R 4156 RESOLUTION NO. 4156
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE TO CONSIDER AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY
CERTIFIED FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,
ADOPT A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, INSTRUCT THE
DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TO FILE A NOTICE OF
DETERMINATION, AND APPROVE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
CASE NO. 01 -001 AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 01-
001 LOCATED AT JAMES WAY AND LA CANADA
WHEREAS, the City Council, "City Council" of the City of Arroyo Grande "City" adopted
Resolution No. 3740 on April 13, 2004 certifying the Revised Final Subsequent
Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 01 -001 and
Planned Unit Development 01 -001 (the "project "); and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on May 3,
2005, June 7, 2005, September 20, 2005 and October 4, 2005 on a previous design of
the project to subdivide a 26.9 -acre property into twenty-one (21) residential lots and one
twenty-two (22) acre open space lot and adopted Resolution No. 05 -1977 recommending
that the City Council deny the project, as then proposed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande held duly noticed public
hearings on November 22, 2005 and December 13, 2005, and after reviewing and
considering the information and public testimony presented at the public hearings, staff
reports, First Addendum to the certified SEIR, and all other information and documents
that were part of the public record for the project, were unable to make required findings
for approval and denied the project, without prejudice; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on May 6, 2008
and recommended approval of the revised project to subdivide a 26.9 -acre property into
fifteen (15) residential lots and one twenty-two (22) acre open space parcel.
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information and public
testimony presented at the public hearing on May 27, 2008 and January 27, 2009, staff
report, and all other information and documents that are part of the public record for the
project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
a. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the implementation of the
project will not have a significant effect or result in a substantial or potentially
substantial adverse change in the environment; and
b. that all significant environmental effects identified in the FSEIR and all
documents associated therewith have been reduced to an acceptable level in
that all significant environmental effects that can feasibly be avoided have been
eliminated or substantially reduced as determined through the findings set forth
herein; and
RESOLUTION NO. 4156
PAGE 2
Required CEQA Findings are attached thereto as Exhibit "A" and Incorporated
herein by this reference.
Tentative Tract Map Findings:
1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies,
plans, programs, intent, and requirements of the 1990 General Plan, and the
requirements of the Development Code and Planned Development district 1.2;
2. The site, as shown on the tentative tract map, is physically suitable for the type
and proposed density because the development is clustered in such a way that all
necessary easements, parking, and open space 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 as the potential impacts have been adequately mitigated to the extent
feasible;
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 previously0acquired by the public;
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 Findings
1. That the proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives and
programs of the 1990 General Plan;
2. That the site for the proposed development is adequate in size and shape
to accommodate the use and all yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls and
fences, parking area, loading areas, landscaping, and other features
required;
3. That 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;
RESOLUTION NO. 4156
PAGE 3
4. That adequate public services exist, or will be provided in accordance with
the conditions of development plan approval, to serve the proposed
development; and that the approval of the proposed development will not
result in a reduction of such public services to properties in the vicinity so
as to be a detriment to public health, safety or welfare;
5. That 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 and planned land use character of the
surrounding area;
6. That the improvements required, and the manner of development,
adequately address all natural and manmade hazards associated with the
proposed development and the project site, including, but not limited to,
flood, seismic, fire and slope hazards;
7. The proposed development, as conditioned, 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 Section 16.32.050.E.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map 01- 001 /Planned Unit Development
01 -001, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "B "; based upon the
project plans set forth in Exhibit "C" and the Mitigation Monitoring Program set forth in
Exhibit "D" copies of each of which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
On motion by Council Member Amold, seconded by Council Member Guthrie, and by the
following roll call vote to wit:
AYES: Council Members Amold, Guthrie, Costello
NOES: Council Member Fellows and Mayor Ferrara
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 27 day of January, 2009.
RESOLUTION NO. Li 154
PAGE 4
TONY M RA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY T % % - E, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
S A A S, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
g
TIM HY J. C L, CITY ATTORNEY
OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the attached
Resolution No. 4156 is a true, full, and correct copy of said Resolution passed and
adopted at a .Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the
27 day of January 2009..
WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 19 day of
February 2009.
KELLY TM • ' E, CITY CLERK
EXHIBIT "A"
CEQA FINDINGS
For the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and P.U.D. 01 -001 Project
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the environmental impacts of a
project be examined and disclosed prior to approval of a project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091
provides the following guidance regarding findings:
"(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified
which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public
agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied
by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the FEIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have
been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other
agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR."
CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 provides the following additional guidance regarding a Statement
of Overriding Considerations:
"(a) CEQA requires the decision - making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the
unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be
considered "acceptable."
(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant
effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the
agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR
and/ or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be
supported by substantial evidence in the record."
Having received, reviewed and considered the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report
(FSEIR) for the VTTM and P.U.D 01 -001 Project, Revised FSEIR, and Addendum to the Revised
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
5
FSEIR (SCH #2001081065) as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this
matter, the following Findings Regarding the Revised FSEIR for the VTTM and P.U.D. 01 -001 Project
(Findings) are hereby adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande.
1.2 Document Format
These Findings have been categorized into the following sections:
1) Section 1.0 provides an introduction to these Findings.
2) Section 2.0 provides a summary of the Project and overview of other discretionary actions
required for the Project, and a statement of Project objectives.
3) Section 3.0 provides a summary of those activities that have preceded the consideration of
the Findings for the Project as part of the environmental review process, and a summary of
public participation in the environmental review for the Project.
4) Section 4.0 sets forth findings regarding those potentially significant environmental impacts
identified in the Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum which the City has
determined to be less than significant with the implementation of Project design features
and/ or Project conditions included in the MMRP for the Project.
5) Section 5.0 sets forth findings regarding those significant or potentially significant
environmental impacts identified in the Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum
which the City has determined can feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level
through the imposition of mitigation measures included in the MMRP for the Project.
6) Section 6.0 sets forth findings regarding those significant or potentially significant
environmental impacts identified in the Revised FSEIR and Addendum which will or which
may result from the Project and which the City has determined cannot feasibly be mitigated
to a less than significant level.
7) Section 7.0 sets forth findings regarding growth inducement impacts.
8) Section 8.0 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the Project.
9) Section 9.0 contains findings regarding the MMRP for the Project.
10) Section 10.0 contains other relevant findings adopted by the City with respect to the Project.
The Findings set forth in each section herein are supported by findings and facts identified in the
administrative record of the Project.
1.3 Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials which constitute the administrative record for the City's actions
regarding the Project are located at the City of Arroyo Grande Planning Division and City Clerk's
Office, 214 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, California, 93421. The City is the custodian of the
administrative record for the Project.
2.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 Project Location
The 26.6 -acre site is located in the City of Arroyo Grande, within the southern portion of the County
of San Luis Obispo. The subject site is located just northeast of the corner of James Way and La
Canada in the northwestern portion of Arroyo Grande. The site is located north of U.S. Highway
101 and east of Oak Park Boulevard. Highway 101 generally bounds the northwestern Planned
Developments on the south, with unincorporated area of the County on the north. The proposed
main entrance to VTTM 01 -001 would cross the East Fork seasonal tributary to Meadow Creek
bordering the westerly portion of the tract.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
6
The subject site is a proposed development phase of the larger Rancho Grande Planned
Development 1.2 of the 1990 General Plan. The Rancho Grande site occupies 464 acres consisting of
a large portion of the northwestern section of the City of Arroyo Grande, on the northeast side of
Highway 101. Adjoining the subject site are other Planned Development tracts within the Rancho
Grande Project including; Tract 1834 to the north and west, Tract 1997 to the east, and Tract 1994 to
the south. VTTM 01 -001 itself is located towards the northeastern section of the greater Rancho
Grande site. The City categorizes the entire Rancho Grande development site (which includes
VTTM 01 -001) as a Planned Development (PD 1.2) Zone.
2.2 Project Description
This revised project is a second reduced density variation of the original project analyzed in the
Revised Final SEIR. This new proposal is a single - family residential development consisting of 15
units on an approximate 26.6 -acre site located near the northeast corner of the intersection of James
Way and La Canada in the City of Arroyo Grande. The proposed residential units would be
clustered in the northeasternmost portion of the site, accessible from one access road off La Canada.
Overall, this second reduced density development proposal consists of 15 clustered residential lots
and one open -space lot on 26.6 acres, with a gross density of 0.56 units per acre. The lots range in
size from 7,200 to 22,302 square feet, with an average lot size of about 8,807 square feet.
Approximately 22 acres (84 percent of the site) would remain in open space.
Of the 15 residential lots proposed, none contain less than 7,200 square feet, the City's single - family
subdivision minimum lot area standard. Fourteen lots contain between 7,200 and 12,000 square feet,
the conventional subdivision minimum lot area for RS zones. One residential lot exceeds 12,000
square feet (Lot 12, at 22,802 square feet), the size normally applied to the RS development, not in a
P.U.D.
The second reduced density development proposal does not propose terracing or retaining walls
on lots, leaving custom site and home design to the discretion of the lot owner. Because lot
owners have discretion regarding site and home design, terracing and retaining walls may still
occur on lots. Flat graded sites (under 2% slope) would be restricted to no more than 50 percent
of roof height exceeding 16 feet while sloped graded sites (over 2% slope) would be restricted to a
no more than 50 percent of roof height exceeding 20 feet.
Compared to the original proposed project, the second reduced density development proposal
places the majority of lots in the northeastern portion of the property. This portion of the property
contains a deeply incised erosion gully, the western edge of which begins near Lot 3 and the eastern
edge of which extends beyond the eastern property line into adjacent open space. Under the second
reduced density development proposal, this erosion gulley would be filled, resulting in a graded
slope of less than 20% throughout this area.
The erosion gulley is not a blue line drainage and likely developed due to modified runoff patterns
from development of adjacent properties. This is evidenced by the expanding extent of the gulley
toward the northwestern property line (toward existing development) through a series of eroded
fingers. Filling of the gulley to allow for the proposed development would not only create slopes of
less than 20 %, but would also cut off a consistent erosion source of sediment and silt runoff that
contributes directly toward Meadow Creek.
Access would be provided via a cul -de -sac (Blossom Valley Road) extending off La Canada. The
cul -de -sac would curve north and then east from La Canada before terminating near the
northeasternmost corner of the property. Road width would vary between 32 feet (at the site
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
7
entrance and residential access areas) and 24 feet (in the vicinity of onsite wetlands and Pismo
Clarkia habitat). A secondary access road would extend from the end of the cul -de -sac for
emergency use.
2.3 Discretionary Actions
Project implementation may indude, but is not limited to, the following discretionary actions by the
City and Responsible Agencies having jurisdiction by law upon the project site and /or the resources
contained thereon:
1) Certification of the Environmental Impact Report
2) Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
3) Approval of a Tract Subdivision Map in accordance with the State Subdivision Map Act
4) Approval of a Planned Unit Development in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande
Development Code
5) Additional permits and approvals, including, but not limited to the following:
a. Grading permits, building permits, and street work permits
b. NPDES compliance review from the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB)
c. Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
d. Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB
e. Section 1600 California Fish and Game Code Streambed Alteration Agreement from
the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)
f. Other ministerial permits /approvals and compliance reviews of inspections required
for the Project.
2.4 Statement of Objectives
The applicant's objective is to develop a clustered residential subdivision as stated in the project
application. Another primary objective is to preserve open space and natural resources to the extent
possible. The proposal to construct 15 residential units (21 fewer than in the original project
description) responds to identified impacts, required mitigation measures and alternatives described
in the certified Revised Final SEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
A comprehensive EIR for the entire Rancho Grande Subdivision was completed and adopted in
January of 1991. The 1991 EIR covered most of the recent phased subdivisions of the Rancho
Grande Subdivision (Tracts 1834, 1994 and 1997) with the exception of the subject property (VTTM
and P.U.D. 01 -001, formerly known as Tract 1998).
On August 13, 2001, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was distributed by the City of Arroyo Grande
for the Vesting Tentative Map 01 -001 and Planned Unit Development Project Subsequent EIR. The
State of California Clearinghouse issued a project number for the Project, SCH #2001081065. The
Draft SEIR is considered to be a follow up document for the aforementioned EIR prepared in 1991
for the Rancho Grande Planned Development 1.2 of the 1990 General Plan.
Subsequent to the public review of the Notice of Preparation, the City of Arroyo Grande internally
reviewed "administrative" copies of the Draft EIR. Upon completion of the review, copies of the
Draft EIR were forwarded to all Responsible /Trustee Agencies and interested groups and
individuals, as required under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15105 and 15087.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
8
The public review of the Draft SEIR began on February 21, 2003 and ended on April 7, 2003. The
Revised FSEIR includes a Response to Comments package, which presents all written comments
received during the public review period of the Draft Subsequent EIR, and includes related
changes made to the Draft SEIR.
During the public review of the 2003 Draft SEIR, the City had requested that a new development
alternative be analyzed along with several technical biological resource questions. As such, a
Revised Draft SEIR was published with the new project alternative along with additional biological
resource analysis. The Revised Draft SEIR included substantial new information not contained in
either the February 2003 Draft SEIR or the April 2003 Final SEIR, therefore the Revised Draft SEIR
was recirculated for public review for an additional 45 -day period that began on December 1, 2003
and ended on January 14, 2004.
The Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing to consider the Revised FSEIR on March
2, 2004. Following the Planning Commission's review, the Planning Commission formulated its
recommendations regarding the Revised FSEIR, and forwarded those recommendations to the
City Council for consideration. The Planning Commission recommended certification of the
Revised FSEIR.
The City Council held a noticed public hearing on April 13, 2004 to consider the Revised FSEIR. At
that hearing, the City Council considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the
information presented in the Revised FSEIR and the record, and public comments and testimony
received at the hearing and certified the Revised FSEIR.
In response to City Council findings, the project applicant submitted a revised proposal which
reduced development from 36 units to 21 units. This project, hereafter the "first reduced density
development proposal," was evaluated in an Addendum to the Revised Final SEIR in February 2005
(hereafter referred to as "First Addendum"). Based upon the First Addendum findings and
comments from Staff, advisory bodies, and the public, additional revisions were made and the
project was resubmitted in March 2005. After public hearings, the City of Arroyo Grande was unable
to make the mandatory findings and denied the first reduced density development proposal
without prejudice on December 13, 2005.
A subsequent revised project was submitted in response to the findings for denial as described in
City Council Resolution No. 3892. The preliminary design for this second revision, which included
17 single -family units, was made available as a pre - application to the City Council in April 2007 for
its review and comments prior to a formal submittal. Based on comments provided by the City
Council, the project was further revised in September 2007 to reduce the project to 15 total single -
family units. This 15 -unit project is the current proposal being analyzed herein, and will be referred
to throughout this document as the "second reduced density development proposal." This CEQA
document will also be referred to as the "Second Addendum," to clarify its relationship to the
previously - prepared First Addendum.
4.0 FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City finds, based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.0 of the Revised FSEIR, the
Addendum to the Revised FSEIR, and the Second Addendum to the FSEIR, dated March 2008, that
the following environmental effects of the Project are less than significant, and, therefore, no
mitigation measures are required. The City hereby finds that project design features and /or project
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
9
conditions have been identified and incorporated into the project which avoid or substantiall
lessen the potentially significant effect on the environment to a less than significant level.
4.1 Biological Resources
4.1.1 Less Than Significant Impact B -1. Development of the project would result in the removal
of Annual Grassland and Coastal Scrub habitat. This is considered a Class III, less than significant
impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Non -native grasses and other invasive, weedy species
dominate the Annual Grassland habitat on the project, site. Annual grasslands are not
considered sensitive plant communities and this habitat type is common throughout the
region. Likewise, Coastal Scrub habitat is not considered a sensitive plant community, as
this habitat type is also common throughout the region. Therefore, the loss of these
vegetation types is not considered a significant impact and no mitigation is required.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.2 -19; Second Addendum page 16.
4.2 Cultural Resources
4.2.1 Less Than Significant Cumulative Cultural Resources Impact. Implementation of the
proposed project would result in Class III, less than significant, cumulative cultural resources impacts.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Buildout of the proposed project in conjunction with other
development in the City of Arroyo Grande has the potential to cumulatively impact
archeological and historical resources. In addition, all ground disturbances in potentially
sensitive areas shall be monitored. This includes any potential use of the designated open
space within the subject property that may involve ground disturbance activities. If any
resources are encountered, work will stop until adequate measures are developed to mitigate
the impacts. Therefore, no significant cumulative archeological impacts are anticipated to
result from the proposed project in conjunction with other projects in the area.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.3 -7.
4.3 Geologic Resources
4.3.1 Less Than Significant Impact G -2. Seismic activity could produce sufficient ground shaking
to result in liquefaction, seismically induced settlement and lateral spreading. On -site soils
proposed for development of residential uses and other facilities are subject to the potential for
liquefaction. However, as determined through on -site investigations, this potential is considered to
be very low. This is considered a Class III, less than significant impact.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
10
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Liquefaction is a localized phenomenon induced by ground
shaking and can result in slope and /or foundation failures with loss of bearing capacity.
As previously mentioned, the results of the Earth Systems Pacific liquefaction analysis (2003)
indicated that, with the proposed grading and existing groundwater conditions in the
locations of the test borings (refer to Appendix K), the potential for Liquefaction is very low
and, if it were to occur, would only occur in a thin zone just above the bedrock surface. The
effects at the surface would be negligible and, as such, the risk of liquefaction- induced
damage at the project site is considered acceptable per Title 14, Section 3721(a) of the
California Code of Regulations.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.4 -13; Second Addendum page 35.
4.3.2 Less Than Significant Cumulative Geologic Resources Impact. Implementation of the
proposed project would result in Class III, less than significant, cumulative geologic resources
impacts.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Buildout of pending and approved projects in the greater
Arroyo Grande area would increase development in the region. Such development would
alter landforms in the City and would expose new residents and property to seismic hazards
that exist in the area. The proposed project would incrementally contribute to these
cumulative impacts. However, grading and seismic issues would be addressed on a case -by-
case basis to mitigate impacts resulting from individual projects. Given that all projects
would be required to adhere to seismic standards contained in the Uniform Building Code
and City requirements pertaining to grading, less than significant cumulative geological
impacts are anticipated to result from the proposed project in conjunction with other projects
in the area.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.4 -18.
4.4 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.4.1 Less Than Significant Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impact. Implementation
of the proposed project would result in Class III, less than significant, cumulative hydrology and
water quality impacts.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
11
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding — The proposed project, in combination with other planned
developments in the City of Arroyo Grande and the surrounding area, would generally
increase the impermeable surface area thereby increasing peak flood flows and the overall
runoff volume. Increased irrigation as the area builds out would further increase the overall
volume of surface water runoff and rate of low flow during the dry season. Such changes in
regional hydrology could potentially have significant cumulative effects on local flooding
conditions if the drainage infrastructure for each individual project is not appropriately
designed and constructed.
Construction activity associated with cumulative development would increase
sedimentation relating to grading and construction activities. In addition, urban
development would increase the concentration of pollutants such as silt, oil, grease, and
trace metals that could adversely affect the water quality. However, all developments in the
area are required to design appropriate flood control systems and implement appropriate
BMPs in accordance with the SWPPP and NPDES permit requirements. Although some
increase in surface water runoff and surface water pollution could be anticipated,
implementation of applicable requirements on all developments in the area would be
expected to reduce cumulative impacts to less than significant.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.5 -11.
4.5 Land Use
4.5.1 Less Than Significant Impact LU -1. The project would not divide an established community,
and would be considered compatible with surrounding residential land uses subject to conditions of
approval. Impacts related to long -term compatibility would be Class III, less than significant.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The proposed project would be an example of infill
development within the existing Rancho Grande PD 1.2. The surrounding land uses are
residential, and the project would be consistent with the type and intensity of adjacent
development. Although the site currently supports a remnant of open space within the
clustered development part of the Planned Development, this open space would be
consistent from a land use compatibility perspective. The project would not divide an
established community. The project, as conditioned would be consistent with both the long-
term planning and existing land uses within the area.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.6-2 and 4.6-3; Second Addendum page 45.
4.5.2 Less Than Significant Impact LU -3. Onsite construction activity would create temporary
noise and air quality impacts due to the use of construction equipment and generation of fugitive
dust. These effects could cause annoyance at neighboring properties. However, these impacts
would be temporary in nature, and are considered Class III, less than significant, given required
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
12
implementation of standard mitigation measures required by City and APCD approvals.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The use of construction equipment during project construction
would increase localized noise levels and generate fugitive dust that would result in a
temporary reduction in local air quality. It is anticipated that construction activity would
take place intermittently as development occurs. Construction activity may therefore cause
temporary annoyance to immediately adjacent residential use.
Most of the residences in neighboring tracts lie to the west and east of the subject site. The
proposed project is set in the drainage of the East Fork of Meadow Creek and is generally
lower in elevation compared to the surrounding built environment. The topography,
combined with the distance to these neighboring homes, would reduce potential short -term
construction impacts.
As discussed in the Air Quality section of the 1991 EIR, San Luis Obispo County is in
nonattainment for the California air quality standards for ozone, fugitive dust (particulate
matter or PM10) and sulfur dioxide. The construction proposed within the Rancho Grande
PD 1.2 is expected to generate fugitive dust. The mitigation measures outlined in the 1991
EIR will reduce construction related PM impacts to a less than significant level.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.6 -4; Second Addendum pages 45-46.
4.5.3 Less Than Significant Cumulative Land Use Impact. Implementation of the proposed
project would result in Class III, less than significant, cumulative land use impacts.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding — Cumulative development throughout the greater Arroyo
Grande area would gradually alter the area's rural character. The proposed project would
incrementally contribute to this substantial change. Individual development projects in the
region would have the potential to create compatibility conflicts relating to the interface of
natural open space and new urban development.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.6 -4.
4.6 Transportation/Traffic
4.6.1 Less Than Significant Impact T -2. The applicant has included a total of 60 off - street parking
spots and 17 on- street parking spots for the proposed 15 -unit residential project. The proposed
parking would meet City parking standards and would result in Class III, less than significant,
impacts.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
13
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - According to City standards, residential projects must provide
two off -street parking spaces per single - family unit and visitor parking. Therefore the
proposed 15 -unit project would result in a parking demand of 30 garage spaces plus visitor
parking. The applicant has included a total of 60 off -street parking spots and 17 on -street
parking spots for the proposed 15 -unit residential project. Consequently, proposed parking
would satisfy City parking requirements, and impacts are considered less than significant.
Reference - Revised FSEIR Addendum page 41 and Second Addendum pages 46 -47.
4.7 Public Services
4.7.1 Less Than Significant Impact PS-1. Project construction has the potential to contribute to the
City cumulative increased demand for police protection services. However, since the project would
not compromise response time goals or substantially affect the personnel, equipment or organization of
the Police Department, Class III, less than significant impacts would result.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The current department ratio of number of Full -Time
Officers to population is currently approximately 1.6 Full-Time Officers per 1,000
residents (1.61: 1,000), which meet's the department's goal. Based on a factor of 2.85
residents per unit, the 15 proposed residential lots would generate 43 new residents.
The population increase would not result in a significant increase in the need for
additional police department service. Sufficient staff varies from day -to -day
depending on workload, and responding to additional service calls would not
significantly compromise response time goals.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.8-2 and Second Addendum page 47.
4.7.2 Less Than Significant Impact PS -3. The project would generate an estimated total of 11
elementary, middle and high school students. The opening of Nipomo High School will assist in
controlling the over - capacity of Arroyo Grande High School. As a result, students generated by the
project would not significantly impact the elementary, middle, or high school serving the project area
because there will be sufficient capacity. Therefore, impacts to schools in the project area are considered
Class III, less than significant, subject to standard school impact fee payment for residential units.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
14
Facts in Support of Finding - The majority of the residential development occurring in the
district has come from the County of San Luis Obispo (53 %). The City of Arroyo Grande has
averaged 25% of the residential development. The LMUSD utilizes student yield factors of
0.7 per single - family detached unit for grades K -12 (Lucia Mar Unified School District -
Developer Fee Study, March 2002).
The Office of Public School Construction yield factors indicate that a total of 11 students will
be generated from this project.
The capacity for the Lucia Mar Unified School District (LMUSD) is based on Office of Public
School Construction School Facility Program loading standards. The K -6 grade classrooms
were loaded at 25 students per classroom and 7 -12th grade classrooms were loaded at 27
students per classroom. The district currently exceeds its K -12th grade facility capacity of
9,163 students by 1,788 students.
As illustrated above, all schools have sufficient capacity to accommodate the 15 new students
resulting from the proposed project, particularly Ocean View Elementary, which would be
57% capacity with the students generated from the proposed project.
As a condition of project approval, development fees mandated by State Law and assessed
by the School District would contribute funding necessary for educational facilities to
accommodate anticipated growth. No further mitigation measures are required.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.8 -9 and 4.8 -10; Second Addendum page 50 -51.
4.7.3 Less Than Significant Impact PS -4. The development of 15 single - family housing units
would generate demand for parkland improvement. The project applicant would be required to
pay improvement fees in the amount established by City Ordinance. With payment of these fees,
the City would improve sufficient parkland and open space to satisfy the City standard of 4 acres of
parkland and open space per 1,000 residents. Therefore, the project would result in Class III, less
than significant, impacts related to park demand.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that project design features and /or project conditions
have been incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially
significant environmental effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Based on the City's factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit,
the 15 -unit project would be expected to generate approximately 43 new residents. Based on
the City's standard of 4 acres of parkland and open space per 1,000 residents, the project
would generate a need for 0.17 acres included as part of prior Rancho Grande park site
dedication in order to maintain acceptable parkland to population ratios. The applicant is
also required to pay a Recreation Impact Fee and Park Improvement Fee per City Resolution
3521 adopted in May of 2001 (prior to the proposed project being deemed complete in June
of 2001). The resolution states that a person seeking to construct a residential development
project shall pay a park improvement fee of $573.08 per new resident generated by such
development project. According to City policy, Single Family Detached development would
contain approximately 2.8 persons per unit. This would yield a fee of $1,604.63 per unit paid
at the time of building permits. Upon compliance with this City resolution, the project
would be consistent with City requirements related to park provision. State Quimby Act
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
15
standards were met with the dedication of the Rancho Grande Park. The project would result
in a less than significant.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.8 -14 and Second Addendum page 51.
4.7.4 Less Titan Significant Cumulative Public Services Impact. Implementation of the
proposed project would result in Class III, less than significant, cumulative public services impacts.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding -
Law Enforcement. Cumulative buildout of the area would not significantly increase any
demands on police protection services by adding 15 units with 43 new residents. It is
anticipated that if needed, adequate police services would be developed to accommodate
cumulative demand.
Fire Protection. Cumulative buildout of area would increase demands on fire protection
services by adding residents and generating additional traffic that would hinder emergency
response. Without increases in staffing and facilities correlating to these population increases,
potentially significant impacts could occur. The proposed project would incrementally
contribute to this impact. It is anticipated that adequate fire services would be developed to
accommodate cumulative demand.
Schools. Cumulative buildout of the area would increase enrollment in the LMUSD. Including
the proposed project, there are currently 9 pending single - family residential subdivision projects
within the project vicinity that could result in a total of 762 new residential units, all of which
would be served by the LMUSD. In addition, there is one multi- family project consisting of 31
units in the project vicinity. The per unit student generation factors for the LMUSD are as
follows: 0.4 (K-6th grade), 0.1 (7 -8t grade), and 0.2 (9-12th grade). If the proposed project were
approved in addition to the cumulative projects in the project vicinity, about 545 new students
would attend the Local elementary, middle and high schools.
The proposed project, in combination with cumulative projects in the vicinity, would potentially
yield 311 new elementary school students, 78 new middle school students and 156 new high
school students. The students generated as a result of the proposed project and other
cumulative projects would be spread out among the schools within the LMUSD. It is possible
that, with the addition of up to 545 new students to the District, some schools would exceed
their operating capacities. Of the schools potentially impacted by these projects, local high
schools and middle schools would be affected the most severely due to their current enrollment
and overall capacities. The proposed construction of the Hidden Oak Elementary School, just
east of the subject property, would increase the District capacity for the addition of new K -6th
grade students, however it is on hold at this time.
With the payment of required development fees, the potential increase in LMUSD enrollment as
a result of cumulative development would be less than significant.
Parks and Recreation Facilities. Cumulative buildout of the area would increase demands for
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
16
recreational facilities by adding both residents and a daytime population. The proposed project
would incrementally contribute to this increase in demand. However, upon payment of park
improvement mitigation fees, adequate park and open space land would exist to serve the
demand generated by the proposed project, in combination with other cumulative projects in
the vicinity. Less than significant cumulative open space, parks and recreation impacts would
result. Refer to Impact LU -2 for a discussion of trail provisions, as they relate to land use
compatibility.
Solid Waste. Cumulative buildout of the area would increase solid waste generation, thereby
reducing the lifespan of solid waste landfills serving the area. The proposed project would
contribute incrementally to the cumulative impact to landfill capacity. However, cumulative
development in the area would not be sufficient to require an expansion of the existing facilities.
Therefore, the contribution of the proposed project to cumulative solid waste impacts would be
less than significant.
Water.
Development of the proposed project would require approximately 8 -10 acre feet of water
for both domestic use and landscape irrigation. Based on the dedication of an existing onsite
water well with an estimated yield of 50 -60 acre feet of potable water, incorporated into the
project description; and all conditions of approval and mitigations measures (including
provisions for water storage and delivery, water conservation design, fixtures and
Landscaping) imposed in the environmental review process for the project and for previous
approvals associated with implementation of the Ranch Grande Master Plan, all impacts to
water resources are mitigated to less than significant.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.8 -3, 4.8 -8, 4.8 -11, 4.8 -14, 4.8 -15, and 4.8 -17; and City of
Arroyo Grande: Resolution No. 2466 - Final Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho
Grande Subdivision, 1991; Resolution No. 2468 - VTTM 1994; Resolution No. 2469 - VTTM
1997; Resolution No. 2467 - VTTM 1834.
5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS
THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City finds, based upon the threshold criteria for significance presented in the Revised FSEIR,
Addendum, and Second Addendum, that the following potentially significant environmental effects
of the Project can be avoided or reduced to insignificance with feasible mitigation measures
identified in the Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum and adopted by the City as
conditions of project approval. No substantial evidence has been submitted to or identified by the
City that indicates that the following impacts would, in fact, occur at levels that would necessitate a
determination of significance.
5.1 Aesthetics
5.1.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact AES -1. The clustering of the proposed residential units
and preservation of open space would partially maintain the open space character of the site.
However, the proposed development has the potential to alter the aesthetic character of the site
vicinity through alteration of scenic vistas from public viewing locations. This is considered a Class
II, significant but mitigable, impact to the aesthetic character of the area.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
17
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The project proposes 15 single - family residences, paved
roadways, street lighting and landscaping on a currently undeveloped site. The proposed
project is to be developed as a phase of the existing, 464 -acre (total) Rancho Grande PD 1.2.
VTTM 01 -001 subdivision improvements are anticipated to occur in a single phase. Individual
homes will be constructed as lots are purchased. The proposed site improvements would be
visible from several public viewing locations along James Way and La Canada, most notably
from segments of James Way, which has been identified as a "potential" scenic road in the
City's Existing Setting Report. In addition, the proposed improvements would be visible
from existing Rancho Grande single family residential subdivision homes to the northwest.
James Way Viewshed. This road offers a scenic view of Newsome Ridge to the east (ridgeline
above the site area), and in some higher locations, the Pacific Ocean to the west. The road
runs east to west through the northwest portion of the City, connecting Oak Park Road
indirectly with the older downtown areas. The view of the proposed project from this
corridor would include: views of potential future residences of the project and its roadways,
indigenous flora and oak trees which aids in providing visual screening of the site in the
foreground, and natural scenery of oak woodlands and chaparral in the middleground and
background. Residences within the existing Rancho Grande PD 1.2 are also visible from
these viewpoints. Scenic views of the Newson ridgeline would generally be maintained.
Additionally, portions of the proposed 15 lots would be visible within the natural geography
of the site. Development within this area could conflict with this aspect of City policy.
Vegetation located immediately adjacent to James Way is comprised of similar flora of Oak
trees, native annual and perennial grasses, and riparian vegetation of the East Fork of
Meadow Creek. The indigenous flora in the foreground frontage of the project site near the
corner of James Way and Las Canada, with project landscaping, would eventually partially
screen views of the proposed improvements. Therefore, the project would result in
potentially significant impacts on views from this viewshed.
Rancho Grande Tract 1834 Viewshed. Tract 1834 is located to the north of the proposed project
site, and sits at a higher elevation. Views from Tract 1834 include: James Way corridor, the
James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife Preserve, Newsome Ridge, and oak woodlands
surrounding the area. For the most part, viewpoints of the proposed project are located along
the lower elevations of the southeastern portion of Tract 1834.
Vesting Tentative Tract 01 -001 Design Guidelines. The applicant for the proposed project has
drafted design guidelines for the site. As was previously mentioned, the proposed project is
considered a phase in the greater Rancho Grande PD 1.2. As such, it is necessary to consider
the proposed project in the context of the rest of the neighboring development. Certain
recommendations are made that help to ensure a general conformity exists between the
development and the natural environment.
The intent of the design guidelines is to encourage planned improvements which are visually
compatible with the oak woodland, savanna, and hillside context of VTTM 01 -001. Although
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
18
the primary issues are summarized below, the complete guidelines are included in their
entirety in Appendix I of the Revised FSEIR. The guidelines address the following topics:
Site and Landscape Design-
• Driveways and Garages:
Slope consideration, avoid large areas of impervious surfaces, construction in
accordance with City standards and suggested paving materials.
• Erosion Control:
Suggested methods of erosion control on banks or slopes, use of plants for soil
stabilization.
• Fencing:
Minimization of view- obstructing fencing (taller than 3 feet), height requirements,
approved fencing materials, fencing alternatives (landscaping).
• Grading, Drainage and Soils:
Requirements for drainage discharge, prevention of excess run -off, provisions to
preserve top soil, mitigation for construction activities within oak tree drip line, use
of "grey- water ".
• Hardscape:
Restriction on paving within oak tree driplines and adding sidewalks not originally
planned in tract improvements, suggestions on paving materials, use of landscaping
to soften hard edges.
• Landscape and Irrigation:
Timing of landscaping after occupancy, landscape plans, planting design, "street
tree" plans, use of drought tolerant plants, irrigation systems and schedules, water
conservation systems, recommended native plants.
• Landscape Lighting:
Lighting plans, glare reduction, lighting placement, electricity conservation.
• Landscape Structures:
Restriction on structure materials, prohibition of structures in open space setbacks,
restrictions regarding the placement of structures.
• Maintenance:
Provisions to ensure properly maintained homes and landscaping and to ensure that
oak woodlands are not disturbed.
• Miscellaneous Guidelines /Requirements:
Property owners are encouraged to respect the privacy of neighbors with regard to
structures and /or equipment (decks, spa equipment, play equipment, etc.), to take
advantage of existing oak trees for landscaping and are encouraged to include crime
prevention measures.
• Oak Tree Protection:
This measure Lists restrictions on the disturbance of existing oak trees including
pruning, digging up, protection during construction activities and restrictions within
oak tree driplines.
• Setbacks:
In general, setbacks shall be 5 or 10 feet on all sides. Other setback requirements
involve open space easements and structures permitted in setbacks.
• Screening:
Outlines requirements regarding the screening of trash and other items or material
intended for discarding or collection.
• Site Art and Sculpture:
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
19
Outlines prohibitions on large, bold or highly visible art.
• Soils Test:
States that property owners are encouraged to provide a soils engineering test prior
to construction such as retaining walls or structural additions.
• Solar Energy Designs:
Encourages the use of solar energy and requires the screening of piping and other
equipment.
• View Corridors:
When locating structures or landscaping element. Impacts to neighboring views
should be considered.
• Water Efficiency:
Encourages the use of grey water and low flow fixtures. Also encourages water
efficiency and an overall water pressure of 70 psi or less.
Architectural Guidelines-
• Maximum Building Size:
Establishes the criteria for the maximum allowable floor area for each lot. Building
Massing, Form and Detail:
Places restrictions on building types, stained and /or etched glass, detached
structures, and plumbing in detached structures, and prohibits outdoor storage of
recreational vehicles.
• Building Security:
States prohibitions against hollow doors, and any locking devices that may hinder
emergency exiting. Also outlines uses of emergency and outdoor lighting.
• Colors:
This guideline states that light - colored roofs are prohibited and that earth -tone colors
are preferred and should be used.
• Community Development Director:
The Community Development Director shall review the site plan, preliminary
grading plan, Lighting plan, elevations, colors and materials of proposed
improvements for "substantial compliance" with these Design Guidelines, tract
mitigations and conditions of approval.
• Detached Structures:
These shall not exceed 14 feet in height above the average natural grade of their
footprints.
• Exposed Pole Supports:
Supports for decks or other structures greater than four feet in height above finished
grade are prohibited unless covered.
• Exterior Products, Finishes and Materials:
Provides an extensive list of approved roofing, paving and exterior finishing
materials.
• Fire Hazard Protection:
Assures compliance with the City of Arroyo Grande Ordinance No. 394 C.S.
Prohibits burning of construction materials and encourages the posting of the
emergency phone number of the Fire Department.
• Fire Sprinkler Requirement:
All houses shall be constructed with automatic fire sprinkler systems.
• General Construction Conditions:
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
20
Provides a list of appropriate measures to help ensure a safe and clean construction
area and surrounding off -site improvements. This guideline also helps to minimize
impacts to neighboring residential units.
• Grading:
This provision helps to ensure that topsoil is preserved and that soil erosion is
minimized.
• Inspections During Construction:
The City of Arroyo Grande will conduct inspections to monitor compliance with
these Guidelines, as well as City codes and regulations.
• Landscape Compliance:
Landscaping must be approved under the requirements listed in the Design
Guidelines.
• Maximum Allowable Height:
In addition to stating that the maximum allowable building height shall be 30 feet,
this guideline provides ways in which the heights shall be measured as well as
heights for walls and detached structures.
• Mechanical Equipment and Utilities:
This guideline outlines ways in which utility lines, flashing and any other mechanical
and /or utility equipment are to be hidden and screened for noise and aesthetic
purposes.
• Modifications to the Approved Plans:
No property owner shall make any modification to an approved plan without a
separate submittal and approval by the City of Arroyo Grande.
• Responsibilities of the Property Owner:
Outlines owner responsibilities including all activities and/ or omissions of
consultants, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and workmen.
• Satellite Dish Antennas:
These are prohibited in front setbacks. Dish antennas are not to exceed 36 inches in
diameter and are to be screened and are to comply with the City of Arroyo Grande
Development Code.
• Seismic Design:
All structures to be built shall conform to the seismic stipulations set forth in the 1991
EIR for the Rancho Grande Subdivision as well as the regulations of the California
Building Code.
• Schedules:
The use of schedules in the required plans (mentioned above) is encouraged.
• Screening:
Requires screening for the poles for decks, mechanical equipment, gas and electric
meters and trash enclosures.
• Solid Waste:
Property owners are encouraged to separate wood byproducts from other
construction waste and salvage for biomass conversion.
• Water Efficiency:
Outlines provisions for water conservation including: pressure reducing valves, low
flow fixtures, use of grey water and the use of building designs to maximize water
efficiency.
Steeper Slope Alterations -
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
21
In addition, slopes are a primary concern for development on the subject property. The
applicant's design guidelines do not address development on steep slopes outside of
suggesting proper methods of erosion control. However, according to the City of Arroyo
Grande Development Code Chapter 16.20.050, building and grading activities are not
permitted on slopes of 25% and greater. This could be considered an aesthetic impact as
well as a grading impact. Structures built higher up on the on -site slopes (directly
proportional to the increased slope percentage) begin to encroach onto the viewsheds of
surrounding neighborhoods. The upper reaches of these slopes are more visible to the
neighboring residences. Mitigation measures associated with this development code are
stated in Section 4.4, Geologic Resources, of the Revised FSEIR, prohibiting development on
slopes of 20% and greater. Although this mitigation measure is written to address geologic
stability, the prohibition of development on these steep slopes also addresses the building of
residential units higher up on the slope that are visible from public viewing areas in the
neighborhoods to the northeast.
Analysis. Because of the clustering of the proposed residential units and the preservation of
open space, the project would partially maintain the rural visual character of the site.
However, the proposed development has the potential to alter the aesthetic character of the
site vicinity by changing the scenic views from public viewing locations, and introducing
community design elements that may be aesthetically inconsistent with the surrounding
area.
The City of Arroyo Grande maintains a policy of preserving the open character of lands
throughout the eastern and northeastern portions of the city and adjacent areas with
emphasis on preservation of prominent slopes and ridgelines in hillside areas. Project
impacts on steeper slopes are therefore considered potentially significant.
When compared to conventional single family residential developments in Suburban
Residential (RS) land use designations, the proposed project would consist of a more
clustered design. The RS land use designation provides a maximum residential density of
one dwelling unit per every 2.5 acres. VTTM 01 -001 would, under the PD 1.2 land use
designation, maintain an average residential density of approximately 1.5 units per acre and
exhibit more of a clustered appearance when compared to the RS designation. This
proposed design would increase the urban feel of the clustered development area, however,
the clustered design would maintain a relatively larger amount of undeveloped natural open
space that helps to preserve the rural aesthetic character of the site.
The second reduced density development proposal eliminates most terracing and retaining
walls on lots, leaving custom site and home design to the discretion of the lot owner.
According to the proposed Design Guidelines, the restriction that no more than 50 percent of
roof height exceed 16 feet (in the Revised Final SEIR and First Addendum) is applicable to
flat graded sites (under 2% slope), while sloped graded sites (over 2% slope) would be
restricted to a no more than 50 percent of roof height exceeding 20 feet. As shown in Figure
5, the overall visual impact in these two cases would be similar. As a result, both scenarios in
the Design Guidelines would address the second item under Mitigation
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.1 of the Revised
FSEIR, and the analysis included in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by
reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the
MMRP.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
22
A key consideration in reducing visual impacts is to maintain public scenic views from the
James Way and La Canada viewing corridors. Adherence to City regulatory requirements
associated with its Development Code would reduce impacts to some extent. The applicant
has proposed design guidelines that substantively address many aesthetic concerns, and
would further mitigate potential project impacts. Specifically, the applicant has proposed
standards related to the following issues that would substantively reduce potential visual
impacts (see Appendix I of the EIR for full text of these guidelines):
• Fences. Restrictions on height, materials and placement;
• Driveways and garages. alterative paving materials, placement;
• Hardscape. limitations on paving;
• Landscape and Irrigation. Specifies landscaping materials and extent of requirements;
• On -Site Equipment. Limits the location and impacts to natural amenities;
• Screening. Trash receptacles must be screened;
• View corridors. Affects location of structures and landscaping;
• Architectural guidelines. Building materials, building heights, colors, massing, and
exterior details.
However, the applicant has proposed that some of the guidelines are required, while others
are merely recommended. Modifications to these guidelines are required to ensure that
aesthetic impacts would be less than significant.
However, impacts would remain significant without further mitigation. The following
additional measures are required:
Mitigation Measure AES -1(a) Modification of Applicant Design Guidelines. The following
modifications to the applicant's proposed design guidelines are required:
• All proposed guidelines noted as recommendations ( "G ") shall be changed to
requirements ( "R ").
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.1 -17 through 4.1 -23; Second Addendum pages 14 -15.
5.1.2 Potentially Significant Direct Impact AES -2. Introduction of light and glare associated with
residential development would extend the area of night light across the currently undeveloped
property, altering the nighttime sky and affecting residences adjacent to the site. This is considered
a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Proposed project illumination would provide safety for residents,
traffic movement, and crossings, warn of hazards, and improve security. The site is currently
undeveloped with no light sources. No lighting plan has been submitted at this time. Despite
its possible benefits, if the proposed project were to incorporate street lighting and/or residential
lighting, the project would result in an adverse light impact at night. Adjacent residential uses
could be affected by such lights (including the headlights of vehicular traffic) related to the
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
23
proposed project. Therefore, the project is considered to have a potentially significant but
mitigable impact with regards to lighting.
In addition, sources of glare that could affect nearby residences include building exterior
materials and surface paving materials. Highly reflective facade materials would be of
particular concern. Building materials that have been identified for use in the proposed
project include brick, stone, wood siding, board on board, board on battens, textured stucco,
split face block, and combed or deep relief stucco finishes. In addition, all roofing materials
shall not consist of reflective glazed tiles, tar and gravel, rock, fiberglass, metal or wood
shingles, or metal tiles. However, since a plan detailing the exact types of building materials
to be used on the exteriors of structures has not been submitted, the project is considered to
have a potentially significant but mitigable impact with regards glare.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.1 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by reference,
the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. The
following exterior lighting mitigation measure is required, and shall be added to the design
guidelines:
Mitigation Measure AES -2(a): Exterior Lighting. Outdoor light poles on internal streets
shall be pedestrian in scale, and shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height. Such lighting shall be
designed to project downward and shall not create glare on adjacent properties. All lighting
fixtures that are visible from surrounding residences shall be designed to fully contain direct
glare on -site, and shall be hooded and shielded. Non -glare lighting shall be used throughout
the proposed project. Exterior Lighting shall be limited to security and safety purposes.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.1 -23 and 4.1 -24; Second Addendum page 16.
5.1.3 Potentially Significant Cumulative Aesthetic Impact. Implementation of the proposed
project would alter the aesthetic rural character of the site by converting an existing undeveloped
area to an area with a suburban/ residential appearance. Because the developed portions of Arroyo
Grande generally exhibit an urban character, impacts are considered significant but mitigable.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - This project would be consistent with the 1990 General Plan
land use designations for the site. However, cumulative development in the project vicinity
would result in a significant cumulative loss of open space and would irrevocably alter the
character of the area to an increasingly urban condition. The proposed project would
incrementally contribute to this change in aesthetic character of the site and the surrounding
areas.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and made binding through the
MMRP. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES -1(a) and AES -2(a) would reduce the
project's contribution to cumulative aesthetic impacts to a less than significant level.
r Prepared by R/ncon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
24
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.1 -24; mitigation measures on Pages 4.1 -22 and 4.1 -23.
5.2 Biological Resources
5.2.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact B -2. Proposed project development would reduce the
acreage of locally and regionally significant vegetation communities, including Valley Foothill
Riparian, Seasonal and Fresh Emergent Wetlands, which may be considered jurisdictional by the
California Department of Fish and Game, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and /or U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. This is a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Valley Foothill Riparian habitat areas are declining vegetation
communities that have been largely converted to urban uses throughout central and
southern California. These habitat types are recognized by DFG as Natural Communities of
Special Concern. The past losses of riparian habitat in the region have resulted in a decline
in the population of certain plant and wildlife species that are uniquely associated with this
habitat type.
Wetlands are protected on a federal and state level. The fill of wetlands and waters of the U.S. is
subject to a Section 404 permit under the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). The recent Supreme
Court S.W.A.N.C.C. decision has resulted in isolated waters (unless interstate commerce is
supported by the waters) being removed from the Corps regulatory authority. Since the
potential wetland areas on the project site are within or immediately adjacent to incised channels
with evidence of an ordinary high water mark, it is assumed that the S.W.A.N.C.C. decision has
no effect on the amount of jurisdictional area located on the project site.
Currently, California Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. allows an applicant to apply for a
Streambed Alteration Agreement to allow impacts to state regulated biological resources such as
alteration of a streambed for construction of a road crossing. Similarly, Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act provides permits for the placement of dredge or fill materials into waters of the
United States. It is the goal of the CEQA environmental review process to minimize impacts to
the extent feasible. Nevertheless, it must be recognized that the current laws would permit
impacts to biological resources, the extent to which mitigation is needed can only be determined
through the permitting process. The specific conditions of the permitting process would be
determined by the responsible regulatory agencies, following CEQA review.
Implementation of the reduced density development project would reduce the loss of acreage of
locally and regionally significant vegetation communities, including Valley Foothill Riparian,
Seasonal and Fresh Emergent Wetlands, which may be considered jurisdictional by the
California Department of Fish and Game, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and /or U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. Portions of Lots 1, 2, and certain roadways, would lie within the 50-
foot setback set forth through mitigation measure B -2(a).
Development of portions of the proposed roadways would occur within Valley Foothill Riparian
and Seasonal Wetland habitat. Indirect impacts could occur to the vegetation as well as the
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
25
structure of the habitat type within these areas due to nearby grading activities or bank
modifications.
Run -off from construction could have short -term significant impacts to onsite drainages.
Silt, sedimentation, or run -off from construction practices could affect water quality in on-
site drainages and in turn affect the species residing in or utilizing these areas. Refer to
Section 4.5, Hydrology/Water Quality, of the Revised FSEIR for further discussion of impacts
and mitigation relating to water quality.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
the MMRP.
Mitigation Measure B -2(a): Riparian and Wetland Protection. Implementation of the
following measure would mitigate the loss of riparian/wetland habitat:
1. All wetland and riparian areas shall be avoided and building envelopes shall be
located so that all riparian and wetland habitat is buffered from development
(including grading) by a minimum 50 -foot setback, or a functional equivalent D
measured from the top of the creek bank or the outer edge of riparian vegetation,
whichever is greater.
2. The riparian and wetland habitat area and minimum 50 -foot buffer zone for
preserved riparian /wetland areas shall be shown on all grading plans and shall be
demarcated with highly visible construction fencing.
3. During construction activities, washing of concrete, paint, or equipment shall occur
only in areas where polluted water and materials can be contained for subsequent
removal from the site. Washing of such materials shall not be allowed near wetland
and riparian resources.
4. As a condition of the 50 -foot setback, primary on -site stormwater drainage shall not
be allowed to enter the East Fork of Meadow Creek. In addition, the project applicant
shall ensure that buffer areas are revegetated using only plant species native to the
region. Thereafter, it shall be the responsibility of the HOA to maintain the buffer
vegetation. It shall also be the responsibility of the HOA to include implementation
of a weed abatement program in order to further ensure that non -native species be
excluded from riparian/wetland areas. Public access to buffer areas shall be
prohibited. Any back or front yards that abut buffer areas shall be fenced in order to
avoid indirect impacts resulting from unrestricted access.
The 50 -foot setback should be measured from the top of the creek banks or the outer
edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. For residential lots that abut
riparian areas, the setback should be measured to the property line of the proposed
lot(s), not to future structures. There should be no private ownership of the riparian
setback area and access by people and pets should be restricted.
If implementing the above measures is not physically, technologically, or
economically feasible for construction of the project as proposed, then the following
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
26
mitigation measures shall be implemented, which require the applicant to comply
with Federal, State and local laws and regulations, and obtain the necessary permits
from the appropriate resource agencies. In doing so, the permitting agencies and the
permit conditions imposed upon the applicant will ensure that the habitats are left in
a condition as good as, or better than, pre - construction conditions. The respective
agencies are required to enforce any permit conditions. The mitigation measures
listed below are intended to provide examples of the requirements the applicant may
have to implement as part of this compliance, and are not intended to assume or
suggest precisely what the permitting agencies will require. Instead, they are
examples of mitigation measures that have been provided as a result of experience
with the resource agencies and typical permit conditions.
5. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant
to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a water quality certification from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act, and a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish
and Game pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code for
any grading or fill activity within drainages and wetlands. It is recommended that
the applicant contact these agencies prior to final plan submittal in order to
incorporate any additional requirements into the project design.
As part of the permitting process, the applicant would likely be required to provide a
compensatory habitat creation/restoration program to mitigate impacts to
jurisdictional wetland and riparian areas. The mitigation components of such a
program would be at the discretion of the applicable regulatory agencies. The
program would be required to be written and implemented by a qualified biologist,
and could include the following components:
i. Mitigation plantings for the loss of existing wetland and riparian habitat shall be
located in the onsite drainages that are proposed to be modified or preserved as
part of the proposed project to the fullest extent feasible. The compensatory
program must provide a minimum 2:1 ratio of habitat values and functions to
that impacted. However, agency permitting may require a higher ratio. If onsite
mitigation is not feasible, offsite options may be considered in accordance with
the requirements of the agencies.
ii. As part of the plan, the applicant shall prepare and submit for approval a
mitigation- phasing plan to ensure that all restoration plantings are in place with
sufficient irrigation prior to final inspection.
iii. Mitigation plantings shall be with native riparian and wetland species from
locally collected stock.
iv. Removal of native species in the creeks / drainages that are to be retained shall be
prohibited.
v. [THIS ITEM WAS DELETED, SINCE IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE REVISED
PROJECT]
vi. Outlet structures shall minimize disturbance to the natural drainage and avoid
use of hard bank structures. Where erosion from outlet structures is a concern
and bank stabilization must be utilized, bioengineering techniques (e.g., fiber
mats and rolls, willow wattling, and natural anchors) shall be used for bank
retaining walls. If concrete must be used, then prefabricated crib wall
construction shall be used rather than pouring concrete. Rock grouting shall only
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
27
be used if no other feasible alternative is available as determined by the City's
Community Development and Public Works Departments.
vii. The drainage bottoms shall not be disturbed or altered by installation of any drain
or outlet structure. Natural rocks imbedded in the stream bank shall be utilized
as a base to tie in riprap if necessary;
viii. A grease trap and /or silt basin shall be installed in all drop inlets closest to the
creek to prevent oil, silt and other debris from entering the creek. Such
traps /basins shall be maintained and cleaned out every spring and fall to prevent
overflow situations and potential mosquito habitats from forming. The
homeowners association shall be responsible for grease trap and /or silt basin
maintenance activities; and
ix. Construction envelopes shall be restricted to those areas shown on approved site
Grading Plans in order to avoid impacts to native vegetation and
riparian/wetland habitats. Envelope boundaries shall be staked in the field.
Approved construction envelopes shall be shown on all approved grading and
building plans.
The applicant's Preliminary Riparian & Wetland Mitigation Plan (see Appendix to the
Addendum) includes several strategies intended to address impacts to riparian and wetland
areas. The plan was submitted to address the applicant's statement that the 50-ft. mitigation
measure buffer is infeasible because it would require a reduction in project density of an
additional 12 units. The plan includes strategies for a functional equivalent to the required
buffer in order to provide mitigation to the extent feasible:
• Bank revegetation
• Wetland enhancement
• Wetland creation
• Riparian buffer revegetation
• Eucalyptus removal from top of bank; and
• Weed control within intact riparian corridor
These strategies are intended to address one or more aspects of Mitigation Measure B -2(a),
which described a series of requirements to protect wetlands or riparian areas. Generally
speaking, these measures appear to be consistent with many of the strategic goals of
Mitigation Measure B -2(a). However, the applicant's plan does not address the requirement
to maintain a 50 -foot setback from identified wetland or riparian resources.
The applicant will be required to obtain a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; a water quality certification from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act; and a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and
Game pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code for any grading
or fill activity within drainages and wetlands. It may be possible that the agencies will
accept the applicant's mitigation strategy as being functionally equivalent to the 50 -foot
setback requirement described in the Revised Final SEIR for this project. However, without
that assurance, the applicant's preliminary mitigation plan may not meet the requirements of
Mitigation Measure B -2(a), because it does not include a 50 -foot buffer setback as required by
the City Council.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.2 -19 through 4.2 -24; Second Addendum pages 16 -23.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
28
5.2.2 Potentially Significant Direct Impact B -3. The proposed project would result would result
in the removal of 13 native coast live oak trees, the transplanting of 16 native coast live oak trees,
and the removal of associated habitat within Coastal Oak Woodland habitat onsite. This is
considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Removal and transplantation of Coastal Oak Woodland
habitat is considered a significant impact due to the long time- period necessary for these
habitats to establish, and the relatively high quality of wildlife habitat that they provide. The
proposed project would result in the removal of 11 native coast live oak trees, the
transplanting of 12 native coast live oak trees, and the removal of associated habitat within
Coastal Oak Woodland habitat onsite. Although the transplanted trees are proposed to be
transplanted onsite, a moderate survival rate is expected. Additionally, transplanting oak
trees may not create oak woodland habitat with similar features to that removed, and
requires many years to establish. Further, the Oak Woodland is serving as an important
corridor for wildlife movements. Development of the site will fragment this wildlife corridor
and alter wildlife movement within the site and also between adjacent open spaces. These
impacts are considered to be Class II, significant but mitigable.
The City of Arroyo Grande has established oak tree mitigation and protection measures. The
guidelines set forth by the City require a tree planting fee at an amount set forth by the City
Council. In lieu of said fee, and upon City approval, the developer shall be responsible for
the purchase, planting, maintenance and replacement of such trees, if necessary. A security
bond may be required, at an amount determined by the City, to ensure faithful performance.
The bond may be held by the City for a maximum of two years. The City may require a six
foot tree planting easement on all or select subdivision streets. No trees may be removed
unless a tree removal permit has been issued or for which a tree removal plan has not been
approved by the City. A minimum 3:1 replacement ratio (trees replaced to trees lost) for oak
trees two inches or more in diameter at grade is required.
Although most of the proposed Lots may be able to be developed while avoiding or
minimizing impacts to individual oaks, many lots contain oak trees and oak woodland
habitat, and as such, the proposed project would result in direct and indirect impacts to
numerous coast live oak trees. Specifically, nearly all of proposed Lots 13 through 15 are
located in oak woodland habitat. Portions of Lots 4 through 12 also involve oak woodland
areas. Because individual property owners may develop or landscape their lots and remove
or damage oak trees and / or oak woodland habitat, the inclusion of oak trees and oak
woodland habitat in individual lots raises the likelihood of impact to these resources.
Therefore, Oak trees included within proposed lots shall be avoided or shall be mitigated
according to the following mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
y Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
29
the MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure B -3(a): Pre- construction Survey and Tree Protection Plan. Prior to
Tract Map Approval, an accurate map identifying and locating all existing onsite trees and
all existing trees that are off -site but affected by the project shall be prepared by a certified
arborist and submitted to the City. Such map shall also identify all existing trees that are
proposed by the applicant for removal or destruction, and such trees shall be visibly marked
for inspection.
Oak trees and Oak Woodland habitat shall be avoided by adjusting or removing proposed
lots to eliminate inclusion of oak trees. If avoidance of oak trees in not feasible, oak trees
included within lots shall require mitigation.
Each tree or group of trees designated to remain in place shall be protected by a five -foot
fence enclosure, prior to the beginning of construction. The fence shall be wooden, chain
link, or plastic barricade fencing. The location of the fence is normally at the dripline of the
tree, but it may by adjusted or omitted with the City's written approval. In addition, the
Community Development, Public Works and Parks and Recreation Departments shall
monitor construction activities and enforce an approved tree protection plan. No parking of
vehicles or equipment, or storage of materials shall be permitted within the dripline of the
trees designated to remain. In the event that underground utilities must be placed within the
dripline of the trees to remain, the utilities shall be installed by auguring at 24 inches
minimum depth or by hand trenching. If roots over one inch in diameter are encountered,
the roots shall be preserved without injury. No machine trenching within a tree's dripline
shall be permitted, unless authorized, in writing, by the Parks and Recreation director.
To ensure protection of trees, a performance bond may be required, as acceptable to the City,
in the amount of $1,500.00, or the value of each affected tree, whichever is greater. If no
damage to protected trees has occurred, in the opinion of the certified arborist and the Parks
and Recreation Department, the bond shall be returned upon final building inspection. If
damage to protected trees is determined to have occurred, the bond shall be held for three
years and forfeited if, in the opinion of the certified arborist and the Parks and Recreation
Department, permanent damage has occurred.
Replacement and relocated trees shall be planted in a natural setting Replacement plantings
shall be at more than a 3:1 ratio and shall be minimum 15 -gallon sized nursery trees or a
sufficient number of locally grown seedlings planted under the direction of a City-
approved arborist or botanist that provides an equivalent level of mitigation.
Replacement and relocated trees shall be planted in a natural setting (not as landscaping) at
the canopy/ dripline edge of existing mature native oak trees; on north- facing slopes; within
drainage swales (except when riparian habitat is present); where topsoil is present; and away
from continuously wet areas (e.g., lawns, irrigation areas, landscaping, etc.), to create oak
woodland habitat to the extent possible. A seasonally timed maintenance program and
appropriate browse protection will be developed for all oak tree planting areas on the project
site. A City approved qualified arborist/ botanist shall be retained to monitor the acquisition,
installation, and maintenance of all oak trees to be replaced and relocated on the project site.
Replacement and relocated trees shall be monitored and maintained by a qualified
arborist /botanist for at least five years or until the trees have successfully established as
determined by the City Parks and Recreation Director. Annual monitoring reports that
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
30
evaluate oak tree survivability and vigor shall be prepared by the certified arborist and
submitted the City.
All trees planted or relocated as mitigation shall have a 90% survival rate after five years. If
the five year survival rate of trees planted or relocated as mitigation is less than 90 %, the
number of trees required to reach 90% survival shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio. All
replacement mitigation trees (trees planted to replace those that did not survive the five year
period), shall in turn have a survival rate of 100% five years from date of planting. Tree
monitoring and replacement shall continue until an overall five year, 90% survival rate is
reached for mitigation trees. Planted or relocated trees shall not be located as to adversely
impact on -site occurrences of Pismo clarkia.
Mitigation Measure B -3(b): Subsequent Grading Plans and Tree Mitigation. Tree
mitigation is based upon the Tree Mitigation Plan Map (Castlerock Development 1998),
which may change depending on the final approved project. Therefore, prior to the approval
of grading permits, final impacts to trees on the project site shall be re- evaluated by a
certified arborist and submitted to the City. Mitigation measures for any trees impacted by
the final approved project shall be the same as presented in B -3(a).
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.2 -24 through 4.2 -27, and Second Addendum Pages 23 -25.
5.2.3 Potentially Significant Direct Impact B4. Construction of the proposed project would impact
Pismo clarkia, a Federally- listed Endangered and State - listed Rare plant species, occurring within
the project site. This would be considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance
Facts in Support of Finding - The original proposed project and the first reduced density
development proposal would impact Pismo clarkia, a Federally - listed Endangered and State -
listed Rare plant species occurring within the project site. Pismo clarkia occurrences can
fluctuate onsite annually depending on the pattern of rainfall received. The site can support
a Pismo clarkia population, which during some years appears to be more robust than during
others. Mitigation outlined in the Revised Final SEIR and incorporated into the First
Addendum included Pismo clarkia avoidance, agency permit compliance, and completion of
a worker education program. As noted in the Revised Final SEIR, implementation of these
measures would not reduce impacts to a less than significant level unless avoidance is
assured, and the impact for the original project was therefore listed as Class I, significant and
unavoidable. The first reduced density development proposal, as analyzed in the First
Addendum, would similarly result in Class I, significant and unavoidable, impacts to Pismo
clarkia. However, the second reduced density development proposal would avoid mapped
occurrences of Pismo clarkia, as all development is located more than 50 feet from the edge
of the occurrences (refer to Figure 6). In fact, the nearest development (proposed span-
culvert crossing the East Fork of Meadow Creek) would be located approximately 175 feet
from the nearest mapped occurrence. The nearest lot (Lot 15 would be located over 200 feet
from the nearest mapped occurrence. Impacts would thus be considered significant but
mitigable (Class II). However, because development would still occur within the vicinity of
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
31
roving Pismo clarkia populations, mitigation would still be required to ensure less than
significant impacts.
The area shown as "Established Pismo Clarkia Mitigation Area" on the Tract 1998 Pismo
Clarkia Distribution and Mitigation Map (Padre Associates 2000) is considered to be
marginally suitable habitat for Pismo clarkia. This area extends from the southern adjacent
property onto the project site. Previous plantings show some success, but invasive non-
native veldt grass currently occupies much of the proposed mitigation area. This grass
commonly out - competes native species, and in a short time period could eliminate potential
Pismo clarkia growth areas. Portions of this area may currently display habitat
characteristics that are suitable for Pismo clarkia, however, the potential for a successful
long -term population of Pismo clarkia is greatly reduced based on the presence of invasive
species. Additionally, it is Rincon s understanding that the "Established Pismo Clarkia
Mitigation Area" is a mitigation area from a previous project, and therefore does not
constitute mitigation for the proposed project.
Many times, native plant species with highly specialised niches are adversely affected by
years of increased precipitation totals. Pismo clarkia appears to be one of those native
species adversely affected through competition with weedy grasses and forbs during years
of higher rainfall totals. Additionally, Mediterranean plants have a wide variation of
responses to the timing of the seasonal rainfall. For instance, many non -native annual
species that compete with native species such as Pismo clarkia respond very well to early
fall/winter rains, while others have specific ecological requirements that suppress seed
germination until later in the growing season. Therefore, the amount of precipitation, as
well as the seasonal timing of the rainfall, can affect Pismo clarkia's distribution and ability
to compete with other plant species.
It is also important to note that variations in yearly rainfall totals affect annual plant species
differently than rainfall totals affect habitat types. For example, the distribution of an annual
plant species from year to year in a particular area is much more a factor of rainfall totals
than the distribution of an established area of a particular habitat type. For instance, wetland
and riparian vegetation occur in areas of increased water availability, and once established
will typically encompass about the same surface area unless there is a consistent increase in
annual rainfall. Similarly, unless there is a substantial reduction in annual rainfall totals or
water availability, established wetland and riparian vegetation can persist during dry
periods. Conversely, native annual plant species such as Pismo clarkia appear to tolerate
and thrive during years of lower average rainfall totals compared to the non -native annual
grasses and forbs that can out - compete such species when annual precipitation values are
high. As such, the area covered by annual plant species can fluctuate naturally based on
precipitation whereas established perennial vegetation and habitat types typically experience
little surface area fluctuations unless consecutive years of either increased precipitation or
drought are experienced, or there is a catastrophic event or a micro-topographic change.
Maps of Pismo clarkia distribution on the subject property have been prepared from studies
performed during 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2003. A comparison of these four maps and an
evaluation of the corresponding precipitation data from the nearest weather station (Pismo
Beach) for the years which the project site was studied show that during average or below
average rainfall years Pismo clarkia did exceptionally well and was observed covering the
largest portion of the site. The map showing the most sporadic and non - contiguous
occurrences of Pismo clarkia was prepared from data collected in 1998. Of the four years of
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
32
precipitation data compared, 1998 had the most spring rain (26.09 inches by May). During
the year 2000, 16.60 inches of rain had fallen by May, and the map produced by Padre
Associates indicates a more contiguous Pismo clarkia occurrence. The map presented in this
SEIR reflects data collected during 2002, and the corresponding precipitation through May of
2002 was 3.78 inches. Finally, during 2003, 6.11 inches of rain had fallen by May and the
corresponding map produced by Althouse and Meade shows large contiguous Pismo clarkia
populations, as well as other significant areas containing Pismo clarkia on the project site
that were not observed or mapped during the previous studies.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
the MMRP.
Mitigation Measure B -4(a): Pismo Clarkia Avoidance.
1. The Pismo clarkia occurrences and minimum 50 -foot buffer zone for preserved areas
shall be shown on all grading plans and shall be demarcated with highly visible
construction fencing.
2. Temporary fencing shall be installed around the Pismo clarkia occurrences prior to any
construction activities, including ground disturbance or site grading. Protective fencing
shall remain in place throughout the project construction period.
Mitigation Measure B -4(b): Agency Coordination. - Because the required buffers for onsite
Pismo clarkia occurrences may be impacted during construction of the proposed access road,
the applicant shall hire a qualified botanist to develop a species habitat mitigation and
monitoring plan. The applicant's botanist shall work with the DFG and City to prepare an
approvable plan that provides the necessary methods and techniques to ensure the ability of
impacted and mitigated onsite occurrences to exist in perpetuity. A salvage and relocation
program shall also be included to collect seed of any individual plants that migrate into the
development footprint. Salvage and relocation shall consist of collecting mature seed and
distributing it into preserved open space areas with the necessary habitat attributes to
support Pismo clarkia. In addition, creation of new occurrences in onsite open spaces as well
as enhancement of existing occurrences through weed abatement and introduction of
greenhouse grown plants may be required to achieve the primary goal of no- net -loss. The
mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to both DFG and USFWS for their review
and their comments incorporated prior to final approval. At a minimum, the plan shall
include:
The overall goal and measurable objectives of the mitigation and monitoring plan;
Specific areas proposed for revegetation and their size;
Specific habitat management and protection concepts to be used to ensure long -term
maintenance and protection of impacted Pismo clarkia occurrences and other impacted
special - status species to be included (i.e.: annual population census surveys and habitat
assessments; establishment of monitoring reference sites; fencing of Pismo clarkia preserves
and signage to identify the environmentally sensitive areas; a seasonally -timed weed
abatement program; and seasonally -timed seed collection, propagation, and reintroduction
of Pismo clarkia into specific receiver sites);
Success criteria based on the goals and measureable objectives to promote a viable Pismo
clarkia population within the planned re- vegetation areas on the project site in perpetuity;
An adaptive management program to address both foreseen and unforeseen circumstances
relating to the preservation and mitigation programs;
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
33
Remedial measures to address negative impacts to Pismo clarkia and its habitat that may
occur during construction activities as well as post - construction when dwellings are
occupied;
An education program to inform residents of the presence of Pismo clarkia and other special -
status plants and sensitive biological resources onsite, and to provide methods that residents
can employ to reduce impacts to Pismo clarkia occurrences in protected open space areas;
Reporting requirements to ensure consistent data collection and reporting methods used by
monitoring personnel.
The primary goal of the mitigation and monitoring plan shall ensure a viable population and
no- net -loss of Pismo clarkia habitat within the project area from the impacts of project
development. To ensure a no- net -loss of this species, the applicant shall create, restore
and/ or enhance a two to one ratio of suitable Pismo darkia habitat for any suitable habitat
impacted by project development. If monitoring data collected over a several year period
determine that gross population numbers are consistently declining within the restoration
areas from the baseline population census data, then additional measures (i.e.: habitat
assessments to determine factors influencing low population numbers, erosion control,
additional reintroduction efforts, and weed abatement etc.) shall occur to ensure the long-
term viability of the replacement Pismo clarkia occurrences and to reintroduce genetic
material collected form extant occurrences within the site vicinity.
Mitigation Measure B -4(c): Worker Education Program. Before any grading or construction
activities commence, all personnel associated with the project shall attend a worker
education program regarding the sensitive biological resources occurring in the project area
(i.e., Pismo darkia and other biological resources susceptible to project related impacts).
Specifics of this program shall include identification of Pismo darkia and its habitat, and
careful review of the mitigation measures required to reduce impacts to this species. A fact
sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. The
Community Development, Public Works and Building Departments shall be notified of the
time that the applicant intends to hold this meeting.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.2 -27 through 4.2 -32; Addendum pages 18 -22; Second
Addendum pages 26 -28.
5.2.4 Potentially Significant Direct Impact B -5. Project implementation would reduce the
populations and available habitat of wildlife in general, including special - status species. Because of
the known or potential presence of sensitive wildlife species on -site, the loss of wildlife habitat is
considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Potential long -term impacts to wildlife are related to
construction activity and noise, and human presence. Specific impacts include the
disruption of patterns of habitat use, displacement of individuals, disruption of breeding
habits, disruption of wildlife movements, and night Lighting.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
34
Impacts to Wildlife in General. The vegetation changes associated with project development
would reduce the acreage of the existing on -site vegetation and would change the ability of
the on -site plant communities to support wildlife populations, including sensitive species. In
addition to the direct loss of habitat, project development would likely result in increased
mortality to species that continue to utilize the project site after development due to
domestic and feral animal predation and collecting, as well as attrition of important prey
resources for wildlife in the remaining habitat.
A wide variety of wildlife species could be adversely affected by the presence of lights from
the proposed development. Nocturnal species that rely on darkness to hunt or evade
predators, including owls, nighthawks and rodents, would be affected. Certain species of
aerial - foraging bats may be helped by night lighting because of their attractiveness to prey
items such as flying insects. Refer to Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the Revised FSEIR for further
discussion of impacts and mitigation relating to project lighting.
Impacts to Special- Status Wildlife. The special - status species, if present on the project site, are
likely to be impacted by direct and indirect activities associated with project implementation.
Development of the project site will remove potential raptor foraging /nesting habitat from
the site.
Impacts to Wildlife Movement Corridors. The entire site currently acts as a wildlife corridor,
facilitating wildlife movement from upland areas through the more urbanized downstream
reaches of the Meadow Creek system. Although the construction of James Way and the
surrounding phases of the Rancho Grande project, as well as increased rural residential
development, has fragmented native habitat in the region, a sufficient movement corridor for
common wildlife species such as black - tailed deer, coyotes, raccoons, rabbits, and opossums
still remains.
Proposed on -site roads and subsequent residential development would fragment habitats,
thereby affecting wildlife movements. Barriers to movement such as roadways and
subsequent residential development are disproportionately greater for small-sized animals,
but even large mammal movements are affected by these features. Most of the impact to
larger animals is due to re- adjustment of home ranges, breeding territories, and foraging
habits in response to changes in prey movements and general reduction in availability of
prey. Studies of small mammal movements have shown that the presence of roadways
would introduce a source of mortality not currently present on the site, i.e., wildlife- vehicle
interactions.
Additionally, the James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife Preserve is designated open space
that is adjacent to the project site, which allows the project site to serve as a narrow corridor
for wildlife to traverse to larger areas of open and undeveloped habitat. The presence of the
east fork of Meadow Creek, the seasonal water that it provides, and its continuance offsite in
both northeastern and southwestern directions, increases the likelihood that the project site
is an important local wildlife corridor. The onsite Oak Woodland habitat is also an
important feature for wildlife movement. Development of the project site would alter
current wildlife movement patterns, fragment and restrict the width of these wildlife
corridors, as well as isolate the open space in the James Way Oak Habitat and Wildlife
Preserve.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
35
Impacts Related to Invasive Non -Native Species. Project development would introduce or
maintain non -native animals such as bullfrogs, house sparrows, European starlings, dogs,
cats, Norway and black rats, and house mice to the project site. In addition, project
development would introduce or maintain non -native invasive plants through Landscaping
of new residences /structures and streets. The introduction and/ or continued presence of
these species would directly and indirectly impact wildlife resources in several ways: 1) by
out - competing native species for food; 2) predation; 3) and habitat alteration. Traffic and
pedestrians, for example, may alter habitat, particularly for ground- dwelling sensitive
species such as the northern harrier, burrowing owl, and California horned lark that feed
and /or nest on or near the ground. Project buildout may result in the spread of non -native
plants through disturbance and escapes of ornamentals. This could potentially impact
wildlife, including sensitive species due to loss of food resources and cover.
Although not a direct impact to wildlife, the introduction of domestic cats and dogs could
create conflicts between predators such as coyotes and domestic animals. Residents may kill
such predators, with the possibility that other non - predator species could be affected.
Impacts to Water Resources. The East Fork of Meadow Creek consists primarily of an earthen
bottom, suggesting that heavy sediment loads are pre - existing conditions in the watershed.
However, adverse effects on the water quality of the east fork of Meadow Creek, the main
channel of Meadow Creek, and several unnamed drainages, both on -site and downstream
from the project site, could pose a risk to these habitats and the species that use them.
Impacts to water quality could result from construction activities on the project site that
create unstable soils or by construction materials. Potential risk comes from the following
sources: (a) fuels, hydraulic fluids, paints, solvents, and other chemicals; (b) increased
sedimentation could occur during and after construction; (c) roadways would become point
sources for runoff into nearby creeks; (d) additional pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides
would be introduced onto the site. Water polluted with silt and /or construction debris, or
any of the above sources would travel downstream, potentially reaching the Pismo Lagoon.
Because of the sensitivity of habitats associated with the oak woodland within the seasonal
drainages and riparian habitat within the east fork of Meadow Creek, as well as their
connection to downstream receptors, the introduction of sediments, fuels, oils, solvents,
pesticides, fertilizers, herbicides, and animal waste to these watercourses is considered a
potentially significant impact. As discussed in Impact B -2(a), if impacts to riparian and
wetland habitats are not avoided, then compliance with Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean
Water Act and Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code would be
necessary. Compliance with these regulations would require that the onsite riparian and
wetland habitats remain as good as or better than pre - construction conditions and any
impacts to water resources would be considered violation of these laws. Impacts to water
quality are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.5 of the Revised FSEIR and the mitigation
measures in Impact H -1(a) indicate that compliance with the National Pollution Elimination
Discharge System and therefore, implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
and Best Management Practices to control impacts to water quality onsite as well as down
stream, including the Pismo lagoon, will be required. Refer to Section 4.5, Hydrology/Water
Quality, of the Revised FSEIR for further discussion of impacts and mitigation relating to
water quality.
Secondary biological impacts can occur as a result of vegetation management requirements
for the purpose of fire control and prevention. Section 4.8.2 Fire Protection, of the Revised
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
36
FSEIR requires the applicant to develop a Fire /Vegetation Management Plan or Fuel
Modification Plan for the site to reduce the site's current high fire hazard. The requirements
as established state that 30 feet of adequate clearance from brush to structures must be
maintained, and vegetation within this 30 -foot zone must be strictly irrigated and controlled.
The SEIR further recommends that grasses shall be cut down to a length of 4 inches or less
yearly, or as required by the City of Arroyo Grande Fire Department. Vegetation
management would potentially involve removal of some, if not all, native vegetation within
30 feet of a structure. The fuel modification plan as required could also involve trimming
oak trees that have branches of two inches in diameter or less within four to six feet of the
ground. Trimming or removing shrubs within the oak tree canopy could also occur as a
result of the fuel modification program.
As long as the 50 -foot riparian and Pismo clarkia setbacks are implemented, the required 30
feet of adequate clearance may be achieved without additional impacts to the onsite
biological resources. The fuel modification program must be strategically implemented,
meaning patches of oak canopy and associated understory plants away from structures and
outside of the fuel modification zones should be left intact. Appropriate low -fuel load native
vegetation may be planted along the perimeters of the native habitat types and removal of
highly combustible species can lessen impacts from implementation of the fuel modification
plan.
The margin of the oak woodland and coastal scrub habitat types would potentially be
affected by the implementation of the fuel modification plan, which could affect animal use
of the margins of these habitat types. However, the development of the site and associated
human disturbances (i.e.: increased human presence, lighting, noise, etc.) would also likely
deter animals from using the margins of the habitat. Removal of vegetation in these areas
may also adversely affect Pismo clarkia plants. As detailed in an August 29, 2000 memo
from Teresa McClish, mowing within areas of Pismo clarkia will occur where necessary
according to the City Fire Department, but shall not take place until after Labor Day to
ensure seeding of Pismo clarkia has occurred. Careful removal of understory woody brush
within the Pismo clarkia preserve areas can also occur without adverse impacts to this
species.
Revegetation of the riparian setback /buffer zone as required in Impact B -2 should consist of
appropriately selected low combustible shrubs and herbaceous species native to the region to
ensure the fuel load is not increased. These areas could also be irrigated to further reduce
the fuel Load and comply with requirements established in the fuel modification program. It
is important to note that careful attention to implementing the fuel modification program
would not adversely impact biological resources.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
the MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure B -5(a): [REMOVED, AS IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS REVISED
PROJECT]
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
37
Mitigation Measure B -5(b): Ground Disturbance Timing. In order to avoid impacts to
nesting birds including the ground- nesting northern harrier, or other birds protected under
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, all initial ground disturbing activities and tree removal
should be avoided from March 31 to September 15, unless a pre - construction survey for
active nests within the limits of grading is conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two
weeks prior to any construction activities. If active nests are located, then all construction
work must be conducted at least 50 to 250 feet from the nest until the adults and young are
no longer reliant on the nest site, as determined by a qualified biologist.
Mitigation Measure B -5(c): Pet Brochure. The applicant shall prepare a brochure that
informs prospective homebuyers and all HOA members about the impacts associated with
non -native animals, especially cats and dogs, and other non -native animals to the project
site; similarly, inform potential homebuyers and all HOA members of the potential for
coyotes to prey on domestic animals.
Mitigation Measure B -5(d): Night Lighting Standards. The following standards pertaining
to night lighting shall be added to the project's design guidelines:
• Night lighting of public areas shall be kept to the minimum necessary for safety and
security purposes.
• Exterior lighting within 100 feet of open space shall be shielded and aimed as needed to
avoid spillover into open space areas. Decorative lighting shall be low intensity.
Mitigation Measure B -5(e): Native Landscaping. In order to ensure that project landscaping
does not introduce invasive non -native plant and tree species into the vicinity of the site, the
final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by a City approved biologist. All
invasive plant and tree species shall be removed from the landscaping plan. These include
the following:
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME
Trees
Acacia spp. Wattle
Populus fremontii Cottonwood
Schinus merle California Pepper Tree
Schinus tembinthifolius Brazilian Pepper Tree
Shrubs/Ground Covers
Acacia redolens Wattle
Arctostaphylos densiflora Sonoma manzanita
Arctostaphylos densiflora McMinn manzanita
Arctotheca calendula Cape weed
Cotoneaster dammeri Bearberry cotoneaster
Cotoneaster spp. Cotoneaster
Myoporum pacificum Myoporum
Myoporum parvifolium Myoporum
Pyracantha spp. Firethorn
In addition, the following discusses concerns with other species that are present in the
suggested plant list. If cottonwood trees are desired, black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera
ssp. trichocarpa) shall be utilized. Manzanita species planted onsite shall be species that are
local and regional natives. A specific species of Ceanothus shall be identified, because
hybridization of certain species does occur. If creeping St. John's wort (Hyperricum caycinum)
is planted it shall not be planted on perimeters of open space to limit vegetative spread. The
plant List identified Clarkia spp., however this needs to be specific. Clarkia purpurea is
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
38
recommended because it is known to occur in the area.
Mitigation Measure B -5(f): Wildlife Corridor Preservation. Preservation of the wildlife
corridors that are present on the project site can be achieved with sufficient setbacks from
Riparian and Wetland Habitats and by avoiding direct and indirect impacts to oak
Woodland habitat. Refer to Mitigation Measure B -2(a), Riparian and Wetland Protection,
setback values to allow for Riparian/ Wetland corridor preservation, and to Mitigation
Measure B -3(a) for oak tree avoidance and mitigation measures.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.2 -32 through 4.2 -38; Second Addendum pages 29 -31.
5.2.5 Potentially Significant Cumulative Biological Resources Impact. Development of the
proposed project would contribute to cumulative biological impacts in the area. These impacts
would include the loss of wildlife foraging /breeding areas, and loss of Pismo clarkia. The
cumulative effect of these impacts depends on the proximity of other approved and proposed
projects to the project under consideration. Due to the loss of wildlife foraging habitat, breeding
habitat, and Pismo clarkia that would occur as a result of project development, as proposed, in
combination with other expected development in the area, cumulative impacts to biological
resources are considered significant but mitigable.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guideline
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - As noted in the Revised Final SEIR, due to the loss of wildlife
foraging habitat and breeding habitat and Pismo clarkia, the original proposed project would
have resulted in Class I, significant and unavoidable, cumulative impacts to biological
resources. The first reduced density development proposal would have similarly resulted in
Class I cumulative impacts, since it would similarly impact Pismo clarkia habitat. However,
impacts related to Pismo clarkia would be reduced from Class I, significant and unavoidable, to
Class II, significant but mitigable, under the second reduced density development proposal.
Impacts related to wildlife foraging /breeding areas would similarly be reduced, as the
second reduced density development proposal represents an overall reduction in residential
density and site disturbance when compared to the original proposed project and the first
reduced density development proposal.
Mitigation Measures - Cumulative biological resource impacts would be Class II, significant
but mitigable. Mitigation Measures B -2(a), B -3(a), B -3(b), B -4(a), B -4(c), B -5(b), B -5(c), B -5(d),
B -5(e), and B -5(f), as discussed previously, would remain project requirements and would
reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 4.2 -38; Second Addendum pages 31 -32.
5.3 Cultural Resources
5.3.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact CR -1. There is the potential that project construction
will disturb previously unidentified buried archeological deposits and /or human remains. This is
considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
39
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Although there is a lack of on -site recorded archaeological
resources, as well as off -site isolated artifacts, there is potential for buried archaeological
deposits to occur within the project boundaries. Construction in areas not known to contain
archaeological resources, may nevertheless affect previously unidentified resources, given
the cultural sensitivity of the project site and its propensity for possible pre - historic human
occupancy. This would be considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is
incorporated.
As previously mentioned, the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City of Arroyo
Grande General Plan (1990) makes specific reference to policy statements and
implementation actions concerning measures to protect cultural resources for future
generations. Implementation of these standards would reduce project impacts related to
cultural resources. Nevertheless, additional mitigation measures are required to ensure less
than significant impacts on cultural resources.
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.3 of the Revised FSEIR,
as augmented in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by reference, the
following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the MMRP. With
imposition of the following mitigation measure, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measure CR -1(a): Archaeological Resource Construction Monitoring. At the
commencement of project construction, an orientation meeting shall be conducted by an
archaeologist for construction workers associated with earth disturbing activities. The
orientation meeting shall describe the possibility of exposing unexpected archaeological
resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if such a find is encountered.
A qualified archaeologist and Native American representative shall monitor all earth moving
activities within native soil. In the event that archaeological or historic artifacts are
encountered during project construction, all work in the vicinity (50 yards or greater, as
determined by an archaeologist) of the find will be halted until such time as a qualified
archaeologist evaluates the find and appropriate mitigation (e.g., curation, preservation in
place, etc.), if necessary, is implemented. Altematively. a Phase II archaeological survey shall be
conducted and recommendations may be considered for implementation through the MMRP.
In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location,
the following steps will be taken:
I. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area
reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
A. The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has been contacted,
and determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required, or
B. Where the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
40
1. The coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours;
2. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it
believes to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American; and
3. The most likely descendent has had the opportunity to work with the landowner
or the person responsible for the excavation work, on the means of treating or
disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated
grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
II. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representatives
shall repatriate the Native American human remains and associated grave items with
appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface
disturbance. However, any such activity will be pursuant to the discretion of a Chumash
representative if a descendent is either not identified or fails to respond to notification.
A. The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely
descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 24
hours after being notified by the commission.
B. The descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or
C. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the
descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to
provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
III. Halt Work Order. If human remains are unearthed, State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area
reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County
Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American
descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.3 -5 through 4.3 -7; Second Addendum pages 32 -34.
5.4 Geologic Resources
5.4.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact G -1. Due to the presence of active faults in the vicinity,
the project site and surrounding area is subject to strong ground shaking. Ground shaking has the
potential to cause fill material to settle, de- stabilize slopes, and cause physical damage to structures,
property, utilities and road access. Ground shaking has the potential to cause injury and death to
humans. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The project site is located approximately 62 kilometers west of
the San Andreas Fault, 25 kilometers east of the Hosgri Fault, and approximately 3
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
41
kilometers north of the Wilmar Avenue Fault. The Hosgri Fault is capable of generating a
Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) of 6.9 to 7.5. The San Andreas Fault is capable of
producing an MCE of 7.5 to 8.0. A seismic event of this magnitude on this fault is
considered likely during the useful life of the proposed structures.
As was previously mentioned, probabilistic ground accelerations for the site should be
considered along with ground shaking hazards. The CDMG Seismic Shaking Hazard Maps
of California (1999) lists a 10% probability of experiencing 0.35 -0.45 g peak horizontal ground
acceleration within the next 50 years for the region. The site - specific engineering geological
analysis done for the subject property outlines a probabilistic ground acceleration range of
0.078g- 0.654g.
It should be noted that the site, as well as much of southern California, will likely experience
strong ground motion from future local and regional earthquakes. There is nothing unique
about the project area that would make it subject to higher ground motions than adjacent or
nearby sites. Recent experience in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake indicates that certain
cut /fill lots are subject to potential fill settlement and translation during strong ground
shaking.
Besides the direct physical damage to structures caused by the ground shaking and
acceleration, marginally stable landslides, slopes, and inadequately compacted fill material
could move and cause additional damage. Gas, water, and electrical lines can be ruptured
during the ground shaking, or broken during movement of earth caused by the earthquake,
which can jeopardize public safety. Impacts are potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.4 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measure, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure G -1(a): CBC Compliance. Above - ground structures shall be designed
and built according to California Building Code Seismic standards.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.4 -11 and 4.4 -12; Second Addendum page 34.
5.4.2 Potentially Significant Direct Impact G -3. Soils at the site have the potential to present soil -
related hazards (i.e., erosive or expansive soils) to structures and roadways on the project site and
are considered Class II, significant but mitiigable impacts.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Erosive Soils. According to the Natural Resource Conservation
Service (NRCS) soils mapping for the project site, the areas proposed for residential
development are underlain by Pismo -Rock outcrop complex (30 -75% slopes) soils and
Arnold loamy sand (5 to 15% slopes), which are characterized by high erosion potential. In
addition, as seen in Table 4.4-1, the remaining on -site soils are also susceptible to erosion
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
42
hazards. Structures and facilities constructed on these soils, as well as occupants of the
proposed facilities, could be exposed to hazards related to erosion. As previously
mentioned, the Earth Systems Pacific report (2003) indicated that surface soils, predominant
soils at depth and the sandstone bedrock observed on -site are sandy and have very little
cohesion and represent a high risk of erosion. Impacts are potentially significant.
Expansive Soils. An expansion index test was performed upon a sample of silty sand soil.
The tested expansion index of the soil of zero places the soil in the very low expansion
category. Soils in the general vicinity, however, exhibit more expansive soils. Expansive
soils tend to swell with moisture and shrink during the dry season. This cyclical change can
stress and damage slabs and foundations if precautionary measures are not incorporated
into the construction procedure.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.4 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
the MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure G -3(a): Soils/Foundation Report. In order to avoid soil- related
hazards, the individual lot owners and the project applicant shall provide soils /foundation
reports that specifically identify expansive soils hazards as part of the application for
Building Permit(s). To reduce the potential for foundation cracking, the reports may
recommend that one or more of the following be considered during design of the project:
1. Use continuous deep footings (i.e., embedment depth of 3 feet or more) and
concrete slabs on grade with increased steel reinforcement together with a pre -
wetting and long -term moisture control program within the active zone.
2. Removal of the highly expansive material and replacement with non - expansive
import fill material.
3. The use of specifically designed drilled pier and grade beam system
incorporating a structural concrete slab on grade supported approximately 6
inches above the expansive soils.
4. Chemical treatment with hydrated lime to reduce the expansion characteristics
of the soils.
Mitigation Measure G -3(b): Expansive Soil Damage. The expansion indices of individual
lots should be determined on a lot- specific basis. In the event that expansive soils will
underlie potential developments, the use of nonexpansive import or presaturation of subslab
soils in areas where slabs will overlie expansive soils is recommended. If it is elected to use
nonexpansive import, the thickness of nonexpansive material should be determined based
upon the results of expansion index testing performed on individual lots. The import shall
be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of
maximum dry density until finished grade is reached.
Mitigation Measure G -3(c): Grading and Erosion Control Plan. A grading and erosion
control plan that minimizes erosion, sedimentation and unstable slopes shall be prepared
and implemented by the project applicant or representative thereof, prior to final map
recordation. It must include the following:
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
43
a. Methods such as retention basins, drainage diversion structures, spot grading, silt
fencing /coordinated sediment trapping, straw bales, and sand bags shall be used to
minimize erosion on slopes and prevent siltation into the East Fork of Meadow Creek
and its tributaries during grading and construction activities.
b. Graded areas shall be revegetated within 4 weeks of grading activities with deep -
rooted, native, drought - tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential.
If determined necessary by the Community Development Department and Public
Works Department, irrigation shall be provided. Geotextile binding fabrics shall be
used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is established.
c. After construction of tract improvements and until construction of individual homes,
exposed areas shall be stabilized to prevent wind and water erosion, using methods
approved by the City Community Development Department, Public Works and
Building Departments and APCD. These methods may include: topsoil is to be
imported and spread on the ground surface in areas having soils that can be
transported by the wind, and /or the mixing of the highly erosive sand with finer -
grained materials (silt or clay) in sufficient quantities to prevent its ability to be
transported by wind. The topsoil or silt/ clay mixture is to be used to stabilize the
existing soil to prevent its ability to be transported by wind. As a minimum, six inches
of topsoil or silt/clay/ sand mixture is to be used to stabilize the wind - erodable soils.
d. Where necessary, site preparation shall include the removal of all or a portion of the
expansive soils at the building sites and replacement with compacted fill.
e. Where necessary, construction on transitional lots shall include overexcavation to
expose firm subgrade; use of post tension slabs in future structures, or other
geologically acceptable method.
f. Landscaped areas adjacent to structures shall be graded so that drainage is away from
structures.
g. Irrigation shall be controlled so that overwatering does not occur. An irrigation
schedule shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development
Department and Public Works Departments prior to land use clearance for grading.
h. Grading on slopes steeper than 5:1 shall be designed to minimize surface water runoff.
i. Fills placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 shall be properly benched prior to placement of
fill.
j. Brow ditches and /or berms shall be constructed and maintained above all cut and fill
slopes, respectively.
k. Cut and fill benches shall be constructed at regular intervals.
1. Retaining walls shall be proposed as part of building construction to stabilize slopes
where there is a 10 -foot or greater difference in elevations between buildable lots.
m. The applicant shall limit excavation and grading to the dry season of the year (typically
April 15 to November 1, allowing for variations in weather) unless a Community
Development and Public Works Department approved erosion control plan is in place
and all measures therein are in effect.
n. The applicant shall post a performance bond as determined by and with the City and
hire a qualified geologist or soils engineer prior to land use clearance for grading, and
to ensure that erosion is controlled and mitigation measures are properly implemented.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.4 -13 through 4.4 -16; Second Addendum pages 35 -37.
r r Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
44
5.4.3 Potentially Significant Direct Impact G -4. The project site contains steep slopes and is
underlain by the Pismo Formation and presents a moderate slope stability hazard. Landsliding has
the potential to damage and destroy structures, roadways and other improvements as well as to
deflect and block drainage channels, causing further damage and erosion. Soil slumping can
damage or destroy structures and lead to erosion problems. These are considered Class II,
significant, but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Approximately 40% of the site consists of slopes greater than
25 %. Altogether, approximately 60% of the site consists of slopes greater than 15 %. The
project is underlain by the Pismo Formation and is characterized by a moderate slope
stability hazard. Earth Systems Pacific has prepared an evaluation of liquefaction, slope
stability and erosion potential for the subject property (refer to Appendix K of the Revised
FSEIR). The objective of this study was to analyze the stability of the two slope conditions
proposed within the tract. The geologic report prepared for the original proposed project
and incorporated into the First Addendum (Earth Systems Pacific, January 2003) identified
two critical areas of slope stability hazards on the property. The areas of potential slope
instability include the banks along the East Fork of Meadow Creek and the cut slope
originally proposed to be retained by stacked walls along the southeastern portion of the
development. Previously proposed Lots 14 and 19 were specifically identified as occurring in
these areas. The second reduced density development proposal does not include any
development in this area, thereby avoiding the identified slope stability hazards. However,
portions of the current proposal would still be located on relatively steep slopes. Specifically,
portions of Lots 1, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 15 would be located on slopes exceeding 20% (after
filling of the gully; refer to Figure 6).
The potential for destabilization or activation of mass wastage areas increases with an
increase in the amount of proposed earthwork. This impact is considered potentially
significant for the proposed project. Debris flows typically form in response to local intense
rainfall in steep swale areas that are filled with saturated, fine- grained soils. The project
area, because of its relatively steep topography, is considered to have a moderate debris flow
potential. Landslide impacts would be potentially significant.
In addition to landslide hazards, chapter 16.20.050 of the City of Arroyo Grande
Development Code states that no building and /or grading shall be permitted on slopes of
25% and greater. Portions of the proposed development conflict with this policy.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.4 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
the MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure G -4(a): [REMOVED, AS IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS REVISED
PROJECT]
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
45
Mitigation Measure G -4(b): Development on Steep Slopes. As prescribed by Title 16 of
the City of Arroyo Grande Development Code, building and grading is not permitted on
slopes of 25% and greater. Steep slopes (considered to be 20 -25 %) present a danger to
landsliding, slope failure, sedimentation of on -site drainages due to accelerated runoff and
soil erosion. Because of the erosive qualities of the site, development shall be prohibited on
slopes exceeding 20 %.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.4 -16 through 4.4 -18; Second Addendum pages 37 -39.
5.5 Hydrology and Water Quality
5.5.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact H -1. During project construction, the soil surface
would be subject to erosion and the downstream watershed would be subject to pollution.
However, compliance with the requirements of the NPDES permit would reduce these impacts to a
Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Regulations under the federal Clean Water Act and the State
require that, for projects that would disturb greater than five acres during construction
(changing to a one -acre maximum in March of 2003), a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) State General Construction Permit be obtained. The proposed
development encompasses 27 acres, of which approximately 6 acres will be disturbed.
Therefore a State Permit would apply to the development of the overall tract. The Permit
requires the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that contains
specific actions, termed Best Management Practices (BMPs), to control the discharge of
pollutants, including sediment, into local surface water drainages. Refer to mitigation
measure B -2(a) in Section 4.2, Biological Resources, of the Revised FSEIR for an outline of the
permitting protocol required when impacts to riparian and wetland habitat are not avoided.
Such impacts fall under the jurisdiction of agencies like the Army Corps of Engineers,
Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Department of Fish and Game. In addition,
a Notice of Intent (NOI) to perform work under the Permit must be filed with the State.
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.5 of the Revised FSEIR,
as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by
reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measure, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure H -1(a): BMP Implementation During Construction. Best Management
Practices shall be used during project implementation, as part of the SWPPP. BMPs that
could be used on the project site include:
Pollutant Escape Deterrence
• Prohibit on -site storage. Cover all other storage areas including soil piles, fuel and
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
46
chemical depots. Protect exposed temporary materials from rain and wind with plastic
sheets and temporary roofs.
Pollutant Containment Areas
• Locate all construction- related equipment and related processes that contain or generate
pollutants (i.e. fuel, lubricant and solvents, cement dust and slurry) in isolated areas
with proper protection from escape. Locate the above - mentioned in secure areas, away
from storm drains and gutters. Place the above - mentioned in bermed, plastic -lined
depressions to contain all materials within that site in the event of accidental release or
spill. Park, fuel and clean all vehicles and equipment in one designated, contained area.
Pollutant Detainment Methods
• Protect downstream drainages from escaping pollutants by capturing sediment carried
in runoff and preventing transport from the site. Examples of detainment methods that
retard movement of water and separate sediment and other contaminants are silt
fences, hay bales, sand bags, berms, silt and debris basins.
Erosion Control
• Large projects should be scheduled into phases that allow for erosion control of smaller
areas rather than a single, large exposed site. Vegetation should only be removed when
necessary and immediately before grading.
• Schedule excavation and grading work for dry weather. These activities may be
prohibited between the months of November and April.
• Slope stabilizers should be utilized. These include natural fiber erosion control blankets
of varying densities according to specific slope/ site conditions.
• Expedite the restoration of natural erosion control and reduce risk of slope failure by
immediately revegetating and irrigating until first one inch of rain. Revegetation should
be completed no later than October 1st so vegetation has had a chance to stabilize the
soil before the rains begin.
• Reduce fugitive dust by wetting graded areas with an adequate yet conservative
amount of water. Cease grading operations in high winds.
Recycling/Disposal
• Provide recycling facilities. Develop protocol for maintaining a clean site. This includes
proper recycling of construction- related materials and equipment fluids (i.e., concrete
dust, cutting slurry, motor oil and lubricants).
• Provide disposal facilities. Develop protocol for cleanup and disposal of small
construction wastes (i.e., dry concrete).
Hazardous Materials Identification and Response
• Develop protocol for identifying risk operations and materials. Include protocol for
identifying spilled - materials source, distribution; fate and transport of spilled materials.
• Provide protocol for proper clean-up of equipment and construction materials, and
disposal of spilled substances and associated cleanup materials.
• Provide emergency response plan that includes contingencies for assembling response
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
47
team and immediately notifying appropriate agencies.
The actual BMPs to be implemented onsite would be developed as part of the SWPPP
required for site construction.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.5 -3 through 4.5 -6; Second Addendum pages 3941.
5.5.2 Potentially Significant Direct Impact H -2. High- velocity, debris -laden storm flows in East
Fork Meadow Creek create potential for flooding and erosive undermining of proposed
improvements in Tract 01 -001. This impact is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - According to a Hawks and Associates peer- review of the
drainage report prepared by Castlerock Development for this site (May 6, 1997), the post -
project peak flow rate generated in a 100 -year storm is 300 cfs. The existing 84-inch wide
culvert under La Canada has the capacity to convey this flow without overtopping the road,
but its impact on upstream properties is unknown since it was not included in the hydraulic
model submitted for review. Furthermore, blockage of this culvert by debris would pose a
flood risk for some of the proposed properties. The existing 48 -inch wide culvert under the
proposed Street "C" is too small for the 100 -year storm, causing flows to overtop the road.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.5 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
the MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure H -2(a): Flood Protection Measures. The applicant shall implement
flood protection measures addressing potential flood risks. These measures shall include:
a. Development of a hydraulic model of East Fork Meadow Creek as it flows through the
tract under proposed conditions. This model generates an expected water surface
elevation used in determining the proper height of proposed building lots so as to
avoid flooding during high -flow events. The culvert in La Canada under conditions of
50% blockage should be included in the model. The grading plan should ensure that
proposed finish floor elevations are at Least 1 foot above the modeled flood elevations.
b. Design of Blossom Valley Road Street where it crosses the East Fork Meadow Creek
such that the 100 -year storm passes without overtopping the adjacent banks.
c. A drainage maintenance plan drawn up to include regular culvert maintenance
(especially during the rainy season) and removal of accumulated sediment and debris
in the channel. The maintenance of internal drainage features shall be the
responsibility of a Home Owners Association (HOA).
d. Design and installation of trash racks upstream of the culvert entrances to lessen the
risk of debris blockage during large storm events.
Mitigation Measure H -2(b): Streambank Vicinity Construction Guidelines. The applicant
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
48
shall limit grading and construction activities in the vicinity of the streambank according to
the following guidelines so as to lessen the risk of streambank erosion and possible
undermining of proposed structures. These guidelines shall include:
a. Appropriate erosion control structures shall be included at the entrance and exit of the
conveyance structure under Blossom Valley Road where it crosses the creek.
b. All necessary environmental permits shall be applied for and complied with. These
permits shall include, but are not limited to, a Streambed Alteration Agreement
(California Department of Fish and Game), Section 401 Permit (State Water Resources
Control Board), and a Section 404 Permit (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.5 -6 and 4.5-7; Second Addendum pages 41-42.
5.5.3 Potentially Significant Direct Impact H -3. Construction of roads, homes, and other structures
will increase runoff amounts and velocities and block local drainage. This impact is considered a
Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - A drainage system is proposed to divert local drainage around
and through the development and convey it to the creek. The impervious areas created by
the development will increase the volume and velocity of runoff, creating the potential for
erosion where these flows are concentrated. Some of the proposed drainage system runs
through individual lots, while the rest of the system is located on common property. A
drainage system maintenance agreement will help assure that the system functions as
intended. Nevertheless, prospective impacts are considered potentially significant. A
technical issue that was identified as an impact for the original proposed project, regarding
the design of the drainage system, has been modified in the project redesign to eliminate this
impact. Thus, mitigation measure H -3(c), which was intended to address this issue, is no
longer required.
The detention basin downstream of Tract 01 -001 was originally designed to detain runoff
from this and other tracts Within the Rancho Grande PD 1.2 that contribute runoff to East
Fork Meadow Creek. As previously mentioned, Garing Taylor & Associates has updated
their original (1991) survey of the James Way detention basin in a current report (December
17, 2002). The report states that while the basin is currently functioning as designed, the
basin would not be able to function properly with the addition of stormwater runoff from
the proposed project. Without a properly functioning detention basin, increased runoff
generated by the development could pose a flooding risk to downstream properties. This
drainage winds its way through the City of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach and eventually
ends up in the Pismo Marsh before finally dumping into the Pacific Ocean. If the drainage
basin is not functioning as designed, it is possible that runoff generated on -site could add silt
and other pollutants to downstream locations.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.5 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
49
the MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure H -3(a): Adequate Detention. The downstream detention basin was
analyzed in December of 2002 by Gazing Taylor & Associates in order to determine if the
basin is able to detain stormwater flows from the Rancho Grande PD 1.2 and release flows at
rates equal to or less than pre - development conditions, as originally designed. The report
states that the existing retardation basin can be used to capture silt from the storm runoff by
over excavating the basin bottom below the lowest outlet elevation. As such, prior to tract
improvements, the James Way detention basin shall be restored based on the current report
by GTA (refer to Appendix J of the Revised FSEIR) as approved by the Director of Public
Works. According to the Conditions of Approval number 50 for the development of Tract
1834, the Homeowners' Association shall maintain the basin and other on -site drainage
facilities.
Mitigation Measure H -3(b): Drainage Plan. For tract- related and individual lot drainage, all
runoff water from impervious areas shall be conveyed by surface or underground conduits,
capable of conveying the 100 -year event, to existing drainage channels. All runoff from
natural areas intercepted by proposed improvements shall be captured and conveyed
around or through developed areas by a drainage system capable of conveying the 100 -year
event. Erosion control structures shall be installed at all pipe outlets and other places where
drainage flows are concentrated. In addition, drainage shall be consistent with approved
drainage plans that include:
a. Locations and dimensions of all proposed drainage components;
b. Amount of water that is captured by the drainage system at all entry points
c. Amount of water discharged by the drainage system at outlets.
Mitigation Measure H -3(c): [REMOVED, AS IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS REVISED
PROJECT
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.5 -7 through 4.5 -9; Second Addendum pages 42-43.
5.5.4 Potentially Significant Direct Impact H-4. The proposed project could reduce the quality of
surface water flowing to offsite drainage facilities because of the change in land use from open space
to residential homes. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Development of the site with residential homes would add
impermeable surfaces such as rooftops, patios and sidewalks, and other surfaces such as
roads, and driveways that would accumulate deposits of oil, grease, and other vehicle fluids
and hydrocarbons. Traces of heavy metals deposited on streets and parking areas from
automobiles and/ or fall out of airborne contaminants are also common urban surface water
pollutants. During storms these deposits would be washed into and through the drainage
systems, Pismo Lagoon and ultimately to the ocean. The project would also introduce
landscaping and associated maintenance chemicals such as fertilizers, pesticides, and
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
50
herbicides. Irrigation and storms could wash some of these landscape chemicals into and
through local drainage systems and into Pismo Lagoon.
Urban runoff can have a variety of deleterious effects. Oil and grease contain a number of
hydrocarbon compounds, some of which are toxic to aquatic organisms at low
concentrations. Heavy metals such as lead, cadmium, and copper are the most common
metals found in urban storm water runoff. These metals can be toxic to aquatic organisms,
and have the potential to contaminate drinking water supplies. Nutrients from fertilizers
including nitrogen and phosphorous can result in excessive or accelerated growth of
vegetation or algae, resulting in oxygen depletion and additional impaired uses of water.
Bacteria in water can lead to asphyxiation or suffocation of aquatic animals in the receiving
waters downstream. Therefore, impacts to surface water quality are considered potentially
significant.
Mitigation Measures - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.5 of the Revised
FSEIR, as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein
by reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measure, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure H4(a): Storm Water Management Plan. A plan that incorporates
BMPs for the long -term operation of the site shall be developed and implemented by the
applicant to minimize the amount of pollutants that are washed from the site. The plan shall
be developed in cooperation with the City of Arroyo Grande and the Central Coast Regional
Water Quality Control Board. Examples of BMPs listed below which apply to the
development of the site may be included in the plan:
Education
• Stencil all storm drains inlets and post signs along channels to discourage dumping by
informing the public that water flows to the ocean.
• Provide educational flyers to each new building unit regarding toxic chemicals and
alternatives for fertilizers, pesticides, cleaning solutions and automotive and paint products.
• Provide educational flyers to each new building unit regarding proper disposal of hazardous
waste and automotive waste.
Source Reduction/ Recycling
• Development of an integrated pest management program for landscaped areas of the
project. These areas would include slope - stabilization Landscaping, and residential area
landscaping. Integrated pest management emphasizes the use of biological, physical, and
cultural controls rather than chemical controls. Examples include use of insect resistant
cultivars, manual weed control, use of established thresholds for pesticide and herbicide
application, use of chemical controls that begin preferentially with dehydrating dusts,
insecticidal soaps, boric acid powder, horticultural oils, and pyrethrin -based insecticides.
Cleaning/ Maintenance
• Routine cleaning of streets, parking Lots and storm drains. Regular maintenance and
cleaning of catch basins, and detention basins by a benefit maintenance assessment
district.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
51
Structural Treatment Methods
• The proposed catch basins should be designed for storm water quality control purposes
in accordance with the California BMP's Handbook. The catch basins would have fossil
filter inserts or be designed with a native soil or sand bottom topped by a minimum of
six inches of float rock covered by a chicken wire grate. Water leaves the sand bottom
catch basin via an underground reinforced concrete pipe covered by a catch basin trap
that prevents floatable material from entering into the discharge pipe. Oil and grease
floats, and so would be captured by the trap. Heavy organic material, sediment and
rubber would fall to the bottom of the pit and also would not be discharged through the
pipe. After the storm water drains from the catch basin, natural biological action
degrades the organic materials contained in the trap. This serves to effectively reduce the
amount of pollutants that would otherwise enter the creek.
• Vegetated swales may be incorporated in the site layout to be used as a stormwater
quality management technique.
• Maintenance of the catch basins and vegetated swales would be required to eliminate the
potential for odor problems, provision of mosquito habitat, and to prevent clogging.
Incorporation of the appropriate BMP's along with a maintenance and operation plan
would reduce the amount of current and potential future pollutants discharged into the
creek and protect against failure of the system.
In addition, the applicant has prepared a "Riparian and Wetland Enhancement Plan", which
is intended as an enhancement plan for the rehabilitation of Meadow Creek along the
portion of Meadow Creek that passes through Tract 01 -001. This is included as an Appendix
to the Addendum. This approach will provide an additional degree of mitigation.
The applicant also proposes to dedicate to the City's use an existing well located on the
project site. This well was drilled in 1992 and used to provide construction water for the
Rancho Grande Subdivision. A well test has been prepared, and the well is located outside
the Santa Maria Ground Water Basin, and thus is not subject to an adjudicated agreement
arising from water use within this basin. This additional water source could be used for
municipal use, which in part can reduce potential impacts with respect to water quality
(correspondence from Andre, Morris and Buttery to the City of Arroyo Grande, December
10, 2004).
These contributions are not intended as mitigation for impact H4, as they are included
because they provide a project benefit to consider in the formulation of a Statement of
Overriding Considerations. Nonetheless, these contributions do provide a nexus in their
potential to reduce impacts to water quality.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.5 -9 through 4.5 -11; Second Addendum pages 43 -45.
5.6 Land Use
5.6.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact LU -2. The project would partially replace an informal
open space area with development. This could hinder the achievement of a coherent open space
network for off -road trails and wildlife migration that makes use of the existing drainage system.
Impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
52
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - This proposed project would subdivide the property into 15
residential lots and one open space lot, access roads, and related site improvements. All
non - developed lands would be placed in an open space easement. Open space areas would
total approximately 84 percent of the site. The remaining approximately 16 percent of the
site would be comprised of residential lots, internal roads and miscellaneous improvements.
Most of the proposed development would be located on the more level portions of the site. The
steeper slopes and the area immediately adjacent to the creek would be the primary open space
areas. There is public access through the site via a trail and emergency access provision from a
point near La Canada and James way, via Blossom Valley Road, and extending to the Hidden
Oaks School Site. This access is consistent with the Rancho Grande Master Plan.
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.6 of the Revised FSEIR,
as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by
reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measure, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure LU -2(a): Trail Access. The proposed project shall include provisions for
improved multi- purpose (pedestrian, bicycles and equestrian) public trails access. The trail
easements shall be situated to allow access along the general alignment of the East Fork of
Meadow Creek and the on -site drainage tributary and oak woodland extending to the east to
connect to the Hidden Oaks school site, such that it supports any potential effort at citywide
recreational and circulation trail access along open space and drainage areas.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.6 -3 and 4.6 -4; Second Addendum page 45.
5.7 Transportation/Traffic
5.7.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact T -1. Development of the project would result in the
addition of 210 average daily trips, 17 A.M. peak hour trips, and 21 P.M. peak hour trips to the
study -area roadways and intersections. The proposed project alone would not result in exceedances
of roadway or intersection LOS standards.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - All of the signalised study -area intersections would continue to
operate at LOS C or better during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hour periods with Existing +
Project traffic. The all-way stop controlled Camino Mercado/ West Branch Street intersection
would continue to operate in the LOS D range during the P.M. peak hour period. The project
would add 2 trips to this location during the P.M. peak hour period. This would add traffic to
an intersection currently functioning below City thresholds. As such, this impact would be
considered potentially significant.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
53
It should be noted that direct access to the project would be provided via the Blossom Valley
Road connection to La Canada Street. Blossom Valley Road is proposed as a 24 - 32 -foot wide
roadway. Given the existing and forecast traffic volumes on La Canada Street, the new
intersection of Blossom Valley Road would operate with minimal delay and accommodate
traffic entering and exiting the project site.
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.7 of the Revised FSEIR,
as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by
reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and is made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measure, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure T -1(a): Fair Share Traffic Mitigation Fees. The City of Arroyo Grande
Capital Improvement Program includes a project to install traffic signals at the intersection of
Camino Mercado/ West Branch Street. The project applicant shall provide fair share traffic
mitigation fees to install traffic signals. With the installation of traffic signals, the
intersection would operate acceptably in the LOS B range with Existing + Project and
Cumulative + Project traffic volumes.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.7 -8 through 4.7 -15; Second Addendum page 46.
5.7.2 Potentially Significant Direct Impact T -3. Development of the project would result in the
addition of 210 average daily trips, 17 A.M. peak hour trips, and 21 P.M. peak hour trips to the
study -area roadways and intersections under cumulative conditions. This would result in
exceedances of intersection LOS standards at the Camino Mercado / W. Branch Street intersection.
Class II, significant but mitigable, impacts would result.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The operational characteristics of the study -area intersections
were analyzed based on the Cumulative + Project traffic volumes. The signalized study -area
intersections will continue to operate acceptably at LOS C or better with Cumulative + Project
traffic volumes. However, the cumulative traffic would degrade the operation of the stop -sign
controlled intersection at Camino Mercado and West Branch Street to LOS E during the A.M.
peak hour period and to LOS F during the P.M. peak hour period intersection. This would be
considered a Cass 11, significant but mitigable, impact.
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.7 of the Revised FSEIR,
which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measure is feasible and
is made binding through the MMRP. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure T -1(a),
less than significant impacts would result.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.7 -16 through 4.7 -21; Second Addendum pages 46-47.
5.8 Public Services
5.8.1 Potentially Significant Direct Impact PS -2. The proposed project will result in an increased
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
54
demand for fire protection services in an area characterized as having a high fire hazard. This would
be considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The proposed project would generate a population of
approximately43 residents served by the Fire Department. However, the corresponding
increase in calls would not appreciably increase response times, and would not generally
result in the need for additional fire department staff or equipment. The current response
times to the project area (five minutes) would be maintained with the development of the
proposed project (Chief, Terry Fibich, Arroyo Grande Fire Department, Phone Conversation,
June 2002).
However, the site's steep slopes, flash fuels and canyons, combined with residential
development, will create a potential fire problem. This could increase the service
requirements of the Arroyo Grande Fire Department and the mutual aid organizations.
There is also threat to structures from areas that remain as open space. A vegetation
management plan in conjunction with applicable city tree ordinances should be incorporated
in the CC &R's to address the vegetation (fire fuels) issue, as well as wildlife habitat and
aesthetic issues. A Landscape Development Standards and Fire Management Plan shall be
approved by the City Fire Chief prior to development of VTTM 01 -001.
Vegetation should be evaluated on an annual basis to determine the threat of fire and
potential damage to structures, and determine what course of action should be taken to
reduce the fire threat. In the event of fire, fire suppression resources would be concerned
with the safety of residents and structures. Therefore, Arroyo Grande Fire Department
would be stationing fire suppression resources near threatened structures. The development
should provide for an adequate circulation system around critical structures and parts of the
property to allow reasonable access to fire crews. Existing fire flow requirements state that
each unit has at least 1250 gpm/ unit, plus 500 gpm /each additional level, plus 500 gpm for
wood siding. These requirements must meet fire flow needs of the 15 -unit development.
Water lines in the area are eight inches and considered adequate for projected fire flow,
subject to project improvements.
There is also a fire threat to proposed structures such that a vegetation management
abatement plan, in conjunction with applicable city tree preservation ordinances, would be
required. The project applicant would be required to comply with the most recent Uniform
Fire Code and implement City fire protection standards as a condition of project approval.
California Resource Code 4219 requires clearance of flammable vegetation for a distance of
30 to 100 feet around a structure located in a fire hazard area. In addition, emergency water
supplies must meet fire flow requirements including installation of fire hydrants, access road
widths of at least 20 feet, use of all- weather road surfaces, road surfaces with a load capacity
of at least 20 tons, non -skid surfaces on roads at any grade exceeding 12 %, maximum dead -
end road lengths of no more than 1,320 feet, provision of a 10 -foot fuel break to each side of
roads and driveways, provision of an automatic sprinkler system where buildings have more
than one story and an upper story is occupied, and maintenance of trees and vegetation near
structures.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
65
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.8 of the Revised FSEIR,
as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by
reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure PS -2(a): Fire/Vegetation Management Plan. The applicant shall
develop a vegetation management plan and /or fuel modification plan for the site. The
following fuel modification specifications are required:
• The plan must set forth requirements to assure ongoing protection of all structures and
roads, both prior to and after lot sales.
• The plan shall require 30 feet of adequate clearance from brush to structures throughout
the development.
• On -site occupants shall not clear vegetation outside designated clearance area
boundaries in order to limit impacts to native habitat.
• Fire resistant landscaping that is compatible with surrounding sensitive native species
should be used throughout the project site.
• Vegetation within the first 30 feet of all structures must be strictly irrigated and
controlled, with specific shrub species eliminated. No conifer (except Monterey pine,
single specimen), eucalyptus, juniper, cypress, pampas grass, acacia, or palm trees should
be allowed within the 30 -foot zone. Coastal live oak (Quercus sp.), California sycamore,
Toyon and shrubs/ trees approved by the City Fire Department will be acceptable within
the 30 -foot zone.
• The plan shall outline fuel modification specifications such as:
- Grasses shall be cut down to a length of 4 inches or less yearly, or as required by the
City of Arroyo Grande Fire Department.
- Shrubs under oaks and within 10 feet of tree canopies shall be pruned to reduce
volume and no shrub shall be removed without the approval of the HOA design
committee.
- Oak tree limbs to be considered for removal shall be less than 2 inches in diameter
within 4 feet of the ground. Branches must be chipped for mulch and left on site.
- Trees with grass growing beneath may not need pruning unless the Limbs touch the
ground. Then, allowable size branches shall be removed to provide clearance.
- Trees and shrubs beneath or adjacent to the canopy shall likewise have limbs 2 inches
or less removed until clearance is achieved between canopy and shrubs.
- If shrubs occur within open areas outside a 10 -foot zone around trees, they shall
remain in their existing form. Some shrubs in this area may be indicated in the field
to be thinned.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
56
- Removal of larger tree limbs over 2 inches in diameter which pose a hazard or are
within 4 feet of vertical clearance zone must be approved by an arborist (all work on
and around existing oak trees shall conform to the conditions of the City of Arroyo
Grande Community Tree Ordinance 431. All pruning of oak trees shall be supervised
by a certified arborist using ISA approved pruning standards.
All fuel modifications shall be consistent with mitigation measure B-4(a) (Pismo
Clarlda Avoidance).
• The Fire/ Vegetation Management Plan must clearly state exactly what management
practices must be accomplished, date of annual compliance, and responsibility for cost of
compliance.
• The plan must also include a Wildland Emergency Response checklist (approved by City
of Arroyo Grande Fire Department) to be made available to all residents.
Mitigation Measure PS -2(b): Road Widths, Lengths, and Fire Hydrants. Road widths,
lengths, and circulation, as well as the placement of fire hydrants shall be designed with the
guidance of the Arroyo Grande Fire Department. A road system that allows unhindered Fire
Department access and maneuvering during emergencies shall be provided. Specifically, the
following measures are required:
• Project roads must be an all weather surface at least 20 feet in width, unobstructed by
parking. Cul -de -sacs and turnouts must be to Fire Department standards. If the roads
are to be a private system, there must be on- going, legally binding provisions in effect to
maintain the roads to Fire Department required levels.
• Road grades on all roads shall not exceed 16 %, per the Uniform Fire Code.
• House numbers and street signs shall be lighted to City standards so that emergency
vehicles including police and ambulances can locate residences in the event of any
emergency.
• All fire apparatus access roads and driveways shall be designed and maintained to
support the imposed loads of 20 tons at 25 mph, and shall be provided with a surface so
as to provide all- weather driving capabilities.
Mitigation Measure PS -2(c): Structural Safeguards. Stringent structural safeguards that
would reduce the need for rapid response of first alarm fire resources will be required. In
general, this would require the use of construction materials that could survive a wildland
fire. It would also include installation of fire sprinklers on any lots accessed by roads that are
less than 32 feet curb -to -curb. Houses located on flag lots or those accessed by driveways
steeper than 15% shall be constructed with automatic fire sprinkler systems, and be subject to
approval and testing by the Fire Chief. As currently required by the City of Arroyo Grande
Fire Code (Section 902.2.1), it is expected that a fire truck could enter the proposed
subdivision and maintain a reasonable response time. From that point, the fire truck would
have a 150 -foot radius (the approximate length of their water hose) of fire protection. Any
unit outside of that radius, according to the Fire Code, must be designed with a sprinkler
system. The following features would be required:
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
57
• Sprinkler Systems. If 50 -foot vegetation management zones are not employed, the
perimeter structures within the fire hazard area must have exterior exposure sprinkler
systems separately applied, per NFPA 13. In addition, residential units that lie outside of
the fire truck protection radius (a 150 -foot radius around a fire truck parked 75 feet in
from the entrance of a subdivision) shall be designed with fire protection sprinkler
systems approved by the Fire Chief.
• Minimum Class B Roofs. Due to the proximity of the project site to a High Hazard Fire
Severity area, all structures in the proposed development should have at the minimum
Class B roofs to mitigate the fire threat.
• Design of Accessory Features. Decks, gazebos, patio covers, fences, etc. must not overhang
slopes and must be one -hour fire retardant construction. Front doors should be solid
core, minimally 1 /a inch thick. Garage doors should be noncombustible.
• Yard Characteristics. Vegetation growing on fences should be prevented.
• Power Lines. All new power lines will be installed underground in order to prevent fires
caused by arcing wires.
The applicant proposes to dedicate two emergency fire access routes leading to surrounding
lands. These are shown on the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map. One goes southeasterly
to Tract 1834 and onto the school property, while the other goes northeasterly to the Ing
property. The applicant will dedicate easements to the benefit of the public for fire access along
these routes, and will design and construct road improvements to the property boundary for the
school property access. As to the access route leading to the school property, the applicant will
also provide an engineering evaluation and construct that portion of the road which crosses
Tract 1834 and the school property up to where the existing road is located on the school
property (letter from Andre, Morris and Buttery to the City of Arroyo Grande, dated December
10, 2004 and subsequent correspondence). This action will implement mitigation.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.8-4 through 4.8 -8: Second Addendum pages 47 -50.
5.8.2 Potentially Significant Direct Impact PS-5. The proposed project would generate
approximately 57 tons of solid waste per year. The solid waste disposal services and landfill that
serve the project site would have adequate capacity to accommodate the waste generated by the
project. However, the project would result in the use of part of the limited remaining capacity of the
landfill. Therefore, solid waste generation would be considered a Class 11, significant but mitigable
impact.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - Solid waste generation is a function of the number of homes,
household size, and per capita waste production. Construction activities and new residents
generated by the proposed project would produce solid waste beyond existing conditions.
Following the initiation of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element, an estimated 0.95
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
58
tons of solid waste is generated per resident per year (Tom Martin, Controller, South County
Sanitary Service, Inc., Phone Conversation, June 2002). Based on a factor of 2.85 persons per
dwelling unit, the 15 -unit project would be expected to generate approximately 43 new
residents. In 1999, the City of Arroyo Grande initiated a recycling program, which decreased
the amount of solid waste generated per household. It is estimated that the proposed project
would generate 57 tons of solid waste per year. The amount of solid waste generated would
represent a small percentage of the permitted daily waste acceptance and remaining capacity
at the landfill. The proposed project would not require the development of additional solid
waste systems or services, as the current infrastructure is capable of handling the projected
solid waste generation (Tom Martin, Controller, South County Sanitary Service, Inc., Phone
Conversation, June 2002). In addition, the project site is located near an existing garbage
collection route and would only require the current service to make 21 more stops to provide
service to the project site, resulting in a less than significant impact for long -term occupancy
service.
Project implementation would not result in any change to service in the area or any
significant changes to the disposal operations. The proposed project would not create the
need for any special solid waste disposal handling and would therefore comply with all
statues and regulations related to solid waste. However, project construction and
occupancy would accelerate use of the remaining Cold Canyon Landfill capacity, which
would be considered a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measure - Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.8 of the Revised FSEIR,
as augmented by the analysis in the Second Addendum, which is incorporated herein by
reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are made binding through the
MMRP. With imposition of the following mitigation measures, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure PS -5(a): Construction Solid Waste Minimization. During the
construction phases of the project, the following mitigation measures will be implemented to
reduce solid waste generation to the maximum extent feasible:
• Prior to construction, the contractor will arrange for construction recycling service with a
waste collection provider. Roll -off bins for the collection of recoverable construction
materials will be located onsite. The applicant, or authorized agent thereof, shall arrange
for pick -up of recycled materials with a waste collection provider or shall transport
recycled materials to the appropriate service center. Wood, concrete, drywall, metal,
cardboard, asphalt, soil, and land clearing debris may all be recycled.
• The contractor will designate a person to monitor recycling efforts and collect receipts for
roll -off bins and/ or construction waste recycling. All subcontractors will be informed of
the recycling plan, including which materials are to be source - separated and placed in
proper bins.
• The contractor will use recycled materials in construction wherever feasible.
• The above construction waste recycling measures will be incorporated into the
construction specifications for the contractor.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
59
Mitigation Measure PS -5(b): Occupancy Solid Waste Minimization. During the long -term
occupancy phase of the project, the following mitigation measures will be implemented to
reduce solid waste generation to the maximum extent feasible.
Gardening Waste: The following mitigation measures will be the responsibility of the
applicant.
• During landscape design, trees will be selected for the appropriate size and scale to
reduce pruning waste over the long -term.
• Slow- growing, drought - tolerant plants will be included in the landscape plan. Drought -
tolerant plants require less pruning and generate less Long -term pruning waste, require
Less water, and require less fertilizer than faster growing plants.
• On -site space will be allocated for a compost area to serve the residential development.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 4.8 -15 through 4.8 -17; Second Addendum pages 51 -52.
6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT
CANNOT FEASIBLY BE AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
No impacts have been identified for this revised project that cannot be mitigated to a less than
significant level.
7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCEMENT IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that an EIR:
"Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population
growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the
surrounding environment."
7.1 Economic Growth Direct Impact. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts
related to economic growth.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The proposed project involves private residential development
and does not include any commercial or industrial development. Therefore, other than short-
term residential construction, it would not directly generate jobs or economic activity. Based on
a factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit, the 15 -unit project would be expected to generate
approximately 43 residents. The estimated 43 residents that would be added on the project site
would incrementally increase activity in nearby retail establishments and may generate demand
for such services as landscaping, gardening, and home cleaning and maintenance. However, the
population that would be generated by the proposed project constitutes approximately one -sixth
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
60
of one percent of the population of the City of Arroyo Grande Planning Area, which was
estimated to contain a population of approximately 15,851 (Census 2000, U.S Census
Bureau). Project residents are expected to draw on existing retail and commercial services
already available in the area rather than inducing new service providers to relocate to the area.
As a result, no significant physical effects are expected to result from economic growth
generated by the proposed project The project is expected to have minor beneficial economic
effects on local retailers and service providers.
Reference - Revised FSEIR page 6 -1.
7.2 Population Growth Direct Impact. The proposed project would not result in significant
impacts related to population growth.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The proposed project involves the development of 15 single -
family residences. Based on a factor of 2.85 persons per residence, this number of new homes
would directly increase the population of the City of Arroyo Grande by 43 people. This
population increase represents only a fraction of one percent of the current Arroyo Grande
Planning Area population.
The environmental areas with the greatest potential to be affected by population growth are
regional concerns such as water supply, air quality, and traffic. The project does not propose
development greater than what was anticipated in the 1991 EIR, so impacts with respect to these
issues are not anticipated to be greater than what was previously studied. Nevertheless, this
SEIR includes a traffic analysis, which confirms that the proposed project would result in less
than significant cumulative traffic impacts on regional roadways. Because the proposed project
is consistent with the project buildout has been anticipated in the regional air quality planning
for the preparation of the County's Clean Air Plan (CAP). Therefore, the project would not have
a significant effect on regional air quality. The city utilizes water from the Lopez Reservoir and
the Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin and service to the project would not result in the need to
secure new water supplies from elsewhere in the region: Impacts related to the provision of
water are considered less than significant. Because population growth directly associated with
the project would not significantly affect regional resources, direct growth inducing impacts are
not considered significant.
The proposed project is a phase of the larger Rancho Grande Planned Development 2.1. The
Rancho Grande site occupies 464 acres consisting of a large portion of the northwestern
section of the City of Arroyo Grande, on the northeast side of Highway 101. Although the
project would not substantially affect the overall city population, it involves the conversion
of a currently undeveloped natural area. The subject property is an integral part of the
Rancho Grande Planned Development 2.1. Planned Development 2.1 surrounds the subject
property and neighboring developments are located within similar PD land use
designations. Consequently, the proposed infill project does not induce growth to rural
locations at the perimeter of the city limits.
Ir y Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
61
If alternative residential developments were to occur, the impacts would depend upon the
location and magnitude of such developments, although the types of impacts would likely be
similar to those of the proposed project. Environmental areas that could experience significant
effects if similar development were to occur elsewhere in the vicinity include impacts on
agriculture, biological resources, and aesthetics. Such impacts would be addressed on a case -by-
case basis as alternative development projects are proposed.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 6 -1 and 6 -2.
7.3 Removals of Obstacles to Growth Direct Impact. The proposed project would not result in
significant impacts related to removals of obstacles to growth.
Finding - Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect on the environment to below a level of significance.
Facts in Support of Finding - The project site is zoned and designated under the 1991 City
General Plan as an integral part of PD1.2 originally proposed to accommodate up to 40 dwelling
units. Because the project site is currently not developed with residential uses, it would require
the extension of urban infrastructure to serve proposed development. However, the site is
completed surrounded by existing development, which already has utilities drainage and
roadway infrastructure in place. The potential for growth - inducing impacts is discussed further
below.
Utilities and Road Extensions. Access to the project site would be provided from La Canada, with
an secondary access off Blossom Valley Road for emergency use. The site is completely
surrounded by development, and the development of internal utilities and roadways would not
result in peripheral growth - inducing impacts.
Drainage Infrastructure. The proposed project includes new drainage infrastructure to handle the
increase in stormwater flow that would be created by on -site development. New facilities are
anticipated to be sized to meet only the needs of proposed development.
Reference - Revised FSEIR pages 6 -2 and 6 -3.
8.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Because an EIR was completed for the project, the City must consider the feasibility of any
environmentally superior alternative to the project, evaluating whether these alternatives could
avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effects while achieving most of the project
objectives.
In rejecting the alternatives, the City has examined the objectives of the Project and weighed the
ability of the various alternatives to meet those objectives. The decisionmakers believe that the
Project best meets these objectives with the Least environmental impact. The specific objectives
associated with the development of the project are as follows:
• To construct a residential development that includes up to 36 units within the Rancho
Grande Master Plan;
Prepared by Rlncon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
62
• To preserve open space and natural resources to the extent possible
The Second Reduced Density Development Proposal of 15 lots evaluated in the Addendum to the
Revised FSEIR is superior to the Project as originally proposed and to the eight Alternative Projects
( "Alternative 1, "Alternative 2," etc.) that were evaluated in the EIR, for the reasons discussed
below. When compared to the Second Reduced Density Development Proposal (Revised Project)
examined in the Second Addendum, each Alternative project described below is infeasible.
The following alternatives were addressed in the Revised FSEIR:
• Originally Proposed Project
• Alternative 1: No Project
• Alternative 2: Noyes Road Site
• Alternative 3: Reconfigured Project
• Alternative 4: Reduced Project
• Alternative 5: Modified Reconfigured Project
• Alternative 6: Modified Reduced Project
• Alternative 7: Buffered Reconfigured Project
• Alternative 8: Pismo Clarkia Avoidance Alternative
In addition, a Reduced Density Development Alternative was analyzed in the First Addendum to
the Revised FSEIR.
Originally Proposed Project
Description: This option is similar to the project as modified (Reduced Density Development
Proposal), but differs in that it would include 15 additional residential units when compared
to the Revised Project. As described in the Revised Final SEIR, the Originally Proposed
Project was a single - family residential development, consisting of 36 units and a 16.5 -acre
open space lot located on the same, 26.6 -acre site. The Originally Proposed Project featured a
residential development density of 1.34 units /acre, compared to 1.27 units /acre with the
project. Although the Originally Proposed Project and the project share similar internal
access footprints, the overall increase in development density with the Originally Proposed
Project contributes to a smaller amount of undeveloped open space (62% of the site,
compared to 83% with the Reduced Density Development ProposaL
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: The Originally Proposed Project is infeasible when compared
to the Reduced Density Development Proposal, for the reasons set forth below. The revised
project has fewer impacts and a better design. The Originally Proposed Project contained
substantially less open space than the project. Due to the 15 -unit increase in development
density, implementation of the Originally Proposed Project would result in greater impacts
related to per capita impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to
the project. In addition, the increased number of residential units would result in greater
impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards. This alternative would
also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased development intensity on the
site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this alternative would result in increased
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
63
impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, and hydrology and water quality, when
compared to the project.
Reference: Revised FSEIR and Addendum Section 4, et. seq.
Alternative 1: No Project/No Development
Description: This option assumes that the project is not implemented, and that the site
remains in its current undeveloped state. If the proposed project were not constructed, it is
assumed that the areas of the project site proposed for development and open space (26.6
acres) would be evaluated relative to the 2001 General Plan and that future opportunities for
development would be limited to the prescribed maximum of five units. The No Project
Alternative would not preclude future proposed development including possible
amendments to existing land use designation. This site is zoned and designated under the
1990 General Plan as Planned Development (PD 1.2).
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Under the No Project alternative, the project site would remain
as is. This alternative would not provide any permanent open space benefits, or housing
supply benefits, and limited economic benefits. In addition, none of the project objectives
would be met.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 8.1.
Alternative 2: Noyes Road Site
Description: This alternative envisions residential planned unit development of a greater
magnitude than the proposed project on a 53 -acre site located along the east edge of Noyes
Road, northwest of the proposed project site. The Noyes Road site (also known as Parcels 10
and 11) assumes consideration for development according to the 2001 General Plan, which
allows a maximum of 35 units, which represents 15 more units than the project.
The Noyes Road site is also undeveloped and has the same land use designation as the
proposed project (PD 1.2). Potential planned unit residential development would likely
change due to the fact that the alternate site is larger than the proposed site and has different
environmental constraints. Overall, development characteristics would be different. The site
is primarily comprised of oak woodland and riparian vegetation associated with Meadow
Creek, which runs parallel to Noyes Road along the western boarder of the site.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Due to the 15 -unit increase in development density,
implementation of this alternative would result in greater impacts related to per capita
impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the Reduced
Density Development Proposal. In addition, the increased number of residential units
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
64
would result in greater impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards.
This alternative would also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased
development intensity on the site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this
alternative would result in increased impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, and
hydrology and water quality, when compared to the Reduced Density Development
Proposal.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 6.2.
Alternative 3: Reconfigured Project
Description: This scenario analyzes an alternate site plan for the project. The overall
development potential of this alternative would be increased when compared to the proposed
project. The main difference between the proposed project and this alternative is that this
alternative would remove proposed Lot 32 along with Lots 16-25 and relocate a total of six of the
lots to the northeastern portion of the subject property. Five Lots would be removed as a result
of this alternative providing for a total of 31 proposed lots in the reconfigured project alternative.
This redesign addresses the primary biological and slope stability impacts associated with the
proposed project. These issues include impacts to Valley Foothill Riparian, Seasonal and Fresh
Emergent Wetlands and Oak Woodland habitats. In addition, Lots 16-25 present the greatest
impacts to the largest concentration of Pismo clarkia (Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata) found
on -site (refer to Section 4.2, Biological Resources, of the Revised FSEIR). The aforementioned
lots would be relocated in the northeastern portion of the site. This would avoid the
undisturbed wetlands at the northernmost corner of the property and the wetlands running
parallel to the northeastern property boundary. This configuration also avoids areas of
established oak woodland and steep slopes (those of a 25% slope and greater).
This reconfigured project alternative was schematically designed to avoid environmental
constraints to the extent possible. These constraints include jurisdictional drainages, riparian
and wetland areas, oak woodlands, Pismo clarkia occurrences and slopes greater than 25 %.
As a result of this alternative, Street D would span the jurisdictional drainage that traverses
the site from east to west in the northern portion of the subject property, minimizing direct
impacts to the drainage.
As compared to the Second Reduced Density Development, this alternative would include 16
additional lots.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Due to the 16 -unit increase in development density,
implementation of this alternative would result in greater impacts related to per capita
impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the Second Reduced
Density Development Proposal. In addition, the increased number of residential units
would result in greater impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards.
This alternative would also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased
development intensity on the site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this
alternative would result in increased impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, and
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
65
hydrology and water quality, when compared to the Reduced Density Development
Proposal.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 8.3.
Alternative 4: Reduced Project
Description: This scenario analyzes a 26 -unit alternative to the proposed project. The overall
development potential of this alternative would be slightly increased compared to the proposed
project. The main difference between the proposed project and this alternative is that this
alternative would reduce the number of lots from 36 to 26 by elimination of Lots 17 -25 and Lot
32 for the purpose of avoiding direct impacts to biological resources and mitigating
hydrology /water quality and slope stability impacts. The proposed change in the total
number of lots would not alter or extend on -site roads. Street D, which provides access to
the lots to be removed as a result of this alternative, also provides access to the proposed
residential units along its northern edge including Lots 7 -15 and would therefore remain in
place. Lot number 16 would remain in place along the cul -de -sac at the end of Street D.
Otherwise, the remaining lots would remain the same size as those shown in the proposed
project. The general configuration and clustering of the individual lots under this alternative
would be altered and would therefore require City approval for redesign elements.
As compared to the Second Reduced Density Development, this alternative would include 11
additional lots.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Due to the 11 -unit increase in development density,
implementation of this alternative would result in greater impacts related to per capita
impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the Second Reduced
Density Development Proposal. In addition, the increased number of residential units
would result in greater impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards.
This alternative would also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased
development intensity on the site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this
alternative would result in increased impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, and
hydrology and water quality, when compared to the Reduced Density Development
Proposal.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 8.4.
Alternative 5: Modified/Reconfigured Project
Description: This scenario analyzes an altemate site plan for the project, a modification of
what was examined as Alternative 3 in the DSEIR. The purpose of this alternative is to
reduce impacts that would otherwise be experienced with either the proposed project or
Alternative 3.
The overall development potential of this alternative would be slightly increased when
compared to the proposed project. The main difference between the proposed project and
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
66
this alternative is that this alternative would remove proposed Lots 16 -36 and relocate a total
of six of the Lots to the northeastern portion of the subject property. Fourteen lots would be
removed as a result of this alternative providing for a total of 22 proposed lots (including the
open space parcel) in the Modified Reconfigured Project Alternative.
The lots to be reconfigured would essentially follow the same pattern as described in Section 8.3,
Alternative 3: Reconfigured Project, of the DSEIR. As described in Alternative 3, Lot number 16
would be relocated directly adjacent to Lot 15, on the northern side of the internal access road
called "Street D ". Street D would be extended to the east and provide access to Lots 17 -21. In
addition, Lots 16 and 17 would be reduced in size to conform to the size of Lots 18-21. Lots 1 -15
would remain in their current locations. This alternative reconfigures the residential and
emergency access road, Street D, within VTTM 01 -001 to conform to the new configuration of
lots and reserved open space. The southwest leg of Street D would be eliminated. Street D
would provide access to the reconfigured Lots 16 (on the north side) through 21 (along the
south side) and finally terminate in a cul -de -sac that would provide access to Lots 17 -20. The
size of the relocated lots would remain relatively commensurate with Lots 8 -15, along the
north side of Street D. The general configuration and clustering of the individual lots under
this alternative would be altered through relocation and would therefore require revised
map and P.U.D. applications and City approval for redesign elements.
This configuration addresses the primary biological and slope stability constraints associated
with the proposed project. These constraints include jurisdictional drainages, riparian and
wetland areas, oak woodlands, Pismo clarkia occurrences and slopes greater than 25 %. As a
result of this alternative, Street D would span the jurisdictional drainage that traverses the
site from east to west in the northern portion of the subject property, minimizing direct
impacts to the drainage. The aforementioned lots would be relocated in the northeastern
portion of the site. This would avoid the undisturbed wetlands at the northernmost corner
of the property and the wetlands running parallel to the northeastern property boundary.
This configuration also avoids areas of established oak woodland and steep slopes (those of a
25% slope and greater).
Along with avoiding sensitive riparian, wetland and oak woodland habitats, this alternative
is designed to avoid impacts to on -site occurrences of Pismo clarkia (Clarkia speciosa ssp.
immaculata). Proposed Lots 17 -33 present the greatest impacts to the largest concentration of
Pismo clarkia found on -site. As discussed in Section 4.2, Biological Resources, of the FSEIR,
Pismo clarkia is a federally- listed endangered, state - listed rare, and CLAPS List 1B species.
Through the removal and relocation of the lots along the south side of Street "D ", the
Modified Reconfigured Project would avoid, to the extent possible, impacts discussed in
Impact B-4 of the FSEIR.
As compared to the Second Reduced Density Development, this alternative would include 7
additional lots.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Due to the 7 -unit increase in development density,
implementation of this alternative would result in greater impacts related to per capita
impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the Second Reduced
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
67
Density Development Proposal. In addition, the increased number of residential units
would result in greater impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards.
This alternative would also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased
development intensity on the site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this
alternative would potentially result in increased impacts to biological resources, cultural
resources, and hydrology and water quality, when compared to the Second Reduced Density
Development Proposal.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 8.5.
Alternative 6: Modified Reduced Project
Description: This scenario analyzes a Modified Reduced Project Alternative to the proposed
project, a variation of what was examined as Alternative 4 in the DSh1R. The purpose of this
alternative is to reduce impacts that would otherwise be experienced with either the proposed
project or Alternative 4.
The overall development potential of this alternative would be reduced compared to the
proposed project. The main difference between the proposed project and this alternative is that
this alternative would reduce the number of lots from 36 to 16 by elimination of Lots 17 -36 for
the purpose of avoiding direct impacts to biological resources and mitigating hydrology /water
quality and slope stability impacts. The proposed reduction in the total number of lots would
reduce the on -site circulation by elimination of the southwest leg of Street D. Lot number 16
would remain in place along the cul -de -sac at the end of Street D. Otherwise, the remaining
lots would remain the same size as those shown in the proposed project. The general
configuration and clustering of the individual lots under this alternative would be altered
and would therefore require VTTM /P.U.D. 01 -001 revised map applications and City
approval for redesign elements.
As compared to the Second Reduced Density Development, this alternative would include 1
additional lot.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Due to the 1 -unit increase in development density,
implementation of this alternative would result in greater impacts related to per capita
impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the Second Reduced
Density Development Proposal. In addition, the increased number of residential units
would result in greater impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards.
This alternative would also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased
development intensity on the site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this
alternative would potentially result in increased impacts to biological resources, cultural
resources, and hydrology and water quality, when compared to the Second Reduced Density
Development Proposal.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 6.6.
r Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
68
Alternative 7: Buffered Reconfigured Project
Description: This scenario analyzes a Buffered Reconfigured Project Alternative that would
restrict development from any area within an identified mitigation, which are 50 -foot setbacks
from riparian areas, wetlands, or Pismo clarkia occurrences. This alternative would also
eliminate Lots that are clearly within identified Oak Woodlands. By eliminating development
within these sensitive areas, and within identified mitigation setbacks, this alternative more
directly responds to the impacts identified in the DSEIR.
Depending on lot sizes and the actual lot reconfiguration, this alternative could accommodate an
estimated 5-14 lots, total. One possible reconfiguration that addresses these changes is shown in
Figure 8 -6, which shows 14 residential lots. In addition to what was described in Alternative 6,
this would be accomplished as follows:
• Eliminate Lots 1 and 5, which are in oak woodland areas;
• Eliminate Lot 6, which is partially within an oak woodland and the 50 -foot setback from a
riparian area;
• Reconfigure the main roadway access to the site to riparian and Pismo clarkia setbacks,
which has the effect of moving the roadway generally away from the steeper slopes on
the southern portion of the site;
• Reconfigure Lots 7 -15, and reduce the total number in this area from 9 to 8, to respond the
reconfigured main road, and to the riparian setback along the creek.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: This alternative was designed specifically to minimize
biological and geological impacts identified with the project and outlined in Section 4.0 of the
Revised FSEIR and the Addendum. Due to the 1- to 10 -unit reduction in development
density, implementation of this alternative would result in reduced impacts related to per
capita impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the project.
In addition, the reduced number of residential units would result in reduced impacts related
to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards. This alternative would also result in
reduced aesthetic impacts due to the decreased development intensity on the site. The
smaller amount of site disturbance with this alternative would result in reduced impacts to
biological resources, cultural resources, and hydrology and water quality, when compared to
the originally proposed project. However, implementation of this alternative would not
satisfy the project applicant's economic objective of providing sufficient residential units on
the site.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 8.7.
Alternative 8: Pismo Clarkia Avoidance
Description: This scenario analyzes an alternate site plan for the project, which is a
modification of the development alternatives examined in the FSEIR. This alternative was
proposed by the project applicant as a means of reducing some of the impacts that would
otherwise be experienced with implementation of either the proposed project or the other
alternatives.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
69
As with the proposed project, the overall development potential of this alternative would
accommodate 36 residential lots. The main difference between the proposed project and this
alternative is that this alternative proposes the relocation of Lots 16-36 to the northeastern
portion of the site. In addition, Street D would be extended in order to accommodate the
relocation of the proposed lots.
This alternative would include a modified access configuration designed in response to Fire
Department concerns to include secondary access to the site. In each case, the concept would
be to construct an 18 -foot wide gravel roadway to the site boundary, where it would be
possible to extend off site in cooperation with neighboring property owners to Easy Street.
The precise configuration of this secondary access has not yet been determined.
Along with the relocation of Lots 16-36 and the extension of Street D, the total lot area coverage
would be reduced. As is listed under the Lot Summary table included on Figure 8-7, this
development alternative proposes a more uniform lot area distribution with parcels ranging
from approximately 5,500 to 9,500 square feet (compared to the proposed project which
proposes five larger lots ranging from approximately 12,500 to 44,800 square feet). In addition,
this project alternative would not include the portion of Street D west of the intersection with
Street C, which was shown for the proposed project, and would have provided access to Lots 28-
36. This alternative would support all of the relocated lots through the extension of Street D to
the northeast, which would turn to the southeast (along the property boundary) and end in a
cul -de -sac. The western portion of the site, which would have supported Lots 28-36 under the
proposed project, would remain in open space.
This configuration is intended to address the primary biological and geologic constraints
associated with the proposed project. These constraints include jurisdictional drainages,
riparian and wetland areas, oak woodlands, Pismo clarkia occurrences and slopes greater
than 25 %. As a result of this alternative, the relocated lots would require the filling of the
jurisdictional drainage that traverses the site from east to west in the northern portion of the
subject property. The general configuration and clustering of the individual lots under this
alternative would be altered through relocation and would therefore require revised map
and P.U.D. applications and City approval for redesign elements.
As compared to the Second Reduced Density Development, this alternative would include 21
additional lots.
Alternate Tract Access Variation. This is a variation of the Pismo Clarkia Avoidance
Alternative described above, and was also suggested by the project applicant. Its key
difference is a modified access configuration included from La Canada to respond to Fire
Department concerns to reduce overall cul -de -sac lengths included in the tract. The access
road would cross the East Fork of Meadow Creek east of the crossing shown for the
proposed project, connecting to Street D between Lots 13 and 15.
Although this variation of Alternative 8 would reduce the length of onsite cul -de -sacs, the
new access road would result in the following impacts if it were implemented:
• Riparian Habitat Impacts. The revised accessway would impact approximately 350
feet of riparian habitat by traversing approximately parallel to the creek for
approximately 200 feet and then crossing the East Fork of Meadow Creek. Both the
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
70
proposed project and the Pismo Clarkia Avoidance Alternative would also cross the
East Fork of Meadow Creek, but would do so perpendicular to the creek through a
much narrower boundary of riparian vegetation that has already been disturbed as
an existing site access route.
• Geotechnical /Slope Stability Impacts. The revised accessway would parallel the
creek on its potentially unstable northern bank. The precise effects have not been
determined, but because the modified access road would be located with 25 feet of
the creek bank for about 200 feet, it can be surmised that substantial bank
stabilization and streambed alteration would be needed to ensure site safety. In
addition, the new road would make a difficult right -hand turn across the creek,
which would require an extensive bridge structure of lengthy culvert. These actions
could further exacerbate the potential impacts to riparian habitat described above.
The magnitude of these potential impacts would be considered "fatal flaws" that potentially
outweigh any potential benefit in reducing onsite cul -de -sac lengths through access redesign.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)].
Facts in Support of Finding: Due to the 21 -unit increase in development density,
implementation of this alternative would result in greater impacts related to per capita
impacts such as land use, traffic, and public services, when compared to the Second Reduced
Density Development. In addition, the increased number of residential units would result
in greater impacts related to the exposure of site occupants to geologic hazards. This
alternative would also result in greater aesthetic impacts due to the increased development
intensity on the site. The increased amount of site disturbance with this alternative would
result in increased impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, and hydrology and
water quality, when compared to the project. In addition, the new access road with this
alternative would result in increased impacts related to riparian habitat and slope stability
compared to the Second Reduced Development Proposal.
Reference: Revised FSEIR Section 8.8.
First Reduced Density Development Proposal
Description: This scenario analyzes an alternate site plan for the project, which is a
modification of the development alternatives examined in the FSEIR. This alternative was
proposed by the project applicant as a means of reducing some of the impacts that would
otherwise be experienced with implementation of either the proposed project or the other
alternatives.
As with the proposed project, the overall development potential of this alternative would
accommodate 21 residential lots.
This alternative would include a modified access configuration designed in response to Fire
Department concerns to include secondary access to the site.
Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
71
considerations make this alternative infeasible. [Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3),
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)j.
Facts in Support of Finding: This alternative would result in impacts similar to the
originally proposed project, but these impacts would generally be of a lesser magnitude.
Class I impacts would still remain with respect to Pismo Clarkia.
Reference: First Addendum.
9.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires that when making findings required by
Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code, the Lead Agency approving a project shall adopt a
reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a
condition of project approval, in order to ensure compliance with project implementation and to
mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The City hereby finds that:
1) A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Project,
and the mitigation measures therein are made a condition of project approval. The MMRP is
incorporated herein by reference and is considered part of the record or proceedings for the
Project.
2) The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of
mitigation. The City will serve as the overall MMRP coordinator. The applicant will be
primarily responsible for ensuring that all Project mitigation measures are complied with.
Mitigation measures are programmed to occur at, or prior to, the following milestones:
• Prior to final map recordation approval. These measures apply to tract -wide
measures that would be reviewed at the time of tract map review. These include
tract -wide design mitigation and access improvements.
• Prior to issuance of grading permits. These are measures that need to be undertaken
before earth moving activities begin. These measures include items such as including
pertinent design details in the Project plans.
• Prior to issuance of building permits. These measures are those that need to occur
during site grading and preparation, but prior to construction of proposed structures.
They include monitoring the construction site for the proper implementation of dust
and emission controls.
• Prior to completion of construction. These measures apply to Project components
that would go into effect at completion of the Project construction phase, including
items such as management or monitoring plans. In order for the plan to be available
for use at completion of each Project component, it will need to be prepared and
completed before construction of the component is finished.
• Following construction /during operation of the project. These are active measures
that will commence upon completion of the various construction phases and, in most
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
72
cases, will continue through the life of the project.
• Prior to occupancy or final inspection of the development.
Connecting each of the mitigation measures to these milestones will integrate mitigation
monitoring into existing City processes, as encouraged by CEQA. In each instance,
implementation of the mitigation measure will be accomplished in parallel with another
activity associated with the Project.
3) The MMRP prepared for the Project has been adopted concurrently with these Findings. The
MMRP meets the requirements of Section 21021.6 of the Public Resources Code. The City
will use the MMRP to track compliance with Project mitigation measures. The MMRP will
remain available for public review during the compliance period.
10.0 OTHER FINDINGS
The City hereby finds as follows:
1) The foregoing statements are true and correct;
2) The City is the "Lead Agency" for the Project evaluated in the Revised FSEIR and
independently reviewed and analyzed in the DSEIR, Revised DSEIR, Revised FSEIR, First
Addendum, and Second Addendum, for the Project;
3) The Notice of Preparation of the DSEIR was circulated for public review. It requested that
responsible agencies respond as to the scope and content of the environmental information
germane to that agency's specific responsibilities;
4) The public review period for the DSEIR was for 45 days between February 21, 2003 and April
7, 2003. The public review period for the Revised DSEIR was for 45 days between December
1, 2003 and January 14, 2004. The DSEIR, Revised DSEIR and appendices were available for
public review during those time periods, respectively. A Notice of Completion and copies of
the DSEIR and Revised DSEIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse, and notices of
availability of the DSEIR and Revised DSEIR were published by the City. The DSEIR and
Revised DSEIR were available for review at the City of Arroyo Grande Planning Division,
100 Civic Center Plaza, Arroyo Grande, California, 93438.
5) The Revised DSEIR, Revised FSEIR, First Addendum, and Second Addendum were
completed in compliance with CEQA;
6) The Revised FSEIR, First Addendum, and Second Addendum reflect the City's independent
judgment;
7) The City evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed
the Revised DSEIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses
describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The Revised FSEIR
provides adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The City reviewed
the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments
received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information to the Revised
DSEIR regarding adverse environmental impacts. The City has based its actions on full
appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of
these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the
Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum.
8) The City finds that the Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum provide objective
information to assist the decisionmakers and the public at large in their consideration of the
environmental consequences of the Project. The public review period provided all interested
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
73
jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit all
comments made during the public review period;
9) The Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum evaluated the following direct and
cumulative impacts: (1) agricultural resources; (2) biological resources; (3) cultural resources;
(4) geologic resources; (5) hydrology and water quality; (6) land use; (7)
transportation /traffic; (8) public services; and (9) growth inducing impacts. Additionally, the
Revised FSEIR, Addendum, and Second Addendum considered, in separate sections,
significant irreversible environmental changes and growth inducing impacts of the Project,
as well as a reasonable range of project alternatives. All of the significant environmental
impacts of the Project were identified in the Revised FSEIR;
10) The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures identified in the Revised FSEIR, First
Addendum, and Second Addendum and has been designed to ensure compliance during
implementation of the Project. The MMRP provides the steps necessary to ensure that the
mitigation measures are fully enforceable;
11) The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of
mitigation; the City will serve as the MMRP Coordinator;
12) In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, and
in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has complied with
CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2;
13) The impacts of the Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of
certification of the Revised FSEIR, First Addendum, and Second Addendum;
14) The City made no decisions related to approval of the Project prior to the initial certification
of the Revised FSEIR by the City Council. The City also did not commit to a definite course
of action with respect to the Project prior to the initial certification of the Revised FSEIR by
the City Council.
15) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the Revised FSEIR, First
Addendum, and Second Addendum are and have been available upon request at all times at
the offices of the City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department, the
custodians of record for such documents or other materials;
16) The responses to the comments on the Revised DSEIR, which are contained in the Revised
FSEIR, clarify and amplify the analysis in the Revised DSEIR;
17) Having reviewed the information contained in the Revised DSEIR, Revised FSEIR, First
Addendum, and Second Addendum, and in the administrative record, the City finds that
there in no new significant information regarding adverse environmental impacts of the
Project in the Revised FSEIR, First Addendum, and Second Addendum, and finds that
recirculation of the Revised DSEIR is not required; and
18) Having received, reviewed and considered all information and documents in the Revised
FSEIR, First Addendum, and Second Addendum, as well as all other information in the
record of proceedings on this matter, these Findings are hereby adopted by the City in its
capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
r 74
EXHIBIT "B"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 01 -001
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 01 -001
GENERAL CONDITIONS
This approval authorizes the subdivision of a 26.9 -acre property into 15 clustered
residential lots ranging in size from 7,200 sq. ft. to 22,766 sq. ft., and one open
space lot consisting of 22.2 acres (Lot 16).
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 01 -001 and Planned Unit Development 01 -001.
3. This vesting tentative tract map approval shall automatically expire on January
27, 2011 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 vesting tentative
tract map presented to the City Council at the meeting of January 27, 2009 and
marked Exhibit "C" except as modified by these conditions of approval.
5. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of this vesting tentative tract
map application, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Arroyo
Grande, its present or former agents, officers and employees from any claim,
action, or proceeding against the City, its past or present agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul City's approval of this
subdivision, which action is brought within the time period provided for by law.
This condition is subject to the provisions of Government Code Section
66474.9, which are incorporated by reference herein as though set forth in
full.
6. A Revised Final SEIR has been certified for this project. An Addendum to the
SEIR was prepared, a copy of which is attached hereto ( "Second
Addendum "). The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( "MMRP ")
for the project is attached hereto in Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by this
reference. Mitigations stated in the MMRP shall be implemented as
conditions of project approval and shall be monitored by appropriate City
departments and other responsible agencies as indicated in Exhibit "D ". The
Developer shall be responsible for verification in writing by the monitoring
department or agency that the mitigation measures have been implemented.
Other monitoring and reporting shall occur as required by the measures
described in the MMRP and consistent with conditions described below.
Costs incurred by City in implementing and monitoring the MMRP, excluding
City maintenance responsibilities and services otherwise paid for through
standard permit / development fees, shall be paid for according to the City's
master fee schedule and be the responsibility of the applicant until at which
time costs are paid by the HOA (per Condition No. 23) once established. The
City shall provide the applicant with itemized billing for services rendered.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
7. SPECIAL PERMITS - The following list of permits are expected to be required
from various responsible agencies in accordance with the MMRP:
a. Biological Opinion and Take Permit/Concurrence letter; US Fish and
Wildlife Service; prior to issuance of Grading Permit.
b. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); Regional Water
Quality Control Board; prior to issuance of Grading Permit
c. Section 404 permit; Army Corps of Engineers; prior to issuance of
Grading Permit
d. Streambed Alteration Agreement; California Department of Fish and
Game; prior to issuance of Grading Permit.
8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING — Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the
applicant of the building permit for the lot, shall pay an in -lieu fee equivalent to
one percent of the estimated value of new construction for each unit within
the development as computed for building permit purposes in accordance
with the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance in effect on June 14, 2001; the
date the application for this project was determined complete. The applicant
shall ensure that all lot owners are aware of this requirement prior to
purchase by including this notice with the lot/building Sales Agreement
between the Developer and lot/building Purchaser.
9. WELL DEDICATION AND EASEMENT. Within ninety (90) days of tentative
tract map approval, and by separate written instrument, subject to the prior
written approval of the City Attorney, the applicant shall offer to dedicate to City:
a) The existing water well ( "well ") located in Lot 1, including existing well
infrastructure and appurtenances located within the well easement
described in subsection b) below; and
b) An easement 16 feet wide and 25 feet deep along La Canada to include
the existing well for the purpose of operating, maintaining, repairing and
replacing the well;
c) An easement 30 feet wide and 40 feet deep on Lot 16 along La Canada
and south of Blossom Valley Road for the purposes of placing additional
infrastructure to extract, treat, store and transport water from the well to
the City's water distribution system;
d) The applicant may reserve from the dedication the right to use
untreated water from this well for construction of the subdivision
improvements and residences. This right to use water for construction
purposes shall terminate upon issuance of a notice of completion for the
last residence in the project, or five years after final tract map approval,
which ever is earlier. Applicant, for itself and for the HOA, may reserve
from the dedication the right to use water from this well for establishment
and maintenance of common area landscaping, including landscaping that
is required by the MMRP. This right to use water for landscaping
purposes shall terminate upon successful completion of the landscaping,
mitigation and restoration requirements of the MMRP.
e) In accordance with subsection d) above, the applicant, for itself, its
successors in interest to the residential lots and for the HOA shall use any
and all well water on and within the boundaries of the subdivision site.
f) The size, location and configuration of the easement and the
placement of equipment shall not unreasonably interfere or detract
from the development of the lot on which the well will be located.
g) The existing storage tanks will either be removed entirely by the
applicant, or moved by the applicant to a location on the project site
approved by the City that does not interfere with use and enjoyment of
the residential subdivision lots.
h) Applicant is responsible for all costs associated with pumping, treating,
transporting and using well water reserved in subsection d) above,
including the provision of electrical power to the existing well; the
applicant is not responsible for any other utilities or equipment,
including treatment equipment.
10. OPEN SPACE EASEMENT - Concurrent with recordation of the final map, a
permanent open space agreement for Lot 16 shall be recorded on the property
consistent with the MMRP. Said easement shall be in favor of the public and
the City and shall prohibit all structures, grazing, grading, filling or vegetation
removal except fire prevention consistent with the MMRP, and except as may
be required for City- approved trails, drainage facilities or other City- approved
infrastructure. Said easement shall be subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director and the City Attorney.
11. ACCESS EASEMENTS — Prior to and /or in concurrence with the recordation of
the final map, the applicant shall grant and record emergency and multi-
use /pedestrian public access easements to the City:
a. Twenty-four (24') foot emergency road and multi- use /pedestrian
path access centered along and extending from "Blossom Valley
Road" through the open space property of the project (Lot 16), through
the open space property (Lot 224) of Tract 1834 Phase V, through the
southwestern corner of the Lucia Mar School District Hidden Oaks
School Site and through the northwestern section of the James
Property (APNs 007- 070 -001 & 007 - 070 -002) connecting to Hidden
Oak Road or alternative alignment approved by the Director of Fire and
Building and the Community Development Director.
b.Twenty (20) foot emergency access and public water, public sewer and
public utility from "Blossom Valley Road" between Lots 2 and 3 to the
northeast property boundary.
12. OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS- Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant
shall
a. Obtain all applicable permits and agreements from regulatory
agencies with jurisdiction and shall construct a paved twenty —four
(24') foot emergency access road and multi- use /pedestrian path
access extending from "Blossom Valley Road" through the open
space property of the project (Lot 16), through the open space
property (Lot 224) of Tract 1834 Phase V, through the
southwestern corner of the Lucia Mar School District Hidden Oaks
School Site and through the northwestern section of the James
Property (APNs 007- 070 -001 & 007 - 070 -002) connecting to
Hidden Oak Road or an alternative alignment as approved by the
Director of Building and Fire and acceptable to City Council. A
multi -use path shall be constructed in the form of a four -foot wide
decomposed granite pathway. Road and trail maintenance shall
be the responsibility of the property owners through a HOA in
accordance with Condition of approval No.23 and a cost and
schedule provision shall be included in the plans and
specifications and reports necessary for the formation of the
District.
OR
b. If an offsite alternative emergency access easement is obtained
and an emergency access road is approved by the City that
connects to the emergency access easement located between
Lots 2 and 3, the Applicant may as an alternative, subject to the
prior approval of the Director of Building and Fire, obtain all
applicable permits and agreements and construct a twenty (20)
foot all weather emergency access road to the north property
line of the property and install appropriate bollards. Additionally,
the applicant shall construct an eight (8) foot wide decomposed
granite trail from "Blossom Valley Road" through the open space
property of the project (Lot 16) and the open space property (Lot
224) of Tract 1834 Phase V, through the James Property (APNs
007- 070 -001 & 007 - 070 -002) connecting to Hidden Oak Road.
Trail maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property
owners through the respective HOAs.
13. RIPARIAN AND WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN — Prior to recordation of the
final map, the applicant shall develop and pay all costs associated with the
implementation and establishment of the riparian and wetland mitigation plan
(Attached in Exhibit "C" project plans pg. A -10) and as referenced in Appendix
"A" to the Second Addendum to the SEIR) consistent with the U.S Fish and
Wildlife Service Recovery Plan and California Department of Fish and Game
regulations. Long -term implementation and monitoring shall be implemented in
accordance with the MMRP.
14. DESIGN MANUAL STANDARDS — Conformance with the Design Manual shall
be a requirement of any construction in the project. Construction of the public
improvements shall be exempt from the requirements of the Design Manual.
This requirement shall be explicitly incorporated into the tract CC &R's and shall
be recorded with each lot. The CC &R's shall incorporate the Design Manual
( "Manual ") by reference.
a. Prior to final map recordation, a Design Review application shall be
submitted for final review of the project Design Guideline Manual by the
Architectural Review Committee for a recommendation to the
Community Development Director. The following modifications shall be
made to the Manual (Exhibit G):
The front setback for front - loaded garages is 20 feet.
ii. All updated requirements from the California Building Code
shall be reflected in the document, including seismic
requirements in Design Manual Section 3.34.
Lots that are not constructed to final grade shall include
specific lot design provisions for site drainage and slope
retention, consistent with site Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan and approved by the Director of Public
Works.
b. Prior to Building Permit issuance, a Design Review application shall be
submitted for each proposed residence to determine consistency with
the approved Design Guideline Manual for the project. The
Community Development Director shall refer an application to the
Architectural Review Committee for consideration and
recommendation. Submittal requirements shall include a site plan,
building elevations, landscape plan, color and materials board, and any
other material needed to determine design consistency, as determined
by the Community Development Director or the Architectural Review
Committee.
NOISE
15. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 7am and 7pm Monday
through Friday; and between 8am and 5pm on Saturday. No construction shall
occur on Sunday.
DEVELOPMENT CODE
16. Development shall conform to the Single Family (SF) zoning requirements
except as otherwise approved.
17.AII walls shall not exceed four feet (4') in height above adjacent grade; All
fences shall not exceed six (6) feet in height above adjacent grade, unless
otherwise approved with a (Minor Use Permit)/Minor Exception application for
consideration of adjacent grade.
18. The applicant shall comply with Development Code Chapter 16.20, "Land
Divisions" except where otherwise approved herein.
19. The applicant shall comply with those portions of the Development Code
Chapter 16.64, "Dedications, Fees and Reservations" that were in effect on
June 14, 2001, the date that the application for this project was determined
complete.
20. Due to the environmental constraints identified in the SEIR, the following uses
and only said uses, may be permitted on the lots in this subdivision:
a) Single family dwellings, not more than one per lot.
b) Gardening in compliance w/ landscape provisions in the approved
Design Manual.
c) Home occupations subject to provisions of the Municipal Code.
d) Other uses or structures considered accessory to single family
houses except that no tennis courts, second residential units
( "Granny units ") or detached guest houses shall be allowed.
Swimming pools may be allowed with a Minor Use Permit/Plot
Plan Review and subject to requirements in Section 16.52.200.
e) Outdoor storage of recreational vehicles or boats is prohibited.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT
21.AII walls, including screening and retaining walls, shall be compatible with the
approved plans, Design Manual and Development Code Standards.
22. Perimeter project fencing and interior habitat fencing shall be constructed in
accordance with the approved plans and MMRP in Exhibit "D ". showing all
perimeter fences and /or walls. Temporary interior habitat protection fencing
may be constructed in accordance with approved plans and the MMRP to
remain in place through the completion of construction until at which time
permanent fencing shall be installed.
PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL MAP
23.The Applicant shall include a provision in the project CC &Rs requiring the
HOA to maintain all common areas and facilities within the subdivision
including, but not limited to, the open space parcel, emergency access road,
multi -use trail and drainage facilities. The CC &Rs shall include a specific
provision requiring the HOA to retain a qualified biological consultant to
perform mitigation and maintenance monitoring pursuant to the MMRP for the
project; the HOA biological consultant shall submit bi- annual reports to the
City's Community Development Department consistent with the MMRP. The
CC &Rs shall authorize City enforcement of City imposed requirements and
the CC &Rs shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. A five -year
maintenance reserve shall be held at all times.
24. 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 be consistent
with the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and the project Design
Manual. The landscaping plan shall include the following for all public street
frontages and common landscaped areas:
a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail;
b. The use of landscaping to screen ground- mounted utility and
mechanical equipment (subject to utility company requirements);
c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes:
(1) Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are
within five feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs;
(2) Water conservation practices including the use of low flow
heads, drip irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants
and mulches shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan;
(3) All slopes 2:1 or greater shall have jute mesh, nylon mesh or
equivalent material; and
(4) An automated irrigation system.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
25.AII fencing shall be installed and shall be compatible with the approved plans,
Design Manual and MMRP.
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
26. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the project's Tree Mitigation
Plan consistent with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program except
that the applicant shall use locally raised oak tree seedlings placed in deep root
tubes in place of fifteen (15) gallon mitigation trees. Any and all potentially
impacted trees as determined by a certified arborist, shall require a tree removal
permit. If determined feasible by a certified arborist and Director of Parks and
Recreation based on final improvement plans, the final grading plan shall
include provisions to protect and prevent impacts to existing Tree No. 1128 as
shown on the plans in Exhibit "C ".
27. Linear root barriers shall be used for street trees to protect the sidewalks.
28. All street front trees shall be 24 -inch box and shall be located a minimum of
two (2) trees for every seventy -five feet (75') of street frontage but may vary in
accordance with the preservation of existing trees onsite.
BUILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
FUEL MODIFICATION
29. The following fuel modification requirements shall be reflected in the Vegetation
Management Plan in accordance with Mitigation Measure PS -2 as specified in
the MMRP.
i. Annual perimeter cuts of (40') forty feet in width with vegetation
down to below (2 ") inches in height are to be cleared surrounding
the tract by the standard date of May 25.
ii. A (100') hundred -foot clearance is to be cut with vegetation below
(2 ") inches in height on the uphill slope connecting to the
Sombrillo properties and Lots 2, and lots 12 -15. For all areas
identified as habitat for Pismo Clarkia, clearance shall take place
after September 1s Lots 3 -11 shall be cleared to the east
property line.
iii. The Oak trees located on the hillside of Sombrillo are to have
ladder fuels trimmed (4') feet in height from ground level.
iv. After September 1 the middle meadow portion of lot 16 is to be
mowed to (4 ") inches in height.
CBC /CFC
30. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California
Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande.
FIRE LANES
31. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire
Department guidelines.
FIRE FLOW /FIRE HYDRANTS
32. Project shall have a minimum fire flow of 1,000 gallons per minute for a
duration of 2 hours.
33. Prior to bringing combustibles on site, fire hydrants shall be installed 300
feet apart, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards or
altemate provisions or locations shall be approved by the Fire Chief.
FIRE SPRINKLERS
34.AII units must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department
guidelines.
ABANDONMENT /NON- CONFORMING
35. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever
occurs first, the applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-
conforming items such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other
undesirable conditions.
OTHER PERMITS
36. Prior to final map approval, the City Council must authorize any change in
the use of the on -site water well and the County Health Department approval
is required for well abandonment/conversion. The applicant shall be entitled
to use on -site water well per condition No 9.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
37.The applicant shall install a City benchmark monument at the north east
corner of La Canada and Blossom Valley Road in accordance with City
standards.
38. The applicant will terminate the water main with a fire hydrant.
39.The applicant shall install an air -vac relief valve at the high point of the
water main.
40. Install fire hydrants to Public Works and Building and Fire Department
requirements.
41.The applicant shall pay an impact fee for the proportionate share of
impacts to the following Capital Improvement Projects:
a. El Camino Real Upgrade,
b. Walnut Street Upgrade.
42.The applicant shall submit the following in regards to the clear -span
culvert:
a. Structural calculations for review and approval,
b. Foundation calculations for review and approval,
c. Hydraulic calculations for review and approval.
43. Streets within the project shall be constructed as follows:
a. 32 feet street width from curb to curb,
b. Parking on one side of the street,
c. Concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the street,
d. Sidewalk on the northeasterly side of the street containing parking,
e. 40 feet wide right -of -way,
f. 25 mile per hour design speed.
44. Streets within the project where a 24 ft. road width is noted on the
tentative map shall be constructed as follows:
a. 24 feet street width from curb to curb;
b. Concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the street;
c. Sidewalk on the northeasterly side of the street;
d. 40 feet wide right -of -way;
e. 25 mile per hour design speed.
45. Install new concrete curb and gutter along the project frontage of La
Canada.
46. Install a decomposed granite walking path behind the curb and gutter
along La Canada.
47. Submit an addendum to the slope stability and liquefaction analysis to
analyze the current lot configuration.
48.The grading plan shall be reviewed and approved by the project soils
engineer for conformance to the recommendations within the slope
stability and liquefaction analysis.
49.The project grading, drainage and erosion control plans are to be
reviewed by the Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District. The
applicant shall reimburse the City for this review.
50.A HOA shall privately maintain all drainage improvements conveying
storm drainage from undeveloped portions of the project site. The
maintenance of these facilities shall be outlined in the CC &R's.
51. The applicant shall clean the culvert that crosses La Canada as needed
until responsibility is assumed by HOA or specifically accepted by the City.
52. The applicant shall clean the culvert outlet from the drop inlet that crosses
La Canada as needed until responsibility is assumed by HOA or
specifically accepted by the City.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
53. Clean all streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks at the end of the day's
operations or as directed by the Director of Community Development or
the Director of Public Works.
54. Perform construction activities requiring City inspection during normal
business hours (Monday through Friday, 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. excluding City
holidays) The developer or contractor shall refrain from performing any
work other than site maintenance outside of these hours as allowed by
local ordinance, 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.
55. Prior to placing the final map on the City Council Agenda, the following
items shall be submitted and approved:
a. Final map signed,
b. Improvement Securities,
c. Fees paid,
d. Inspection agreement signed,
e. Subdivision improvement agreement signed,
f. Tax certificate,
g. Project CC &R's approved by the City Attorney and Director of
Public Works.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
56.AII project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance
with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications.
57. Submit four (4) full -size paper copies and one (1) full -size mylar copy of
approved improvement plans for inspection purposes during construction.
58. Submit record (as- built) drawings prior to acceptance of the improvements
by the City. One (1) set of mylar prints and an electronic version on CD in
AutoCAD format shall be required.
59. The following Improvement plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the Public Works Department:
a. Grading, drainage and erosion control,
b. Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk,
c. Public utilities,
d. Water and sewer,
e. Landscaping and irrigation (prepared by a Landscape Architect),
f. Any other improvements as required by the Director of Public
Works.
60.The site plan shall include the following:
a. The location and size of all existing and proposed water, sewer,
and storm drainage facilities within the project site and abutting
streets or alleys,
b. The location, quantity and size of all existing and proposed sewer
laterals,
c. The location, size and orientation of all trash enclosures,
d. All existing and proposed parcel lines and easements crossing the
property,
e. The location and dimension of all existing and proposed paved
areas,
f. The location of all existing and proposed public or private utilities.
61. Improvement plans shall include plan and profile of existing and proposed
streets, utilities and retaining walls.
62.Any landscape and irrigation within the public right of way require plans
that shall be approved by the Public Works, Community Development and
Parks and Recreation Departments.
WATER
63.The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated
increase in water demand created by the project by either:
a. 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,
b. The applicant may pay an in lieu fee of. $5,945.95 per acre -foot.
64. Each parcel shall have separate water meters. Duplex service lines shall
be used if feasible.
65. Lots using fire sprinklers shall have individual service connections. A fire
sprinkler engineer shall determine the size of the water meters. The meter
sizes shall be noted on the individual lot improvement plans when a
building permit application is submitted for construction of the residence.
66. Existing water services to be abandoned shall be properly abandoned and
capped at the main per the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
SEWER
67. All new sewer mains must be a minimum diameter of 8 ".
68. All new sewer mains must have a minimum slope of 0.5 %.
69. Each parcel shall be provided a separate sewer lateral.
70.AII sewer laterals within the public right of way must have a minimum
slope of 2 %.
71.AII sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities
shall be constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency
standards.
72.Obtain approval from the South County Sanitation District for the
development's impact to District facilities.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
73. Underground all new public utilities in accordance with Section 16.68.050
of the Development Code.
74. Underground improvements shall be installed prior to street paving.
75. 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.
76. Submit the Final Map to the public utility companies for review and
comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public
Works for approval.
77. The public utility plans shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works
for review and comment.
STREETS
78. Obtain approval from the Director of Public Works prior to excavating in
any street recently over -laid or slurry sealed. The Director of Public Works
shall approve the method of repair of any such trenches, but shall not be
limited to an overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal.
79.AII trenching in City streets shall utilize saw cutting. Any over cuts shall be
cleaned and filled with epoxy.
80. All street repairs shall be constructed to City standards.
81. Street structural sections shall be determined by an R -Value soil test and
traffic index of 6.5, but shall not be less than 3" of asphalt and 6" of Class
II AB.
82. Overlay, slurry seal, or fog seal any roads in the project that are dedicated
to the City prior to acceptance by the City may be required as directed by
the Director of Public Works.
83.The horizontal and vertical curves shall meet all applicable Caltrans
standards.
CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK
84. Install new concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk as directed by the Director
of Public Works.
85. Utilize saw cuts for all repairs made in curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
86. Install deep root barriers for all trees planted adjacent to curb, gutter and
sidewalk to prevent damage due to root growth.
GRADING
87. Perform all grading in conformance with the City Grading Ordinance.
88. Submit all retaining wall calculations for review and approval by the
Director of Public Works for walls not constructed per City standards.
DRAINAGE
89.AII drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 100 -year storm
flow.
90.AII drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the Drainage Master
Plan.
91. The project is in Drainage Zone "B" and allows storm water runoff to be
directed to the creek.
92. Submit detailed drainage calculations for all drainage facilities to be
reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works.
EROSION CONTROL
93. Submit an erosion control plan for review and approval prior to issuing a
grading permit.
94. Provide a WDID No. from the State Water Resources Control Board prior
to issuance of a grading permit.
DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS
95.AII 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.
96.Abandonment of public streets and public easements shall be listed on the
final map in accordance with Section 66499.20 of the Subdivision Map
Act.
97. Street tree planting and maintenance easements shall be dedicated
adjacent to all street right of ways. Street tree easements shall be a
minimum of 10 feet beyond the right of way, except that street tree
easements shall exclude the area covered by public utility easements.
98.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.
99. Easements shall be dedicated to the public on the map, or other separate
document approved by the City, for the following:
a. Drainage easements where for the outlet of the drain line. These
easements shall be a minimum of 15' wide,
b. Sewer easements over the emergency access road over lot 3,
c. Water easements over the emergency access road over lot 3,
d. Emergency access easements as shown on the tentative map.
These easements shall be a minimum of 20' wide.
e. Well easements as determined by the Director of Public Works in
accordance with Condition of approval No. 9.
PERMITS
100. Obtain an encroachment permit prior to performing any of the following:
a. Performing work in the City right of way,
b. Staging work in the City right of way,
c. Stockpiling material in the City right of way,
d. Storing equipment in the City right of way.
101. Obtain a grading permit prior to commencement of any grading
operations on site.
FEES
102. Pay all required City fees at the time they are due.
103. Fees to be paid prior to plan approval:
a. Map check fee
b. Plan check fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork
estimate.
c. Plan check fee for improvement plans based on an approved
construction cost estimate.
d. Permit fee for grading plans based on an approved earthwork
estimate.
e. Inspection fee of subdivision or public works construction plans based
on an approved construction cost estimate.
AGREEMENTS
104. 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.
105. Subdivision Improvement Agreement: The subdivider shall
enter into a subdivision agreement for the completion and guarantee of
improvements required. The subdivision agreement shall be on a form
acceptable to the City.
106. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for maintenance of all
commonly held areas. The CC &R's shall be subject to the review and
approval of the City Attorney and the Director of Public Works.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES
107. All improvement securities shall be of a form as set forth in
Development Code Section 16.68.090, Improvement Securities.
108. Submit an engineer's estimate of quantities for public
improvements for review by the Director of Public Works.
109. Provide financial security for the following, to be based upon a
construction cost estimate approved by the Director of Public Works:
a. Faithful Performance: 100% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements,
b. Labor and Materials: 50% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements,
c. One Year Guarantee: 10% of the approved estimated cost of all
subdivision improvements. This bond is required prior to acceptance
of the subdivision improvements.
d. Monumentation: 100% of the estimated cost of setting survey
monuments. This financial security may be waived if the developer's
surveyor submits to the Director of Public Works a letter assuring that
all monumentation has been set.
OTHER DOCUMENTATION
110. Tax Certificate: The applicant shall furnish a certificate from the tax
collector's office indicating that there are no unpaid taxes or special
assessments against the property. The applicant may be required to bond
for any unpaid taxes or liens against the property.
111. Preliminary Title Report: A current preliminary title report shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to checking the map.
112. Subdivision Guarantee: A current subdivision guarantee shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works with the final submittal of the
Map.
PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT
113. The Final Map shall be recorded with all pertinent conditions of approval
satisfied.
PRIOR TO ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
114. All utilities shall be operational.
115. 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.
116. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide a haul
route for any fill material to be imported to the site showing all roads
travelled within the City. A road condition survey will be performed by the
applicant and approved by the Director of Public Works before and after
hauling operations to assess deterioration. Any damage or deterioration
beyond normal traffic wear and tear, as determined by the Director of
Public Works, shall be repaired by the applicant at its sole expense
(including wear to existing striping) prior to issuance of a building permit.
Additionally, the applicant shall clean the street by mechanical sweeper at
the end of each day during the hauling operation to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director.
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
TRACT 1998
. ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
V
THE MEADOWS
AT
RANCHO 'GRANDE .
Arroyo Grande - California --
CONSULTANTS &tare MAP PROJECT SUw4ARY SHEET INDEX
/ m T.,t., l %&Ora
`A N.ulcI- ...l °u wales,. Ma solo iwrt .su. ID ; . w <
, «.a.w sou
.I:uNUIC u• yap In. w arom� <. moo t T n ca Ms a NW n •
WO Mt -KC o w 11 7 v4 Co c u•w <w sat
<avwo. catnip nau.a..,r.s nw
YI[•V: WwYW <M W.Rn vacua. Dave miff PMYYMU EuM .nr HST
,/ +Tfw. . CMITI. CO IMANIN
panto urx.Loo,„ grr .wcon Ion too DIMS r.IU ro.o van WOO wµ
cop
PO ut�u. cA nun m COOS. : / �� - DIMS a rat rll.wl.I. you no 5 MC
ICON I^ -.n> POI 23I-S10 /. IIEm IMeson M. p SA CM MM<.M ,soot rc .M MOOED so n 6y f n n V L tn<..Y s •
'now _ Cola. M& MP nalct: T. NU< M.Y.Mr WPC Y arc nw
mo o Pw.c
POOR Tor u Cann. so, Duo m<..
r. M MO SAN 7F ` my . - N tN f . .an
OPEN ... Val I uralmNr acu Pisa l
OW Ml..rw Ona.WIOMY('a un 1 N un Wt ae. No
C.Ngr.l W wtu .s.s.o<. op .RKaash: nmC .. Pram n.o //
o
COOKS 1011 elm INN. SIW PION w
HI
I .
Klwu <. •34 tat wan aI IIU Da "Oa" na"
aENSDN ISIY
PC NO t 45mo Ion) Ll Da O l / 1 � .�� .. . • .K APO Dar ,¢ `
IMO
PO nwln t wlm MOW WPC r�.r�r \ n, ,Jbo� - t: '..
ca WO WAWA I V ONO. t nNtl WSW:
WNW. CA 4 �mj Iw r .AO . C. tut,.
r t \
Pal W2276 40NO L. Pn
M cbM4 SIItl K. - �. �1 I
PO llu. o, so ' zoo mom` c c .l� Jar l Cfl l
]MI EPOS . l Y J .':so
POO Mr -MW VI ON..lac mL_.' -�
... __ Erril
. 1
, r E.cr - ..
•
cm Nos sown&
ALL pJf i y % to
• DAVIS ' , lln ,a ,�
ENGINEERING
505 arc w.. ONna ,. .:
S. lure 0
In) MFI. roo c1-541 seas ism.454
.ww.. i i. Vr •••u
r.. boat r. w
•
i
,
'Il'HCi:S7V H0 U g i . / - 'H'IF,..F:!':"f'i 1834 V,ITErg /
k \ ,
I
L
'''.\------ °°AMMIC at°[
v wux .
' \ .' ...._® \ `.�\ :, e 1 I
: v = F
: tot
\__
" — +vaau `\ 4. 1 -_ .. u , a -. ,
IA 11 11 7 1
■ 7. a \ ;r.' 'a t , I
...,,
• .� 1 1
y
_ _ _ TRACT 1834 'RAS'P �- / , a
Aa0
p'....... O' •--- -� rY
I I' Ilan
?5 man U[ yam wws we \'' `: Q ° ,,
Arta inn tar.... .. - ri.r a orr,a�.ran
�
x •
.LT3 NCO . m.r.r o n2 i/ - - s ,
m• , - r:r.ri� or.�l0�=�10c —� women,. Ev it x
Olt NS
_ _ �� DAVIS g Af r , , ; � a t io z ci i 'w
.n::�w aves. a>c� 0
+....... I �.........ww. r•w . 'a 1
0
EXHIBIT C-3
tb i
Id iF ($:.....n, 0104 .`dd
■ \ 1 \• \ E
• i t@Q��a . FA: 1 � . � I j ii F \ \ go• Gy\,.\..k ‘ 'C - 11 1 \c ��
N
� 7pF ,.,\\\ \ \ \� \ �i yl /' \ \�` � .i \ a te \ c ` •`\•; \ \\ 1 .R 1
l\ , h I � V .1 Y v11 v ,4�y
I \ \ . \\\ \= � " lk, 1 \ N♦ /IIt ao 114111\ -e. 1 •
\ I \ 1 ■ ; \ \ `_ - /` � 1 P. S � s � if - ` r 1 - -.r i
L 1 l 'w / 75-i- `>zf✓i \ / z _ l I / 1 1 1 { 11 ! j
1 L ,. �` \ ` !! V r l / iii it, /i / i 1 - C i P iiS
y � .; , ? // 11 "ur% 3 r . ,. _ i I ' i1 1
F , � a 1 1 I I �N /
a l 1 [ \ - \ \ I \ / I • // //l rt,1yil 4 I 1( _ ) ii kk
(:,5•;;:f :���_ _ /iii �I {1
� A i \ ,\.'\‘'W,1 ` ; , \, /�,. / , /r / / /i/ / ! ,,i 0 /4rUi. , ice �� : g.r 1 • 1 // `N��/ /, /r,,, /, /�� 1 1' � > / JI I I %� i' III 1 �s i 1 1 J 4 'iii I
,
III i f 1 1 10 4 I 1 . 1 . \I " 1 1 / / 1/ / / / /fr I / Ill rr l / /// , , �/
4/ I I { f \ 0 1 111 1 11 1 \ 91 11 1 1 1 1 11 \110 \411 1� 11 I III / \ r ! T r/
{ ,r J Y I I 11 \ 11 %\\\\\u}�1`11 ia I 1 1 1 / f{ J
r KE 1 .1`i 1111 "1!1111III P\n \111'11'\\11 \ \I\ \p1PA`\\.RI�)\Z\ 4\te\11 \ \11 1 11 II
oft, . + . 1: .1 11 111 1 1 11 1\40 \d \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .o.). \\ \11 11 11 1
• I . I I I 1\ \N ` :\\ \�`\
c 1 1 • It i l 1 I I 1`I IIIIII .\\ 0�\ \\ \\ ♦ ♦ \\\\ \pll 1 1 11
a, o p Ili! I/ 1 11 \Q \P \ O C. ,,,k. \Il�\
�.7 / / F O , I 11, I \11111111 \ \ \) \. ,a 1 .\\\ 1 1, ,
1- , C 4 11 11 1 1 111 111 1, IP it \n 1\ \W 0`\ , ( 0 l '
\ ;Pirko " I I I I 1 1 \\\ \\ 11 1 1 1 1 / 1 I I Y/
J 4.4- I l j Z I 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 11 \ \ \ \ � v / i r " 1�1 1 I fi
. 24-
/ui / //f✓ A _ ; 9111 I 1 11 1 ,1 \ \ \ \ \ 5,4 ;4/ / / / / / / II / / / r 0 I i
i lit
/' I If t j l j 111111 1 1 \ 1 \ \ l/ l i / � //I 11Ili/ / /l1 / 1 1 1 - > VA
` / / , j , a% X1 t 1 1 1II I 1 \ \` , \ �1qy / / ii / // 110 f /4 i ril1 A rthi 51
1 / ' - '\il . \ II 1\ \1 \ \ \4 1 Il;� \ \A\ \ d i \ i l � i lu41� aid" ' / .Q � i •
\ \\\:\ \ \ II 1 T \ \\ \ \1 0 1, E \ 1111 .
/ 1 11 . . � r� ✓ps' � \\ \1\\ \ \v, \� 1 1'li 4 1 1 \ : \\1\ \o\\\P\Pd1 1)\011 Q -I
' '+ \\ \ 11111] 1111 \11 \ \ \ \N1 \1 \\ \ \ - i x• .. it
/ el- \ III 1 1 1 11 \d V 11\ 1 III
\,/ I f i.\ \1\111 11 111 \ \ \ \ \\ a \\\ \\u, 1nir P I
V '� I - ' � 1 , ,,// r� AAI A��1 I1' 1191A 1AVAVAVAAA \AVAVAA ...
i S . ' if� ilia .n I ,, j i 11 I \ L \, iii ��111101 \\ \
1 \ \ \ \Il \ 0\ k i 11 I N 1 1 \ p
u , Y ; x p 11 1 11vv v vA V V 1 v \II 1 wvi311/11,y
.r � 4,1 1 1 111 111 ∎ \ VAAVA , / i t t th
r s = % r T - 1 - ` 11 1 1 , 9 1 vLw ‘V y i1 I P 1 p 11 ) 5 > % ia I % 0 0 0 r f ), /,
• A I , - i \ l`. V ° - 1 '1 11*i /l,,i/. � /!r/i// /, /ii/, r 41 '
if 1 1 il/ \ .'i yy � 1 \d 1 1 1 i irf)1,1si o ,,,i lilt
- -
:1 /1 1 ` -1 /I /11 a/ /i /Or , //dil
jil \ . 6' $I 1911 / f n ii.fr to, r, i tei
} + k � l l d I l 1/`!a / // /
i` \I \ r . 7 11 ! l+ \ \. ' / 1 / i r(ry %i /iN q {w�-
tk+ \ 1 � \` \ \ . \ \ 1 l lil . I L � 1 1 ', i r�l / rhl_ y
'WI` i/t I C I1 C.‘, \ \ Ilill i, �i./ 1 \ \ \ , + � • 1 i � Al "i tl1 1'N i \\ \ \
I 11
, 1 1 � \ 1 �:
i '1't � �\ " \ \�\ � ` �
1 t. 11 IV'- 1\.
11 II \ .. {�, I 1 \ \ \ \ v. \ `i ti
F III 1M [t l 1 `" @r31 R Ir1\ \\ \ .. 1 i
1 r I bi ! \,..k\ ,., \\/ I r r , ill f \ l \ \\ \ \, \ i 0 1
ft f t II I I
I . i t, t t ��� : , , r r11 1j11 6 J lii f r l + ; ; \ \ . a, : 0 1 1 a
I` I /N / ! p ¢ \ >� e 1 1 \ 1 1 1 1,11 ' , ( 0 1 \ �l re 1
4 p J. �^. \ 11 111 Q i Q ,„ •1 1 ® I
'I' � I I I / , r L.vS\ •\ \ \ \ \1 \I`\p \� ♦ ys
' A 111 \L*.C" W,\11 _ I C I I
77 1 /F 1041
I // Y� �I 1 1 V A1 1 \1 >A�� \11\ � 'VA � ,I
'II . _. ,, q.` \ 1 \ \; A r t
J � 1 1 1 1 �/ II . I I 1 1 \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \�.inr '�,
• c. . . , - 1 1 1 i c`�� 11 1 1 1 \ \ \l \\ \ Ii t \ \ \i 1 1
_ 1. `��11 1 l SCO 1 l I 110\
1 1 I� 1 U j j 1 1 11 1\�Y \ i i. ii i ' 1 { I I I 9 ..
' \� .411 Y J n`� � 1 1 1 1 1 11 , j j 1 11 111�yD +' 1 1; li I s_ S p i 1 I ` it i� EIS •1
\\ \,%, 1 `� � A L 1 1 1 1 111 j 1 11), In 1 1 1 1 1 I* • i 1 r1 1 Ili 'I i p = q • 1 . r ' f iT n
A� 3 � 1l \ \low r � ter i ,. it it i I f i•! s iu
, Q \ \ \ \ i 1 0 ,, 1 1.) a "� r � F I. i 11 1 , , � Qi !lid • 1 a a 1 -. h X1 A
�\ r - r ' /� /ir \, y � I;i i4.ee iIii !! .Pi i gg :t E s I i 11;t
2 ' , ew did rli I. fig 11 OM !1 ; n 'III I - 6I 1 i
. Px wail'
1 , ., iii - h i1' F 16 :' j 9 91' 9 : f 1 :1! li 1 i � y
\` I %a \ '
F� �� F i , li i i111 1 1 1 �; F 9 llli i 9 y � ll
yy � xii Oa : ex• Nil IIiI ES x19,! i. x . i I n !9 �I ...
EXHIBIT C-4
i s a ill /l --ark- " a
ll , \
a i iI i , 1 \ \ \ a Ir -s
�' \ id S \ I • . : 11
f
_ \ -- 1 t ' 1 . 'l�/ _ Ill i '� FE;
� � I � 1 i1 ♦ [. 111 � . . -;-114- � - 111;10
I % A / / srtl 1
\ \fi t .,, _ � ,,, / 1
\ 1 1 ,/ it // / "/ /,/ / / / / / /', �. 1 411111
1 11I . / ll
c.5 t
1 dr l_ iH \t l I I 1 I 1 i + 1 f \ I V \, \ \'.. \ I\ 11 \ ll 1 /I C
I ,' , V i \I I I 1 1 11 1 1 1 \ 1 \ l \ \ \ \ \ \\ t 1 \ 3
I 11 }'\ \ \ \ 11 1 1
\ / / / 1 i i ,_\ II � II I I 1 I \ \ / / ` 7 1 1 QQ.. I 0 -„1
J j . / \ I , II If I \ \ I % R
• i I 11 'I / I / ' / \ \ / 11 I I ■ d:1
/ ! 4 / .I / 1'� .I 1 Q \ ' / / r I I I 1 /I li I iaa
- ) it 7> / / i 1 \ \ `i I ' 1 '\ 1 I 1 i / l/ ✓' I
t 1 i\\\ 1 1 �\ i 2'
1 1 1 I I A A A Y I
al
X fy /j \ 1 1 1 P t I \ \ \ \ 1 1 I I g
f1
\ � � �/ v 1 1 1 \ A 1 v 1 r/ ji
\\; . I I QSµ =I II i' i /ppp/ c
n / I 1
- ` 1 F
,,, ,,,....,. , f I 11 1 ` i S 1 1 '! 11
1� 44 j . I' a \ I , 1 ,a \ \ \ 1 \ \\ ;` i Il n(1 #fit i � RRE
et, •I' 1; , 1 1 1 1; \\ I I 1 i f iii
j 1 /.. \. \ 1 I1 �
IF \
n
_ :1 ,1 II I 1 \ \\\ , ... ��� g B i 3
\ L
a I1 it
} \ 1 \ • 1 \ 1 „ j II w 1 I \ \\ \ \ \,-. II I
II � ` �
l 1 I l 1 1111 ____ j
1I• \ y 1 I I i i :! a §i i 1' I y i , i o 1 .0 + . E it
\ \ i. . �/ 1 ;i1��1I i �� °. !i i ll 3I = e !Il1 f[ 11
11 \ �. ' I / �i`i° '- IN
iii.
<' Olt i; I• g 1iry Ii'- t 1 Z � I I ill . i
-. P :.. ✓'� ' /' 3 !h ' ` i li qi, :P yl i' it 1I i I N i i
! i ij ° ii t. .
' 1 `,•` 2 WWI II; �Mil 1 !! iii !ii / !I. ;II09 , �I� e !:
': I 1 I
II I `AS'- I 44,: �i
KM -1-11-100 ^' �L 7 ri MMinr
MI OW 171%011. SI
� geom. 4 4 0
ant_ 1t 1]♦ �' i 1 - c • S1 /\ Y Q um, F It'..11r lk t :IWIWItli DFt11 441 M.:r. T
(Q •, f MS Sw IN4 3S
ell 3MdQNl Ir., 'WM U333tl MITT NI Nrad3N33
s. m
�� ■ �� �� Sind 7013N30 00031
%� I 6 �t �V� �. �� � �. � A —AAA
y l" \ . i��� `�/ /ice / h . ��-C \ � J �1 . y )Ii /;* �� � 'lli \
. ( �4' �1'1 fin, ��� � r , - i� lJ0
-� l / I �- .�' . A o��i l 1 /' r moo♦ 11
; ". , \;;t i. ` _ � � J i ce r ■
ions-
/ nt )N":1:::, ''''; ..,,,,,,•,a--4.- .\ C f .,-(1 -- /'
*5-- 1-11 `� .� yr . \ e .. • I -- fi `�
•
EXHIBIT C - 6
. & F ,_
IIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIl01IIIJIIIIIIIIIIf illiII6mI1IIIl :. II I
hilIIldIlI� 1
thoi1III1 iiIllli.lill:1 I',Iaili4►i1111hI►iiIIh1I11ii rg
1:2:::::t: E EtE E' E L E 2..::.L. IIIIE A tr LtrL t :E "
r try r ; h i t rrnr, rd i rr rr'rrrr t ,
g"" [[Cr�Cft€[:[:t: t::a 1_> € — 'r" r][[[C[[ €C €t:::::]f =` 'G I
3111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111n1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 hill: r i ,I
1
{11111111111 1,19!1 1111111111911&1111 '10111I1111K ! 11111114111 1 1,1111 IIIII11111111±11111 ,
51111 iiiiliiuiiiiiiihI 1
lilili nial11iII ililIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIYi b6IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIYIIIIIIIIIIIIiiliiii IIiII111111luIII 11 :- 0,1 1
r•AiAi.- EEEEEEEEEE'��td� d Erb rr irr rr r iA r rri „ir ?rr Ltir : ,, rrrrrrE E]Err;r� :fErL •...r F� i v �11
s ' i [t[t[tttttt ;'a[' p '' , t:: rtt... "[ttt:.:f:.dtttt' :J: [ :t t::]tt[ttttt[ Yttftlt9dtt[ft�t Y ...... . at: II; Ir. .1
im umumummi mammumnmumuunnnnmm ummunmmmmnummuumi Ri 1 1
0
11'111111111111 m 11111 111 1111 I 11 ±1111 1 111 111!1 :111 1111111111'11111 gI11111'11
i11I11I:11i1111I
lIlli 1111 Id IIIYIIII IIi
I I11 nI1I11111 1h
1 1id11' hill III.11 '
r' jl ll
t 0,01iMdidr drrri "E ^drrrrd 0 „, r rir dri' nr,.G 14.1.1iirrriidrr in,r r'....H hir•.rr,* lin - :
S'r' p ° 9o-} + :.r, .u_� rim-- , r1Lr' M1 -
... €.E:.r:�::C t.:CC.:u c t1. C: I :tc::[...Y :::f ]] ::t' ” i j�j l
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111 111111 I
1 11 1 1111111 t 11 1 11 1: 9 1 11212 :1111:: i1IiiIII:I 11111 " ,l,IIIIIy 11 11d 1111111F1 tl1 1111 .II1111111!Il1hgnI82l'!111'1:1111111I,111111' 1111111!!I!I
111111111. TICI1r lltlll! WIII:YIIIIIIIII'y1911'1!1 •,
E
rr.rr
LEEEEEittrrr rtiA.rr.,t.pi +rnrrrnr t• td••irr•rirr1 nirrtl , *nerd tAir.r•.r Pan d•.•rr ridL,i•r.Lrtr 4
t.hC]IC €st]tttt [- YY� [:..::YY.....t.:C Sr € € t:: ...:.......:.:a....t
1 : 1111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111I1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 N i' a
141111119, 1111111111 It 1111111111111111111111111111111d IIIIIII'6f11 11111111 > ;.1
CA J CC Ad+ ri ..... .. ,i 1 }idrni �+rtrrtt
II 111111 II 111111 111111. ILII1 II IIIIII 11111.11 i11111I111111Iih1111111 .III111tt1I1IIIIIII IIId Ih111hkkhdhII11
I Q IR
1 C:C :d' r . d e irr rrwiErrr n r• +b EEr r E i i• rr • , rrd.1. r CE 0 ;if
J..
+id L
. ....:.
....,.rt.: °' r t.:' 1 ° "'.. €[[.:..]...... :.:CC:.t..[...Y..][CC[L[t:[Y1[: "" ' 1.1. :.[[:.....[Lt
!11111
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 :11111111111:1111111 111111111 111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111 1
111 lay! 11 1 ° g11' 4 1 1 1 +11111 111
"!1111111'11 111+
1 111 111 11 a 11 1iill ilfi4141111hifilllh16: 11d11111111111i11111 it: Il' u . a11111111Mi1d111111111 : ::1111hJ111111I11 i11_ i
rdi i EIZ: X r rii ::CC:ir 'rirrA t: rdrriid rrroidA +tl A r,i rrrlwr r idi.d rA ndA d' liar r _ rr •r !P. T 1
t C J.0 E t .. : .t tC .t C C t .. C 5 .
s�pr rr ?� pr1 , r •...s n rrrrp. -.• R r r.
Gni tt , uu ::.Y .......„ t CY . .....:: . ....... ....... .. 66:::6.6..61;66...... ., t:[t ... ..: g i fl
cIIIIIIniiiiii111111111III11111iIIIIIIiIliiiiii I iMilI11II1111111111111iinirnitlIIIIIIIIliniiIIIIIIIIIiiiiMIIIIIILI ' i
i1 1 1 1 1 11III i 1111 I 1 1 111 1 1 1 1I 1 1 11 1 1 1111 I11 �111 1 1 1II I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I II I I 1 11 1 1I11 1 1 1 I1 1 011 1 JI II IM i l 1I d hu i 1I I 1 11II all �I
±L dAdAldiri rdrEtAid ^rtr11 1A ++irlrrliir,M L t rij ' •rrr •n r 1't•irrr Atrr 6 irrr.•r rr , r ,
Mrr' r r n '..,.. , r ,r-7"::::::::::::
1111111111111: 111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111
t Il ili 1111111111IIII11iiiii1111iiiii. 1ull 4
il lill :llhillIlllliliil::li11111tiIiil licllil r 6 ;1111161111111
a:n t A+ in l r +r+ N Yi rrrr r ' n i• h rr d a., •1 r h n ' r �1 n •rir`
tt . A,• ".L A � L C E E E f t t tCi r
,. , .n ..,a .,C rr L :C
�r Y nr. 1] CY[G
f6t €t: :JJi1JSJJJ..iJn� � � t.::Jt..J a [�::Yittt '••• i :+ � e[[ :.:J .Ynu.tYY . .... nn:.un:Y
LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
III IIIIIII ,11111111I1T11111,011111111
111111111a111111I111dI111i1I I W111
r
crldiAifdili,rAr r rm.pri I p +n Ely1.
1 e r t n.r
uttttdat[E °'° ••' '
. %.. / \ / ' • \ /YlS /
r.
il r I _ tin . ,, L. . e, t. ^ rte• ' \ „ �.„,. . 'r
,,,,,,,, .. . 'L. ■.... , -
I �' r^
� _ \\ \`‘.
\♦ ♦\♦ a ka®
�.✓.��_ a�e_� ‘1.7._,-./ '.yeti \\\ .�� 2
}
� ... � [ +�i..•' .w . y . "' .
0 \ C rte _ ra le ..1 �. U ± \ ; �L` ■
a 1/4 oc
o..
TRACT 18134IEA9'¢ ,..
1
l y ¢ ,.,.
in-ma Mai
nwml - - ` - Nona MN RIMS 01111Ap «w MANG ova MY \ti '�`' \ \\ • ' „ gym/
her " t 6 W 1114-0611L0111 • KC / IAS Cle 6 N PU IR %V i 15 Y M
ti.) ! \ /`
xp US S6 nf1YMr N10.1W N41t1 py`` X
1nJlL NII[Y10 at VI =WA
t• 11
f.1.1.InwiM SO A . �,. ,� ��11'' Al
It w«a n«IN 1� r MV , 1 r W
■ • mw lanm C A SI ' L ER000 aa:_ \ l'•111f'U,111 >11l d�'I.iFh
:: n : Naw DAVIS � `� _ 15 �T1 teV. F ofolialbs
1•51.2-1•01 in 040
ln.amAlw n.a.ve <�71T.1.r.1UfI1Ie1:if6v; Wa «w MUOwn Nr- nxarw.. nw 01014 1011 Nn. w aM 1.• a oN « � ENGINEERING ` � � r'jf v IIN r*�n IPAS q OK MO NS wr.n NM lasamlm ueal «. Nn .rrc Nr. «.n«
\ ', ! TRACT 11... ' , �, T , ,Jq Il834'?;1E�RT
___ __'. - - - -- y1 \ ` j '. / , .. 1
7
+s .�..wsi a.�..��f GRAPHIC SCALE
.. tMIT n F�GGC PFN NM1R 1
\ •
� 1.. . FFNbt io aE N;YOAp
•� __ Tiii
➢T2�
4 _
l f 4
4
a in
- + ..0 .a, w . TRACT LL Q ®0ip� ' 4 1 1 r i 1l l •
_ a
O f11 Y%•• _4
LLCM �:1 =.-
a X1 1
r • 1 —,..M
'1 J
V 'iT
a ^,
MCKING;9ANAR4 - _
...�a..l .. .: 1 % 1.
TRACT 1334 EAST
a 1
PI MK RAN NOTES
� � � " � 6 \v ` - Fi
.,«..». �..
EOM a CM MICR -. t ,
MCC TO 9E WC
M�ENG RAN MOMS - 1/4-1 v x
e ININ'pashihilIq�L`ar -1
ENGINEERING �.. ti ml
ISi u .11 - TAI Of i 4 1 1 � {$
-w .... .l i ,
I
•
/ u lll / 1 ' I <. IIICII I' x\ \ III , I 1 • I 'I ' ' I L I •u�•, ri
' / / v v v vv1V / / /11i4"� 111 11 I 11 n I1I) 1 111 VI I 1 hIIIII�U11I111 LIP 'f r v , _
i. .\ \ I \I 111, I I I 1 ; /° M'4444 !4 I Y ; 1 1 II I c II I /' iti 1An 11 „ P - GRAPHIC SCALE „' 4ny
. . 4 1 1 � � ' Naga'
. _ ' . 1 "'t' \ \ \ r S 1 1 I I I . l 1 I 1. -1-1-tit IIIIIIii,1 I i q Inn
• = 1 l \ ` nr t 1_ t''+rr'r7 -1 U I 1 ' 1 1 I . Wppitlllil , I ,
Z's f I v. II \\ 11 i 1 I •4 i -yt-- yI1 1 � ` 111411 l ___ {
i M I I I i 1 111 hi I • I I' t ` , 1' 1 I T; I 1 solli��� / i i r 1 / � I �
.,!, ' ■ QI I \ 1 , - I I /r.- 1 I 1 I I ,.r� / w. r _ —4 4 -
I I .. i 1 \l �\ `?.}rl l” / +St /rl I l l ,l r 1 1 1 1 4 IIII" .. r, r t
1 \ .S \ ; ; 1 1111 I f I I Ni 1 11IIIIIIII / _ ... "�
YIV ) I n. 'a, lIN j1 l / II 'I 1I / ii , 11111111 I „,1 \ ;� , , ,?, ll i
r
\ , I. et / 11 ' I R 1 \\\h\ \\ �,�/ / '/' - ��I h1
TI /- O \ � . . . a� . .` J 1
L I 1 I I I ' i I 1I M � / -; ; 1111 '
• / / (,. / 1 1 1 i rmu, ,.. .T1 I / f �� "i `� \ 1 q 11 11\ I /
r I / ' ,r // / WS • I -,,, / I 1 I. ,; 41 11 II:, }��p mo o. / // .` \ .. �1 1� 1. • / l A , /. ` ' : _ 11' ; / t . 1 1 il // , I r., j: �'%� : f.., /. � , \� \ \Id1n1'u -, /.
/ �. 1 1 . 1 I / 11\\ I \ ,\ \IIg1
` 1 f lr r �a+ �ii .ra ' I /r1 // 1111 1 Y ,/ .r^' 1 O ^-} 1 \ \ , \ \. `l I 1 1 111 \ /' /
ga ,, / I a 1 I I 111 jr; /9-,e;',-,4 1 , \ \ \II 911\ • & I" I � , ! I . 1 11 1 1 r 11 1 ' 11 ' :I : / / .. '': \ \ \ 11 1 \ \q \ \I\I\� ; / •
/ /'�/ / / /, e:7 \ oG -/ \ , - 1 1 ' 11 \1 1 17 11111111 if ,J ll�� / i i , - \ ./ 1 • `, 1 .. 1 1' 11 1 \ \ , z . ,, , �.\ I /
a % / of / ,/ V 111 I/ i y { ,- : / . / \ . . Ems ..\
,C4 /.1/S • ' 711` X 1 / 1111 /l / , // 1 , , i 1 1 // / I ' — . `-.-'S-==' \ \ . 1 • rt 't - , c\ , =: 1 i> 1 .o \N ). .
I �� / / /i a T� -- -� r /ryr ll /r �r lrl /r /: ' /'�i -/ /:-.r."‘"""141------j : _ I I� \\ ��
S' ' ' ? 4•9 %.tom = / / ' • /' ' 1 1 v /1 /o I I . ., l\ Q\ j � `
'c ri�f'4 UL, .� .r .c am- .r /r /, / ✓ r , ' 1; / iN / i lll ' / r __ Z Q�\
• • I ti
TIFIACT e,
Ilffi�4 , .\ fit 1I ( r -, IOI f I.7- / , ./ 1 �
>,q / r 'h 4 ' Il2 9ffi � 5, . ,/
r �h. v'i i � 1 1 I.
i1F - 1 /� s ✓ ,Su' ' / 6 ( V / •
a➢$ / / // g " i1 y z C .-. :.- "T" yj t, N / ji ' I
r ` ._ - .�• • ,, l
t Y i /� Y / s Y 1 Y Ir'. / ' 1 :, / /
V !1'nF° /// I / / , ,7 A7 �. / /ice 'C+1t ' f // i / , . �'' r r `
hl /l /lj /i _ / Y: , +h / i Y.s y{y- bt ' 'L V r 1 Y / I
I l l' /a) j j %1 K'1 t Mi+v a a V \ /1 'i •
/ / /// % /(�$, d''�: A. �. /I _ v 1 '( 1,
4.,/,1/44,44,4,.. ' 11r. . o r � I L. :j- I w xr r. xxxe.xx r"'n'a t ; � + 1
rlr ex,r ra ». .s, ' '
now f �; ) f ,...0 t DAVIS t � 1111 I.• 7 1'.' 7' t rrii
ENGINEERING 0 Ili
C 0 iu y
,),. 1.4,Y -x11 M. wf r :.».
ra.a... .. t" ....w"7��.- _
■
tAt11BIT C -10 I 71
mato
11111 w...eM " Illittia
r` 1 \ ' - - -\ • ` \` � d i ;
I t + 9 t i p 1 I. rri n. 3 R 1-
x
!' j i
' $$$ ;II y
1 1 1
i x . 41 �� �.- *' � # # # #�' s
i. } j
1. a i
V . iv. n��
I 111 .AZ
: Ili ' .", ^!!‘ ,,,, ) \h 1 i li 1 1 l ij i 1 1 111 i c cE p
S ' i) 1 1�', ` I1 11
1 c
r i , 11 1 11 11 1; t il l } ��. ; � + : _ �� i ' 1 � {A \ i f "111 ° a7 111 ;
• 4 \ �I � , i �� \ 1,11 �i,1� ��� \, \� \\�' , \� � � �fl i 1' ti 1 ,; ,
•
1 � \
\ Sflit:,% ,) \ \ '.: ,1\ k'„` fi„,') ..> / . ,`' 1 I . ",,
. lit ' \` 'cii'''' ..„ 7 u ,,, ,,
p h . ti 1,
i. r` { \ \\l'e‘ i'� R i1 k ' r `
,oi t � 1 !c .., k it ) 1r i1 9'\v1 d ii
•
•
EXHIBIT "D"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a reporting or monitoring
program be adopted for the conditions of project approval that are necessary to mitigate or avoid
significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code 21081.6). The mitigation monitoring
and reporting program is designed to ensure compliance with adopted mitigation measures
during project implementation. For each mitigation measure recommended in the Revised Final
Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (RFSEIR) Second Addendum, specifications are made
herein that identify the action required and the monitoring that must occur. In addition, a
responsible agency is identified for verifying compliance with individual conditions of approval
contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
In order to implement this MMRP, the City of Arroyo Grande shall designate a Project Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Coordinator ( "Coordinator "). The coordinator shall be responsible for
ensuring that the mitigation measures incorporated into the project are complied with during
project implementation. Further, the coordinator will distribute copies of the MMRP to those
responsible agencies identified in the MMRP, which have partial or full responsibility for
implementing certain measures. Failure of a responsible agency to implement a mitigation
measure shall not in any way prevent the lead agency from implementing the proposed project.
It should be noted that several previous CEQA documents have been prepared for other portions
of the Rancho Grande subdivision. These previous CEQA documents did not specifically address
the project site. The comprehensive EIR for the entire subdivision adopted in January 1991
covered most of the recent phased subdivisions of the Rancho Grande Subdivision (Tracts 1834,
1994 and 1997) with the exception of the subject property (VTTM and P.U.D. 01 -001, formerly
known as Tract 1998). The SEIR is considered a follow up document to the 1991 EIR, but the
mitigation measures contained in the 1991 EIR would not apply to the proposed project.
Therefore, the mitigation measures included in the previous CEQA documents are not included in
this MMRP.
The following table shall be used as the Coordinator's checklist to determine compliance with
required mitigation measures.
Prepared by Rincon Consultants for the City of Arroyo Grande
99
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
AESTHETICS
AES - 1(a) Modification of Applicant The applicant shall Review design Review design AGCDD, AGBD
Design Guidelines. The following submit the design guidelines prior to guidelines
modifications to the applicant's proposed guidelines subject to final map once. Site
design guidelines are required: the review and recordation. Verify inspect for
approval of AGCDD. compliance prior to compliance
• All proposed guidelines noted as This requirement final inspection. once.
recommendations ( "G ") shall be shall be noted on
changed to requirements ( "R "). tract improvement
and building plans.
AES -2(a) Exterior Lighting. Outdoor light The applicant shall Review lighting Review plans AGCDD, AGBD
poles on internal streets shall be pedestrian submit the lighting plans prior to final once. Site
in scale, and shall not exceed ten (10) feet in plan subject to the map recordation (for inspect for
height and in accordance with standards set review and approval street lights) or compliance
by PG &E for maintenance. Such lighting of AGCDD. building permit once.
shall be designed to project downward and approval (individual
shall not create glare on adjacent properties. exterior lighting).
All lighting fixtures that are visible from Verify compliance
surrounding residences shall be designed to with approved plans
fully contain direct glare on -site, and shall be prior to final
hooded and shielded. Non -glare lighting inspection.
shall be used throughout the proposed
project. Exterior lighting shall be limited to
security and safety purposes.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
B -2(a) Riparian and Wetland Protection. The applicant shall Review permits Review permits AGCDD,
Implementation of the following measure submit the agency- prior to tract map once. Site AGBD,
would mitigate the loss of riparian/wetland approved wetland recordation. Site inspect as AGPWD,
habitat: compensation plan inspect throughout necessary USAGE,
and a copy of the all phases of during RWQCB,
1. If feasible, all wetland and riparian areas USACE permit, development to construction. CDFG
shall be avoided and building envelopes RWQCB 401 water ensure compliance
shall be located so that all riparian and quality certification, with all habitat
wetland habitat is buffered from and CDFG restoration
development (including grading) by a Streambed measures.
minimum 50 -foot setback measured from Alteration
the top of the creek bank or the outer Agreement or
edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is written confirmation
greater, unless another design would that a permit is not
provide an equivalent level of protection. required to AGCDD,
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
100
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
AGBD, and
2. The riparian and wetland habitat area AGPWD for review
and minimum 50 -foot buffer zone for and approval. All
preserved riparian /wetland areas shall aspects of the plan
be shown on all grading plans and shall shall be
be demarcated with highly visible implemented as
construction fencing. approved.
3. During construction activities, washing
of concrete, paint, or equipment shall
occur only in areas where polluted
water and materials can be contained
for subsequent removal from the site.
Washing of such materials shall not be
allowed near wetland and riparian
resources.
4. As a condition of the 50 -foot setback,
primary on -site stormwater drainage
shall not be allowed to enter the East
Fork of Meadow Creek. In addition, the
project applicant shall ensure that buffer
areas are revegetated using only plant
species native to the region.
Thereafter, a benefit maintenance
district shall be set up At-shall-be-the
to maintain the
buffer vegetation . -tt A benefit
maintenance district shall also include
be- the- responsibility ef•`oOA to to
implementation of a weed abatement
program in order to further ensure that
non - native species be excluded from
riparian /wetland areas. Public access
to buffer areas shall be prohibited . Any
back or front yards that abut buffer
areas shall be fenced in order to avoid
indirect impacts resulting from
unrestricted access.
The 50 -foot setback should be
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWOCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
101
Responsible
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
measured from the top of the creek
banks or the outer edge of riparian
vegetation, whichever is greater. For
residential lots that abut riparian areas,
the setback should be measured to the
property line of the proposed lot(s), not
to future structures. There should be no
private ownership of the riparian
setback area and access by people and
pets should be restricted.
If implementing the above measures is
not physically, technologically, or
economically feasible for construction of
the project as proposed, then the
following mitigation measures shall be
implemented, which require the
applicant to comply with Federal, State
and local laws and regulations, and
obtain the necessary permits from the
appropriate resource agencies. In doing
so, the permitting agencies and the
permit conditions imposed upon the
applicant will ensure that the habitats
are left in a condition as good as, or
better than, pre- construction conditions.
The respective agencies are required to
enforce any permit conditions. The
mitigation measures listed below are
intended to provide examples of the
requirements the applicant may have to
implement as part of this compliance,
and are not intended to assume or
suggest precisely what the permitting
agencies will require. Instead, they are
examples of mitigation measures that
have been provided as a result of
experience with the resource agencies
and typical permit conditions.
[Responds to City Council request to
clarify riparian setback requirements
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
102
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
and the feasibility of mitigation
measures.]
5. The applicant shall obtain a permit from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, a water quality certification
from the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) pursuant to Section
401 of the Clean Water Act, and a
Streambed Alteration Agreement from
the California Department of Fish and
Game pursuant to Section 1600 et seq.
of the California Fish and Game Code
for any grading or fill activity within
drainages and wetlands. It is
recommended that the applicant contact
these agencies prior to final plan
submittal in order to incorporate any
additional requirements into the project
design.
As part of the permitting process, the
applicant would likely be required to
provide a compensatory habitat
creation /restoration program to mitigate
impacts to jurisdictional wetland and
riparian areas. The mitigation
components of such a program would
be at the discretion of the applicable
regulatory agencies. The program
would be required to be written and
implemented by a qualified biologist,
and could include the following
components:
i. Mitigation plantings for the loss of
existing wetland and riparian
habitat shall be located in the
onsite drainages that are proposed
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
103
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
to be modified or preserved as part
of the proposed project to the
fullest extent feasible. The
compensatory program must
provide a minimum 2:1 ratio of
habitat values and functions to that
impacted. However, agency
permitting may require a higher
ratio. If onsite mitigation is not
feasible, offsite options may be
considered in accordance with the
requirements of the agencies.
ii. As part of the plan, the applicant
shall prepare and submit for
approval a mitigation - phasing plan
to ensure that all restoration
plantings are in place with sufficient
irrigation prior to final inspection.
iii. Mitigation plantings shall be with
native riparian and wetland species
from locally collected stock.
iv. Removal of native species in the
creeks /drainages that are to be
retained shall be prohibited.
v. Outlet structures shall minimize
disturbance to the natural drainage
and avoid use of hard bank
structures. Where erosion from
outlet structures is a concern and
bank stabilization must be utilized,
bioengineering techniques (e.g.,
fiber mats and rolls, willow wattling,
and natural anchors) shall be used
for bank retaining walls. If concrete
must be used, then prefabricated
crib wall construction shall be used
rather than pouring concrete. Rock
grouting shall only be used if no
other feasible alternative is
available as determined by the
City's Community Development
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
104
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
and Public Works Departments.
vi. The drainage bottoms shall not be
disturbed or altered by installation
of any drain or outlet structure.
Natural rocks imbedded in the
stream bank shall be utilized as a
base to tie in riprap if necessary;
vii. A grease trap and /or silt basin shall
be installed in all drop inlets closest
to the creek to prevent oil, silt and
other debris from entering the
creek. Such traps /basins shall be
maintained and cleaned out every
spring and fall to prevent overflow
situations and potential mosquito
habitats from forming. Public Works
shall be responsible for
maintenance activities of grease
traps and /or silt basins that convey
water runoff from the street. The
homeowners association shall be
responsible for maintenance
activities of grease traps and /or silt
basins which convey stormwater
runoff from undeveloped portions of
the site around the developed
portions of the site; and
viii. Construction envelopes shall be
restricted to those areas shown on
approved site Grading Plans in
order to avoid impacts to native
vegetation and riparian /wetland
habitats. Envelope boundaries
shall be staked in the field.
Approved construction envelopes
shall be shown on all approved
grading and building plans; and
B -3(a) Pre - construction Survey and Tree The applicant shall Review tree survey, Review tree AGCDD,
Protection Plan. Prior to Final Tract Map conduct tree tree map and tree protection plan AGPRD,
Approval, a revised accurate map identifying survey, submit tree protection plan, and once. Collect AGPWD
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD- Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
105
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
and locating all existing onsite trees and all map and tree collect performance performance
existing trees that are off -site but affected by protection plan to bond prior to tract bond once.
the project shall be prepared by a certified AGCDD. Post map approval. Site inspect as
arborist and submitted to the City. Such performance bond. Verify compliance necessary
map shall also identify all existing trees that Implement tree during and following during and
are proposed by the applicant for removal or protection plan construction. following
destruction, and such trees shall be visibly during and following Review tree construction.
marked for inspection. construction. replacement Review tree
monitoring reports replacement
Oak trees and Oak Woodland habitat shall annually. monitoring
be avoided by adjusting or removing reports
proposed lots to eliminate inclusion of oak annually.
trees. If avoidance of oak trees in not
feasible, oak trees included within lots shall
require mitigation.
Each tree or group of trees designated to
remain in place shall be protected by a five -
foot fence enclosure, prior to the beginning
of construction. The fence shall be wooden,
chain link, or plastic barricade fencing. The
location of the fence is normally at the
dripline of the tree, but it may by adjusted or
omitted with the City's written approval. In
addition, the Community Development,
Public Works and Parks and Recreation
Departments shall monitor construction
activities and enforce an approved tree
protection plan. No parking of vehicles or
equipment, or storage of materials shall be
permitted within the dripline of the trees
designated to remain. In the event that
underground utilities must be placed within
the dripline of the trees to remain, the utilities
shall be installed by auguring at 24 inches
minimum depth or by hand trenching. If
roots over one inch in diameter are
encountered, the roots shall be preserved
without injury. No machine trenching within
a tree's dripline shall be permitted, unless
authorized, in writing, by the Parks and
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD- Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
106
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
Recreation director.
To ensure protection of trees, a performance
bond may be required, as acceptable to the
City, in the amount of $1,500.00, or the value
of each affected tree, whichever is greater.
If no damage to protected trees has
occurred, in the opinion of the certified
arborist and the Parks and Recreation
Department, the bond shall be returned upon
final building inspection. If damage to
protected trees is determined to have
occurred, the bond shall be held for three
years and forfeited if, in the opinion of the
certified arborist and the Parks and
Recreation Department, permanent damage
has occurred.
Replacement plantings shall be at more than
a 3:1 ratio and shall be minimum 15- gallon
sized nursery trees, or a sufficient number of
locally grown seedlings planted under the
direction of a City- approved arborist or
botanist that provides an equivalent level of
mitigation. Replacement and relocated
trees shall be planted in a natural setting (not
as landscaping) at the canopy /dripline edge
of existing mature native oak trees; on north-
facing slopes; within drainage swales
(except when riparian habitat is present);
where topsoil is present; and away from
continuously wet areas (e.g., lawns, irrigation
areas, landscaping, etc.), to create oak
woodland habitat to the extent possible. A
seasonally timed maintenance program and
appropriate browse protection will be
developed for all oak tree planting areas on
the project site. A City approved qualified
arborist/botanist shall be retained to monitor
the acquisition, installation, and maintenance
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWOCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
107
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
of all oak trees to be replaced and relocated
on the project site. Replacement and
relocated trees shall be monitored and
maintained by a qualified arborist/botanist for
at least five years or until the trees have
successfully established as determined by
the City Parks and Recreation Director.
Annual monitoring reports that evaluate oak
tree survivability and vigor shall be prepared
by the certified arborist and submitted the
City.
All trees planted or relocated as mitigation
shall have a 90% survival rate after five
years. If the five year survival rate of trees
planted or relocated as mitigation is less
than 90 %, the number of trees required to
reach 90% survival shall be replaced at a 1:1
ratio. All replacement mitigation trees (trees
planted to replace those that did not survive
the five year period), shall in turn have a
survival rate of 100% five years from date of
planting. Tree monitoring and replacement
shall continue until an overall five year, 90%
survival rate is reached for mitigation trees.
Planted or relocated trees shall not be
located as to adversely impact on -site
occurrences of Pismo clarkia.
B - 3(b) Subsequent Grading Plans and The applicant shall Verify that the tree Review tree AGCDD,
Tree Mitigation. Tree mitigation is based submit a final tree report and tree protection plan AGPRD,
upon the Tree Mitigation Plan Map report and tree protection plan are once. Site AGPWD
(Castlerock Development 1998), which may protection plan adequate prior to inspect as
change depending on the final approved prepared by a City- tract map approval. necessary
project. Therefore, prior to the approval of approved arborist or Verify compliance during and
grading permits, final impacts to trees on the biologist that during and following following
project site shall be re- evaluated by a includes the construction. construction.
certified arborist and submitted to the City. species, quantity, Review tree Review tree
Mitigation Measures for any trees impacted and status (live, replacement replacement
by the final approved project shall be the dead, diseased, monitoring reports monitoring
same as presented in B -3(a). etc.) of native trees annually. reports
to be removed prior annually.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
108
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
to initiation of the
proposed project.
This report shall
also identify the
final number of
replacement trees
utilizing the City's
replacement ratio
identified above. All
aspects of the plans
shall be
implemented as
approved. Prior to
site occupancy,
trees shall be
planted, fenced,
and appropriately
irrigated.
B-4(a) Pismo Clarkia Avoidance. The applicant shall Review avoidance Review AGCDD,
1. If feasible, all Pismo darkia occurrences submit for approval measures prior to avoidance AGPWD,
shall be avoided and building envelopes that the Pismo tract map approval. measures once. AGPRD,
shall be located so that all occurrences clarkia occurrences Site inspect to Site inspect USFWS, CDFG
are buffered from development (including have been evaluate the site for once prior to
grading) by a minimum 50 -foot setback appropriately compliance prior to construction and
from the edge of the occurrence. fenced. and during as necessary
2. The Pismo clarkia occurrences and construction. during
minimum 50 -foot buffer zone for construction.
preserved areas shall be shown on all
grading plans and shall be demarcated
with highly visible construction fencing.
3. Temporary fencing shall be installed
around the Pismo darkia occurrences
prior to any construction activities,
including ground disturbance or site
grading. Protective fencing shall remain
in place throughout the project
construction period.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
109
Mitigation Measure/Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Action Required Agency or
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
B-4(b) Agency Coordination— Because The applicant shall Prior to any The City shall AGCDD,
the required buffers for onsite Pismo clarkia submit a Pismo significant verify that the AGPWD,
occurrences may be impacted during clarkia mitigation vegetation clearing annual AGPRD,
construction of the proposed access road, and monitoring plan or any grading and monitoring USFWS, CDFG
the applicant shall hire a qualified botanist to developed by a City except for approved program has
develop a species habitat mitigation and approved botanist fuel modification been
monitoring plan. The applicant's botanist in conjunction with activities, the City conducted by a
shall work with the DFG and City to prepare CDFG and USFWS. shall verify that the City approved
an approvable plan that provides the All special status- DFG and USFWS botanist.
necessary methods and techniques to species identified has reviewed the
ensure the ability of impacted and mitigated as potentially mitigation and
onsite occurrences to exist in perpetuity. A impacted by the monitoring plan,
salvage and relocation program shall also be proposed project and that any
included to collect seed of any individual shall be included. recommendations
plants that migrate into the development The mitigation and by the resources
footprint. Salvage and relocation shall monitoring plan agencies have been
consist of collecting mature seed and shall be incorporated into
distributing it into preserved open space implemented at a the final mitigation
areas with the necessary habitat attributes to minimum of five and monitoring
support Pismo clarkia. In addition, creation years, or _a program.
of new occurrences in onsite open spaces reasonable time
as well as enhancement of existing frame the City,
occurrences through weed abatement and CDFG and USFWS
introduction of greenhouse grown plants has deemed
may be required to achieve the primary goal appropriate, prior to
of no- net -loss. The mitigation and monitoring any construction
plan shall be submitted to both DFG and activities onsite.
USFWS for their review and their comments Because there is
incorporated prior to final approval. At a little known about
minimum, the plan shall include: the feasibility of
The overall goal and measurable objectives propagating and
of the mitigation and monitoring plan; reintroducing Pismo
Specific areas proposed for revegetation clarkia, a minimum
and their size; of five years of
Specific habitat management and protection annual data
concepts to be used to ensure long -term collection will be
maintenance and protection of impacted necessary to
Pismo clarkia occurrences and other evaluate the
impacted special- status species to be salvage and
included (i.e.: annual population census reintroduction
surveys and habitat assessments; program to
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB – Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG – California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
110
Responsible
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or
Approval Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
establishment of monitoring reference sites; determine if it is
fencing of Pismo clarkia preserves and successful. The
signage to identify the environmentally approved botanist
sensitive areas; a seasonally -timed weed or horticulturalist
abatement program; and seasonally -timed implementing the
seed collection, propagation, and mitigation and
reintroduction of Pismo clarkia into specific monitoring plan,
receiver sites); which includes the
Success criteria based on the goals and salvage and
measureable objectives to promote a viable reintroduction
Pismo clarkia population within the planned program, shall be
re- vegetation areas on the project site in required to keep
perpetuity; records of all
An adaptive management program to propagation and
address both foreseen and unforeseen reintroduction
circumstances relating to the preservation methods and
and mitigation programs; techniques. This
Remedial measures to address negative information shall be
impacts to Pismo clarkia and its habitat that made available to
may occur during construction activities as other scientists
well as post - construction when dwellings are working on similar
occupied; rare plant
An education program to inform residents of conservation
the presence of Pismo clarkia and other projects.
special- status plants and sensitive biological
resources onsite, and to provide methods
that residents can employ to reduce impacts
to Pismo clarkia occurrences in protected
open space areas;
Reporting requirements to ensure consistent
data collection and reporting methods used
by monitoring personnel.
The primary goal of the mitigation and
monitoring plan shall ensure a viable
population and no- net -loss of Pismo clarkia
habitat within the project area from the
impacts of project development. To ensure a
no -net -loss of this species, the applicant
shall create, restore and /or enhance a two to
one ratio of suitable Pismo clarkia habitat for
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWOCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
111
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
any suitable habitat impacted by project
development. If monitoring data collected
over a several year period determine that
gross population numbers are consistently
declining within the restoration areas from
the baseline population census data, then
additional measures (i.e.: habitat
assessments to determine factors
influencing low population numbers, erosion
control, additional reintroduction efforts, and
weed abatement etc.) shall occur to ensure
the long -term viability of the replacement
Pismo clarkia occurrences and to
reintroduce genetic material collected form
extant occurrences within the site vicinity.
B-4(c) Worker Education Program. Conduct worker Prior to Once. AGCDD,
Before any grading or construction activities education program commencement of AGPWD
commence, all personnel associated with the and distribute fact grading or
project shall attend a worker education sheet. Notify construction.
program regarding the sensitive biological AGCDD and
resources occurring in the project area (i.e., AGPWD in advance
Pismo clarkia and other biological resources of meeting.
susceptible to project related impacts).
Specifics of this program shall include
identification of Pismo clarkia and its habitat,
and careful review of the mitigation
measures required to reduce impacts to this
species. A fact sheet conveying this
information shall also be prepared for
distribution to all contractors, their
employers, and other personnel involved
with construction of the project. The
Community Development, Public Works and
Building Departments shall be notified of the
time that the applicant intends to hold this
meeting.
B -5(b) Ground Disturbance Timing. In The applicant shall Review survey Review survey AGCDD
order to avoid impacts to nesting birds submit the results of results prior to results once.
including the ground- nesting northern the above surveys, issuance of grading Site inspect as
harrier, or other birds protected under the as applicable, for permits. Site necessary
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWOCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
112
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, all initial ground approval by the inspect as during
disturbing activities and tree removal should AGCDD. AGCDD necessary during construction.
be avoided from March 31 to September 15, to check plans for construction.
unless a pre - construction survey for active compliance with
nests within the limits of grading is any mitigation
conducted by a qualified biologist at the site measures
two weeks prior to any construction recommended by
activities. If active nests are located, then all the surveys and site
construction work must be conducted at inspect during
least 50 to 250 feet from the nest until the construction.
adults and young are no longer reliant on the
nest site, as determined by a qualified
biologist.
8 -5(c) Pet Brochure. The applicant shall The applicant shall Review information Once. AGCDD
prepare a brochure that informs prospective draft a notice prior to occupancy
homebuyers and all HOA members about indicating the above clearance. The
the impacts associated with non - native information, subject applicant shall
animals, especially cats and dogs, and other to approval by develop a package
non - native animals to the project site; AGCDD. of information to be
similarly, inform potential homebuyers and provided to home
all HOA members of the potential for coyotes buyers, obtain buyer
to prey on domestic animals. signatures on an
appropriate form
indicating that they
received the
package of
information, and
provide the signed
form to AGCDD
prior to issuance of
Certificate of
Occupancy for each
unit.
B -5(d) Night Lighting Standards. The The applicant shall Review plans prior Review plans AGCDD
following standards pertaining to night submit a lighting to final map once. Site
lighting shall be added to the project's design plan for approval by clearance. Site inspect once.
guidelines: the AGCDD. inspect one year
• Night lighting of public areas shall be AGCDD shall check after completion of
plans and site development for
kept to the minimum necessary for inspect for compliance.
safety and security purposes. compliance.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
113
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Action Required Agency or
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
• Exterior lighting within 100 feet of open
space shall be shielded and aimed as
needed to avoid spillover into open
space areas. Decorative lighting shall
be low intensity.
B - 5(e) Native Landscaping. In order to The applicant shall Review landscaping Review plans AGCDD,
ensure that project landscaping does not submit a plan prior to final once. Site AGPRD
introduce invasive non - native plant and tree landscaping plan for tract approval. Site inspect once.
species into the vicinity of the site, the final approval by inspect six months
landscaping plan shall be reviewed and AGCDD and after completion of
approved by a City approved biologist. All AGPRD. The plan the development for
invasive plant and tree species shall be changes shall be compliance.
removed from the landscaping plan. These recorded with the
include the following: final map.
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME
Trees:
Acacia spp. Wattle
Populus fremontii Cottonwood
Schinusmolle California Pepper
Tree
Schinus terebinthifolius Brazilian Pepper
Tree
Shrubs /Ground Covers:
Acacia redolens Wattle
Arctostaphylos densitlora Sonoma manzanita
Arctostaphylos densiflora McMinn manzanita
Arctotheca calendula Cape weed
Cotoneaster dammed Bearberry
cotoneaster
Cotoneaster spp. Cotoneaster
Myoporum pacificum Myoporum
Myoporum parvifolium Myoporum
Pyracantha spp. Firethorn
In addition, the following discusses concerns
with other species that are present in the
suggested plant list. If cottonwood trees are
desired, black cottonwood (Populus
balsami /era ssp. hichocarpa) shall be
utilized. Manzanita species planted onsite
shall be species that are local and regional
natives. A specific species of Ceanothus
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCOD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
114
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
shall be identified, because hybridization of
certain species does occur. If creeping St.
John's wort (Hypenicum caycinum) is
planted it shall not be planted on perimeters
of open space to limit vegetative spread.
The plant list identified Clarkia spp., however
this needs to be specific. Clarkia purpurea is
recommended because it is known to occur
in the area.
B -5(f) Wildlife Corridor Preservation.
Preservation of the wildlife corridors
that are present on the project site can be
achieved with sufficient setbacks from
Riparian and Wetland Habitats and by Refer to Mitigation Measure B -2(a), Riparian and Wetland Protection, setback values to allow for Riparian/Wetland corridor
avoiding direct and indirect impacts to oak preservation, and to Mitigation Measure B -3(a) for oak tree avoidance and mitigation measures.
Woodland habitat. Refer to Mitigation
Measure B -2(a), Riparian and Wetland
Protection, setback values to allow for
RiparianNVetland corridor preservation, and
to Mitigation Measure B -3(a) for oak tree
avoidance and mitigation measures.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CR -1(a) Archaeological Resource Conduct orientation Throughout Site inspect as AGCDD,
Construction Monitoring. At the meeting, monitor construction of each necessary AGPWD,
commencement of project construction, an construction for project phase. during AGBD
orientation meeting shall be conducted by an archaeological construction.
archaeologist for construction workers resources.
associated with earth disturbing activities.
The orientation meeting shall describe the
possibility of exposing unexpected
archaeological resources and directions as
to what steps are to be taken if such a find is
encountered.
A qualified archaeologist and Native
American representative shall monitor all
earth moving activities within native soil.
Alternatively, a Phase II archaeological
survey shall be conducted and
recommendations may be considered for
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
115
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
implementation through this MMRP.
In the event that archaeological or historic
artifacts are encountered during project
construction, all work in the vicinity (50 yards
or greater, as determined by an
archaeologist) of the find will be halted until
such time as a qualified archaeologist
evaluates the find and appropriate mitigation
(e.g., curation, preservation in place, etc.), if
necessary, is implemented.
In the event of the accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains in any
location, the following steps will be taken:
I. There shall be no further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie
adjacent human remains until:
A. The coroner of the county in which
the remains are discovered has
been contacted, and determined
that no investigation of the cause of
death is required, or
B. Where the coroner determines the
remains to be Native American:
1. The coroner shall notify the
Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours;
2. The Native American Heritage
Commission shall identify the
person or persons it believes
to be most likely descended
from the deceased Native
American; and
3. The most likely descendent
has had the opportunity to
work with the landowner or the
person responsible for the
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
116
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
excavation work, on the means
of treating or disposing of, with
appropriate dignity, the human
remains and any associated
grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98.
II. Where the following conditions occur,
the landowner or his authorized
representatives shall repatriate the
Native American human remains and
associated grave items with appropriate
dignity on the property in a location not
subject to further subsurface
disturbance. However, any such activity
will be pursuant to the discretion of a
Chumash representative if a
descendent is either not identified or
fails to respond to notification.
A. The Native American Heritage
Commission is unable to identify a
most likely descendent or the most
likely descendent failed to make a
recommendation within 24 hours
after being notified by the
commission.
B. The descendent identified fails to
make a recommendation; or
C. The landowner or his authorized
representative rejects the
recommendation of the
descendent, and the mediation by
the Native American Heritage
Commission fails to provide
measures acceptable to the
landowner.
III. Halt Work Order. If human remains are
unearthed, State Health and Safety
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDO - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
117
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
Code Section 7050.5 requires that no
further disturbance of the site or any
nearby area reasonably suspected to
overlie adjacent human remains shall
occur until the County Coroner has
made the necessary findings as to
origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. If
the remains are determined to be of
Native American descent, the coroner
has 24 hours to notify the Native
American Heritage Commission.
GEOLOGIC RESOURCES
G - 1(a) CBC Compliance. Above - ground Final project plans Review plans prior Review plans AGBD
structures shall be designed and built submitted to AGBD to issuance of once. Site
according to California Building Code shall have a note building permits. inspect as
Seismic standards. printed on the plans Site inspect prior to necessary
which specify CBC occupancy during and
Seismic standards clearance. following
for all structures. construction.
Building plans
submitted in an
application for a
Building Permit
shall include
documentation that
these standards are •
met. Final project
plans shall be
submitted which
include the required
design
specifications.
G - 3(a) Soils /Foundation Report. In order The applicant shall AGPWD shall Review plans AGPWD,
to avoid soil - related hazards, the individual notify AGPWD review and approve once. Site AGBP
lot owners and the project applicant shall regarding specific the methods to inspect as
provide soils /foundation reports that methods to avoid avoid soils related necessary
specifically identify expansive soils hazards soils related hazards (including during
as part of the application for Building hazards and the foundation construction.
Permit(s). To reduce the potential for implement design) prior to
foundation cracking, the reports may approved methods. issuance of Building
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
118
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
recommend that one or more of the following Permits. Building
be considered during design of the project: inspectors shall
make site
1. Use continuous deep footings (i.e., inspections to
embedment depth of 3 feet or more) assure
and concrete slabs on grade with implementation of
increased steel reinforcement together approved plans.
with a pre- wetting and long -term Grading inspectors
moisture control program within the shall monitor
active zone. technical aspects of
2. Removal of the highly expansive the grading
material and replacement with non- activities
expansive import fill material.
3. The use of specifically designed drilled
pier and grade beam system
incorporating a structural concrete slab
on grade supported approximately 6
inches above the expansive soils.
4. Chemical treatment with hydrated lime
to reduce the expansion characteristics
of the soils.
G -3(b) Expansive Soil Damage. The The applicant shall AGPWD shall Review plans AGPWD,
expansion indices of individual lots should be notify AGPWD review and approve once. Site AGBP
determined on a lot- specific basis. In the regarding specific the methods to inspect as
event that expansive soils will underlie methods to avoid avoid soils related necessary
potential developments, the use of soils related prior to issuance of during
nonexpansive import or presaturation of hazards and Building Permits. construction.
subslab soils in areas where slabs will implement Site inspect to
overlie expansive soils is recommended. If it approved methods. assure
is elected to use nonexpansive import, the implementation of
thickness of nonexpansive material should approved plans.
be determined based upon the results of Grading inspectors
expansion index testing performed on shall monitor
individual lots. The import shall be placed in technical aspects of
lifts not exceeding 12 inches and compacted the grading
to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry activities.
density until finished grade is reached.
G -3(c) Grading and Erosion Control Plan. The grading and Review plans prior Review plans AGPWD,
A grading and erosion control plan that erosion control plan to issuance of once. Site AGBP
minimizes erosion, sedimentation and shall be submitted grading permits. inspect as
unstable slopes shall be prepared and for review and Site inspect to necessary
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
119
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
implemented by the project applicant or approval to assure during
representative thereof, prior to final map AGPWD. This implementation of construction.
recordation. It must include the following: condition shall be approved plans.
noted on grading Grading inspectors
a. Methods such as retention basins, plans. The shall monitor
drainage diversion structures, spot applicant shall notify technical aspects of
grading, silt fencing /coordinated City permit the grading
sediment trapping, straw bales, and compliance prior to activities.
sand bags shall be used to minimize commencement of
erosion on slopes and prevent siltation grading.
into the East Fork of Meadow Creek
and its tributaries during grading and Building inspectors
construction activities. shall make site
b. Graded areas shall be revegetated inspections to
within 4 weeks of grading activities with assure
deep- rooted, native, drought - tolerant implementation of
species to minimize slope failure and approved plans.
erosion potential. If determined Grading inspectors
necessary by the Community shall monitor
Development Department and Public technical aspects of
Works Department, irrigation shall be the grading
provided. Geotextile binding fabrics activities.
shall be used if necessary to hold slope
soils until vegetation is established.
c. After construction of tract improvements
and until construction of individual
homes, exposed areas shall be
stabilized to prevent wind and water
erosion, using methods approved by the
City Community Development
Department, Public Works and Building
Departments and APCD. These
methods may include: topsoil is to be
imported and spread on the ground
surface in areas having soils that can be
transported by the wind, and /or the
mixing of the highly erosive sand with
finer- grained materials (silt or clay) in
sufficient quantities to prevent its ability
to be transported by wind. The topsoil
or silt/clay mixture is to be used to
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
120
•
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
stabilize the existing soil to prevent its
ability to be transported by wind. As a
minimum, six inches of topsoil or
silt/clay /sand mixture is to be used to
stabilize the wind - erodable soils.
d. Where necessary, site preparation shall
include the removal of all or a portion of
the expansive soils at the building sites
and replacement with compacted fill.
e. Where necessary, construction on
transitional lots shall include
overexcavation to expose firm
subgrade; use of post tension slabs in
future structures, or other geologically
acceptable method.
f. Landscaped areas adjacent to
structures shall be graded so that
drainage is away from structures.
g. Irrigation shall be controlled so that
overwatering does not occur. An
irrigation schedule shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Community
Development Department and Public
Works Departments prior to land use
clearance for grading.
h. Grading on slopes steeper than 5:1
shall be designed to minimize surface
water runoff.
i. Fills placed on slopes steeper than 5:1
shall be properly benched prior to
placement of fill.
j. Brow ditches and /or berms shall be
constructed and maintained above all
cut and fill slopes, respectively.
k. Cut and fill benches shall be
constructed at regular intervals.
I. Retaining walls shall be proposed as
part of building construction to stabilize
slopes where there is a 10 -foot or
greater difference in elevations between
buildable lots.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
121
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
m. The applicant shall limit excavation and
grading to the dry season of the year
(typically April 15 to November 1,
allowing for variations in weather)
unless a Community Development and
Public Works Department approved
erosion control plan is in place and all
measures therein are in effect.
n. The applicant shall post a performance
bond as determined by and with the City
and hire a Community Development
Department and Public Works
Department - qualified geologist or soils
engineer prior to land use clearance for
grading, and to ensure that erosion is
controlled and mitigation measures are
properly implemented. The applicant
shall post a performance bond as
determined by and with the City and
hire a qualified geologist or soils
engineer prior to land use clearance for
grading, and to ensure that erosion is
controlled and mitigation measures are
properly implemented.
G -4(b) Development on Steep Slopes. As Refrain from During construction, As necessary AGPWD
prescribed by Title 16 of the City of Arroyo development on prior to occupancy during and
Grande Development Code, building and slopes exceeding clearance. following
grading is not permitted on slopes of 25% 20 %. construction.
and greater. Steep slopes (considered to be
20 -25 %) present a danger to landsliding,
slope failure, sedimentation of on -site
drainages due to accelerated runoff and soil
erosion. Because of the erosive qualities of
the site, site improvement shall be prohibited
on slopes exceeding 20 %.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
H -1(a) BMP Implementation During The applicant shall Review SWPPP Review permit AGPWD
Construction. Best Management obtain an NPDES and NPDES permit once. Site
Practices shall be used during project permit and comply prior to approval of inspect as
implementation, as part of the SWPPP. with all NPDES and tract improvement necessary
BMPs that could be used on the project SWPPP permit plants for tract during
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
122
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
site include: measures. grading and map construction.
recordation. Site
Pollutant Escape Deterrence inspect as
• Prohibit on -site storage. Cover all necessary during
other storage areas including soil construction.
piles, fuel and chemical depots.
Protect exposed temporary materials
from rain and wind with plastic sheets
and temporary roofs.
Pollutant Containment Areas
• Locate all construction- related
equipment and related processes that
contain or generate pollutants (i.e.
fuel, lubricant and solvents, cement
dust and slurry) in isolated areas with
proper protection from escape. Locate
the above - mentioned in secure areas,
away from storm drains and gutters.
Place the above- mentioned in bermed,
plastic-lined depressions to contain all
materials within that site in the event
of accidental release or spill. Park,
fuel and clean all vehicles and
equipment in one designated,
contained area.
Pollutant Detainment Methods
• Protect downstream drainages from
escaping pollutants by capturing
sediment carried in runoff and
preventing transport from the site.
Examples of detainment methods that
retard movement of water and
separate sediment and other
contaminants are silt fences, hay
bales, sand bags, berms, silt and
debris basins.
Erosion Control
• Large projects should be scheduled
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCOD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
123
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
into phases that allow for erosion
control of smaller areas rather than a
single, large exposed site. Vegetation
should only be removed when
necessary and immediately before
grading.
• Schedule excavation and grading
work for dry weather. These activities
may be prohibited between the
months of November and April.
• Slope stabilizers should be utilized.
These include natural fiber erosion
control blankets of varying densities
according to specific slope/ site
conditions.
• Expedite the restoration of natural
erosion control and reduce risk of
slope failure by immediately
revegetating and irrigating until first
one inch of rain. Revegetation should
be completed no later than October
1st so vegetation has had a chance to
stabilize the soil before the rains
begin.
• Reduce fugitive dust by wetting
graded areas with an adequate yet
conservative amount of water. Cease
grading operations in high winds.
Recycling/Disposal
• Provide recycling facilities. Develop •
protocol for maintaining a clean site.
This includes proper recycling of
construction - related materials and
equipment fluids (i.e., concrete dust,
cutting slurry, motor oil and
lubricants).
• Provide disposal facilities. Develop
protocol for cleanup and disposal of
small construction wastes (i.e., dry
concrete).
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r 124 City of Arroyo Grande
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
Hazardous Materials Identification and
Response
• Develop protocol for identifying risk
operations and materials. Include
protocol for identifying
spilled- materials source, distribution;
fate and transport of spilled materials.
• Provide protocol for proper clean -up of
equipment and construction materials,
and disposal of spilled substances
and associated cleanup materials.
• Provide emergency response plan
that includes contingencies for
assembling response team and
immediately notifying appropriate
agencies.
The actual BMPs to be implemented onsite
would be developed as part of the SWPPP
required for site construction.
H -2(a) Flood Protection Measures. The The applicant shall Prior to map Site inspect AGPWD
applicant shall implement flood protection submit the hydraulic recordation, once prior to
measures addressing potential flood risks. model and revised AGPWD shall site map recordation
These measures shall include: grading and inspect to verify all and as
drainage plan to the flood protection necessary
a. Development of a hydraulic model of satisfaction of measures have following
East Fork Meadow Creek as it flows AGPWD. Public been implemented. construction.
through the tract under proposed Works shall be
conditions. This model generates an responsible for
expected water surface elevation used maintenance
in determining the proper height of activities drainage
proposed building lots so as to avoid facilities that convey
flooding during high -flow events. The water runoff from
culvert in La Canada under conditions the street. The
of 50% blockage should be included in homeowners
the model. The grading plan should association shall be
ensure that proposed finish floor responsible for
elevations are at least 1 foot above the maintenance
modeled flood elevations. activities of
b. Design of Blossom Valley Road drainage facilities
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department U$ACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
125
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency
Party Initial Date Comments
(formerly "C" Street) where it crosses which convey
the East Fork Meadow Creek such that stormwater runoff
the 100 -year storm passes without from undeveloped
overtopping the adjacent banks. portions of the site
67 A drainage maintenance plan drawn up around the
to include regular culvert maintenance developed portions
(especially during the rainy season) and of the site.
removal of accumulated sediment and
debris in the channel. The maintenance
of internal drainage features on private
property shall be the responsibility of
either a Home Owners Association
(HOA). Drainage on public property,
easement or right of way shall be the
responsibility of a Maintenance District.
tura
d. Design and installation of trash racks
upstream of the culvert entrances to
lessen the risk of debris blockage during
large storm events.
H -2(b) Streambank Vicinity Construction The applicant shall Review permits Review permits AGPWD,
Guidelines. The applicant shall limit grading obtain all necessary prior to issuance of once. Site CDFG,
and construction activities in the vicinity of permits, submit a grading permits. inspect as USACE,
the streambank according to the following revised grading AGPWD shall site necessary RWQCB
guidelines so as to lessen the risk of plan showing inspect during during
streambank erosion and possible minimum setbacks, construction to construction.
undermining of proposed structures. These and submit detailed verify that all
guidelines shall include: designs of roads setbacks are
and retaining walls observed and
a. Appropriate erosion control structures to the satisfaction of construction is
shall be included at the entrance and AGPWD. carried out as
exit of the conveyance structure under designed.
"C" Street where it crosses the creek. Permit agencies
b. All necessary environmental permits may have additional
shall be applied for and complied with. permit and
These permits shall include, but are not monitoring
limited to, a Streambed Alteration requirements.
Agreement (California Department of
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
126
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
Fish and Game), Section 401 Permit
(State Water Resources Control Board),
and a Section 404 Permit (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers).
H -3(a) Adequate Detention. The Plan requirements Review plan Review plans AGPWD
downstream detention basin was analyzed in shall be submitted requirements prior once. Site
December of 2002 by Garing Taylor & by the applicant for to issuance of inspect as
Associates in order to determine if the basin review and approval grading permits. necessary
is able to detain stormwater flows from the by the AGPWD. Review installation during
Rancho Grande PD 1.2 and release flows at Installation of of detention facilities construction.
rates equal to or less than pre - development detention facilities prior to occupancy
conditions, as originally designed. The report shall be performed clearance.
states that the existing retardation basin can by the project
be used to capture silt from the storm runoff applicant per
by over excavating the basin bottom below approved plans.
the lowest outlet elevation. As such, prior to
tract improvements, the James Way
detention basin shall be restored based on
the current report by GTA (refer to Appendix
J) as approved by the Director of Public
Works. According to the Conditions of
Approval number 50 for the development of
Tract 1 834, the Homeowners' Association
shall maintain the basin and other on -site
drainage facilities.
H -3(b) Drainage Plan. For tract- related and The drainage plans Grading inspectors Review plans AGPWD
individual lot drainage, all runoff water from shall be submitted shall monitor once. Site
impervious areas shall be conveyed by for review and technical aspects of inspect as
surface or underground conduits, capable of approved by the grading necessary
conveying the 100 -year event, to existing AGPWD prior to activities. AGPWD during
drainage channels. All runoff from natural issuance of grading shall ensure construction.
areas intercepted by proposed improvements permits. All installation of
shall be captured and conveyed around or components of the drainage facilities
through developed areas by a drainage drainage plan shall prior to issuance of
system capable of conveying the 100 -year be implemented building permits.
event. Erosion control structures shall be prior to issuance of
installed at all pipe outlets and other places occupancy permits.
where drainage flows are concentrated. In
addition, drainage shall be consistent with
approved drainage plans that include:
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
127
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
a. Locations and dimensions of all
proposed drainage components;
b. Amount of water that is captured by the
drainage system at all entry points
c. Amount of water discharged by the
drainage system at outlets.
H Storm Water Management Plan. A The applicant shall Review plan prior to Review plans AGPWD
plan that incorporates BMPs for the submit the storm issuance of grading once. Site
long -term operation of the site shall be water management permits. Site inspect as
developed and implemented by the applicant plan to AGPWD. inspect as necessary necessary
to minimize the amount of pollutants that are during and following during and
washed from the site. The plan shall be construction. following
developed in cooperation with the City of construction.
Arroyo Grande and the Central Coast
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Examples of BMPs listed below which apply
to the development of the site may be
included in the plan:
Education
• Stencil all storm drains inlets and post
signs along channels to discourage
dumping by informing the public that
water flows to the ocean.
• Provide educational flyers to each new
building unit regarding toxic chemicals
and alternatives for fertilizers,
pesticides, cleaning solutions and
automotive and paint products.
• Provide educational flyers to each new
building unit regarding proper disposal
of hazardous waste and automotive
waste.
Source Reduction/ Recycling
• Development of an integrated pest
management program for landscaped
areas of the project. These areas would
include slope - stabilization landscaping,
and residential area landscaping.
Integrated pest management
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
City of Arroyo Grande
128
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of
Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
emphasizes the use of biological,
physical, and cultural controls rather
than chemical controls. Examples
include use of insect resistant cultivars,
manual weed control, use of established
thresholds for pesticide and herbicide
application, use of chemical controls
that begin preferentially with
dehydrating dusts, insecticidal soaps,
boric acid powder, horticultural oils, and
pyrethrin -based insecticides.
•
Cleaning/ Maintenance
• Routine cleaning of streets, parking lots
and storm drains. Regular maintenance
and cleaning of catch basins, and
detention basins by a through a
maintenance assessment district 14OA.
Structural Treatment Methods
• The proposed catch basins should be
designed for storm water quality control
purposes in accordance with the
California BMP's Handbook. The catch
basins would have fossil filter inserts or
be designed with a native soil or sand
bottom topped by a minimum of six
inches of float rock covered by a
chicken wire grate. Water leaves the
sand bottom catch basin via an
underground reinforced concrete pipe
covered by a catch basin trap that
prevents floatable material from
entering into the discharge pipe. Oil
and grease floats, and so would be
captured by the trap. Heavy organic
material, sediment and rubber would fall
to the bottom of the pit and also would
not be discharged through the pipe.
After the storm water drains from the
catch basin, natural biological action
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
129
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
degrades the organic materials
contained in the trap. This serves to
effectively reduce the amount of
pollutants that would otherwise enter
the creek.
• Vegetated swales may be incorporated
in the site layout to be used as a
stormwater quality management
technique.
• Maintenance of the catch basins and
vegetated swales would be required to
eliminate the potential for odor
problems, provision of mosquito habitat,
and to prevent clogging. Incorporation
of the appropriate BMP's along with a
maintenance and operation plan would
reduce the amount of current and
potential future pollutants discharged
into the creek and protect against failure
of the system.
LAND USE
LU - 2(a) Trail Access. The proposed project The applicant Review plans prior Review plans AGCDD
shall include provisions for public trails shall indicate trail to final map once. Site
access. The trail easements shall be easements on site recordation. inspect once.
situated to allow access along the general plans and Verify compliance
alignment of the East Fork of Meadow Creek implement trail prior to issuance
and the on - site drainage tributary and oak
woodland extending to the east to connect to access. of building
the Hidden Oaks school site, such that it permits.
supports any potential effort at citywide trail
access along open space drainage areas.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
T -1(a) Fair Share Traffic Mitigation Fees. The applicant shall Review fee payment Review fee AGCDD,
The City of Arroyo Grande Capital provide fees prior to final map payment once. AGPWD
Improvement Program includes a project to adequate to pay for recordation. Review traffic
install traffic signals at the intersection of the applicant's pro- Review construction signals once.
Camino Mercado/West Branch Street. The rata share for the of traffic signals
project applicant shall provide fair share intersection prior to issuance of
traffic mitigation fees to install traffic signals. signalization. building permits.
With the installation of traffic signals, the Construction of the
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USAGE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r 130 City of Arroyo Grande
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
intersection would operate acceptably in the traffic signals shall
LOS B range with Cumulative + Project occur per approved
traffic volumes. plans.
PUBLIC SERVICES
PS -2(a) FireNegetation Management The applicant shall Review plans prior Review plans AGCDD, AGBD
Plan. The applicant shall develop a submit plans for to final map once. Site
vegetation management plan and /or fuel review and approval recordation. Verify inspect once.
modification plan for the site. The following by the Arroyo compliance prior to
fuel modification specifications are required Grande Fire occupancy
Department, which clearance.
• The plan must set forth requirements to incorporate their
assure ongoing protection of all recommendations,
structures and roads, both prior to and including fuel
after lot sales. modification
• The plan shall require 100 feet of specifications.
adequate clearance from brush to
structures throughout the development.
• On -site occupants shall not clear •
vegetation outside designated
clearance area boundaries in order to
limit impacts to native habitat.
• Fire resistant landscaping that is
compatible with surrounding sensitive
native species should be used
throughout the project site.
• Vegetation within the first 30 feet of all
structures must be strictly irrigated and
controlled, with specific shrub species
eliminated. No conifer (except
Monterey pine, single specimen),
eucalyptus, juniper, cypress, pampas
grass, acacia, or palm trees should be
allowed within the 30 -foot zone.
Coastal live oak (Quercus sp.),
California sycamore, Toyon and
shrubs/trees approved by the City Fire
Department will be acceptable within
the 30 -foot zone.
• The plan shall outline fuel modification
specifications such as:
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
131
Mitigation Measure/Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
- Grasses shall be cut down to a
length of 4 inches or less yearly, or
as required by the City of Arroyo
Grande Fire Department.
- Shrubs under oaks and within 10
feet of tree canopies shall be
pruned to reduce volume and no
shrub shall be removed without the
approval of the HOA design
committee.
- Oak tree limbs to be considered for
removal shall be less than 2 inches
in diameter within 4 feet of the
ground. Branches must be chipped
for mulch and left on site.
- Trees with grass growing beneath
may not need pruning unless the
limbs touch the ground. Then,
allowable size branches shall be
removed to provide clearance.
- Trees and shrubs beneath or
adjacent to the canopy shall
likewise have limbs 2 inches or less
removed until clearance is
achieved between canopy and
shrubs.
- If shrubs occur within open areas
outside a 10 -foot zone around
trees, they shall remain in their
existing form. Some shrubs in this
area may be indicated in the field to
be thinned.
- Removal of larger tree limbs over 2
inches in diameter which pose a
hazard or are within 4 feet of
vertical clearance zone must be
approved by an arborist (all work
on and around existing oak trees
shall conform to the conditions of
the City of Arroyo Grande
Community Tree Ordinance 431.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGM] - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r 132 City of Arroyo Grande
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
All pruning of oak trees shall be
supervised by a certified arborist
using ISA approved pruning
standards.
All fuel modifications shall be consistent with
mitigation measure B -4(a) (Pismo Clarkia
Avoidance).
• The FireNegetation Management Plan
must clearly state exactly what
management practices must be
accomplished, date of annual
compliance, and responsibility for cost
of compliance.
• The plan must also include a Wildland
Emergency Response checklist
(approved by City of Arroyo Grande Fire
Department) to be made available to all
residents.
PS - 2(b) Road Widths, Lengths, and Fire The applicant shall Review plans prior Review plans AGCDD, AGBD
Hydrants. Road widths, lengths, and submit plans for to final map once. Site
circulation, as well as the placement of fire review and approval recordation. Verify inspect once.
hydrants shall be designed with the guidance by the Arroyo compliance prior to
of the Arroyo Grande Fire Department. A Grande Fire occupancy
road system that allows unhindered Fire Department which clearance.
Department access and maneuvering during incorporate their
emergencies shall be provided. Specifically, recommendations,
the following measures are required: including roadway
design, adequate
• Project roads must be an all weather site access, and the
surface at least 20 feet in width, placement of fire
unobstructed by parking. Cul -de -sacs hydrants throughout
and turnouts must be to Fire the site
Department standards. If the roads are
to be a private system, there must be
on- going, legally binding provisions in
effect to maintain the roads to Fire
Department required levels.
• Road grades on all roads shall not
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Carps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
133
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
exceed 16 %, per the Uniform Fire
Code.
• House numbers and street signs shall
be lighted to City standards so that
emergency vehicles including police
and ambulances can locate residences
in the event of any emergency.
• All fire apparatus access roads and
driveways shall be designed and
maintained to support the imposed
loads of 20 tons at 25 mph, and shall be
provided with a surface so as to provide
all- weather driving capabilities.
PS - 2(c) Structural Safeguards. Stringent Where appropriate, Review structural Review plans AGCDD, AGBD
structural safeguards that would reduce the all of the structural safeguards prior to once. Verify
need for rapid response of first alarm fire safeguards shall be issuance of building compliance
resources will be required. In general, this graphically depicted permits. Verify once. Site
would require the use of construction on grading and compliance prior to inspect for
materials that could survive a wildland fire. It construction plans. occupancy. Review maintenance as
would also include installation of fire Measures shall be maintenance as necessary.
sprinklers on any lots accessed by roads that installed prior to necessary.
are less than 32 feet curb -to -curb. Houses occupancy, and be
located on flag lots or those accessed by maintained
driveways steeper than 15% shall be regularly by the
constructed with automatic fire sprinkler applicants as
systems, and be subject to approval and applicable.
testing by the Fire Chief. As currently
required by the City of Arroyo Grande Fire
Code (Section 902.2.1), it is expected that a
fire truck could enter the proposed
subdivision for 75 feet from the center -line of
the cross street and maintain a reasonable
response time. From that point, the fire truck
would have a 150 -foot radius (the
approximate length of their water hose) of
fire protection. Any unit outside of that
radius, according to the Fire Code, must be
designed with a sprinkler system. The
following features would be required:
• Sprinkler Systems. If 50 -foot vegetation
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPWD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r 134 City of Arroyo Grande
Responsible
Mitigation Measure/Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
management zones are not employed,
the perimeter structures within the fire
hazard area must have exterior
exposure sprinkler systems separately
applied, per NFPA 13. In addition,
residential units that lie outside of the
fire truck protection radius (a 150 -foot
radius around a fire truck parked 75 feet
in from the entrance of a subdivision)
shall be designed with fire protection
sprinkler systems approved by the Fire
Chief.
• Minimum Class B Roofs. Due to the
proximity of the project site to a High
Hazard Fire Severity area, all structures
in the proposed development should
have at the minimum Class B roofs to
mitigate the fire threat.
• Design of Accessory Features. Decks,
gazebos, patio covers, fences, etc. must
not overhang slopes and must be one -
hour fire retardant construction. Front
doors should be solid core, minimally 1
''4 inch thick. Garage doors should be
noncombustible.
• Yard Characteristics. Vegetation
growing on fences should be prevented.
• Power Lines. All new power lines will
be installed underground in order to
prevent fires caused by arcing wires.
PS -5(a) Construction Solid Waste The applicant shall Review plan prior to Review plan AGCDD,
Minimization. During the construction submit a issuance of building once. Site AGPWD,
phases of the project, the following mitigation Construction Solid permits. Verify inspect as AGBD
measures will be implemented to reduce Waste Minimization compliance during necessary
solid waste generation to the maximum Plan to AGCDD, construction. during
extent feasible: AGPWD, and construction.
AGBD for review
• Prior to construction, the contractor will and implement the
arrange for construction recycling plan during
service with a waste collection provider. construction.
Roll -off bins for the collection of
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
135
Mitigation Measure /Condition of When Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Compliance Verification
Approval Action Required to Occur Frequency Agency or
Party Initial Date Comments
recoverable construction materials will
be located onsite. The applicant, or
authorized agent thereof, shall arrange
for pick -up of recycled materials with a
waste collection provider or shall
transport recycled materials to the
appropriate service center. Wood,
concrete, drywall, metal, cardboard,
asphalt, soil, and land clearing debris
may all be recycled.
• The contractor will designate a person
to monitor recycling efforts and collect
receipts for roll -off bins and /or
construction waste recycling. All
subcontractors will be informed of the
recycling plan, including which materials
are to be source - separated and placed
in proper bins.
• The contractor will use recycled
materials in construction wherever
feasible.
• The above construction waste recycling
measures will be incorporated into the
construction specifications for the
contractor.
Occupancy Solid Waste Minimization. The applicant shall Review plan prior to Review plan AGCDD,
During the long -term occupancy phase of the submit a Solid occupancy once. AGPWD,
project, the following mitigation measures Waste Management clearance. AGBD
will be implemented to reduce solid waste Program to
generation to the maximum extent feasible. AGCDD, AGPWD,
and AGBD for
Gardening Waste: The following mitigation review.
measures will be the responsibility of the
applicant.
• During landscape design, trees will be
selected for the appropriate size and
scale to reduce pruning waste over the
long -term.
• Slow- growing, drought - tolerant plants
will be included in the landscape plan.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r City of Arroyo Grande
136
Responsible
Mitigation Measure /Condition of Action Required When Monitoring Monitoring Agency or Compliance Verification
Approval to Occur Frequency Party Initial Date Comments
Drought - tolerant plants require less
pruning and generate less long -term
pruning waste, require less water, and
require less fertilizer than faster growing
plants.
• On -site space will be allocated for a
compost area to serve the residential
development.
Key: AGBD - Arroyo Grande Building Department APCD -San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AGCDD - Arroyo Grande Community Development Department USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Public Works Department RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board
AGPRD - Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department CDFG — California Department of Fish and Game
r 137 City of Arroyo Grande