HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 03 - COUNCIL READING FILE_e_Resolution No. 10718 (2016 Series)CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1
City of San Luis Obispo
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: Calle Joaquin Siphon and Lift Station Replacement
Project, Spec. # 91133
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jennifer Metz, Utilities Project Manager
4. Project Location: Calle Joaquin south of Los Osos Valley Road, east of
the U.S. Highway 101 northbound Los Osos Valley
Road off-ramp.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Same as Lead Agency
6. General Plan Designation: Tourist Commercial (lift station site)
Agriculture (where inverted siphon daylights)
Open Space (the route of the inverted siphon)
7. Zoning: Consistent with General Plan
8. Description of the Project:
The proposed project is the replacement of the lift station and sanitary sewer pipeline
associated with the lift station, operated by the City of San Luis Obispo as part of its wastewater
collection system. The project includes removal of approximately 24,464 square feet (0.56
acres) of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) and approximately 1,000 cubic yards of associated
silt removal from San Luis Obispo Creek. The lift station receives wastewater from gravity sewer
mains in Los Osos Valley Road, gravity sewer lines on Calle Joaquin Road, and inverted siphon
under San Luis Obispo Creek. The project location is shown on Figure 1.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST2
1. Existing Conditions
a. Existing Gravity Sewer Crossing of Highway 101
In May 2011 a closed circuit television (CCTV) inspection of the existing 12-inch diameter gravity
line identified a failed connection approximately 100 feet from the upstream manhole between
the north-bound freeway off ramp and U.S. Highway 101. While making a point repair, staff
noted that the gravity sewer’s steel casing and spacers had deteriorated and that the sewer line
was significantly out of grade. City staff determined that the sewer line will therefore need to
be replaced. The 12-inch gravity sewer line extends approximately 450 feet underneath
Highway 101 where it connects to the lift station wet well below optimal wet well operational
range. With the pumps set to cycle on when the wet well fills to approximately four feet, the
gravity sewer line and siphon back up during each pump cycle. Due to the system backing up,
the siphon is on a six-month preventative maintenance schedule to prevent clogging from
sediment and grease.
b. Existing San Luis Obispo Creek Crossing
An existing 12-inch gravity sewer line conveys wastewater from the neighborhoods adjacent to
South Higuera Street through a single-barrel (pipeline) siphon under San Luis Obispo Creek and
US 101. In October 2005, during creek crossing inspections, City staff found that the siphon (a
concrete-encased ductile iron pipe) was partially exposed resulting from a shift in the alignment
of San Luis Creek and degradation of the concrete encasement. There is a high level of risk
associated with the failure of the siphon as further failure of the pipe material would result in
the discharge of wastewater directly to San Luis Obispo Creek. There is a dense muli-layered
riparian habitat in the San Luis Obispo Creek project area. Upstream and downstream of the
existing and proposed crossing are several extensive patches of non-native invasive plant the
giant reed with associated accumulated siltation within the active creek floodplain.
c. Existing Lift Station
The existing lift station, constructed in the 1960s, is located in a landscaped commercial motel
frontage area within the flood plain of the adjacent Froom Creek, on the west side of Calle
Joaquin Road, north of Froom Creek. The existing site is approximately 1,800 square feet. The
ground elevation at the lift station of 105.20 feet places it approximately 5.2 feet beneath the
expected base flood elevation (BFE) of 110.40 feet (FIRM and Hydrology and Hydraulic Report
for Hampton Inn, VCE Services, February 2008). The existing lift station does not have a backup
generator but is configured for a portable gas or diesel generator should a power outage occur
require the auxiliary power. The existing wet well/ dry well lift station is approximately six feet
in diameter by 22 feet deep and houses two submersible solids handling pumps that operate
one at a time in a duty/standby mode. In its current configuration the pumps are too large for
the low flows that the station experiences. In order to prevent rapid cycling and the
consequential deterioration of the pumps the level controls have been adjusted to allow the
wetwell to fill to approximately four feet. This causes the water level in the wetwell to rise
above the downstream end of the inverted siphon, making the siphon more susceptible to
clogging from sediment and grease.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST3
d. Existing Calle Joaquin Gravity Sewer (KSBY Reach, 1772 Calle Joaquin)
An existing 1,000 linear foot vitrified clay 8-inch sewer line located in the north shoulder of
Calle Joaquin Road between the existing Calle Joaquin Lift Station and the KSBY facility . City
staff determined based on review of CCTV inspection and the 2010 Flow Study confirmed the
condition of this line led to a significant source of inflow and infiltration and is in poor
condition, requiring replacement and realignment as part of the project.
2. Proposed Facilities
The project includes five major components: a) Lift station replacement; b) New gravity line
from the new lift station east across U.S. Highway 101 installed by jack and bore and new
siphon under San Luis Obispo Creek installed by open trench excavation; c) Invasive species and
silt removal; and d) Gravity sewer main replacement in Calle Joaquin south of the lift station.
Each segment is described in further detail below. Figure 2 provides a proposed project layout
map.
a. Lift Station Replacement
The new lift station is proposed to be sited in a landscaped area north of the existing lift
station as shown on the project plans (See Figures 1 through 4). This location provides a
corridor for connecting the inverted siphon and gravity sewer lines. Additionally, it
minimizes the amount of new easement required, provides an accessible location for
the proposed auxiliary generator, and allows for simplified lift station discharge piping.
Construction dewatering of the lift station excavation will be discharged to the nearby
Froom Creek with approval of the Central Coast Water Board.
b. Gravity Sewer Line and Inverted Siphon Replacement
The existing gravity sewer line under U.S. Highway 101 and inverted siphon under San
Luis Obispo Creek that connects the sewer system from the Los Verdes neighborhoods
to the lift station will be replaced. The installation of the new 12-inch replacement
gravity sewer line and 30-inch steel casing will utilize jack and bore method from the
new lift station to the top of the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek (approximately 460
feet). The entry pit for the jack and bore will have a footprint of approximately 600
square feet (15’ X 40’) located in the landscaped and parking area of the motel where
the new lift station will be constructed . Given the proximity to the creek, no receiving
pit will be used but the pipe will connect to the siphon approximately 10 feet to the
north of existing Manhole H17-25 on the western bank of San Luis Obispo Creek.
The installation of the 6-inch double-barrel siphon under San Luis Obispo Creek will be
constructed using open trench excavation through the riparian corridor and creek
bottom (approximately 240 feet). This approach will require the diversion of San Luis
Obispo Creek flows around the work site and likely dewatering the excavated trench.
Diversion of the creek flows and construction dewatering of the inverted siphon
excavation trench will be discharged to the San Luis Obispo Creek with approval of the
Central Coast Water Board. The siphon replacement alignment is proposed to be
located approximately 10 feet north of the existing siphon alignment connecting to new
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST4
manholes or by pipe to the existing Manhole H17-25 on the west bank of San Luis
Obispo Creek to existing Manhole H18-10 on the east bank. It is estimated that an
approximately 40-foot wide disturbance footprint through the San Luis Obispo Creek
riparian corridor would be required for the open trench construction for the siphon
replacement if shoring is feasible and successful. A disturbance footprint of up to 70-
feet wide may be needed if shoring cannot be used depending on the type of soil
material encountered in the open trench excavation.
The new inverted siphon is proposed to consist of two 6-inch carrier pipes contained
within a single 30-inch encasement. The upstream end (east side) of the siphon is
proposed to include a hydraulic structure capable of diverting flow between carrier
pipes. The downstream end (west side) of the inverted siphon connects to the gravity
crossing of Highway 101 at a new manhole’ located near the existing MH H17 25. The
Highway 101 gravity sewer crossing then terminates at a manhole immediately
upstream of the new lift station wet well. At the center of the creek, the pipeline will be
approximately 13 feet deep below existing streambed. Because the existing siphon has
to remain in service until the new siphon and lift station are completed, the new siphon
is proposed to be constructed parallel to the existing siphon approximately 10 feet
upstream to allow a reasonable margin for the excavation operations.
The existing siphon and gravity line will be abandoned in place to minimize riparian
habitat disturbance. Abandonment within the Caltrans right-of-way may include
cleaning of the existing pipe and completely filling with either a controlled low-strength
material (CLSM) or sand-slurry mixture as required by Caltrans.
c. Invasive Species / Silt Removal
Along with the open trench siphon replacement through San Luis Obispo Creek
described above, the City proposes to access from the siphon replacement disturbance
area within the riparian zone equipment and hand removal of approximately 24,464
square feet of invasive species giant reed and 1,000 cubic yards of accumulated
sediment. Approximately 14,209 square feet of the giant reed removal is proposed to be
completed with mechanical methods with the balance, approximately 10,255 square
feet, to be removed by hand. The proposed method of mechanical removal is through
the use of a bulldozer pushing the material to a location accessible to an excavator
where it will be loaded onto dump trucks and hauled off.
d. Gravity Sewer Line Replacement (KSBY Reach)
Approximately 750 feet of six-inch gravity sewer line from the lift station up Calle
Joaquin to the south will be replaced within the pavement footprint. The existing line is
currently located to the west of the roadway and will be abandoned in place. The new
line will be located within Calle Joaquin matching the existing depth and size of the
current line and crossing over the Froom Creek culvert crossing avoiding impacts on the
creek and riparian habitat.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST5
Right of Way and Easements
Portions of the proposed project are within existing road rights-of-way and portions are within
easement areas (See Figure 2A). As part of this proposed project, new temporary and
permanent easements will be acquired for the construction of and access to proposed facilities.
Construction Sequence and Schedule
Construction of the proposed project, including the lift station replacement and inverted siphon
crossing is anticipated to require a total of approximately 12 months from the time the final
design plans are approved and permitted. Individual project elements maybe constructed
concurrently, but all elements will be completed within the 12 -month time frame. The open
trench work in San Luis Obispo Creek will have seasonal restrictions for nesting birds and
allowable in stream work windows required by the regulatory agencies for the California red-
legged frog and steelhead and will be implemented to minimize the time of disturbance to San
Luis Obispo Creek.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
The proposed project is located on the urban edge of San Luis Obispo, where U.S. Highway 101
and the San Luis Obispo Creek corridors bisect agricultural and developed urban land. The
existing lift station is proximate to Froom Creek on the west side of Calle Joaquin. Froom Creek
flows east through a culvert under Calle Joaquin and U.S. Highway 101 to San Luis Obispo
Creek. Immediately to the east of the northbound U.S. Highway 101 off ramp is the San Luis
Obispo Creek riparian zone. The riparian zone extends to the eastern bank where it is boarded
by an active annually cultivated agriculture field that has an existing sanitary sewer pipeline and
manhole. To the north of the existing (and proposed) lift station is urban land and commercial
development leading to a cul-de-sac at the northern end of existing Calle Joaquin. The
proposed project extends along the eastern edge of the active agricultural field to the end of
the northern project limits at an existing sanitary sewer pipeline connection that crosses under
U.S. Highway 101. South of the lift station Calle Joaquin crosses Froom Creek, and bisects
annual and native grassland, eucalyptus groves, native landscaping, riparian, and freshwater
marsh habitats.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
Regulatory compliance for work within the Caltrans right-of-way and the open trench
excavation across San Luis Obispo Creek for the siphon replacement is expected to require
permit/authorizations from the following agencies.
Caltrans right-of-way encroachment permit.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act Section 404 permit for fill in waters of the
U.S.
Regional Water Quality Control Board Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality
Certification for fill in waters of the U.S., diversion of San Luis Obispo Creek, and
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST6
dewatering discharge for the lift station and open trench construction in San Luis Obispo
Creek.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Agreement for
excavation, fill, and removal of riparian vegetation.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Act take authorization for potential
impacts on the California red-legged frog.
National Marine Fisheries Service Endangered Species Act take authorization for
potential impacts on central California coast steelhead.
Air Pollution Control District.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Figure 3 – Site Photos (provided by SII)
Photo 1: View south showing existing lift station and future lift station relocation area. Photo 2: View southwest of riparian habitat behind lift station relocation area.
Photo 3: View west of Calle Joaquin lift station. Photo 4: View south of Calle Joaquin from lift station.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Figure 3 – Site Photos (provided by SII)
Photo 5: View south of Calle Joaquin leading to KXBY station. Note new sewage line
connection to maintenance site east of road.
Photo 6: View north of Calle Joaquin. Note new sewage line maintenance site east of
road.
Photo 7: View looking west of existing sewer line creek crossing. Photo 8: View looking downstream at existing sewer line creek crossing.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Figure 3 – Site Photos (provided by SII)
Photo 9 – Example giant reed and Cape ivy thickets to be removed. Photo 10 – Example giant reed and Cape ivy thickets to be removed.
Photo 11: View looking toward San Luis Obispo creek on the east side. Note existing manhole H18-4.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Figure 3 – Site Photos (provided by SII)
Photo 12: View west along Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD). Manhole H18-10 in
foreground.
Photo 13: View south across active agricultural field towards sewer line creek crossing
on east side of San Luis Obispo Creek.
Photo 14: Photo west of drainage depression between Los Osos Valley Road off-ramp and Highway 101.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Figure 3 – Site Photos (provided by SII)
Photo 15: View west along approximate HDD line, Los Osos Valley Road off-ramp on
the right.
Photo 16: View south along drainage.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population / Housing
X--
Agriculture Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Public Services
Air Quality
Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation
X-- Biological Resources
Land Use / Planning
Transportation / Traffic
X-- Cultural Resources Mineral Resources
Utilities / Service Systems
Geology / Soils
Noise
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND GAME FEES
The Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination
request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat
see attached determination).
X--
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of
California Department of Fish and Wildlife fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game
Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review
and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
X--
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more
State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and
Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines
15073(a)).
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each qu estion. A “No Impact” answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be
explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then th e checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be signifi cant. If
there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less
than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be
cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,”
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to
which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,8,9 --X--
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
1 --X--
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings?
1,9 --X--
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
1 --X--
Evaluation
The following evaluation has been based in part from pre-and post-construction visual simulations that have been prepared
for the proposed project (Figure 4).
a) The project site is visible from U.S. Highway 101. The City’s General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element
designates the portion of Highway 101 at the southern end of the City north to Marsh Street as a viewing corridor of “High
Scenic Value.” The existing General Plan includes policies to protect scenic viewsheds, the most relevant of which to this
project are as follows:
Conservation and Open Space Element:
Policy 9.2.1 Views to and from public places, including scenic roadways.
The City will preserve and improve views of important scenic resources from public places, and encourage other agencies
with jurisdiction to do so. Public places include parks, plazas, the grounds of civic buildings, streets and roads, and publicly
accessible open space. In particular, the route segments shown in Figure 11 are designated as scenic roadways.
A. Development projects shall not wall off scenic roadways and block views.
B. Utilities, traffic signals, and public and private signs and lights shall not intrude on or clutter
views, consistent with safety needs.
C. Where important vistas of distant landscape features occur along streets, street trees shall be
clustered to facilitate viewing of the distant features.
D. Development projects, including signs, in the viewshed of a scenic roadway shall be
considered “sensitive” and require architectural review.
Program 9.3.5 Visual assessments.
Require evaluations (accurate visual simulations) for projects affecting important scenic resources and views from public
places.
Program 9.3.6 View blockage along scenic highways.
Determine that view blockage along scenic roadways is a significant impact.
Circulation Element:
Policy 15.0.1 Views
The City will preserve and improve views of important scenic resources form [sic] streets and roads. In particular, the
route segments shown in Figure 6 [of the Circulation Element] and the Conservation and Open Space Element are
designated as scenic roadways.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. Development projects shall not wall off scenic roadways and block views.
B. Development projects, including signs, in the viewshed of a scenic roadways shall be considered
sensitive” and require architectural review.
Policy 15.0.4 Public Equipment and Facilities
The City and other agencies should be encouraged to avoid cluttering scenic roadways with utility and circulation-
related equipment and facilities.
B. Public utilities along scenic highways should be installed underground.
C. The placement of landscaping and street trees should not block views from Scenic Routes. Clustering of street
trees along scenic roadways should be considered as an alternative to uniform spacing.
Program 9.3.6 states that blocking scenic views would be a significant impact under CEQA. The “scenic views” in this case
are those of the surrounding hillsides. However, the lift station, whether or not it is screened with landscaping, would not
be blocking any scenic views. From that perspective, no significant impact would occur with respect to that policy. That
said, Program 9.3.5 does require visual simulations in drawing such conclusions, and for this reason photo simulations
were prepared to support this analysis.
Policy 9.2.1.b. provides direction regarding the design of public utilities with respect to minimizing visual impacts. Based on
this policy, projects must be designed not to “intrude on or clutter” views consistent with safety needs. As designed, with
or without landscaping, the project would be consistent with the intent of this policy, especially in the context of nearby
commercial development, which is much more visually prominent than the lift station. The project includes the addition of
a landscaping screen that would further minimize any potentially intrusive visual experience for travelers on Calle Joaquin
or U.S. Highway 101 who drive past the facility. This is illustrated in the accompanying photo simulations.
Policy 15.0.4 calls for undergrounding of public utilities along scenic highways. However, the intent of this policy is
primarily directed at powerlines and similar high -profile facilities. In addition, since the lift station would not be blocking
scenic views as designed, and would include landscaping that would act as a visual screen, visual impacts would be less
than significant. In addition, the proposed facility as designed and screened would not block scenic views from the
freeway, which is the High Value Scenic corridor of concern. For this reason, there would be no need to underground this
facility based on this policy, since there would be no visual impact to the scenic corridor of the surrounding hillsides.
b) The proposed project would be located in an area adjacent to Froom Creek, but would not require the removal of trees
or other natural features, nor the loss of designated open space. The open trench cut through the San Luis Obispo Creek
would create a temporary break in the riparian tree canopy but would be restored as part of the proposed project. Giant
reed removal would be below top of the creek bank under the existing riparian canopy and would likely not be noticeable
from the off-ramp and highway. There are no existing buildings on the site, so no historical structures would be affected. As
noted above, U.S. Highway 101 is designated as a corridor of High Scenic Value under the City’s General Plan. Please refer
to the discussion under a) for an analysis of impacts related to this issue.
c) The project would replace an existing lift station facility with a new one, in a location adjacent to the existing facility. It
would be substantially similar in size to the existing facility, so there would be no discernible change to the visual character
of the area. The proposed project would also include landscaping as part of its design, intended for the most pa rt to screen
the facility from passing motorists. This would further minimize potential impacts, and in fact may be an improvement over
the visual quality of the existing facility, which is not similarly screened. The proposed pipeline under San Luis Obispo Creek
would not be visible when completed, so it would not contribute to any possible change in the v isual character of the area.
In the short-term, project construction may temporarily degrade the visual quality of the area as equipment is brought on
site, and facilities are replaced. However, because of the temporary nature of these activities, and because they will be
regulated by City requirements, long-term impacts to the visual character of the area would be considered less than
significant.
d) The proposed project would not include lighting, and thus would not be a source of light or glare that co uld impact
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
neighboring land uses. In addition, because the facility will be screened by landscaping, any glare that may result from
reflected sunlight that could otherwise affect passing motorists would be minimized. No impacts would occur.
Conclusion
The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts on visual resources. In addition, because the project
design includes landscaping intended to screen the facility, the visual impacts may be considered less than what is currently
the case with the existing facility. The current facility which lack screening. Refer to Figure 4 for the pre- and post-project
visual simulations that support this conclusion.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST22
Figure 4 – Visual Simulations
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST23
Figure 4 – Visual Simulations
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST24
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
1 --X--
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson
Act contract? 1 --X--
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due
to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use?
1 --X--
Evaluation
a) The lift station site is not located on land in active agricultural production, nor on farmland identified as Prime, Unique,
or of Statewide Importance, thus no impacts would occur from this project component. The gravity pipeline component of
the project on the east side of U.S. Highway 101 is in active agricultural land that identified as Prime Farmland. However, it
would not impact either the production capability of that land, nor convert any of the soils to non -agricultural use. In the
short-term, construction activities at that end of the pipeline would be served by an existing dirt roadway adjacent to the
agricultural field, and temporary staging activities may occur within areas used for agricultural production. Mitigation has
been provided below to ensure temporary impacts to prime farmland are reduced to a less than significant level.
b) and c) The proposed project would replace existing wastewater collection infrastructure, and would not result in the
conversion of any lands from their current uses. Infrastructure of the type envisioned in the project is consistent with any
zoning in the City. The project would not convert land zoned for agricultural use, nor would it convert any land under
Williamson Act contract. The project would not convert active or potentially active farmland to non -agricultural use. No
impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required to avoid, minimize and compensate for potentially significant impacts on
agricultural resources.
AG-1: The contractor shall segregate all topsoil located with the active agricultural field east of San Luis Obispo Creek prior
to initiation of construction activities. The top six (6) inches of soil shall be removed and protected onsite via covering with
plastic or storing in protective bins. All topsoil shall be replaced and lightly disked-in upon completion of the project.
Conclusion
The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to agricultural with implementation of mitigation
measure AG-1. The project would not convert any farmlands to non-agricultural use. The project will not impact Williamson
Act lands.
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality m anagement or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
1,7 --X--
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to
an existing or projected air quality violation?
7 --X--
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any 7 --X--
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST25
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment
under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
2,3 --X--
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
2,3 --X--
Evaluation
a), b) and c) The City of San Luis Obispo falls within the jurisdiction of the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District
SLOAPCD). SLOAPCD is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin. SLOAPCD monitors air pollutant levels to assure
that air quality standards are met, and if they are not met, to develop strategies to meet the standards. Depending on
whether the standards are met or exceeded, the air basin is classified as being in “attai nment” or as “non-attainment.”
In general, the existing air quality in San Luis Obispo County, including the City of San Luis Obispo, may be characterized a s
moderate. As of 2013, the County is in attainment for all measured pollutants, with the exception of ozone (O3) and
particulate matter exceeding 10 microns (PM10). The following table shows the attainment status, state and federal
standards for all criteria pollutants (SLOAPCD, 2013).
The nearest monitoring station to the project area is in San Luis Obispo. In 2008, only one exceedance of the federal 8-hour
one standard of 0.075 parts per million (ppm) occurred at the San Luis Obispo station. Exceedance of the more stringent
state 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm occurred on two days at this station, while the state one hour ozone standard of
0.09 ppm was exceeded on one day (SLOAPCD, 2008-09 Annual Air Quality Report).
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST26
The APCD has adopted a Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County (2001), which includes strategies to help achiev e
attainment status for these pollutants.
Project Emissions. The proposed project would not generate emissions associated with long-term operations, because it
would not generate trips nor inherently result in air pollutants from its ongoing use. The existing lift station is currently
configured for connecting a portable auxiliary diesel/gasoline generator as backup during power outages. The new lift
station will include a more efficient natural gas auxiliary generator for the same purpose. Use of the auxiliary generator
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST27
would be the same set of circumstances and probabilities as under existing conditions. Thus, there would be no operational
air quality impacts. However, short-term emissions are possible from equipment used in project construction. The fo llowing
table summarizes APCD’s significance criteria for construction-related impacts:
Table 1:
San Luis Obispo APCD Thresholds of Significance for Construction Operations
Because of the de minimus nature of activities that would occur during project construction (including the duration of such
activities), such emissions would not exceed the 2.5 -ton quarterly threshold, for ROG and PM10. Impacts would be less than
significant. Emissions would be reduced to the extent feasible through standard conditions imposed on the project
consistent with APCD requirements. These include:
Onsite construction vehicle speeds shall be limited to no more than 12 mph on unpaved surfaces.
Minimal area shall be disturbed, with dust control measures implemented following soil distributing activities.
Such measures may include revegetation or other APCD-approved methods.
If airborne dust is observed leaving the site during construction activities, water from trucks or other sources
must be applied in sufficient quantities to reduce those emissions.
Erosion and drainage control features are to be available to be placed in the event of rain or other erosive
action to prevent any sediment from leaving the site. Erosion control devices shall be installed and in place
following daily construction activities. The City shall notify the Engineering Division of any changes in
construction that will require additional erosion control measures.
No construction permits will be issued during the period from November 1 to Mar ch 31 without prior approval
of the Engineering Division and an approved erosion and sediment control plan and construction schedule.
Erosion control measures shall be in place and approved by the Engineering Division prior to the start of
construction.
The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, and is therefore anticipated in the Clean Air Plan (CAP),
which includes long-range traffic and air emission forecasts based on the level of development anticipated in the general
plans of jurisdictions within the SLOCOG region. Future construction activities will also be required to comply with APCD
requirements, which will contribute to further consistency with the CAP.
d) The project will not generate increased concentrations of pollutants. The nearest sensitive receptors are homes along Los
Palos Drive, about 250 feet east of the agricultural field where the inverted siphon would meet the new manhole. These
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST28
residents will not be exposed to any increased concentrations of pollutants. Temporary transient residents in nearby motels
are within 200 feet of the lift station site. Similarly, these residents will not be exposed to any increased concentrations of
pollutants.
e) The proposed project does not have the potential to create objectionable odors. Objectionable odors are generally
caused by some commercial and industrial uses, such as restaurants or waste disposal facilities that dispose of trash
materials, none of which will be occurring on the site. While objectionable odors o ften occur with sewer facilities. The new
lift station design incorporates several provisions to reduce the occurrence of objectionable odors including minimizing
turbulence, and provision for additional of odor control facilities.
Conclusion
The proposed project would result in less than significant air quality impacts. Emissions would occur only during the
construction phases of the project, and compliance with identified APCD strategies would result in less than significant
impacts. There would be no net increase in emissions for the infrequent probabilities of use of the auxiliary generator over
existing conditions.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 10, 11 --X--
b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 10-12 --X--
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
1, 10, 11 --X--
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the
use of native wildlife nursery sites?
1, 10 --X--
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
1, 10 --X--
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
1, 10 --X--
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST29
Evaluation
The following discussion is based on the results of a Biological Assessment completed by Sage Institute Inc. and a 2014
protocol least Bell’s vireo survey conducted for the project that included biological surveys and preliminary wetland
delineation and jurisdictional determination. Refer to Exhibit A for detailed background biological resource information and
project-related impact analysis.
a) through d) The construction of the new lift station will not directly impact riparian habitat along Froom Creek, although
site grading may encroach up to the riparian edge. Dewatering discharge into Froom Creek would be temporary and a
potential benefit to the aquatic resource values of the creek at that time. The installation of the gravity sewer siphon
replacement under San Luis Obispo Creek will require open trench excava tion through the riparian corridor and creek
bottom. This approach will require the diversion of San Luis Obispo Creek flows around the work site and likely dewatering
the excavated trench. The proposed siphon alignment is proposed to be located approximat ely 10 feet north of the existing
siphon alignment. It is estimated that an approximately 40-foot to 70-foot wide by 350-feet long disturbance footprint
through the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor would be required for the open trench construction for the siphon
replacement. As such, approximately 0.32 to 0.56 acre of combined riparian wetland and streambed habitat would be
temporarily impacted by the siphon replacement project element. The project includes habitat enhancements to San Luis
Obispo Creek that includes removal of approximately 24,464 square feet of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) and 1,000
cubic yards of associated silt removal in the creek corridor. The temporary loss of vegetative cover would be replaced by
revegetation plantings with native riparian tree, shrub and forb species. The existing siphon and gravity line will be
abandoned in place. The construction across San Luis Obispo Creek would temporarily disturb biolog ical resources through
direct temporary loss of riparian and wetland vegetation and potential for increased erosion and sedimentation.
Riparian corridors support the highest diversity and abundance of plant and animal life in the study area. San Luis Obi spo
Creek, Froom Creek, and Prefumo Creek within the study area have been designated “critical habitat” for the central
California coast steelhead (NOAA, 2007). The riparian plant communities within study area drainage include the Central
Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest, Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, Central Coast Cottonwood -Sycamore
Forest (Holland, 1986). The majority of the riparian woodland is dominated by Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest.
Riparian habitat supports a diver se assemblage of resident and migratory wildlife species, as well as provide prey base for a
variety of predatory species. Two state or formally-listed animal species are known or expected to occur within riparian and
aquatic habitats of San Luis Obispo Creek within the project vicinity. These include the Federally Threatened California red-
legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) and central California coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) - Central California
Coast Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU). Additionally, the State Species of Special Concern western pond turtle (Emys
marmorata) and two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) could occur in the project area.
Although there would be no long term disturbance of biological resources along th e replacement sewer line corridor, the
open trenching across San Luis Obispo Creek and excavation associated with the construction of the new lift station
proximate to Froom Creek could impact special-status species as a result of strikes with construction equipment, pitfall
traps, stream flow diversion, and other project-related activities. The proposed inverted siphon installation across San Luis
Obispo Creek and construction activities proximate to Froom Creek may impact nesting or roosting wildlife utilizing the
riparian corridors. Mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
e) A Tree Removal Permit is required from the City of San Luis Obispo under tree maintenance by public utilities
12.24.120) of the tree removal ordinance (No 1544-2010 Series). Based on the onsite restoration that will occur for
potential riparian tree removal activities, impacts are considered less than significant.
f) No regional or state Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community C onservation Plan is applicable in the project area.
No significant impacts are anticipated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST30
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are recommended to avoid, minimize and compensate for potentially significant impacts
on biological resources associated mostly with the open trench construction for the siphon replacement across San Luis
Obispo Creek.
Riparian, Coastal and Valley Marsh, and Pale Spike Rush Marsh Alliance Impacts
The following mitigation measures are recommended to ensure regulatory compliance is obtained for proposed project
work in waters of the U.S./State including wetlands.
BIO-1: The City shall obtain Clean Water Act (CWA) regulatory compliance in the form o f a permit from the Corps or written
documentation from the Corps for the diversion, dewatering, and trenching of San Luis Obispo Creek. The City of SLO shall
implement all the terms and conditions of the permit to the satisfaction of the Corps. Corps per mits and authorizations
require applicants to demonstrate that the proposed project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that
avoids and minimizes impacts on aquatic resources to the extent feasible. Compliance with Corps permitting would also
include obtaining and CWA 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, the
Corps may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable temporary and permanent impacts on herbaceous and/or
riparian wetlands to achieve the goal of a no net loss of wetland values and functions. At a minimum, the City shall prepare
and implement an onsite riparian and creek habitat restoration plan for all disturbed areas that includes approximately 0.56
acre (24,464 square feet) of giant reed eradication (approximately 10,255 square feet by hand and 14,209 removed
mechanically) and 1,000 cubic yards of silt removal effort in the vicinity upstream and downstream of the project alignment.
As such, regulatory compliance would reduc e potential impacts on waters of the U.S. to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-2: The City shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code (Streambed Alteration
Agreement; SAA) in the form of a completed Streambed Alteration Agreement or written documentation from the CDFW for
the San Luis Obispo Creek trenching and creek flow diversion. The City shall implement all the terms and conditions of the
SAA to the satisfaction of the CDFW. The CDFW SAA process encourages appli cants to demonstrate that the proposed
project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts in the stream zone to the
extent feasible. In addition, CDFW may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts on wetland and riparian
habitats in the form of habitat restoration of disturbed areas to the extent feasible. At a minimum, the City shall prepare
and implement an onsite riparian and creek habitat restoration plan for all disturbed areas that includes approximately
24,464 square feet of giant reed eradication (approximately 10,255 square feet by hand and 14,209 square feet removed
mechanically) and 1,000 cubic yards of silt removal effort in the vicinity upstream and downstream of the project alignment.
As such, regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the state to a less -than-significant level.
Central California coast steelhead, California Red -Legged Frog, Western Pond Turtle, & Two Striped Garter Snake Impacts
The following mitigation measures are recommended to ensure appropriate regulatory compliance is obtained and that
measures to avoid and minimize impacts are implemented for proposed project work in San Luis Obispo Creek.
BIO-3: The City shall provide proof of compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act for potential impacts on the
central California coast steelhead and California red -legged frog in the form of a take permit/authorization or written
documentation from the National Marine Fisheries S ervice (NMFS) for the central California coast steelhead and USFWS for
the California red-legged frog that the proposed project would not result in take of the central California coast steelhead or
California red-legged frog or would otherwise not adversel y affect these species. Should a take permit or authorization be
required, or conditions imposed by the NMFS or USFWS to ensure that no take would result from the project, the applicant
shall implement all the terms and conditions of the NMFS/USFWS permit, authorization, or recommendations to the
satisfaction of the NMFS/USFWS. The NMFS/USFWS can only provide take authorization for projects that demonstrate the
species affected would be left in as good as or better condition than before the project was imp lemented. Additionally, the
NMFS/USFWS cannot authorize any project that would jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST31
BIO-4: To avoid and minimize potential impacts on the western pond turtle and two striped garter snake, a qualified
biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian zone project site to salvage and
relocate any individuals out of harm’s way. Onsite monitoring by a qualified biologist, during initial vegetation removal and
ground disturbing activities and as needed during project construction, shall also be required to salvage and relocate any
western pond turtles encountered out of harm’s way.
General Nesting/Roosting Wildlife Impacts
The proposed siphon replacement construction across San Luis Obispo Creek and associated construction may impact
nesting or roosting wildlife throughout the riparian corridor. To avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds,
ground dwelling and roosting wildlife, the following mitigation measures are recommended.
BIO-5: Vegetation removal and initial site disturbance for any project elements shall be conducted between September 1st
and March 1st outside of the nesting season for birds. If vegetat ion removal is planned for the bird nesting season (March
1st to August 31st), then preconstruction nesting bird surveys shall be required to determine if any active nests would be
impacted by project construction. If no active nests are found, then no further mitigation shall be required.
If any active nests are found that would be impacted by construction, then the nest sites shall be avoided with the
establishment of a non-disturbance buffer zone around active nests as determined by a qualified biologi st. Nest sites shall be
avoided and protected with the non -disturbance buffer zone until the adults and young of the year are no longer reliant on
the nest site for survival as determined by a qualified biologist. As such, avoiding disturbance or take of a n active nest would
reduce potential impacts on nesting birds to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-6: Prior to ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction survey within 30 days of
initial ground disturbance to identify whether any non-listed special-status or common wildlife species are using any portion
of the project areas where ground disturbance is proposed. The survey shall cover the boundaries of proposed disturbance
and 100 feet beyond. If ground dwelling or roosting wildlife species are detected, a biological monitor shall be present
during initial ground disturbing and/or vegetation removal activities to attempt relocation efforts for the wildlife that may
be present such as common reptiles, small mammals, or roosting bats. The salvage and relocation effort for non -listed
wildlife species would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level.
Conclusion
Based on the findings described above establishing the existing conditions of bio logical resources within the study area and
incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any
substantial adverse effects on biological, botanical, wetland habitat resources. Therefore, wit h mitigation measures
incorporated into the project, direct and indirect project impacts on biological resources would be considered to be less
than significant.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST32
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST33
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource as defined in §15064.5.
1,13 --X--
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5)
1,13 --X--
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
1,13 --X--
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
1,13 --X--
Evaluation
A formal Archaeological Records Search was conducted by the staff of the California Historical Resources Information
System Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), which is housed at the Department of Anthropology, University of
California, Santa Barbara (Appendix B). The CCIC searched their records for archaeological sites, historical resources, and
previous cultural resource surveys within one half mile of the Project Area. The findings of this searc h are summarized
below:
There are no recorded sites within the specific Project Area. There are four archaeological sites within the half -mile search
area. Of these, two are prehistoric bedrock mortar sites (CA-SLO-783 and CA-SLO-1365) and one is a prehistoric debris
scatter that contains shell fragments, deer bones, and chert flakes (CA -SLO-1195). The site nearest to the Project Area,
approximately 0.2 miles away. The CCIC records search also found a Historic Property Evaluation for the Froom House, a
historic ranch house in the search area. According to the records search, there have been 34 cultural resource surveys
within a half mile of the Project Area. None of these surveys included the specific Project Area. The CCIC recommends that
a cultural resource field survey is conducted.
a) through d) All of western San Luis Obispo County, including the City of San Luis Obispo, lies within a region that was
historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, who lived on the central coast of California for more than 9,000 years.
The proposed project will not result in substantial ground disturbance, which will in general be limited to previously
disturbed areas, including roadways, landscaped/developed areas, and the margins of an agricultural field. of the siphon
replacement through San Luis Obispo Creek is near the previously disturbed alignment but would disturb approximately
0.40 acre of riparian habitat and streambed. Less than an acre of land will be used from the lift station and for boring holes
associated with installation of the gravity line replacement. No buildings (with the exception of the existing lift station) will
be removed or otherwise modified. No known historic resources will be disturbed or in any way affected.
Relative to archaeological and paleontological resources, the intent of the project is to minimize ground disturbance, and
respect the nature of the resources that may be buried on or near the site. Nevertheless, sit e disturbance mostly through
the creek corridor has the potential to impact as yet unknown cultural resources, particularly since activities are occurring
near San Luis Obispo and Froom Creeks, which would be areas of relatively high archaeological sensitivity.
In the event resources are uncovered, th ey will be protected through implementation of various General Plan policies,
which are included to be consistent with state and federal laws relative to resource protection. Specifically, these include
policies 3.5.1 through 3.5.11 of the City’s General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element. These policies describe the
procedures that must be followed in the event resources are encountered, which among other things, require work to be
stopped, and native American representatives to be consulted regard ing further disposition of such resources before
resuming work. In order to ensure compliance with General Plan policies, state and federal laws, and per the CCIC
recommendation, the following measures are recommended. Impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST34
Mitigation Measures
CR-1: In the event of the unforeseen encounter of subsurface materials suspected to be of an archaeological or
paleontological nature, all grading or excavation shall cease in the immediate area and in the find left untouched until a
qualified professional archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate and
make recommendations as to its disposition, mitigation and/or salvage. All applicable requ irements of any law or agency of
the State, City of Pismo Beach and any other governmental entity at the time of construction shall be met.
CR-2: Conduct a cultural resource field survey by a qualified archaeologist along all portions of the project align ment subject
to ground disturbing and vegetation removal activities. Any observed sites as a result of this survey shall be avoided or a
professional archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, shall be contacted and called in to evaluate an d
make recommendations as to its disposition, mitigation and/or salvage.
Conclusion
The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources with implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures. No known historic or prehistoric resources would be disturbed, and state and local law
require specific procedures to be followed in the event previously unknown resources are found.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
1, 3 --X--
I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
1, 3 --X--
II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 1, 3 --X--
III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 1, 3 --X--
IV. Landslides? 1, 3 --X--
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1, 3 --X--
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
1, 3 --X--
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of
the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to
life or property?
1, 3 --X--
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
1, 3 --X--
Evaluation
a)(I) Several faults in the region are considered geologically active or potentially active and are capable of causing significant
ground motion in the vicinity of the City of San Luis Obispo. An active fault is defined by the California Division of Mines and
Geology (CDMG) as a fault that has “had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years).” “A
potentially active fault is a fault with evidence of surface displacement during Quaternary time (last 2 million years).”
The project site is located near the general trace of the Los Osos Fault, a portion of which is identified under the State of
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST35
California Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazards Act. While the project site is not located within this zone, the fault trace generally
follows the length of Los Osos Valley south of Los Osos Valley Road, and crosses Highway 101 in the general vicinity of the
project site. Additional site-specific studies may find other segments of the fault, in which case it would be appropriate for
the California Department of Mines and Geology to expand the zone. This fault has been classified as active within the last
11,000 years. As noted in the City’s General Plan, the Los Osos Fault presents a high to very high fault rupture hazard to
development and facilities in the Los Osos Valley. Other faults in the vicinity of San Luis Obispo are the West Huasna,
Oceanic, and Edna faults. These faults are considered potentially active and present a moderate fault rupture hazard to
developments near them.
Implementation of the proposed project will not result in any increased or change in the significance of exposure to people
or structures, which would result in adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury or death. The facility does not suppo rt
onsite workers or residents. The risk of loss, injury or death associated with the rupture of a known earthquake fault will
not be significantly altered by the implementation of the project. However, a significant earthquake in the region could
disrupt this facility, as it could man y other similar facilities in the region. In this event, the provision of public services
related to this project could be disrupted. That said, there is nothing unique about this location that would pose a geologic
risk significantly greater than any other location in the City. For these reasons, the proposed project will not generate any
potentially significant impacts related to seismic activity.
a)(II) Mitigation of groundshaking effects is provided through enforcement of structural and nonstructural seismic design
provisions defined in the Uniform Building Code. These codes are updated every three years and through this updated
process the codes will be incorporated into new design provisions as needed. No significant impact is anticipated.
a)(III-IV) Based on the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the potential for seismic liquefaction of surface soils is moderate.
However, given proper densification of site soils consistent with standard construction practices and requirements, the
potential for seismically induced settlement and differential settlement is considered to be low. The site is relatively flat,
although there is a slight slope toward Froom Creek to the south of the proposed lift station site. Although there is the
potential for very localized landslide risk along this escarpment, the facility itself will be built on level ground with required
pads and footings that are designed to mitigate potential for landslide risk. Upon implementation of standard structural and
nonstructural development requirements by the Uniform Building Code, no significant impacts are anticipated.
b) Very little ground disturbance will be necessary on the site to implement the proposed project, and will be confined to a
level and graded area for the purpose of constructing the pad for the facility itself. There will not be a substantial loss or
disturbance of topsoil. No significant impacts are anticipated.
c) and d) Very little ground disturbance will be necessary on the site to implement the proposed proj ect, and will be
confined to level area for the purpose of constructing the facility itself. Upon implementation of standard structural and
nonstructural development requirements by the Uniform Building Code, no significant impacts related to liquefaction and
subsidence are anticipated. Based on the minimal ground disturbance and upon implementation of standard structural and
nonstructural development requirements by the Uniform Building Code, no significant impacts related to geologic hazards,
including expansive soils, are anticipated.
e) The project would not require the use of septic systems, so no impacts would occur relative to soil suitability for this
purpose.
Conclusion
The proposed project would result in no geologic impacts, since it would not expose residents or employees to potential
hazards of this nature. The site would be built to City and State codes, on relatively level ground suitable for this purpose ,
and not subject to unique geologic hazards.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST36
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
1 --X--
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
1, 14 --X--
Evaluation
Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on the Earth as a whole, including temperature, wind
patterns, ocean currents, and precipitation. Global temperatures are moderated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases,
known as “greenhouse gases” (GHG), including water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O).
These gases allow solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth’s atmosphere, but prevent heat from es caping, thus warming the
Earth’s atmosphere.
Global climate change attributable to the emission of greenhouse gases (mainly CO 2, CH4 and N2O) generated by human
activity is currently one of the most important and widely debated scientific, economic and political issues in the United
States. GHGs are the result of both natural and human activity. CO2 is the most abundant GHG. Forest fires, decomposition,
industrial processes, landfills, and consumption of fossil fuels for power generation, transportation, heating, and cooking
are the primary sources of GHG emissions. According to the California Energy Commission, emissions from fossil fuel
consumption represent approximately eighty -one percent (81%) of human-caused GHG emissions, and transportation
creates forty-one percent (41%) of human-caused GHG emissions in California.
The State of California has adopted a series of laws to reduce both the level of GHGs in the atmosphere and to reduce
emissions of GHGs from commercial and private activities within the State. Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, requiring the
development and adoption of regulations to achieve “the maximum feasible reduction of greenhouse gases” emitted by
noncommercial passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, and other vehicles used primarily for personal transportation in the
state was signed into law in September 2002.
AB 32, the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” was signed into law in the fall of 2006. AB 32 (codified at
Section 38500 et seq. of the California Health & Safety Co de) required the ARB to adopt regulations to require reporting
and verification of statewide GHG emissions. The bill requires achievement by 2020 of a statewide GHG emissions limit
equivalent to 1990 emissions, and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible
and cost-effective GHG emissions reductions.
Senate Bill (SB) 97, signed in August 2007, requires the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”) to develop
proposed guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions. The California Resources Agency (Resources Agency)
certified and adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions on January 1,
2010. These updated CEQA Guidelines provide regulatory guidance on the analysis of GHG emissions in CEQA documents,
while giving lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of
impacts related to climate change.
Senate Bill (SB) 375, signed in August 2008, requires the development of sustainable communities’ strategies (SCS) for the
purpose of reducing GHG emissions and achieving regional targets set by ARB for 2020 and 2035. On September 23, 2010,
ARB adopted regional targets to be considered in the City’s long-range planning relative to reducing greenhouse gas
emissions.
In 2006, the SLOAPCD staff initiated implementation of its plan to address climate change in the county, specifically to
address the achievement of the emission reduction goals embodied in AB 32. The City’s Climate Action Plan addresses four
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST37
key sectors — energy, waste, transportation, and land use.
Local Regulations and CEQA Requirements . The City of San Luis Obispo has the following adopted General Plan policies
within its Conservation and Open Space Element that directly address this issue:
Policy 2.1.1: City actions shall seek to minimize undesirable climate changes and deterioration of the atmosphere’s
protective functions that result from the release of carbon dioxide and other substances.
Policy 4.6.18. County Air Pollution Control District support. Seek the support of the San Luis Obispo County Air
Pollution Control District in calculating emission inventories and the development of balanced strategies for
addressing climate protection through development of model ordinances and guidelines designed to meet the City’s
goals.
Quantitative significance thresholds for this topic have not bee n adopted by the City or the San Luis Obispo APCD
SLOAPCD). Therefore, there are no quantitative emission thresholds to determine whether the impacts with respect to
global climate change or GHGs are significant. Therefore, this analysis uses a qualitative approach in order to determine
whether the project would result in a significant impact.
a) and b) The proposed project is the replacement of a lift station and associated wastewater facilities, consistent with what
is required and anticipated under the General Plan to serve existing and future development within the City. It is needed to
ensure the long-term operation and maintenance and operation of the City’s wastewater collection system. In that sense, it
is consistent with long-range strategies articulated in the City’s draft Climate Action Plan relative to future consideration of
developing a recycled water program.
By itself, the construction of the new facility will not generate significant greenhouse emissions (through construction
equipment used for that purpose). Long-term operation of the facility will not generate emissions. As noted above, the
facility is anticipated in the City’s long-range planning, and thus consistent with the assumptions that underlie the City’s
General Plan policies and draft Climate Action Plan. Refer to Section 3, Air Quality, above for a discussion of temporary air
quality impacts expected to occur during construction activities. No significant impacts are anticipated.
Conclusion
Impacts would be less than significant.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
1 --X--
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
1 --X--
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
1 --X--
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
1 --X--
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where 1,6,8 --X--
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST38
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working
in the project area?
1,6 --X--
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
1 --X--
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury,
or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
1 --X--
Evaluation
The City’s Safety Element, establishes three major goals, which would apply to all activities in the City, including the
proposed project:
Goal 1: Minimize injury and loss of life.
Goal 2: Minimize damage to public and private property.
Goal 3: Minimize social and economic disruptions resulting from injury, death, and property damage.
The Safety Element also includes many policies and programs inten ded in part to be applied to the design and operation of
buildings and other facilities in order to minimize risk associated with natural and manmade hazards. In general, these
policies and programs strive to achieve the following:
Apply the most recent safety requirements from state and local building and fire codes;
Use the planning and technical criteria presented in the Safety Element as basic guidelines for all new public
facilities;
Evaluate new development (including utilities), to ensure that construction or operation of the project will not
cause hazardous conditions at an unacceptable level of risk; and
Requiring new development to avoid portions of sites with high hazard levels.
The following discussion addresses the proposed project’s relation ship to each hazard issue described in the Initial Study
checklist:
a) The proposed project would not require the use of materials with a significant hazardous potential. Therefore, there is
no potential to create any significant hazard to the public o r the environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials potential or otherwise, given the appropriate procedures and guidelines are followed
during the construction and operation phases of the project. Therefore, the impact of the proposed project is not
significant.
b) and c) Activities onsite would not use materials that would pose the threat of significant hazardous conditions in the
event of an accident. The project would not emit hazardous materials or fumes. The City’s building code and OSHA regulate
the use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials. Although not anticipated, demolition and replacement of the existing
lift station structure may reveal unknown hazards. However, the intent of the project is to imp rove the City’s wastewater
collection system, which by its nature is intended to protect public health and safety, consistent with state and local
regulatory requirements. The project site is not within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, so no impacts to
such facilities would occur. No significant impacts are anticipated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST39
d) The proposed project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5, and, as a result, it would not create a significant hazard for the public or the environment.
e) and f) The proposed project site is not located within a designated safety zone under the Airport Land Use Plan for the
San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, which is located a bout two miles east of the site. There would be no restrictions to
the proposed development based on the Airport Land Use Plan policy framework. The project site is not within the vicinity
of a private air strip. No aircraft-related hazards would occur as a result of the project.
g) and h) The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan and no impact is anticipated. In fact, the project is adjacent to Calle Joaquin, which provides
immediate access for emergency vehicles. No significant impacts related to fire hazards and emergency response are
anticipated.
Conclusion
The proposed project would result in no impacts related to ha zards and hazardous materials. The project would not use or
emit hazardous materials, and would not introduce residents or workers who might be exposed to such hazards from other
land uses that might otherwise be in the vicinity of the project site.
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
1,5 --X--
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
1 --X--
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on or off site?
1,3 --X--
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off
site?
1,3 --X--
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
1,3 --X--
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1,3,5 --X--
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped
on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
1 --X--
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
1 --X--
i) Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the
1 --X--
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST40
failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1 --X--
Evaluation
The State Water Resources Control Board is responsible for maintaining the quality of surface waters through various
restrictions and permit programs. Through their subordinate regional boards (Regional Water Quality Control Basin) water
quality plans (Basin Plans) were prepared and implemented. Nonpoint sources of water pollution are controlled under the
Clean Water Act (1987) by the U.S. EPA. Construction sites over five acres are required to obtain a Phase I permit under the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Construction sites for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
MS4s) between one and five acres are required to comply with Phase II of the NPDES program. An MS4 is a publicly-owned
conveyance or system of conveyances (i.e., ditches, curbs, catch basins, underground pipes, etc.) that is designed or used
for collecting or conveying stormwater and that discharges to surface waters of the State. The proposed project is part of
the City’s wastewater system, which ultimately allows the discharge of treated wastewater to surface waters of the State,
and therefore qualifies as an MS4.
a), c), and f) Future activities on the site would disturb less than five acres, and would not include new residences or
commercial buildings. As such, sources of water pollutants would be limited, and an NPDES Phase I permit would not be
required. While the lift station site would require minimal ground disturbance, the require d work space for the jack and
bore rig would be about 15,000 SF (0.34 acre), with a very small portion of this being disturbed ground. Because the total
area of disturbance is likely to be less than 1 acre, it would not be subject to Phase II permitting requirements of the NPDE S
program. Impacts would be less than significant.
The project would also include the installation of an inverte d siphon below the bed of San Luis Obispo Creek. This activity
will not permanently alter the bed or banks of the creek, and ground disturbance is anticipated to be contained within a 40-
foot to 70-foot right-of-way. As designed, the intent is to ensure that no sewage or effluent would escape into San Luis
Obispo Creek or its related watershed, and that erosion will be minimized, during either the construction or operation
phases of the project. This activity, including the design and operation thereof, must comply with the permit conditions set
forth by agencies that may have jurisdiction over areas near the creek, including the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (Corps),
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). However, the
jurisdictional determination has yet to be verified, pending consultation with these agencies. In any event, the final project
design will be based on input received during this consultation and permitting process and will include onsite restoration
for temporary impacts.
Project construction activities in San Luis Obispo Creek and near Froom Creek could introduce short-term soil erosion, or
hydrocarbon runoff (e.g., grease, oil, tire particulates), from construction equipment, and minor siltation from diversion and
dewatering activities. It is assumed that impacts are potentially significant, and will require a Section 401 water quality
certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps), and a Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDFW). At a minimum, these permits will require onsite restoration of disturbed creek areas and riparian habita t with
native plant species and appropriate water quality BMP’s.
b) Project activities would not include onsite commercial or residences. There would be no use of water onsite (other than
during construction activities). Onsite landscaping would use minimal water from existing City supplies. The project is
required to support existing and planned development under the City’s General Plan, so additional water supply is not
needed. No impacts to groundwater sources would occur.
d) As described above, the proposed project would not result in a significant increase in impervious surfaces in the project
area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST41
e) Runoff volumes would be de minimis from the proposed project and would not impact downstream drainage facilities.
Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
g) and h). The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM, 2008) includes the
existing lift station site within the Zone A Special Flood Hazard Area, indicating that floodplain elevations have not been
established by FEMA. The floodplain extends across Froom Creek and north toward Los Osos Valley Road. While the project
by its nature would not expose lives or other property to flood hazard as a result of its implementation, the p roject itself
would be exposed to flood hazards.
The area including and surrounding the lift station has experienced historical flooding events, according to City staff. The
existing lift station has been covered by water to a depth of three or four feet in the past based on City staff observation.
This flooding appeared to result from surcharge of both Froom Creek and Prefumo Creek as tributaries to San Luis Obispo
Creek. In addition, both the on-ramp to U.S. Highway 101 and the highway itself have been observed to flood in this vicinity.
Based on a floodplain analysis (included in the PDR), AECOM (project engineer) determined appropriate design parameters
for safeguarding the project in the event of a flood.
The proposed Calle Joaquin wetwell will extend approximately 28.75 feet below grade. In order to raise the top of the
wetwell above the 100-year flood plain, the wetwell will extend approximately six feet above the existing grade for a total
wetwell depth of 34.75 feet.
Based on the 110.40 foot elevation of the 100-year storm event the proposed Calle Joaquin wetwell will be elevated
approximately 5.2 feet above the existing grade. The lift station will also have a deck surrounding the top of the wetwell to
provide access for City maintenance personnel and to locate electrical equipment out of the flood area. The proposed
layout utilizes a three-foot retaining wall around the site with concrete piers supporting the deck. This allows the discharge
manifold piping to be above grade while providing room f or maintenance. The site itself will be built up three feet and
sloped to drain toward the landscaped areas to the north and west. Although the proposed siphon will be installed across
the floodplain of San Luis Obispo Creek, it will be installed at an appropriate depth below the creek bed where it will not be
affected by flood events. Based on the flood analysis, and subsequent design measures included in the project to address
potential flood issues, impacts would be less than significant.
i) and j) As indicated in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the site is not subject to tsunami, seiches, mudflow, or
potential flooding inundation because of dam or levee failure. There would be no impact from these hazards.
Conclusion
Although the project would be located in the 100-year flood plain, and adjacent to both Froom Creek and San Luis Obispo
Creek, hydrology and water quality impacts would be less than significant both as a result of the project design, and
minimum subsequent requirements that will be imposed through the permitting process of jurisdictional agencies, as
applicable.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? 1,3,8 --X--
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
1 --X--
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
1 --X--
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST42
Evaluation
a) The proposed project is located in developed streets and at the edge of an existing roadway right-of-way on disturbed
vacant land. The project will result in temporary construction impacts. The project would not divide an established
community.
b) The project area is located within the existing City limits, and in a location appropriate for the development of t he
required infrastructure needed to support existing uses as well as future uses under the General Plan. No impact would
occur.
c) There is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor Natural Community Conservation Plan that include lands within the
project area, so there would be no impact relative to such plans.
Conclusion
No impacts related to land use or planning would occur because the project is consistent with the General Plan’s
requirement to provide infrastructure needed to support existing and future development.
11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
1 --X--
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
1 --X--
Evaluation
a) and b) The project site is not located in an area that has any mineral extraction potential, nor will it preclude the
possibility of mineral extraction outside of the project area. No impacts would occur.
Conclusion
No impacts related to mineral resources would occur.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST43
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
1 --X--
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
1 --X--
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
1 --X--
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
1 --X--
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
1 --X--
1 --X--
Evaluation
a) and c) The project would not be located near any residents or employees, so it would not be inherently noise-sensitive.
During operations, the project would not generate noise, nor would it induce traffic that could generate noise, so ambient
noise levels in the area would not rise. The permanent natural gas auxiliary generator would be operated under the same
circumstances and probabilities as under existing conditions use of the portable diesel/gasoline generator in the case of
power outages. No impacts would occur.
b) Vibration is a form of noise in that its energy is carried through structures and the earth, whereas noise is carried through
the air. Thus, vibration is generally felt rather than heard. Some vibration effects can be caused by noise; for example, the
rattling of windows from truck pass-bys. Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by man-made activities attenuates
rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration. The primary vibration source generally associated with the project
would be jack and bore and trenching activities due to the type of equipment and process used. However, this impact is
expected to be less than significant due to the distance to sensitive land uses.
d) During project construction, short-term noise increases in the immediate vicinity could occur. Drilling operations and
pipeline excavation activities typically produce a substantial amount of noise. However, there are no permanent residences
near the project site. The nearest homes to the project are those along Los Palos Drive, about 250 east of where the
pipeline would meets the existing pipeline on the east side of San Luis Obispo Creek. Near the proposed lift station, the
closest hotel rooms are those at Courtyard by Marriott (about 160 feet) and Motel 6 (about 200 feet). However, such
transient residents are not likely to be disturbed because there would be no construction activities at night, when patrons
are typically in their rooms. Construction activities would be restricted to certain hours and prohibited on weekends or
holidays, per City ordinance. Because construction would take place during daylight hours, be far enough from these homes
and lodging facilities, restricted by City Ordinance, and be temporary, such impacts would be adverse but less than
significant.
e) and f) The project area is not located within an airport land use plan noise restriction area or within the vicinity of a
private airstrip. Therefore, no impacts from aircraft operations would occur.
Conclusion
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST44
Impacts related to noise would be considered less than significant because the project would not generate long-term noise
from traffic or operations over existing conditions and because of the lack of nearby sensitive land uses that might be
disturbed by construction noise.
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
1 --X--
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
1 --X--
1 --X--
Evaluation
a) through c) The project will not result in an increase in onsite population. The project by its nature is infrastructure
intended to be an asset to serve the existing community. It will not induce new population growth, nor displace any existing
housing or population. No impacts would occur.
Conclusion
No impacts related to population and housing would occur.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
a) Fire protection? 1 --X--
b) Police protection? 1 --X--
c) Schools? 1 --X--
d) Parks? 1 --X--
e) Other public facilities? 1 --X--
Evaluation
a) through e) The project will not result in an increase in onsite population, and thus would not generate additional need
for any public services, including fire, police protection, schools or parks. No impacts would occur.
Conclusion
No impacts related to public services would occur.
15. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
1 --X--
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the 1 --X--
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST45
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Evaluation
a) and b) The project will not result in an increase in onsite population, and thus would not increase use on existing
recreational facilities or require construction of new facilities. No impacts would occur.
Conclusion
No impacts related to recreational facilities would occur.
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of
the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel
and relevant components of the circulation system, including
but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
1 --X--
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other standards established by the
county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
1 --X--
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
1 --X--
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
e.g. farm equipment)?
1 --X--
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1 --X--
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding
public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
1 --X--
Evaluation
a), b) and f) The proposed project would not generate traffic, because there would be no onsite residents or employees.
Thus, it would not conflict with or hinder the attainment of General Plan levels of service standards with respect to traffic
flow on nearby streets, including Calle Joaquin, Los Osos Valley Road, and U.S. Highway 101. The project would not impair
or otherwise affect other transportation systems, including bike paths, sidewalks, or bus routes. The project would not
present a safety hazard to pedestrians, cyclists or motorists, nor would it impair a driver’s visual sight lines on Calle Joaquin.
The project would not block or remove parking opportunities. No impacts would occur.
In the short-term, project construction could result in temporary lane closures along Calle Joaquin south of Los Osos Valley
Road, and the northbound off-ramp to Los Osos Valley Road while the new lift station is being installed, and during siphon
replacement across San Luis Obispo Creek. A Traffic Control Plan will require approval from the City and a Caltrans
encroachment permit. In addition, no driveways to nearby commercial establishments, including motels, would be blocked.
Given the short term construction impacts, no significant impacts would occur.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST46
c) The project area is not within any airport traffic patterns, or near any airport. It is located about two miles west of San
Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, and outside of safety zones identified in the Airport Land Use Plan for that facility. No
impacts would occur.
d) The project would not result in any hazardous transportation design features. No impacts would occur.
e) The project would not impede emergency access either to the site or to neighboring properties. It would not require the
extension of emergency access roads in the event of an onsite incident. No significant impact would occur.
Conclusion
No impacts related to with respect to transportation and circulation would occur.
17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
5 --X--
b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
1,3 --X--
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
1,3 --X--
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and
expanded entitlements needed?
1 --X--
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
1,3 --X--
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
1 --X--
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
1 --X--
Evaluation
a), b), and e) The project will not increase the City’s population, nor would it bring in permanent new jobs. Therefore, it will
not generate additional wastewater. The project is proposed to = improve the City’s wastewater collection system, so the
project will be beneficial from this perspective. No expansion of the City’s existing wastewater treatment capacity will be
required as a result of the project.
c) The proposed project would not require new drainage infrastructure, and would not introduce significant runoff that
would necessitate modifications to existing drainage infrastructure. Once installed, the new lift station components will be
designed such that runoff will flow into existing curb and gutter systems. No significant impact is anticipated.
d) The project would not generate any long -term water demand, other than what is needed for onsite landscaping. Long-
term water demand would be minimal, and consistent with what occurs within landscaped areas in public rights -of-way
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST47
through the City. No impact is anticipated.
f) and g) Because there would be no onsite residents, employees or visitors, no solid waste would be generated. Thus, the
project does not represent a new source of solid waste that requires potential expansion of service capacity. No impact is
anticipated.
Conclusion
No adverse impacts related to with respect to utilities and service systems would occur.
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
NA X--
The proposed project would not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species or cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels. There is no significant evidence of historical importance or
prehistory. However, the biological elements analyzed in this Initial Study indicate the potential presence of special -status
species including central California coast steelhead, California red-legged frog, western pond turtle, and two-striped garter
snake. In addition, the proposed project would result in impacts to protected riparian habitat and jurisdictional waters.
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-5 would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. In addition, the
project site may contain previously unidentified buried archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure CR -1 and CR-2 would
reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the
past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
NA X--
The project is accommodating existing and approved infrastructure needs and will not have impacts that are cumulatively
considerable. No impact is anticipated.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
NA X--
The proposed project may result in potential adverse impacts to human beings as described in the Biological and Cultural
Resource Sections above. Mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-4 and CR-1 and CR-2 are proposed to reduce impacts to a
less than significant level.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST48
19. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion
should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
N/A
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
N/A
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -
specific conditions of the project.
N/A
20. SOURCE REFERENCES.
1. San Luis Obispo, City of. 2007. General Plan.
2. San Luis Obispo, City of. 2012. Preliminary Design Report, Calle Joaquin and Laguna Lift Stations. Prepared by
AECOM. March 2012.
3. State of California. California Office of Planning and Research. CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act;
Statutes and Guidelines, Section 15002(a).
4. State of California. Porter-Cologne Act. Water Code Section 13260-13274. Waste Discharge Requirements.
5. San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission. Airport Land Use Plan.
6. San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District. 2013 Annual Air Quality Report. (latest available)
7. Google Earth, February 2013.
8. Robert Carr. 2013. Photo simulations. January 24, 2013.
9. Sage Institute, Inc. 2015. Calle Joaquin Lift Station Project Biological Assessment: May 2015 (Exhibit A)
10. Holland, R. 1986. Preliminary list of terrestrial natural communities of California. Department of Fish and Game,
Sacramento, CA.
11. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS). 2007.
2007 Federal Recovery Outline for the Distinct Population Segment of Central California Coast Steelhead.
12. Applied EarthWorks. 2013. Phase I Records Search for Cultural Resources. January 31, 2013. (Exhibit B)
13. City of San Luis Obispo. 2012. Climate Action Plan. August 2012.
Issues, Discu ssion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST49
REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
Mitigation Measures Section 2, Agricultural Resources:
AG-1: The contractor shall segregate all topsoil located with the active agricultural field east of San Luis Obispo Creek prior
to initiation of construction activities. The top six (6) inches of soil shall be removed and protected onsite via c overing with
plastic or storing in protective bins. All topsoil shall be replaced and lightly disked -in upon completion of the project.
Mitigation Monitoring Program:
Utilities Department staff will insure that requirements for agricultural resources mitigation shall be clearly noted on all
plans for project grading and construction. City engineering staff will inspect the construction operations to verify
conformance with specifications and mitigations.
Mitigation Measures Section 3, Biological Resources:
BIO-1: The City shall obtain Clean Water Act (CWA) regulatory compliance in the form of a permit from the Corps or written
documentation from the Corps for the diversion, dewatering, and trenching of San Luis Obispo Creek. The City of SLO shall
implement all the terms and conditions of the permit to the satisfaction of the Corps. Corps permits and authorizations
require applicants to demonstrate that the proposed project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that
avoids and minimizes impacts on aquatic resources to the extent feasible. Compliance with Corps permitting would also
include obtaining and CWA 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, the
Corps may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable temporary and permanent impacts on herbaceous and/or
riparian wetlands to achieve the goal of a no net loss of wetland values and functions. At a minimum, the City shall prepare
and implement an onsite riparian and creek habitat rest oration plan for all disturbed areas that includes approximately 0.56
acre (24,464 square feet) of giant reed eradication (approximately 10,255 square feet by hand and 14,209 removed
mechanically) and 1,000 cubic yards of silt removal effort in the vicinit y upstream and downstream of the project alignment.
As such, regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the U.S. to a less -than-significant level.
BIO-2: The City shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code (Streambed Alteration
Agreement; SAA) in the form of a completed Streambed Alteration Agreement or written documentation from the CDFW for
the San Luis Obispo Creek trenching and creek flow diversion. The City shall implement all the terms and conditions of the
SAA to the satisfaction of the CDFW. The CDFW SAA process encourages applicants to demonstrate that the proposed
project has been designed and will be implem ented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts in the stream zone to the
extent feasible. In addition, CDFW may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts on wetland and riparian
habitats in the form of habitat restoration of disturbed ar eas to the extent feasible. At a minimum, the City shall prepare
and implement an onsite riparian and creek habitat restoration plan for all disturbed areas that includes approximately
24,464 square feet of giant reed eradication (approximately 10,255 squa re feet by hand and 14,209 square feet removed
mechanically) and 1,000 cubic yards of silt removal effort in the vicinity upstream and downstream of the project alignment.
As such, regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the state to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-3: The City shall provide proof of compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act for potential impacts on the
central California coast steelhead and California red -legged frog in the form of a take permit/authorization or written
documentation from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the central California coast steelhead and USFWS for
the California red-legged frog that the proposed project would not result in take of the central California coast st eelhead or
California red-legged frog or would otherwise not adversely affect these species. Should a take permit or authorization be
required, or conditions imposed by the NMFS or USFWS to ensure that no take would result from the project, the applicant
shall implement all the terms and conditions of the NMFS/USFWS permit, authorization, or recommendations to the
satisfaction of the NMFS/USFWS. The NMFS/USFWS can only provide take authorization for projects that demonstrate the
Issues, Discu ssion and Supporting Information Sources
ER #
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST50
species affected would be left in as good as or better condition than before the project was implemented. Additionally, the
NMFS/USFWS cannot authorize any project that would jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species.
BIO-4: To avoid and minimize potential impacts on the western pond turtle and two striped garter snake, a qualified
biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian zone project site to salvage and
relocate any individuals out of harm’s way. Onsite monitoring by a qua lified biologist, during initial vegetation removal and
ground disturbing activities and as needed during project construction, shall also be required to salvage and relocate any
western pond turtles encountered out of harm’s way.
BIO-5: Vegetation removal and initial site disturbance for any project elements shall be conducted between September 1st
and March 1st outside of the nesting season for birds. If vegetation removal is planned for the bird nesting season (March
1st to August 31st), then preconstruction nesting bird surveys shall be required to determine if any active nests would be
impacted by project construction. If no active nests are found, then no further mitigation shall be required.
BIO-6: Prior to ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 30 days of
initial ground disturbance to identify whether any non -listed special-status or common wildlife species are using any portion
of the project areas where ground disturbance is proposed. Th e survey shall cover the boundaries of proposed disturbance
and 100 feet beyond. If ground dwelling or roosting wildlife species are detected, a biological monitor shall be present
during initial ground disturbing and/or vegetation removal activities to at tempt relocation efforts for the wildlife that may
be present such as common reptiles, small mammals, or roosting bats. The salvage and relocation effort for non -listed
wildlife species would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significan t level.
Mitigation Monitoring Program:
Utilities Department staff will insure requirements for biological resources mitigation shall be clearly noted in project
specifications related to project grading and construction. City engineering staff will inspect the construction operations to
verify conformance with specifications and mitigations.
Mitigation Measures Section 5, Cultural Resources:
CR-1: In the event of the unforeseen encounter of subsurface materials suspected to be of an archaeological or
paleontological nature, all grading or excavation shall cease in the immediate area and in the find left untouched until a
qualified professional archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate and
make recommendations as to its disposition, mitigation and/or salvage. All applicable requirements of any law or agency of
the State, City of Pismo Beach and any other governmental entity at the time of construction shall be met.
CR-2: Conduct a cultural resource field survey by a qualified archaeologist along all portions of the project alignment subject
to ground disturbing and vegetation removal activities. Any observed sites as a result of this survey shall be avoided or a
professional archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, shall be contacted and called in to evaluate and
make recommendations as to its disposition, mitigation and/or salvage.
Mitigation Monitoring Program:
Utilities Department staff will insure requirements for cultural resources mitigation shall be clearly noted in project
specifications related to project grading and construction. City engineering staff will inspect the construction operations to
verify conformance with specifications and mitigations.
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & W ETLAND ASSESSMENT
May 11, 2015
Prepared for:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND
AECOM
Exhibit A
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
i
Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................ 2
3.0 METHODS ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
4.0 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 GENERAL SETTING ................................................................................................................................. 5
4.2 SOILS ................................................................................................................................................... 6
4.3 CHARACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUNITIES ..................................................................................................... 6
4.4 WILDLIFE ............................................................................................................................................. 9
4.5 WATERS OF THE U.S., WATERS OF THE STATE & WETLANDS ........................................................................ 9
4.6 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES AND NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN............................................... 10
4.6.1 Special-Status Botanical Resources ...................................................................................... 11
4.6.2 Special-Status Wildlife .......................................................................................................... 11
5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................. 13
5.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................... 13
5.2 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................................ 14
6.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 16
7.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 16
APPENDIX A – FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Location Map
Figure 2: Project Layout Map
Figure 3: CNDDB Botanical Occurrences Map
Figure 4: CNDDB Wildlife Occurrences Map
Figure 5: Study Area Soils Map
Figure 6: Study Area Habitat Map
Figure 7: Waters of the U.S./State Jurisdictional Limits
Figure 8: Representative Photographs
APPENDIX B – TABLES
Table 1: Plant Species Observed
Table 2: Wildlife Species Observed
Table 3: CNDDB Recorded Occurrences (Five-mile Search Radius)
APPENDIX C – LEAST BELL’S SURVEY REPORT
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
1
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed City of San Luis Obispo Calle Joaquin Lift Station Project (proposed project) will replace
the existing lift station and upgrade several appurtenant facilities that are operated and maintained by
the City of San Luis Obispo (City). The Calle Joaquin Lift Station is a sanitary sewer pump facility located
0.32 mile south of Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) on the west side of Calle Joaquin (see Appendix A,
Figure 1). The project includes the installation of a new lift station; repair of a failed gravity sewer
connection; replacement of the existing gravity pipeline that crosses beneath Highway 101 (Hwy 101)
and San Luis Obispo Creek (SLO Creek); and the replacement of a portion of the pipeline that follows
Calle Joaquin leading up to the KSBY-TV Studio.
The proposed project is located on the outskirts of urban edge of San Luis Obispo, where Hwy 101 and
the SLO Creek corridors bisect agricultural and developed urban land. The existing lift station abuts
Froom Creek on the west side of Calle Joaquin. To the east of Calle Joaquin across Hwy 101 in 2015 is
disturbed from the construction of improvements to the Hwy 101 Los Osos Valley Road interchange
improvements. Immediately to the east of the northbound Hwy 101 off ramp is the SLO Creek riparian
zone. The riparian zone extends to the eastern bank where it is boarded by an active annually cultivated
agriculture field that has an existing sanitary sewer pipelines and manholes. To the north of the existing
and proposed) Calle Joaquin lift station is urban land and commercial development. South of the lift
station Calle Joaquin crosses Froom Creek, and bisects annual and native grassland, eucalyptus groves,
native landscaping, riparian, and freshwater marsh habitats. The overall study area (a 500-foot buffer
around the proposed project features) supports agricultural and developed urban lands, disturbed
annual and native blue wild rye grasslands, eucalyptus groves, and riparian corridors with a mosaic of
Central Coast Arroyo Willow Forests and Central Coast Riparian Scrubland, Southern Cottonwood-
Willow and Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forests.
SII conducted a review of available background information including the proposed project information,
local soils survey, and a search and review of the current California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB)
within an approximate five-mile search radius of the proposed project site. SII Principal Biologist Jason
Kirschenstein, SII Principal Ecologist David Wolff, SII Senior Biologist Michaela Koenig, and SII Biologist
Danielle Castle, conducted field reconnaissance surveys of the proposed project locations and study
area between July 2012 and July 2014. The purpose of the field surveys was to document existing
conditions in terms of habitat for plants and wildlife species, wetland and/or riparian habitats, and
suitability to support habitat for special-status plant or wildlife species. Plant and wildlife species
observed in the field were recorded (see Appendix B, Tables B-1 and B-2).
The search and review of the CNDDB revealed 34 special-status plant species, 18 special-status wildlife
species, and three natural communities of special concern with recorded occurrences within the five-
mile search radius of the project site (Appendix B, Table B-3). Based on the project location, a five-mile
CNDDB search radius was selected as it excluded a large number of strictly coastal species that would
not occur on the project site. The Blue Wild Rye Meadow, Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest,
Central Coast Willow Riparian Scrubland, and Central Coast Willow Riparian Forest community types
were added to the list of natural communities of special concern based on SII observations along the
Calle Joaquin and the SLO Creek riparian corridor. No other observations of any rare, threatened or
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
2
endangered plant or wildlife species within the study area, however, the central California coast
steelhead, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle are known from SLO Creek. Terra Verde
Environmental Consulting, LLC (Terra Verde) conducted protocol-level least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii
pusillus; LBV) surveys completed on behalf of the City in response to a request from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) for additional information on the presence/absence of LBV within specific
areas targeted for giant reed (Arundo donax) removal as part of the overall project. No LBV were
documented during the protocol survey in 2014.
The proposed project includes excavation on landscaped turf for the lift station, staging in developed
landscape/parking areas or agricultural fields, open trenching in the agricultural field and Calle Joaquin
for pipeline replacement, horizontal directional drilling for pipeline placement from the lift station under
Hwy 101 to SLO Creek, and open cut trenching through SLO Creek for pipeline placement to the existing
sewer connection. As such, implementation of the proposed project would result in impacts to urban
land, agricultural land, and the SLO Creek riparian corridor. The open cut trenching through SLO Creek
would require removal of riparian vegetation, excavation of the stream bed and banks, and temporary
dewatering for construction access and pipeline placement. A series of recommended mitigation
measures to avoid, minimize and compensate for potentially significant impacts on biological resources
are provided. Mitigation measures include regulatory compliance for fill of waters of the U.S./State, and
impacts on the federally threatened central California coast steelhead and California red-legged frog.
Measures to avoid and minimize potentially significant impacts on biological resources include pre-
construction and during construction surveys to salvage and relocated central California coast steelhead,
California red-legged frogs, western pond turtles, and two striped garter snake out of harm’s way, and
seasonal construction timing to avoid impacts on nesting birds. Compensatory mitigation includes the
restoration of SLO Creek to preconstruction contours with riparian habitat plantings in disturbed areas,
along with the removal of patches of giant reed (Arundo donax) upstream and downstream of the
pipeline alignment along SLO Creek.
Based on the findings described in the biological assessment establishing the existing conditions of
biological resources within the study area and incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures,
implementation of the project would not result in any substantial adverse effects on biological,
botanical, or wetland habitat resources. Therefore, with mitigation measures incorporated into the
project, direct and indirect potentially significant project impacts on biological resources would be
reduced to a less than significant level.
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The proposed Calle Joaquin Lift Station Project (proposed project) will replace the existing lift station
and several associated sanitary sewer pipelines that are operated and maintained by the City of San Luis
Obispo. The project includes the installation of a new lift station adjacent to the existing Calle Joaquin
lift station, replacement of a reach of gravity sewer on Calle Joaquin, replacement of a gravity sewer
crossing of Highway 101, and replacement of the siphon under San Luis Obispo Creek (SLO Creek). Sage
Institute, Inc. (SII) conducted the review of available background information and completed numerous
biological, botanical, and wetland resources field surveys between July 2012 and July 2014 (Table 1). The
purpose of this biological assessment is to document existing conditions of the proposed project site and
to evaluate the potential for any direct or indirect significant impacts on biological resources or adverse
effects on any rare, threatened, or endangered plant or wildlife species.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
3
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The Calle Joaquin lift station and appurtenant pipeline replacement segments are located on the
southern outskirts of the City of San Luis Obispo around the intersection of Hwy 101 and Los Osos Valley
Road (LOVR) (see Figure 1). The existing and proposed Calle Joaquin lift station is located 0.32 mile
south of LOVR on the west side of Calle Joaquin, abutting Froom Creek to the south. The gravity line and
siphon extend from the lift station under Hwy 101 and SLO Creek to the gravity line running through the
agricultural field on the east side of SLO Creek. The existing and proposed gravity line to the KSBY facility
runs approximately 750 feet to the south in the shoulder of Calle Joaquin where the replacement will
run within the Calle Joaquin paved alignment.
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Calle Joaquin Lift Station project can be divided into three segments: 1) Calle Joaquin lift station
replacement; 2) New gravity line from the new lift station east across Hwy 101 and SLO Creek installed
by horizontal directional drilling and new siphon under SLO Creek installed by open trench excavation;
and 3) KSBY gravity line replacement in Calle Joaquin. The project also includes removal of
approximately 24,571 square feet of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) and approximately 1,000 cubic
yards of associated silt removal from San Luis Obispo Creek to be conducted during the open trench
construction of the SLO Creek crossing replacement. Each segment is described in further detail below.
Construction of the proposed project, including the lift station replacement and inverted siphon crossing
is anticipated to require a total of approximately 12 months from the time the final design plans are
approved and permitted. Individual project elements maybe constructed concurrently, but all elements
will be completed within the 12-month time frame. The open trench work in San Luis Obispo Creek will
have seasonal restrictions for nesting birds and allowable in stream work windows required by the
regulatory agencies for the California red-legged frog and steelhead and will be implemented to
minimize the time of disturbance to San Luis Obispo Creek.
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION REPLACEMENT – The new lift station is proposed to be sited in a landscaped area
north of the existing lift station as shown on the project plans. This location provides a corridor for
connecting the inverted siphon and gravity sewer lines. Additionally, it minimizes the amount of new
easement required, provides an accessible location for the proposed auxiliary generator, and allows for
simplified lift station discharge piping. Construction dewatering of the lift station excavation will be
discharged to the nearby Froom Creek with approval of the Central Coast Water Board.
GRAVITY SEWER LINE AND SIPHON REPLACEMENT – The existing gravity sewer line under U.S. Highway 101 and
inverted siphon under San Luis Obispo Creek that connects the sewer system from the Los Verdes
neighborhoods to the lift station will be replaced. The installation of the new 12-inch replacement
gravity sewer line and 30-inch steel casing will utilize jack and bore method from the new lift station to
the top of the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek (approximately 460 feet). The entry pit for the jack
and bore will have a footprint of approximately 600 square feet (15’ X 40’) located in the landscaped and
parking area of the motel where the new lift station will be constructed. Given the proximity to the
creek, no receiving pit will be used but the pipe will connect to the siphon approximately 10 feet to the
north of existing Manhole H17-25 on the western bank of San Luis Obispo Creek.
The installation of the 6-inch double-barrel siphon under San Luis Obispo Creek will be constructed using
open trench excavation through the riparian corridor and creek bottom (approximately 240 feet). This
approach will require the diversion of San Luis Obispo Creek flows around the work site and likely
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
4
dewatering the excavated trench. Diversion of the creek flows and construction dewatering of the
inverted siphon excavation trench will be discharged to the San Luis Obispo Creek with approval of the
Central Coast Water Board. The siphon replacement alignment is proposed to be located approximately
10 feet north of the existing siphon alignment connecting to new manholes or by pipe to the existing
Manhole H17-25 on the west bank of San Luis Obispo Creek to existing Manhole H18-10 on the east
bank. It is estimated that an approximately 40-foot wide disturbance footprint through the San Luis
Obispo Creek riparian corridor would be required for the open trench construction for the siphon
replacement if shoring is feasible and successful. A disturbance footprint of up to 70-feet wide may be
needed if shoring cannot be used depending on the type of soil material encountered in the open trench
excavation.
The new inverted siphon is proposed to consist of two 6-inch carrier pipes contained within a single 30-
inch encasement. The upstream end (east side) of the siphon is proposed to include a hydraulic
structure capable of diverting flow between carrier pipes. The downstream end (west side) of the
inverted siphon connects to the gravity crossing of Highway 101 at a new manhole’ located near the
existing MH H17 25. The Highway 101 gravity sewer crossing then terminates at a manhole immediately
upstream of the new lift station wet well. At the center of the creek, the pipeline will be approximately
13 feet deep below existing streambed. Because the existing siphon has to remain in service until the
new siphon and lift station are completed, the new siphon is proposed to be constructed parallel to the
existing siphon approximately 10 feet upstream to allow a reasonable margin for the excavation
operations.
The existing siphon and gravity line will be abandoned in place to minimize riparian habitat disturbance.
Abandonment within the Caltrans right-of-way may include cleaning of the existing pipe and completely
filling with either a controlled low-strength material (CLSM) or sand-slurry mixture as required by
Caltrans.
Along with the open trench siphon replacement through San Luis Obispo Creek described above, the
City proposes to access from the siphon replacement disturbance area within the riparian zone
equipment and hand removal of approximately 24,571 square feet of invasive species giant reed and
1,000 cubic yards of accumulated sediment. Approximately 1,250 square feet of the giant reed removal
is proposed to be completed with mechanical methods and 1,250 square feet by hand. The proposed
method of mechanical removal is through the use of a bulldozer pushing the material to a location
accessible to an excavator where it will be loaded onto dump trucks and hauled off.
KSBY GRAVITY LINE REPLACEMENT – Approximately 750 of six-inch gravity sewer line from the lift station up
Calle Joaquin to the south will be replaced within the pavement footprint. The existing line is currently
located to the west of the roadway and will be abandoned in place. The new line will be located within
Calle Joaquin matching the existing depth and size of the current line and crossing over the Froom Creek
culvert crossing avoiding impacts on the creek and riparian habitat.
3.0 METHODS
SII conducted a review of available background information including the proposed project information,
local soils survey, multiple years of aerial photographs, and a search and review of the current California
Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) within an approximate five-mile search radius of the proposed
project site. The five-mile search was deemed appropriate given the study area location intermediary
between the Port San Luis/Pismo Beach coast and the inland valleys and mountains. The CNDDB
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
5
provided a list with mapped locations of special-status plant and wildlife species, as well as natural
communities of special concern that have been recorded within the region of the project site. The
CNDDB records help focus the field survey efforts and evaluation of potential project effects on specific
species or habitats. The CNDDB occurrence maps for botanical and wildlife resources are provided in
Appendix A, Figures 2 and 3 respectively. It is noted that the CNDDB does not necessarily include all
potential special-status wildlife that may potentially occur on site, but rather only those that have been
recorded by the CNDDB.
SII Principal Biologist Jason Kirschenstein, SII Principal Ecologist David Wolff, SII Senior Biologist Michaela
Koenig, and SII Biologist Danielle Castle conducted field reconnaissance surveys of the proposed project
sites and study area on July 6, November 29, and December 13, 2012, January 18, 2013, July 30, 2014,
and May 11, 2015. (Table 1). The purpose of the field surveys was to document existing conditions in
terms of habitat for plants and wildlife species, to map upland, wetland, and riparian habitats. Plant and
wildlife species observed in the field were recorded.
TABLE 1. LIST OF SITE VISITS
July 6, 2012 SII Principal Biologist Jason Kirschenstein
November 29, 2012 SII Principal Ecologist David Wolff and SII Biologist Danielle Castle
December 13, 2012 SII Senior Biologist Michaela Koenig and SII Biologist Danielle Castle
January 18, 2013
July 30, 2014
May 11, 2015
SII Principal Ecologist David Wolff and SII Senior Biologist Michaela Koenig
SII Principal Biologist Jason Kirschenstein & Principal Ecologist David Wolff
SII Principal Ecologist David Wolff
The onsite habitat types were described by the aggregation of plants and wildlife based on the
composition and structure of the dominant vegetation observed at the time the field reconnaissance
was conducted. SII Principal Ecologist David Wolff reviewed the available background information and
acted as primary editor and principal in charge of report preparation. The survey data collected on plant
and wildlife species and conclusions presented in this biological assessment are based on the methods
and field reconnaissance conducted over the project site as described above. Note that since SII field
surveys were conducted, project areas to the east of Calle Joaquin across Hwy 101 in 2015 have been
disturbed from the construction of improvements to the Hwy 101 Los Osos Valley Road interchange
improvements and no longer reflect conditions observed during SII field surveys.
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 GENERAL SETTING
The proposed project is located on the outskirts of urban edge of San Luis Obispo, where Hwy 101 and
the SLO creek corridors bisect agricultural and developed urban land. The existing lift station abuts
Froom Creek on the west side of Calle Joaquin. To the east of Calle Joaquin across Hwy 101 in 2015 is
disturbed from the construction of improvements to the Hwy 101 Los Osos Valley Road interchange
improvements. Immediately to the east of the northbound Hwy 101 off ramp is the SLO Creek riparian
zone. The riparian zone extend to the eastern bank where it is boarded an active annually cultivated
agriculture field that has existing sanitary sewer pipelines and manholes. To the north of the existing
and proposed) Calle Joaquin lift station is urban land and commercial development. South of the lift
station Calle Joaquin crosses Froom Creek, and bisects annual and native grassland, eucalyptus groves,
native landscaping, riparian, and freshwater marsh habitats. The overall study area (a 500-foot buffer
around the proposed project features) supports agricultural and developed urban lands, disturbed
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
6
annual and native blue wild rye grasslands, eucalyptus groves, and riparian corridors with mosaic of
Central Coast Arroyo Willow Forests and Central Coast Riparian Scrubland, Southern Cottonwood-
Willow and Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forests.
4.2 SOILS
The study area supports five mapping units designated by Natural Resources Conservation Service,
United States Department of Agriculture (NRSC 2006) soils mapped as Concepcion loam, Cropley clay,
Los Osos-Diablo complex, Salinas silty clay loam and Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex are described
below and illustrated Figure 5.
Concepcion Series (2 to 5 percent slopes) – is characterized by deep, moderately well-drained soils with
very slow permeability that formed in old alluvium weathered from sedimentary rocks. Typically the
surface layer is loam about 14 inches thick with a clay subsoil to a depth of 47 inches, with sandy clay
loam below.
Cropley Series (0 to 2 percent slopes) – is characterized by deep moderately well drained soils with slow
permeability that formed in alluvium weathered from sedimentary rocks. Typically the surface layer is
clay to about 36 inches with a silty clay loam to 60 inches.
Los Osos-Diablo Complex (15 to 30 percent slopes) – are steep soils characterized by well drained soils
with slow permeability formed from weathered sandstone and shale. The Los Osos soils have a loam
surface layer to about 14 inches with a clay layer to 32 inches, which gives way to a sandy loam before
hitting sandstone (43 inches). Typically the Diablo soils have a clay surface layer to about 38 inches with
clay and weathered mudstone below.
Salinas Series (0 to 2 percent slopes) – is characterized by deep, well-drained soil with moderately low
permeability formed from weathered sandstone and shale. The Salinas soil has a clay loam surface layer
of about 23 inches that has fine sandy loam below.
Xererts-Xerolls-Urban Land Complex (0 to 15 percent slopes) – include poorly drained clay soils and
well drained alluvial soils. These soils have been modified by earth movement and urban development
such that the original shape and physical characteristics have been altered.
4.3 CHARACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUNITIES
Plant communities are generally described by the assemblages of plant species that occur together in
the same area forming habitat types. Community alliance and alliance codes used in this report follow
A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd Edition (Sawyer et al. 2009) and California Native Plant Society
CNPS) nomenclature. Plant names used in this report follow the The Jepson Manual, Vascular Plants of
California, Second Edition Thoroughly Revised and Expanded (Baldwin et al. 2012). The following
describes the plant communities and habitat characteristics of the study area. Figures 6 and 7A to 7D
provide habitat and project footprint maps respectively. Figure 8 provides a set of representative
photographs of the existing conditions in and around the various proposed project elements. Tables B-1
and B-2 in Appendix B provide a list of plant and wildlife species observed.
BLUE WILD RYE MEADOW – The blue wild rye meadow alliance (CNPS: 41.640.00) occurs along the west
side of Calle Joaquin leading to the KSBY building. Blue wild rye (Elymus glaucus) is dominant in this
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
7
community, classifying it as its own association (CNPS: 41.640.01). Other plants found within this
community are Fuller’s teasel (Disacus sativus), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata) and harding grass
Phalaris aquatica).
DISTURBED ANNUAL GRASSLAND – The semi-natural annual brome grassland alliance (CNPS: 42.026.00) is
typically dominated by non-native annual grasses and herbaceous broadleaf plant species, along with
native forbs and wildflowers. The non-native annual grassland habitat occurs to the west of Calle
Joaquin, along the fringe of agricultural lands, and along the edges Hwy 101 in and around the LOVR
interchange. Characteristic species observed in the grassland habitat were typical of grazed grassland
areas and included wild oats (Avena spp.), rip gut brome (Bromus diandrus), soft chess brome (Bromus
hordeaceous), filarees (Erodium botrys, E. cicutarium), black mustard (Brassica nigra), and cheeseweed
Malva parviflora).
DISTURBED/RUDERAL– Although not defined by Sawyer and others (2009) or by Holland (1986), disturbed
and ruderal areas are dominated by non-native plant species in areas subject to ongoing or periodic
disturbance and do not contain significant component of native or naturalized vegetation. These
anthropogenic communities consist of artificial communities of non-native plants or landscaped areas
established and maintained by human disturbance. Ruderal areas are typically dominated by introduced
Mediterranean annual plant species. Ruderal or disturbed habitat is typically found in areas altered by
agriculture, construction, and other land-clearing activities, along roadsides, and in other areas
experiencing repeated ground surface disturbance. Plant species observed in the ruderal habitat areas
of the project alignment include ripgut brome, black mustard, Aaron’s beard (Hypericum calycinum),
silver leaf cotoneaster (Cotoneaster pannosus), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), and Spanish
clover (Acmispon sp.). Within the study area, ruderal habitat is located where the new lift station is
proposed, which is currently a maintained turfgrass landscape. Other planted and ruderal areas are
along the highway or surrounding buildings.
URBAN LAND – is comprised of areas of intensive use with much of the land covered by structures.
Included in this category are hotels, roadways, commercial and industrial buildings and facilities. No
attempt has been made in this assessment to distinguish specific uses because the focus of this report is
on native biodiversity.
AGRICULTURAL LAND – Although not defined by Sawyer and others (2009) or by Holland (1986), active
agricultural lands include areas in annually cultivated crop production. The agricultural lands within the
study area include the Dalidio property at the north end of Calle Joaquin and on the east side of SLO
Creek.
EUCALYPTUS GROVE – Eucalyptus semi-natural woodland stands (CNPS: 79.100.00) were introduced from
Australia for commercial use in the 1870’s and occur in planted patches and woodlands found
throughout the central coast of California. While no impacts on the eucalyptus groves are proposed for
this project, this discussion is included for habitat mosaic context. A stand of blue gum (Eucalyptus
globulus) occurs along US 101 to the north of the pipeline crossing, and a stand of red gum eucalyptus
Eucalyptus camaldulensis) is located on the east side of Calle Joaquin leading to the KSBY building. The
establishment of understory growth is suppressed by heavy leaf litter that has allelopathic properties
from the volatile oils in the fallen debris.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
8
HERBACEOUS FRESHWATER MARSH HABITATS
PALE SPIKE RUSH MARSH – During SII field surveys but now disturbed by the LOVR interchange project Pale
spike rush marsh alliance (CNPS: 45.230.00) was observed within the low-lying area between the
northbound Hwy 101 lanes and the LOVR off-ramp. Other species observed in and along the fringes of
the basin with pale spike rush marsh include cut leaf geranium (Geranium dissectum), umbrella sedge
Cyperus squarrosus), bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and a single
California sycamore.
COASTAL FRESHWATER MARSH –Coastal and valley freshwater marshes (CNDDB: CTT52410CA) are
dominated by perennial, emergent monocots in drainages that are seasonally or permanently flooded
and generally lack a significant sustained current. During SII field surveys but now disturbed by the
LOVR interchange project, cattail marsh alliance (CNPS: 52.050.00) was observed on the drainage ditch
on the east side of Calle Joaquin near the lift station. Here the drainage ditch between Hwy 101 and
Calle Joaquin is dominated by cattails (Typha spp.) along with bull rush (Bolboschoenus robustus),
mugwort (Artemisia californica), California sawgrass (Cladium californicum), and willowherb (Epilobium
ciliatum). The banks and fringe of the drainages are dominated by the upland bristly ox-tongue typical of
areas subject to regular disturbance. Froom Creek runs perpendicular to Calle Joaquin before it runs
below the highway. The west side of the Calle Joaquin slopes down to the south allowing for arroyo
willow thickets and more dense riparian vegetation to intergrade with the freshwater marsh habitat in
Froom Creek.
RIPARIAN FOREST AND SCRUB COMMUNITIES
SLO Creek hosts a complex assemblage of riparian alliances that are stratified along the creek bank by
elevation. The upper reaches of the bank or top of bank (TOB) is dominated by tall woody trees with an
herbaceous understory that can be classified as either Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest or
Central Coast Cottonwood Sycamore Riparian Forest. These forest types intergrade with Central Coast
Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest closer to the active flowing channel of SLO Creek where there are finer-
textured sediment and more constant depth to the water table. Within SLO Creek pure stands of giant
reed are found classified as Giant Reed Breaks. Within the shallow drainage associated with Froom
Creek, and the roadside ditches along Calle Joaquin and LOVR Arroyo Willow Thickets can be found
intermixed with the freshwater marsh habitats.
SOUTHERN COTTONWOOD-WILLOW RIPARIAN FOREST – Fremont cottonwood forest alliance (CNPS: 61.130.00,
CNDDB: CTT61330CA) is composed of moderately closed broadleafed riparian forests dominated by
California sycamore and Fremont’s cottonwood (Populus fremontii), with scattered coast live oaks
Quercus agrifolia). The Fremont cottonwoods are affiliated with a California walnut (Juglans californica)
and coast live oak association. Intermixed within these community types are dense patches of Central
Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forest. In the lower elevations of SLO Creek channel Central
Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest and Central Coast Riparian Scrub can be found intermixed within
this habitat type. The understory vegetation consists of Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus), fennel
Foeniculum vulgare), and extensive amounts of cape ivy (Delairea odorata). These associations occur in
line with the existing and proposed sewer line footprint. Specifically, within 20 feet north of the existing
Manhole H18-4 is a cluster of mature southern California black walnuts, coast live oaks and arroyo
willows (Salix lasiolepis).
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
9
CENTRAL COAST COTTONWOOD-SYCAMORE RIPARIAN FOREST – California sycamore, Fremont cottonwood, and
arroyo willow alliance (CNPS: 61.312.03, CNDDB: CTT61210CA) dominates the eastern banks of SLO
Creek. Within the southern extent of the project boundary, on the eastern bank of SLO Creek the
riparian forest is composed of a California sycamore, coast live oak, Fremont cottonwood, and red
willow (Salix laevigata) association (CNPS: 61.312.06). The understory vegetation is similar to that of the
Fremont cottonwood associations.
CENTRAL COAST ARROYO WILLOW RIPARIAN FOREST AND CENTRAL COAST RIPARIAN SCRUB – arroyo willow thickets
alliance (CNPS: 61.201.00) dominates the lower elevations of SLO Creek and the small riparian corridors
associated with the road side drainage along Calle Joaquin and Froom Creek. The SLO Creek channel
below TOB) is lined with a mosaic of arroyo willow thickets alliance and giant reed (Arundo donax) semi-
natural stands. The arroyo willow thicket here is considered Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian
Forest (CNDDB: CTT63230CA). The forest understory includes fennel, cape ivy, poison hemlock (Conium
maculatum), umbrella sedge (Cyperus squarrosus), and castor bean (Ricinus communis). Along the small
riparian corridors associated with the road side drainage along Calle Joaquin and Froom Creek the
arroyo willow thickets alliance is more indicative of Central Coast Riparian Scrub (CNDDB: CTT63200CA).
Many of the species found within the freshwater marsh category make up the canopy understory.
GIANT REED BREAKS – the semi-natural stands of giant reed alliance (CNPS: 42.080.00) are located within
the channel in three main monoculture clusters. The largest stand occupies approximately 14,256
square feet to the north, and intersects the proposed sewer line, stopping short of the existing pipeline.
The two other clusters of giant reed (3,751and 6,564 square feet respectively) occur south of the
existing sewer line. The total area occupied by giant reed within the project area is 24,571 square feet.
No understory vegetation was noted, as few plants are able to compete with this invasive weed.
4.4 WILDLIFE
The mosaic of native and annual grassland, active agriculture, riparian habitats, coastal freshwater
marsh, pale spike rush herbaceous alliance, and the patches of eucalyptus groves provide habitat for an
array of resident and migratory wildlife species known from the region. The riparian habitat can provide
food, cover and breeding sites for mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians. Observations of bird species
during the field reconnaissance include lesser goldfinch (Spinus psaltria), orange-crowned warbler
Oreothlypis celata), and song sparrow (Melospiza melodia). Mammal sign observed includes the
raccoon (Procyon lotor), California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi) and Botta’s pocket gopher
Thomomys bottae). The field surveys were sufficient to record a representative sample of wildlife
species using the area, however, additional resident, locally nomadic, and migratory mammal, bird,
reptile and amphibian species likely occur in the vicinity/region of the project site that were not
observed during site visits. Table 2 in Appendix B provides a list of wildlife species observed during SII
field surveys of the Calle Joaquin lift station study area.
4.5 WATERS OF THE U.S., WATERS OF THE STATE & WETLANDS
The study area is traversed by two perennial creeks, Froom Creek and SLO Creek. There is also a
drainage ditch that parallels Calle Joaquin and the west side of Hwy 101, and a low-lying area located
between Hwy 101 and the northbound LOVR off ramp that host wetland and upland plant species that
have been modified by the LOVR interchange project. The creeks have distinct bed, banks and channels
that also support a mature riparian community with forest like trees and dense herbaceous understory.
As such Froom Creek and SLO Creek are considered to be waters of the U.S. and waters of the State
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
10
subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
jurisdiction respectively.
SII field review of the SLO Creek impact identified a multiple channel system for high and low water
flows along with islands covered in woody riparian vegetation. Large and small woody debris piles are
scattered throughout the creek channel suggesting the active floodplain crosses the entire section of the
creek bottom to the toe of banks through the project area. Based on field evaluation and review of SLO
Creek topographic cross sections the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) follows approximately along
the toe of bank slope contour through the project area.
The banks that quickly slope upwards through the project area support a tree strata dominated by large
riparian trees considered wetland indicator species such as willows (FACW), cottonwood (FAC), and
sycamore (FACW), with live oak (UPL) and walnut trees (FAC) higher on the upper banks. Given the close
association of the adjacent woody riparian trees it is considered an adjacent palustrine forested wetland
by the Cowardin Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. The area
below the OHWM along with the adjacent palustrine forested wetland dominated by riparian trees are
considered to fall under the jurisdiction of the Corps.
The CDFW exerts jurisdiction over waters of the State that includes the bed, bank, and channel of rivers
extending to the outside edge of riparian habitat should it exist. Therefore, the limits of waters of the
State within the project area falls at the outside edge of the riparian habitat that is the same as the
limits of adjacent palustrine forested wetland waters of the U.S. under Corps jurisdiction. Figure 7
illustrates the jurisdictional limits of Corps waters of the U.S. and CDFW waters of the State.
4.6 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES AND NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN
Special-status species are those plants and animals listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing
as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA); those considered “species of
concern” by the USFWS; those listed or proposed for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered under
the California Endangered Species Act (CESA); animals designated as “Species of Special Concern” by the
CDFW; and plants occurring on lists 1B, 2, and 4 of the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular
Plants of California. Natural Communities of Special Concern are habitat types considered rare and
worthy of tracking in the CNDDB by the CDFW because of their limited distribution or historic loss over
time.
The search and review of the CNDDB revealed 34 special-status plant species, 18 special-status wildlife
species, and three natural communities of special concern with recorded occurrences within the 5-mile
search radius of the project site. Based on the proximity of the project site to the ocean, a 5-mile radius
was selected as an appropriate CNDDB search radius that still captured a large number of strictly coastal
species that would not occur on the project site. California sawgrass (Cladium californicum) and white-
tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) were observed on site and included in the CNDDB table. Although not within
the CNDDB search the two striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) was also added to the CNDDB
table. The community types Blue Wild Rye Meadow, Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest,
Central Coast Willow Riparian Forest, and Central Coast Willow Riparian Scrub were also observed on
site and were included in the CNDDB table of natural communities of special concern. Appendix A,
Figures 2 and 3 provide maps of the CNDDB special-status plant and wildlife species respectively with
recorded occurrences falling within five-miles of the project site. The following briefly describes or
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
11
summarizes the special-status species issues and observations or potential for occurrence on the project
site. Appendix B, Table B-3 provides a detailed list of the CNDDB recorded occurrences along with
common and scientific names, listing status, habitat requirements, and observations or likelihood for
occurrence within the study area.
4.6.1 Special-Status Botanical Resources
The CNDDB search revealed the recorded occurrences of 34 special-status plant species and three
natural communities of special concern within a five-mile radius of the project site (Appendix B, Table B-
3). In addition to the CNDDB recorded natural communities of special concern, the field reconnaissance
documented an occurrence of Blue Wild Rye Meadow, Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest,
Central Coast Willow Riparian Forest, and Central Coast Willow Riparian Scrub. The CNDDB recorded
natural communities of special concern Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh was also observed within
the study area. The special-status plant species occurrences recorded in the CNDDB are commonly
associated with a specific soil type, habitat, and/or elevation range that dictates the range or
microhabitat of the species. Special-status plants in the region are typically associated with serpentine,
sandy, or heavy clay soils. While the CNDDB list is exhaustive, the field surveys resulted in no
observations of any threatened or endangered plant species within the study area. Only the rare
California sawgrass was observed within the study area but would not be impacted by any project
element but may have been disturbed by the LOVR interchange project.
4.6.2 Special-Status Wildlife
The CNDDB search revealed the recorded occurrences of 18 special-status wildlife species within the
five-mile search radius of the project site. Although not found in the CNDDB search, two striped garter
snake was added to the CNDDB table as a potential riparian species that may occur within the project
area. Special-status wildlife species known from the region evaluated for this study are discussed below
by groups or based upon habitat preferences, specific habitat use requirements (i.e. terrestrial or
aquatic), mobility, and migratory patterns.
Invertebrates – The CNDDB has recorded occurrences for the Atascadero June beetle (Polyphylla
nubila), monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) within
the five-mile search range. The small stands of eucalyptus trees could provide suitable winter roosting
habitat for the monarch butterfly. An individual monarch butterfly was observed during the January 18,
2013 field visit. Monarch roosting sites have been recorded in the CNDDB from 1998 to the northeast
along Prefumo Creek and from 1996 approximately two miles north of the study area along Hwy 101.
There is not any suitable habitat for the Atascadero June beetle or the vernal pool fairy shrimp.
Aquatic Species – The CNDDB has recorded occurrences of the central California coast steelhead and
tidewater goby within the five-mile search radius. Central California coast steelhead trout
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) are known to occur in SLO Creek, Froom Creek, and Prefumo Creek. The
riparian zone within SLO Creek is also suitable habitat for two striped garter snakes, although no
individuals were observed and there are no known CNDDB occurrences for this species in the general
area. However, no two-striped garter snakes were observed. The project site is well outside the
estuarine and brackish water coastal range of the tidewater goby.
The CNDDB has recorded occurrences for the California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) and western
pond turtle (Emys marmorata) upstream of the study area where Prefumo Creek connects to SLO Creek.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
12
SII biologists have observed the western pond turtle in SLO creek as well. The California red-legged frog
CRLF) is a federally listed threatened species and California State species of special concern that occurs
in relatively small coastal drainages and ponds between Marin and Santa Barbara Counties. The CRLF is
recorded in SLO Creek upstream and downstream of the project area but has not been recorded in the
SLO creek within the City. There is an occurrence in one of the old concrete treatment facilities in the
waste water treatment plant. CRLF breeding and egg laying season occurs from late November to April.
Tadpoles hatch approximately four weeks after the eggs are fertilized. Depending on weather
conditions, tadpoles will metamorphose between four to seven months. When water is unavailable
during the dry season, the California red-legged frog will disperse to aestivate in moist shady riparian
areas or small mammal burrows close creeks and ponds.
Reptiles – The CNDDB has recorded occurrences for the coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) and
black legless lizard (Anniella pulchra nigra) now considered the same as the silvery legless lizard. These
species are mostly associated with sandy soils in coastal scrub or chaparral habitats in sandy or very
friable soils. The coast horned lizard also feeds primarily on native ants. The riparian habitat and
cultivated lands are unsuitable for these species. These species would not be expected to occur within
the study area.
Birds – The CNDDB includes occurrences for both localized habitat specialists and wide-ranging resident
and migratory bird species within the region of the project site. The CNDDB has recorded occurrences of
the loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), and historic western
yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis). There is suitable nesting habitat present in the
riparian corridor for the loggerhead shrike, where abundant foraging opportunities are available in the
surrounding grasslands and active agricultural fields. There is no suitable nesting habitat for prairie
falcons on site, however they are known to overwinter in grasslands and cultivated croplands. The last
recorded occurrence of a prairie falcon for the area was in 1978. It is unlikely that prairie falcon will
occur on site. The western yellow-billed cuckoo is believed to be extirpated, as the last occurrence was
recorded in 1921. White-tailed kites were observed foraging over the Dalidio agricultural fields during
the January 18, 2013 site visit (no longer a project area). White-tailed kites are known to winter in San
Luis Obispo County; however no breeding has been documented in over half a century. Although
present in the wintertime no impacts are expected to affect this species during the project duration.
Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC (Terra Verde) conducted protocol-level least Bell’s vireo
Vireo bellii pusillus; LBV) surveys completed on behalf of the City in response to a request from the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for additional information on the presence/absence of LBV within
specific areas targeted for giant reed (Arundo donax) removal as part of the overall project. No LBV were
documented during the protocol survey in 2014.
Mammals – The CNDDB search included three species of mammals with recorded occurrences in the
region. Two species of bats including the pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) and western mastiff bat (Eumops
perotis californicus) are known from the region. Pallid bats roost during the day in caves, crevices,
mines, and occasionally hollow trees and buildings. At night, they may roost in more open areas such as
porches and open buildings. The western mastiff bats prefer extensive open areas with roost locations in
rocky outcrops, tunnels, trees and buildings. Habitat for the mastiff bat includes open, semi-arid to arid
habitats, including coastal scrub, grasslands, and chaparral. The last mastiff bat to be recorded was in
1991, and is not likely to occur on site. No bat surveys were performed for this project. The American
badger (Taxidea taxus) was recorded in the CNDDB, and requires open grassland and other open
habitats in friable soils. Recorded CNDDB occurrences of American badger are located two miles
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
13
northwest and 1.7 mile northeast of the Calle Joaquin Lift Station. Native grasslands to the west of Calle
Joaquin leading to KSBY may support American badger, however the project is restricted to the road and
will not affect surrounding habitat.
5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES
SII biologists reviewed available background information and conducted field surveys of the study area
in July 2012 to July 2014 that included a floristic inventory and wildlife observations. The available data
and field surveys provided sufficient information to establish existing conditions of the study area for
plant and wildlife species, to evaluate potential project impacts on biological resources, and to identify
any potentially significant impacts that may result from project information.
5.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Implementation of the proposed project would result in impacts to vegetation and wildlife using non-
native grassland, annually cultivated farmland, coastal and valley freshwater marsh, and riparian habitat
mostly from the siphon replacement across SLO Creek. The following summarizes the proposed project
impacts and suggests a level of significance.
Calle Joaquin Lift Station
The construction of the new lift station will not directly impact riparian habitat along Froom Creek,
although site grading may encroach up to the riparian edge. Dewatering discharge into Froom Creek
would be temporary and a potential benefit to the aquatic resource values of the creek at that time.
Gravity Line Replacement HDD and Siphon Replacement Open Trenching Across SLO Creek
The installation of the gravity sewer siphon replacement under San Luis Obispo Creek will require open
trench excavation through the riparian corridor and creek bottom. This approach will require the
diversion of San Luis Obispo Creek flows around the work site and likely dewatering the excavated
trench. The proposed siphon alignment is proposed to be located approximately 10 feet north of the
existing siphon alignment. It is estimated that an approximately 40-foot to 70-foot wide by 350-feet long
disturbance footprint through the San Luis Obispo Creek riparian corridor would be required for the
open trench construction for the siphon replacement. As such, approximately 0.32 to 0.56 acre of
combined riparian wetland and streambed habitat would be temporarily impacted by the siphon
replacement project element. The project includes habitat enhancements to San Luis Obispo Creek that
includes removal of approximately 24,571 square feet of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) and 1,000
cubic yards of associated silt removal in the creek corridor. The temporary loss of vegetative cover
would be replaced by revegetation plantings with native riparian tree, shrub and forb species. The
existing siphon and gravity line will be abandoned in place. The construction across San Luis Obispo
Creek would temporarily disturb biological resources through direct temporary loss of riparian and
wetland vegetation and potential for increased erosion and sedimentation.
Riparian corridors support the highest diversity and abundance of plant and animal life in the study area.
San Luis Obispo Creek, Froom Creek, and Prefumo Creek within the study area have been designated
critical habitat” for the central California coast steelhead (NOAA, 2007). The riparian plant communities
within study area drainage include the Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest, Southern
Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Forest (Holland, 1986). The
majority of the riparian woodland is dominated by Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
14
Riparian habitat supports a diverse assemblage of resident and migratory wildlife species, as well as
provide prey base for a variety of predatory species. Two state or formally-listed animal species are
known or expected to occur within riparian and aquatic habitats of San Luis Obispo Creek within the
project vicinity. These include the Federally Threatened California red-legged frog (Rana aurora
draytonii) and central California coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) - Central California Coast
Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU). Additionally, the State Species of Special Concern western pond
turtle (Emys marmorata) and two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) could occur in the
project area.
KSBY Gravity Line Replacement
The new KSBY sewer line will be installed within previously paved roads and over the Froom Creek
culvert to connect to the new lift station. Given that no habitat will be disturbed for installation, this
activity would have no impact on biological resources.
5.2 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures are recommended to avoid, minimize and compensate for potentially
significant impacts on biological resources associated mostly with the open trench construction for the
siphon replacement across SLO Creek.
Riparian, Coastal and Valley Marsh, and Pale Spike Rush Marsh Alliance Impacts – The following
mitigation measures are recommended to ensure regulatory compliance is obtained for proposed
project work in waters of the U.S./State including wetlands.
BIO-1: The City shall obtain Clean Water Act (CWA) regulatory compliance in the form of a permit
from the Corps or written documentation from the Corps for the diversion, dewatering, and
trenching of San Luis Obispo Creek. The City of SLO shall implement all the terms and
conditions of the permit to the satisfaction of the Corps. Corps permits and authorizations
require applicants to demonstrate that the proposed project has been designed and will be
implemented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts on aquatic resources to the
extent feasible. Compliance with Corps permitting would also include obtaining and CWA 401
Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, the
Corps may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable temporary and permanent
impacts on herbaceous and/or riparian wetlands to achieve the goal of a no net loss of
wetland values and functions. At a minimum, the City shall prepare and implement an onsite
riparian and creek habitat restoration plan for all disturbed areas that includes approximately
0.57 acre 24,571 square feet of giant reed eradication (approximately half by hand and half
removed mechanically) and 1,000 cubic yards of silt removal effort in the vicinity upstream and
downstream of the project alignment. As such, regulatory compliance would reduce potential
impacts on waters of the U.S. to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-2: The City shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code
Streambed Alteration Agreement; SAA) in the form of a completed Streambed Alteration
Agreement or written documentation from the CDFW for the San Luis Obispo Creek trenching
and creek flow diversion. The City shall implement all the terms and conditions of the SAA to
the satisfaction of the CDFW. The CDFW SAA process encourages applicants to demonstrate
that the proposed project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids
and minimizes impacts in the stream zone to the extent feasible. In addition, CDFW may
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
15
require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts on wetland and riparian habitats in
the form of habitat restoration of disturbed areas to the extent feasible. At a minimum, the
City shall prepare and implement an onsite riparian and creek habitat restoration plan for all
disturbed areas that includes approximately 24,571 square feet of giant reed eradication
approximately half by hand and half removed mechanically) and 2,700 cubic yards of silt
removal effort in the vicinity upstream and downstream of the project alignment. As such,
regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the state to a less-than-
significant level.
Central California coast steelhead, California Red-Legged Frog, Western Pond Turtle, and Two Striped
Garter Snake Impacts – The following mitigation measures are recommended to ensure appropriate
regulatory compliance is obtained and that measures to avoid and minimize impacts are implemented
for proposed project work in SLO Creek.
BIO-3: The City shall provide proof of compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act for
potential impacts on the central California coast steelhead and California red-legged frog in
the form of a take permit/authorization or written documentation from the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the central California coast steelhead and USFWS for the
California red-legged frog that the proposed project would not result in take of the central
California coast steelhead or California red-legged frog or would otherwise not adversely affect
these species. Should a take permit or authorization be required, or conditions imposed by the
NMFS or USFWS to ensure that no take would result from the project, the applicant shall
implement all the terms and conditions of the NMFS/USFWS permit, authorization, or
recommendations to the satisfaction of the NMFS/USFWS. The NMFS/USFWS can only provide
take authorization for projects that demonstrate the species affected would be left in as good
as or better condition than before the project was implemented. Additionally, the
NMFS/USFWS cannot authorize any project that would jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species.
BIO-4: To avoid and minimize potential impacts on the western pond turtle and two striped garter
snake, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of the San Luis Obispo Creek
riparian zone project site to salvage and relocate any individuals out of harm’s way. Onsite
monitoring by a qualified biologist, during initial vegetation removal and ground disturbing
activities and as needed during project construction, shall also be required to salvage and
relocate any western pond turtles encountered out of harm’s way.
General Nesting/Roosting Wildlife Impacts –The proposed siphon replacement construction across SLO
Creek and associated construction may impact nesting or roosting wildlife throughout the riparian
corridor. To avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds, ground dwelling and roosting
wildlife, the following mitigation measures are recommended.
BIO-5: Vegetation removal and initial site disturbance for any project elements shall be conducted
between September 1st and March 1st outside of the nesting season for birds. If vegetation
removal is planned for the bird nesting season (March 1st to August 31st), then preconstruction
nesting bird surveys shall be required to determine if any active nests would be impacted by
project construction. If no active nests are found, then no further mitigation shall be required.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
16
If any active nests are found that would be impacted by construction, then the nest sites shall be
avoided with the establishment of a non-disturbance buffer zone around active nests as
determined by a qualified biologist. Nest sites shall be avoided and protected with the non-
disturbance buffer zone until the adults and young of the year are no longer reliant on the nest
site for survival as determined by a qualified biologist. As such, avoiding disturbance or take of
an active nest would reduce potential impacts on nesting birds to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-6: Prior to ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey
within 30 days of initial ground disturbance to identify whether any non-listed special-status or
common wildlife species are using any portion of the project areas where ground disturbance is
proposed. The survey shall cover the boundaries of proposed disturbance and 100 feet beyond. If
ground dwelling or roosting wildlife species are detected, a biological monitor shall be present
during initial ground disturbing and/or vegetation removal activities to attempt relocation efforts
for the wildlife that may be present such as common reptiles, small mammals, or roosting bats.
The salvage and relocation effort for non-listed wildlife species would reduce potentially
significant impacts to a less than significant level.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings described above establishing the existing conditions of biological resources within
the study area and incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures, implementation of the
proposed project would not result in any substantial adverse effects on biological, botanical, wetland
habitat resources. Therefore, with mitigation measures incorporated into the project, direct and indirect
project impacts on biological resources would be considered to be less than significant.
7.0 REFERENCES
1. Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, T. J. Rosatti, Ed. 2012. The Jepson Manual,
Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Thoroughly Revised and Expanded. University of
California Press.
2. California Native Plant Society. 2012. Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants
of California.
3. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2012. Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB)
of recorded occurrences of special-status species. Accessed December 2012.
4. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2008. Endangered and Threatened Animals
List. The Resources Agency of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Natural Heritage
Division, Natural Diversity Database. Sacramento, California.
5. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 1990. California Wildlife Habitat
Relationships System. Western Mastiff Bat (Eumops perotis). California Department of Fish and
Wildlife California Interagency Wildlife Task Group.
6. City of San Luis Obispo. Year unknown. Arundo Removal Sites. Aerial imagery map and Arundo
removal area calculations provided by SLO City GIS department.
7. City of San Luis Obispo. 2011. Biological Assessment for the Calle Joaquin Lift Station
Replacement Project. Prepared for City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department. Prepared by City
of San Luis Obispo Natural Resources Program. December 2011
8. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
17
9. Hickman, J. C., Ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California
Press.
10. Holland, R. 1986. Preliminary list of terrestrial natural communities of California. Department of
Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA.
11. Holland, V.L. and D.J. Keil. 1990. California Vegetation. Biological Sciences Department,
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California.
12. Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. 2002. San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed
Enhancement Plan.
13. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Services
NMFS). 2007. 2007 Federal Recovery Outline for the Distinct Population Segment of Central
California Coast Steelhead.
14. Sawyer, J.O.; T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second
Edition. California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento.
15. Schultze, R. F. 1994. CWHR Agricultural Habitats. California Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Sacramento, CA.
16. Sibley, D. A. 2001. National Audubon Society, The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.
17. Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Houghton Mifflin
Company.
18. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRCS). 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the
Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. Agricultural Handbook 296 digital maps and attributes. State of
California, San Luis Obispo County.
19. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005. Revised Guidance of Site Assessments
and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service. August 2005.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11,2015
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Location
Figure 2: Project Layout Map
Figure 3: CNDDB Botanical Occurrences Map
Figure 4: CNDDB Wildlife Occurrences Map
Figure 5: Study Area Soils Map
Figure 6: Study Area Habitat Map
Figure 7: Jurisdictional Limits Map
Figure 8: Representative Photographs
GF
Ap
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
Z
Ma
y
2
0
1
5
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
a
n
d
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
GF
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
Ci
t
y
o
f
S
a
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
C
a
l
l
e
J
o
a
q
u
i
n
L
i
f
t
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
01
2
3
0.
5
Ki
l
o
m
e
t
e
r
s
01
2
0.
5
Mi
l
e
s
Z
Ma
y
20
1
5
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
an
d
We
t
l
a
n
d
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
of
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
0100
200
50
Fe
e
t
020
40
60
10
Me
t
e
r
s
Se
r
v
i
c
e
La
y
e
r
Cr
e
d
i
t
s
Im
Ma
p
da
t
a
Go
o
g
l
e
2
0
1
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Ci
t
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Ar
u
n
d
o
Re
m
o
v
a
l
Ar
e
a
Ma
n
h
o
l
e
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
KS
B
Y
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Si
p
h
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Zma
p
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
5/
1
2
1
5
OccurrencesGF
US
G
S
Q
U
A
D
M
O
R
R
O
B
A
Y
S
O
U
T
H
US
G
S
Q
U
A
US
G
S
Q
U
A
D
P
O
R
T
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
US
G
S
Q
U
A
D
P
I
S
M
So
u
r
c
e
s
E
s
r
i
H
E
R
E
D
e
L
o
r
m
e
T
o
m
T
o
m
I
n
t
e
r
m
a
Ja
p
a
n
M
E
T
I
E
s
r
i
C
h
i
n
a
H
o
n
g
K
o
n
g
s
w
i
s
s
t
o
p
o
Ci
t
y
o
f
S
a
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
C
a
l
l
e
J
o
a
q
u
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
a
n
d
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
A
s
0
0
7
1
4
2
1
2
8
0.
3
5
Ki
l
o
m
e
t
e
r
s
005
1
15
2
0.
2
5
Mi
l
e
s
G F
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
US
G
S
7.
5
Mi
n
u
t
e
Qu
a
d
a
n
g
l
e
Se
a
r
c
h
Ra
d
i
u
s
5
mi
l
e
s
CN
D
D
B
Bo
t
a
n
i
c
a
l
Oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
s
mo
s
t
be
a
u
t
i
f
u
l
je
w
e
l
f
l
o
w
e
r
so
u
t
h
e
r
n
cu
r
l
y
le
a
v
e
d
mo
n
a
r
d
e
l
l
a
um
b
r
e
l
l
a
la
r
k
s
p
u
r
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
fo
u
n
t
a
i
n
th
i
s
t
l
e
ad
o
b
e
sa
n
i
c
l
e
Ar
r
o
y
o
de
la
Cr
u
z
ma
n
z
a
n
i
t
a
Be
t
t
y
s
du
d
l
e
y
a
bl
a
c
k
fl
o
w
e
r
e
d
fi
g
w
o
r
t
Bl
o
c
h
m
a
n
s
du
d
l
e
y
a
Br
e
w
e
r
s
sp
i
n
e
f
l
o
w
e
r
Ca
m
b
r
i
a
mo
r
n
i
n
g
gl
o
r
y
Ce
n
t
r
a
l
Ma
r
i
t
i
m
e
Ch
a
p
a
r
r
a
l
ch
a
p
a
r
r
a
l
ra
g
w
o
r
t
Co
a
s
t
a
l
an
d
Va
l
l
e
y
Fr
e
s
h
w
a
t
e
r
Ma
r
s
h
Co
n
g
d
o
n
s
ta
r
p
l
a
n
t
Cu
e
s
t
a
Ri
d
g
e
th
i
s
t
l
e
du
n
e
la
r
k
s
p
u
r
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
s
la
r
k
s
p
u
r
Ho
o
v
e
r
s
be
n
t
gr
a
s
s
Ho
o
v
e
r
s
bu
t
t
o
n
ce
l
e
r
y
In
d
i
a
n
Kn
o
b
mo
u
n
t
a
i
n
b
a
l
m
Jo
n
e
s
la
y
i
a
La
Pa
n
z
a
ma
r
i
p
o
s
a
li
l
y
me
s
a
ho
r
k
e
l
i
a
Mi
l
e
s
mi
l
k
ve
t
c
h
Mo
r
r
o
ma
n
z
a
n
i
t
a
mo
u
s
e
gr
a
y
du
d
l
e
y
a
Pa
l
m
e
r
s
mo
n
a
r
d
e
l
l
a
Pe
c
h
o
ma
n
z
a
n
i
t
a
Pi
s
m
o
cl
a
r
k
i
a
sa
l
i
n
e
cl
o
v
e
r
Sa
n
Be
n
i
t
o
fr
it
i
l
l
a
r
y
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
Co
u
n
t
y
lu
p
i
n
e
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
ow
l
s
cl
o
v
e
r
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
se
d
g
e
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
ma
r
i
p
o
s
a
li
l
y
Sa
n
t
a
Ma
r
g
a
r
i
t
a
ma
n
z
a
n
i
t
a
Se
r
p
e
n
t
i
n
e
Bu
n
c
h
g
r
a
s
s
So
u
r
c
e
s
C
D
F
W
C
N
D
D
B
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
5
Zma
p
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
5/
1
2
1
5
OccurrencesGF
US
G
S
Q
U
A
D
M
O
R
R
O
B
A
Y
S
O
U
T
H
US
G
S
Q
U
A
US
G
S
Q
U
A
D
P
O
R
T
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
US
G
S
Q
U
A
D
P
I
S
M
So
u
r
c
e
s
E
s
r
i
H
E
R
E
D
e
L
o
r
m
e
T
o
m
T
o
m
I
n
t
e
r
m
a
Ja
p
a
n
M
E
T
I
E
s
r
i
C
h
i
n
a
H
o
n
g
K
o
n
g
s
w
i
s
s
t
o
p
o
Ci
t
y
o
f
S
a
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
C
a
l
l
e
J
o
a
q
u
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
a
n
d
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
A
s
0
0
7
1
4
2
1
2
8
0.
3
5
Ki
l
o
m
e
t
e
r
s
005
1
15
2
0.
2
5
Mi
l
e
s
G F
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
US
G
S
7.
5
Mi
n
u
t
e
Qu
a
d
a
n
g
l
e
Se
a
r
c
h
Ra
d
i
u
s
5
mi
l
e
s
CN
D
D
B
Wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
Oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
s
Am
e
r
i
c
a
n
ba
d
g
e
r
At
a
s
c
a
d
e
r
o
Ju
n
e
be
e
t
l
e
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
re
d
le
g
g
e
d
fr
o
g
Co
a
s
t
Ra
n
g
e
ne
w
t
bl
a
c
k
le
g
l
e
s
s
li
z
a
r
d
co
a
s
t
ho
r
n
e
d
li
z
a
r
d
fe
r
r
u
g
i
n
o
u
s
ha
w
k
fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
ye
l
l
o
w
le
g
g
e
d
fr
o
g
lo
g
g
e
r
h
e
a
d
sh
r
i
k
e
mo
n
a
r
c
h
bu
t
t
e
r
f
l
y
pa
l
l
i
d
ba
t
pr
a
i
r
i
e
fa
l
c
o
n
st
e
e
l
h
e
a
d
so
u
t
h
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
co
a
s
t
DP
S
ti
d
e
w
a
t
e
r
go
b
y
ve
r
n
a
l
po
o
l
fa
i
r
y
sh
r
i
m
p
we
s
t
e
r
n
ma
s
t
i
f
f
ba
t
we
s
t
e
r
n
po
n
d
tu
r
t
l
e
we
s
t
e
r
n
ye
l
l
o
w
bi
l
l
e
d
cu
c
k
o
o
So
u
r
c
e
s
C
D
F
W
C
N
D
D
B
A
p
r
i
l
2
0
1
5
Z
Ma
y
20
1
5
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
an
d
We
t
l
a
n
d
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
of
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
0100
200
50
Fe
e
t
0
20
40
60
80
10
Me
t
e
r
s
Se
r
v
i
c
e
La
y
e
r
Cr
e
d
i
t
s
Im
No
k
i
a
AN
D
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Ci
t
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Ar
u
n
d
o
Re
m
o
v
a
l
Ar
e
a
Ma
n
h
o
l
e
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
KS
B
Y
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Si
p
h
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
So
i
l
Ma
p
p
i
n
g
Un
i
t
Co
n
c
e
p
c
i
o
n
lo
a
m
2
to
5
sl
o
p
e
s
Cr
o
p
l
e
y
cl
a
y
0
to
2
sl
o
p
e
s
Lo
s
Os
o
s
Di
a
b
l
o
co
m
p
l
e
x
1
5
to
30
sl
o
p
e
s
Sa
l
i
n
a
s
si
l
t
y
cl
a
y
lo
a
m
0
to
2
sl
o
p
e
s
Xe
r
e
r
t
s
Xe
r
o
l
l
s
Ur
b
a
n
la
n
d
co
m
p
l
e
x
0
to
15
sl
o
p
e
s
Z
Ma
y
20
1
5
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
an
d
We
t
l
a
n
d
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
of
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
0100
200
50
Fe
e
t
0
20
40
60
80
10
Me
t
e
r
s
Se
r
v
i
c
e
La
y
e
r
Cr
e
d
i
t
s
Im
No
k
i
a
AN
D
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Ci
t
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Ar
u
n
d
o
Re
m
o
v
a
l
Ar
e
a
Ma
n
h
o
l
e
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
KS
B
Y
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Si
p
h
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ar
e
a
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
s
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
La
n
d
Bl
u
e
Wi
l
d
Ry
e
Me
a
d
o
w
Ce
n
t
r
a
l
Co
a
s
t
Wi
l
l
o
w
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n
Fo
r
e
s
t
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Fr
e
s
h
Wa
t
e
r
Ma
r
s
h
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Sc
r
u
b
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
An
n
u
a
l
Gr
a
s
s
l
a
n
d
Eu
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
Gr
o
v
e
Or
n
a
m
e
n
t
a
l
Tr
e
e
s
Ro
a
d
Ru
d
e
r
a
l
So
u
t
h
e
r
n
Co
t
t
o
n
w
o
o
d
Wi
ll
o
w
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n
Fo
r
e
s
t
Ur
b
a
n
Z
Ma
y
20
1
5
Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
an
d
We
t
l
a
n
d
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
of
Sa
n
Lu
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
0100
50
Fe
e
t
020
40
10
Me
t
e
r
s
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
Ma
n
h
o
l
e
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ca
l
l
e
Jo
a
q
u
i
n
Li
f
t
St
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
KS
B
Y
Gr
a
v
i
t
y
Se
w
e
r
Li
n
e
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Si
p
h
o
n
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Ar
u
n
d
o
Re
m
o
v
a
l
Ar
e
a
Ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
Li
m
i
t
s
Wa
t
e
r
s
of
th
e
U.
S
O
H
W
M
Wa
t
e
r
s
of
th
e
U.
S
Ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
We
t
l
a
n
d
St
a
t
e
C
D
F
W
Ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL AND WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix A
Figure 8
Page 1 of 4
Photo 1: View south showing existing lift station and future lift station
relocation area. 12/13/2012
Photo 2: View southwest of Froom Creek riparian habitat behind lift
station relocation area 12/13/2012
Photo 3: View west of existing Calle Joaquin lift station (fence/gate) &
grassy knoll for lift station replacement location (arrow). 12/13/2012
Photo 4: View south of Calle Joaquin across Froom Creek culvert
crossing from lift station. 12/13/2012
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL AND WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix A
Figure 8
Page 2 of 4
Photo 5: View north of KSBY reach along Calle Joaquin. New gravity
line to follow in road with connection at arrow. 12/13/2012
Photo 6: View north of Calle Joaquin gravity line replacement across
Froom Creek and LOVR interchange project drainage work. 5/11/2015
Photo 7: View west from LOVR northbound off ramp across Hwy 101
and towards Calle Joaquin lift station. 1/29/2012
Photo 8: View southwest from LOVR northbound on ramp across Hwy
101 at disturbed area from LOVR Interchange project. 5/11/2015
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL AND WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix A
Figure 8
Page 3 of 4
Photo 9: View east from LOVR northbound off ramp at manhole H17-
25 (arrow) & riparian habitat along SLO Creek. 1/18/2013
Photo 10: View west at dense riparian habitat in SLO Creek & existing
sewer siphon creek crossing exposed in creek bed (arrow). 1/18/2013
Photo 11: View west at SLO Creek riparian habitat from cultivated
field at existing Manhole H18-4 (arrow). 1/18/2013
Photo 12: View southwest at SLO Creek riparian habitat across
cultivated field for gravity sewer replacement. 7/30/2014
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL AND WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix A
Figure 8
Page 4 of 4
Photo 13: View north along west bank of SLO creek at giant reed and
cape ivy removal area. 7/30/2014
Photo 14: View north along west bank of SLO creek at giant reed and
cape ivy removal area. 7/30/2014
Photo 15: View downstream of SLO Creek main channel and riparian
habitat showing high water drift line of debris (arrow). 7/30/2014
Photo 16: View downstream from existing sewer line crossing of SLO
Creek main channel and active floodplain. 1/18/2013
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11,2015
APPENDIX B
TABLES
Table 1: Plant Species Observed
Table 2: Wildlife Species Observed
Table 3: CNDDB Recorded Occurrences (5 mile Search Radius)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix B
TABLE B-1: PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED
Common Name Scientific Name(s) Bl
u
e
W
i
l
d
R
y
e
M
e
a
d
o
w
Co
a
s
t
a
l
S
c
r
u
b
Co
y
o
t
e
B
r
u
s
h
S
c
r
u
b
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
G
r
a
s
s
l
a
n
d
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
R
u
d
e
r
a
l
Ur
b
a
n
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
L
a
n
d
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
al
L
a
n
d
Eu
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
G
r
o
v
e
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Fr
e
s
h
w
a
t
e
r
M
a
r
s
h
Pa
l
e
Sp
i
k
e
R
u
s
h
M
a
r
s
h
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n
F
o
r
e
s
t
Gi
a
n
t
R
e
e
d
B
r
e
a
k
s
Common yarrow Achillea millefolium •
Spanish lotus Acmispon americanus •
Beach ambrosia Ambrosia camissonis •
Western ragweed Ambrosia psilostachya • • •
California sagebrush Artemisia californica •
Mugwort Artemisia douglasiana • • •
Giant reed Arundo donax • •
Onionweed¤ Asphodelus fistulosus • •
Coyote brush Baccharis pilularis • • • •
Mule fat Baccharis salicifolia •
Sturdy bullrush Bolboschoenus robustus •
Black mustard Brassica nigra • • •
Broccoli¤ Brassica oleracea¤ • • •
Wild mustard Brassica rapa
Ripgut brome Bromus diandrus • • •
Soft chess brome Bromus hordeaceous • • •
Italian thistle Carduus pycnocephalus • • •
Bull thistle Circium vulgare • •
Rock rose¤ Cistus sp. • •
California sawgrass Cladium californicum •
Poison hemlock Conium maculatum • • •
Bindweed Convovulus arvensis • •
Silverleaf cotoneaster¤ Cotoneaster pannosus¤ • •
Bermuda grass Cynodon dactylon •
Tall cyperus Cyperus eragrostis • •
Umbrella plant Cyperus involucratus •
Umbrella sedge Cyperus squarrosus
Cape ivy¤ Delairea odorata •
Fuller’s teasel¤ Dipsacus fullonum •
Pale spike rush Eleocharis macrostachya • •
Giant wild rye Elymus condensatus • •
Blue wild rye Elymus glaucus •
Flax-leaved horseweed Erigeron bonariensis •
Horseweed Erigeron canadensis
Seacliff buckwheat Eriogonum parvifolium •
Storkbill filaree Erodium botrys • •
Red-stemmed filaree Erodium cicutarium • • •
California poppy Eschscholzia californica • • •
Red gum eucalyptus Eucalyptus camaldulensis •
Blue gum eucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus •
Horsetail Equisetum arvense
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix B
TABLE B-1: PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED
Common Name Scientific Name(s) Bl
u
e
W
i
l
d
R
y
e
M
e
a
d
o
w
Co
a
s
t
a
l
S
c
r
u
b
Co
y
o
t
e
B
r
u
s
h
S
c
r
u
b
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
G
r
a
s
s
l
a
n
d
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
R
u
d
e
r
a
l
Ur
b
a
n
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
L
a
n
d
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
al
L
a
n
d
Eu
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
G
r
o
v
e
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Fr
e
s
h
w
a
t
e
r
M
a
r
s
h
Pa
l
e
Sp
i
k
e
R
u
s
h
M
a
r
s
h
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n
F
o
r
e
s
t
Gi
a
n
t
R
e
e
d
B
r
e
a
k
s
Fennel Foeniculum vulgare • • • •
Cutleaf geranium Geranium dissectum • • •
Foxtail barley Hordeum murinum • •
Aaron's beard¤ Hypericum calycinum¤ •
Southern California black walnut Juglans californica •
Soft rush Juncus effusus •
Italian rye grass Festuca perennis • •
Cheeseweed Malva parviflora • • • • •
White sweetclover Melilotus alba • •
Watercress Nasturtium officinale •
Canary grass Phalaris aquatica • • •
Bristly ox-tongue Picris echioides • • • • •
English plantain Plantago lanceolata • • • •
California sycamore Platanus racemosa • •
Prostrate knotweed Polygonum aviculare •
Smartweed Polygonum amphibium • •
Fremont cottonwood Populus fremontii •
Jersey cudweed Pseudognaphalium
luteoalbumCoastliveoakQuercusagrifolia •
Wild radish Raphanus sativus • •
Castor bean Ricinus communis •
Elmleaf blackberry Rubus ulmifolius •
California blackberry Rubus ursinus •
Curly dock Rumex crispus •
Red willow Salix laevigata •
Arroyo willow Salix lasiolepis •
Peruvian pepper tree Schinus molle •
California bullrush Schoenoplectus acutus •
Milk thistle Silybum marianum • •
Black nightshade Solanum douglasii •
Smilo grass Stipa miliacea •
Poison oak Toxicodendron diversilobum •
Nasturtium¤ Tropaeolum majus¤
Cattail Typha spp. • •
Stinging nettle Urtica dioica •
Vetch Vicia sp. •
Periwinkle Vinca minor • •
Prickly cocklebur Xanthium strumarium •
Rare plant (CNPS) ¤ Cultivar
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11, 2015
Appendix B
TABLE B-2: WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED
Common Name Scientific Name(s) Bl
u
e
W
i
l
d
R
y
e
M
e
a
d
o
w
Co
a
s
t
a
l
S
c
r
u
b
Co
y
o
t
e
B
r
u
s
h
S
c
r
u
b
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
G
r
a
s
s
l
a
n
d
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
R
u
d
e
r
a
l
Ur
b
a
n
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
L
a
n
d
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
al
L
a
n
d
Eu
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
G
r
o
v
e
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Fr
e
s
h
w
a
t
e
r
M
a
r
s
h
Pa
l
e
Sp
i
k
e
R
u
s
h
M
a
r
s
h
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n
F
o
r
e
s
t
Gi
a
n
t
W
il
d
R
e
e
d
B
r
e
a
k
s
Bi
r
d
s
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos • • • • • • • • • • • •
American kestrel Falco sparverius • • • • • • • • • • • •
Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna • • •
Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans • • •
Brewer’s blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus • • • •
Chestnut-backed chickadee Poecile rufescens • •
Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas • •
European starling Sturnus vulgaris • • • •
House finch Carpodacus mexicanus • •
Lesser goldfinch Spinus psaltria • • • •
Mourning dove Zenaida macroura • • • • • • • • • • • •
Nuttall’s woodpecker Picoides nuttallii • • •
Orange-crowned warbler Oreothlypis celata •
Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus • • • • • • • • • • • •
Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis • • • • • • • • • • • •
Song sparrow Melospiza melodia • • •
Townsend’s warbler Setophaga townsendi •
Turkey vulture Cathartes aura • • • • • • • • • • • •
Yellow-rumped warbler Setophaga coronata •
Western scrub-jay Aphelocoma californica • • • • • • • • • • • •
White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus •
Ma
m
m
a
l
sRaccoonProcyonlotor •
California ground squirrel Spermophilus beecheyi • • •
Botta's pocket gopher Thomomys bottae • • • •
He
r
p
s
Pacific chorus tree frog Pseudacris regilla •
Western fence lizard Sceloporus occidentalis • •
Western pond turtle Emys marmorata •
insect Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus •
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Appendix B
TABLE B-3 CNDDB RECORDED OCCURRENCES (5 MILE SEARCH RADIUS)
Common Name
Scientific Name(s)
Listing Status
USFWS/CDFW/CNPS
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION Period of
Identification
Observed/
Potential
Occurrence
Plants
Hoover's bent grass
Agrostis hooveri --/--/
1B.2
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland in Santa
Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. Dry, sandy Soil. 120-600m.
Flowering:
April-August
Not observed
Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita
Arctostaphylos cruzensis --/--/
1B.2
Broad-leafed upland forest, coastal bluff scrub, closed-cone coniferous
forest, chaparral, coastal scrub, & grassland. On sandy soils. 60-310m.
Flowering:
December-March
Not observed.
Habitat not suitable
within project area.
Morro manzanita
Arctostaphylos morroensis --/
ST/1B.2
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub. On
Baywood fine sands usually with chaparral associates. 5-205m.
Flowering:
December-March
Not observed.
Habitat not suitable
within project area.
Pecho manzanita
Arctostaphylos pechoensis --/--/
1B.2
Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub. Grows on siliceous
shale with other chaparral associates. 150-850m.
Flowering:
November-March
Not observed.
Habitat not suitable
within project area.
Santa Margarita manzanita
Arctostaphylos pilosula --/--/
1B.2
Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral. Shale outcrops & slopes;
reported growing on decomposed granite or sandstone in San Luis
Obispo. 170-1100m.
Flowering:
December-March
Not observed.
Habitat not suitable
within project area.
Miles' milk-vetch
Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus --/--/
1B.2 Coastal scrub, coastal grassland. Clay soil. 20-90m.
Flowering:
March - June
Not observed
San Luis Obispo mariposa-lily
Calochortus obispoensis --/--/
1B.2
Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Often in serpentine
grassland. 75-665m.
Flowering:
April- June
Not observed
La Panza Marchiposa-lily
Calochortus simulans --/--/
1B.3
Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland, chaparral.
Decomposed granite. 395-1100m.
Flowering:
May - July
Not observed
Cambria morning-glory
Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis --/--/
4.2 Dry open scrub, chaparral, and cismontane woodland. 60-500m.
Flowering:
April- June
Not observed
San Luis Obispo sedge
Carex obispoensis --/--/
1B.2
Springs and stream sides in closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral,
coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. <800m.
Flowering:
March - June
Not observed
San Luis Obispo owl's-clover
Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis --/--/
1B.2
Meadows and seeps and valley and foothills grasslands, typically in heavy
clay soil, sometimes in serpentine soils. 10-400m.
Flowering:
March - May
Not observed
Congdon's tarplant
Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii --/--/
1B.2
Alkaline seeps and springs. Alkaline soils, sometimes described as heavy
white clay. 1-230m.
Flowering:
June - October
Not observed.
pappose tarplant
Centromadia parryi ssp. parryi --/--/
1B.2
Coastal prairie, meadows and seeps, coastal salt marsh, valley and foothill
grassland.
Flowering:
June - October
Not observed
Brewer's spineflower
Chorizanthe breweri --/--/
1B.3
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, closed-cone coniferous
forest. Gravel or rocks. 60-800m.
Flowering:
May - July
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Chorro Creek bog thistle
Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense
FE/SE/1B.2
Chaparral and cismontane woodland serpentine seeps and streams.
350m.
Flowering:
April - October
Not observed
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Appendix B
TABLE B-3 CNDDB RECORDED OCCURRENCES (5 MILE SEARCH RADIUS)
Common Name
Scientific Name(s)
Listing Status
USFWS/CDFW/CNPS
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION Period of
Identification
Observed/
Potential
Occurrence
Cuesta Ridge thistle
Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum --/--/
1B.2
Chaparral in openings on serpentine, often on steep rocky slopes and
along disturbed roadsides. 500-750 m.
Flowering:
April - July
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
California sawgrass
Cladium californicum --/--/
2.2
Freshwater and alkali marshes, seeps/ freshwater or alkaline moist
habitats. 60-600m.
Flowering:
June - September
Observed outside
project area
Pismo clarkia
Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata
FE/SR/1B.1
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. On ancient
sand dunes on the coast. Sandy soils, openings. 25-185m.
Flowering:
May - July
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
dune larkspur
Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae --/--/
1B.2 Coastal dunes (maritime chaparral). Rocky areas and dunes. 30-375m.
Flowering:
April - May
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Eastwood's larkspur
Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae --/--/
1B.2 Chaparral, coastal dunes (Maritime)
Flowering:
April - May
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Betty's dudleya
Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae --/--/
1B.2 Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, chaparral
Flowering:
April - June
Not observed
mouse-gray dudleya
Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina --/--/
1B.3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland.
Flowering:
April - June
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Blochman's dudleya
Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae --/--/
1B.1 Coastal scrub, coastal bluff scrub, valley and foothill grassland.
Flowering:
April - June
Not observed
Indian knob mountainbalm
Eriodictyon altissimum --/--/
1B.1 Chaparral (Maritime), cismontane woodland. Sandstone ridges. <270m.
Flowering:
March - June
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Hoover's button-celery
Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri --/--/
1B.1
Alkaline depressions, vernal pools, roadside ditches and other wet places
near the coast. 5-45m.
Flowering:
July
Not observed.
San Benito chocolate bells
Fritillaria viridea --/--/
1B.2 Serpentine slopes in chaparral. 100-1500m.
Flowering:
March - May
Not observed.
Mesa horkelia
Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula --/--/
1B.1
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub in sandy or gravelly
soils. 70 to 810 meters.
Flowering:
March - July
Not observed
Jone’s tidy tips
Layia jonesii --/--/
1B.2 Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Sandy flats and washes. <900m.
Flowering:
March - May
Not observed
Palmer's monardella
Monardella palmeri --/--/
1B.2 Cismontane woodland, chaparral, forests on serpentine. 200-800m.
Flowering:
June - August
Not observed
adobe sanicle
Sanicula maritima --/--/
1B.1
Meadows and seeps, valley and foothill grassland, chaparral, coastal
prairie. 150m.
Flowering:
April - May
Not observed
black-flowered figwort
Scrophularia atrata --/--/
1B.2
Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal dunes, coastal scrub,
riparian scrub. Sandy, diatomaceous shale and soils derived from other
parent material; along swales and in sand dunes. 10-250m.
Flowering:
April - July
Not observed
chaparral ragwort
Senecio aphanactis --/--/
2.2
Cismontane woodland, coastal scrub.
Drying alkaline flats. 20-575m.
Flowering:
February - May
Not observed
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Appendix B
TABLE B-3 CNDDB RECORDED OCCURRENCES (5 MILE SEARCH RADIUS)
Common Name
Scientific Name(s)
Listing Status
USFWS/CDFW/CNPS
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION Period of
Identification
Observed/
Potential
Occurrence
most beautiful jewel-flower
Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus --/--/
1B.2
Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. Serpentine
outcrops, on ridges and slopes. 120-730m.
Flowering:
April - June
Not observed
saline clover
Trifolium hydrophilum --/--/
1B.2
Marshes and swamps, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Mesic,
alkaline sites. 0-300m.
Flowering:
April - June
Not observed
Natural Communities
Blue Wild Rye Meadow --/--/NCSC
Grassland with 50% or more cover of blue wild rye (Elymus glaucus) found
in coastal and montane forests, montane woodlands and open flatlands.
Soils may be seasonally flooded with a fluctuating water table. 0-2500m.
Observable year
round
Observed
Central Coast Willow Riparian Forest --/--/NCSC
Wetland freshwater habitat seasonally flooded, saturated. Occurs in
flood-plains; low gradient depositions along rivers, streams (CNDDB
CTT61330CA; Holland 1986).
Observable year
round
Observed
Central Coast Riparian Scrub --/--/NCSC
A scrubby streamside thicket, varying from open to impenetrable,
dominated by any of several willows. This early seral community may
succeed to any of several riparian woodland or forest types absent severe
flooding disturbance. Relatively fine-grained sand and gravel bars that are
closed to river channels and therefore close to ground water. Coarser
substrates or greater depths to the water table favor dominance by
Baccharis species (CNDDB CTT63200CA; Holland 1986).
Observable year
round
Observed
Central Coast Cottonwood Sycamore Riparian
Forest --/--/
NCSC
Moderately closed broadleafed riparian forests dominated by California
sycamore (Platanus racemosa) and Fremont cottonwood (Populus
fremontii), with lesser amounts of coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia).
Understories may be dense thickets of shrubby willows. Floodplains of
sub-perennial streams, usually with fairly coarse bedload and seasonally
variable depths to the water table (CNDDB CTT61210CA; Holland 1986).
Observable year
round
Observed
Central Maritime Chaparral --/--/NCSC
Well-drained, sandy substrates within the zone of summer coastal fog
incursion. Fire appears necessary for continued reproduction. Intergrades
on more mesic, less sandy sites with Monterey Pine Forest, Bishop Pine
Forest with Lucian Coastal Scrub closer to the coast or on shaley
substrates (CNDDB CTT37C20CA; Holland 1986).
Observable year
round
Not observed
Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh --/--/NCSC
Dominated by perennial, emergent monocots to 4-5m tall. Often forming
completely closed canopies. Tule rush (Scirpus spp.) and cattails (Typha
spp.) dominated. Quiet sites (lacking significant current) permanently
flooded by fresh water (rather than brackish, alkaline, or variable).
Prolonged saturation permits accumulation of deep, peaty soils (CNDDB
CTT52410CA; Holland 1986).
Observable year
round
Observed
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Appendix B
TABLE B-3 CNDDB RECORDED OCCURRENCES (5 MILE SEARCH RADIUS)
Common Name
Scientific Name(s)
Listing Status
USFWS/CDFW/CNPS
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION Period of
Identification
Observed/
Potential
Occurrence
Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland --/--/NCSC
A community restricted to serpentine soils in more protected, drier, less
windy, and more sunny uplands than serpentine scrub. It is dominated by
purple needlegrass and foothill needlegrass, an array of wildflowers
including cream cups, gold fields, California poppies, as well as other
species found on serpentine soil (CNDDB CTT42130CA, Holland 1986).
Observable year
round
Not observed
Southern Cottonwood-Willow Riparian Forest --/--/NCSC
Tall, open, broad-leafed winter-deciduous riparian forests dominated by
Fremont’s cotton (Populus fremontii), and several tree willow species.
Understories usually are shrubby willows. Sub-irrigated and frequently
overflowed lands along rivers and streams. The dominant species require
moist, bare mineral soil for germination and establishment. This is
provided after flood waters recede, leading to uniform-aged stands in this
seral type.
Observable year
round
Observed
Invertebrates
Atascadero June beetle
Polyphylla nubila --/
SA/-- Occurs in sand dunes of San Luis Obispo County
Breeding:
April -July (June)
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
monarch butterfly
Danaus plexippus --/
SA/--
Winter roost sites extend along the coast from northern Mendocino to
Baja California, Mexico. Roost located in wind-protected tree groves
Eucalyptus, Monterey pine, Cypress), with nectar and water sources
nearby.
October-February
Observed. No
documented
roosting site.
vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
FT/SA/-- Vernal pools, swales, and ephemeral freshwater habitats. November-April
No vernal pools in
project area
Fish
steelhead trout- south/central California
coast DPS
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus
FT, CH/SSC/--
Central Coast rivers and streams from the Pajaro River, Santa Cruz County
to (but not including) the Santa Maria River. Clear, cool water with
abundant in-stream cover, well-vegetated stream margins, relatively
stable water flow.
Fall, winter, spring
migrations.
Known occurrence
in SLO Creek
tidewater goby
Eucyclogobius newberryi
FE/SSC/--
Brackish water habitats along the California coast from Agua Hedionda
Lagoon, San Diego County. To The mouth of the Smith River.
Found in shallow lagoons and lower stream reaches, they need fairly still
but not stagnant water & high oxygen levels.
Observable year
round
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Amphibians
California red-legged frog
Rana aurora draytonii
FT/SSC/--
Lowlands and foothills I or near permanent sources of deep water with
dense, shrubby or emergent vegetation. Requires 11-20 weeks of
permanent water for larval development. Must have access to estivation
habitat.
Aquatic breeding
phase:
March - August
Nearby recorded
occurrences
Coast Range newt
Taricha torosa --/
SSC/--
Coastal drainages from Mendocino county to San Diego county. Lives in
terrestrial habitats & will migrate over 1 km to breed in ponds, reservoirs
slow moving streams.
Aquatic breeding
phase:
September - May
Not observed
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Appendix B
TABLE B-3 CNDDB RECORDED OCCURRENCES (5 MILE SEARCH RADIUS)
Common Name
Scientific Name(s)
Listing Status
USFWS/CDFW/CNPS
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION Period of
Identification
Observed/
Potential
Occurrence
foothill yellow-legged frog
Rana boylii --/
SSC/--
Partly-shaded, shallow streams & riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety
of habitats. Needs at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying.
Need at least 15 weeks to attain metamorphosis.
Aquatic breeding
phase:
March - June
Not in range
Reptiles
coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii --/
SSC/--
Chaparral, sage scrub, oak woodlands, and grasslands; sometimes occurs
along seldom used dirt roads where native ant species are prevalent
Observable year
round.
Not observed
black legless lizard
Anniella pulchra nigra --/
SSC/--
Sand dunes and sandy soils in the Monterey Bay and Morro Bay regions.
Inhabit sandy soil/dune areas with bush lupine and mock heather as
dominant plants. Moist soil is essential.
Observable year
round.
Not observed. No
suitable habitat.
Two-stripe garter snake
Thamnophis hammondii --/
SSC/--
Coastal California from vicinity of Salinas to northwest Baja California.
From sea to about 7,000 feet elevation. Highly aquatic, found in or near
permanent fresh water. Often along streams with rocky beds and riparian
growth.
Observable year
round.
Not observed
Western pond turtle
Emys marmorata --/
SSC/--
Requires perennial aquatic habitat and constructs nests along edge of
streams and ponds.
Observable year
round.
Nearby recorded
occurrences
Birds
loggerhead shrike
Lanius ludovicianus
MBTA/SSC/--
Occurs in open ocean, beaches, bays, estuaries, lagoons, as well as
garbage dumps, agricultural fields, and freshwater ponds and lakes
Nesting:
March – August.
Year-round
resident.
Not observed
prairie falcon
Falco mexicanus
MBTA/CFP/-- Open grassland, agricultural fields and desert scrub
Nesting:
February – Sept.
Year-round
resident.
Not observed
western yellow-billed cuckoo
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
MBTA, FC/SE/--
Riparian forest nester, along the broad, lower flood-bottoms of larger
river systems. Nests in riparian jungles of willow, often mixed with
cottonwoods, w/ lower story of blackberry, nettles, or wild grape.
Nesting:
June- September
Very low
white-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
MBTA/CFP/--
Rolling foothills and valley margins with scattered oaks & river
bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous woodland. Open grasslands,
meadows, or marshes for foraging close to isolated, dense-topped trees
for nesting and perching.
Nesting:
January – August.
Year round
resident.
Observed
Mammals
American badger
Taxidea taxus --/
SSC/-- Grasslands and other open habitats in friable soils. Year-round
No burrows
observed
pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus --/
SSC/--
Utilizes open forest and grassland habitats for feeding and multiple
habitats for roosting.
Year-round Not observed
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Appendix B
TABLE B-3 CNDDB RECORDED OCCURRENCES (5 MILE SEARCH RADIUS)
Common Name
Scientific Name(s)
Listing Status
USFWS/CDFW/CNPS
GENERAL HABITAT DESCRIPTION Period of
Identification
Observed/
Potential
Occurrence
western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis californicus --/
SSC/--
Many open, semi-arid to arid habitats, including conifer & deciduous
woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc. Roosts in crevices in
cliff faces, high buildings, trees & tunnels.
Year-round Not observed
Status Codes
Federal
State
California Native Plant Society
FE = Federally Endangered SE = State Endangered List 1 = Plants of Highest Priority (2 sublists):
FT = Federally Threatened ST = State Threatened 1A = Plants Presumed Extinct in California
FC= Federal Candidate SR= State Rare 1B = Plants Rare and Endangered in California and Elsewhere
CH = Federal Critical Habitat CFP = California Fully Protected List 2 = Plants Rare or Endangered in California, but More Common Elsewhere
BGEPA= Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act SSC = State Species of Special Concern List 3 = Plants about which More Information is needed
MBTA = Protected by Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act SA = Not formally listed but included in CDFG “Special Animal” list. List 4 = Plants of Limited Distribution (A Watch List)
NCSC = Natural Community of Special Concern
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO – CALLE JOAQUIN LIFT STATION PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND ASSESSMENT – FINAL MAY 11,2015
APPENDIX C
LEAST BELL’S VIREO PROTOCOL SURVEY REPORT
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805-701-4648 bdugas@terraverdeweb.com
September 26, 2014
Jennifer Metz
Utilities Project Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
RE: Protocol-level Surveys for Least Bell’s Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) in Support of the
Calle Joaquin Lift Station Project, City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County,
California
Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC (Terra Verde) is pleased to present this report
documenting the results of protocol-level least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus; LBV) surveys
completed on behalf of the City of San Luis Obispo (City) for the Calle Joaquin Lift Station
Project located directly southeast of the intersection of U.S. Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley
Road (LOVR) within San Luis Obispo Creek (SLO Creek), San Luis Obispo, California (project). The
surveys were initiated by the City in response to a request from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) for additional information on the presence/absence of LBV within specific
areas targeted by the City for giant reed (Arundo donax) removal as part of the overall pipeline
replacement project (refer to attached Figure). Therefore, the surveys were conducted in
accordance with the USFWS Least Bell’s Vireo Survey Guidelines (Guidelines) for detecting this
species (USFWS 2001) and included eight (8) morning surveys conducted between the protocol-
recommended dates of April 10 through July 31 in 2014. The following report provides an
overview of the survey area and survey methods and provides an overview of survey findings.
Survey Area
Three individual patches of giant reed totaling 24, 571 square feet (0.56 acre) were identified
and constituted the survey area; these locations were the primary focus of the survey effort
including all adjacent suitable riparian habitat areas in the vicinity of the removal locations and
pipeline alignment (refer to attached Figure). This included an approximate 1,000-foot long by
250-foot wide section of SLO Creek between the proposed vegetation removal locations and
the pipeline replacement area located directly adjacent to the LOVR off-ramp of Highway 101
refer to attached Figure). Dominant plant communities within the survey area included dense
riparian willow scrub habitat, eucalyptus grove, and giant reed stands (refer to Attachment A –
Site Photographs). Surrounding land uses in the vicinity of the survey area include active row
crop farming operations, residential housing, and existing highways/roadways including U.S.
Highway 101 and LOVR with moderate to heavy traffic.
2
Literature Review
A search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity
Database (CNDDB 2014) was conducted prior to the surveys did not result in the identification
of any previous LBV occurrences within the subject survey area or within a 10-mile radius.
However, the project site supports suitable habitat for LBV and is located within the historic
range for this species.
Methodology
Per the USFWS Guidelines, 8 pedestrian surveys were conducted between April 14, 2014 and
July 21, 2014 by expert ornithologist Peter Gaede, accompanied by Terra Verde biologist,
Halden Petersen. Surveys were conducted in typical spring season weather for the region and
ranged from calm to breezy with clear to occasionally overcast skies; inclement weather and
extreme conditions were avoided during all site visits. The surveys were generally conducted
between the hours of 6:30 and 9:30 a.m. and were spaced between 11 and 20 days apart to
maximize the detection of early arriving individuals of both sexes and potential nesting pairs. A
summary of the survey dates and weather conditions is provided in the following Table 1:
Table 1. LBV Survey Summary Table
Survey
No.
Survey Date Survey Time
Weather (Degrees
Fahrenheit [°F])
Surveyors
1 April 14, 2014 0730-0900 Overcast, calm; 56°F
Peter Gaede
Halden Peterson
2 April 24, 2014 0730-0900 Calm, clear; 58°F
Peter Gaede
Halden Peterson
3 May 9, 2014 0630-0900
Fog/partly cloudy,
light breeze; mid-
50°F
Peter Gaede
4 May 20, 2014 0630-0815 Overcast, calm; 54°F
Peter Gaede
Halden Peterson
5 June 4, 2014 0630-0800
Overcast, light north
winds; 50°F
Peter Gaede
Halden Peterson
6 June 18, 2014 0630-0800 Clear, calm; 62°F
Peter Gaede
Halden Peterson
7 July 8, 2014 0630-0800
Overcast and low
fog, calm; 58°F
Peter Gaede
8 July 21, 2014 0800-0920
Cool, overcast, light
south winds; 65°F
Peter Gaede
Halden Peterson
Daily survey routes within the project area were chosen to minimize disturbance to potential
habitat features yet maximize observance of densely concentrated avian activity. Areas
adjacent to dense willow scrub habitat and eucalyptus stands within the SLO Creek channel
became a particular focus of the surveys as these areas showed the highest levels of avian
activity. However, the surveys efforts included sites within close proximity to the existing stands
3
of giant reed to determine extent of avian activity within these habitat features. Avian species
were identified and recorded through visual observation and identification of vocalizations;
presence and abundance were also noted during each site survey. Per Guidelines, no
vocalization tapes were used at any time during the combined survey efforts.
Findings
The survey area exhibited the highest level of avian species diversity and individual avian
species abundance particularly during site visits 1 through 4 (April 14 through May 20). A
maximum of 37 individual avian species were identified on May 20, 2014 with an estimated
combined abundance of 146 individuals observed. Overall, a total of 62 different avian species
were identified during the surveys, including observations from a preliminary site visit
conducted on April 1, 2014. In summary, no potential LBV vocalizations were detected nor were
any LBV observed during the combined survey efforts. A summary of all avian species observed
and overall abundance is provided as Attachment B and includes the results of the initial site
visit and negative LBV survey completed on April 10.
The Guidelines describe extending the survey effort through August 31 if additional information
is desired or necessary. Survey findings showed a substantial decrease in both the total number
of avian species and individuals observed after the fourth survey (May 20), and as such, the
survey efforts were terminated after completion of the required eighth survey on July 21.
Conclusion
In summary, Terra Verde conducted focused surveys in accordance with the USFWS LBV
Guidelines (2001) and did not detect the presence of LBV within the survey area. The timing
and frequency of the combined surveys encompassed the recommended survey period during
which time most, if not all, vireo adults in occupied habitats are generally detected. No further
LBV surveys and/or LBV avoidance and minimization measures are recommended at this time.
If you should have any questions or require further information, please contact Brian Dugas at
bdugas@terraverdeweb.com or 805-701-4648.
Sincerely,
Halden Petersen
Biologist
6
ATTACHMENT A
Site Photographs
8
Photo 1: View south of typical riparian habitat within SLO Creek and subject pipeline
alignment, bordering a giant reed stand, September 4, 2013.
Photo 2: View north of typical riparian habitat within SLO Creek and subject pipeline
alignment, September 4, 2013.
9
ATTACHMENT B
City of San Luis Obispo Call Joaquin Lift Station Project
Least Bell’s Vireo Survey
Summary Table
11
April 10—July 31, 2014
LBV Protocol Survey
Period)
SURVEY NUMBER
Species Observed
Site
Visit
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Mallard 4 6 5 0 6 1 2 8 0
Great Egret 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Great Blue Heron 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Western Gull 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0
Turkey Vulture 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 4
White-tailed Kite 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
American kestrel 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1
Red-shouldered Hawk 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
Red-tailed Hawk 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Killdeer 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
Band-tailed Pigeon 5 4 2 8 5 12 6 25 3
Mourning Dove 1 4 2 0 1 1 1 0 0
Eurasian Collared-dove 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Rock Pigeon 0 0 0 10 0 10 4 0 7
Anna’s Hummingbird 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1
Black-chinned Hummingbird 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Selasphorus sp. 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
hummingbird sp. 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 2
Nuttall’s Woodpecker 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
Downy Woodpecker 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
Hairy Woodpecker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Black Phoebe 1 1 2 2 1 4 1 1 1
Pacific-slope Flycatcher 2 5 4 4 7 4 6 5 2
Western wood-pewee 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
American Crow 2 4 4 2 2 1 2 4 4
Northern Mockingbird 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0
Western Scrub-jay 0 0 3 2 1 3 2 1 3
Steller’s Jay 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
N. Rough-winged Swallow 5 2 6 1 4 2 4 2 0
Cliff Swallow 0 75 25 10 45 15 2 1 6
Vaux’s Swift 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0
White-throated Swift 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chestnut-backed Chickadee 2 6 3 6 5 6 6 3 6
Oak Titmouse 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
Bushtit 2 10 7 12 16 10 0 0 25
Bewick’s Wren 0 4 8 7 3 3 5 3 3
12
SURVEY DATES:
Reconnaissance-level survey: April 01, 2014. PAG/HP. 0800-0930.
Protocol-level survey dates, surveyors, times, and weather conditions:
1. April 14, 2014. PAG/HP. 0730-0900. Overcast, calm; 56°.
2. April 24, 2014. PAG/HP. 0730-0900. Calm, clear; 58°.
3. May 9, 2014. PAG. 0630-0900. Fog and partly cloudy at start, light breeze; mid-50°s.
4. May 20, 2014. PAG/HP. 0630-0815. Overcast, calm; 54°.
5. June 4, 2014: PAG/HP. 0630-0800. Overcast, light breeze from north; 50°.
6. June 18, 2014: PAG/HP. 0630-0800. Clear, calm; 62°.
7. July 8, 2014: PAG. 0630-0800. Overcast and low fog, calm; 58°.
8. July 21, 2014: PAG/HP. 0800-0920. Cool, overcast, light breeze from south; 65°.
Surveyors: Peter Gaede (PG), Halden Petersen (HP)
Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
American Robin 1 2 2 0 2 2 1 0 0
Western Bluebird 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
Hermit Thrush 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cedar Waxwing 0 0 15 37 0 0 0 0 0
European Starling 0 4 0 1 1 2 2 0 0
Orange-crowned Warbler 1 4 2 0 1 0 0 0 1
Yellow Warbler 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0
Yellow-rumped Warbler 10 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Townsend’s Warbler 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Common Yellowthroat 1 6 2 2 3 3 2 4 0
Wilson’s Warbler 2 5 4 6 3 4 9 3 3
Cassin’s Vireo 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Warbling Vireo 0 0 5 2 2 2 2 1 0
Spotted Towhee 2 3 3 4 2 2 2 0 0
California Towhee 0 3 4 2 4 1 4 4 3
Song Sparrow 3 8 12 12 7 10 14 3 4
Lincoln’s Sparrow 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dark-eyed Junco (Oregon) 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Black-headed Grosbeak 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
House Finch 3 5 0 2 2 0 0 1 8
Red-winged Blackbird 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Brewer’s Blackbird 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 0 3
Brown-headed Cowbird 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0
Lesser Goldfinch 0 6 1 0 1 2 2 0 0
American Goldfinch 0 1 6 1 2 2 3 1 4
TOTAL SPECIES 26 33 35 33 37 27 28 24 25
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS 58 192 160 150 146 108 88 78 99
743 Pacific St., Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-1920
O: (805) 594-1590 | F: (805) 594-1577
ARCHAEOLOGY
CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT www.appliedearthworks.com
31 January 2013
David K. Wolff
Sage Institute
1065 Higuera Street, Suite 301
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340l
RE: Calle Joaquin Lift Station Project Records Search
Dear Mr. Wolff:
At your request, Applied EarthWorks, Inc. (Æ) has obtained an archaeological records search for the
Calle Joaquin Lift Station Project in the City of San Luis Obispo. The search area included the Calle
Joaquin Lift Station and approximately one mile of sewage pipeline that may be repaired or replaced
during the project. The records search was conducted by the staff of the California Historical Resources
Information System Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), which is housed at the Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara. The CCIC searched their records for
archaeological sites, historical resources, and previous cultural resource surveys within one half mile of
the Project Area. Data sources included: State Historic Property Data Files, California Office of Historic
Preservation Determinations of Archaeological Eligibility, National Register of Historic Places, National
Register of Determined Eligible Properties, California Historical Landmarks, California Points of
Historic Interest, and the Caltrans State and Local Bridge Surveys.
Although there are no recorded sites within the specific Project Area, CCIC records indicate four
archaeological sites have been recorded within the half-mile search area. Of these, two are prehistoric
bedrock mortar sites (CA-SLO-783 and CA-SLO-1365) and one is a prehistoric debris scatter that
contains shell fragments, deer bones, and chert flakes (CA-SLO-1195). The site nearest to the Project
Area, approximately 0.2 miles away, is the historic homestead CA-SLO-1780. The CCIC records search
also found a Historic Property Evaluation for the Froom House, a historic ranch house in the search area.
According to the records search, there have been 34 cultural resource surveys within a half mile of the
Project Area. None of these surveys included the specific Project Area. Due to the archaeological and
historical sensitivity of the area, however, the CCIC recommends that a cultural resource field survey is
conducted.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require additional information regarding our study.
Sincerely,
Barry A. Price, M.A., R.P.A.
Vice President/Principal Archaeologist
Applied EarthWorks, Inc
Exhibit B