown. In
over 15 years of production, there has been consistent delivery without impact to
groundwater levels. However, as described in Chapter 3, water from Well 9 requires
treatment in order to comply with Water Quality Standards. Chapter 7 discusses water
quality impacts on the City's system.
4.3 City of Arroyo Grande Safe Yield Analysis
Tt\e City has relied on surface water and groundwater sources for the past 35-year
period. The conjunctive use of the groundwater basins and surface water supplies will
provide an effective management strategy, which increases the overall reliability of all
the resources to meet current and future water demands. Based on the information
available at this time, it is calculated that the City of Arroyo Grande currently has a safe
yield estimate of 3,758 AFY; however, future supplemental water sources are projected
to contribute at least an additional 750 AFY. A breakdown of this value, along with a 20-
year projected safe yield estimate, can be found in Table 9.
I...>..i.;i' 'Ta~le9.,ArroyoGJ:an~e.SafeYiel~A~~!~i$;\".' >':::i;:f~;;'t;';.
Year 2005 2010 2015 2020
Lopez Reservoir 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290
Groundwater; Arroyo Grande Basin 1,298 1,298 1,298 1,298
Groundwater: Pismo Formation 70 170 170 170
OCSD Agreement 100 01 0 0
Supplemental Water Source2 0 0 750 750
Total 3,758 3,758 4,508 4,508
, The City may pursue an extension of the OSD agreement for 100 AF.
2Desalination or Nacimiento PiDeline Extension or Other
Units of Measure: Acre-feellYear
Three-Year Worst Case Water Supply
2025
2,290
1,298
170
o
750
4,508
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 4: Supply Reliability
4-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
In seasons of extended drought, the City of Arroyo Grande could receive a reduced
surface water allocation from the Lopez Project. However, current reservoir levels will
allow the normal allocation to be obtained over the next three years.
~ -c,.. T!lble10.Mlni~";;nAvailableWat~r'$~pply rY'"e, ": ..,',
,., Y.,"/' , .:'
..',' , .;..:", - .," ,.,-,. ""'''''''''''','' .
Source Three-Year Worst-Case Supply'
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Groundwater: Arroyo Grande Basin 1,298 1,298 1,298
Groundwater: Pismo Formation 70 170 170
Lopez Reservoir Water Entitlement 2,290 2,290 2,290
OCSO Agreement 100 0 0
Surplus Lopez Water 0 0 0
Total 3,758 3,758 3,758
Units of Measure: Acre-feeVYear
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 4: Supply Reliability
4-3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
5.0 WATER USE
Water Code Section 10631 (e)
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the
following:
(e) (1) Quantify, to the extent records are available, past and current water use, over
the same five-year increments descried in subdivision (a), and projected water use,
identifying the uses among water use sectors including, but not necessarily limited to,
all of the following uses:
(A) Single-family residential.
(8) Multifamily
(C) Commercial
(D) Industrial
(E) Institutional and governmental
(F) Landscape
(G) Sales to other agencies
(H) Saline water intrusion barriers, groundwater recharge, or conjunctive use, or any
combination thereof.
(2) Agricultural
(3) The water use projections shall be in the same five-year increments described in
subf/ivision (a).
5.1 Historical Water Use
The following table outlines overall historical water use for the City of Arroyo Grande from 1987
to 2005.
.;\'..0\\",""<<"<('0:'.'';. '. ' ". .,.".... ,... .. .TABLE '11itfISTORICALWATER:DEMAND ' .... : ";::\):i.(~f~~0~~i~j:Z*1,\j':.1\:~s.~r,':\?\~:': :'X:f\1\~~'~i~;;~~Yt:!,1
TOTAL TOTAL METERED PRODUCTION
PRODUCTION CONSUMPTION UAW UAW ESTIMATED PER CAPITA TOTAL
YEAR (ac-fl) (ac-fl) (ac-fl) (%) POPULATION (gpcd) RAINFALL
1987 2,891 2,830 61 2.1 N/A NIA 9.7
1988 3,027 2,997 30 1 13,750 197 13,5
1989 2,938 2,785 158 5,2 14,090 186 5.5
1990 2,922 2,755 168 5,7 15,150 172 5.6
1991 2,665 2,484 180 6,8 14,600 163 20.4
1992 2,662 2,533 129 4.8 14,650 162 14.9
1993 2,747 2,600 147 5.4 15,070 163 16.7
1994 2,703 2,487 215 8 15,150 159 12.5
1995 2.628 2,585 43 1.6 15,500 151 20,9
1996 2,794 2.739 55 2 15,500 161 28.3
1997 3,087 3,021 67 2.2 15,500 178 13
1998 2,766 2,567 199 7.2 15,500 159 27,3
1999 3,173 2,983 190 6 15,776 180 12,6
2000 3,384 3,231 153 4.5 15,851 191 18.5
2001 3,303 3,210 93 2.8 16,115 183 19.7
2002 3,503 3,353 150 4,3 16,294 192 10.5
2003 3,517 3,458 41 1,7 16,623 189 10.9
2004 3,594 3,490 104 2,9 16,637 193 13.7
2005 3,415 3,205 210 6,1 16,682 183 17.7
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
After 1990, the City began tracking water use according to customer type, Table 11 outlines the
~ity'~ historical water use by specific category. By using overall water consumption and
Indlv!dual water use by customer type, water demand factors can be determined, which help
predict the City's future water needs according to population projections and available land
within City limits. The City's Water Master Plan (prepared in 2001) presented water demand
factors for the City's water customers. These demand factors can be found in Table 13.
.'.. "c' fa~!tl1~.Hil>toricaIWat~~'Use;BYCat~~e;:f,,! ". !,.. ~
. . ':
Water Use - Acre-Feet
Customer Sector
1990 1995 2000 2005
Residential - Single Family 2104 1892 2436 2459
Residential - Multi Family 263 237 305 307
Commercialllnstitutional 351 315 406 410
Governmental 29 26 34 34
Land~cape Irrigation 175 158 203 205
Agricultural 0 0
Total 2,922 2,628 3,384 3415
5.2 Customer Types
The following is a brief description of the various water customer types found within the City of
Arroyo Grande.
5.2.1 Residential Sector
Residential water use accounts for 81% of the total water consumption in the City of Arroyo
Grande. In 2005, the average use for each single family residence was 425 gallons per day,
The average residential (single and multiple family) per capita use, excluding other water use
categories, has remained fairly constant over the past ten years.
In accordance with the City's General Plan Update, the population of the City is expected to
increase to 20,000 over the next twenty to twenty five years - a growth rate of approximately
1 %. When compared to the existing residential areas, future development in the City is
expected to consist of a limited increase of infill development of homes on larger lots in the
City's rural/suburban areas and an increase of residences on small lots and planned unit
developments in the City's single family and mixed use districts. As a result, conservation
efforts are expected to reduce per capita usage; however, these efforts might be partially offset
by significant areas of the City with rural/suburban residential development. Projected
residential water use can be found in Table 14.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
5.2.2 Commercial Sector
In 2001, the City re-designated a significant portion of the City's commercial corridors from
gen~ral commercial to mixed use, allowing for the potential increase in multi-family and single
family planned unit development density in these areas. The City of Arroyo Grande has a
variety of existing commercial and mixed use land uses including the following general areas:
· The Arroyo Grande Village - Village Core Downtown and Village Mixed Use districts.
The Village area has a small-town, rustic nature and includes such commercial uses as
antique and novelty shops, restaurants, coffee houses, professional offices, and other
small retail operations and allows for residential use.
· Highway 101 and E. Grand' Ave. Corridor - Gateway Mixed Use/Fair Oaks Mixed
Use/Highway Mixed Use districts. This area includes larger retail installations for
general shopping and commercial needs and allows for a variety of higher density
residential uses.
· Halcyon Road - Office Mixed Use district. This area has predominantly medical-related
businesses due to the proximity to Arroyo Grande Hospital and allows for a mix of office
and residential use.
.:..'
· Traffic Way - Traffic Way Mixed use district- This area has predominantly auto-related
and service commercial uses.
· EI Camino Real - Miscellaneous fabrication and small production facilities, and a
hardware store.
. Five Cities Center - This area includes large retail operations for regional shopping.
5.2.3 Industrial Sector
The area in the vicinity of Freeway 101 and EI Camino Real includes an Industrial mixed use
district. This area includes small fabrication and production as well as agricultural supply stores.
There are currently no industrial water connections in the City system. The City does not have
any vacant land zoned for industrial use.
5.2.4 Institutional/Government Sector
The City has a slowly growing institutionallgovernment sector, primarily local government,
elementary schools, a middle school and high school, and a performing arts center. In the
upcoming years, an expansion for City Hall facilities, as well as a community sports center, are
expected to be constructed. However, water use is not estimated to increase significantly for
the institutional government sector.
5.2.5 Agricultural Sector
All agricultural water within the City limits is provided by private wells. The City places a high
value on maintaining agricultural land uses within and immediately adjacent to the City and as a
result, it is expected that agricultural groundwater pumping within the City will remain fairly
constant over the next 20 years, However, potential agricultural conversions outside the City as
well as modified irrigation practices may cause a decrease in the amount of water pumped for
irrigation.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
A stu.dy to determine aVf~rage water consumption for selected housing types was conducted by
staff In October of 2005 In order to compareltestthe validity of the City's water demand factors.
Consumption data was obtained from water meter records from 1999 through 2004 for five
residential sample areas, including large lot single-family; standard lot single-family; small lot
single-family; condominiums; and apartment complexes. Sample areas included an average of
25 units. Based on information provided in the City's 2001 Water Master Plan, and updated by
City staff for residential use, the following water demand factors have been determined.
Tabl.13. Water Demand Factors '.
Zone Description
Demand Factor (gpd)
350 per standard lot
260 er small lot
425 per lot
728 per lot
500 per lot
250 per additional unit
No future development for
zonin
1,400 per acrel
210/unit Planned unit
develo ment
1 ,000 per acrel
210/unit Planned unit
develo ment
1 ,600 per acrel
210/unit Planned unit
develo ment
1,000 per acre
Single Family & Village Residential (SF; VR)
Suburban (RS)
Rural (RR), Hillside (RH), Estate (RE)
Planned Development (PD)
Cond9miniumITownhouses (MF), Apartments (MFA),
Mobile Home Parks MHP, Senior Housin SR
Industrial (I)
Gateway/Fair OakslHighway Mixed Use (GC)
Village Core DowntownNillage Mixed Use (VMU),
Office Mixed Use (OMU)
Public (PF)
5.3 Projected Water Use
'According to the General Plan update (October .2001) and as amended by the Housing Element
(2003 and 2005), the anticipated build-out population of the City is 20,000 residents.
In order to appropriately prepare for adequate water supply for future residents of the City, the
estimated projected water demand must ,be determined. Future water demand is typically
determined using proposed build-out of land within the City's limits along with the demand
factors shown in Table 13. Overall projected water demand for 2000 to 2025 can be found in
Table 14.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-4
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Table 14. ProjectedWater Demand; ElY Customer Type ':, " ",':/,)
,.-".:- '
2010 2015 2020 2025
Customer Sector Accounts Deliveries Accounts Deliveries Accounts Deliveries
Accounts Deliveries
(#) (AFY) (#) (AFY) (#) (AFY) (#) (AFY)
Residential Single 5865 2578 6160 2707 6560 2844 6872 2988
Family
Residential- Multi 110 322 115 338 120 356 127 374
Family
Commercial/Institutional 400 430 420 451 435 474 458 498
Landscape Irngation 128 215 150 215 170 237 179 249
Governmental 48 35 50 35 51 39 53 41
Agricultural 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Industrial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 6551 3580 6895 3760 7336 3950 7689 4150
}
Figure 7 represents the division of water use by category.
6%
1%
9%
E1Single Family
IiIMulti Family
DCommercial I Institutional
ClLandscape I Irrigation
.Government
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-5
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Figure 8 describes projected water supply and demand from 2010 to 2024 based upon a 1% growth rate. Water supply is projected to
increase in 2015 based on the completion of the Desalination or Nacimiento water projects.
;'o\IlC
4600
4400
4200
-
Gl 4000
Gl
II-
Gl 3800
...
~ 3600
3400
3200
3000
Figure 8 Projected Water Supply Vs. Water Demand
-- Projected Water Supply
--- Projected Water Demand
2010
2014
2024
2016
2018
2020
2012
2022
Year
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-6
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Figure 9 describes projected water supply and demand from 2005 to 2010 based upon recent and projected development project
subrnittals. In 2007, the OCSD water a reement is com leted and well ten is anlict ated to come online.
WATER SUPPLY ANALYSIS
3,900.0
3,850.0
3,800,0
_ 3,750.0
"'
~ 3,700.0
...
~ 3,650.0
0(
~ 3,600,0
w
!;;: 3,550.0
;:
3,500.0
3.450.0
3,400.0
3,350,0
9/5/2005
- --- .- .-------.--------
- ---- ---- -. - -... -- - - - '-' . ,-
\
- - - - - ---.....- "'... - ~ -- .,. ,-- --. -- . - -- ., -, - -
- .. _..~--~
~ ~
-_.- --.- - ___MO. l- - - -- ..
t:
--". .- - ._~.- -- -- - --~ - - .- - ---. - .- - .-.
~
.--.- .. - ., - - -- ----- - -. - .J -, .--.- - -- " - --'-~' " ,-
.---. -- - -- - - --- f--- ~- ---.. -- -- - - ----. -,- ,-,
... - f--.-
-, -- - - .._-- . - ~-- --""_.- .. - - -.-.
- -- '- ---- - -- .- -- " ----- - - ---- - - - ,,- --
[}
.. . -- -- - --- - -- -- ---- .- - --- - --- -- -- ~---- -
3/24/2006
10/10/2006
4/28/2007
11/14/2007
DATE
6/1/2008
12/18/2008
71612009
1122/2010
__CUMULATIVE WATER USAGE
(ACFTIYR)
--I!'l- CUMULATIVE WATER SUPPLY
(ACFTIYR)
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-7
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
5.4 Water Shortage Contingency Plan
Water Code Section 10632
10632, The plan shall provide an urban water shortage contingency analysis that
includes each of the following elements that are within the authority of the urban
water supplier:
(a) Stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to
water supply shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water
supply, and an outline of specific water supply conditions which are applicable
to each stage.
(b) An estimate of the minimum water supply available during each of the next
three water years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the
agency's water supply.
(c) Actions to be undertaken by the urban water supplier to prepare for, and
implement during, a catastrophic interruption of water supplies including, but
not limited to, a regional power outage, an earthquake, or other disaster.
(d) Additional, mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices during
water shortages, including, but not limited to, prohibiting the use of potable
water for street cleaning.
ire) Consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages. Each urban
water supplier may use any type of consumption reduction methods in its
water shortage contingency analysis that would reduce water use, are
appropriate for its area, and have the ability to achieve a water use reduction
consistent with up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply
(f) Penalties or charges in excessive use, where applicable.
(g) An analysis of the impacts of each of the actions and conditions described in
subdivisions (a) to (f), inclusive, on the revenues and expenditures of the
urban water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts,
such as the development of reserves and rate adjustments.
(h) A draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance.
(i) A mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the
urban water shortage contingency analysis. .
Following the adoption of the May 2001 Urban Water Management Plan, the City adopted a
water conservation program in May 2003 which directed preparation of a water shortage
contingency analysis, in compliance with State Water Code Section 10632. The following is a
description of the City's conservation program.
Water Suoolv Conditions
The City has developed four water supply conditions that have been incorporated into the
Municipal Code. The water supply conditions are defined as the percentage of the available
water supply currently being consumed (Table 15). Each water supply condition establishes
water use restrictions to be enforced for the declared condition. Such restrictions can be viewed
in Chapter 13.05 of the City's Municipal Code and posted on the City's website at
www,arrovoqrande.orq.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-8
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Table 15.~~te~ Supply CO,nclitiolls
. .. . .. ., .. ... . . . . ,- ..
Water Supply Condition
Normal
Moderately Restricted
Severely Restricted
Critical
Percentage of Water Supply Being
Consumed
0-90%
90-95%
95-99%
100%
As discussed above, residential water use accounts for 80% of the City's total water
consumption. Based on sanitary sewer collection system flows, the City estimates that
approximately 60% of the residential water use is for outdoorlirrigation purposes. In the event of
a water shortage, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply, the City would declare
a Critical Water Supply Condition. Under this condition, water use for irrigation would be
prohibited, which would result in an approximately 48 percent decrease in water consumption.
Combined with the additional restrictions imposed during this condition, the City expects that the
water. consumption could be reduced by 50 percent while still providing for customer's health
and sanitary needs.
Minimum Available Water Suoolv
Chapter 4 discusses the analysis of the minimum available water supply projections for the next
three years. As will be discussed in the next section, the City could receive a reduced Lopez
surface water allocation in the event of a drought; however, current reservoir levels will allow for
normal allocation for the next three years. Based on Lopez availability, and the reliability of
groundwater supplies, the minimum available supply is estimated in Table 16.
"..' , "C" . . "", ,'. ,.. ~jjJi;,/;'i\':
Table1,6;'''''linimum'.Avail~~le\Watllr S~pply '.,
" -.",' ',........,
Source Three-Year Worst-Case Supply
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Groundwater; Arroyo Grande Basin 1298 1298 1298
Groundwater; Pismo Formation 100 170 170
Lopez Reservoir Water Entitlement 2290 2290 2290
Surplus Lopez Water 0 0 0
Total 3,686 3,758 3,758
Units of Measure: Acre-feeUYear
Catastroohic Water Suoolv Interruotion
The City of Arroyo Grande has an Emergency Operations Plan containing preparation and
response procedures for disasters such as earthquakes, floods, wildland fires, dam failures and
terrorism. In addition to the emergency response guidelines established for City personnel, the
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-9
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Plan includ~s a Memorandum of Understanding between cities withiri San Luis Obispo County
to offer assistance as available to neighboring cities during time of disaster.
In the ~vent of an emergency that interrupts use of a surface water source, th~ City will be able
to provide an average flow of 300 gallons per capita per day from the City well water. .
Penalties or Charoes for Excessive Use
In March 2006, a tiered water rate structure will be implemented to discourage excessive water
use. Please refer to Section 6.11 Conservation Pricing.
Chapter 13.05, shown below, describes the City's regulations for excessive water use.
Revenue and Exoenditure Impacts
The intent of the restrictions enforced under each of the Water Supply Conditions is to reduce
water consumption. The City recognizes that as a result of the reduced water consumption
under all conditions besides a Normal Water Supply Condition, revenue from water sales will
decline. It is possible that during a Critical Water Supply Condition, revenues could be reduced
by as much as 50 percent. While revenues may decline, operations and maintenance costs will
not decline because of reduced water consumption.
The C,ity's current rates are set to provide for a reserve fund as well as coverage of 60 days of
operalions and maintenance expense. In the case of a prolonged reduction of water revenues,
the City could offset reduced revenues (up to a 50 percent reduction) with available fund
balances, for a period of two years assuming no change in operating and capital expenditures.
In the case of an extended Critical Water Supply Condition, the City could delay capital
improvements (both routine and non-routine) to reduce expenses, enabling the offset of reduced
revenues for a period of three years. Should a critical water shortage extend beyond three
years, the consideration of a rate increase would be required.
Mechanism for Determinino Water Use Reduction
Potable water production figures are recorded daily at the City Corporation Yard. The daily data
is compiled into monthly reports and sent to the State Department of Health Services and
annual reports sent to the California Department of Water Resources and San Luis Obispo
County. The City also maintains copies of all reports prepared. These reports can be used to
compare monthly and annual water consumption to determine the efficiency of implemented
water conservation measures, If the City determines that the desired level of water
conservation is not being reached, additional conservation measures can be implemented with
the direction of City Council. -.
5.4.1 Lopez Drought Contingency Plan
Zone 3 of the County Flood Control District has prepared an Urban Water Management Plan
that addresses rationing of the City's surface water during drought situations. The following is
an excerpt from the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control District outlining their Water Supply
Drought Contingency Plan for the Lopez Water Supply System.
District Descriotion
Zone 3 of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District was
established to construct and operate the Lopez water supply system, which consists of a 51,800
AF reservoir providing both supply and recreation uses, a 960 AF terminal reservoir providing a
30-day retention. a 6 MGD water treatment plant and 16 mile water transmission line with
turnouts to various contractors.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-10
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
The contracto~s are primarily municipal water purveyors: The Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover
Beach., and Plsmo Beach, the Oceano Community Services District, and County Service Area
12 whl.ch In turn serves ~ 9 ~ubcontractors (the largest three entitlements of which are held by
the Avila County Water DistriCt, the Port San Luis Harbor District, and the City of Pismo Beach).
In addition, stream releases are made from the main reservoir to replenish groundwater which
s~,:"es high intensity agricultural users in the Arroyo Grande Valley, Cienaga Valley, ~nd the
Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach plus the Oceano Community
Services District, but not CSA No. 12.
The 8,730 AF yield of the project has been apportioned by agreements. Each of the contractors
and subcontractors has contractual entitlements. No peaking or fire flow capacity is required of
Zone 3, though in practice, the contractors have occasionally utilized the system for such
purposes.
Stream releases, likewise, are provided a specific entitlement; however, management of the
releases to avoid surface flow to the ocean has generally resulted in an unreleased portion,
which is offered to the contactors as surplus water.
Coordinated Plannina
Due to the contractual obligations, Zone 3 has little operational flexibility. It exists to serve the
contractors and the taxpayers within Zone 3. Within the flow and entitlement limits of the
contracts, it operates in direct response to the contractors demands. Thus, it has been the
consensus of the recipients that water continue to be delivered upon demand until no water is
available (rather than to ration the supply to preserve reservoir storage).
Water Use
Deliveries to date have been normal.
Worst Case Water Suoolv Availabilitv
With approximately 22,000 AF presently in storage, if there were no inflows to the reservoir and
deliveries continued unabated, the system would be out of water in approximately 1.5 years.
With minimal rainfall (a more realistic appraisal), the outlook would be extended an additional
year. Continuing deliveries and drawing down the reservoir to the 4,000 AF minimum pool is
being proposed. Evaporation losses from the reservoir have been approximately 2,000 AFY.
Groundwater sources, which are largely insulated from this effect, are available to the municipal
contractors and to the agricultural sector. Groundwater sources are not available to CSA No.
12.
CSA No. 12 users are more at risk since they have no alternative source of supply. However,
their usage is sufficiently small (approximately 80 AFY) that any rainfall should be able to supply
their needs. Alternatively, water could be obtained from the minimum pool (4000 AF) or
purchased from a groundwater source and delivered by the pipeline system.
Staaes of Action
None are contemplated,
Mandatorv Prohibitions on Water Use
Due to contractual obligations, Zone 3 has no ability to impose any such prohibitions. Zone 3
does not recognize that emergency regulation by the State may impose prohibitions on water
use.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-11
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Consumotion Limits
Due to contractural obligations, Zone 3 has no ability to impose limits. Zone 3 does not
recognize that emergency regulation by the State may impose consumption limits.
Penalties or CharQes for Excessive Use
Not applicable.
Analvsis of Revenue and Exoenditure Imoacts
Zone 3 operates on property tax receipts and billings to contractors. This process would not
change with a reduction, or cessation of flow. Impacts to Zone 3 would be limited to a possible
temporary reassignment of Operations Personnel.
Imolementation of the Plan
This plan needs no implementation, as it is a reaffirmation of current operations.
5.4.2 Groundwater
In the event the surface water is unavailable for a significant period of time due to an emergency
or unprecedented drought, the City will be able to provide an average flow of 300 gallons per
capit~ day from the City well water. This figure exceeds the typical health standard of 50
gallons per capita day.
There currently exists Sections in the City Municipal Code, which addresses water use
restrictions, which may be implemented during critical water supply conditions. These Sections
of the Municipal Code are shown below:
13.05.010 Water supply conditions.
A. The city council shall from time to time adopt resolutions declaring the level of
the city water supply condition, which in turn will determine the water conservation measures in
effect at any particular time within the city. The four levels of water supply conditions are:
1. Normal Water Supply Condition. Dc-fined as consuming zero to ninety (90)
percent of the annually available water supply;
2. Moderately Restricted Water Supply Condition. Defined as consuming ninety
(90) to ninety-five (95) percent of the annually available water supply;
3. Severely Restricted Water Supply Condition. Defined as consuming ninety-five
(95) to ninety-nine (99) percent of the annually available water supply; and
4. Critical Water Supply Condition. Dc-fined as consuming one hundred (100)
percent of the annually available water supply.
B. Upon adoption of the required resolution, the restrictions and measures identified
in this chapter shall take effect immediately.
C. The city council may from time to time adopt resolutions designed to implement
the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 540 ~ 1, Exh. A (part), 2003)
13.05.020 Normal water supply conditions.
During normal water supply conditions the following restrictions and measures shall be
in effect:
A. Outdoor water use for washing vehicles, boats, paved surfaces, buildings and
other similar uses shall be attended and have hand-controlled water devices, typically in-eluding
spring loaded shutoff nozzles.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-12
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
B. Outdoor irrigation resulting in excessive gutter runoff is prohibited. (Ord. 540 S 1,
Exh. A (part), 2003)
13.05.030 Moderately restricted water supply conditions.
During moderately restricted water supply conditions the following restrictions and
measures shall be in effect;
A. Outdoor water use for washing vehicles, boats, buildings or other similar uses
shall be attended and have hand-controlled watering devices, typically including spring-loaded
shutoff nozzles.
B. Use of water, which results in excessive gutter runoff, is prohibited.
C. No water shall be used for cleaning driveways, patios, parking lots, sidewalks,
streets, or other such uses except as found necessary by the city to protect the public health or
safety.
D.
1.
Outdoor Irrigation.
Outdoor irrigation is prohibited between the hours of ten (10:00) a.m. and four
p.m.
2. Irrigation of private and public landscaping, turf areas and gardens is permitted at
even-numbered addresses only on Mondays and Thursdays and at odd-numbered addresses only
on TU,esdays and Fridays. No irrigation of private and public landscaping, turf areas and gardens
is perlnitted on Wednesdays. Irrigation is permitted at all addresses on Saturdays and Sundays
however, in all cases customers are directed to use no more water than necessary to maintain
landscaping.
E. Use of potable water for compaction or dust control purposes in construction
activities is prohibited. (Ord. 540 S I, Exh. A (part), 2003)
13.05.040 Severely restricted water supply conditions.
During severely restricted water supply conditions the following restrictions and
measures shall be in effect:
A. Use of water, which results in excessive gutter runoff, is prohibited.
B. Outdoor Water Use -- Except Irrigation.
1. No water shall be used for cleaning driveways, patios, parking lots, sidewalks,
streets or other such use except where necessary to protect the public health and safety;
2. Outdoor water use for washing vehicles shall be attended and have hand-
controlled watering devices, typically including spring-loaded shutoff nozzles.
C. Outdoor Irrigation.
1. Outdoor irrigation is prohibited between the hours often (10:00) a.m. and four
p.m.
2. Irrigation of private and public landscaping, turf areas and gardens is permitted at
even-numbered addresses only on Mondays and Thursdays and at odd-numbered addresses only
on Tuesdays and Fridays. No irrigation of private and public landscaping, turf areas and gardens
is permitted on Wednesdays. Irrigation is permitted at all addresses on Saturdays and Sundays
however, in all cases customers are directed to use no more water than necessary to maintain
landscaping.
D. Emptying and refilling swimming pools and commercial spas is prohibited except
to prevent structural damage and/or to provide for the public health and safety.
B. Use of potable water for compaction or dust control purposes in construction
activities is prohibited. (Ord. 540 S 1, Exh. A (part), 2003)
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-13
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
13.05.050 Critical water supply conditions.
In addition to the conditions specified in Section 13 .05.040, the following restrictions
and measures shall be in effect during critical water supply conditions:
A. Outdoor irrigation of private or public landscaping, turf areas and gardens is
prohibited.
B. Outdoor water use for washing vehicles is prohibited except at a public car wash
facility.
The city council may also impose any water-rationing requirements as it deems
appropriate to protect public health, safety, welfare, comfort and convenience. (Ord. 540 S I,
Exh. A (part), 2003)
13.05.060 Penalties for noncompliance.
A. Violation of any provision of this chapter may result in termination of water
service until such violation is corrected, and until all appropriate fees and penalties are paid in
full and will be subject to the following administration procedure:
I. Written notice to the alleged offender, including the furnishing of informational
material and advice where appropriate;
2. Recovery of all city staff costs, including overhead, for any second or greater
offense within anyone-year period;
.~ 3. Additional civil administrative penal-ties for any third or greater offense within any
one year period;
4. The right to appeal first to the utility billing adjustment committee and then to the
city council. (Ord. 540 S I, Exh. A (part), 2003)
13.05.070 Violation--Penalty.
In addition to, and completely separate from, the civil enforcement provisions of the
ordinance codified in this chapter, any person who knowingly and willfully violates the pro-
visions of this chapter shall be guilty of a criminal misdemeanor as provided in the general
penalty provisions of this code. All previous attempts by the city to obtain compliance by the
defendant may be introduced as evidence of the offender's knowledge and willfulness. (Ord. 540
S I, Exh. A (part), 2003)
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 5: Water Use
5-14
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
6.0 WATER CONSERVATION
Water Code Section 10631 (f)
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the
following:
(f) Provide a description of the supplier's water demand management measures. This
description shall include all of the following:
(1) A description of each water demand management measure that is currently being
~mplemented, or scheduled for implementation, including the steps necessary to
Implement any proposed measures, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(A) Water survey programs for single-family residential and multifamily
residential customers.
(8) Residential plumbing retrofit
(C) System water audits, leak detection, and repair
(D) Metering with commodity rates for all new connections and retrofit
of existing connections.
(E) Large landscape conservation programs and incentives.
(F) High efficiency washing machine rebate programs
j (G) Public information programs
(H) School education programs
(I) Conservation programs for commercial, industrial, and institutional
accounts
(J) Wholesale agency programs
(K)Conservation pricing
(L) Water conservation coordinator
(M) Water waste prohibition
(N) Residential ultra-low-flush toilet replacement programs
(2) A schedule of implementation for all water demand management measures
proposed or described in the plan.
(3) A description of the methods, if any, that the supplier will use to evaluate the
effectiveness of water demand management measures implemented or described
under the plan.
(4) An estimate, if available, of existing conservation savings on water use within the
supplier's service area, and the effect of the savings on the supplier's ability to further
reduce demand.
The City implemented a phased water conservation program, including many demand
management measures (DMM), in 2003. It is the goal of the City to reduce the per
capita water use 160 gpcd. In 2005, per capita water use was 183gpcd, which was an
average rainfall year. Continued implementation of DMMs will be monitored by City staff
to determine future impacts on per capita water use.
The Water Conservation Program is divided into two components: Phase I - plumbing
retrofit, and Phase II - irrigation system assessment, enforcement of City water
conservation regulations, washing machine rebates, public information and education
programs and irrigation system improvements or landscape modifications.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
6.1 Water Survey Programs for Single-Family Residential and Multi-family
Residential Customers
City staff provides leak detection information and assistance to residents. Although
currently there is not a formalized water survey program, staff monitors meter readings
for discrepancies or variations in historic use and will inform and assist residents of
potential leaks, Staff also routinely performs leak detection surveys upon request. The
City's website includes up-to-date information on the City's water conservation programs
and residents are encouraged to contact the Public Works Department for questions
regarding water use.
A service request database is maintained regarding the number of residents assisted
and the number of surveys performed. It is estimated that twenty-five leaks are detected
per year for residential connections.
The City has obtained materials and identified steps necessary to implement a
formalized water survey program that includes a commitment of additional staff
resources, development of a statistical tracking database and preparation of water
survey material. Specifically, implementing the water survey program will consist of the
foliowing actions:
Table 17. Sample Water Survey Program
a) Develop and implement a strategy targeting and marketing water use surveys to single-
family residential and multi-family residential customers.
b) Directly contract via letter or teiephone not less than 20% of single-family residential
customers and 20% of multi-family residential customers each reporting period.
c) Surveys shall include indoor and outdoor components, and at minimum shall have the
following elements:
Indoor -
i) Check for leaks, including toilets, faucets, and meter check
ii) Check for showerhead flow rates. aerator flow rates, and offer to replace
or recommend replacement, as necessary
Iii) Check toilet flow rates and offer to install or recommend installation of
displacement device or direct customer to ULFT replacement program,
as necessary; replace leaking toilet flapper, as necessary.
Outdoor -
i) Check irrigation system and timers
i1) Review or develop customer irrigation schedule
Recommended but not required
i) Measure currently landscaped area
ii) Measure total irrigable area
d) Provide customer with evaluation results and water saving recommendations; leave
information packet with customer.
e) Track surveys offered, surveys completed. survey results. and survey costs.
Implementation Schedule
a) Develop and implement a strategy targeting and marketing water use surveys to single-
family and multi-family residential customers by the end of the first reporting period
following the date of implementation,
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
r
Table 17. Sample Water Survey Program
Documentation
Develop a database to track survey delivery and response
Criteria to Determine Implementation Status
a) Develop and implement a strategy targeting and marketing water use surveys to single.
family residential and multi-family residential customers.
b) Directly contact 20% of the single-family and 20% of multi-family residential customers.
c) Complete surveys for 15% of single-family and 15% of multi-family residential customers
within 10 years of date of implementation,
fordeterminin the results of the SUNe s.
Please refer to section 6.10 for additional information regarding a Water Conservation
Coordinator).
6.2 Residential Plumbing Retrofit
The first phase of the City's Water Conservation Program includes the Plumbing Retrofit
Piogram, which was implemented in 2004. Program marketing includes retrofit request
forms sent to all single family homes built prior to 1992. In addition City staff door-
tagged each property that did not respond to the survey. Furthermore, announcements
were sent in the City's utility bills, ,on the City's website and in the City's quarterly
newsletter the Stagecoach Express.
The City has a contracted plumber to retrofit fixtures for residents. The City provides
labor and materials for replacement of toilets, shower-heads, faucet aerators, and
pressure regulators are installed or adjusted as required. The City currently has
satisfied the 75% saturation requirement for single-family housing units. In 2006, the
City will be targeting multi-family households for retrofitting. Funding for the Plumbing
Retrofit Program is derived from the City's Water Neutralization Fund, which has been
developed to offset increased water use by allowing in lieu fees of performing plumbing
retrofits for toilets, Table 19 includes statistics for the evaluation of the plumbing retrofit
program.
Number of showerhead and
aerators Installed
Number of pressure
re ulators Installed
Number of ULF toilets
Installed
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
ACTUAL WATER SAVINGS
Table 18 Plumbln' RetrofitPro ram '..,. "
2003-2005 TotalCostlSaviri 5
2,827 17,000 cost
200
$20,000 cost
1,680
$378,000 cost
$415,000 cost
34 AFY savin s
In 2005 the City adopted an ordinance for a mandatory plumbing retrofit program
applicable to the resale of property. These regulations can be found in Chapter 13.06 of
the City's Municipal Code.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
6.3 Distribution System Water Audits Leak Detection and Repair
The Public Works Department accounts for water production and consumption and
rep~rts. results to t~e California Department of Water Resources each year. The City
maintains an on-going program of meter testing and replacement that tracts the age and
testing frequency of each city meter. Water for flushing operations and other
maintenan~ procedures is also estimated and recorded.
Between the years 1987 and 2005, unaccounted for water has averaged 4%. Based on
City's water audits, it is anticipated that future unaccounted for water will remain below
5%. Additionally, the City repairs all water main and service leaks upon notification or
detection. The City also uses ultrasonic leak detectors to survey water mains and
services. To date, the City has surveyed approximately ten miles of distribution mains.
In conjunction with this DMM, the City has an ongoing funded Capital Improvement
Program that replaces older water mains and services.
6.4 Metering With Commodity Rates for all New Connections and retrofit of
existing connections
All water service connections to the City are metered, and billing is proportional to
volume of use. The City currently has 6,200 connections.
6.5 Large Landscape Water Conservation Programs and Incentives
The City has 102 dedicated irrigation water meters. Currently, these irrigation meters do
not have water budgets. As a financial incentive to install an irrigation water meter, the
meter is not subject to City sewer charges.
Large landscape users within the City include seven parks, a sports complex, and the
Arroyo Grande District Cemetery. Following the 1985 UWMP, the City identified the
Soto Sports Complex as a significant irrigation water user and proceeded with a storm
water reclamation project for irrigation of the site, as described in Chapter 5. This storm
water project has resulted in a decrease in water use by 100 AFY. Currently, the
cemetery is the largest irrigation user with an average consumption of approximately 30
AF per year.
As part of phase II of the City's Water Conservation Program, the City will provide
assistance on improving water irrigation efficiency and modifications, such as the
replacement of sprinkler irrigation with drip irrigation. Additionally, the City will provide
financial incentiveS by supplying irrigation system assessments for the top water users.
This program is scheduled to by implemented in May of 2007.
The City is working on a landscape conservation ordinance scheduled to be complete by
December 2006. Currently, all new development projects are required to mitigate for
water impacts by providing native and drought resistant landscaping, installing irrigation
systems that are automated, and including low flow head and drip irrigation, and limiting
use of landscaping which uses high water demand.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-4
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
6.6 High-efficiency Washing Machine Rebate Program
The washing machine rebate program is an optional component of Phase " of the City's
Water Conservation Program. The City may participate in the "Lightwash" program
funded by the California Public Utilities Program. This program offers rebates for the
replacement of washing machines in common use areas, including laundromats and
multi-family residential laundry facilities. The implementation of the "Lightwash" program
involves entering into an MOU and depositing funds equal to the amount of expected
rebates. The CPUC contributes $100 dollars towards rebates for multi-family residential
washing machines and $150 dollars towards rebates for laundry facilities. The City
would deposit the amount of funds equaling the amount of expected rebates.
In conjunction with this effort, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern Gas Company both
currently offer rebates of up to $75 for installation of a high-efficiency washing machine.
6.7 Public Information
The City has a forum to promote water conservation in its newsletter entitled "The Stage
C6ach Express." The newsletter provides an opportunity to inform the public on
conservation efforts, retrofit opportunities, arid new City conservation policies. In 2004
and 2005, the City sent out informational brochures on water conservation with utility
bills, shown below.
d drop eflo
e"~ ,', '-llll
" l1'.:p;',?"" ,.
. ~.,,#i..~."".*"..ll .
E" ...
if.iC)""'~'
~."'''7'.:,
~:~.~i;.,
Ji~l, j,1+\
~s~t~~;~~
lIaw to ContAct u.:
Public Work.. UepD.rtmerU .
1:.'/1':1 klh ~tr"e{
Anoyo Gr.nde. CA !I:1.&;IO
Phone: jlM)~) "7;~'IUUO
I"IUI; l.folO1S) 41:H),UI:.!
_.lUTUyoeflUlde.ofll
'~.C";.i
,m~_, .
",,;:-.-.~:~t
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-5
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
All water bills show water usage in comparison to previous years usage. The City's
w\lbsite includes up-to-date information on the City's website. Other opportunities for
pdblic involvement will occur as an integral par! of this Plan. The City will continue to
implement this demand management measure to keep the public aware of the
importance of conservation.
6.8 School Education
Although the City has obtained school education materials from the 'Waterwise"
program, the City has not yet implemented a School Information Program to
promote water conservation. Phase II of the City's Water Conservation Program
includes a public information component which may be expanded to include a
school education program.
Implementation shall consist of at least the following actions:
Sample School Education Program
.:. Implement a school education program to promote water conservation and water
conservation related benefits,
.:. Programs include working with school districts and private schools in the City's
service area to provide instructional assistance, educational materials, and classroom
presentations that identify urban, agricultural, and environmental issues and
conditions in the local watershed. Education materials include 'Waterwise" and meet
the state education framework requirements, and grade appropriate materials shall
be distributed to grade levels K-3, 4-6, 7-8 and high school.
.:. Document number of school presentations made during reporting period,
.:. Document number and type of curriculum materials developed and/or provided by the
City, including confinmation that curriculum materials meet state education framework
requirements and are grade-level appropriate.
.:. Document number of students reached/session,
.:. Document number of in-service presentations or teacher's workshops conducted
during reporting period.
.:. Develop annual budget for school education programs related to conservation.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-6
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
6.9 Conservation programs for Commercial, Industrial and Institutional
Accounts
Currently, the City has 410 commercial and institutional accounts that represent
approximately 12% of the City's total accounts. Retrofitting is performed by developers
in order to offset water use anticipated with new commercial or residential construction.
This process is applied as a mitigation measure during the planning process. In June
1997, the City was able to further its efforts toward implementation of this demand
management measure as a result of water neutralization for a 44-acre commercial
development. The mitigation measure for the project indicated that the developer should
implement a retrofit program to offset 48 AFY of water use. As part of this effort, the City
identified the top 20% of water users in the residential and commercial sectors. This
identification process was facilitated by a computer database containing categorized
metered use data. Retrofitting efforts continue as a priority as new development
continues. The capabilities of the water use data will allow the City to update the list of
top water users in conjunction with the retrofit process. Since most of the commercial
and institutional water accounts have now been retrofitted, the City allows developers to
pay an in lieu fee to offset water impacts. ,This fee has provided revenue for the City's
wilter neutralization fund. The City will continue to implement this demand management
measure for all new developments.
6.10 Wholesale Agency Programs
The City is not a wholesaler provider, and hence wholesale agency programs are not
applicable.
6.11 Conservation Pricing
In March 2006, the City is implementing a conservation water rate structure based upon
a water and sewer rate study adopted by City Council on June 14, 2005. The intent of
the conservation rate structure is to reduce residential water consumption per account.
The tiered (inclining block) structure is designed to allow single-family and multi-family
residential customers to continue to use the average consumption at nearly the same
price but encourage those customers that use water above the average to conserve
water through higher price signals. Under the tiered rate structure, it is estimated that
3,500 households use an amount below 32 ccf and 2,000 households use an amount
above 32 ccf. Because irrigation accounted for 6.3% of the overall water usage in
FY2003-04, and 4.5% in FY 2004-05, it is apparent that large users are those whose
properties have large landscaped areas. It is anticipated that this program will result in a
5% drop in residential water use. When accompanied by the public education and
water conservation incentiyes.
Table 20 includes the rate structure for the new billing rates for different levels of water
use.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-7
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Table 17. Water Rates and Service Charges
Inside City Outside City
Meter Size FY 05106 FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 08109 FY 05106 FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 08109
Inches $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth
5/8 $ 4,30 $ 4,60 $ 4.90 $ 5.25 $ 8.60 $ 9,20 $ 9,80 $ 10.50
3/4 4.30 4.60 4.90 5.25 8.60 9.20 9,80 10.50
I 5.05 5.40 5.80 6,20 10,10 10.80 11.60 12.40
1-1/2 6.05 6.45 6.90 7.40 12,10 12.90 13.80 14.80
2 8.70 9.30 9.95 10.65 17.40 18.60 19,90 21.30
3 28.60 30.60 32.75 35.05 57,20 61.20 65,50 70,10
4 35,90 38.40 41.10 44.00 71.80 76.80 82,20 88.00
6 53.10 58.80 60.80 65,05 106.20 113.60 121.60 130.10
8 73.90 79.05 84.60 90.50 147.80 158.10 169.20 181.00
Volume Charges
Inside City Outside City
~ FY 05106 FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 08109 FY 05106 FY 06107 FY 07/08 FY 08109
Customer Class $/Ccf $/Ccf $/Ccf S/Ccf $/Ccf $/Ccf $/Ccf $/Ccf
Single Family [aJ
First 12 Ccf I bi-month $ 0.96 $ 1.02 $ 1.09 $ 1.16 $ 1.20 $ 1.28 $ 1.36 $ 1.45
Next 20 Ccf I bi-month 1.06 1.13 1.2! 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
Next 32 Ccf I bi-month 1.20 1.28 1.37 1.46 1.50 1.60 1.71 1.83
Over 64 Ccf I bi-month 1.45 1.55 1.66 1.77 1.81 1.94 2.08 2.21
Multi-Family [aJ
First 12 Ccf! bi-month 0.96 $ 1.02 1.09 1.16 1.20 1.28 1.36 1.45
Next 6 Ccf I bi-month 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
Next 12 Ccf I bi-month 1.20 1.28 1.37 1.46 1.50 1.60 1.71 1.83
Over 30 Ccf / bi-month 1.45 1.55 1.66 1.77 1.81 1.94 2.08 2.21
Business 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
Church 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
School 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
Hospital 1.06 1.l3 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.5\ 1.61
Irrigation 1.16 1.24 1.33 1.42 1.45 1.55 1.66 1.78
Motel 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.6\
Convalescent Homes 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
Other 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.51 1.61
Water Wheeling 1.05 1.12 1.20 1.28
Hydrant 7,67 8.21 8,78 9,39
[a] Rates are on a per constructed unit basis
Fire Protection Charges
Hvdrant Size FY 05106 FY 06107 FY 07/08 FY 08109
Inches $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth $ Imonth
l.'h $ 1.76 $ 1.88 $ 2,01 $ 2,15
2 1.76 1.88 2.0t 2,\5
3 5.25 5,62 6,01 6.43
/ 4 10.53 11.27 12.06 12.90
6 29.24 31.29 33.48 35.82
8 61.40 65.70 70.30 75.22
10 105.26 112.63 120.51 128.95
City of Arroyo Grande 6-8 2005 Urban Water Management Plan
Section 6: Water Conservation DRAFT
I~
!
In addition to the tiered water rate structure, the City has been billing sewer charges
according to volume of water used as shown below.
Table 18. Sewer Rates and Service Charges
Customer Class
Monthly Cnstomer Charge [dJ
FY 2004/05
[a]
FY 2005/06
[h]
FY 2006/07
[c]
FY 2007/08
[c]
FY 2008/09
[c]
All Customers
$ 2.05
$ 2,10
$ 2,10
$ 2.10
$ 2.15
Volnme Charge - $ per hnndred cnbic reel [e]
Single Family [I] $ 0,31 $ 0.37 $ 0.37 $ 0,37 $ 0.39
Multi Family [I] 0.45 0.52 0,52 0.52 0.54
Business 0,52 0,58 0.58 0.58 0,60
Church 0,52 0,58 0.58 0.58 0.60
School 0,52 0.58 0,58 0.58 0,60
Mospital 0.52 0.58 0.58 0,58 0,60
Motel 0,52 0.58 0,58 0,58 0,60
Convalescent Homes 0.52 0,58 0.58 0.58 0.60
Other 0,52 0,58 0.58 0,58 0,60
[a] Rates currently in effective.
[h] Rates effective September I, 2005.
[c] Rates effective with June bills of previous year to be fully effective for the entire fiscal year.
[d] Monthly charge per account, dwelling unit, or mobile home space.
[eJ Charged based on metered water volume.
[I] Single family class retums 50 percent of metered water to the sewer system, multifamily class retums
75 percent, and all other classes retum 85 percent. Because sewer volume rates are proposed to be
charged based on metered water use, volume rates are lower for the single family and multi-family class
because the cost of service is calculated on sewer volume. but recovered on metered water volume.
City staff will measure the effectiveness of the water and sewer rate programs by
comparing usage data annually.
6.12 Water Conservation Coordinator
Prior to 1991, the City employed a part-time conservation coordinator, Due to budgetary
constraints, this position was eliminated and conservation duties have been absorbed by
the Public Works Department.
6.13 Water Waste Prohibition
Currently, Title 13 of the City's Municipal Code makes is unlawful for any person to
willfully or negligently waste water (please refer to Chapter 5).
6.14 Residential Ultra-low flush Toilet Replacement Programs
The City administers this DMM as part of the residential plumbing retrofit program
described in Section 6.2.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-9
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
6.15 Evaluation of Demand Management Measures Not Implemented
Water Code Section 10631(g)
9g) An evaluation of each water demand management measure listed in paragraph
(1) of subdivision (f) that not currently being implemented or scheduled for
implementation. In the course of the evaluation, first consideration shall be given to
water demand management measures, or combination of measures, that offer lower
incremental costs than expanded or additional water supplies. This evaluation shall
do all of the following:
(1) Take into account economic and non-economic factors, including
environmental, social, health, customer impact, and technological factors.
(2) Include a cost-benefit analysis, identifying total benefits and total costs.
(3) Include a description of funding available to implement any planned water
supply project that would provide water at a higher unit cost.
(4) Include a description of the water supplier's legal authority to implement
the measure and efforts to work with other relevant agencies to ensure the
implementation of the measure and to share the cost of implementation.
}
6.15.1 Demand Management Measures
The City has implemented or is planning to implement all applicable demand
management measures as part of the Water Conservation Program. Additional
staffing for a Water Conservation Coordinator may be required to fully implement
DMMs as the City progresses into phase II of the Water Conservation Program.
6.16 Recycled Water Plan
Water Code Section 10633
10633. The plan shall provide, to the extent available, information on recycled water
and its potential for use as a water source in the service area of the urban water
supplier. To the extent practicable, the preparation of the plan shall be coordinated
with local water, wastewater, groundwater, and planning agencies.
6.16.1 Current Recycling System
Since 1990, the City has operated the Soto Sports Complex Storm Water Reclamation
Project. This project includes a forty-acre joint use facility, which serves as a collection
point for drainage from a third of the City's area. Storm water is collected for the
subsequent irrigation of a park and seven athletic fields. The estimated irrigation
capacity of the system is 100 AFY. The system includes drainage water sumps, an
irrigation well, two booster pump stations, an irrigation system, and a construction water
fill station.
6.16.2 Proposed Water Reclamation
The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) provides collection,
treatment, and disposal of wastewater for the communities of Arroyo Grande, Oceano,
and Grover Beach. The total population served is approximately 30,000 persons
producing an average daily flow of 2.8 millions of gallons of wastewater per day. In
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-10
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
1982, and again in 1993, SSLOCSD hired a consultant to study opportunities to provide
recycled water to the surrounding communities. Potential uses include agricultural
andlor landscape irrigation, groundwater recharge, habitat restoration, and industrial
uses. Unfortunately, the SSLOCSD treatment plant is geographically isolated from the
potential reclamation customers. As a result, it was generally determined that the scope
of capital improvements necessary to treat the wastewater to the required level,
transport it to the potential use areas, and distribute it to the individual customers make
the project economically infeasible.
Another report, titled Water Recycling Progress Report, was prepared in 2001 to analyze
the reclamation possibilities and associated costs that exist for the SSLOCSD. While
advances in reclamation technology have reduced the cost of wastewater reclamation
considerably, findings from the report indicate that the market for recycled water is still
not available and overall capital improvement costs would be too great to recommend
water reclamation for the SSLOCSD at this time.
Water Division staff members will continue to monitor the City's water reclamation efforts
and will update this UWMP accordingly.
',~.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 6: Water Conservation
6-11
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
7;0 WATER QUALITY IMPACTS AND WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY
Water Code Sections 10634 & 10635
10634. The plan shall include information, to the extent practicable, relating to the
quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year
increments as described in subdivision (a) of Section 10631, and the manner in which
water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability.
10635. (a) Every urban water supplier shall include, as part of its urbafJ water
management plan, an assessment of the reliability of its water service to its
customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. This water supply and
demand assessment shall compare the total water supply sources available to the
water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years, in five-year
increments, for a normal water year, a single dry water year, and multiple dry water
years. The water service reliability assessment shall be based upon the information
compiled pursuant to Section 10631, including available data from state, regional, or
local agency population projections within the service area of the urban water
supplier.
(b) The urban water supplier shall provide that portion of its urban water management
plan prepared pursuant to this article to any city or county within which it provides
water supplies no later than 60 days after the submission of its urban water
management plan.
(c) Nothing in this article is intended to create a right or entitlement to water service or
any specific level of water service.
(d) Nothing in this article is intended to change existing law concerning an urban
water supplier's obligation to provide water service to its existing customers or to any
potential future customers.
The City shall sustain city-wide water efficiency programs and strive to provide an
adequate supply of high quality water which
. Meets all Federal and State standards;
. Provides uninterrupted water fiow at sufficient pressures;
. Provides fire protection.
The City shall allocate funding to meet the goals and objectives presented in this
section. The City's Public Works Department's mission statement is to ensure and
maintain the integrity of the City's water system and supply while promoting excellence
in personal achievement and customer service.
The City currently receives its water from two sources, the Lopez Reservoir, and
groundwater. Over the past twenty years, surface water treatment and groundwater
treatment standards and regulations have become more stringent. With the enactment
of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) in 1974, Congress authorized the federal
government to establish national drinking water regulations. Since that time, many
amendments have been made to the act, which require additional monitoring and
thereby increased operational costs. The following sections discuss the impacts of the
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 7: Water Quality
7-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
current regulations on the City's and Lopez water treatment facilities and potential
impacts of any foreseeable amendments to the current regulations,
7.1 Surface Water
The City of Arroyo Grande depends on surface water to meet most of its water
requirements. The Lopez Reservoir, located seven miles northeast of the Village of
Arroyo Grande, has been providing water to the City since 1970. The Lopez Water
Treatment Plant is a conventional plant that includes pre-chlorination, coagulation,
flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, post chlorination and disinfection. Currently, the
plant uses chloramines as the primary disinfectant. The plant has operated successfully
for over 35 years with only minor modifications.
Since the existing water treatment plant was built, the Safe Drinking Water Act was
adopted and was significantly amended. The 1986 amendments were extremely broad
in scope and required implementation of new regulations by the U.S. Environmental
P~otection Agency. The Safe Drinking Water Act also required the Environmental
Protection Agency to specify criteria under which filtration is required as a treatment
technique for surface supplies. On June 29, 1989, the Environmental Protection Agency
issued the Surface Water Treatment Rule, which defines the standards for surface water
treatment and has specific compliance deadlines.
The purpose of the regulation is to protect the public, as much as possible, from
waterborne diseases. Waterborne diseases, most notably giardia lamblia,
cryptosporidium, and legionella, are most commonly transmitted by surface water
contamination. For the City of Arroyo Grande, the most significant issue is the
regulation aimed at reducing the formation of disinfeclion-by- products (DBP),
specifically trihalomethanes (THM's). THM's are a group of compounds formed during
disinfection by the reaction of chlorine with naturally occurring organics. While the City
has consistently met the current 80 micrograms-per-Iiter limits, there have been
occasional instances in which the standard has been exceeded due to the high organic
content of Lopez Reservoir water during certain times of the year. The new regulations
require increased chlorine contact times, which will cause the THM levels to exceed the
regulations, It is anticipated that the new regulations will reduce the allowable level for
THM's in the future.
Second to disinfection-by-products, is nitrite content. Due to the use of ammonia and
chlorine to form chloramines, it is possible for nitrification to occur in the reservoirs
where there is not adequate turnover. The City staff continually monitors the distribution
system and reservoir detention times to assure adequate turnover. This ensures good
quality water.
In April 2004, Black & Veatch Engineering prepared a Basis of Design Report (BDR) for
an upgrade to the Lopez WTP. The planned upgrade is designed for improvements to
the treatment process to ensure a reliable supply in response to changing regulations
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 7: Water Quality
7-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
while meeting the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation
D!st~ict's (District) b~~eline needs .to participating agencies. The proposed plant upgrade
will Include the addition of chemical pretreatment, a new membrane filtration system
and disinfection to produce water that meets or exceeds current state and nationai
standards. A dissolved air flotation (DAF) unit will be constructed for pretreatment while
an encased pressurized membrane system will be used for primary filtration. In addition
to the process upgrade, the new layout includes necessary facilities for a complete
operational facility including chemical storage and pump facilities along with a light
maintenance facility.
While the planned upgrade will ensure that product water meets the appropriate
standards, an upgrade in hydraulic capacity is not anticipated. Currently the maximum
capacity of the plant is 6.0 MGD. Major infrastructure for the proposed upgrade is being
designed for 6.7 MGD, however the new membrane filters will be installed with an
operating capacity of 6.0 MGD. Historically, the treatment plant operates at an average
of 3.0 MGD, 1 MGD less than the contractual requirement from Lopez Reservoir.
7.2 Groundwater
,I
.'
Groundwater was the exclusive source of drinking water serving the City of Arroyo
Grande until 1970. Since then, the City has been receiving water from Lopez reservoir in
addition to the City's pumping from the Arroyo Grande Basin and Pismo Formation
Basin,
The Safe Drinking Water Act governs groundwater quality requirements along with
surface water. Like surface water, groundwater must meet the standards set in the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Analytical techniques now allow for detection of lower levels of
regulated water contaminants. As new contaminants are added to the regulatory list
issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and State regulatory agencies,
there maybe impacts on the City's water treatment operations.
7.3 Water Quality Impact on Water Reliability
At the present time, production from one of the City's seven wells exceeds the maximum
contaminant level for nitrate concentration. This condition is corrected by blending prior
to distribution. Additionally, one well exceeds the maximum contaminant level for
manganese. This is reduced by filtration prior to distribution. Given the City's use of
both surface and groundwater, and the capability of the water treatment system, the City
anticipates meeting SDWA requirements in the future and that supplies will remain
unaffected by water quality impacts.
7.4 Water Service Reliability
The Urban Water Plan Act requires that every urban supplier include an assessment of
the reliability of its future water service to its customers during normal, dry, and multiple-
dry water years. This assessment compares the impact of varied dry year conditions on
total water supply sources available to the City with the total projected water supply over
the next twenty years in five-year increments. Projections include data from Tables 1, 4,
11 and 14 including historical dry-year rainfall and water demand.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 7: Water Quality
7-3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
A com~arison of projected normal water year demands compared to normal water year
supply IS shown on Tables 19 - 21. It is projected that the City will use 95% of its supply
In 2010, based on a 1% growth rate. In 2015, 17% of supply is projected to remain
available based on an additional 750afy of supply. By 2025, 8% of supply is projected to
remain available based on projected supply and demand.
a e - rOle e orma ater ear uooly- AFIY
2010 2015 2020 2025
Suoolv 3758 4508 4508 4508
% of Normal Year 100 100 100 100
T bl 19 P . cl d N
IW
y S
a e - rOlec e orma aer ear emand - AFIY
2010 2015 2020 2025
Demand 3580 3760 3950 4150
% of year 2005 105 110 116 122
T bl 20 P . t d N
IW t Y 0
T bl 21 P' N
a e - rOlected ormal Year Suooly and Demand Comoarison - AFIY
2010 2015 2020 2025
Suoolv totals 3758 4508 4508 4508
Demand totals 3580 3760 3950 4150
Difference (supply 178 748 558 358
minus demand)
Difference as % of 5% 17% 12% 8%
Suooly
Difference as % of 5% 20% 14% 9%
Demand
For projected single-dry year supply and demand comparisons, no significant change is
anticipated as shown in Tables 22-25. This data assumes an increase in demand due to
increased irrigation needs, as well as demand reductions based on demand
management measures.
Ie d ear Water Su I - AFIY
2015 2020 2025
4508 4508 4508
100 100 100
able 23 - rOlecte SInOle jry year ater eman -
2010 2015 2020 2025
Demand .3640 3822 4013 4214
% of projected 102 102 102 102
normal
T
P
d . I d
W
D
d AFIY
T bl 24 P .
d . I d
S
dD
dC
AFIY
a e - ro ecte SinO Ie 'I year UDOIV an eman omoanson -
2010 2015 2020 2025
SuPOly totals 3758 4508 4508 4508
Demand totals 3640 3822 4013 4214
Difference (supply 118 686 495 294
minus demandi
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 7: Water Quality
7-4
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Difference as % of 3% 15% 11% 7%
SUDDlv
Difference as % of 3% 18% 12% 7%
Demand
For the multiple-dry year supply and demand assessment, projections are made for the
years 2016-2020 and 2021-2025 and include anticipated trends based on increased
irrigation needs, balanced by demand reductions resulting from the City's demand
management measures. Multiple-dry year projections are shown in Tables 26-31.
Su I
% of projected
Normal
eriod end in in 2020 - AFIY
2019 2020
4508 4508
100 100
Table 26 - Proiected demand multiole drv vear oeriod endino in 2020 AFIY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Demand 3846 4129 3936 3675 4013
0/0" of projected 85 92 87 82 89
normal
Table 27 - Projected Supply & Demand Comparison during multiple dry year,period'.
endinD in 2020 - AFIY ;..:" ,
',:
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
sUOOiV totals 4508 4508 4508 4508 4508
Demand totals 3846 4129 3936 3675 4013
Difference 662 379 572 833 495
(supply minus
demand)
Difference as % 15% 8% 13% 18% 11%
of SUDolv
Difference as % 17% 9% 15% 23% 12%
of Demand
Su I
% of projected
Normal
ear eriod endin in 2025 - AFIY
2023 2024 2024
4508 4508 4508
100 100 100
Table 29- Proiected demand multiole drv vear oeriod endino in 202 -
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Demand 4140 4335 4134 3860 4214
% of projected 92 96 92 86 93
normal vear
5 AFIY
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 7: Water Quality
7-5
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
Table 30 -Projected Supply & Demand Comparison during multiple dry year period
endino in 2025 - AFIY
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
SUDolv totals 4508 4508 4508 4508 4508
Demand totals 4140 3822 4013 3675 4013
Difference 368 73 374 648 294
(supply minus
demand)
Difference as % 8% 4% 8% 14% 7%
of Suoolv
Difference as % 9% 4% 9% 17% 7%
of Demand
:~l
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 7: Water Quality
7-6
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
8.0 ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
Water Code Section 10640-10645
10640. Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan pursuant to this part
shall prepare its plan pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630).
The supplier shall likewise periodically review the plan as required by Section 10621,
and any amendments or changes required as a result of that review shall be adopted
pursuant to this article.
10641. An urban water supplier required to prepare a plan may consult with, and
obtain comments from, any public agency or state agency or any person who has
special expertise with respect to water demand management methods and
techniques.
10642. Each urban water supplier shall encourage the active involvement of diverse
social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior
to and during the preparation of the plan. Prior to adopting a plan, the urban water
supplier shall make the plan available for public inspection and shall hold a public
hearing thereon. Prior to the hearing, notice of the time and place of hearing shall be
published within the jurisdiction of the publicly owned water supplier pursuant to
Section 6066 of the Government Code. The urban water supplier shall provide notice
of the time and place of hearing to any city or county within which the supplier
~rovides water supplies. A privately owned water supplier shall provide an equivalent
notice within its service area. After the hearing, the plan shall be adopted as prepared
or as modified after the hearing.
10643. An urban water supplier shall implement its plan adopted pursuant to this
chapter in accordance with the schedule set forth in its plan.
10644. (a) An urban water supplier shall file with the department and any city or
county within which the supplier provides water supplies a copy of its plan no later
than 30 days after adoption. Copies of amendments or changes to the plans shall be
filed with the department and any city or county within which the supplier provides
water supplies within 30 days after adoption.
(b) The department shall prepare and submit to the Legislature, on or before
December 31, in the years ending in six and one, a report summarizing the status 01
the plans adopted pursuant to this part. The report prepared by the department shall
identify the outstanding elements of the individual plans. The department shall
provide a copy of the report to each urban water supplier that has filed its plan with
the department. The department shall also prepare reports and provide data for any
legislative hearings designed to consider the effectiveness of plans submitted
pursuant to this part.
10645. Not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the
urban water supplier and the department shall make the plan available for public
review during normal business hours.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 8: Implementation
8-1
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
L-_
,f'
Completion of this section is pending on information from private and public review of
this draft Urban Water Management Plan.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 8: Implementation
8-2
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
8.1 Public Meeting Notice
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
On TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2006, the Arroyo Grande City Council will conduct a
public hearing at 7:00 P.M. in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET to
consider the following item:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
City of Arroyo Grande
Citywide
The 2005 Urban Water Management Plan is being
prepared by the Public Works Department for the California
Department of Water Resources. The update includes the City's
Water Facilities, projected Water Supply, projected Water Use,
Water Conservation Program, Water Shortage Contingency
Analysis and Recycled Water Opportunities.
Section 15262 of the California Environmental Quality Act
provides that planning studies such as the 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan are exempt from the requirements to prepare
Environmental Impact Reports or Negative Declaration.
Don Spagnolo, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Environmental
Determination:
Representative:
The Council may also discuss other hearings or business items before or after the item
listed above. If you challenge the proposed action in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the
public hearing. Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds
for any court to invalidate the action of the legislative body for which the notice was
given.
Information relating to these items is available by contacting Arroyo Grande City Hall at
473-5414. The Council meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20.
Isl Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk
Publish 2T, The Tribune, Friday, February 10, 2006 and Friday, February 17, 2006
. NOTE: On February 28, 2006 the City Council continued the public hearing
to March 14, 2006.
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 8: Implementation
8-3
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
8.2 Adoption Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING AND DIRECTING THE FILING AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the California Legisiature enacted Assembly Bill 797 (Water Code Section 10610 el.
seq.), known as the Urban Water Management Planning Act, which mandates that every urban
supplier of water providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or
supplying more than 3,000 acre feet of water annually, prepare an Urban Water Management
Plan, the primary objective of which is to plan for the conservation and efficient use of water; and
WHEREAS, AB 797 required that an initial Plan be adopted by December 31,1985, after public
review and hearing, and filed with the California Department of Water Resources within thirty
days of adoption; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande did prepare and file said Plan with the California
DElpartment of Water Resources after adoption in December, 1985 and updated the Plan in 1990
arid 2001; and
WHEREAS, AB 797 requires that said Plan be periodically reviewed at least once every five
years, and that the urban water supplier shall make any amendments or changes to its plan
which are indicated as necessary by the review; and
WHEREAS, the City is an urban supplier of water providing water to more than 6,200
connections. and has therefore prepared and advertised for public review a Urban Water
Management Plan Update, in compliance with the requirements of AB 797, and a duly noticed
public hearing regarding said Plan Update was held by the City Council on March 14, 2006.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as
follows:
1. The 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (Plan), a copy of which is on file in the
Administrative Services Department, and incorporated herein by this reference as though
set forth in full, is hereby adopted and ordered filed with the Director of Administrative
Services;
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to file the Plan with the California
Department of Water Resources within 30 days of the effective date of this Resolution, as
set forth below, in accordance with AB 797;
The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to implement the programs as
detailed in the adopted Urban Water Management Plan Update, including development of
recommendations to the City Council regarding necessary procedures, rules, and
regulations to carry out effective and equitable water conservation programs.
On motion of Council Member
and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
, seconded by Council Member
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2006.
City of Arroyo Grande 8-4 2005 Urban Water Management Plan
Section 8: Implementation DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO.
Page 3
TONY FERRARA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
City of Arroyo Grande
Section 8: Implementation
8-5
2005 Urban Water Management Plan
DRAFT
9.0 REFERENCES AND ACRONYMS
9.1 References
Cityof Arroyo Grande, July 13,1999. Water System Master Plan
City of Arroyo Grande, May, 2001. Urban Water Management Plan
City of Arroyo Grande, 2002. Wastewater Management Plan
City of Arroyo Grande, October 2001. General Plan
City of Arroyo Grande, 2001. Program Environmental Impact Report for the
General Plan Update
City of Arroyo Grande, 2003, Amended 2005. General Plan Housing Element
C~y of Arroyo Grande, Staff report for Water Alternatives Study, August 2004
Water Rate Study, June 2005 Tuckfield & Smith
DWR (California Department of Water Resources). 2003. Bulletin 118,
California's Groundwater
2002. Water Resources of the Arroyo Grande-Nipomo Mesa Area
State of California, The Water Resources Agency Department of Water
Resources Southern District, Water Resource of the Arroyo Grande -
Nipomo Mesa Area, Southern District Report 2002
San Luis Obispo County, 2005 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
Draft July 2005, San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District
Wallace Group, February 22, 2006. Water Supply Study: Desalination
Wallace Group, February 22, 2006. Supplemental Water Supply Study
Nacimiento Pipeline Extension
Arroyo Grande Creek Habitat Conservation Plan
Lopez Water Treatment Plant Audit
City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department
City of Grover Beach Community Development Department
City of Pismo Beach Engineering Department
Oceano Community Services District
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation/Zone 3
San Luis Obispo County Public Works Department
Cleath & Associates, May 29, 1998. Test Hole Results, Deer Trail Circle
,~
9.2 Acronyms
Act Urban Water Management Plan Act
af acre-feet
afy acre-feet per year
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System
OMMs demand management measures
OWR California Department of Water Resources
~
ETo Evapotranspiration
Gpcd gallons per capita per day
NPOES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Settlement Settlement Stipulation in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin
Litigation
SOWA Safe Drinking Water Act
TOS total dissolved solids
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
WRCC Western Regional Climate Center
WY Water Year
APPENDICES
Settlement Stipulation, Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District v. City of
Santa Maria et a/., May 15, 2004
Management Agreement, City of Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach,
2002
City of Arroyo Grande, Municipal Code Chapter 13.05, Water Conservation
Program, Adopted May 13, 2003
,'{
-
-,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
SANTA MARIA VALLEY WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF SANTA MARIA, et ai.,
. Defendants.
AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS AND
ACTIONS CONSOLIDATED FOR ALL
PURPOSES
) SANTAMARIA GROUNDWATER
) LITIGATION
) Lead Case No. CV 770214
) (CONSOLIDATED FOR ALL PURPOSES)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
[Consolidated With Case Numbers:
CV 784900; CV 785509; CV 785522;
CV 787150; CV 784921; CV 785511;
CV 785936; CV 787151; CV 784926;
CV 785515; CV 786791; CV 787152;
CV 036410]
San Luis Obispo County Superior Court Case
Nos. 990738 and 990739
[Assigned to Judge Jack Komar for All
Purposes]
STIPULATION
STIPULATION
1
2
3 I.
4
5
6 II.
7 III.
8
9
12
13
14
15
16 V.
17
18
19
20
.-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION -- ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS .................................................... 1
A.
B.
C.
Parties and Jurisdiction .............................................,.................".......................... 1
Further Trial.................. ......... .............. ......... ...... ............ ...... ..... ............. ........., ...... 2
Defini ti ons................,..................................................................................."..,...... 2
EXHIBITS .......,.. ........ .......... ......, .......... .................................... ......... ..... .......... .......... ........ 6
DECLARATION OF RIGHfS -- ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS .................................. 6
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Recognition of Priority of Overlying Rights........................................................... 7
Prescripti ve Rights ............. ...... ..... ...................... .... ........... ......................... .... ........ 7
Appropriative Rights ....................... ........ ...:............ ....... ..... ... ............... .......... ........ 7
Developed Water Rights ......................................................................................... 7
Rights to Storage Space .......................................................................................... 7
Other Surface Water Rights .................................................................................... 7
PHYSICAL SOLUTION - ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS ........................................... 8
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Authori ty ................................................................................................................. 8
Purposes and Objectives ................................................,........................................ 8
Basin Management Areas ....................................................................................... 8
Groundwater Monitoring .,...,...............................................................,..................9
New Developed Water ..........................................................................................10
Severe Water Shortage Response ......................................................................... II
PHYSICAL SOLUTION: PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO SANTA MARIA
VALLEY MANAGEMENT AREA ................................................................................. II
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Water Rights to Sources of Supply....................................................................... 11
Monitoring and Management ........... ... .................................................................. 14
Response to Varying Conditions.....................:..................................................... 15
Management and Administration of the Twitchell Project................................... 17
New Urban Uses - Santa Maria Valley Management Area.................................. 20
VI. PHYSICAL SOLUTION: PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO NIPOMO MESA
21 MANAGEMENT AREA .................................................................................................. 21
22
23
24
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Supplemental Water ........................ ........... ................... .... .................................... 21
Rights to Use Groundwater...................................................................................23
NMNlA Technical Group ....................... ..... ......................................... ................. 24
Potentially Severe and Severe Water Shortage Conditions ................................... 25
New Urban Uses ...................................................................................................27
25 VII. PHYSICAL SOLUTION: PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO NORTHERN CITIES
MANAGEMENT AREA.................................................................................,................28
26
27
28
VIII. INJUNCTION - ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS ........................................................... 29
A.
B.
Use Only Pursuant to Stipulation..........................................................................29
Injunction Against Transportation From the Basin...................................,........... 29
- i -
STIPULATION
1
2 IX.
3
4
5
X.
6
7
8
9
10
11 ~;
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
C. No Third Party Beneficiaries ........................................................................'....... 29
RESERVED JURlSDICTION - ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS ............,...;................. 30
A, Reserved Jurisdiction; Modifications, Cancellations, Amendments..................... 30
B. Noticed Motion ................,................................................................................,.., 31
C. De Novo Nature of Proceeding ...........................................................:.................31
D. Filing and Notice................................................................................................... 31
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS - ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS ......................... 31
A. Unenforceable Tenns .....................................,......................................................31
B. Water Quality .....................,................................................:................................. 32
C. Duty to Cooperate .................................................................................................32
D. Stipulating Parties Under Public Utilities Commission Regulation .....................32
E. Designation of Address, for Notice and Service ...................................................33
F. . No Loss of Rights .............................................................;...........,....................... 33
G. Intervention After Judgment .................................................................................33
H. Stipulation and Judgment Binding on Successors, Assigns, etc. .......................... 34
1. Costs.................. .................................................................................................... 34
J. Non-Stipulating Parties .........................................................................................34
K. Counterparts .............. ............ ....... ........................... ...... .... ................... .......... ....,.. 35
L. Effective Date........................ ............... ............ ........... ......................... ....... .......... 35
- ii -
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
: : 22
i :' 23
24
: I
25
26
27
28
:
I. INTRODUCTION.- ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS
The Stipulating Parties hereby stipulate and agree to entry of judgment containing the
terms and conditions of this Stipulation.
A. Parties and Jurisdiction
1. Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District
("District") is a water conservation district organized under California Water Code section 74000,
et seq. The District does not pump Groundwater from the Basin.
2. Defendants, Cross-Complainants and Cross-Defendants the City of Santa Maria
("Santa Maria"), City of Guadalupe ("Guadalupe"), Southern California Water Company
("SCWC"), Nipomo Community Services District ("NCSD"); Rural Water Company ("RWC"),
'i City of Arroyo Grande ("Arroyo Grande"), City of Pismo Beach ("Pismo Beach"), City of Grover
Beach ("Grover Beach") and Oceano Community Services District ("Oceano") rely, in part, on
Groundwater to provide public water service to customers within the Basin.
3. Cross-Defendant County of San Luis Obispo ("San Luis Obispo") is a subdivision
of the State of California. Cross-Defendant San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District ("SLO District") is a public entity organized pursuant to the laws of the
State of California. ' Neither San Luis Obispo nor SLO District pumps Groundwater from the
Basin.
4. Cross-Defendant County of Santa Barbara ("Santa Barbara") is a subdivision of
the State of California. Santa Barbara does not pump Groundwater from the Basin.
5. Numerous other Cross-Defendants and Cross-Complainants are Overlying
Owners. Many of these Overlying Owners pump Groundwater from the Basin, while others do
not currently exercise their Overlying Rights. Those Overlying Owners who are Stipulating
Parties are identified on Exhibit "A".
6. This action presents an inter se adjudication of the claims alleged between and
among all Parties. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over the
Parties herein.
III
- 1 -
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
B.
Further Trial
The Stipulating Parties recognize that not all Parties have entered into this Stipulation and
that a trial will be necessary as to all non-Stipulating Parties. No Stipulating Party shall interfere
or oppose the effort of any other Stipulating Party in the preparation and conduct of any such
trial. All Stipulating Parties agree to cooperate and coordinate their efforts in any trial or hearing
necessary to obtain entry of a judgment containing the terms and conditions of this Stipulation;
No Stipulating Party shall have any obligation to contribute financially to any future trial.
C. Definitions
As used in this Stipulation, the following terms shall have the meanings herein set forth:
1. Annual or Year - That period beginning January 1 and ending December
10
11 31.
".
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2. Annual Report - The report prepared and filed with the Court annually for
each Management Area.
3. Appropriative Rif!hts - The right to use surplus Native Groundwater for
reasonable and beneficial use.
4. Available State Water Proiect Water - The amount of SWP Water an
Importer is entitled to receive in a given Year based upon the California Department of Water
Resources final Table A allocation.
5. Basin - The groundwater basin described in the Phase I and n orders of the
Court, as modified and presented in Exhibit "B".
6. Developed Water - Groundwater derived from human intervention as of
the date of this Stipulation, which shall be limited to Twitchell Yield, Lopez Water, Return
Flows, and recharge resulting from storm water percolation ponds.
7. Groundwater Twitchell Yield, Lopez Water, Return Flows, storm water
percolation, Native Groundwater and all other recharge percolating within the Basin.
,8. Importer(s) - Any Party who brings Imported Water into the Basin. At the
date of this Stipulation, the Importers are Santa Maria, S,CWC, Guadalupe, Pismo Beach, and
Oceano.
- 2-
STIPULATION
.. I.
'!
1
9,
IlIlvarted Water - Water within the Basin, originating outside the Basin
2 that absent human intervention would not recharge or be used in the Basin,
3
10.
ravez Proiect - Lopez Dam and Reservoir located on Arroyo Grande
4 Creek, together with the associated water treatment plant, delivery pipeline and all associated
5 facilities, pursuant to State Water Resources Control Board permit No. 12814 (A-18375) and
6 pending application No. A-30826.
7
11.
8 the Lopez Project.
9
12.
ravez Water- Groundwater within the Basin derived from the operation of
Manaf!elllent Areas - The three areas within the Basin that have sufficient
10 distinguishing characteristics to permit the water resources and facilities of each area to be
11 jndividually managed. The Management Areas are: the Northem Cities Management Area, the
12 Nipomo Mesa Management Area, and the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, as shown on
13 Exhibit "C".
14
13.
Manaf!elllent Area Enf!ineer - The individual(s) or consulting firm(s) that
15 are hired to prepare the Monitoring Plan(s) and Annual Report(s) for one or more of the
16 Management Areas.
17
14. . Manitorinf! Parties - Those Parties responsible for conducting and funding
18 each Monitoring Program.
19
15.
Monitorinf! Proflram - The data collection and analysis program to be con-
20 ducted within each Management Area sufficient to allow the preparation of the Annual Report.
21
16.
Native Groundwater - Groundwater within the Basin, not derived from
22 human intervention, that replenishes the Basin through precipitation, stream channel infiltration,
23 tributary runoff, or other natural processes.
24
17.
New Develaved Water - Groundwater derived from human intervention
25 through programs or projects implemented after the date of this Stipulation.
26
18.
New Urban Uses - Municipal and industrial use which may occur on land
27 that, as of January 1,2005, 'was located: 1) within the boundaries of a municipality or its sphere of
28 influence, or within the process of inclusion in its sphere of influence; or 2) within the certificated
- 3 -
STIPULATION
1 service area of a publicly regulated utility. The New Urban Use areas are identified in Exhibit
2 "D". New Urban Uses does not include the current DJ Farms development within Guadalupe
3 City limits (including Santa Barbara County APN 113-080-18, 113-080-24).
4
19.
5 shown on Exhibit "C".
6
20.
NilJomo Mesa Manallement Area or NMMA - That Management Area
NilJomoMesa Manallement Area Technical GrOlllJ - The committee
7 formed to administer the relevant provisions of the Stipulation regarding the Nipomo Mesa
8 Management Area.
9
21.
Northern Cities Manallement Area That Management Area which is part
10 of Zone #3 of the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District as
11 . shown on Exhibit "C".
}~
12
22.
13 Oceano.
14
23.
Northern Cities - Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach and
Northern Parties - The, Northern Cities, the Overlying Owners within the
15 Northern Cities Management Area, San Luis Obispo and the SLO District.
16
24.
Over/vinll Rillht - The appurtenant right of an Overlying Owner to use
17 Native Groundwater for overlying, reasonable and beneficial use.
18
25.
19 Overlying Right.
20
26.
Overlvinll Owner(s) - Owners of land overlying the Basin who hold an
f.m1:t. - Each Person in this consolidated action, whether a Stipulating
21 Party or a non-Stipulating Party.
22
27.
Person - Any natural person, firm, association, organization, joint venture,
23 partnership, business, trust, corporation, or public entity.
24
28.
Public Hearinll - A hearing after notice to all Parties and to any other
25 person legally entitled to notice.
26
29.
Return Flows - Groundwater derived from use and recharge within the
27 Basin of water delivered through State Water Project facilities.
28 III
-4-
STIPULATION
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
!:i 28
1
30.
Santa Maria Valley Manaf!ement Area - That Management Area shown on
2 Exhibit "C",
3
31.
Severe Water Shortaf!e Conditions - Those conditions, as separately
4 defined in a Seyere Water Shortage Response Plan for each Management Area, that trigger
5 certain discretionary and mandatory responses by the Stipulating Parties upon order of the Court.
6
32.
Severe Water Shortaf!e Resoonse Plan - The discretionary and mandatory
7 responses for each Management Area that are to be implemented when Severe Water Shortage
8 Conditions exist.
9
33.
State Water Proiect Water or SWP Water - Water imported through the
10 State of California State Water Resources Development System pursuant to Division 6, Part 6,
11 ,Chapter 8, of the California Water Code.
"
"\
34. Stioulatinl! Party - A Party" that has signed this Stipulation, as listed in
Exhibit "A", or its heirs, executors, administrators, trustees, successors, assigns, and agents.
35. Storaf!e Soace - The portion of the Basin capable of holding water for sub-
sequent reasonable and beneficial uses.
36. SWP Contract{ s) - Those series of contracts that entitle the Importers to
use SWP facilities to bring Imported Water into the Basin. .
37. Twitchell Manaf!ement Authority or TMA - The committee formed to
administer the relevant provisions of the Stipulation regarding the Santa Maria Valley Manage-
ment Area.
38. Twitchell Particioants - Those Stipulating Parties holding rights to
Twitchell Yield.
39. Twitchell Proiect - Dam and reservoir authorized by Congress as the
"Santa Maria Project" on September 3, 1954 (public Law 774, 83d Congress, ch. 1258, 2d
session, 68 Stat. 1190) and located on the Cuyama River, approximately six miles upstream from
its junction with the Sisquoc River, pursuant to that certain License For Diversion And Use of
Water, License No. 10416, issued by the State Water Resources Control Board.
/1/
- 5-
STIPULATION
1
2 Project.
3
4
5 II.
6
7
8
9
10
11
:,~
12 Areas.
13 4. Exhibit "D", map identifying those lands as of January 1,2005: 1) within
14 the boundaries of a municipality or its. sphere of influence, or within the process of inclusion in its
15 sphere of influence; or 2) within the certificated service area of a publicly regulated utility; and a
16 list of selected parcels that are nearby these boundaries which are excluded from within these
17 areas.
18 5. Exhibit "E", 2002 Settlement Agreement between the Northern Cities and
19 Northern Landowners.
20 6. Exhibit "F", the agreement among Santa Maria, SCWC and Guadalupe
21 regarding the Twitchell Project and the TMA.
22 7. Exhibit "G", the Court's Order Concerning Electronic Service of Pleadings
23 . and Electronic Posting of Discovery Documents dated June 27, 2000.
24 8. Exhibit "H", the form of memorandum of agreement to be recorded.
25 III. DECLARATION OF RIGHTS.- ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS
26 The terms and conditions of this Stipulation, set forth a physical solution concerning
27 Groundwater, SWP Water and Storage Space, consistent with common law water rights priorities.
28 III
40.
Twitchell Water - Groundwater derived from operation of the Twitchell
41. Twitchell Yield - The total amount of Groundwater allocated annually to
the Twitchell Participants.
EXHIBITS
The following Exhibits are attached to this Stipulation and incorporated herein:
1. Exhibit "A ", list identifying the Stipulating Parties and the parcels of land
bound by the terms of this Stipulation.
2. Exhibit "B", Phase I and II Orders, as modified, and the attached map
depicting the Santa Maria Basin.
3. Exhibit "C", map of the Basin and boundaries of the three Management
- 6-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
,:i
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Recognition of Prioritv of Overlving Rights
Except as expressly modified by the settlement agreement among the Northern Parties
(Exhibit "E"), all Overlying Owners that are also Stipulating Parties have a prior and paramount
Overlying Right, whether or not yet exercised.
B. Prescriptive Rights
As to the Stipulating Parties, no Party has proved prescriptive rights to any Native
Groundwater. Future use by the Stipulating Parties will not be adverse and will not ripen into a
prescriptive right as between the Stipulating Parties.
C. Appropriative Rights
Consistent with the specific provisions governing each Management Area, the Stipulating
:. Parties owning and exercising Appropriative Rights have the right to the reasonable and bene-
ficial use of Native Groundwater that is surplus to the reasonable and beneficial uses of the
Stipulating Parties that are Overlying Owners. New appropriative uses shall be subordinate to
existing appropriations and shall be prioritized on a first in time, first in right basis.
D. Developed Water Rights
The Stipulating Parties owning Developed Water or New Developed Water have the right
to its reasonable and beneficial use, consistent with the specific provisions governing each
Management Area. The right to use Developed Water is a right to use commingled Groundwater
and is not limited to the corpus of that water.
E. Rights to Storage Space
The Court shall reserve jurisdiction over the use of the Storage Space, and any Party may
apply to the Court for the approval of a project using Storage Space. The Court must approve any
project using Storage Space before any Party can claim a right to stored water from that project.
The Stipulating Parties agree that Groundwater derived from Developed Water is exempt from
the Court approval requirements of this Paragraph.
F. Other Surface Water Rights
Nothing in this Stipulation affects or otherwise alters common law riparian rights or any
surface water rights, unless expressly provided in this Stipulation.
-7 -
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~\
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
IV. PHYSICAL SOLUTION - ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS
A. Authoritv
Pursuant to Article X, section 2 of the California Constitution, the Stipulating Parties
agree that the Court has the authority to enter a judgment and physical solution containing the
terms and conditions of this Stipulation. Unless the Court imposes this physical solution, poten-
tial changes in water use could affect Basin adequacy and integrity. The Declaration of Rights is
a component of this physical solution.
B. Purooses and Obiectives
The terms and conditions of this Stipulation are intended to impose a physical solution
establishing a legal and practical means for ensuring the Basin's long-term sustainability. This
physical solution governs Groundwater, SWP Water and Storage Space, and is intended to ensure
that the Basin continues to be capable of supporting all existing and future reasonable and
beneficial uses. This physical solution is: I) a fair and equitable basis for the allocation of water
rights in the Basin; 2) in furtherance of the mandates of the State Constitution and the water
policy of the State of California; and 3) a remedy that gives due consideration to applicable
common law rights and priorities to use Groundwater and Storage Space, without substantially
impairing any such right.
C. Basin Mana2ement Areas
Development and use of Groundwater, SWP Water and Storage Space h~ve historically
been financed and managed separately in three Management Areas. For example, only the
Northern Parties have paid for, managed, and benefited from the Lopez Project; whereas only
Santa Maria Valley parties have paid for, managed, and benefited from the Twitchell Project. In
contrast, the Nipomo Mesa parties have not been involved in the funding or management of either
the Twitchell or Lopez Projects.
The Stipulating Parties agree that Groundwater, SWP Water and Storage Space can be
more efficiently allocated and managed in three Management Areas, given the physical, geo-
graphical; political, economic, and historic conditions. The three Management Areas, as shown
on Exhibit "C," are as follows: Northern Cities Management Area; Nipomo Mesa Management
- 8 -
STlPULA TlON
1 Area; and Santa Maria Valley Management Area. The Stipulating Parties intend that manage-
2 ment through three Management Areas will preserve the Basin's integrity.
3
4
D.
Groundwater Monitorinl!
1.
Monitorillf! Prof!ram. A Monitori'ng Program shall be established in each
5 of the three Management Areas to collect and analyze data regarding water supply and demand
6 conditions. Data collection and" monitoring shall be sufficient to determine land and water uses in
7 the Basin, sources of supply to meet those uses, groundwater conditions including groundwater
8 levels and quality, the amount and disposition of Developed Water supplies, and the amount and
9 disposition of any other sources of water supply in the Basin. The Northern Cities Management
10 Area shall not be required to include in its Monitoring Program or Annual Reports quantification
11 [, of groundwater recharge from the Lopez Project or storm water percolation ponds, unless the
''i,',
12 Court orders inclusion of this information.
13 Within one hundred and eighty days after entry of judgment, representatives of the Moni-
14 toring Parties from each Management Area will" present to the Court for its approval their
15 proposed Monitoring Program. The Management Area Engineers shall freely share available well
16 data, groundwater models, and other products and tools utilized in monitoring and analysis of
17 conditions in the three Management Areas, consistent with the confidentiality provisions of this
18 Stipulation.
19 Absent a Court order to the contrary, all Stipulating Parties shall make available relevant
20 information regarding groundwater elevations and water quality data necessary to implement the
21 Monitoring Program approved for their respective Management Area. The Monitoring Parties
22 shall coordinate with the Stipulating Parties to obtain any needed data on reasonable terms and
23 conditions. Metering may only be imposed on Stipulating Parties upon a Court order following a
24 showing that such data is necessary to monitor groundwater conditions in the Basin, and in the
25 case of an Overlying Owner, that Overlying Owner has failed to provide information comparable
26 to that provided by other Overlying Owners. The c'onfidentiality or' well data from individual
27 owners and operators will be preserved, absent a Court order or written consent.
28 III
-9-
STIPULATION
1
2
2.
Monitorinf! Parties. The Monitoring Parties are as follows:
(a),
Santa Maria Valley Management Area - The Twitchell Manage-
3 ment Authority.
4
5
6
(b)
(c)
Northern Cities Management Area - The Northern Cities.
Nipomo Mesa Management Area - The NMMA Technical Group.
3.
Annual Reports. Within one hundred and twenty days after each Year, the
7 Management Area Engineers will file an Annual Report with the Court. The Annual Report will
8 summarize the results of the Monitoring Program, changes in groundwater supplies, and any
9 threats to Groundwater supplies. The Annual Report shall also include a tabulation of Manage-
10 ment Area water use, including Imported Water availability and use, Return Flow entitlement and
11 J use, other Developed Water availability and use, and Groundwater use. Any Stipulating Party
~H
12 may object to the Monitoring Program, the reported results, or the Annual Report by motion.
13
4.
Manaf!emelZt Area Enf!ineer. The Monitoring Parties may hire individuals
14 or consulting firms to assist in the preparation of the Monitoring Programs and the Annual
15 Reports. Except as provided below for the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, the Moni-
16 toring Parties, in their sole discretion, shall select, retain and repiace the Management Area
17 Engineer.
18
19
E.
New DeveloDed Water
1.
Stipulating Parties in each Management Area may prepare and implement
20 plans to develop, salvage or import additional water supplies.
21
2.
The Stipulating Parties that pay, or otherwise provide consideration, for
22 New Developed Water are entitled to use it to the extent the New Developed Water augments the
23 water supplies in that Management Area. If more than one Stipulating Party finances or partici-
24 pates in generating New Developed Water, rights to the supply of New Developed Water shall be
25 proportional to each Stipulating Party's financial contribution or other consideration, or as other-
26 wise mutually agreed to by the participating Stipulating Parties. This paragraph does not apply to
27 Return Flows.
28 III
- 10-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 .<
''>'
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3. The Stipulating Parties who desire to claim New Developed Water supplies
must bring a motion, and obtain an order from the Court, quantifying and allocating the rights to
the New Developed Water, before they have the prior right to the New Developed Water.
F. Severe Water Shorta2e Response
This physical solution sets forth a Severe Water Shortage Plan for each Management Area
which is intended to provide an effective response to Severe Water Shortage Conditions that may
develop within each or all of the Management Areas. The specific Severe Water Shortage Plans
for each Management Area are incorporated herein and made a part of the physical solution.
V. PHYSICAL SOLUTION: PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO SANTA MARIA VALLEY
MANAGEMENT AREA
As supplemented by the provisions of this Stipulation that apply to all Management Areas,
the following terms govern rights to Groundwater, SWP Water and Storage Space in the Santa
Maria Valley Management Area.
A. Water Ri2hts to Sources of Supplv
1. Overlvim! Rif!hts. The Stipulating Parties who are Overlying Owners
within the Santa Maria Valley Management Area each have the prior and paramount right to use
Native Groundwater. Subject to Paragraph V(C)(2)(b)(vi), all Overlying Rights are appurtenant
to the overlying land and cannot be assigned or conveyed separate or apart from those lands.
2. Appropriative RiJ!hts. The Parties listed in Exhibit "A" are the owners of
Appropriative Rights exercised in the Santa Maria Valley Management Area. Each Appropriative
Right is limited to Native Groundwater that is surplus to reasonable and beneficial uses of the
Stipulating Parties that are Overlying Owners in the Santa Maria Valley Management Area. New
appropriative uses shall be subordinate to existing Appropriative Rights and shall be prioritized
on a first in time, first in right basis.
3. Developed Water. The Stipulating Parties owning Developed Water have
the right to its reasonable and beneficial use, subject only to the Severe Water Shortage Plan. On
an annual basis, the Stipulating Parties shall have the right to the reasonable imd beneficial use of
Developed Water that is surplus to the reasonable and beneficial uses of the owners of that
- 11-
STIPULATION
1 Developed Water. The right to use Developed Water is a right to use commingled Groundwater
2 and is not limited to the corpus of that water.
3
(a)
New Develooed Water. The ownership and use of New Developed
4 Water shall be subject to Court order.
5
6
(b)
Twitchell Water.
(i)
Amount. The Twitchell Project annually provides a variable
7 amount of Developed Water that augments the Groundwater in the Santa Maria Valley Manage-
8 ment Area. Twitchell Yield is thirty-two thousand acre-feet per year (Uafy").
9
(ii)
Division of Twitchell Yield. Twitchell Yield shall be
10 divided as follows: 80% to Santa Maria, SCWC and Guadalupe, and 20% to the Overlying
J 1 6. Owners within the District who are Stipulating Parties:
12
a.
The Twitchell Yield allocated to Santa Maria,
13 SCWC and Guadalupe is suballocated pursuant to the agreement among Santa Maria, SCWC and
14 Guadalupe, as attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit uF'.
15
b.
The Twitchell Yield allocated to the Overlying
16 Owners who are Stipulating Parties within the District shall be equally allocated to each acre of
17 land within the District owned by these Stipulating Parties. Concurrently with the execution of
18 this Stipulation, each of these Stipulating Parties shall report their acreage of overlying land
19 within the District on a parcel specific basis. Within one hundred and twenty days of the effec-
20 tive date of this Stipulation, the Management Area Engineer shall create a list of all the Stipu-
21 lating Parties and their respective allocation of the Twitchell Yield.
22
(iii) Recapture of Twitchell Yield. The right to use Twitchell
23 Yield is a right to use commingled Groundwater and is not limited to the corpus of that water.
24
(iv) Transfer of Twitchell Yield. Twitchell Yield may be trans-
25 ferred, temporarily or permanently, only between Stipulating Parties and the transfer market shall
26 be as open and competitive as practical. A memorandum of agreement summarizing each transfer
27 shall be filed with the Court and provided to the TMA. Any such memorandum of agreement
28 shall state the Parties to the transfer, the amount of Twitchell Yield transferred, the price per acre-
- 12-
STIPULATION
i !I
111
I foot, and the Party responsible for the financial obligation associated with the Twitchell Yield.
2
(v)
Carryover. Any portion of Twitchell Yield that is not used
3 in a given Year shall not be carried over into the following Year.
4
5
(c)
State Water Proiect Water.
(i)
Impon and Use of State Water Project Water. Santa Maria,
6 SCWC and Guadalupe all have SWP Contracts. Santa Maria will import and use within the Santa
7 Maria Valley Management Area not less than 10,000 acre-feet each Year of Available SWP
8 Water, or the full amount of Available SWP Water if the amount physically available is less than
9 10,000 acre-feet in a given Year under Santa Maria's SWP Contract. Guadalupe will import and
10 use within the Santa Maria Valley Management Area a minimum of 75% of its Available SWP
11 Water. SCWC will import and use within the Basin all its Available SWP Water. Santa Maria,
;'\.
12" SCWC and Guadalupe will not voluntarily relinquish or terminate their current SWP Contracts,
13 and shall seek renewal of these SWP Contracts:
14
15
(ii)
Return Flows.
a.
Fixed Amount. The Return Flows available to each
16 Importer is fixed based on a percentage of the annual amount of SWP Water the Importer uses
17 within the Basin. The fixed percentage for each importer is as follows: (a) Santa Maria 65%; (b)
18 SCWC 45%; and (c) Guadalupe 45%. The percentage provided to SCWC and Guadalupe shall
. 19 be adjusted through a Court order if: a) either entity increases its use of water imported into the
20 Basin, b) the applicable method of wastewater treatment and discharge to the Basin is altered, or
21 c) good cause is shown.
22
b.
Recapture. The right to use Return Flows does not
23 attach to the corpus of SWP water deliveries or the treated SWP wastewater discharged into the
24 Basin but is a right to use the commingled Groundwater. The Importer's right to Return Flows is
25 assignable in whole or in part, subject to necessary accounting.
26
c.
Quantification of Return Flows. Return Flows equal
27 the total amount of SWP Water used by the Importer in the prior five Years, divided by five, and
28 then multiplied by the Importer's percentage as provided in Paragraph V(A)(3)(c)(ii)(a) above.
- 13 -
STIPULATION
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
d. Carryover. Any portion of Return Flows that is not
used in a gi ven Year shall not be carried over into the following Year.
B. Monitorinl! and Manal!ement
1. Status of Manaflement Area. Current Groundwater and SWP Water sup-
plies are sustaining existing water uses. Changes in land and water use and demographic con-
ditions can be expected to occur, possibly resulting in changes in water supply or demand
requirements.
2. Need for Monitorinfl. Monitoring and reporting of changes in land and
water use and demographic conditions are necessary to ensure that water supplies continue to be
sufficient to support water uses.
3. Monitorillfl Proflram.
(a) Annual Reoort: Content and Processing.
The Annual Report shall include an analysis of the relationship between projected water demands
and projected water supplies.
(i) The Annual Report shall be prepared and signed by the
Management Area Engineer, and shall be simultaneously submitted to the Court and the TMA.
(ii) Within forty-five days of submission, the TMA shall hold a
noticed public hearing to take comments on and consider for adoption the Annual Report. No
later than forty-five days from the date of the public hearing, the TMA shall submit to the Court
its recommendations regarding the Annual Report.
(iii) Within one hundred and twenty days of the date of the
submission of the Annual Report to the Court, it shall conduct a noticed hearing on the Annual
Report. Any Party may submit comments on the Annual Report. After the hearing, the Court
shall accept the Annual Report or direct its modification.
(b) Management Area Enl!ineer
(i) Absent the unanimous consent of the TMA, the Manage-
ment Area Engineer shall not concurrently be employed by any Party holding rights to use
Groundwater in the Santa Maria Valley Management Area.
- 14-
STIPULATION
1
(ii)
The Management Area Engineer shall initially be the engin-
2 eering firm of Luhdorff & Scalmanini. Luhdorff & Scalmanini shall be the Management Area
3 Engineer for a minimum of the shorter of five years from the date of this Stipulation or the date
4 upon which Mr. Joseph Scalmanini discontinues full time work for that firm.
5
(iii) The TMA shall employ the following process to replace the
6 Management Area Engineer:
7
a.
The TMA shall solicit candidates for Management
8 Area Engineer through a public process. All submissions and candidate materials shall be avail-
9 able to any Party upon request. The TMA shall conduct its interview through a public process to
10 the extent practical, and include District and Overlying Owner representatives in the candidate
11 review process.
'1
I,:,
12
b.
Once a short list of candidates (less than five) for
13. Management Area Engineer is obtained, the TMA shall hold a noticed public hearing to take
14 comments on and consider the candidates for Management Area Engineer. The TMA shall make
15 a reasonable effort to select the Management Area Engineer with a unanimous vote. If the TMA
16 unanimously endorses a candidate, that nominee shall be recommended to the Court. Otherwise,
17 the short list of candidates shall be submitted.
18
c.
The Court shall appoint the Management Area
19 Engineer following a noticed hearing.
20
4.
Fundinfl. The TMA shall pay for the Monitoring Program for the Santa
21 Maria Valley Management Area, which includes the cost of the Management Area Engineer and
22 the Annual Report. The cost of the Monitoring Program shall be divided among the Twitchell
23 Participants on the same basis as the allocation of their Twitchell Yield.
24
25
C.
Response to Varvim! Conditions
1.
Early Response to Avoid Severe Water Shortafle Conditions. If the Man-
26 agement Area Engineer determines that projected demands are expected to materially exceed
27 projected 'water supplies, then the Management Area Engineer may recommend programs and
28 projects to augment the Management Area's water supplies. The Stipulating Parties will collabo-
- 15-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
",.
""
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
rate on a response based upon current conditions, but absent Severe Water Shortage Conditions,
implementation of programs and projects will hot be mandated.
The Stipulating Parties may voluntarily participate in any recommended program or
project, either through financial or other contributions. The Stipulating Parties that contribute to
such a program or project shall have a priority to the water supplies generated by that program or
project with Court approval. The Stipulating Parties agree to aggressively pursue New
Developed Water sources, including necessary funding.
2. Severe Water Shortafle Conditions and Response.
(a) Determination. Severe Water Shortage Conditions shall be found
to exist when the Management Area Engineer, based on the results of the ongoing Monitoring
Program, finds the following: 1) groundwater levels in the Management Area are in a condition of
chronic decline over a period of not less than five YearS; 2) the groundwater decline has not been
caused by drought; 3) there has been a material increase in Groundwater use during the five- Year
period; and 4) monitoring wells indicate that groundwater levels in the Santa Maria Valley
Management Area are below the lowest recorded levels.
(b) ResDonse.
(i) If the Management Area Engineer determines that Severe
Water Shortage Conditions exist within the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, the Manage-
ment Area Engineer shall file and serve, as part of its Annual Report, findings and recommen-
dations to alleviate such shortage conditions or the adverse effects caused by such water shortage.
(ii) Upon the filing of the Annual Report, the Court shall hold a
noticed hearing regarding the existence and appropriate response to the Severe Water Shortage
Conditions. If, after that hearing, the Court finds that Severe Water Shortage Conditions exist in
the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, the Court shall first order all use to be limited to: (a)
for Guadalupe, Santa Maria and SCWC, their Developed Water; (b) entitled Stipulating Parties to
their New Developed Water; and (c) for the Overlying Owners, the Native Groundwater plus any
Developed Water to which individual Overlying Owners are entitled.
III
- 16-
STIPULATION
1
(iii) The Court may also order Stipulating Parties to address
2 specific adverse effects caused by the Severe Water Shortage Conditions. The responses may
3 include, but are not limited to: (a) measures recommended in the Annual Report and the related
4 Court proceedings; and (b) other measures intended to address localized problems in the Santa
5 Maria Valley Management Area directly related to the Severe Water Shortage Conditions.
6
(iv) The Court may adjust the Groundwater use limitations
7 imposed on any Stipulating Party(ies) who implement programs or projects providing additional
8 water supplies within the Santa Maria Valley Management Area.
9
(v)
if the Court finds that Management Area conditions have
10 deteriorated since it first found Severe Water Shortage Conditions, the Court may impose further
11 limitations on Groundwater use. If the Court imposes further limitations on Groundwater use, a
12 Stipulating Party shall be exempt from those limitations to the extent: (a) the Stipulating Party can
13 demonstrate that it has already implemented limitations in its Groundwater use, equivalent to
14 those ordered by the Court; or (b) the Stipulating Party can demonstrate that further limitations
15 would not avoid or reduce the deteriorating conditions.
16
(vi) During Severe Water Shortage Conditions, the Stipulating
17 Parties may make agreements for temporary transfer of rights to pump Native Groundwater,
18 voluntary fallowing, or the implementation of extraordinary conservation measures. Transfers of .
19 Native Groundwater must benefit the Management Area and be approved by the Court.
20
21
D.
Manaeement and Administration of the Twitchell Proiect
1.
Overational Parameters. All Twitchell Project operations (operation and
22 maintenance and capital projects) will be peIformed consistent with the following parameters
23 (Operational Parameters):
24
(a)
Maximize recharge of the Santa Maria Valley Management Area
25 from Twitchell Water, including without limitation, the avoidance of impacts on recharge
26 resulting from ongoing accumulation of silt to the maximum extent practical.
27
(b)
Operate the Twitchell Project in accordance with the requirements
28 of applicable law including, without limitation, the requirements of the Bureau of Reclamation
- 17 -
STIPULATION.
1 and Army Corps of Engineers.
2 (c) Operate the Twitchell Project in accordance with industry standards
3 and best management practices.
4
5
2.
Twitchell Proiect Maliual.
(a)
The TMA will hire and pay for a professional engineering con-
6 suIting firm with expertise in dam and reservoir operations and maintenance, acceptable to the
7 District and the TMA, to develop an integrated operation and maintenance procedure manual
8 ("Twitchell Project Manual") and provide recommendations for capital and maintenance projects
9 that are consistent with the Operational Parameters.
10 (b) The District shall hold one or more public hearings to solicit input
11 :\ regarding the content of the Twitchell Project Manual.
12 (c) Within eighteen months of entry of the judgment, the TMA and the
13 District shall adopt a final Twitchell Project Manual.
14
(d)
Any disagreement between the District and the TMA regarding the
15 content of the final Twitchell Project Manual shall be presented for Court review and detennina-
16 tion pursuant to the judicial review provisions provided in this Stipulation.
17
(e)
The District will exercise its discretionary authority to conduct all
18 its operation and maintenance activities for the Twitchell Project in accordance with the Twitchell
19 Project Manual.
20
21
3.
Twitchell Proiect Fundinf!.
(a)
District will maintain its current operation and maintenance (O&M)
22 assessment. These funds will be used for District staff salaries, property, equipment, rent,
23 expenses, and other day-to-day operations, and will be expended consistent with the Twitchell
24 Project Manual to the extent it is applicable.
25
(b)
The TMA will separately fund, administer, construct and manage
26 any additional Twitchell Project expenses or projects, including Capital Improvement Projects
27 (see below) and O&M, (Extraordinary Project Operations) consistent with the Twitchell Project
28 Manual. The TMA and the District will make reasonable efforts to work cooperatively to imple-
- 18-
STIPULATION
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
i 20
,I
.I 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ment Extraordinary Project Operations.
(c) Consistent with the provisions of this Paragraph V(D), the District
and the TMA shall be responsible for ensuring the ongoing operational integrity of the Twitchell
Project and the maintenance of the Twitchell Yield. The Stipulating Parties expect that this
ongoing responsibility may involve significant expenditures. Within 120 days of the effective
date of this Stipulation, and annually thereafter, the Twitchell Participants shall establish an
operating budget for the TMA to fund its responsibilities set forth in this Stipulation. For the first
five years following the PUC approval as provided below, the TMA's annual budget shall be
established at an amount between $500,000 to $700,000. Following the initial budgeting period,
the TMA shall set its budget in three- to five-year increments, as it deems necessary to meet its
obligations to preserve the Twitchell Yield. Any unused revenues shall be segregated into a
reserve account, for future funding needs of the Twitchell Project. The Stipulating Parties agree
to cooperate and coordinate their efforts to enable the TMA to fulfill'its responsibilities as pro-
vided in this Stipulation.
4. Twitchell Manallement Authoritv.
(a) The TMA shall be comprised of one representative of each of the
following parties: Santa Maria, Guadalupe, Southern California Water Company, the District, and
Overlying Landowners holding rights to Twitchell Yield.
(b) Only those parties holding an allocation of Twitchell Yield shall be
voting members of the TMA. Voting shall be based on each party's proportionate allocation of
Twitchell Yield.
(c) The TMA shall be responsible for all the Extraordinary Project
Operations.
(d) The TMA shall be responsible for developing proposals for Capital
Improvement Projects relating to the Twitchell Project. Capital Improvement Projects shall mean
projects involving the expenditure of funds for the improvement or enhancement of the Twitchell
Project, but shall not include normal operation, maintenance or repair activities.
III
, - 19-
STIPULATION
1
(e)
Upon the development of a prop?sal for a Capital Improvement
2 Project, the TMA shall, in cooperation with the District, hold one or more public hearings to
3 solicit input.
4
(f)
Following the public hearing process, the TMA may vote on
5 whether to implement the Capital Improvement Project.
6
(g)
All the costs of design, permitting and construction of any TMA
7 sponsored Capital Improvement Project shall be borne by the TMA, in accordance with its
8 members proportionate financial obligations as provided in the judgment.
9
10
11
12
(h)
The District shall assume operation and maintenance responsibility
for any TMA sponsored Capital Improvement Project to the extent practical within the District's
day-to-day operations.
}
.
5.
Ref!u[atorv Compliance. The TMA or the District shall provide advance
13 notice to the Court and all Parties of the initiation of any regulatory proceeding relating to the
14 Twitchell Project
15
6.
Existinf! Contracts. The Twitchell Reservoir Project will continue to be
16 governed by and subject to the terms and conditions of the December 1955 agreement between
17 the District and the Santa Barbara County Water Agency and nothing in this Stipulation is
18 intended. to modify the rights or obligations provided in that agreement. To the extent that the
19 approval of Santa Barbara County Water Agency or the United States Bureau of Reclamation is
20 required in connection with the implementation of this Stipulation, the Stipulating Parties agree to
21 work cooperatively to obtain such approval(s).
22
23
E.
New Urban Uses Santa Maria Vanev Manal!ement Area
1.
New Urban Uses shall obtain water service from the local public water
24 supplier. The local public water supplier shall provide water service on a reasonable and non-
25 discriminatory basis.
26
2.
New municipal and industrial uses on land adjacent to or within one-
27 quarter mile of the boundary line depicted in, Exhibit D shall comply with any applicable Cor-
28 porations Code provisions and negotiate in good faith to obtain water service from the local
- 20-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
public water supplier, before forming a mutual water company to provide water service.
3. This Stipulation does not modify the authority of the respective entity
holding land use approval authority over the proposed New Urban Uses.
4. New Urban Uses shall provide a source of supplemental water to offset the
water demand associated with that development. For the purposes of this section, supplemental
water shall include all sources of Developed Water, except: i) Twitchell Water, ii) storm water
percolation ponds existing as of the date of entry of the judgment, or iii) Overlying Owners' right
to use of surplus Developed Water.
VI. PHYSICAL SOLUTION: PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO NIPOMO MESA MAN-
AGEMENTAREA
As supplemented by the provisions of this Stipulation that apply to all Management Areas,
the following terms shall apply to the Nipomo Mesa Management Area.
A. Supplemental Water
1. MOU. NCSD has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding
(AMOU@) with Santa Maria which contemplates the wholesale purchase and transmission from
Santa Maria to the NMMA of a certain amount of water each Year (the "Nipomo Supplemental
Water"). All water delivered pursuant to the MOU for delivery by NCSD to its ratepayers shall
be applied within the NCSD or the NCSD=s sphere of influence as it exists at the time of the
transmission of that water.
2. The NCSD agrees to purchase and transmit to the NMMA a minimum of
2,500 acre-feet of Nipomo Supplemental Water each Year. However, the NMMA Technical
Group may require NCSD in any given Year to purchase and transmit to the NMMA an amount
in excess of 2,500 acre-feet and up to the maximum amount of Nipomo Supplemental Water
which the NCSD is entitled to receive under the MOU if the Technical Group concludes that such
an amount is necessary to protect or sustain Groundwater supplies in the NMMA. The NMMA
Technical Group also may periodically reduce the required amount of Nipomo Supplemental
Water used in the NMMA so long as it finds that groundwater supplies in the NMMA are not
endangered in any way or to any degree whatsoever by such a reduction.
-.21 -
STIPULATION
1
3.
The Stipulating Parties agree to support (and, conversely, not to oppose in
2 any way or to encourage or assist any other Person or party in opposing or challenging) the imple-
3 mentation of the MOD, which includes environmental and regulatory permits and approvals, the
4 approval of a wholesale water supply agreement between Santa Maria and NCSD, and the
5 alignment and construction of a pipeline and related infrastructure necessary to deli ver the
6 Nipomo Supplemental Water from Santa Maria to the NMMA ("Nipomo Supplemental Water
7 Project"). ConocoPhillips retains the right to object to or provide input on the alignment of any
8 pipelines associated with the Nipomo Supplemental Water Project if they might interfere with the
9 location of existing ConocoPhillips pipelines. The Stipulating Parties retain their rights to be
10 compensated for any interest or property acquired in implementing the Nipomo Supplemental
11 t Water Project.
,'~'
12
4.
NCSD and Santa Maria shall employ their best efforts to timely implement
13 the Nipomo Supplemental Water Project, subject to their quasi-judicial obligations specified for
14 administrative aCtions and in the California Environmental Quality Act.
15
5.
The enforcement of the provisions of Paragraphs VI(D) below is condi-
16 tioned upon the full implementation of the Nipomo Supplemental Water Project, including the
17 Yearly use of at least 2,500 acre-feet of Nipomo Supplemental Water (subject to the provisions of
18 Paragraph VI(A)(2) above) within the NMMA. In the event that Potentially Severe Water
19 Shortage Conditions or Severe Water Shortage Conditions are triggered as referenced in Para-
20 graph VI(D) before Nipomo Supplemental Water is used in the NMMA, NCSD, SCWC,
21 Woodlands and RWC agree to develop a well management plan that is acceptable to the NMMA
22 Technical Group, and which may include such steps as imposing conservation measures, seeking
23 sources of supplemental water to serve new customers, and declaring or obtaining approval to
24 declare a moratorium on the granting of further intent to serve or will serve letters. In the event
25 that it becomes apparent that the Nipomo Supplemental Water will not be fully capable of being
26 delivered, any Stipulating Party may apply to the Court, pursuant to a noticed motion, for appro-
27 priate modifications to this portion of the Stipulation and the judgment entered based upon the
28 terms and conditions of this Stipulation, including declaring this Paragraph VI to be null and void,
- 22-
STIPULATION
and of no legal or binding effect. '
6. Once the Nipomo Supplemental Water is capable of being delivered, those
certain Stipulating Parties listed below shall purchase the following portions of the Nipomo
Supplemental Water Yearly:
NCSD - 66.68%
Woodlands Mutual Water Company - 16.66%
SCWC - 8.33%
RWC - 8.33%
B. . Ril!hls to Use Groundwater
1. ConocoPhillips and its successors-in-interest shall .have the right to the
reasonable and beneficial use of Groundwater on the property it owns as of the date of this Stipu-
lation located in the NMMA ("ConocoPhillips Property") without limitation, except in the event
the mandatory action trigger point (Severe Water Shortage conditions) described in Paragraph
VI(D) (2) below is reached. Further, any public water supplier which provides water service to
the ConocoPhillips Property may exercise that right subject to the limitation described in Para-
graph VI(D)(2).
2. Overlying Owners that are Stipulating Parties that own land located in the
NMMA as of the date of this Stipulation shall have the right to the reasonable and beneficial use
of Groundwater on their property within the NMMA without limitation, except in the event the
mandatory action trigger point (Severe Water Shortage Conditions) described in Paragraph
VI(D)(2) below is reached.
3. The Woodlands Mutual Water Company shall not be subject to restriction
in its reasonable and beneficial use of Groundwater, provided it is concurrently using or has made
arrangements for other NMMA parties to use within the NMMA, the Nipomo Supplemental
Water allocated to the Woodlands in Paragraph VI(A)(5). Otherwise, the Woodlands Mutual
Water Company shall be subject to reductions equivalent to those imposed on NCSD, RWC and
SCWC, as provided in Paragraph VI(D)(1-2).
III
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
:.:~
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 23-
STIPULATION
1
2
c.
NMMA Technical Group
1.
The NMMA Technical Group shall include representatives appointed by
3 NCSD, SCWC, ConocoPhillips, Woodlands Mutual Water Company and an agricultural Over-
J
4 lying Owner who is also a Stipulating Party.
5
2.
The NMMA Technical Group shall develop a Monitoring Program for the
6 NMMA (ANMMA Monitoring Program@), which shall be consistent with the Monitoring
7 Program described in Paragraph IV(D). The NMMA Monitoring Program shall also include the
8 setting of well elevation and water quality criteria that trigger the responses set forth in Paragraph
9 D below. The Stipulating Parties shall provide monitoring and other production data to the
10 NMMA Technical Group at no charge, to the extent that such data has been generated and is
ll~readily available. The NMMA Technical Group shall adopt rules and regulations concerning
12 measuring devices and production reports that are, to the extent feasible, consistent with the
13 Monitoring Programs for other Management Areas. If the NMMA Technical Group is unable to
14 agree on any aspect of the NMMA Monitoring Program, the matter may be resolved by the Court
15 . pursuantto a noticed motion.
16
3.
The NMMA Technical Group meetings shall be open to any Stipulating
17 Party. NMMA Technical Group files and records shall be available to any Stipulating Party upon
18 written request. Notices of the NMMA Technical Group meetings, as well as all its final work
19 product (documents) shall be posted to groups.yahoo.com/grouplNipomoCommunityl
20
4.
TheNMMA Technical Group functions shall be funded by contribution
21 levels to be negotiated by NCSD, SCWC, RWC, ConocoPhillips, and Woodlands Mutual Water
22 Company. In-lieu contributions through engineering services may be provided, subject to agree-
23 ment by those parties. The budget of the NMMA Technical Group shall not exceed $75,000 per
24 year without prior approval of the Court pursuant to a noticed motion.
25
5.
Any final NMMA Technical Group actions shall be subject to de novo
26 Court review by motion.
27 III
28 III
- 24-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
D.
Potentiallv Severe and Severe Water Shortage Conditions
1.
Caution trigger point (potentially Severe Water Shortage Conditions)
(a)
Characteristics. The NMMA Technical Group shall develop
4 criteria for declaring the existence of Potentially Severe Water Shortage Conditions. These
5 criteria shall be approved by the Court and entered as a modification to this Stipulation or the
6 judgment to be entered based upon this Stipulation. Such criteria shall be designed to reflect that
7 water levels beneath the NMMA as a whole are at a point at which voluntary conservation
8 measures, augmentation of supply, or other steps may be desirable or necessary to avoid further
9 declines in water levels.
10
(b)
Responses. If the NMMA Technical Group determines that Poten-
11tially Severe Water Shortage Conditions have been reached, the Stipulating Parties shall coordi-
12 nate their efforts to implement voluntary conservation measures, adopt programs to increase the
13 supply of Nipomo Supplemental Water if available, use within the NMMA other sources of
14 Developed Water or New Developed Water, or implement other measures to reduce Groundwater
15 use.
16
17
2.
Mandatory action trigger point (Severe Water Shortage Conditions)
(a)
Characteristics. The NMMA Technical Group shall develop the
18 criteria for declaring that the lowest historic water levels beneath the NMMA as a whole have
19 been reached or that conditions constituting seawater intrusion have been reached. These criteria
20 shall be approved by the Court and entered as a modification to this Stipulation or the judgment to
21 be entered based upon this Stipulation.
22
(b)
Responses. As a first response, subparagraphs (i) through (iii) shall
23 be imposed concurrently upon order of the Court. The Court may also order the Stipulating
24 Parties to implement all or some portion of the additional responses provided in subparagraph (iv)
25 below.
26
(i)
For Overlying Owners other than Woodlands Mutual Water
27 Company'and ConocoPhillips,a reduction in the use of Groundwater to no more than 110% of
28 the highest pooled amount previously collectively used by those Stipulating Parties in a Year,
- 25-
STlPULA TION
i
I prorated for any partial Year in which implementation shall occur, unless one or more of those
2 Stipulating Parties agrees to forego production for consideration received. Such forbearance shall
3 cause an equivalent reduction in the pooled allowance. The base Year from which the calculation
4 of any reduction is to be made may include any prior single Year up to the Year in which the
5 Nipomo Supplemental Water is transmitted. The method of reducing pooled production to 110%
6 is to be prescribed by the NMMA Technical Group and approved by the Court. The quanti fica-
7 tion of the pooled amount pursuant to this subsection shall be determined at the time the manda-
8 tory action trigger point (Severe Water Shortage Conditions) described in Paragraph VI(D)(2) is
9 reached. The NMMA Technical Group shall determine a technically responsible and consistent
10 method to determine the pooled amount and any individual's contribution to the pooled amount.
II Jf the NMMA Technical Group cannot agree upon a technically responsible and consistent
(.;1,.
"
12 method to determine the pooled amount, the matter may be determined by the Court pursuant to a
13 noticed motion.
14
(ii)
ConocoPhillips shall reduce its Yearly Groundwater use to
IS no more than 1l0% of the highest amount it previously used in a single Year, unless it agrees in
16 writing to use less Groundwater for consideration received. The base Year from which the calcu-
17 lation of any reduction is to be made may include any prior single Year up to the Year in which
18 the Nipomo Supplemental Water is transmitted. ConocoPhillips shall have discretion in deter-
19 mining how reduction of its Groundwater use is achieved.
20
(iii) NCSD, RWC, SCWC, and Woodlands (if applicable as
21 provided in Paragraph VI(B)(3) above) shall implement those mandatory conservation measures
22 prescribed by the NMMA Technical Group and approved by the Court.
23
(iv) If the Court finds that Management Area conditions have
24 deteriorated since it first found Severe Water Shortage Conditions, the Court may impose further
25 mandatory limitations on Groundwater use by NCSD, SCWC, RWC and the Woodlands. Manda-
26 tory measures designed to reduce water consumption, such as water reductions, water restrictions,
27 and rate increases for the purveyors, shall be considered.
28 III
- 26-
STIPULATION
1
(v)
During Severe Water Shortage Conditions, the Stipulating
2 Parties may make agreements for temporary transfer of rights to pump Native Groundwater,
3 voluntary fallowing, or the implementation of extraordinary conservation measures. Transfer of
4 Native Groundwater must benefit the Management Area and be approved by the Court.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
New Urban Uses
1. Within the sphere of influence or service area. New Urban Uses shall
obtain water service from the local public water supplier. The local public water supplier shall
E.
provide water service on a reasonable and non-discriminatory basis.
2. Outside the sphere of influence or service area. New municipal and indus-
trial uses on land adjacent to or within one quarter mile of the boundary line depicted in Exhibit D
shall comply with any applicable Corporations Code provisions, including good faith negotiations
'with the local water purveyor(s), prior to forming a mutual water company to provide water
service.
3.
The ConocoPhillips property, owned as of the date of this Stipulation and
15 located within the NMMA, is not in the sphere of influence or service area, nor is it in the process.
16 of being included in the sphere of influence, of a municipality or within the certificated service
17 area of a publicly regulated utility as of the date of this Stipulation, nor is it adjacent to or in close
18 proximity to the sphere of influence of a municipality or the certificated service area of a publicly
19 regulated utility as of the date of this Stipulation, as those terms are used in Paragraphs VICE)(1
20 and 2).
21 4. No modification of land use authority. This Stipulation does not modify the
22 authority of the entity holding land use approval authority over the proposed New Urban Uses.
23 5. New Urban Uses as provided in Paragraph VICE)(I) above and new muni-
24 cipal and industrial uses as provided in Paragraph VI(E)(2) above shall provide a source of
25 supplemental water, or a water resource development fee, to offset the water demand associated
26 with that development. For the purposes of this Paragraph, supplemental water shall include all
27 sources of Developed Water or New Developed Water.
28 1/ I
- 27-
STIPULA nON
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 ,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
VII. PHYSICAL SOLUTION: PROVISIONS SPECIFIC TO NORTHERN CITIES
MANAGEMENT AREA
These terms, supplemented by the provisions of this Stipulation that apply to all
Management Areas, govern water rights and resources in the Northern Cities Management Area.
1. Groundwater Monitoring. Groundwater monitoring in the Northem Cities
Management Area will be conducted by the Northern Cities in the manner described above.
2. Lopez Project. The Lopez Project will continue to be managed by the SLO
District. The Northern Cities and Landowners will continue to bear costs of the Lopez Reservoir
and no costs of the Twitchell Reservoir.
3. Independent Management Per Settlement Agreement.
(a) Existing Groundwater, SWP Water and Storage Space in the
Northern Cities Management Area will continue to be allocated and independently managed by
the Northern Parties in accordance with the Northern Cities and Northern Landowners' 2002
Settlement Agreement (Exhibit "En) for the purpose of preserving the long-term integrity of water
supplies in the Northern Cities Management Area. That Settlement Agreement initially allocates
57% of the safe yield of groundwater in Zone 3 to the fanners and 43% to the cities; and it
provides inter alia that any increase or decrease in the safe yield will be shared by the cities and
landowners on a pro rata basis. That Settlement Agreement is reaffirmed as part of this Stipula-
tion and its terms are incorporated into this Stipulation, except that the provisions regarding con-
tinuing jurisdiction ('II 4), groundwater monitoring, reporting, and the Technical Oversight
Committee ('II'II 7-20) are canceled and superseded by the provisions of this Stipulation dealing
with those issues.
(b) Without the written agreement of each of the Northern Cities, no
party other than Northern Parties shall have any right to:
(i) pump, store, or use Groundwater or surface water within the
Northern Cities Management Area; or
(ii) limit or interfere with the pumping, storage, management or
usage of Groundwater or surface water by the Northern Parties within the Northem Cities
- 28-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 ,~
"
'.
12
13
Management Area.
(c) For drought protection, conservation, or other management pur-
poses, the Northern Parties may engage in contractual transfers, leases, licenses, or sales of any of
their water rights, including voluntary fallowing programs. However, no Groundwater produced
within the Northern Cities Management Area may be transported outside of the Northem Cities
Management Area without the written agreement of each of the Northern Cities.
4. Current and future deliveries of water within the spheres of influence of the
Northern Cities as they exist on January I, 2005 shall be considered existing uses and within the
Northern Cities Management Area.
VIII. INJUNCTION - ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS
A. Use Only Pursuant to Stipulation
Each and every Stipulating Party, their officers, agents, employees, successors and
assigns, are enjoined and restrained from exercising the rights and obligations provided through
14 this Stipulation in a manner inconsistent with the express provisions of this Stipulation.
15
B.
Iniunction Al!ainst Transportation From the Basin
16 Except upon further order of the Court, each and every Stipulating Party and its officers,
17 . agents, employees, successors and assigns, is enjoined and restrained from transporting Ground-
18 water to areas outside the Basin, except for those uses in existence as of the date of this Stipula-
19 tion; provided, however, that Groundwater may be delivered for use outside the Basin as long as
20 the wastewater generated by that use of water is discharged within the Basin, or agricultural
21 return flows resulting from that use return to the Basin.
22
C.
No Third Party Beneficiaries
23 This Stipulation is intended to benefit the Stipulating Parties and no other Parties. Only a
24 Stipulating Party may enforce the terms of this Stipulation or assert a right to any benefits of, or
25 enforce any obligations contained in this Stipulation.
26 III
27 III
28 III
- 29-
STIPULA nON
r
IX. RESERVED ,JURISDICTION ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS
A. Reserved Jurisdiction: Modifications. Cancellations, Amendments
Jurisdiction, power and authority are retained by and reserved to the Court as set forth in
this Paragraph. Nothing in the Court's reserved jurisdiction shall authorize modification, cancel-
lation or amendment of the rights provided under Paragraphs III; Y(A, E); YI(A, B, D); Yll(2, 3);
YIII(A); IX(A, C); and X(A, D) of this Stipulation. Subject to this limitation, the Court shall
make such further or supplemental orders as may be necessary or appropriate regarding the
following:
1. enforcement of this Stipulation;
2. claims regarding waste/unreasonable use of water;
3. disputes between Stipulating Parties across Management Area boundaries;
4. interpretation and enforcement of the judgment;
5. consider the content or implementation of a Monitoring Program;
6. consider the content, conclusions, or recommendations contained in an
Annual Report;
7. consider Twitchell Project operations, including, but not limited to: i) the
content of the Twitchell Project Manual; ii) TMA or District compliance
with the Twitchell Project Manual; iii) decisions to implement Extraor-
dinary Project Operations; or iv) the maintenance of Twitchell Yield;
8. claims of localized physical interference between the Stipulating Parties in
exercising their rights pursuant to this Stipulation; provided, however,
rights to use Groundwater under this Stipulation shall have equal status;
and
9. modify, clarify, amend or amplify the judgment and the Northern Parties
. Settlement Agreement; Provided, however, that all of the foregoing shall
be consistent with the spirit and intent of this Stipulation.
III
III
- 30-
STIPULATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
, ,
I' 15
,
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B. Noticed Motion
Any party that seeks the' Court's exercise of reserved jurisdiction shall file a noticed
motion with the Court. Any noticed motion shall be made pursuant to the Court's Order Con-
cerning Electronic Service of Pleadings and Electronic Posting of Discovery Documents dated
June 27, 2000, attached and incorporated as Exhibit "G". Any request for judicial review shall be
filed within sixty days of the act or omission giving'rise to the claim. Upon a showing of good
cause, the Court may extend the sixty-day time limitation.
C. De Novo Nature of Proceeding
The Court shall exercise de novo review in all proceedings. The actions or decisions of
any Party, the Monitoring Parties, the TMA, or the Management Area Engineer shall have no
, heightened evidentiary weight in any proceedings before the Court.
t;,
D. Filing and Notice
As long as the Court's electronic filing system remains available, all Court filings shall be
made pursuant to Exhibit "G". If the Court's electronic filing system is eliminated and not
replaced, the Stipulating Parties shaIIpromptly establish a substitute electronic filing system and
abide by the same rules as contained in the Court's Order.
X. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ALL MANAGEMENT AREAS
A. Unenforceable Terms
The Stipulating Parties agree that if any provision of this Stipulation or the judgment
entered based on this Stipulation is held to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining pro-
visions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect; provided, however, any order which
invalidates, voids, deems unenforceable, or materially alters those Paragraphs enumerated in
Paragraph IX(A) or any of them, shall render the entirety of the Stipulation and the judgment
entered based on this Stipulation voidable and unenforceable, as to any Stipulating Party who
files and serves a motion to be released from the Stipulation and the judgment based upon the
Stipulation within sixty days of entry of that order, and whose motion is granted upon a showing
of good cause.
III
- 31 -
STIPULA nON
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 :\
.......
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B. Water Qualitv
Nothing in the Stipulation shall be interpreted as relieving any Stipulating Party of its
responsibilities to comply with state or federal laws for the protection of water quality or the
provisions of any permits, standards, requirements, or orders promulgated thereunder.
c.
Dutv to Cooperate
./
The Stipulating Parties agree not to oppose, or in any way encourage or assist any other
party in opposing or challenging, any action, approval, or proceeding necessary to obtain
approval of or make effective this Stipulation or the judgment to be entered on terms consistent
with this Stipulation.
D. StipulatiDl.! Parties Under Public Utilities Commission Rel.!l1lation
1. To the extent allowed by law, SCWC and RWC shall comply with this
Stipulation, prior to obtaining California Public Utilities Commission ("PUC") approval. If the
PUC fails to approve SCWC's and RWC's participation or faiis to provide approval of the neces-
sary rate adjustments so that SCWC and RWC may meet their respective financial obligations,
including the participation in Developed Water projects, Monitoring Programs, TMA and as
otherwise provided in this Stipulation, shall render the entirety of the Stipulation and those terms
of any judgment based on this Stipulation invalid, void and unenforceable, as to any Stipulating
Party who files and serves a notice of rescission within sixty days of notice by SCWC or RWC of
a final PUC Order.
2. Any Party, or its successors or assigns, agreeing to become a new customer
of SCWC or RWC, or an existing customer proposing to increase its water use through a change
in land use requiring a discretionary land use permit or other form of land use entitlement, that
has not executed reservation contracts for supplemental water as specified in Exhibit F will
provide the following, once approved by the PUC:
(a) If in the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, a water resource
development fee as specified in Exhibit F or a source of supplemental water sufficient to offset
the consumptive demand associated with the new use as provided in Paragraph V(E); or
III
- 32-
STIPULATION
1
(b)
If in the NMMA, a water resource development fee, or a source of
2 supplemental water sufficient to offset the consumptive demand associated with the new use.
3
3.
Any Person who is not engaged in a New Urban Use and who agrees to
4 become a customer of SCWC or RWC shall retain its right to contest the applicable water
5 resource development fee, should that fee ever become applicable to that Person.
6
E.
Deshmation of Address, for Notice and Service
7 Each Stipulating Party shall designate the mime, address and e-mail address, if any, to be
8 used for purposes of all subsequent notices and service, either by its endorsement on the Stipula-
9 tion for entry of judgment or by a separate designation to be filed within thirty days after execu-
10 tion of this Stipulation. This designation may be changed from time to time by filing a written
11 'i notice with the Court. Any Stipulating Party desiring to be relieved of receiving notices may file
12 a waiver of notice on a form approved by the Court. The Court shall maintain at all times a
13 current list of Parties to whom notices are to be sent and their addresses for purposes of service.
14 The Court shall also maintain a full current list of names, addresses, and e-mail addresses of all
15 Parties or their successors, as filed herein. Copies of such lists shall be available to any Person.
16 If no designation is made, a Stipulating Party's designee shall be deemed to be, in order of
17 priority: i) the Party's attorney of record; ii) if the Party does not have an attorney of record, the
18 Party itself at the address specified.
19
F.
No Loss of Ri!!:hts
20 Nothing in this Stipulation shall be interpreted to require or encourage any Stipulating
21 Party to use more water in any Year than is actually required. As between the Stipulating Parties,
22 failure to use all of the water to which a Stipulating Party is entitled hereunder shall not, no matter
23 . how long continued, be deemed or constitute an abandonment or forfeiture of such Stipulating
24 Party's rights, in whole or in part.
25
G,
Intervention After .Jud!!:ment
26 Any Person who is not a Party or successor to a Party, who proposes to use Groundwater
27 or Storage Space, may seek to become a Party to the judgment through a petition for intervention.
28 The Court will consider an order confirming intervention following thirty days notice to the
- 33-
STIPULATION
1 Parties, Thereafter, if approved by the Court, such intervenor shall then be a Party bound by the
2 judgment as provided by the Cburt.
3 H. Stipulation and Jud!!ment Bindin!! on Successors, Assi!!ns. etc.
4 The Stipulating Parties agree that all property owned by them within the Basin is subject
5 to this Stipulation and the judgment to be entered based upon the terms and conditions of this
6 Stipulation. This Stipulation and the judgment will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of
7 each Stipulating Party and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, trustees, successors,
8 assigns, and agents. This Stipulation and the judgment to be entered based the terms and condi-
9 tions of this Stipulation shall not bind the Stipulating Parties that cease to own property within the
10 Basin, or cease to use Groundwater. As soon as practical after the effective date of this Stipula-
11, tion, a memorandum of agreement referencing this Stipulation shall be recorded in Santa Barbara
1. -
12 and San Luis Obispo Counties by Santa Maria, in cooperation with the Northern Cities and
13 SCWC. The document to be recorded shall be in the format provided in Exhibit "H".
14
I.
Costs
15 No Stipulating Party shall recover any costs or attorneys fees from another Stipulating
16 Party incurred prior to the entry of a judgment based on this Stipulation.
17
J,
Non-Stipulatin!! Parties
18 It is anticipated that the Court will enter a single judgment governing the rights of all
19 Parties in this matter. The Stipulating Parties enter into this Stipulation with the expectation that
20 the Court will enter as a part of the judgment, the terms and conditions of this Stipulation. This
21 Stipulation shall not compromise, in any way, the Court's legal and equitable powers to enter a
22 single judgment that includes provisions applicable to the non-Stipulating Parties that may
23 impose differing rights and obligations than those applicable to the Stipulating Parties. As against
24 non-Stipulating Parties, each Stipulating Party expressly reserves and does not waive its right to
25 appeal any prior or subsequent ruling or order of the Court, and assert any and all claims and
26 defenses, including prescriptive claims. The Stipulating Parties agree they will not voluntarily
27 enter into 'a further settlement or stipulation with non-Stipulating Parties that provides those non-
28 Stipulating Parties with terms and conditions more beneficial than those provided to similarly
- 34-
STIPULATION
I ,
I
-
I 1 situated Stipulating Parties.
2 K. Counteroarts
i
I 3 This Stipulation may be signed in any number of counterparts, including counterparts by
,I
:
,! 4 facsimile signature, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall together
5 constitute one and the same instrument. The original signature pages shall be filed with Court.
,I
I' 6 L. Effective Date
7 This Stipulation shall be effective when signed by the Stipulating Parties listed on Exhibit
8 "A" and accepted by the Court.
9 Party Signature, title, and date ,Parcels Subject to
10 Stipulation
II
I.
12
, Attorney of Record Approved as to form:
13
, By:
14
;0
15 Date:
16
17
18
19
20
I 21
22
23
, 24
25
26
'.
27
I 28
- 35 -
STIPULATION
-- ------ . ..---. ----
"
'~
,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
EXHIBIT "E"
NOSSAMAN, GUTHNER, KNOX & ELLIOTT LLP
Frederic A. Fudacz, State Bar No. 50546 '
Henry S. Weinstock, State Bar No. 89765
Alfred E. Smith, State Bar No. 186257
445 South Figueroa Street, 31st Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 612-7800
Facsimile: (213) 612-7801
Attorneys for Defendants City of Arroyo Grande,
City of Grover Beach, City of Pismo Beach,
Oceano Community Services District
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
SANTA MARIA VALLEY WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT, a public
entitY';
) SANTA MARIA GROUNDWATER
) LITIGATION, LEAD CASE No. CV 770214
) (Consolidated with CV 784900, 784921,
) 784926,785509,785511,785515,785522,
) 785936,786971,787150,787151,787152,
) 990738,990739)
)
)
) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
) NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN
) LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff ,
v.
CITY OF SANTA MARIA, et aI.,
Defendants.
AND ALL RELATED ACTIONS.
PARTIES AND EFFECTIVE DATE
This Agreement is entered into among the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Pismo
Beach, Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District (collectively "Northern
Cities"), owners/lessors of land located in the Northern Cities Area ("Northern Landowners"),
and other parties who execute this Agreement. This Agreement is entered into as of April 30,
25 2002.
26 STIPULATIONS OF FACT
27
A:
In 1997, the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District initiated this
28 action, Santa Clara Superior Court Case Number CV 770214, consolidated with Case
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. ~ 1-
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
,l
1 Numbers 784900, 784921,784926,785509,785511,785515,785522, 785936, 786971,
2 787150,787151,787152,990738, and 990739 (the "Action"), to adjudicate groundwater rights
3 in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin;
4
B.
Numerous parties have filed complaints and/or cross-complaints in the
5 Action with respect to rights to produce water in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin;
6
C.
By Order dated December 21, 2001, the Court determined the geographic
7 area constituting the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin ("Basin") and ruled that the Northern
8 Cities Area (identified on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A) is within the Basin;
9
D.
Under current water supply and demand conditions, the groundwater
10 basin in the Northern Cities Area is in rough equilibrium, and groundwater pumping in the
11 Northern Cities Area does not negatively affect water supplies in the remainder of the Basin;
'j
.,;
12
E.
For more than 30 years, there have been separate funding, management
I'i
13 and usage of groundwater in the Northern Cities Area from groundwater in the Santa Maria
14 Valley. For example, the Northern Cities and Northern Landowners have paid and are paying
15 tens of millions of dollars for the construction and retrofit of the Lopez Reservoir, which
16 benefits the Northern Cities Area; whereas the Twitchell Reservoir has been paid for by parties
17 in the Santa Maria Valley who benefit from it.
18
F.
The Northern Cities and Northern Landowners have agreed among
19 themselves and do hereby reaffirm their agreement to cooperatively share and manage
20 groundwater resources in the Northern Cities Area in accordance with a "Gentlemen's
21 Agreemenf' that was originally developed in 1983 and amended thereafter. Said Agreement
22 confers no rights on any third parties;
23
G.
It is in the interest of all of the parties to this litigation that the parties settle
24 their claims and potential claims on the basis of the continued separate funding, management,
25 and usage of the waters conserved by the Lopez Reservoir in the Northern Cities Area and by
26 the Twitchell Reservoir in the remainder of the Basin, to preserve and protect water resources
27 in those separate management areas.
28
H.
This Settlement Agreement is also intended to provide the parties with
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. ~2.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1 advance notice of changes in the groundwater conditions in the Northern Cities Area and
2 Nipomo Mesa, as water supplies and demands may change with time. (The Nipomo Mesa is
3 southeast of the Zone 3 Line, and north of the Santa Maria River.); and
4 I. The parties to this Settlement Agreement have agreed to settle and
5 resolve their cross-claims and potential cross-claims on the conditions set forth below:
6 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS
7 1. Separate ManaQement Areas. Subject to the conditions set forth below,
8 water resources and water production facilities in the Northern Cities Area shall continue to be
9 independently managed by the Northern Cities, the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
10 Water Conservation District, and the Northern Landowners, with the intention of preserving the
11 long~,term integrity of water supplies in the Northern Cities Area. For example, the Northern
,..;1
12 Cities and Northern Landowners will not be responsible to pay for any of the costs of the
13 Twitchell Reservoir; and the parties outside of the Northern Cities Area (Zone 3) shall not be
14 responsible to pay any of the costs relating to the Lopez Reservoir.
15
2.
Effects on Litiqation.. Except as provided below, the parties in the
16 Northern Cities Area, on the one hand, and the other parties hereto, on the other hand, agree
17 not to pursue or assert any claims against one another relating to water rights in the Santa
18 Maria Groundwater Basin. Each of the Northern Landowners who execute this Agreement will
19 be deemed to have been served by each of the water purveyor parties in this action who have
20 signed this Agreement with cross-complaints seeking declaratory and other relief in the form of
21 the cross-complaints previously filed by the City of Santa Maria; and each of the Northern
22 Landowners who execute this Agreement shall be deemed to have served and filed answers to
23 said cross-complaints denying all of their material allegations and asserting all available
24 affirmative defenses. The Northern Cities and Landowners shall continue to be subject to
25 reasonable discovery requests that are relevant to the remaining issues in the case.
26 3. Court Approval. This Settlement Agreement shall be submitted to the
27 Court for approval. If approved, this Settlement Agreement shall be included in and attached
28 as an exhibit to the final judgment in this Action, and the Northern Cities Area shall be ,treated
SettlemantAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. -3-
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1 separately under the judgment in accordance with the provisions set forth herein. Paragraphs
2 4 and 7-20 of this Agreement shall take effect only upon Court approval of this Agreement.
3
4.
Consent to Continuino Jurisdiction, Prior to this Agreement, there has
4 been no adjudication of the water rights of the Northern Cities, Northern Landowners, or any
5 other party, other than the determination of the boundaries of the Basin. Except ~ 5 below,
6 nothing in this Agreement authorizes the Court to restrict or affect the right of any party to
,
7 pump, divert, use, or store groundwater or surface water without first according that party all of
8 its substantive, procedural, and due process rights under constitutional, statutory, and common
9 law requirements. Subject to the above and to the limitations of paragraphs 5-6 below, the
10 parties hereto agree that the Court reserves and retains full jurisdiction, power, and authority
11 over Jhe Northern Cities Area, the Northern Cities, and the Northern Landowners, to enable the
"
12 Court, upon motion of any party, to make such further orders or directions (1) to interpret,
13 enforce, amend, or amplify any of the provisions of this Agreement; (2) to enforce, protect, or
14 preserve the rights of the respective parties, consistent with the rights here.in decreed; or (3) to
15 issue such additional orders and/or injunctions to prevent injury to any party that might result
16 from any material adverse change in the availability or quality of the water supplies in the
17 Northern Cities Area, or the Nipomo Mesa Area, or any part of the Basin,
18
5.
Reaffirmation of Gentlemen's Aoreement. The Northern Cities and
19 Northern Landowners hereby reaffirm their Agreement to cooperatively share and manage
20 groundwater resources in the Northern Cities' Area in accordance with their AGREEMENT
21 REGARDING MANAGEMENT OF THE ARROYO GRANDE GROUNDWATER BASIN, aka
22 the "Gentlemen's Agreement." (A copy of the current version of this Agreement is attached
23 hereto as Exhibit B.) In particular, the Northern Cities and the Northern Landowners agree
24 with each other to continue to divide the safe yield of groundwater in the Northern Cities' Area,
25 including any increases or decreases of the safe yield, in accordance with ~ 1 of Exhibit B
26 hereto. Said water-sharing Agreement and this paragraph 5 shall only be binding on and
27 enforceable by the Northern Cities and Northern Landowners.
28 6, No Effect on Water Riohts. Except as provided in ~ 5 above, nothing in
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. 4~
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1 this Agreement shall be construed to create, eliminate, increase, or reduce any substantive
2 right of any party to pump, divert, use, or store groundwater or surface water; and nothing in
3 this Agreement shall be construed to prove or disprove, directly or indirectly, any element of
4 prescriptive rights to groundwater.
5 TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
6 7. Formation. A Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) shall be established
7 to carry out the ongoing monitoring and analysis program ("MAP," see below).
8 8. Composition. The TOC shall be comprised of two voting representatives
9 of the Northern Cities and two voting representatives of parties providing public water seNice
10 on the Nipomo Mesa ("Mesa Parties," which include the Nipomo Community SeNices District,
11 RuraJ Water Company and Southern California Water Company, and their successors or
S';,
12 assigns). At least one of the two representatives from the Northern Cities and the Mesa
13 Parties shall be technically qualified to carry out the MAP duties described below. The other
14 TOC representatives may be technical, policy, managerial, or legal in nature. The voting
15 representatives shall attempt to operate by consensus. However, if consensus cannot be
16 achieved, TOC decisions may be made by majority vote of the voting representatives.
17 9. Responsibility. The TOC shall implement and carry out the MAP.
18 10. MeetinQs. The TOe shall meet at least semi-annually for the first five (5)
19 years of implementing the MAP, and at least annually thereafter.
20 11. Procedures of the TOC. The TOC shall establish procedures for the
21 fulfillment of its responsibilities under this Agreement.
22 MONITORING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM
23 12. Purpose and LeQal Effect. A monitoring and analysis program (MAP) shall
24 be established to provide ongoing data collection and analysis of water supplies and demands
25 in the Northern Cities Area and the Nipomo Mesa. The purpose of the MAP is to regularly
26 assess the potential impact on the water supplies on either side of the Zone 3 bouJ:1dary line
27 resulting from changing conditions regarding the water supplies and demands in the Northern
28 Cities Area and the Nipomo Mesa, and the resulting changes in the surface and groundwater
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. -5-
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
,I
,
i 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
'J
flow conditions adjacent to and across the Zone 3 boundary line.
13. The Water Management Plans and the Annual Reports (collectively
"Plans") prepared pursuant to this Agreement are for information purposes only. They shall
not independently create in the party(ies) preparing them any affirmative obligation to act, or
implement any part of the Plans, nor shall they independently provide any other party or the
Court any right to compel Action or enforce any obligation. However, any party may challenge
the sufficiency of any Plan produced pursuant to this Agreement by showing that it has not
been completed in substantial compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, except that
any challenge to a Water Management Plan created pursuant to Paragraph 15 below may only
be undertaken in a proceeding and under the standards set forth under Water Code sections
106S,t?, et seq.
14. The Parties shall be excused from the preparation of the Plans required in
this Agreement when the Court enters a final judgment in this litigation.
15. Water Supplv Plan nino and Reports. Within two years iifter Court
approval of this Settlement, each of the Northern Cities 'and the Mesa Parties shall evaluate
their current and future water supplies and prepare a Water Management Plan. The Water
Management Plan shall generally include the content and analysis described in Water Code
sections 10630 through 10635, and shall also include an analysis of the ongoing availability of
groundwater in the Northern Cities Area given the changing urban and agricultural water
demands in the Northern Cities Area. Each of the Northern Cities and the Mesa Parties shall
update and revise their previously prepared Water Management Plans prior to December 31,
2006, and every five years thereafter; provided however, that this requirement to prepare a
Water Management Plan is not intended to expand or impose upon any party rights or
obligations with respect to such Water Management Plans: other than those specifically stated
in this Section. Copies of the Water Management Plans shall be provided to the Northern
Cities, the Mesa Parties, the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District and the City of
Santa Maria.
16. Monitorino and Data Collection. The TOC shall implement a MAP that
SettlementAgreementbatweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. -6-
SETTlEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1. shall include the data collection and analysis elements described below, and any other
2 monitoring and analysis, if the TOC deems them appropriate and cost-effective to fulfill the
3 purpose of this Agreement. The data collection and database development shall be created so
4 that the data can be shared and transferred between the TOC members for review and
5
6
evaluation in electronic format. The MAP shall include the following elements.
a. Design. Within six months after Court approval of this Agreement,
the TOC shall review existing data to select existing wells to include in the MAP. The TOC
shall define the list of wells to be monitored and specific information to be obtained from each
well, such as groundwater levels and groundwater quality constituents. The MAP shall also
include data collection to provide for early detection of seawater intrusion and collection of
other related data (e.g., deliveries of supplemental water, precipitation, discharge of treated
..~.
waste water, etc.) as are necessary for preparation of the analyses and reports required by this
Agreement. To the extent practical to adequately meet the purpose of this Agreement, the
TOC shall use existing facilities, rather than new facilities, in the design of the MAP.
b. Data Collection. As soon as the design of the MAP is complete, the
TOC shall commence collection of groundwater monitoring data, with data collection to occur
at intervals determined by the TOC.
c. Changing Groundwater Use Patterns. The TOC may also monitor
the groundwater pumping patterns in the Northern Cities Area and the Nipomo Mesa. The
monitoring shall be based on either observed changes (municipal pumping) or estimated
changes (private or agricultural pumping). The TOC may review the changes in pumping to
assess the potential impacts on groundwater flow conditions along the Zone 3 boundary line
and include its findings in the Annual Report, described below.
d. MAP Assessment. Within two years of Court approval of this
Agreement, and annually thereafter, the TOC shall evaluate data from the monitoring program,
assess data gaps, and m,ake recommendations to revise the monitoring program, including the
use of other wells or installation of new monitoring wells, as appropriate. The TOC may
recommend to the Northern Cities and the Mesa Parties or to the Court any additional
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. .7.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANOOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
i " 27
28
monitoring of hydrologic characteristics that may be prudent and cost-effective to meet the
goals of this Agreement, to provide a higher level of confidence in the data and analyses than
that which is based on existing wells, stream gages, etc.
17. Annual Report. Based upon the MAP and other relevantinformation, the
TOC shall annually prepare a Report on Water Supply and Groundwater Conditions (Annual
Report) for the Northern Cities Area and Nipomo Mesa. The Annual Report shall be filed with
the Court, posted on the Court's website, and served on the Northern Cities, the Mesa Parties,
the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District, and the City of Santa Maria. The first
Annual Report shall be completed, filed and served, as described in the previous sentence, on
or before the second (2nd) anniversary of this Court's approval of this Agreement, and
annually thereafter. The Annual Report shall assess the adequacy of the water supplies in
~ .
each area in comparison to the corresponding demands, and shall include an analysis and
discussion of the estimates of the volume of groundwater in storage, an updated water budget
assessment, and anticipated water.supply constraints, if any.
18. Cost Sharina. Unless otherwise agreed, each of the Northern Cities and
the Mesa Parties shall bear their own costs in participating in the TOC, gathering and
analyzing data, and producing any written documents as may be required by this Agreement.
To the extent the construction of new facilities may be required to implement this Agreement,
the Northern Cities and the Mesa Parties shall develop an equitable cost sharing agreement.
The parties will use their best efforts to minimize the costs of compliance in undertaking the
obligations of this Agreement.
19. Coooeralion of all Parties. All parties to this litigation and this Agreement
shall provide any documents, information, access to wells, and well data, and take any other
actions reasonably requested to implement the MAP, subject to prior protective orders and
reasonable confidentiality restrictions.
ADVANCE NOTICE OF INCREASED WATER PRODUCTION
20. The Mesa Parties, the Northern Cities, and the Northern Landowners shall
provide prior written notice to each other of their intent to drill new wells, materially increase
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. ~8-
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHE,R PARTIES
!
1
the production capacity of existing wells or take over the use of an existing well, if the well is to
be used for water production (not monitoring). The notice must be served prior to or
concurrent with the initiation of environmental review under the California Environmental
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Quality Act (CEQA), if required, or at least ninety (90) days prior to the construction of a new
well or the takeover or increase in capacity of an existing well. This ninety (90) day notice
requirement shall not apply in the event of emergencies, such as replacement of a collapsed
well, in which case notice will be provided as promptly as possible. The notice should provide
a description of the location, intended capacity and use of the well.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
21. No Third Party Beneficiary. Nothing in this Agreement, whether express
or implied, shall confer any rights or remedies under this Agreement on any persons other than
','}j
the Parties to it and their respective successors and assigns. Nothing in this Agreement shall
relieve or discharge the obligation or liability of any third parties to any Party to this Agreement.
22.. Leoal Capacity. The Parties warrant that all necessary approvals and
authorizations have been obtained to bind them to all terms of this Agreement, and further
warrant that the persons signing have authority to sign on behalf of their respective Parties.
23. Amendment. No amendment to this Agreement will be binding unless it
is either signed by an authorized representative of all of the Parties or approved by the Court.
24. Governino Law. This Agreement will be construed in accordance with,
and governed by, the I?ws of the State of California as applied to contracts that are executed
and performed entirely in California.
25 Severabilitv. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or
unenforceable by any court, it is the intent of the Parties that all other provisions of this
Agreement be construed so as to remain fully valid, enforceable, and binding on the Parties.
26. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more
counterparts, each of which will be considered an original, but all of which together will
constitute one and the same instrument. Any party that is currently a party to this Action and
any Northern Landowner may become a party to this Agreement by agreeing in writing to be
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc. .9.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
1 bound by its terms at any time prior to the entry of judgment in this Action. Future signatories
2 to this Agreement shall sign the signature pages attached hereto as Exhibits C (for Northern
3 Landowners) or D (for other parties to this litigation) to confirm their acceptance of its terms.
4
27. Merqer Clause. This Agreement supersedes and replaces all prior
5 settlement negotiations and agreements, written or oral. It is the complete, final, and exclusive
6 statement of the parties' agreement. The parties hereto acknowledge that no party, agent or
7 attorney of any party has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express
8 or implied, not contained herein, to induce them to execute this Agreement. Each party has
)
9 executed this Agreement in reliance on the advice of his/her or its own attorney.
10
Dated: April_, 2002
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
11
.~~~
12
13
14 Dated: April_, 2002
15
16
17
18 Dated: April _ , 2002
19
20
21 Dated: April _ , 2002
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
By: SiGnature PaGe Filed with Court
Title:
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
By: SiGnature PaGe Filed with Court
Tille:
CITY OF PISMO BEACH
By: SiGnature PaGe Filed with Court
Title:
OCEANO COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
By: SiGnature PaGe Filed with Court
Title:
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNortharnCitiesatc, .1 O.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG NORTHERN CITIES, NORTHERN LANDOWNERS, AND OTHER PARTIES
,
1
2
EXHIBIT C - NORTHERN LANDOWNER SIGNATURE PAGE FOR
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
3
5
6
1. I am the owner and/or lessor (circle one or both) of at least ten acres of
agricultural land in the Northern Cities Area (the area so designated on Exhibit A to this
Settlement Agreement).
2. Describe the parcel(s) of agricultural land that you own or lease:
Address(es):
Assessor's Parcel Number(s):
Number of acres of agricultural land that you own or lease:
Approximate number of acre-feet of water pumped annually:
3. I have read this Settlement Agreement. I have obtained such legal advice
4
7
(a)
8
(b)
9
(c)
10
(d)
11
,.,
\,.,
12
terms.
14
15
16
17
Dated:
,2002
Print Name of Owner/Lessor:
Sianature Paae Filed with Court
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc.
EXHIBIT C - NORTHERN LANDOWNERS SIGNATURE PAGE
, I
"
I'
,
1 EXHIBIT D - SIGNATURE PAGE FOR OTHER PARTIES - WATER PURVEYORS
2 AND LANDOWNERS OUTSIDE NORTHERN CITIES AREA
3
4
5
6
1. I am a party to the Santa Maria Groundwater Litigation, or the legal
representative of such a party.
2. I have read this Settlement Agreement. I have obtained such legal advice
or other counsel regarding its terms as I deem appropriate. I understand and agree to its
terms.
7
8
9
10
11
12
Dated:
,2002
,
;~
"
Print Name of Party(ies):
13
14
Title of Signer:
15
16
Signature:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26,
27
28
Sic mature Paae Filed with Court
SettlementAgreementbetweenandamongNorthemCitiesetc.
EXHIBIT 0 - SIGNATURE PAGE FOR OTHER PARTIES
-...;:~
+. '
AGREEMENT REGARDING
MANAGEMENT OF THE
ARROYO GRANDE GROUNDWATER BASIN
A. Parties
This Agreement is entered into among the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach. Grover
Beach and the Oceano Community Services District (collectively referred to hereinafter as .
"Parties" or "Urban Parties").
B. Recitals
WHEREAS, in January 1983, a Technical Advisory Committee consisting of
, representative~ ~:}\..'Toyo Grande, Grover City, Pismo Beach, Oceano Community Services
District, Port San Luis Harbor District, the Farm Bureau, Avila Beach County Water District and
the County of San Luis Obispo ("Committee") determined in reliance on the 1979 Report of the
qepartment of Water Resources entitled Ground Water in the Arrovo Grande Area that the safe
yield of the Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin ("Basin") is 9,500 acre feet per year;
WHEREAS, in or about February 1983, the Parties agreed to enter into a voluntary
groundwater management plan to provide fo.r effective management of groundwater resources in
the Basin through which each party was given sufficient water to meet its needs as then
projected; such needs being met in part by the City of Arroyo Grande foregoing 358 acre feet per
year of its historical use and the City ofPismo Beach foregoing 20 acre feet per year of its
historical use;
WHEREAS, this manager.Jent plan provided a reasonable division of the safe yield of the
Basin without court imposed groundwater basin adjudication;
WHEREAS, on February 9; 1983, the terms of the management plan'were incorporated
into Resolution No; 83-1 of the South San Luis Obispo County Water Association Approving the
Recommendations of the Committee relating to the Basin (the "Resolution");
WHEREAS, each of the Parties have a90pted individual resolutions endorsing the
provisions of the Resolution;
WHEREAS, the Parties have generally complied with the terms and conditions of the
Resolution; and
WHEREAS, genera'/ compliance with the Resolution has proven to be a fair and efficieEt
means of managing and protecting groundwater resources in the Basin as confirmed by the
revised final draft report prepared by the Department of Water Resources entitled, Water
Resources of Arrovo Grande and Nipomo Mesa. Januarv'2000. '
, (
Gentlemen_s Agreement.DOC
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
j'
,
'\:l
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I. Division of Safe Yield.
a, The Parties agree to a division of the safe yield of the Basin as follows:
Applied Irrigation
5,300 acre feet
Subsurface flow to ocean
200 acre' feet
Urban Use:
City of Arroyo Grande
1,202 acre feet
City of Grover Beach
1,198 acre feet
City ofPismo Beach
700 acre feet
"
"
Oceano Community Services District
900 acre feet
I
be Any increase or decrease in the safe yield of the Basin attributable to changed
operation of the Lopez Reservoir, or any other cause, shall first be divided between the Urban
Parties and applied irrigation on a pro rata basis using the formula from the 1983 Gentlemen's
Agreement, fifty-seven percent (57%) to applied irrigation and fortY-three percent (43%) to the
Urban Parties. Thereafter, the first 378 acre feet per year of any increase of safe yield allocated
to the, Urban Parties shall be divided between the City of Arroyo Grande and the City ofPismo
Beach on a pro rata basis (95% to Arroyo Grande and 5% to Pismo Beach).
c. The entitlements of each respective Urban Party may be increased based upon the
conversion of irrigated agricultural lands to urban use. An Urban Party to this Agreement may
increase its entitlement for urban use by a factor of three (3) acre feet per acre per year minus the
calculated urban usage per acre per year upon the conversion of irrigated agricultural land to
urban usage. "Irrigated agricultural land" shall be that land within the corporate limits of the
party that was identified as irrigated agricultural land in the 1979 Department of Water Resources
Report entitled Ground Water in the Arrovo Grande Area. This agricultural conversion factor
may be applied to all acreage converted to urban use from January I, 1983, throughout the life of
this Agreement. Such an agricultural conversion factor is in the best interests of the overall
Basin in that it will not result in any decline in the groundwater service over time. The Parties
agree that no water should be converted to urban use within the Basin without establishing that it
was irrigated agricultural land as defined in the 1979 Department of Water Resources Report,
Groundwater in the Arrovo Grande Area.
d. The Parties agree and understand that the safe yield figures utilized in this
Agreement are a product of the 1979 Department of Water Resources Report regarding the
Arroyo Grande Basin as adjusted by the 1983 ad hoc Technical Advisory Committee and that the
division of the resources is based upon the historical use of each party and a practical
accommodation of each Party's needs as they existed at the time of the adoption of the 1983
Gentlemen_s Agreement.DOC
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
2
~
t.
agreement. It is agreed that the Parties will meet and confer on issues related to safe yield and
division of existing water resources upon the final adoption of the new Arroyo Grande Basin
study performed by the Department of Water Resources, which is currently in draft.
2. Shared Information and Monitoring: The Urban Parties to this Agreement shall freely
share information with each other regarding each of their respective uses of groundwater in the
Basin, including all pumping data such as amounts of water extracted, well static water levels.
and water quality. The Urban Parties to this Agreement shall meet on a quarterly basis to share
this information and to discuss water usage and impacts upon the Basin. The Parties shall
conduct a review of water usage and the impacts on Basin hydrology in 2010 and 2020.
3. Tell'll:
a. ;';',is Agreement shaIl bind the Parties indefinitely absent a significant change of
circumstances as to available water, water quality, or hydrogeology of the Arroyo Grande Basin.
A significant change of circumstances shall allow any Party to opt out of this Agreement if the
signiticant chanl,;e of circumstances put that Party at risk of not being able to meet its potable
"later needs.
b. Significant changed circumstances shall include changes within the Basin or
outside of the Basin, including but not restricted to, a change in the Lopez Reservoir safe yield or
an increase in Lopez Reservoir discharges for conservation purposes that threatens the ability of
the Urban Parties to obtain their contractual allotments under their Lopez agreements, or a
significant chang", in groundwater yields or quality, or a reduction in foreign water imported liy
any Urban Party. The Parties recognize that rainfall within the watershed is the most significant
factor affecting the yield of Lopez Reservoir and the Basin.
c. The Parties shall revisit the issue of the allocation of groundwater resources
within the Arroyo Grande Basin in 20 LO and 2020 in the context of the review provided for in
section 2 of this Agreement The Parties shall make new allocations of groundwater resources at
that time if circumstances justify it and if no harm will result to other groundwater users. Priority
shall be given to reallocation of historical use of groundwater to Arroyo Grande and Pismo
Beach'that those agencies chose not to pursue in the entering into of the original Gentlemen's
Agreement in 1983 should such new allocations be made.
d. A Party may opt out of this Agreement if significant changed circumstances arise
as defined in this section. Such a party shall give all other parties to the agreement not less than
six months written notice of its intention to opt out. The written notice shall describe in detail
the significant changed circumstances upon which the Party bases its election to opt out of the
Agreement.
4. Mediation Agreement: The Parties agree to medi!'ite any disputes that arise out of the
Parties' performance under this Agreement, or the interpi'etation ofth~ ~erms of this Agreement,
prior to institutipg any litigation against or between any other Party tothis Agreement Should a
Party institute litigation without first offering in good faith to mediate any such dispute, any Party
may move for an order compelling mediation and staying the proceedings in the litigation until
Gentlemen_s Agreement.DOC
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
3
~
after mediation has been completed. The prevailing party on a motion to compel mediation shall
be entitled to recover its attorney's fees against any resisting party or any party who filed
litigation without first making a good faith attempt to mediate the dispute. This mediation
requirement shall not apply where the health and safety of any of the Parties, or any of the
Parties' residents, is threatened and they must seek, and have obtained, preliminary relieffor the
purposes of preserving health and safety.
5. No Third Partv Beneficiaries: The Parties are entering into this Agreement in order to
reasonably allocate existing groundwater resources between themselves and not to benefit any
third parties. This agreement shall only be enforceable between the Parties themselves. This
Agreement does not create any right enforceable by any person or entity that is not a party to this
Agreement
6. Ger,era.yrovisions:,
a. The Parties warrant that all necessary approvals and authorizations have been
optained to bind them to all terms of this Agreement, and further warrant that the persons signing
hlJ.ve authority to sign on behalf of their respective Parties. , '
b. Written notice under this Agreement shall be given by placing such notice in the
. first class mail, postage prepaid, or by hand delivery to the current address of the office of any
Party to this Agreement.
c. No amendment to this Agreement will be binding on any of the Parties unless it is
in writing and signed by an authorized representative of all of the Parties.
d. This Agreement will be construed in accordance with, and govemed by, the laws
of the State of California as applied to contracts that are executed and performed entirely in
California.
e. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable by any final
judgment, it is the intent of the Parties that all other provisions of this Agreement be construed to
remain fully valid, enforceable, and binding on the Parties.
Ii
Ii
!i
: :1
I!!
, ,
f. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in one or more counterparts,
each of which will be considered an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the
same instrument.
g. The Parties repn,sent that prior to the execution of this Agreement, they consulted
independent legal counsel of their oWn selection regarding the substance of this Agreement.
.,
'Gentle~en_s AgreementDOC
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
4
, .
.
r
WHEREFORE, the Parties publicly consent to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement by executing the same as set forth below.
Dated: (/1 A -I 70
I
,2002.
City of Arroyo Grande
--
l:>)qf
By:
Print Name and Title: I'll \ C. RAE: L 1\. ....t\D Y I tIU\"O,...
, Itln'"
Dated: V \.. .'-
iQ
j lY ,2002.
City ofPismo Beach
"
By1i~1! ~)
Print Name and Title: MAYoR RUDV NATOLI
Dated:
May 21
,2002.
City of Grover Beach
Attest:
~_ o-lfA.'lIl....t
onna L. McMahon
City Clerk
BY:~
Print Name and Title: 'lW>..Yce-
Dated: April 24, ,2002.
Oceano Community Services District
At.test:
By:
1 \ s;::.
,~e.ee '-- J~A.c-r;; ----'
r:::::--;1~~-<;./., -'~--<
Francis M. Cooney, Bo~retary
Print Name and Title: Board President
.f
Gentlemen_s Agreement.DOC
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
5
.
,
.t-
City of
Arroyo Grande
,-'< CITY OF
."~.Xr~
, ;.~ .. . e-;~.
.
~ , '
~~,.. -,;:;" \~'
.~~.
i1jJl;c-!, L I ~'~~~ A/ 'If~,'~
ll'~y:7""-~ ,.:-~J
-..... ---..
Water Conservation Program
Adopted May 13,2003
~,
City of Arroyo Grande
Water Conservation Program
Purpose
Currently, Section V of Arroyo Grande's Urban Water Management Plan includes 16
Best Management Practices (BMPs) identiiying measures currently in place for overall
water conservation. The intent of this Water Conservation Program is to supplement the
BMPs already practiced by the City in an effort to further reduce the per capita water
usage.
Goals
To continue to meet water supply needs up to the City's General Plan buildout
requirements, the long-term goal of the program is to reduce per capita water use. The
intent is to establish a program that will meet this goal via voluntary conservation
measures.
Discussion
The City currently has a "water neutralization" environmental mitigation measure that
may require developers to perform retrofits to offset water use anticipated by the
proposed development In lieu of retrofitting, developers can provide funding to the City
to be used for water conservation efforts. The existing funds provided by this mitigation
measure wiil allow for the implementation of this program. Future funds collected will
allow for long-term continuation of the program.
The program is divided into two phases, the first focusing on building retrofitting and the
latter focusing on irrigation efficiency. Phasing the program in this order will result in the
following benefits:
. Because the estimated plumbing retrofit effort can be quantified, partial
completion of Phase I will trigger the commencement of Phase II
. Replacement of plumbing fixtures provides highly reliable water savings and
does not require behavioral changes on behalf of the customer
. Plumbing fixture replacement is relatively inexpensive in comparison to
replacement of landscaping or irrigation systems
. Ability to monitor the effectiveness of each measure independently of one
another.
As previously discussed, the City's water neutralization environmental mitigation
measure has contributed to the plumbing retrofit effort in the City. In June 1997, the
measure resulted in the retrofit of 900 units to provide water neutralization for the Five
Cities Town Center commercial development. Unit values were determined' based on a
percentage of water use as compared to a single-family residential toilet. For example,
replacement of one restaurant toilet may equal eight units because of higher frequency
of use. Because this unit value system has promoted developers to focus retrofits on
commercial buildings, most commercial customers already have water efficient plumbing
fixtures. Therefore, this retrofit program will focus on single family residential customers.
Page I
.
City of Arroyo Grande
Water Conservation Program
Concurrent with Phase I, the City will prepare a water shortage contingency analysis
consistent with the requirements of State Water Code Section 10632. Specifically, to
,comply with the Water Code, the analysis must incorporate the following items:
(a) Stages of action to be undertaken by the City in response to water supply
shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply, and an
outline of specific water supply conditions which are applicable to each stage.
(b) An estimate of the minimum water supply available during each of the next
three water years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the
agency's water supply.
(c) Actions to be undertaken by the City to prepare for, and implement during, a
catastrophic interruption of water supplies including, but not limited to, a
regional power outage, an earthquake, or other disaster.
/~
(d) Additional, mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices during
water shortages, including, but not limited to, prohibiting the use of potable
water for street cleaning.
(e) Consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages. The City may
use any type of consumption reduction methods in its water shortage
contingency analysis that would reduce water use, are appropriate for the
area, and have the ability to achieve a water use reduction consistent with up
to a 50 percent reduction in water supply.
(f) Penalties or charges for excessive use, where applicable.
(g) An analysis ofthe impacts of each of the actions and conditions described in
subdivisions (a) to (t), inclusive, on the revenues and expenditures of the
urban water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts,
such as the development of reserves and rate adjustments.
(h) A draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance.
(i) A mechanism for determining actuel reductions in water use pursuant to the
urban water shortage contingency analysis.
Elements (b) and (d) above are currently addressed by the Urban Water Management
Plan. The proposed amendments to the Municipal will address elements (a), (e), (f), and
(h). Elements (c), (g), and (i) will be addressed through studies performed during Phase
I.
Although it is much more difficult to estimate possible water savings from irrigation
efficiency measures, it remains a critical element that must be addressed in the City's
Water Conservation Program. As discussed in the Urban Water Management Plan,
residential use accounts for 80% of the City's total water consumption. Based on the
portion of this water that later enters the wastewater system, the City estimates that
approximately 60% of the residential water use is for landscaping purposes.
Page 2
.'
City of Arroyo Grande
Water Conservation Progrem
Because of the variety of irrigation systems available and problems that can be present
within a system, wide-scale administration of irrigation improvements would require
resources currently unavailable to the City. To address this critical component of water
use with resources available, the City will focus on providing the public with general
information and education while directing specific efforts at the highest water users.
Program Components
Although the water conservation effort will primarily revolve around the phases
previously mentioned. concurrent processes will occur to evaluate the effectiveness of
the program and address all elements of State Water Code Section 10632. Additionally,
the City will continually research methods employed by other water suppliers to maintain
a successful water conservation program. Some of these methods have been included
as optional measures in this program and may be incorporated at any time at the
request of City Council. If deemed appropriate, additional conservation measures will be
recommended and implemented by resolution. This program classifies current
measures as follows:
:1.
'-"
Main Components
. Plumbing Retrofit
. Water Shortage Contingency Analysis
. Public Information and Education
. Information System Assessment for Top Water Users
. Enforcement of City's Water Conservation Codes
"
Optional Components
. Washing Machine Rebates
. Informational Materials
Alternative Components
. Irrigation System or Landscaping Rebates
. Retrofit Cemetery with Non-Potable Water
The steps required to implement each of the current proposed and optional water
conservation components are detailed in this section.
Main Components
Phase I
Plumbing Retrofit:
.
The City will issue a Notice Inviting Bids from qualified plumbers for an ongoing
contract consisting of materials and installation of the following plumbing
fixtures: 1.6 gallon ultra-low-flow toilets. 2.0 gallon per minute (gpm) indoor
faucet aerators, 2.5 gpm showerheads. The contract will also include checking
and adjusting or installing pressure regulators in homes with water pressure of
80 pounds per square inch (psi) or greater. The bid invitation will request a unit
price per type of fixture installed. The unit price will include materials and labor
as well as proper disposal of replaced fixtures. The City has obtained cost
Page 3
./
City of Arroyo Grande
Weter Conservation Program
estimates for the retrofit fixtures to be used as a basis of comoari<:on for bids
received. ' -
o Based on the California State Plumbing Code requirement that all houses built
since 1985 have water efficient plumbing fixtures, the City has estimated the
location and number of houses that will be targeted for the retrofit program.
Mailers will be sent to these locations in phases with each mailing targeting
approximately 300 to 500 homes. Mailings will occur in intervals appropriate for
maintaining an adequate, not excessive, log of homes to be retrofit. The mailer
will inform water customers of the retrofit program and provide contact
information for requesting a retrofit. The City will maintain records of how many
houses targeted with each mailing have been retrofitted and how many are
scheduled for retrofits. When 90 percent of the targeted homes in the current
mailing have been retrofitted, or an insufficient log of homes awaiting retrofit
exists, another group of homes will be targeted. Once each of the target areas
has received mailers and the majority of the retrofits have been performed, a
final mailing will be sent to all homes estimated to need retrofits that did not
respond to initial mailings.
o
Retrofit requests will be directed to the City's Corporation Y~rd. The request will
then be faxed to the plumber awarded the contract who will be responsible for
scheduling an appointment with the customer to perform the retrofit Should a
requesting customer's home be equipped with low flow fixtures comparable to
those being provided, no retrofit will be performed.
o Upon completion of a retrofit, the plumber will notify the City Corporation Yard
via a faxed or mailed notice of such work signed by the plumber and the
homeowner. The Code Enforcement Officer will then randomly verify that such
work has been completed. On average, approximately ten-percent of the
retrofits performed will be verified by the City. Forms to be used for notices of
completed work should be in a format agreed upon by the plumber and the City.
o Format and frequency of invoicing should be agreed upon by the City and the
plumber prior to commencement of work.
Water Shortage Contingency Analysis:
To address the requirements of State Water Code Section 10632, the City will perform a
fiscal analysis to identify the impacts of a water shortage up to a 50% reduction in water
supply. The analysis will also identify solutions to such a shortage. City staff will direct
appropriate personnel to carry out such analysis. The City expects to complete the
analysis within the 2003 calendar year. The analysis will be formally incorporated into
the City's 2005 Urban Water Management Plan update.
Phase II
It is anticipated that Phase II will begin three years after the implementation of the
plumbing retrofit program.
Page 4
J
City of Arroyo Grande
Water Conservation Program
Public Information and Education:
This measure will consist primarily of direct mailings to areas within the City requiring the
greatest amount of landscape maintenance. Because of the larger lots prevalent on the
east side of the City, the mailing effort will be focused in that area. However, mailings
will incorporate certain western neighborhoods in less densely populated areas and
eliminate eastern neighborhoods where irrigation is minimal.
Mailing materials may include lawn watering guides, troubleshooting handbooks, water
efficient landscaping brochures, and general water saving tips. In addition to direct
mailing, these materials may also be available to the public at the City Public Works
Department Information may also be published in the City's Stagecoach Express
newsletter and on the City's website. Based on experiences of other local Cities,
mailings sent with regular water billings have been least effective. Therefore, any
mailings should be independent of water billings unless such measures are cost
prohibitive. '
Irrigation System Assessment for Top Water Users:
By, querying data contained in the City's water billing program, the ,top water users can
be identified. With this information, the City can direct technical assistance efforts at
reducing water use among that particular group. Assistance may include. mailing
suggestions on improving irrigation efficiency or direct contact with Public Works staff.
Direct contact with Public Works staff would require proper training of staff on issues
relating to irrigation efficiency. If deemed a cost-effective method of achieving the City's
water conservation goal, the City may request assistance of landscape maintenance
professionals to supplement in advising top water users on possible irrigation
improvements. The percentage of top water users targeted would depend on funding
available and the effort required to water use among these customers.
Enforcement of City's Water Conservation Codes:
With the addition of a specific Water Conservation Chapter to the City's Municipal Code,
City Staff will be able to easily identify any water conservation violations. Staff will
actively issue warnings for water conservation violations and impose appropriate
penalties where necessary. Warnings will consist of door knob hung notifications
informing the occupant of the Municipal Code and the nature of the violation. Record of
such notifications, including violation type, date of violation, and address of violation will
be maintained by the City, which will allow for the identification and penalization of
repeat violators.
Optional Components
Washing Machine Rebates:
LightWash is a program funded by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
and participating water agencies (administered by Energy Solutions), that offers rebates
for the replacement of washing machines in common use areas including laundromats
and multi-family residential laundry facilities. Energy Solutions provides marketing,
rebate application and review processing, payment processing, quality control and site
inspection services free of charge to the City. The City's involvement in the program
Page 5
.,
City of Arroyo Grande
Water Conservation Program
consists of providing a portion of the rebate amount to be combined with a rebate
contribution provided by the CPUC. The CPUC contributes $100 towards rebates on
multi-famiiy residential laundry facility washing machines and $150 towards rebates on
laundromat washing machines.
Implementation of the UghtWash program involves the following steps:
. City will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Energy
Solutions.
. City will deposit funds with Energy Solution equaling the amount of expected
rebates.
Informational Materials:
Although informational materials were discussed as a component of Phase II, they may
be incorporated at any stage of the program. In addition to printed materials listed in the
Public Information and Education section of this program, the City may provide
information to the public through the City web site, public service announcements, and
Raid advertising. "
Alternative Components
Irrigation System or Landscaping Rebates:
The City may issue rebates for irrigation system improvements or landscape
modifications such as replacement of sprinkler irrigation with drip irrigation, installation of
rain or moisture sensors, or planting water efficient landscaping. Because of the diverse
nature of irrigation systems and water efficient landscaping, such a rebate program
would involve an extensive effort is determining allowable rebates and administrating the
rebate program. The effort required to implement such a measure exceeds current
available resources.
Retrofit Cemetery with Non-Potable Water:
As identified in BMP 5 of the Urban Water Management Plan, the Arroyo Grande District
Cemetery is the largest irrigation water user in the City at 42 acre-feet per year 2002.
Providing the cemetery with non-potable water from the Soto Sports Complex has been
considered as a possible water conservation measure. Implementation of this
component would require labor and materials associated with installing 3,200 linear feet
, of eight-inch piping along Halcyon Road. At an estimated project cost of $275,000, such
a measure would greatly reduce neutralization funds available for the implementation of
other measures.
Success Measurement
Since the program will be implemented in two, nearly consecutive phases, reduction in
water use will be easily attributable to a specific measure. Prior to implementation of
Phase II, the City will assess per capita water use relative to the overall goal and in
comparison to historical data. Depending on the success resulting from Phase I, the
City will determine if additional measures should be employed during Phase II.
Page 6
10.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGE~
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF FIRE CONSOLIDATION OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE PROPOSAL
DATE:
MARCH 14,2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council: 1) approve the proposed structure and scope of
work for the Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee; and 2) appoint a representative
from the City Council to participate on the Committee ("Committee").
FUNDING:
No costs are associated at this time with the proposed scope of work. However,
consultant services be may recommended at a later time in order to study in more depth
specific items under consideration.
DISCUSSION
On Monday, January 30, 2006, the Councils and Board of Directors of the Cities of
Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach and Oceano Community Services District
conducted a joint meeting to discuss potential consolidation of fire services. The
discussion was based upon the results of a study contracted by the City of Pismo Beach
and prepared by Citygate Associates.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the city managers and general manager were directed
to prepare recommendations for establishment of an oversight committee to work on
follow-up to the report and discussion. A copy of the proposal that has been developed
is attached.
It is recommended a Committee be established that would meet monthly and include a
representative from each elected body and each city manager/general manager. Other
technical staff would also be requested to participate in the meetings. The committee
would develop recommendations on overall objectives, additional follow-up studies and
a number of specific potential interim steps in coordination of fire operations. Each
elected representative would report back to their respective City Councilor Board on a
monthly basis and receive feedback.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF FIRE CONSOLIDATION OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
PROPOSAL
MARCH 14,2006
PAGE 2
This item was approved by the City of Pismo Beach and the Oceano Community
Service District Board of Directors at their last meeting and will be considered by the
City of Grover Beach at their March 20th meeting. If approved, it is requested the City
Council appoint one representative to participate on the Committee. The first meeting
has been tentatively targeted for March 24, 2006, depending upon the availability of
appointed members.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
- Approve the Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee proposal and appoint a City
Council representative;
Recommend modifications or additions to the proposed scope of work and/or
structure, which would then be communicated to the other jurisdictions for
consideration;
Do not approve the proposal;
Provide staff direction.
Attachment:
1. Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee Proposal
S:ICITY MANAGERISTEVEIConncil ReportslFire Consolidation Oversight Committee 3.14.06.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CITY OF GROVER BEACH,
OCEANO COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND CITY OF PISMO BEACH
FIRE CONSOLIDATION OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE PROPOSAL
BACKGROUND
On Monday, January 30, 2006, the Councils and Board of Directors of the Cities of
Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach and Oceano Community Services District
(OCSD) conducted ajoint meeting to discuss potential consolidation of fire services. The
discussion was based upon the results of a study contracted by the City of Pismo Beach
and prepared by Citygate Associates. At the conclusion of the meeting, the following
general consensus was reached:
. While immediate full consolidation is not economically feasible at this time, it may
be a goal that the jurisdictions should work towards by developing interim steps
aimed at increased joint operations and coordination;
. To accomplish this, a Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee (Committee) will be
formed to prepare recommendations, which shall consist of elected and staff
representatives from each of the jurisdictions; and
. The City Managers and General Manager were requested to prepare
recommendations on the structure and scope of work for the Committee.
STRUCTURE OF COMMITTEE
Goals
It is recommended that the following goals be achieved in structuring the Committee:
. Representative of each community and governing board
. Appropriate size to enable productive discussion and agreement on strategies
. Necessary expertise available to make effective decisions
Representatives
It is recommended that the Committee include the following representatives:
. One appointed representative from each City CouncillBoard of Directors
. City Manager and General Manager from each jurisdiction
It is further recommended that additional fire and other technical staff be requested to
participate in the meetings at appropriate times to provide input on selected technical
topics.
Meetinl!s
It is proposed the Committee meet on a monthly basis at rotating locations. It is also
proposed that each elected official representative report back to their respective
governing board on a monthly basis and receive feedback regarding the topics discussed.
Fire Consolidation Committee Proposal
Page 2
Additionally, an option has been identified in the proposed scope of work to schedule a
joint meeting of the governing boards in September-October 2006 to review progress and
ensure that efforts are on track with the expectations of each of the governing boards.
SCOPE OF WORK
Future Vision. Goals and Obiectives
Based upon the input from the joint meeting, it is recommended that the Committee
establish recommendations regarding the ultimate vision and direction desired for the
Five Cities area. This discussion should be based upon needs and desired service levels
rather than cost and revenue limitations, with the understanding that ideas will likely
focus on long-range objectives. This is intended to address comments expressed at the
meeting to not set sights too low.
Once the direction is determined, costs and revenue restrictions will be addressed when
determining implementation steps. Ways in which to implement steps through a phased
approach should also be discussed. For example, there may be items that would be
desirable to implement initially between two or three jurisdictions, maintaining some
level of involvement of the other jurisdictions on an interim basis prior to ultimately
expanding to all four agencies. The purpose of this exercise is to ensure that
implementation steps are consistent with the ultimate desired outcome.
Follow-up Studies
At the joint meeting, assumptions, analysis and recommendations of the consultant were
questioned. It was also indicated that there may be other options available to address the
needs identified in the study. Therefore, it is recommended the Committee review the
study results and provide recommendations if additional follow-up studies are necessary
to address specific issues and/or objectives.
Implementation Steps
There were a significant number of comments by participants at the meeting regarding
potential interim steps that can be pursued to address needs identified in the study and to
work towards the goal of fire consolidation and joint services. Items identified include,
but shall not be limited, to the following:
Joint Training - Discuss whether the agencies should increase joint training to improve
coordinated response to major incidents. If so, recommend how a structure can be
established to provide qualified and dedicated staffing to ensure that such training takes
place on a regular basis.
Shared Purchase and Utilization of Equipment - Identify opportunities to share use and
costs for necessary fire operation equipment and apparatus. Specifically, it is
recommended that the Committee identify areas where cost savings can be achieved
through the joint utilization of necessary equipment, review replacement schedules for
that equipment, and agree on methods to best share the use and costs of that equipment
Fire Consolidation Committee Proposal
Page 3
Joint Maintenance of Equipment - Review how each agency is currently maintaining
equipment and determine if there are ways in which to increase efficiency and service
levels through joint operations and/or coordination.
Joint Command/Administration - The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach have
recently implemented a step that has substantially enhanced joint operations and is a
significant step towards consolidation, which has involved sharing administration and
training positions. It may be beneficial for the Committee to review options and the
potential for expanding this concept to three and/or all four of the agencies.
Joint Dispatch - Review opportunities to improve overall coordination, response and
efficiency through a joint dispatch operation. Based on the initial evaluation, it is
recommended the Committee determine whether it would be desirable to jointly fund a
contract for a professional consultant firm to assist in developing the analysis and
recommendations. It is also recommended that the senior police department official from
each agency be requested to participate in this review. The proposed steps for this review
include the following:
. Review existing operations
. Identify options and objectives oftransitioning to joint dispatch
. Identify constraints to providing joint dispatch and whether they can be addressed
in a feasible manner
. If initial analysis indicates objectives can potentially be achieved and constraints
addressed, determine whether contracting for professional analysis is necessary
. Prepare in-depth analysis of objectives, options, costs, benefits, and implementation
strategies
. Based on analysis, prepare recommendations
Other Opportunities - Based on feedback from each of the goveming boards, identify
other opportunities for potential coordination that are requested to study and to provide
recommendations.
CHART OF WORK
The following is a general overview of the proposed work plan. However, specific steps
will likely be adjusted throughout the process based upon conclusions reached by the
Committee.
March - April 2006
. Discuss and develop recommendations on future goals, objectives and vision
. Discuss initial need for follow-up studies
. Identify information needed to review opportunities for joint training
. Review of existing mutual and automatic aid agreements
Fire Consolidation Committee Proposal
Page 4
May - June 2006
. Agree on future goals, objectives and vision
. Develop recommendations regarding joint training
. Identify information needed to review opportunities for shared purchase and
utilization of equipment
. Identify information needed to revtew opportunities for joint maintenance of
equipment
July 2006
. Develop recommendations regarding opportunities for shared purchase and
utilization of equipment
. Develop recommendations regarding opportunities for joint maintenance of
equipment
. Identify information needed to review joint command/administration opportunities
August 2006
. Develop recommendations regarding opportunities
command/administration opportunities
. Identify information needed to review joint dispatch opportunities
for
joint
September 2006
. Review existing joint dispatch opportunities
. Identify dispatch options and objectives
. Identify constraints
October 2006
. Analysis of joint dispatch opportunities, strategies and costs
November 2006
. Continued analysis of joint dispatch opportunities, strategies and costs
December 2006
. Develop recommendations regarding joint dispatch
January 2007
. Identify other opportunities to improve coordination and steps to work towards
consolidation
. Prepare cost analysis on recommendations
. Schedule joint meeting of the governing boards to provide an update and obtain
interim direction to ensure efforts are on track
Fire Consolidation Committee Proposal
Page 5
February 2007
. Review other opportunities to improve coordination and steps toward consolidation
and develop recommendations
. Complete cost analysis on recommendations
. Prepare recommendations for next steps
PROCESS
It is recommended each City Council and the OCSD Board of Directors review the
process and provide feedback and questions. The City Managers and General Manager
will meet to address comments and present the final recommended process to each
Council and Board for consideration and appointment ofrepresentative(s).
11.8.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
CITY COUNCIL
ANGELA KRAETSCH, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES AK
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF FINANCING ALTERNATIVES FOR THE LOPEZ
WATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE PROJECT
FROM:
DATE:
MARCH 14, 2006
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council receive the San Luis Obispo County staff
presentation on the four financing alternatives proposed for the Lopez Water Treatment
Plant Upgrade Project for Flood Control Zone 3 and provide feedback regarding the
alternatives to Council Member Costello to take forth to the Zone 3 Water Advisory
Board. It is staff's recommendation that the project be financed through the 20 year
State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan. This loan provides the lowest interest cost at 2.6%
and the annual payment is only slightly higher than the other financing options.
FUNDING:
The City is responsible for 50.55% of the cost for the construction of the Lopez Water
Treatment Plant Upgrade. The Council approved a Water and Sewer Rate Study in
June 2005. This study included a majority of the increased debt service cost when
calculating the new rates for the Lopez Fund. Based on the updated five-year estimate
provided by the County (Attachment A), staff anticipates that the current approved rate
structure and the use of the Lopez reserve fund balance will be able to cover increased
costs until FY 2010-11.
DISCUSSION:
At the request of Council Member Costello, representatives from San Luis Obispo
County have prepared a presentation on the four financing options being considered for
the Lopez Water Treatment Plant Upgrade Project. The cost of the water treatment plant
upgrade was originally estimated at $18.4 million. However, design changes, a
construction contingency, and the escalation of construction costs since the original loan
documents were submitted have increased the upgrade costs to $26 million. Due to the
increased costs, members of the Technical Advisory Committee and the Advisory
Committee requested that several financing options be explored. The committee
members were concerned that future generations would be burdened with the water
treatment plant upgrade project costs. In addition, there was a concern about how these
increased costs would affect the rates for each of the agencies.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF LOPEZ WATER TREATMENT PLANT FINANCING
MARCH 14, 2006
PAGE 2
At the request of the Finance Committee, the County provided the expected lifetime for the
Lopez Water Treatment Plant Upgrade. The actual structure has an expected life of 50
years. However, the major process equipment only has a 20 year life expectancy. This is
important to note when considering the four financing options. If a term beyond 20 years
is selected it is possible that the City could still be paying for the original equipment even
after it has been replaced.
County staff provided Attachment A, which provides four different water treatment plant
upgrade financing scenarios and the cost to Arroyo Grande of each scenario. The four
scenarios can be described as follows:
$26 million project:
1. 100% financed through a State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan
2. 100% financed with 20 year bond financing
3. 100% financed with 30 year bond financing
4. 100% financed with 35 year bond financing
The first option is the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan. This option is a 20-year loan,
which has an interest of 2.6%. SRF loans also require establishing a reserve with annual
contributions equal to 10% of the debt service payment for the first 10 years. This reserve
requirement is then used to make the final debt payment so that the effective loan term is
19 years. The reserve amount for the City of Arroyo Grande is an additional $85,000 for
the first 10 years of the loan. This option has the greatest economic benefit, as it has the
lowest interest cost The County has already gained the approval from the Department of
Health Services for the SRF loan of $26 million for the upgrade project
The second option is the 20-year Bond Pool; this option has the largest annual debt
service payment with a larger interest cost (estimated at 4.44%) than the SRF loan.
The third option is the 30-year Bond Pool; this option has a lower annual debt service
payment than the 20-year bond, as well as being slightly less than the SRF option.
However, the interest costs, at an estimated 4.67%, are higher than the two previous
options.
The last option is the 35-year Bond Pool; this option has the lowest annual debt service,
the highest total payments, and the highest total interest cost (estimated at 4.76%) of the
four options. .
Below is a schedule of the City's debt service cost for each proposal. The last column
shows the increase or decrease in the annual payment compared to the SRF loan.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF LOPEZ WATER TREATMENT PLANT FINANCING
MARCH 14, 2006
PAGE 3
Arroyo Grande Debt Service:
Option
Annual
Debt
Service
846,919
1,017,095
834,518
790,115
Number
of Years
20
20
30
35
Total
Payments
16,938,372
20,341,894
25,035,541
27,654,030
Total
Interest Cost
3,795,372
6,961,309
11,639,791
14,248,170
Increase!
Decrease
in annual
payment
SRF
20 Year Bond Pool
30 Year Bond Pool
35 Year Bond Pool
170,176
(12,401 )
(56,804)
As you can see, the 20-year Bond Pool is the most expensive at $170,176 above the
SRF loan payment The lowest annual cost is the 35-year Bond Pool at $56,804 less
than the SRF loan. However, this option also has the highest total interest cost at $14.3
million.
Below is a schedule of the additional costs or savings per customer for the three Bond
Pools:
Bi-
Increase! Monthly
Decrease Number of Yearly Billing
in Debt City Increase! Increase!
Option Service Customers Decrease Decrease
20 Year Bond Pool 170,176 6150 $ 27.67 $ 4.61
30 Year Bond Pool (12,401 ) 6150 $ (2.02) $ (0.34)
35 Year Bond Pool (56,804) 6150 $ (9.24) $ (1.54)
The 20 Year Bond Pool would increase customer's bi-monthly invoices by $4.61 and
total interest payments would be $6,961,309 or $3,165,937 above the SRF loan.
The 30 Year Bond Pool would slightly decrease customer's bi-monthly rates by .34
cents. However, total interest costs for this option would be $11,639,791 or an increase
of $7,844,419 above the 20 year SRF loan.
While the 35 Year Bond Pool option would provide the greatest decrease in customer's
rates at $1.54 per billing, the total interest costs would increase to $14,248,170 or
$10,452,798 above the 20 year SRF loan.
The schedule on the following page lists the current Lopez rate structure as approved
by the City Council at the June 14, 2005 meeting. These rates were based on the five-
year billing estimate prepared by the County. At that time, the estimated cost for the
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF LOPEZ WATER TREATMENT PLANT FINANCING
MARCH 14, 2006
PAGE 4
water treatment upgrade project was approximately $22 million. Based on the updated
five-year estimate provided by the County (Attachment A), staff believes that the current
approved rate structure and the use of the current Lopez reserve fund balance will be
able to cover increased costs until FY 2010-11. At that time, staff will reevaluate the
rates to determine if an increase will be needed or whether a new rate study should be
prepared.
City of Arroyo Grande
Lopez Bi-Monthly Charges
Current
Meter Size FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09
5/8 inch 48.34 58.92 72.52 79.38
3/4 inch 48.34 58.92 72.52 79.38
1 inch 69.34 84.52 104.02 113.86
1 1/2 inch 90.10 109.82 135.16 147.92
2 inch 111.36 135.82 167.06 182.84
3 inch 132.14 161.04 198.22 216.94
4 inch 153.40 186.96 230.12 251.86
6 inch 195.62 238.44 293.46 321.18
8 inch 241.72 294.60 362.58 396.86
Attachments:
A Attachments A-1 through A-4 - Flood Control Zone 3 Billing Estimates.
B. Water and Sewer Rate Study - Lopez Fund Water Charges
Attachment A-I
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE 3
Arroyo Grande
5 year Billing Estimate for 2006 - 100% SRF
Estimated Project Costs: $26,000,000
A
F
Entitlement
50.55%
1 Debt Service
2 Lopez Dam Bonds A - 2000
3 SRF Loan
, 4 WTP Upgrade Bonds
5
6
Total Debt Service:
7 Operations & Maintenance
8 Routine Costs
9 Additional WTP O&M
10 State Water Wheeling
11
Total Routine Costs:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 Capital Outlay
19 Capital Outlay
Non.Routine
Pigging
Slale Water Wheeling
T olaf Non-Routine Costs:
Total 0 & M:
20
21
Total Capital Outlay:
Total FCZ 3 Billing:
20
22
23
24
2S
Cost Per Acre Foot
Increase From Prior Year
Percentage Increase From Prior Year
Increase Related to WTP Upgrade
Percentage Increase Related to Upgrade
2/22/2006 Preparation Date
B
C
D
E
2006107
2007108
2008/09
2009/10
2010111
554.920 553,731 553.599 554.478 553.443
202,200 931.610 931.610 931.610 931.610
0 0 0 0 0
L 75?,,12,()j1 1.485,3411L-!,.485.~L 1.486.~1 1.485,053
910,770 947,201 985,089 1.024.492 1.065.472
130.632 - 194,229
201.998 210.078 218.481
0 0 0 0 0
1 1.041.4021 1,141.4301 1,187,08711 1,234.57011 1.283,953
123,550 128.492 133,632 138.977 144.536
35.389 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
I 1s8,93911 128,49211 133,63211 138,97711 144.536
1200341
1 269 922
1 320719
1373547
1 428 489
293,201 281,601 475.271 300,773 403,389
293,201 281.601 475.271 300,7731 403,389
$2,250,6621 $3,036,864 $3,281,199 $3,160,408 $3,316,932
$983 $1.326 $1.433 $1,380 $1,448
nla 786,202 244,335 .120.791 156,524
n/a 34.9% 8.0% -3.7% 5.0%
nla 793.007 7.769 8,080 8.403
nla 35.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3%
V:\fUNDQRGSIDISTRICTlSP .DISTlFCl 3\Flve Year Cost Projechons\FCl3 2006 Versions\FCZ3 5 yr 8,1 iog Estimate FYE2006.FY201 1 Prolect Cost $26K All SRF 2-2006 XLS
Attachment A-2
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE 3
Arroyo Grande
5 year Billing Estimate for 2006 - 20 Year Bond Funding
Estimated Project Costs: $26,000,000
A
F
Entitlement
50.55%
1 Debt Service
2 Lopez Dam Bonds A ' 2000
3 SRF Loan
4 WTP Upgrade Bonds
S
6
Total Debt Service:
7 Operations & Maintenance
8 Routine Costs
9 Additional WTP O&M
10 State Water Wheeling
11
Total Routine Costs:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 Capitat Outlay
19 Capital Outlay
Non-Routine
Pigging
State Water Wheeling
Total Non-Routine Costs:
Total 0 & M:
20
21
Total Capital Outlay:
Total FCZ 3 Billing:
20
22
23
24
25
Cost Per Acre Foot
Increase From Prior Year
Percentage Increase From Prior Year
Increase Related to WTP Upgrade
Percentage Increase Related to Upgrade
2/22/2006 Preparation Date
B
C
D
E
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
554.920 553.731 553.599 554.4 78 553.443
202.200 0 0 0 0
0 1.017.095 1.017,095 1.017,095 1,017,095
,-- t-'-~
I, ,757,}?.QJL" 1.570,826J~,570:,69,~1 1,571.573 L.", 1 ,570.538
910.770 947,201 985.089 1.024.492 1,065.472
130,632 194,229 201.998 210.078 -,
218.481
0 0 0 0 0
I 1,041,40211 1,141.43011 1.187,08711 1,234,57011 1.283.953
123.550 128.492 133.632 138.977 144,536
35,389 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
r--- 158,93911 128.49211 133.63211 138,97711 144.536
1.200,341
1.269,922
1.320.719
1.373.547
1.428.489
293,201 281.601 475.271 300,773 403,389
293,201 281.601 475,271 300,773 ..
403.389
$2,250,662 $3,122,349 $3,366,684 $3,245.8931 $3,402,416
$983 $1.363 $1,470 $1,417 $1,486
n/a 871,687 244,335 .120.791 156,524
nfa 38.7% 7.8% -3.6% 4.8%
nfa 878,492 7.769 8,080 8,403
n/a 39.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3%
v \FUNDORGSIDISTRlcnSP_Dlsr,FCl 3\F.ve Year Cost ProjechonslFCZ3 2006 VersionsIFCZ3 5 YI Bil ing Es1>male FYE2006-FY201 1 Project Cost S26K 20 year Bonds 2-2006 XLS
Attachment A-3
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE 3
Arroyo Grande
5 year Billing Estimate for 2006 - 30 Year Bond Funding
Estimated Project Costs: $26,000,000
A
F
Entitlement
50.55%
1 Debt Service
2 Lopez Dam Bonds A - 2000
3 SRF Loan
4 WTP Upgrade Bonds
5
6
Total Debt Service:
7 Operations & Maintenance
8 Routine Costs
9 Additional WTP O&M
10 State Water Wheeling
11
Total Routine Costs:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 Capital Outlay
19 Capital Outlay
Non-Routine
Pigging
State Water Wheeling
Total Non-Routine Costs:
Total 0 & M:
20
21
Total Capital Outlay:
Total FeZ 3 Billin9:
20
22
23
24
25
Cost Per Acre Foot
Increase From Prior Year
Percentage Increase From Prior Year
Increase Related to WTP Upgrade
Percentage Increase Related to Upgrade
2/22/2006 Preparation Date
B
c
D
E
2006/07
2007108
2008/09
2009f10
2010/11
554,920 553.731 553.599 554.4 78 553.443
202.200 0 0 0 0
0 834.518 834,518 834,518 834.518
----
757.120 1.388,2_49L 1,388.11711 _ 1,3889_9?J1 1,387,961
,--
910.770 - 947.201 985.089 1,024.492 1.065.472
130,632 194.229 201,998 210.078 218.481
0 0 0 0 0
1 .., 1,041.40211 ---- 1.141.43011 -- 1,187~08711 --- i .234,57011
1.283.953
123,550 128.492 133,632 138,977 ,144,536
35.389 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1 158.93911 128.49211 133.63211 138,97711 144.536
1,200.341
1,269.922
1.428.489
1.320,719
1.373.547
293,201 281,601 475.271 300,773 403.389
293.201 281.601 475.271 300,773 403,389
$2.250,662 $2,939,7721 $3,184,1071 $3,063.3161 $3,219,839
$983 $1,284 $1.390 $1,338 $1,406
nfa 689,110 244.335 .120.791 156.524
n/a 30.6% 8.30/0 -3.8% 5.1%
nfa 695,915 7,769 8,080 8.403
"fa 30.9% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%,
V.\FUNDORGS\DISTRlcr,sp _OlsnFCl 3\Flve Year Cost ProleclionslFCZ3 2006 Vers;ons'FCZ3 5 yr BIlling E~II1Tlale FYE2006.rY201' Project Cost $26K '30 year Bonds 2.2006XLS
Attachment A-4
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE 3
Arroyo Grande
5 year Billing Estimate for 2006 - 35 Year Bond Funding
Estimated Project Costs: $26,000,000
A
E
F
Entitlement
50.55%
1 Debt Service
2 Lopez Dam Bonds A - 2000
3 SRF Loan
4 WTP Upgrade Bonds
5
6
B
C
D
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
554.920 553,731 553,599 554,478 553,443
202.200 0 0 0 0
0 790,115 790.115 790,115 790,115
----
Total Debt Service: 1____~7. ~2()jL_1.J,~~",~,~~JI
7 Operations & Maintenance
8 Routine Costs
9 Additional WTP O&M
10 State Water Wheeling
11
Total Routine Costs: I
12 Non-Routine
13 Pigging
14 State Water Wheeling
15
16
17
18 Capital Outlay
19 Capital Outlay
20
21
Total Non-Routine Costs:
Total 0 & M:
Total Capital Outlay:
Total FCZ 3 Billing:
20
22
23
24
25
Cost Per Acre Foot
Increase From Prior Year
Percentage Increase From Prior Year
Increase Related to WTP Upgrade
Percentage Increase Related to Upgrade
2/22/2006 Preparalion Dale
1.343. 714IL_1.344.5~11
1,343,558
910.770 947.201 985.089 1,024,492 1,065.472
-,- "'..--"-.....---- --"....---.......--. ------ --.---.--...............--.-- ---------..--.---..
130.632 194,229 201,998 210,078 218,481
0 0 0 0 0
1,041.40211
1.141,43011
1.187.08711
1,234,570JI
1.283,953
123.550 128,492 133.632 138.977 144,536
35,389 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
158.93911
128,49211
133.63211
138,97711
144.536
1,200,341
1.269.922
1.320,719
1.373,547
1.428,489
I
293,201 281,601 475.271 300,7731 403,389
293,201 281.601 475.271 300,7731 403,389
$2,250,6621 $2,895,3691 $3,139,704 $3,018,9131 $3,175,437
$983 $1,264 $1,371 $1.318 $1,387
nla 644,707 244,335 .120.791 156,524
n/a 28.6% 8.4% -3.8% 5.2%
nla 6S1.S12 7.769 8.080 8.403
nla 28.9% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%
V.',FUNDORGS\DISTRlcnSP_DIST1FCZ 3\Flve Year Cost Projeclions\FCZ3 2006 Versions\FCZ3 5 yr Billing Estimate FYE2006-FY2011 Project Cost S26K 35 year Bonds 2-2006 XLS
Attachment B
Water and Sewer Rate Study
Arroyo Grande, California
Lopez Fund Water Charges
Part of the scope of this study includes updating the City's charges to water service customers for the
Lopez reservoir water entitlement received by the City. The Lopez reservoir and dam are operated and
maintained by the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation Disnict (Disnict).
The charges from the Disnict to the City include debt service, operation and maintenance, and capital
outlay.
Because of the recent Lopez darn remediation project, the Disnict debt service expense related to the
project will be increasing in future years. The Disnict has provided projections of futUre charges to the
City and these are shown on line 4 of Table A-I. Table A-I provides the projected cashflow of the
Lopez Fund, including the charges from the Disnict and City cost allocations to the fund. Line I shows
the budgeted revenue for the Lopez Fund for FY 2005-06 and FY 2006-07. Future revenue is established
such that total operating revenue is equal to the fund expenses beyond FY 2006-07.
Table A-1
City of Arroyo Grande
Lopez Fund
Flow of Funds Statement
. , ,--
"I " ( "
Line. . - " ',Fiscal Year Ending June 30
No. Description r. . - , .... 20Q4..GS 2005-06 2006--07 . 2007-08 . 20DS.Q9
Revenue
1 Lopez Charge Revenue $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,594.818 $3.215.372 $3.543.100
2 Interest Income 4.200 5.100 5.400 5.400 5.400
3 Total Operating Revenues Available 2.104,200 2.105.100 2,600.218 3,220,772 3,548.500
Revenue Requirements
4 Lopez Operation and Maintenance Expense [aJ 1,707,424 1,721 ,902 2,388,318 2,998,272 3.314.900
5 Cost Allocation Transfers Out (bJ 186.150 201 ,800 211.900' 222,500 233.600
6 Total Revenue Requirements 1.893.574 1,923,702 2.600.218 3,220,772 3.548,SOO
7 Net Operating Funds Available 210,626 181,398 0 0 0
8 Beginning Operating Fund Balance leI 902.725 1.113,351 1.294.749 1.294.749 1.294.749
9 Cumulative Operating Fund Balance 1,113.351 1.294.749 1,294.749 1.294.749 1.294.749
ta) From San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
[b) From City of Arroyo Grande.
[e) From City of Arroyo Grande. cash only.
Table A-2 shows the existing Lopez Fund charges to the City's water customers. The charges are b~so:l
on water meter size and by charging for additional "units" on the same meter. For residential custome,:s,
additional units mean dwelling units, whereas for nonresidential customers, units may mean park'.ll1g
space, room, bed, or additional water service on the same meter.
Tuckfield & Associates
Water and Sewer Rate Study
Attachment B
Arroyo Grande, California
Table A-2
City of Arroyo Grande ,
Lopez Existing Rates and Charges [a]
. FY 2004-05
,,~.
. Meter Size' City. City'
Meter Charges
5/8 inch $20.55 $26.79 .
3/4 inch $20.55 $26.79
1 inch $29.48 $35.83
1 1/2 inch $38.30 $44.66
2 inch $47.34 $53.70
3inch $56.17 $62.50
4inch $65.21 $71.43
6 inch $83.16 $89.30
Additional Unit Charges
Single Family
Mobile Home Parks [b]
Other MF [c]
Business [d]
Hospital [e]
Motel [I]
Convalesent Home Ie]
$20.55
$20.55
$20.55
$20.55
$20.55
$20.55
$5.48
$26.79
$26.79
$26.79
$26.79
$26.79
$26.79
$7.00
[a] Charges effective April 1. 2004.
[b] Each additional space.
[c] Each additional dwelling unit
[d] Each additional water service on same meter.
,[e] Each additional bed.
[I] Each additional room.
Table A-3 presents the new charges for implementation in FY 2005-06 through FY 2008-09. The new
structure is similar to the old structure however the additional unit charge has been more equitably
determined such that the charge is developed based on actual water consumption per unit for FY 2003-
04. In this way, the impact on low water consumers per unit, as compared to single family customers, is
less than the previous charges. These low water use per unit customers consist of mobile home parks,
multifamily, hospital, motel, and convalescent home.
Tuckfield & Associates
Water and Sewer Rate Study
Attachment B
Arroyo Grande, California
Table A.3
City of Arroyo Grande
Lopez Meter Charges and Additional Unit Charges
'. . . . FY 2Q05.0S FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09.
. '." :' MeterRatiol-, Inside. Outside- ~ ~ .ln$lde Outside
, Mete,Sa... E<r.UnitRatia'., c-rty C;ty" C;ty C;ty' C;ty . 'C;ty C;ty C;ty
(.J (bJ
Meter Charges
5/8 inch 1,0 $24.17 $31.51 $29.46 $38.41 $36.26 $47.27 . $39.69 $51.74
3/4 inCh 1,0 $24.17 $31,51 $29.46 $38.41 $36.26 $47.27 $39.69 $51.74
1 inch 1.4 $34.67 $42.14 $42.26 $51.36 $52.01 $63.22 $56.93 $69.19
11J2inch 1,9 $45.05 $52.53 $54.91 $64.02 $67.58 $78.80 , $73.96 $86.25
2 inch 2.3 $55.68 $63.16 $S7.86 $76.98 $83.53 $94.75 $91.42 $103.70
3 inch 2,7 $66.07 $73.51 $80.52 $89.60 $99.11 $110.27 $1bS.47 $120.70
4 inch 3,2 $76.70 $84.02 $93.48 $102.40 $115.06 $126.03 $125.93 $137.94
Sinch 4,0 $97.81 $105.04 $119.22 $128.02 $146.73 $157.56 $160.59 $172.45
6 Inch 5,0 $120.66 $126.90 $147.30 $154.66 $181.29 $190.35 $198.43 $208.35
Additional Unit Charges
Single Family 1.00 $24.17 $31.51 $29.46 $38.41 $36.26 $47.27 $39.69 $51.74
Mobile Home Parks (c) 0.43 $10.43 $13.60 $12.71 $16.57 $15.64 $20.39 $1712 $22,32
Other MF [d] 0.43 $10.43 $13.60 $12.71 $16.57 $15.64 $20.39 $17.12 $22.32 ' '
Business tel 0.90 $21.87 $28.52 $26.66 $34.75 $32.81 $42.76 $35.91' $46.81
Hospital If] 0.77 $16.53 $24.17 $22,59 $29.45 $27.80 $36.23 $30.43 $39.66
Motel[g) 0.21 $5.06 $6,59 $6.16 $8.04 $7.59 $9.69 - $8.30 $10.82
Convalesent Home (f] 0.23 $5.48 $7.14 $6.68 $8,72 $8,22 $10.72 $9.00 $11.73
tal Based on current Lopez Fund charge meter proportionality.
(b) Additional unit equivalency factor based on ratio of consumption per unit as compared with single family classification.
(c] Each additional space.
(d] Each additional dwelling unit
[eI Each additional water service on same meter.
[fl Each additional bed.
Igl Each additional room.
Tuckfield & Associates