HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8 - Attachment B - Whale Rock Stilling Basin IS-MND and APCD letter*NOTE: The project site is located on parcels owned by the State of California outside of the San Luis Obispo City limits in
the unincorporated area of San Luis Obispo County. The General Plan and Zoning designations are based on information in
the San Luis Obispo County Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance (Title 23); however, the project does not require
discretionary or ministerial permits from the County and any references to County planning documents are provided for
informational purposes only.
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For: EID-0683-2022
1. Project Title:
Whale Rock Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo (on behalf of the Whale Rock Commission)
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Noah Evans, Whale Rock Supervisor, Public Utilities
nevans@slocity.org
805.995.3701
Shawna Scott, Special Projects Manager, Public Utilities
sscott@slocity.org
805.781.7176
4. Project Location:
Whale Rock Reservoir spillway basin
Near terminus of 13th Street, Cayucos, California.
APNs: 073-093-005, 073-095-001, and 073-095-006
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
Public Utilities Department
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
6. General Plan Designations:
Open Space*
7. Zoning:
Open Space*
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
8. Description of the Project:
The proposed project includes dewatering, sediment removal, and visual inspection of the spillway basin below
Whale Rock Reservoir located east of the community of Cayucos in San Luis Obispo County, California (see
Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity Map).
As it currently exists, the concrete spillway conveys water from controlled dam releases when the reservoir has
reached its capacity, as well as local precipitation which directly enters the channel, into a rip-rap lined energy
dissipation basin. The spillway and rip-rap basin are an extension of Old Creek, a USGS blue line drainage.
Vegetation within the spillway, where present, is dominated by dense patches of common tule (Schoenoplectus
acutus var. occidentalis). The majority of the project site’s upland area consists of ruderal grassland habitat that is
regularly mowed and tilled.
The City of San Luis Obispo (City) is required by the Division of Safety of Dams to inspect the integrity of the
spillway basin below Whale Rock Reservoir. In order to conduct the visual inspection, the City must first dewater
the lower section of the basin, then remove accumulated sediments and vegetation from the area for an engineer to
gain and see the basin bottom. The proposed project includes the use of submersible pumps to dewater the area,
discharging the water to the adjacent disturbed upland terraces, 50 feet or greater from the spillway and top of bank,
on either side of the spillway bank (see Figure 2: Proposed Dewatering Plan). Temporary sediment catchments and
dissipation devices, such as straw bales and plastic sheeting, will be used to slow down and settle turbid water
before it is allowed to run overland. Additional devices (e.g., sandbags, silt fence, straw wattle, hay bales) will be
implemented around the perimeter of the sediment discharge area as needed to ensure no erosion or sedimentation
occurs to the creek below.
Once the area is dewatered, equipment such as a backhoe or skid steer will be lowered down from the 13th
Street/access road bridge above the spillway. A container will also be lowered down. Sediment and vegetation will
be scooped up and placed in the container, and once filled, it will be pulled back up to the bridge and emptied onto
either of the disturbed upland terraces, 50 feet or greater from the spillway and top of bank, on either side of the
spillway. Sediment and vegetation removed from the channel with be spread locally in the disturbed upland terrace,
where the materials will not wash back into the spillway or downstream to the creek (see Figure 2). Once the area
is accessible and the concrete channel visible, an engineer or engineers will conduct the required inspection.
The project would result in approximately 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to waters of the state,
including 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to waters for the U.S. Specifically, temporary impacts
are expected as a result of dewatering and excavating accumulated sediment and vegetation. No permanent impacts
are proposed. As such, impacts to the spillway would require permits from California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW), Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) (see Figure 3: Jurisdictional Delineation Map).
9. Project Entitlements:
N/A
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
Surrounding land uses are summarized below:
• North – open space and open waters of Whale Rock Reservoir
• South – open space, including riparian corridor of Old Creek
• East – open space and open waters of Whale Rock Reservoir
• West – City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department maintenance yard, agricultural accessory structures, and
single-family residences along 13th Street
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for
consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural
resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Native American Tribes were notified about the project on July 15, 2022 consistent with City and State regulations
including, but not limited to, Assembly Bill 52. See Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, for further information
on correspondence and consultation with California Native American Tribes.
12. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), if needed
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), if needed
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Coast)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
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 ☐ Public Services
☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources ☒ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation
☒ Air Quality ☒ Hydrology and Water Quality ☐ Transportation
☒ Biological Resources ☐ Land Use and Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources
☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities and Service Systems
☐ Energy ☒ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☒ Geology and Soils ☐ Population and Housing ☒ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND WILDLIFE FEES
☐
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife 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).
☒
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and
Game 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
☒
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 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to by the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required. ☐
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
☐
January 3, 2023
Signature Date
Shawna Scott
For: Michael Codron,
Printed Name Community Development Director
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
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 question. 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 the 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 significant. 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
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099,
would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1, 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
1, 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1, 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The project site is located approximately 0.3-mile east of State Route 1, an officially designated Federal Scenic Byway. The
project site is accessed from 13th Street, which is lined intermittently with single family residences, agricultural row crops, and
mature stands of trees. Topography at the base of the of the Whale Rock Reservoir’s dam consists of two relatively flat terraces
to the east and west of the spillway, with elevations ranging from 9 to 18 meters (30 to 60 feet). Vegetation within the spillway,
where present, is dominated by dense patches of common tule (Schoenoplectus acutus var. occidentalis). The majority of the
project site’s upland area consists of ruderal grassland habitat that is regularly mowed and tilled. Downstream from the spillway,
Old Creek includes an intact riparian corridor with mature trees and shrubs.
a) A scenic vista is generally defined as a high-quality view that can be seen from public viewpoints. A substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista would occur if the proposed project would significantly degrade the scenic landscape as viewed
from public roads or other public areas. The existing vegetation and intervening topography provide a highly filtered
view of the stilling basin to travelers on surrounding roadways. The proposed project is temporary in nature and would
not result in the modification of views. The project would not change or obstruct views from public vantage points and
would be consistent with surrounding land uses; therefore, potential impacts associated with adverse effects on a scenic
vista would be less than significant.
b) Although the project is located approximately 0.3-mile from a designated Scenic Byway (State Route 1), the project
activities would not be visible from State Route 1 due to intervening vegetation and topography. Additionally, the
project activities do not include any modifications to scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and
historic structures; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
c) The project is located in a non-urbanized, publicly accessible area. The project would not substantially degrade the
character or quality of the views from surrounding roads. However, heavy equipment, vehicles, and construction
materials located within the project site and sediment spreading areas would be visible from the immediate surrounding
areas during project construction. These construction-related visual impacts would be temporary and limited to the
construction window, and therefore impacts would be less than significant.
d) The project does not include any new source of light or glare, therefore there would be no impact.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project would not be highly visible from nearby public roadways designated as having high scenic value and does not include
any permanent or built features. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts associated with aesthetic resources would occur
and mitigation measures are not required.
2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model
(1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by
the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
4 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? 3, 5, 6 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
3, 5, 6,
7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?
3, 5, 6,
7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
3, 5, 6,
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The California Department of Conservation (CDOC) classifies and maps agricultural lands in the state in the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP identifies five farmland categories: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Local Potential. The project site is designated
as Grazing land by the FMMP. The project site is in the Cayucos Agricultural Preserve Area. There are lands under Williamson
Act Contract in the vicinity (northwest and southeast of Whale Rock Reservoir) but not within the project area. There are
agricultural fields located adjacent to 13th Street; however, these lands are not located within a Williamson Act Contract.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
According to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g), forest land is defined as land that can support 10 percent native
tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest
resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.
Timberland is defined as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of
Forestry and Fire Protection, as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a
commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. The project site does not support
any forest land or timberland and is not surrounded by forest land or timberland.
a) According to the FMMP, the project site and surrounding land uses are designated as Grazing land. Since the project
site is not located on or adjacent to designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance,
implementation of the project would not result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use; therefore, no
impacts would occur.
b) While there are lands in agricultural use and under Williamson Act contract in the general vicinity of the project site,
the project is temporary and would not affect zoning, access to, or use of these properties; therefore, impacts are
considered less than significant.
c) The project does not conflict with the existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land or timberland zoned for
Timberland Production as there are no designated forest land or timberlands within the project area; therefore, there are
no impacts.
d) The project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use as there are no designated forest
lands within the project area; therefore, there are no impacts.
e) The proposed project would be consistent with surrounding land uses and with existing zoning designation for the
project site and would not adversely affect agricultural water supplies or other agricultural support facilities. Placement
of sediment and vegetation removed from the spillway on upland terraces would not be located on or adjacent to
Farmland. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial changes in the environment that could result in
conversion of nearby agricultural land or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest use, and impacts are considered
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project is consistent with surrounding land uses and would not adversely affect surrounding agricultural areas. The project
would not result in impact to or conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local or Statewide Importance,
timberlands, or forest lands. Therefore, no significant impacts to agricultural and forest resources are anticipated, and no
mitigation measures are necessary.
3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan? 10, 11 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
8, 9,
10, 11,
12
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
9, 10,
12, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people? 11, 13 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The project is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which includes San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara,
and Ventura Counties. Air quality within the SCCAB is regulated by several jurisdictions, including the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control
District (SLOAPCD).
San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as “nonattainment” for the state standards for ozone, partial nonattainment
(in eastern San Luis Obispo County, outside of the project area) for federal ambient standards for ozone, and nonattainment for
the state standards for particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter (PM10).
The SLOAPCD has developed a CEQA Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated with a November 2017 Clarification
Memorandum) to evaluate project-specific impacts and determine if potentially significant impacts could result from a project.
To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to reach acceptable air quality levels,
the 2001 San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan (Clean Air Plan) was prepared and adopted.
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others depending on the population groups and the
activities involved. The CARB has identified the following groups as most likely to be affected by air pollution (i.e., sensitive
receptors): children under 14, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. The
nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a rural residence located approximately 400 feet southwest along 13th Street.
Naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. Any ground disturbance
proposed in an area identified as having the potential to contain NOA must comply with the CARB Airborne Toxics Control
Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. The SLOAPCD Naturally Occurring
Asbestos Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential to contain NOA.
a) The project involves temporary construction methods, including dewatering and sediment removal, and would not
generate new traffic or increase vehicle miles. Therefore, the source control measures in the Clean Air Plan are not
directly applicable to the project, and the project does not conflict with the Clean Air Plan. The project is consistent
with the applicable SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook and therefore impacts are considered less than significant.
b) San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as non-attainment for ozone and PM10 under state ambient air quality
standards. Construction of the project would result in emissions of ozone precursors including reactive organic gasses
(ROG), nitrous oxides (NOx), and fugitive dust emissions (PM10). The project is temporary in nature and there are no
operational emissions associated with project implementation.
Project construction would require removal of up to 100 cubic yards of sediment and organic materials (e.g., tule plants)
and spreading on the surface of two previously disturbed upland areas totaling 36,475 square feet (0.84 acre). This
would result in the generation of construction dust as well as short-term construction vehicle emissions, including diesel
particulate matter (DPM), ROG, NOx, and PM10. The estimated construction related emissions are included in Table
1 below.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Table 1. Estimated Emission Rates for Construction Operations
Pollutant
Emission Rate1
(Lbs/Cubic Yard
of Material
Moved)
Project Quantity Project
Emissions
APCD Threshold
of Significance
for Construction
Operations2
Diesel Particulate
Matter (DPM) 0.0049 100 cubic yards 0.49 lbs total 7 lbs (daily)
Reactive Organic
Gases (ROG) 0.0203 100 cubic yards 2.03 lbs total ROG + NOx
137 lbs (daily) Oxides of
Nitrogen (NOx) 0.0935 100 cubic yards 9.35 lbs total
Fugitive Dust
(PM10)
0.75
tons/acre/month3 0.84 acre 0.63 tons/month 2.5 tons
(quarterly)
Pollutants may occur during the proposed dewatering and sediment removal project; however, pollutant producing work
would be temporary and compliant with the APCD Air Quality Guidelines. The use of diesel engines, diesel idling,
diesel fuel, and portable equipment 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, if required for construction, would comply with
relevant State laws to reduce ozone precursors and diesel particulate matter (Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California
Code of Regulations (for on-road vehicles) and Section 2449 of the CARB In-Use Off-Road Diesel regulation (for off-
road equipment). In addition, standard measures for reducing DPM and fugitive dust are required and have been
included as Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. These requirements would help ensure the project does not contribute
to a considerable net increase of criteria air pollutants; therefore, potential air quality impacts from criteria pollutants
related to project construction would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) Construction activities such as dewatering, sediment removal, and sediment spreading would result in temporary
construction vehicle emissions and fugitive dust that may affect nearby sensitive receptors. SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air
Quality Handbook recognizes special conditions, such as proximity to sensitive receptors (e.g., residential dwelling
units), that require implementation of standard construction mitigation measures to reduce diesel idling (DPM) and
fugitive dust. Since the project is located within 1,000 feet of residential dwelling units, standard measures for reducing
DPM and fugitive dust are required and have been included as Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. Therefore,
potential air quality impacts associated with project construction would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) Construction of the proposed project would generate odors associated with construction smoke, dust, and equipment
exhaust and fumes. Proposed construction activities would not differ significantly from those resulting from any other
type of construction project. Any effects would be short-term in nature and limited to the construction phase of the
proposed project and would not be expected to disturb nearby land uses.
The SLOAPCD Naturally Occurring Asbestos Map indicates the project site is located within an area identified as
having a potential for NOA to be present. Typically, projects that have the potential for NOA must either: 1). Submit
a NOA ATCM exemption along with a supporting geologic evaluation that confirms the project materials do not contain
NOA; or, 2). Assume that NOA could be present within the sediment and implement Mini Dust Control Measures (as
outlined in the Asbestos ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations Section
93105[e]) during project activities. Mitigation Measure AQ-3 requires the submittal of an NOA Construction and
1 Based on APCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook Table 2-2: Screening Emission Rates for Construction Operations
2 Based on APCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook Table 2-1: Thresholds of Significance for Construction Operations
3 Assuming 22 days of operation per month
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Grading Project Form, a Dust Control Measure Plan, and required fees. Therefore, potential NOA impacts associated
with project construction would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
AQ-1 At the time of building and/or grading permit submittal, the following idling control techniques shall be shown on all
applicable plans and implemented during all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of
the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles
with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It
applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said
vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted
in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system to power a heater, air conditioner, or any
ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5 minutes at
any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit.
The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following
website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/capp-resource-center/heavy-duty-diesel-vehicle-idling-information.
AQ-2 At the time of building and/or grading permit submittal, the following particulate matter control measures shall
be shown on all applicable plans and implemented during all construction and ground-disturbing activities:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site
and from exceeding the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District’s limit of 20 percent opacity for greater
than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds
exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible. When drought
conditions exist and water use is a concern, the contractor or builder should consider use of a dust suppressant
that is effective for the specific site conditions to reduce the amount of water used for dust control. Please refer
to the following link from the San Joaquin Valley Air District for a list of potential
dust suppressants:
http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/PM10/Products%20Available%20for%20Controlling%20PM10%20E
mi ssions.htm.
3. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed.
4. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible, and building
pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding, soil binders or other dust controls are used.
5. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet
of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) or otherwise comply with
California Vehicle Code Section 23114.
6. “Track-Out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor
vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as described in
California Vehicle Code Section 23113 and California Water Code 13304. To prevent ‘track out’, designate
access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install and operate a ‘track-out
prevention device’ where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The ‘track-out prevention
device’ can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at preventing track out, located at the
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
point of intersection of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices need periodic
cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked out soils, the track-out prevention device may
need to be modified.
7. All fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans.
8. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust
emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures as necessary
to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control
District’s limit of 20 percent opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall
include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could
be generated on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the San
Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or
demolition (Contact the Compliance Division at 805-781-5912).
9. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be
implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
10. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall be sown
with a fast-germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
11. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical binders, jute
netting, or other methods approved in advance by the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District.
12. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 miles per hour on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
13. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers
shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible.
14. Take additional measures as needed to ensure dust from the project site is not impacting areas outside the project
boundary.
AQ-3 Prior to the commencement of construction and grading activities, the City Public Utilities Department shall submit
the NOA Construction and Grading Project Form and a Mini Dust Control Measure Plan (as outlined in the Asbestos
ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations Section 93105.e.A-F), and the
associated fees to the SLOAPCD for review and approval.
Conclusion
Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3 have been identified to address potential impacts associated with the project and
sensitive receptors’ exposure to air pollutants. Upon implementation of these measures, residual impacts associated with air
quality would be less than significant with mitigation.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
3, 14,
15 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
3, 14,
15 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
3, 14,
15 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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?
14, 15,
16, 17 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
3, 14,
15 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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?
14 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The following section is primarily based on the Biological Survey Results Memorandum for the Proposed Whale Rock Reservoir
Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project, prepared for the City by Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC, in June
2022 (included as Attachment 1). For the biological survey, a reconnaissance-level biological constraints report (BCR) and
jurisdictional delineation were performed to determine the expected level and extent of environmental effects of the project on
biological resources. The survey area included the entire proposed project area, and an approximate 100-foot buffer, where access
was feasible.
Jurisdictional Waters. The project is located within the Cayucos USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. Topography at the
base of the of the Whale Rock Reservoir’s dam consists of two relatively flat terraces to the east and west of the spillway, with
elevations ranging from 9 to 18 meters (30 to 60 feet). As it currently exists, the concrete spillway conveys water from controlled
dam releases when the reservoir has reached its capacity, as well as local precipitation which directly enters the channel, into a
rip-rap lined energy dissipation basin. The spillway and rip-rap basin are an extension of Old Creek, a USGS blue line drainage.
Vegetation within the spillway, where present, is dominated by dense patches of common tule (Schoenoplectus acutus var.
occidentalis). The majority of the project site’s upland area consists of ruderal grassland habitat that is regularly mowed and
tilled.
Old Creek is a USGS blue line drainage that historically flowed into traditionally navigable waters (i.e., Pacific Ocean) from its
headwaters in the Santa Lucia Mountains, northeast of the proposed project site. The Whale Rock Reservoir was formed by
construction of the Whale Rock Dam in 1961 which impounded Old Creek, approximately 0.95-mile upstream from its outlet to
the Pacific Ocean. During the field surveys, standing water was observed within the stilling basin and its outlet, the rip-rap energy
dissipator. The jurisdictional limits within the stilling basin are defined b y the vertical concrete channel walls. The natural channel
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
bottom of Old Creek, downstream of the constructed features, is higher in elevation and was dry at the time of the surveys. At
this location, the dense patch of common tule transitions into an arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) thicket within the channel.
Connectivity between the stilling basin and the waters of Old Creek occurs during water releases from the reservoir. It was
determined that the waters within the proposed project site would likely be considered waters of the U.S. and waters of the State
under the jurisdiction of CDFW, RWQCB, and the USACE.
In addition to evidence of waters, portions of the stilling basin and energy dissipator channel bottom support a dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation, indicating presence of a potential in-channel wetland. Due to the design of the constructed features on
site, water appears to pond at the constructed outlet and potentially flow underground through the rip-rap energy dissipator
structure. The dominant vegetation, common tule, observed in five patches within the channel feature, is considered a typical
wetland indicator. It was determined that due to the constructed nature of the concrete stilling basin and rip-rap outlet structure,
that hydric soils, a required parameter for federal wetlands, were not present. It was concluded that no federal wetlands are on
site; however, based on the single parameter criteria for state wetlands, portions of the areas mapped as state waters are also
considered state wetlands.
As part of the biological constraints report, desktop-level background review was conducted and included a review of the CDFW
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), maps of the project area, and other literature and online resources to identify
special-status plant and wildlife species that have been previously documented within the project region. An initial habitat
assessment field survey of the project site and daytime survey for special-status amphibians was conducted on August 26, 2021.
A nighttime survey for special-status amphibians was conducted on August 30, 2021. A field survey to conduct a jurisdictional
delineation and botanical and wildlife inventory was conducted on April 12, 2022, during the appropriate bloom period for
regionally occurring special-status plant species. Based on the habitat conditions of species known to occur in the region and
conditions observed at the project site, the BCR identified the following special-status plant species and special-status wildlife
species that have the potential to occur within the project site.
Special-Status Plants. During an appropriately timed 2022 botanical survey, no special-status plant species were observed on
the project site. According to the BCR, no other special-status plant species known to occur within the region are expected to
occur on-site due to the high degree of land manipulation and ongoing disturbance (i.e., frequent mowing) occurring within the
proposed project site.
Special-Status Wildlife. According to the BCR, no special-status wildlife species were detected during the 2021 or 2022 surveys;
however, there is potential to occur on-site, due to presence of suitable habitat, for the following special-status animal species
known to occur in the area:
California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii): This species is listed as federally threatened and is a CDFW State Species
of Special Concern (SSC). California red-legged frogs require permanent or semi-permanent bodies of water such as
lakes, streams, and ponds with plant cover for foraging and breeding. Reproduction occurs in aquatic habitat from late
November to early April. Egg masses are laid in the water following breeding, often on emergent vegetation. Following
metamorphosis, juvenile frogs may remain in the breeding ponds or disperse into uplands regardless of topography.
California red-legged frogs have been documented dispersing over two miles from aquatic habitat. Dispersing frogs
may seek refuge in small mammal burrows or soil fractures. The presence of aquatic habitat and dense wetland
vegetation provides suitable habitat for this species within and directly below the stilling basin. As such, this species
has potential to occur on site.
Southwestern pond turtle (Actinemys pallida): This species is a CDFW SSC. This species inhabits many types of
permanent and ephemeral aquatic habitats, including sloughs, rivers, ponds, lakes, vernal pools, and marshes, as well
as human-constructed water bodies such as irrigation ditches and impoundments that provide adequate basking sites
(e.g., logs, rocks, mats of floating vegetation, or open mud banks), emergent vegetation, and underwater refugia (e.g.,
rocks or submerged vegetation). The turtles also spend significant time on land, frequently moving between aquatic and
upland habitats to nest, aestivate, and overwinter. Nests are usually partially or completely concealed beneath soil, moss,
detritus, and leaf and needle litter and located within 165 feet of the water’s edge. Though, females have been observed
moving overland more than 1,300 feet to find suitable nesting sites. The presence of aquatic habitat and dense wetland
vegetation provides marginally suitable habitat for this species within and directly below the stilling basin. As such, this
species has potential to occur on site.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
South-Central California Coast Steelhead DPS (Oncorhynchus mykiss): This species is listed as federally threatened.
These fish live in the ocean as adults but migrate to freshwater streams or creeks that have cool flowing water, access
to the ocean, and available food sources for spawning. Adults in San Luis Obispo County enter freshwater systems for
spawning from December to March, depending on specific stream conditions. Specific habitat requirements for south-
central California coast steelhead vary by life stage. In general, the crucial requirements of steelhead habitat include
adequate substrate, water quality, water quantity, water temperature, water velocity, and cover from riparian vegetation.
This distinct population segment of steelhead tends to utilize perennial streams dominated by woody debris with
relatively stable water flows. Local biological knowledge supports the presence of steelhead in the waters of the Whale
Rock Reservoir and downstream in Old Creek. As such, there is a low potential for south-central California coast
steelhead to occur in the waters of the stilling basin.
Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi): This species is listed as federally endangered and is a CDFW SSC.
Tidewater goby generally inhabits cool, brackish water in lagoons, estuaries, marshes, and coastal streams that are
protected from the Pacific Ocean by sand bars. They preferentially occur in areas with nearby emergent vegetation with
salinities less than 10 parts per thousand. This species may occur in groups under a dozen or in large aggregations of
several hundred. Habitat with sandy bottom substrate is preferred to allow subsurface burrowing by males prior to mate
selection. Tidewater goby has an annual life cycle, with adults rarely exceeding two inches in length. Tidewater goby
has been locally extirpated from Old Creek since the 1980s, and there is a lack of regular connectivity between the
stilling basin and the Pacific Ocean. As such, tidewater goby is not expected to occur.
Migratory nesting birds: In addition to those species protected by the state or federal government, all native avian
species are protected by state and federal legislature, most notably the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the CDFW Fish
and Game code. Avian species can be expected to occur within the project area during all seasons and throughout
implementation of the proposed project. The potential to encounter and disrupt avian species is highest during their
nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31) when nests are likely to be active, and eggs and young are
present. The patches of common tule, arroyo willow thicket, and man-made structures within the survey area may
provide suitable habitat opportunities for a variety of common passerine and raptor species during the typical avian
nesting period. Raptors are particularly drawn to large trees and structures, and they are less tolerant of disturbances
than other species. As such, migratory and nesting birds have potential to occur on site.
Critical Habitat and Sensitive Communities. USFWS-designated critical habitat for California red-legged frog and NMFS-
designated critical habitat for south-central California coast steelhead occurs within the proposed project area. Critical habitat
designation supports the continued conservation of endangered species, but this designation only affects federal agency actions
or federally funded or permitted activities.
a) The project site consists of a concrete spillway and rip rap dissipation basin that are an extension of a USGS blue line
drainage as well as ruderal grassland that is regularly mowed and tilled. Based on the conditions of the project area, there
are four special-status wildlife species with potential to occur on site. The proposed project would cause temporary impacts
to the aquatic and upland ruderal habitats on the project site. Potential impacts to special-status plant and wildlife species
are discussed in detail below.
Special-Status Plants. During the appropriately timed botanical survey in 2022, no special-status plant species were detected
on site, and none are expected to occur as suitable habitat is not present on site due to human alteration of the landscape such
as mowing and tilling. As such, no impacts to special-status plants are expected to occur.
Special-Status Wildlife. No special-status wildlife species were detected during the 2021 or 2022 surveys; however, there
is potential for various wildlife species to occur on-site, due to presence of suitable habitat, as described below.
California red-legged frog. There is potential for this species to utilize the project area for breeding, foraging, or upland
habitat. Federally designated critical habitat for CRLF overlaps with the project site. The nearest CNDDB occurrence of this
species is approximately one mile southeast of the project site, documented in 1999. However, this species was not observed
during amphibian-focused field surveys, and bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeiana), a non-native predatory species that preys
on and often outcompetes CRLF, were observed.
Project construction could result in the injury or mortality of California red-legged frog (if present) during dewatering and
sediment removal. The potential need to capture and relocate this species could subject individual frogs to stresses (e.g.,
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
temporary removal from aquatic habitat, relocation to unfamiliar aquatic habitat) that could result in adverse effects. Injury
or mortality could also occur via accidental crushing by worker foot-traffic or construction equipment. However, the
potential for these impacts is anticipated to be low due to no observations of the species within the project area during
surveys. Mitigation measures BIO-4 through BIO-5 have been identified to reduce impacts to CRLF specifically by ensuring
there is no incidental take of this species and by requiring a preconstruction survey as well as monitoring for this species
during construction. With implementation of these measures and the other mitigation measures listed below, impacts to
CRLF are expected to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Southwestern pond turtle. There is potential for this species to utilize aquatic habitat present on the project site. The nearest
CNDDB occurrence of this species overlaps with the project site and was documented in 1989. However, this species was
not observed during the field surveys and has low potential to occur on site in the stilling basin.
Project construction could result in the injury or mortality of southwestern pond turtle (if present) during dewatering and
sediment removal. The potential need to capture and relocate this species could subject individual turtles to stresses (e.g.,
temporary removal from aquatic habitat, relocation to unfamiliar aquatic habitat) that could result in adverse effects. Injury
or mortality could also occur via accidental crushing by worker foot-traffic or construction equipment. However, the
potential for these impacts is anticipated to be low due to no observations of the species within the project area during
surveys. Mitigation measure BIO-3 has been identified to reduce impacts to southwestern pond turtle specifically by
requiring a preconstruction survey for this species as well as monitoring during construction activities for the proposed
project. With implementation of this measure and the other mitigation measures listed below, impacts to southwestern pond
turtle are expected to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
South-Central California Coast Steelhead DPS. There is potential for this species to utilize the aquatic habitat present
within the project area. Federally designated critical habitat for south-central California coast steelhead is present within the
project site. The nearest CNDDB occurrence of this species is approximately 2 miles southwest of the project site
documented in 1988. However, this species was not observed during field surveys and local biological knowledge suggests
there is low potential for this species to occur on site in the stilling basin.
In addition to avoidance and minimization measures related to jurisdictional features, which would avoid, minimize, and
mitigate for impacts to aquatic habitats, additional measures have been identified to further minimize potential project-
related impacts to south-central California coast steelhead, including conducting a worker environmental training program,
limiting work to occur within the seasonal minimum creek flow period, and use of fine mesh screening to prevent steelhead
and other aquatic species from entering the pump system during dewatering. These measures are detailed as mitigation
measures BIO-2, BIO-6, and BIO-7. Upon implementation of these measures and compliance with federal and state
policies, impacts to south-central California coast steelhead would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
Tidewater goby. There is potential for this species to utilize the aquatic habitat present within the project area. The nearest
CNDDB occurrence of this species overlaps with the project site and was documented in 2004. However, this species was
not observed field surveys and local biological knowledge suggests there is low potential for this species to occur on site in
the stilling basin.
In addition to avoidance and minimization measures related to jurisdictional features, which would avoid, minimize, and
mitigate for impacts to aquatic habitats, additional measures have been identified to further minimize potential project-
related impacts to tidewater goby, including conducting a worker environmental training program, limiting work to occur
within the seasonal minimum creek flow period, and use of fine mesh screening to prevent tidewater goby and other aquatic
species from entering the pump system. These measures are detailed as mitigation measures BIO-2, BIO-6, and BIO-7.
Upon implementation of these measures and compliance with federal and state policies, impacts to tidewater goby would be
reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Migratory nesting birds. The patches of common tule, arroyo willow thicket, and man-made structures within the survey
area may provide suitable habitat opportunities for a variety of common passerine and raptor species during the typical avian
nesting period (February 1 through August 31). Although no nesting bird species were observed during the biological
surveys, there is potential for species to occur. Mitigation measure BIO-8 has been identified to protect migratory nesting
birds with requirement of a preconstruction survey and implementation of non-disturbance buffers if nesting birds should
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
be observed. Upon implementation of these measures, impacts to migratory nesting bird species would be reduced to less
than significant with mitigation incorporated.
b) Jurisdictional Waters. The project would result in approximately 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to
waters of the state, including 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to waters for the U.S. Specifically,
temporary impacts are expected as a result of dewatering and excavating accumulated sediment and vegetation. No
permanent impacts are proposed. As such, impacts to the spillway would require permits from CDFW, Central Coast
RWQCB, and the USACE. Mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-10 have been identified to protect jurisdictional water
features within the project area. These measures include, but are not limited to, the development of a Spill Contingency Plan
for the project and the implementation of storing vehicles and equipment away from the spillway and creek at the end of the
day to the maximum extent feasible. With the implementation of these mitigation measures along with the necessary permits
from the appropriate agencies, impacts to jurisdictional water features are expected to be less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
California Red-Legged Frog USFWS Critical Habitat. California red-legged frog critical habitat overlaps with the project
site. Implementation of the project would result in temporary impacts to this habitat as a result of construction activities,
including dewatering the stilling basin and sediment removal. Approximately 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary
impacts would occur to this critical habitat located within the stilling basin from dewatering and sediment removal.
Mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-10 have been identified to avoid or minimize impacts to jurisdictional water features
within the project area and would effectively reduce and compensate for impacts to CRLF critical habitat. Upon
implementation of these measures, impacts to CRLF critical habitat would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
South-Central California Coast Steelhead DPS USFWS Critical Habitat. South-central California coast steelhead DPS
critical habitat is present within the project site in the stilling basin, spill way, and waters of Old Creek below the project
site. Implementation of the project would result in temporary impacts to this aquatic habitat as a result of construction
activities, including dewatering the stilling basin and sediment removal. Loss of service in steelhead critical habitat, while
dewatering, would be an adverse effect to the primary functions of steelhead critical habitat, but only temporary in duration.
Approximately 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts would occur to this critical habitat located within the
stilling basin from dewatering and sediment removal. Mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-10 have been identified to avoid
or minimize impacts to jurisdictional water features within the project area and would effectively reduce and compensate
for impacts to steelhead critical habitat. Upon implementation of these measures, impacts to south-central California coast
steelhead critical habitat would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
c) A jurisdictional determination was conducted for the project and potential federal and state jurisdictional areas were
identified within the survey area based on historical aerial imagery and field observations of the OHWM and top of bank.
Due to the constructed nature of the concrete stilling basin and rip-rap outlet structure, it was determined that hydric soils, a
required parameter for federal wetlands, were not present. Because of the lack of hydric soils, it was concluded that no
federal wetlands are on site; however, based on the single parameter criteria for state wetlands, portions of the areas that
were mapped as state waters are also considered state wetlands. Dewatering and sediment removal of the proposed project
occurs partially within the identified state wetlands. Permits from CDFW and RWQCB will be required. Mitigation measures
BIO-2 and BIO-10 have been identified to protect jurisdictional water features within the project area. These measures
include, but are not limited to, the development of a Spill Contingency Plan for the project and the implementation of storing
vehicles and equipment away from the spillway and creek at the end of the day to the maximum extent feasible. With the
implementation of these mitigation measures along with the necessary permits from the appropriate agencies, impacts to
state wetlands are expected to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
d) Although a portion of the project site is considered NMFS designated south-central California coast steelhead critical habitat,
the stilling basin and spillway are man-made structures with inconsistent levels of water. These factors indicate that this
waterway would not serve as a suitable nursery for native or migratory fish. Proposed dewatering and sediment removal
activities could result in increased erosion and other pollutants that could run into downstream portions of Old Creek and
other waterways. Mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-10 has been included to minimize the potential for increased erosion
or other pollutants to run from the site and disturb downstream waterways and interfere with off-site areas that may provide
connectivity for wildlife movement.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
The project site is subject to frequent disturbance such as mowing and tilling and is adjacent to some rural development and
active agriculture. Further, the project site is within 0.25 mile of Highway 101. As a result, the project site does not provide
connectivity to other natural areas, and the implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with any terrestrial
wildlife movement or connectivity. With implementation of mitigation to minimize the potential to disturb wildlife
connectivity associated with off-site waterways, the project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
e) According to San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 12.08, projects must identity best management practices (BMPs)
for any project with potential to degrade, pollute, or contaminate storm water, the storm drain system, or waters of the U.S.
Mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-10 require implementation of BMPs, including sediment and erosion control to protect
aquatic resources present on site, including jurisdictional water features. As such, the project would be consistent with San
Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 12.08. Upon implementation of the identified mitigation measures, the project would
not result in a conflict with local policies or ordinances; therefore, the potential impacts associated with conflicts with local
policies would be less than significant with mitigation.
f) The project is not located within an area under an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the
provisions of an adopted plan and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 An environmental awareness training shall be presented to all construction personnel by a qualified biologist prior
to start of project activities. The training shall include color photographs and a description of the ecology of all
special-status species known or determined to have potential to occur, including but not limited to CRLF, south-
central California coast steelhead, and southwestern pond turtle, as well as other sensitive resources requiring
avoidance near project impact areas. The training shall also include a description of protection measures required by
any discretionary permits, an overview of the Endangered Species Act, implications of noncompliance with the
Endangered Species Act, and required avoidance and minimization measures.
BIO-2 The following measures shall be incorporated into the project to protect wetlands/waterways and special-status
species:
1. No refueling or maintenance of vehicles or equipment shall occur within 100 feet of the spillway/Old Creek.
2. Spill clean-up kits and secondary containment shall be made available and used to prevent spills or leaks from
entering the drainage.
3. Secondary containment such as drop pans shall be used to prevent leaks and spills of potential contaminants.
4. Washing of concrete, paint, or equipment, and refueling and maintenance of equipment shall occur only in
designated areas.
5. Sandbags and/or absorbent pads shall be available to clean up any spilled fuel, as needed.
6. Any chemicals used shall be prevented from entering the jurisdictional areas.
7. Construction equipment shall be inspected by the operator daily to ensure that equipment is in good working
order and no fuel or lubricant leaks are present.
8. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material will not be used on site due to the
potential to entangle special-status wildlife. Acceptable substitutes are coconut coir matting, biodegradable
fiber rolls, or tackified hydroseeding compounds.
9. During project activities, all trash that may attract predators or scavengers shall be properly contained, removed
from the work site, and disposed of at the end of each work week. Following construction, all trash and debris
shall be removed from work areas.
BIO-3 The following protection measures will be incorporated into the project to protect southwestern pond turtle during
project operations:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 23 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
1. A qualified biologist shall complete a pre-construction survey for southwestern pond turtle within 48 hours
prior to the start of all work within 100 feet of suitable habitat. Surveys shall include an inspection of all work
areas, staging areas, and access routes. Further, daily site inspections shall be completed each morning prior to
the start of work within all work areas, throughout the dewatering and sediment removal phases. All vehicles,
equipment, and materials staged on site overnight shall be inspected during pre-activity surveys and daily site
inspections.
2. A qualified biologist shall monitor all initial equipment mobilization and staging activities within 100 feet of
the creek. If southwestern pond turtles are discovered in the work areas, they shall be allowed to leave the area
on their own volition or be relocated by a qualified biologist with appropriate authorization from CDFW to pre-
determined suitable habitat areas located outside the immediate impact area.
BIO-4 The following protection measures will be incorporated into the project to protect California red-legged frog during
project operations:
1. To avoid the potential for take of CRLF that may disperse through the project area during the project, all initial
project activities associated with the dewatering and sediment removal will be completed in the dry season
(between April 15 and October 31) or when conditions are dry. During rain events or any day for which the
National Weather Service has predicted a 25% or more chance of at least 0.1 inch rain in 24 hours (Predicted
Rain Event) construction activities below top of creek banks or in other waters of the State may resume after
the rain has ceased, the National Weather Service predicts clear weather for at least 24 hours, and site conditions
are dry enough to continue work without discharge of sediment or other pollutants from the project site.
2. During temporary dewatering activities, the intake screen will consist of wire mesh not larger than 0.20-inch to
prevent any CRLF from entering the pump system.
3. If exotic species known such as bullfrogs, crayfish, or centrarchid fishes are observed in the project area, a
USFWS-approved biologist shall permanently remove these individuals from the project area to extent possible.
4. To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the USFWS-approved biologist, the following
fieldwork practices will be implemented:
a. Mud, snails, algae, and other debris shall be removed from nets, traps, boots, vehicle tires, and all other
surfaces. Items will be rinsed cleaned with sterilized (e.g., boiled or treated) water before leaving each
work site or prior to equipment being used again.
b. Boots, nets, traps, and other types of equipment used in the aquatic environment shall be scrubbed with 70
percent ethanol solution and rinsed clean with sterilized water (e.g., boiled or treated) between sites.
BIO-5 The following measures shall be implemented immediately prior to and during dewatering and sediment removal
activities within the project site for CRLF until completion:
1. A qualified biologist will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before the onset of work activities. If
the biologist finds any life stage of the CRLF which are likely to be killed or injured by work activities, the
biologist will be allowed sufficient time to move them from the site before work begins, assuming authorization
from USFWS has been granted. The biologist will relocate the CRLFs to a pre-designated relocation site within
the same drainage that contains suitable habitat and that will not be affected by activities associated with the
proposed project.
2. A qualified biologist will be present at the work site during all initial equipment mobilization and staging
activities and until all CRLFs have been relocated out of harm’s way and disturbance of suitable habitat areas
has been completed. After this time, the biologist will designate a person to monitor on-site compliance with
all minimization measures. The biologist will ensure that this monitor receives the training outlined in BIO-1
and in the identification of CRLFs. If the designated CRLF monitor or the biologist recommends that work be
stopped because CRLFs would be affected in a manner not anticipated during initial project review, they will
notify the City immediately. The City will either resolve the situation by eliminating the adverse effect
immediately or require that all actions causing these effects be halted. If the City halts work, the USFWS will
be notified for further consultation.
3. The biological monitor will inspect the project site each morning prior to the onset of activities. The biologist
will relocate any CRLF found to the pre-designated relocation area.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 24 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
BIO-6 The following measures shall be incorporated as a part of the project to further protect fish and other aquatic wildlife
on site:
1. Prior to capture and relocation activities, the relevant regulator/resource agency shall be notified to allow for
an opportunity to provide watershed specific guidance.
2. In-stream work, including dewatering activities, shall take place between April 15 and October 31 in any given
year, when the surface water is likely to be at seasonal minimum. Deviations from this work window will only
be made with permission from the relevant regulatory/resource agencies.
3. During in-stream work, if pumps are incorporated to assist in temporarily dewatering the site, intakes shall be
completely screened with no larger than 0.2-inch wire mesh to prevent steelhead and other sensitive aquatic
species from entering the pump system. Pumps shall release the additional water to a settling area, basin, or
tank, allowing the suspended sediment to settle out prior to re-entering the stream(s) outside of the isolated
area. The form and function of all pumps used during the dewatering activities shall be checked daily, to ensure
a dry work environment and minimize adverse effects to aquatic species and habitats.
BIO-7 The following measures shall be implemented immediately prior to and during all project work area dewatering
activities to further protect steelhead and other aquatic wildlife on site:
1. A qualified biologist(s) shall identify and evaluate the suitability of downstream and/or upstream steelhead
relocation habitat(s) prior to undertaking the dewatering activities that are required to isolate the work area from
standing/flowing water. This shall include an evaluation of potential relocation sites based on attributes such as
adequate water quality (a minimum dissolved oxygen level of 5 mg/L and suitable water temperature), cover
(instream and over-hanging vegetation or woody debris) and living space. Multiple relocation habitats may be
necessary to prevent overcrowding of a single habitat depending on the number of steelhead captured, current
number of steelhead already occupying the relocation habitat(s), and the size of the receiving habitat(s).
2. Prior to dewatering, block nets shall be installed immediately downstream of the proposed work area. The
purpose will be to exclude fish from reentering the work area by blocking the stream channel below with fine
meshed nets or screens. Mesh will be no greater than 1/8-inch diameter. The bottom of the seine must be
completely secured to the channel bed to prevent fish from reentering the work area. Exclusion screening must
be placed in areas of low water velocity to minimize fish impingement. Block nets shall be placed and
maintained throughout the construction period at the lower extent of the areas where fish will be removed.
Block net mesh shall be sized to ensure steelhead upstream or downstream do not enter the areas proposed for
dewatering between passes with the electrofisher (if authorized) or seine.
3. The qualified biologist(s) shall lead all block netting, seining, electrofishing, and fish relocation activities
including the capture and relocation of steelhead prior to installation of block nets. This shall include the
documentation of the number of steelhead observed in the affected area, the number of steelhead relocated, and
the date and time of collection and relocation. The following requirements for capture and transport of steelhead
shall be adhered to during all operations:
a. Determine the most efficient means for capturing fish. Complex stream habitat generally requires the use
of electrofishing equipment, whereas in outlet pools, fish may be concentrated by pumping down the pool
and then seining or dip-netting fish.
b. Initial fish relocation efforts will be conducted several days prior to the start of construction. This will
provide the biologist(s) an opportunity to return to the work area and perform additional electrofishing
passes immediately prior to project implementation. In many instances, additional fish will be captured
that eluded the previous day’s efforts.
c. If the project site has high summer water temperatures, perform relocation activities during morning
periods.
d. Periodically measure air and water temperatures and monitor fish health. Temperatures will be measured
at the head of riffle tail of pool interface. Cease activities if health of fish is compromised owing to high
water temperatures, or if mortality exceeds three percent of captured steelhead.
4. The following methods shall be used if fish are removed with seines:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 25 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
a. A minimum of three passes with the seine shall be utilized to ensure maximum capture probability of
steelhead within the area.
b. All captured fish shall be processed and released prior to each subsequent pass with the seine.
c. The seine mesh shall be adequately sized to ensure fish are not gilled during capture and relocation
activities.
5. If standard fish capture methods are deemed ineffective due to environmental conditions, electrofishing shall
only be used following the methods listed below (assuming authorization):
a. All electrofishing will be conducted according to NMFS’ Guidelines for Electrofishing Waters Containing
Salmonids Listed Under the Endangered Species Act, including modifications for South Central and
Southern California streams including all voltage settings on the electrofisher which shall not exceed 300
volts.
b. A minimum of three passes with the electrofisher shall be utilized to ensure maximum capture probability
of steelhead within the area proposed for dewatering.
c. Water temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity shall be recorded in an electrofishing logbook,
along with electrofishing settings.
d. A minimum of one assistant shall aid the NMFS/USFWS approved biologist(s) by netting stunned fish and
other aquatic vertebrates.
6. Steelhead relocation activities will be consistent with the measures presented below, which are excerpted from
Measures to Minimize Impacts to Aquatic Habitat and Species During Dewatering of Project Sites, on pages
IX-51 and IX-52 of the CDFW California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual:
a. All project site dewatering activities shall be coordinated with the qualified biologist and/or other biologists
qualified to perform fish and amphibian (i.e., CRLF) relocation activities.
b. Minimize the length of the dewatered stream channel and duration of dewatering.
c. The work area may often be periodically pumped dry of seepage. Place pumps in flat areas, well away from
the stream channel. Secure pumps by tying off to a tree or stake in place to prevent movement by vibration.
Refuel in an area well away from the stream channel and place fuel absorbent mats under pump while
refueling. Pump intakes should be covered with 1/8-inch wire mesh to prevent entrainment of fish or
amphibians that failed to be removed. Check intake periodically for impingement of fish or amphibians.
7. In order to minimize injury or mortality of steelhead during fish relocation and dewatering activities, additional
measures are presented below consistent with the Measures to Minimize Injury and Mortality of Fish and
Amphibian Species During Dewatering, on pages IX-52 and IX-53 of the CDFW California Salmonid Stream
Habitat Restoration Manual:
a. Fish relocation activities will be led by the qualified biologist(s) who has experience in steelhead biology
and ecology, aquatic habitats, biological monitoring (including diversion/dewatering), and capturing,
handling, and relocating fish species.
b. The qualified biologist(s) will continuously monitor placement and removal of any required block nets and
will capture stranded steelhead and other native fish species and relocate them to suitable habitat, as 14
appropriate. The biologist(s) will capture steelhead stranded as a result of dewatering and relocate them to
the nearest suitable instream habitat. The biologist(s) will note the number of steelhead observed in the
affected area, the number relocated, and the date and time of the collection and relocation.
c. Minimize handling of salmonids. However, when handling is necessary, always wet hands or nets prior to
touching fish.
d. Discharge wastewater from project area to an upland location where it will not drain sediment-laden water
back to the stream channel. When the project is completed, the block nets shall be removed as soon as
possible in a manner that will allow flow to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 26 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
e. Fish shall not be overcrowded into buckets, allowing no more than 150 0+ fish (approximately six cubic
inches per 0+ individuals) per 5-gallon bucket and fewer individuals per bucket for larger/older fish.
f. Every effort shall be made not to mix 0+ steelhead with larger steelhead, or other potential predators, that
may consume the smaller steelhead. Have at least two containers and segregate young-of-year (0+) fish
from larger age-classes. Place larger amphibians in the container with larger fish.
g. Salmonid predators, including other fishes and amphibians, collected and relocated during electrofishing
or seining activities shall not be relocated so as to concentrate them in one area. Emphasis shall be placed
on avoiding relocation of predators into the steelhead relocation pools. To minimize predation of steelhead,
these species shall be distributed throughout the wetted portion of the stream to avoid concentrating them
in one area.
h. All captured steelhead shall be relocated, preferably upstream, of the proposed construction project and
placed in suitable habitat. All captured fish shall be placed into a pool, preferably with a depth of greater
than two feet with available instream cover.
8. NMFS shall be contacted immediately if one or more steelheads are found dead or injured. The purpose of the
contact shall be to review the activities resulting in take and to determine if additional protective measures are
required. All steelhead mortalities shall be retained, frozen as soon as practical, and placed in an appropriate
sized sealable bag that is labeled with the date and location of the collection and fork length and weight of the
specimen(s). Frozen 15 samples shall be retained by the biologist until additional instructions are provided by
NMFS.
BIO-8 If work is planned to occur between February 1 and August 31, a qualified biologist shall survey the area for nesting
birds within one week prior to activity beginning on site. If nesting birds are located on or near the proposed project
site, they shall be avoided until they have successfully fledged, or the nest is no longer deemed active. A non-
disturbance buffer of 50 feet will be placed around non-listed, passerine species, and a 250-foot buffer will be
implemented for all raptor species. All activity will remain outside of the buffer until a qualified biologist has
determined that the nest is no longer active (e.g., young have fledged, nest failed, etc.) or that proposed construction
activities would not cause adverse impacts to the nest, adults, eggs, or young. If any active nests of listed, fully
protected, or otherwise special-status species are detected during the surveys, the appropriate wildlife protection
agency shall be contacted for guidance on how to proceed. No work would occur within the specified no-work
buffers unless previously coordinated with CDFW prior to initiation.
BIO-9 Prior to project initiation, all applicable agency permits with jurisdiction over the project area (i.e., USACE, CDFW,
and RWQCB) should be obtained, as necessary. All additional mitigation measures required by these agencies would
be implemented as necessary throughout project activities.
BIO-10 The following measures are provided to further protect drainage features and aquatic resources on site:
1. The limits of jurisdictional aquatic features shall be clearly shown on all site plans. Further, temporary
construction activities including access routes and staging areas shall be reduced to the smallest area required.
2. All equipment and materials shall be stored away from the edge of the spillway/creek to the maximum extent
feasible at the end of each working day.
3. Prior to project implementation, a Spill Contingency Plan shall be developed which outlines the procedures for
prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of
preventing spills and of the appropriate measures should a spill occur.
4. All staged and stored equipment shall have secondary containment (i.e., drip pans) to prevent leaks and spills
of potential contaminants from entering the creek.
5. Washing of concrete, paint, or equipment, and refueling and maintenance of equipment shall occur only in
designated areas with appropriate containment 16 (i.e., visqueen, temporary L-bracket berms). Sandbags and/or
absorbent pads shall be available to prevent water and/or spilled fuel from leaving the site.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 27 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Conclusion
No special-status botanical or wildlife species were detected during surveys of the project area. However, it was determined that
low suitable habitat exists for four special-status wildlife species as well as nesting birds within the project area. NOAA/NMFS
and USFWS-designated critical habitat for south-central California coast steelhead DPS and California red-legged frog are
present within the project area. The waters within the stilling basin were determined to be under the jurisdiction of CDFW,
RWQCB, and the USACE. The dewatering and inspection project is confined to the constructed concrete spillway basin. Based
on the current project description, implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-10 will avoid and/or minimize
impacts to potentially occurring special-status species and sensitive resources to a less than significant impact with mitigation.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 28 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource pursuant to §15064.5?
5, 14,
18 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
5, 14,
18 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
5, 14,
18 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
Consideration of cultural resources under CEQA (Section 15064.5) includes evaluation of project impacts on resources listed in
or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. This can include, among other things, historical buildings,
structures, and sites, and archaeological resources.
The project is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, the northernmost of the Chumash people
of California. The Obispeño Chumash occupied much of San Luis Obispo County, and the earliest evidence of human occupation
in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. The City’s Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE)
establishes various goals and policies to balance cultural and historical resource preservation with other community goals. The
project site is not located in an Archaeologically Sensitive combining designation (as identified by the County); however, the
project is in an area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash and archaeological resources are known to exist in the
region.
The Whale Rock dam was designed and constructed by the State Department of Water Resources beginning in October 1958
and completed in April 1961 to provide water to the City of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly State University and California Men’s
Colony (these three groups make up the Whale Rock Commission). The City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department maintains
13 miles of fence line, 1,400 acres of open space, dam structure and monitoring instrumentation, two pumping stations, and 18
miles of pipeline. The proposed project is a continuation of existing practices and activities performed by the City per the
direction of the Whale Rock Commission. The intent of the project is to allow for inspection of the integrity of the spillway basin
below Whale Rock Reservoir as required by the California Division of Safety of Dams. No modifications are proposed to the
spillway structure and no new ground disturbance is proposed; sediment will only be removed from within the concrete spillway
structure and spread on the surface of two previously disturbed locations. As a result, a Phase I Archaeological Survey or record
search is not required.
a) The intent of the project is to allow for inspection of the integrity of the spillway basin below Whale Rock Reservoir as
required by the California Division of Safety of Dams. No modifications are proposed to the spillway structure and no
new ground disturbance is proposed. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historic resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 and no impacts would occur.
b) No significant archaeological resources are known to exist within the project area; therefore, the project would not cause
a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. However, there would be some potential
for inadvertent discovery of unknown archaeological resources during sediment removal activities. Mitigation measures
CR-1 and CR-2 have been included to address inadvertent discovery during project construction to ensure potential
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) No human remains are known to exist within the project site; however, the discovery of unknown human remains is
possible during sediment removal activities. Protocol for properly responding to the inadvertent discovery of human
remains is identified in the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and would be required to be printed on
all construction plans per mitigation measure CR-3. Potential impacts related to disturbance of human remains would
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 29 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
be less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measure CR-3. Therefore, potential impacts related to
disturbance of human remains would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
CR-1 Prior to initiation of project activities, a City-qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural resource awareness training
for all construction personnel including the following:
1. Review the types of archaeological artifacts that may be uncovered;
2. Provide examples of common archaeological artifacts to examine;
3. Review what makes an archaeological resource significant to archaeologists and local Native Americans;
4. Describe procedures for notifying involved or interested parties in case of a new discovery;
5. Describe reporting requirements and responsibilities of construction personnel;
6. Review procedures that shall be used to record, evaluate, and mitigate new discoveries; and
7. Describe procedures that would be followed in the case of discovery of disturbed as well as intact human burials
and burial-associated artifacts.
CR-2 The following measure shall be shown on all applicable plans and implemented if cultural resources are encountered
during all construction activities:
If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all ground-disturbing activities within a
25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a City-
qualified archaeologist assesses the find and determines the need for further study. If the find includes Native
American-affiliated materials, a local Native American tribal representative will be contacted to work in conjunction
with the City-approved archaeologist to determine the need for further study. A standard inadvertent discovery clause
shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously
unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and
Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified archaeologist.
If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a
research design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American
representative(s) as necessary, that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The
archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the
Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the
permanent curation of the recovered materials.
CR-3 The following measure shall be shown on all applicable plans and implemented if human remains are exposed during
construction and ground-disturbing activities:
In the event that human remains are exposed during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an
immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director and locally affiliated
Native American representative(s) (as necessary) shall be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human
remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to
PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the
Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours.
Conclusion
No archaeological or historic resources are known or expected to occur within the project site. However, mitigation measures
CR-1 through CR-3 have been identified in the event that archaeological resources or human remains are unearthed during
ground-disturbing activities; therefore, potential impacts on cultural resources would be less than significant impact with
mitigation.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 30 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
6. ENERGY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation?
19, 20 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
14, 19,
20 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The City COSE establishes goals and policies to achieve energy conservation and increase use of cleaner, renewable, and locally
controlled energy sources. These goals include increasing the use of sustainable energy sources and reducing reliance on non-
sustainable energy sources to the extent possible and encouraging the provision for and protection of solar access. Policies
identified to achieve these goals include, but are not limited to, use of best available practices in energy conservation,
procurement, use, and production; energy-efficiency improvements; pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly facility design; fostering
alternative transportation modes; compact, high-density housing; and solar access standards.
The City Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery also identifies strategies and policies to increase use of cleaner and
renewable energy resources in order to achieve the City’s GHG emissions reduction target. These strategies include promoting
a wide range of renewable energy financing options, incentivizing renewable energy generation in new and existing
developments, and increasing community awareness of renewable energy programs.
a) The project would remove sediment from an existing stilling basin to allow for inspection of Whale Rock Dam. There
would be no change in capacity or modifications to dam operations, so there would be no energy consumption impacts
relevant to project operation. During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction
vehicles and equipment. The energy consumed during construction would be short term and would not represent a
significant or wasteful demand on available resources. Therefore, the project would not result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and impacts would
be less than significant.
b) The project does not propose any new buildings or uses that would generate significant long-term operational energy
demands. The project would not conflict with other goals and policies set forth in the COSE or Climate Action Plan
associated with renewable energy or energy efficiency; therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
The project would not result in significant effects on energy resources. The air quality impact assessment for the project,
described in the Air Quality section above, addresses construction-related consumption of fossil fuels from the perspective of
corresponding air emissions, and recommends project-specific mitigation measures that may avoid wasteful or unnecessary fuel
consumption. No additional mitigation measures are required.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 31 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
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.
20, 21,
22, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 20, 21,
22, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 20, 21,
22, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? 5, 20, 21,
22, 23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
5, 20, 21,
24, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the
California Building Code (2013), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
20, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
n/a ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature? 5, 26 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The project site is located in the vicinity of the San Luis Range of the Coast Range Geomorphic Province of California. The
Coast Ranges lie between the Pacific Ocean and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley and trend northwesterly along the California
Coast for approximately 600 miles between Santa Maria and the Oregon border. Regionally, the Site is located on the Cambrian
Slab, which is composed of a large, thick block of Cretaceous age sediments that are surrounded by Franciscan Complex rocks.
The Cambrian Slab extends from the Los Osos fault approximately 8 miles south of the project site and northward to San Simeon
Creek, approximately 18 miles to the northwest.
Seismic Hazards. The project site is not in the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone and there are no known active faults in the vicinity.
The Department of Conservation Fault Activity Map of California identifies a potentially capable fault approximately 1.3 miles
south of the project site and a second potentially capable fault located approximately 3.3 miles east of the project site.
Seismic-related Ground Failure. Settlement is defined as the condition in which a portion of the ground supporting part of a
structure or facility lowers more than the rest or becomes softer, usually because ground shaking reduces the voids between soil
particles, often with groundwater rising in the process. Liquefaction is the sudden loss of the soil’s supporting strength due to
groundwater filling and lubricating the spaces between soil particles as a result of ground shaking. Soils with high risk for
liquefaction are typically sandy and in creek floodplains or close to lakes. In extreme cases of liquefaction, structures can tilt,
break apart, or sink into the ground. The likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake.
Based on the Liquefaction Hazards Map in the County of San Luis Obispo Safety Element, the project site is located within areas
of moderate and low liquefaction potential.
Slope Instability and Landslides. Slope instability can occur as a gradual spreading of soil, a relatively sudden slippage, a
rockfall, or in other forms. Causes include steep slopes, inherently weak soils, saturated soils, and earthquakes. Improper grading
and human-made drainage can be contributing factors. Much of the development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 32 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
is low potential for slope instability. Based on the Landslide Hazards Map in the County of San Luis Obispo Safety Element, the
project site is located within areas of high landslide potential; however, topography at the base of the of the Whale Rock
Reservoir’s dam consists of two relatively flat terraces to the east and west of the spillway, with elevations ranging from 9 to 18
meters (30 to 60 feet).
Subsidence. Land subsidence is a gradual settling or sudden sinking of the Earth’s surface due to subsurface movement of earth
materials. Primary causes are groundwater withdrawal, in which water is removed from pore space as the water table drops,
causing the ground surface to settle; tectonic subsidence, where the ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic
factors such as faulting or folding; and earthquake-induced shaking that causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lead to
ground-surface subsidence. Based on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Areas of Land Subsidence in California map, the
project site is not located in an area of known subsidence.
Soil Limiting Factors. The project site is underlain by three soil units, as described below based on the San Luis Obispo County
Soil Survey:
Cropley clay (0 to 2 percent slopes). This very deep, moderately well-drained, nearly level soil has slow permeability
and high available water capacity. Surface runoff is low, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. This soil has high
shrink-swell potential.
Obispo-Rock outcrop complex (15 to 75 percent slopes). This moderately steep to very steep soil and Rock outcrop is
about 50 percent Obispo soil and 30 percent Rock outcrop; included in this complex are a few small areas of Diablo
clay, which is commonly in swales, and Henneke clay loam. The Obispo soil is shallow and well-drained with slow
permeability and very low or low water capacity. The Rock outcrop is exposed, hard serpentine at or near the soil
surface.
Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex (0 to 15 percent slopes). This complex consists of nearly level to strongly sloping
soils and miscellaneous areas that are covered by urban structures. The soil materials have been modified by
earthmoving equipment or covered by urban structures so that much of their original shape and physical characteristics
have been altered. The Xererts of this complex are Cropley or Diablo soils that shrink and swell appreciably in moisture
content.
a.i) Implementation of the proposed project would 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 project would
not support onsite workers or residents. Furthermore, the intent of the project is to allow for inspection of the Whale
Rock Dam for seismic integrity. For these reasons, there will be less than significant impacts related to seismic activity.
a.ii) Ground shaking is primarily a function of the distance between a particular area and the seismic source, the type of
materials underlying the site and the motion of fault displacement. The number or frequency of large magnitude
earthquakes that may occur during the life of the project cannot be predicted reliably. The potential hazards or adverse
effects of ground shaking depend on several factors that include the severity of ground shaking; the nature, depth, and
extent of the seismic event; the type of structures involved; and the local topography. No active faults that could produce
strong ground shaking are located within the project area; however, the entire county is potentially subject to seismic
activity. Mitigation of ground shaking 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 are incorporated into new design provisions as needed. The project is temporary in nature
and does not include the development of any structures that would be vulnerable to seismic ground shaking; therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
a.iii) Soil liquefaction is a secondary effect associated with seismic loading. It can occur when saturated, loose to semi-
compact, granular soils, or specifically defined cohesive soils, are subjected to ground shaking sufficient to increase
pore pressure to trigger liquefaction. In general, liquefaction hazard is most severe within the upper 50 feet of the ground
surface. The project site is mapped in areas of low and moderate liquefaction potential. The project is temporary in
nature, does not include the development of any structures on soils with low or moderate liquefaction potential, and
would therefore have a less than significant impact related to seismic-related ground failure.
a.iv) Landslides are the downslope motions of conglomerations of earth materials, bedrock, or combinations of both. The
chance of a landslide occurring are increased by increases in slope gradient, looseness of material, clay content of the
bedrock, underground springs, unfavorable slope orientation with existing fault boundaries, human disturbance of the
landslide, increases in water content, earthquake forces to help mobilize the mass, and disturbance of the lateral
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 33 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
confining forces. The project site is mapped within areas of high landslide potential; however, the sediment removal
and upland spreading areas are relatively flat and are not considered at risk from landslides. The project is not expected
to increase or exacerbate the risk of potential landslide and would have a less than significant impact.
b) Dewatering, sediment removal, and upland discharge/spreading required for the project could result in temporary soil
erosion, sedimentation, and/or stormwater runoff. No substantial changes in the existing site topography would occur
and temporary sediment catchments and dissipation devices, such as straw bales and plastic sheeting, will be used to
slow down and settle turbid water before it is allowed to run overland. Additional devices (e.g., sandbags, silt fence,
straw wattle, straw bales) will be implemented as needed to ensure no erosion or sedimentation occurs to the creek
below. Sediments or vegetation removed from the channel will be spread locally above the spillway and in areas where
the materials will not wash back into the spillway or downstream to Old Creek. Construction in jurisdictional areas will
be conducted outside of the normal rainy season, thus minimizing potential erosion and adverse water quality impacts
to Old Creek. The project would not require excessive grading and is not going to result in significant geologic impacts
related to erosion or displacement/loss of topsoil and would therefore result in a less than significant impact.
c) Based on the County of San Luis Obispo Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with low to moderate
liquefaction potential. Based on the USGS Areas of Land Subsidence in California Map, the project is not located in an
area of current or historical land subsidence. The project site is mapped within areas of high landslide potential;
however, the sediment removal and upland spreading areas are relatively flat and are not considered at risk from
landslides. The project is temporary in nature and does not include the development of any structures or ground-
disturbing activities on unstable soils. Therefore, potential impacts related to on- or off-site landslides, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse would be less than significant.
d) Based on the Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County and Web Soil Survey, the project site contains Cropley Clay (0 to
2 percent slopes), Obispo-Rock outcrop complex (15 to 75 percent slopes), and Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex (0
to 15 percent slopes). Typically, soils that consist of clay or clay materials have a higher shrink-swell potential than
soils without clay or clay materials. Soils at the project site are composed of clay and clay materials. The project is
temporary in nature, does not include the development of any structures or ground-disturbing activities on expansive
soils. Therefore, potential impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant.
e) The use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are not proposed for the project and therefore would
have no impact.
f) The project site is underlain by Quaternary Alluvium (Qa), which has a low paleontological sensitivity. There are no
known fossils or other paleontological resources in the project area. Further, the project would not require excavation
into steep slopes or disturbance of bedrock that may result in the discovery of unknown fossils at the project site. In the
event an unknown paleontological resource is identified on-site, the project would be required to comply with PRC
Section 5097.5, which prohibits the removal or disturbance of paleontological resources without permission of the
jurisdictional agency. In addition, implementation of mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2 included in Section 5,
Cultural Resources, would avoid or minimize the potential to disturb previously unidentified paleontological resources
through identification of the proper protocol to be implemented in the event of inadvertent discovery of resources. Based
on the low paleontological sensitivity of the project site, required compliance with the PRC, and implementation of
mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2, the project is not anticipated to result in the disturbance of known or unknown
paleontological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Conclusion
The project site is not located within a known fault zone or area of land subsidence. The project site is mapped within areas of
high landslide potential; however, the sediment removal and upland spreading areas are relatively flat and are not considered at
risk from landslides. The project would incorporate standard BMPs and mitigation measures to reduce the potential for erosion,
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 34 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
sedimentation, and siltation; therefore, with implementation of identified mitigation, potential impacts related to geology and
soils would be less than significant with mitigation.
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment?
19, 27,
28, 29,
30, 31
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
19, 27,
28, 29,
30, 31
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
GHGs are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere and are different from the criteria pollutants discussed in
Section 3, Air Quality. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. The City of San Luis Obispo 2005 Community Wide GHG
Emissions Inventory showed that 50 percent of the city’s GHG emissions came from transportation, 22 percent came from
commercial and industrial uses, 21 percent came from residential uses, and 7 percent from waste.
A number of statewide legislations, rules, and regulations have been adopted to reduce GHG emissions from significant sources.
Senate Bill (SB) 32 and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 extended the state’s GHG reduction goals and required the CARB to
regulate sources of GHGs to meet a state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, 40 percent below 1990 levels
by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Other statewide policies adopted to reduce GHG emissions include AB 32,
SB 375, SB 97, Clean Car Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, California Building codes, and
the California Solar Initiative.
The City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery is a long-range plan to reduce GHG emissions from
City government operations and community activities. Implementation of the Climate Action Plan is also intended to help achieve
multiple community goals such as lowering energy costs, reducing air pollution, and supporting local economic development.
The Climate Action Plan was prepared with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2035. The Climate Action Plan includes
measures to reduce communitywide GHG emissions by 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 66 percent below 1990 levels
by 2035, which is consistent with California’s goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
a) The project would not generate operational air emissions. The project would result in short-term construction equipment
exhaust emissions which result in contributions of GHG emissions. Based on the small scope of the project and the
short-term construction duration, construction would not generate greenhouse gas emissions that would have a
significant impact on the environment; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Appendix C of the 2020 Climate Action Plan includes thresholds and guidance for the preparation of GHG emissions
analysis under CEQA for projects within the City. To support progress toward the City’s long‐term aspirational carbon
neutrality goal, plans and projects within the city that undergo CEQA review need to demonstrate consistency with
targets in the Climate Action Plan, a Qualified GHG Emissions Reduction Plan, consistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15183.5. According to the adopted SLOAPCD guidance, if a project is consistent with a qualified GHG
reduction strategy, such as the City’s 2020 Climate Action Plan, the project would not result in a significant impact.
Projects that are consistent with 2014 General Plan land use and zoning designations can utilize the City’s CEQA GHG
Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist to demonstrate consistency with the Climate Action Plan’s GHG emissions
reduction strategy. Based on the analysis provided in Table 2 below, the project would be consistent with the City’s
GHG Emissions Analysis Checklist.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 35 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Table 2. Project’s Consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan
Climate Action Plan Measures Project Consistency
Pillar 2: Clean Energy Systems
Does the Project/Plan include an operational
commitment to participate in Central Coastal
Community Energy (previously entitled Monterey
Bay Community Power)?
Not applicable. The project includes dewatering,
sediment removal, and sediment spreading at
previously disturbed locations. The project is
temporary in nature and does not include operational
components that will result in a demand for energy
resources.
Pillar 3: Green Buildings
Does the Project exclusively include “All-electric
buildings”? For the purpose of this checklist, the
following definitions and exemptions apply:
All-electric building. A new building that has no
natural gas plumbing installed within the building and
that uses electricity as the source of energy for all
space heating, water heating, cooking appliances, and
clothes drying appliances. An All-Electric Building
may be plumbed for the use of natural gas as fuel for
appliances in a commercial kitchen. Specific
exemptions to the requirements for all - electric
buildings include:
Commercial kitchens
a. The extension of natural gas infrastructure into an
industrial building for the purpose of supporting
manufacturing processes (i.e. not including space
conditioning).
b. Accessory Dwelling Units that are attached to an
existing single-family home. Essential Service
Buildings including, but not limited to, public
facilities, hospitals, medical centers and
emergency operations centers.
c. Temporary buildings.
d. Gas line connections used exclusively for
emergency generators.
e. Any buildings or building components exempt
from the California Energy Code.
f. Residential subdivisions in process of permitting
or constructing initial public improvements for any
phase of a final map recorded prior to January 1,
2020, unless compliance is required by an existing
Development Agreement.
If the proposed project falls into an above exemption
category, what measures are applicants taking to
reduce onside fossil fuel consumption to the
Not applicable. The project includes dewatering,
sediment removal, and sediment spreading at
previously disturbed locations. The project is
temporary in nature and does not include the
development of any buildings.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 36 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
maximum extent feasible? If not applicable (N/A),
explain why this action is not relevant.
If the Project/Plan includes a new mixed-fuel
building or buildings (plumbed for the use of natural
gas as fuel for space heating, water heating, cooking
or clothes drying appliances) does that building/those
buildings meet or exceed the City’s Energy Reach
code?
Not applicable. The project includes dewatering,
sediment removal, and sediment spreading at
previously disturbed locations. The project is
temporary in nature and does not include the
development of any buildings.
Pillar 4: Connected Community
Does the Project/Plan comply with requirements in
the City’s Municipal Code with no exceptions,
including bicycle parking, bikeway design, and EV
charging stations?
Not applicable. The project includes dewatering,
sediment removal, and sediment spreading at
previously disturbed locations. The project is
temporary in nature and does not require
improvements for bicycles and EV charging stations.
Is the estimated Project/Plan-generated Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) within the City’s adopted
thresholds, as confirmed by the City’s Transportation
Division?
Consistent. The project traffic analysis determined
that the project would generate no new daily
operational vehicle trips and would not exceed the
City’s adopted VMT analysis threshold or OPR’s
significance threshold of 110 trips per day (see
Section 17. Transportation for further discussion). If “No”, does the Project/Plan include VMT
mitigation strategies and/or a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Plan approved by the City’s
Transportation Division? Please explain. TDM
components may include, but are not limited to:
Telecommuting
Car Sharing
Shuttle Service
Carpools
Vanpools
Bicycle Parking Facilities
Participate in Rideshare’s Back n Forth Club
Transit Subsidies
Off-Site Sustainable Transportation Infrastructure
Improvements
Does the Project/Plan demonstrate consistency with
the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan?
Consistent/Not Applicable. The project is located
outside of the City limits and will be accessed from
County maintained roadways. The project is
temporary in nature, does not include the
development of any structures or facilities, and will
not impact any multimodal transportation facilities.
Pillar 5: Circular Economy
Will the Project/Plan subscribe all units and/or
buildings to organic waste pick up and provide the
appropriate on-site enclosures consistent with the
provisions of the City of San Luis Obispo
Development Standards for Solid Waste Services?
Please provide a letter from San Luis Garbage
company verifying that the project complies with
Not Applicable. The project includes dewatering,
sediment removal, and sediment spreading at
previously disturbed locations. The project is
temporary in nature and does not include the
development of any facilities that would generate
organic waste.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 37 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
their standards and requirements for organic waste
pick up.
Pillar 6: Natural Solutions
Does the Project comply with Municipal Code
requirements for trees?
Consistent. The project does not propose any tree
removal and would be subject to all tree protection
regulations cited within the City Municipal Code.
Construction of the project would be required to be conducted in accordance with the 2019 California Green Building
Standards Code (CALGreen) and other applicable policies for equipment use, energy sources, and construction waste
diversion. The project would not conflict with Senate Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006);
SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan; or other statewide, regional, or local plans or policies intended to reduce
GHG emissions. The project would be consistent with the City’s 2020 CAP, a qualified GHG reduction strategy
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
The project would not generate significant GHG emissions above existing levels and would not exceed any applicable GHG
thresholds, contribute considerably to cumulatively significant GHG emissions, or conflict with plans adopted to reduce GHG
emissions. Therefore, potential impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are
necessary.
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
33, 34 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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?
33, 34 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
33, 34 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
33, 34,
35, 36 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 38 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
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 result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
21 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
21 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires?
21, 37,
38 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Site (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the state, local agencies, and developers
to comply with CEQA requirements related to the disclosure of information about the location of hazardous materials release
sites. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to
develop, at least annually, an updated Cortese List. Various state and local government agencies are required to track and
document hazardous material release information for the Cortese List. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control
(DTSC) EnviroStor database tracks DTSC cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste
facilities and sites with known contamination, such as federal Superfund sites, state response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school
cleanup sites, school investigation sites, and military evaluation sites. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
GeoTracker database contains records for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water in California such as Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites, Department of Defense sites, and Cleanup Program Sites. The remaining data regarding
facilities or sites identified as meeting the “Cortese List” requirements can be located on the CalEPA website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. According to the Cortese List the project is not located in an area of known
hazardous material contamination. A review of the EnviroStor database did not identify documented contaminated sites within
a mile of the project. Based on the SWRCB GeoTracker database, there is one closed LUST site located along 13th Street,
approximately 0.66-mile southwest of the project site.
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) classifies moderate, high, and very high Fire Hazard
Severity Zones (FHSZ) in areas where the State has financial responsibility for fire protection and prevention (State
Responsibility Areas or SRA). A FHSZ is a mapped area that designates zones (based on factors such as fuel, slope, and fire
weather) with varying degrees of fire hazard (i.e., moderate, high, and very high). FHSZ maps evaluate wildfire hazards, which
are physical conditions that create a likelihood that an area will burn over a 30- to 50-year period. The project site is located in
the urban-wildland interface and has been mapped within a moderate FHSZ.
a) The project does not include the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous substances. Construction of the project
is anticipated to require the use of commonly used hazardous substances within the project site, including cleaners,
solvents, oils, paints, etc. Any hazardous substances that are used during project construction would be transported,
stored, and used according to federal, state, and local regulatory requirements and existing procedures for the handling
of hazardous materials. In addition, implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 would ensure any accidental
construction-related spills would be properly cleaned in order to avoid indirect impacts to Old Creek. Therefore, based
on implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 and required compliance with existing regulations, potential impacts
associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous substances would be less than significant with
mitigation.
b) The project does not include the handling or use of hazardous materials or volatile substances that would result in a
significant risk of upset or accidental release conditions. Construction activities associated with the project are
anticipated to require use of limited quantities of hazardous substances, including gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid,
solvents, oils, and paints, which would be used in accordance with existing regulatory requirements related to proper
use of hazardous substances. Construction contractors would be also required to comply with applicable federal and
state environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of hazardous materials, including the federal
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Process Safety Management Standard (CCR 29.1910.119),
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 39 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
which includes requirements for preventing and minimizing the consequences of accidental release of hazardous
materials. Further, implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 would ensure any accidental construction-related spills
would be properly cleaned in order to avoid indirect impacts to Old Creek. The project site does not contain any paved
roadways that may have released aerially deposited lead into soils at the project site that could be released during
sediment removal and spreading activities. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) Cayucos Elementary School (Cayucos Elementary School District) is located more than one mile northwest of the
project site. Additionally, the project would not result in the transportation or use of acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
d) There are no previously identified hazardous materials sites within or adjacent to the project site. Based on a search of
the DTSC EnviroStor database, SWRCB GeoTracker database, and CalEPA Cortese List website, the nearest hazardous
materials sites is one closed LUST site located along 13th Street, approximately 0.66-mile southwest of the project site.
Hazardous materials associated with the site is not anticipated to be present within the soils on-site. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
e) The project site is located approximately 20 miles from the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport and the associated
Airport Review Area. Therefore, the project is not within an airport land use plan or airport review area and would have
no impact.
f) Project construction will occur on private property and will not require temporary traffic control on public roadways.
Emergency access and public circulation would be maintained in the project area. Therefore, project implementation
would not result in a significant temporary or permanent impact on any adopted emergency response plans or emergency
evacuation plans and impacts would be less than significant.
g) According to CAL FIRE, the project site and surrounding lands are located within a moderate wildland FHSZ. The
nearest fire station is CAL FIRE/San Luis Obispo County Fire station 16, located approximately 1 mile northwest of
the project site at 201 Cayucos Drive in the unincorporated community of Cayucos. According the to the San Luis
Obispo County Safety Element, emergency response times for the project site are less than 5 minutes. The project is
temporary in nature and would not substantially increase wildfire risks in the long term; however, construction activities
have the potential to result in accidental ignition of onsite fires. Given the nature of construction activities and the work
requirements of construction personnel, OSHA has developed safety and health provisions for implementation during
construction which are set forth in 29 CFR, Part No. 1926. In accordance with these regulations, construction managers
and personnel would be trained in emergency response and fire safety operations, which include the monitoring and
management of life safety systems and facilities, such as those set forth in the Safety and Health Regulations for
Construction established by OSHA. Additionally, in accordance with the provisions of OSHA regulations, fire
suppression equipment (e.g., fire extinguishers) specific to construction would be maintained onsite. Project
construction would also occur in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements regarding the
handling, disposal, use, storage, and management of hazardous materials. Compliance with regulatory requirements
would effectively reduce the potential for project construction activities to expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires and impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measure BIO-2.
Conclusion
The project does not propose the routine transport, use, handling, or disposal of acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
that could result in significant accident or upset conditions. Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 and required
compliance with existing regulations would reduce impacts related to use of construction-related materials and accidental
construction-related spills to less than significant. Any hazardous substances used during operation of the project would be
required to comply with federal, state, and local requirements. Project implementation would not subject people or structures to
substantial risks associated with wildland fires and would not impair implementation of or interfere with any adopted emergency
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 40 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
response or evacuation plan. Upon implementation of the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts associated with
hazards and hazardous materials would be considered less than significant with mitigation.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 41 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
3, 14,
39, 40 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
41, 42,
48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site; 3, 14,
39, 40,
43
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or offsite;
3, 14,
39, 40,
44, 47
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
3, 14,
39, 40,
44, 47
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? 3, 14,
39, 40,
44, 47
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
3, 14,
39, 40,
44, 45,
46, 47
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
41, 42,
48, 49 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
According to the San Luis Obispo County Watershed Management Plan, the project site is located adjacent to Old Creek which
is within the Cayucos Creek/Whale Rock Area Watershed that lies within the southern portion of the California Coast Range.
The watershed is bounded to the west by the Pacific Ocean and the east by the Santa Lucia Mountain Range. The watershed area
contains four major drainages that independently reach the Pacific Ocean: Cayucos Creek, Old Creek, Toro Creek, and Morro
Creek; the latter of which borders and shares some attributes with the Morro Bay watershed. The headwaters of the watershed
are in Santa Lucia Range, reaching a maximum elevation of approximately 2,345 feet with the lowest elevation at around sea
level, draining into the Pacific Ocean. Whale Rock Reservoir was formed by construction of the Whale Rock Dam in 1961 which
impounded Old Creek approximately 0.95-mile upstream from its outlet to the Pacific Ocean. There is no specific watershed
management plan for the Cayucos Creek/Whale Rock Area.
The USACE regulatory jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) extends to work in, over, and under waters
of the United States that results in a discharge of dredged or fill materials within USACE jurisdiction. Old Creek is considered
jurisdictional waters of the United States by the USACE. Section 401 of the CWA functions to ensure that federally permitted
activities comply with the federal CWA and other state-mandated water quality laws. Section 401 is implemented through a
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 42 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
review process that is conducted by the RWQCB and is typically triggered by the Section 404 permitting process. The RWQCB
issues a Water Quality Certification via the Section 401 process that ensures a proposed project complies with applicable effluent
limitations, water quality standards, and other conditions of state law. Evaluating the effects of the project on both water quality
and quantity (runoff) falls under the jurisdiction of the RWQCB.
Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, “waters of the State” fall under the jurisdiction of the California State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and RWQCBs. The RWQCBs must prepare and periodically update water quality
control basin plans. Each basin plan sets forth water quality standards for surface water and groundwater, as well as actions to
control non-point and point sources of pollution to achieve and maintain these standards. In most cases, the RWQCBs seek to
protect these beneficial uses by requiring the integration of water quality control measures into projects that would result in
discharge into waters of the State. The Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin (Central Coast Basin Plan)
identifies the following present and potential beneficial uses of Old Creek, downstream from Whale Rock Reservoir: municipal
and domestic supply; agricultural supply; groundwater recharge; water contact recreation; non-contact water recreation; wildlife
habitat; warm freshwater habitat; rare, threatened, or endangered species; estuarine habitat; freshwater replenishment; and
commercial and sport fishing.
The City is enrolled in the State General Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program
governing stormwater. As part of this enrollment, the City is required to implement the Central Coast RWQCB’s adopted Post
Construction Stormwater Management requirements through the development review process. The primary objective of these
post-construction requirements is to ensure that the permittee is reducing pollutant discharges to the Maximum Extent Practicable
and preventing stormwater discharges from causing or contributing to a violation of receiving water quality standards in all
applicable development projects that require approvals and/or permits issued.
In 2015, the state legislature approved the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA requires governments
and water agencies of high and medium priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of
pumping and recharge. Under SGMA, these basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of implementing their
sustainability plans. According to California Department of Water Resources Groundwater Bulletin 118, the project is not
located within the boundaries of a groundwater basin. Water from the dewatering activities can be used for dust control during
construction, as necessary. In addition, the City Utilities Department has access to non-potable, recycled construction water at
its Water Resource Recovery Facility located on Prado Road, San Luis Obispo. Therefore, there is existing recycled water
available to support construction activities, as necessary.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zone identifies areas that would be subject to inundation
in a 100-year storm event, or a storm with a 1 percent chance of occurring in any given year. Based on the FEMA National Flood
Hazard Layer Viewer, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone. The project site is located at the base of Whale
Rock Reservoir dam and according to the County of San Luis Obispo Tsunami Emergency Response Plan seiche could occur in
any reservoir in the County. The California Department of Conservation has developed tsunami hazard maps for San Luis Obispo
County. The project site is located within a mapped tsunami hazard area.
a) The project includes the removal of sediment from the stilling basin and spreading of sediment in two previously
disturbed upland areas totaling 36,475 square feet (0.84 acre). Because the project involves less than one acre of
disturbance, it is not subject to a SWRCB General Permit and preparation of a SWPPP is not required. Additionally,
the project does not include the creation or replacement of impervious surfaces and is not subject to the requirements
set forth in the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central
Coast Region. As designed, the project would include temporary sediment catchments and dissipation devices, such as
straw bales and plastic sheeting, to slow down and settle turbid water before it is allowed to run overland. Additional
devices (e.g., sandbags, silt fence, straw wattle, hay bales) will be implemented around the perimeter of the sediment
discharge area as needed to ensure no erosion or sedimentation occurs to the creek below. These project design features
along with implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 reduce the potential for erosion or an accidental construction-
related spills to enter Old Creek, therefore impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) The project is not located within the boundaries of a ground water basin, and there would be no interference with
groundwater recharge. The project would utilize minimal amounts of water during construction activities for dust
management and other incidental uses but would not otherwise generate any long-term operational demand in water
supply. Water from the dewatering activities can be used for dust control during construction, as necessary. In addition,
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 43 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
the City Utilities Department has access to non-potable, recycled construction water at its Water Resource Recovery
Facility located on Prado Road, San Luis Obispo. Therefore, there is existing recycled water available to support
construction activities, as necessary. As such, the project would not substantially affect groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge and impacts would be less than significant.
c) i. As discussed in (a), construction activities have the potential to cause erosion and sedimentation from disturbed areas.
Appropriate sedimentation and erosion controls would be used to ensure there is no substantial erosion or siltation.
These project design features along with implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2 would reduce the potential for
erosion or an accidental construction-related spill to enter Old Creek, therefore impacts would be less than significant
with mitigation.
c) ii. – iv. The project includes the removal of sediment from the stilling basin and spreading of sediment in two previously
disturbed upland areas. The design of the project includes temporary sediment catchments and dissipation devices to
slow down and settle turbid water before it is allowed to run over land. Construction activities within jurisdictional areas
would be conducted during the dry season when stream flows would be at annual lows (June 15 through October 31) in
any given year, or as otherwise directed by applicable regulatory agencies. This would preclude construction activities
from occurring during the wet season during which flood flows may occur. The project does not include the creation or
replacement of impervious surfaces, changes to existing topography or drainage patterns, and would not impede or
redirect flood flows; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) The project site is not within a 100-year flood zone; however, it is located at the base of Whale Rock Reservoir dam
where the is the possibility of a seiche occurring. Additionally, the project site is located within a mapped tsunami
hazard area. Although there is the potential for seiche and tsunami hazards, the project is temporary in nature and does
not include the development any new structures or facilities; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Per the City’s General Plan Water and Wastewater Management Element, Policy A2.2.1, the City has four primary
water supply sources, including Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water
(for irrigation). Groundwater serves as a fifth supplemental source. The project includes removal of deposition of
sediment in previously disturbed areas and would not conflict with the City’s Waterways Management Plan or other
water quality control plans. Construction water would be supplied by the City of San Luis Obispo, which has ample
water supply based on diversification of its water resources. In addition, the project would not substantially interfere
with groundwater recharge of any groundwater basin. The project would not conflict with the SGMA, Central Coast
Basin Plan, or other local or regional plans or policies intended to manage water quality or groundwater supplies;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measure BIO-2.
Conclusion
Through project design, implementation of mitigation measure BIO-2, standard BMPs, and City Engineering Standards, the
project would not substantially impede or redirect flood flows, alter existing drainage patterns, degrade surface water quality,
decrease groundwater supplies, or conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan. The project would retain the preconstruction water infiltration rates and flow volumes currently
occurring on the project site. Therefore, potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant
with mitigation.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 44 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? 3, 5, 6 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
3, 6 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The project is located within City-managed property located outside of the Cayucos Urban Reserve Line. The project site is
surrounding by parcels designated with Open Space and Agriculture land uses by the County of San Luis Obispo Coastal Zone
Land Use Ordinance (Title 23).
a-b) The project would not physically divide an established community. The project has been designed and will be implemented
in compliance with the requirements of the City Municipal Code. The project would not divide an established community
or conflict with land use plans or policies; therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigated measures are required.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to physically divide an established community or cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land use plan or policy; therefore, there would be no impacts and no mitigation measures are
necessary.
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
5 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
5 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The project site and surrounding parcels are not designated for mineral extraction and there are no known mineral resources
present.
a-b) There are no known mineral resources present on the project site and the site is not located within proximity of any known
mineral resource recovery sites located on local planning documents; therefore, no impacts would occur.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 45 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
No impacts to mineral resources were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.
13. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
50, 51,
52 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
50, 51,
53 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or
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?
21 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The existing ambient noise environment is characterized by intermittent vehicle noise from 13th Street, State Route 1, and various
agricultural activities surrounding the project site. Noise-sensitive land uses typically include residences, schools and parks. The
nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a rural residence located approximately 400 feet southwest along 13th Street. The
project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or public airport.
Based on the City Municipal Code Chapter 9.12 - Noise Control, operating tools or equipment used for construction activities
between weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or any time on Sundays or holidays is strictly prohibited, except for emergency
works of public service utilities or by exception issued by the City Community Development Department. The Municipal Code
also states that construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner, where technically and economically feasible, that the
maximum noise levels at affected properties shall not exceed 75 dBA at single-family residences, 80 dBA at multi-family
residences, and 85 dBA at mixed residential/commercial uses. The Municipal Code also states that operating any device that
creates ground vibration above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond 150 feet from the source on a
public space or right-of-way is prohibited.
a) During project construction, noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in
the immediate area. The project would require the use of typical construction equipment (backhoe, skid steer, etc.) for
dewatering, sediment removal, and spreading. Typical noise levels produced by equipment commonly used in
construction projects are shown in Table 3.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 46 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Table 3. Typical Construction Noise Equipment Emission Levels
Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (dBA)
50 feet from Source
Concrete mixer, dozer, excavator, jackhammer, man
lift, paver, scraper 85
Heavy truck 84
Crane, mobile 83
Concrete pump 82
Backhoe, compactor 80
Source: Federal Highway Administration (2017)
Construction equipment that would be used during project construction would not exceed 85 dB; however, the nearest
sensitive noise receptor is located approximately 400 feet northwest from the western property boundary. Due to the
project’s proximity to nearby sensitive receptors (e.g., residential dwelling units), mitigation has been included to reduce
construction-related noise.
Mitigation measure N-1 is identified to require implementation of standard noise BMPs to reduce noise generated during
the project, which is considered short-term and would not result in a permanent source of noise. Upon implementation
of these measures, project construction activities would not result in generation of a substantial increase in ambient
noise levels in exceedance of applicable regulatory thresholds. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
b) The project does not propose pile driving or other high-impact activities that would generate substantial noise or
groundborne vibration during construction. Use of heavy equipment would generate groundborne noise and vibration;
however, there are no buildings that surround the project site (i.e., historical buildings and occupants of surrounding
buildings) that would be substantially affected by this groundborne vibration. Based on the proposed construction
activities, groundborne vibration is expected to be imperceptible at adjacent properties. Therefore, potential impacts
would be less than significant.
c) The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or public airport and the project would not expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels; therefore, there would be no impact.
Mitigation Measures
N-1 The following noise reduction measures shall be shown on all applicable plans and adhered to during project activities:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at the project
boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern noise control devices (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor
enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jackhammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall be
hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from
pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed, such
as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 47 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and
presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
Conclusion
Since the project is located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, mitigation measure N-1 is included to reduce potential
construction-related impacts. Impacts related to noise would be less than significant with mitigation.
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned 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)?
41, 42 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
41, 42 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
According to the City’s General Plan 2021 Annual Report, the average annual growth rate between 2015 and 2021 was 0.81
percent, which is in compliance with the 1 percent maximum average annual residential growth rate (City LUE Policy 1.11.2).
San Luis Obispo contains the largest concentration of jobs in the county. During workdays, the city’s population increases to an
estimated 70,000 persons.
The City’s Housing Element identifies various goals, policies, and programs based on an assessment of the City’s housing needs,
opportunities, and constraints. The City’s overarching goals for housing include safety, affordability, conservation of existing
housing, accommodation for mixed-income neighborhoods, providing housing variety and tenure, planning for new housing,
maintaining neighborhood quality, providing special needs housing, encouraging sustainable housing and neighborhood design,
maximization of affordable housing opportunities for those who live or work in the City, and developing housing on suitable
sites. On November 17, 2020, City Council adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element that includes housing policies and programs
for 2020–2028. The City’s Housing Element was updated in compliance with State requirements.
The project site is undeveloped and unpopulated with open space (riparian corridor) and previously disturbed areas. The area is
further surrounded by agriculture, scattered rural residences, and outbuildings.
a) The project does not include the construction of new residential land uses that could directly contribute to population
growth. The project includes maintenance of existing facilities managed by the City Utilities Department and is not
expected to generate any new long-term employment opportunities. Short-term construction activities may increase
temporary construction-related employment opportunities; however, temporary employment opportunities generated by
the project are anticipated to be filled by the local workforce and would not result in a substantial population increase.
Based on the nature and limited scale of proposed project, the project would not induce substantial or unplanned
population growth; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
b) The project would not result in the displacement of any existing or proposed housing; therefore, no impacts would
occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 48 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Conclusion
The project would not induce population growth either directly or indirectly and would not displace people or housing. Population
and housing impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for 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:
Fire protection? 56 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Police protection? 57 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Schools? 58, 59 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Parks? 5 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Other public facilities? n/a ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Fire protection and emergency medical services are provided by CAL FIRE/San Luis Obispo County Fire station 16, located
approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site at 201 Cayucos Drive in the unincorporated community of Cayucos. According
the to the San Luis Obispo County Safety Element (SOURCE) emergency response times for the project site are less than 5
minutes. Response times are within the performance standards outlined in the CAL FIRE/San Luis Obispo County Strategic
Plan.
The community of Cayucos and surrounding areas rely on the County of San Luis Obispo Sheriff’s Office and the California
Highway Patrol. The primary station serving the community is the Sheriff’s Coast Station located in the community of Los Osos
at 2099 10th Street. The Coast Station patrols from Avila Beach to San Simeon and from the Los Padres mountain range to the
Pacific Ocean. Response times for the Sheriff’s Office vary based on allocated personnel, existing resources, time and day of the
week, and prioritized calls for law enforcement services.
The project site is located within the Cayucos Elementary School District and the San Luis Coastal Unified School District for
middle and high school. Public parks and recreation trails within the community of Cayucos are managed and maintained by the
San Luis Obispo County Parks and Recreation Department.
a) Fire and Police Protection: The project includes dewatering, sediment removal, and sediment spreading at previously
disturbed locations. The project is temporary in nature and does not include operational components that will result in
a demand for additional fire protection or police protection services. The project would not result in a need for additional
or altered government facilities for fire or police protection; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Schools: No new land uses or habitable structures would be developed and therefore the project would not result in the
need for new or expanded school facilities within the area. Impacts related to provision or need of new or altered school
facilities would be less than significant.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 49 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Parks: No new land uses or habitable structures are proposed, and the project would not result in the need for new or
expanded parks or recreational facilities. The project would not result in an increased demand for park or recreation
facilities; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Other Public Facilities: No new land uses or habitable structures are proposed, and the project would not result in the
need for new or expanded public services. The project would not result in an increased demand for other public facilities
such as libraries or post offices; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. Public services impacts would be less than
significant, and no mitigation is required.
16. RECREATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
5, 60 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
5, 60 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The project site is located in proximity to two public recreation trails, Cayucos Cass Hill and Whale Rock Reservoir. Cayucos
Cass Hill trail is located northwest of the project site and has access locations located along 13th Street south of the project
property boundary. Whale Rock Reservoir trail is located northeast of the project site off Old Creek Road.
a) The project is temporary in nature and would not result in the increase of use of existing parks or recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
b) The project does not include recreation facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities and
there would be no impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 50 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Implementation of the project would not result in the construction of new recreational facilities and would not increase the use
of existing public recreational facilities in a manner that would result in substantial physical deterioration of existing facilities.
The project would not result in significant impacts to recreational facilities, and mitigation measures are not required.
17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
61, 62,
63, 64 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
61, 62,
63, 64 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
61, 62,
63, 64 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 21, 23,
56 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
In 2013, SB 743 was signed into law with the intent to “more appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with
statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions” and required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new metrics for
identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. As a result, in December 2018, the California Natural Resources
Agency certified and adopted updates to the State CEQA Guidelines. The revisions included new requirements related to the
implementation of SB 743 and identified VMT per capita, VMT per employee, and net VMT as new metrics for transportation
analysis under CEQA (as detailed in Section 15064.3[b]). In June 2020, the City formally adopted the transition from Level of
Service to VMT for the purposes of CEQA evaluation and also established local VMT thresholds of significance.
The project site is located outside of the City limits within private property that is accessed from the eastern terminus of 13th
Street approximately 0.25 mile east of State Route 1. 13th Street, east of South Ocean Avenue, is a county-maintained roadway
that has average daily motor-vehicle trip volume (ADT) as 2,832, with an AM peak volume of 299 trips and a PM peak volume
of 302 trips, as identified by the San Luis Obispo County Public Works Department Traffic Count Data. There are no bicycle
facilities or transit stops located along 13th Street within the vicinity of the project site.
a) The project involves temporary construction methods, including dewatering and sediment removal, and would not
generate new traffic or increase vehicle miles. The project has been designed to comply with City Municipal Code
standards and would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. There would be no impacts.
b) The 2018 OPR SB 743 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA states that absent substantial
evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a
Sustainable Communities Strategy or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally
may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. The project involves temporary construction
methods, including dewatering and sediment removal, and would not generate new traffic or increase vehicle miles.
The project would not exceed the City’s adopted VMT analysis threshold or OPR’s significance threshold of 110 trips
per day. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to generate VMT at a rate that is inconsistent with local and regional
thresholds pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b). Impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 51 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
c) The project would be accessed from the eastern terminus of 13th Street at a location that does not contain dangerous
curves, short sight distance, or other dangerous design features. Therefore, project impacts associated with increased
hazards due to a geometric design feature would be less than significant.
d) Project construction would not result in the need for traffic controls along public roadways and the project site and
surrounding areas would remain accessible to emergency and other vehicles. Therefore, potential impacts related to
inadequate emergency access would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.
Conclusion
The project is temporary in nature and would not generate new traffic or increase vehicle miles. The project is consistent with
local transportation planning documents, would not exceed the City’s established thresholds for VMT, ands would maintain
adequate emergency access. Therefore, potential impacts associated with transportation would be less than significant and no
mitigation measures are required.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 52 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k)?
5, 14,
18, 65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
5, 14,
18, 65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
Approved in 2014, AB 52 added tribal cultural resources to the categories of resources that must be evaluated under CEQA.
Tribal cultural resources are defined as either of the following:
1) Sites, features, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe
that are either of the following:
a. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; or
b. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of California PRC Section 5020.1.
2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of California PRC Section 5024.1. In applying these criteria for the
purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American
Tribe.
Recognizing that tribes have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide
notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if they have requested
notice of projects proposed within that area. If the tribe requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead
agency must consult with the tribe regarding the potential for adverse impacts on tribal cultural resources as a result of a project.
Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the presence and/or significance of tribal
cultural resources, the level of significance of a project’s impacts on the tribal cultural resources, and available project alternatives
and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe to avoid or lessen potential impacts on tribal cultural resources.
Native American Tribes were notified about the project consistent with State and City regulations under AB 52 on July 15, 2022.
Patti Dunton, Tribal Administrator of the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties, responded via email and
stated that they are aware of cultural resources in the area and would like to see all ground disturbing activities be monitored by
a cultural resource specialist and Native American monitor.
a) Based on consultation with local tribes, the project site may have the potential to contain tribal cultural resources that
could be eligible for listing in the CRHR or local register. Mitigation measure TCR-1 has been identified to require
presence of a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor during all project related construction activities that
result in disturbance of native soil. If previously unidentified tribal cultural materials are unearthed during construction,
mitigation measure CR-1 has been identified to require work be halted in that area until a qualified archaeologist can
assess the significance of the find. Therefore, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
b) Based on consultation with local tribes, the project site may have the potential to contain resources considered
significant by a California Native American tribe. Mitigation measure TCR-1 has been identified to require presence
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 53 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
of a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor during all project related construction activities that result in
disturbance of native soil. Therefore, with incorporation of mitigation measures TCR-1, CR-1, and CR-2, impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2.
TCR-1 A qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be present during all project related construction
activities that result in disturbance of native soil that may contain tribal cultural resources. Monitoring activities shall
be conducted in accordance with a Monitoring Plan as approved by the City Community Development Department.
The plan shall include provisions such as:
1. List of personnel involved in the monitoring activities including a Native American monitor;
2. Description of how the monitoring shall occur;
3. Description of monitoring frequency;
4. Description of circumstances that would result in the “work diversion,” in the case of discovery, at the project
site;
5. Description of procedures for diverting work on the site and notification procedures;
6. Description of monitoring reporting procedures; and
7. Description of the procedures for reburial of artifacts and/or human remains within identified areas on the
project site or other suitable location.
Conclusion
With the implementation of the mitigation measures CR-1, CR-2, and TCR-1, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less
than significant with mitigation.
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
n/a ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
48, 49 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) 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?
n/a ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
66 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 54 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 66 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City’s Utilities Department is the sole water provider within the city, provides potable and recycled water to the community,
and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility
(WRRF) treats all the wastewater from the city, California Polytechnic State University, and the airport. The facility treats up to
4.5 million gallons of wastewater per day. The WRRF manages and treats wastewater in accordance with standards established
by the SWRCB to remove solids, reduce the amount of nutrients, and eliminate bacteria in treated wastewater. A portion of the
treated water is recycled for irrigation use within the city and the remaining flow is discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek.
Construction water for the project would be provided by the City’s Utilities Department and the project does not require
wastewater services. The project includes the removal of sediment from the stilling basin and spreading of sediment in two
previously disturbed upland areas. The design of the project includes temporary sediment catchments and dissipation devices to
slow down and settle turbid water before it is allowed to run over land.
a) The project does not include the creation or replacement of impervious surfaces, changes to existing topography or
drainage patterns, and would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. Therefore, there are no
impacts associated with construction of utility connections.
b) The project would require water supplies during construction activities for dust suppression, vehicle washing, and other
ancillary activities, but would not otherwise generate any long-term demand in water supply. The City has adequate
water supply for project construction and no long-term increase in water supply demand would occur. Therefore,
impacts related to sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry, and multiple dry years would be less than significant.
c) The proposed project does not propose use or development of any on-site wastewater disposal systems or connection to
any community wastewater system. The project would not include any use that would require wastewater discharge,
except for short-term construction activities that would be serviced by on-site portable restroom and hand-washing
facilities and/or existing facilities within the project site. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
d) Construction activities have the potential result in the generation of solid waste materials, including temporary fencing.
Upon completion, the project would not generate any solid waste. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
No significant impacts to utilities and service systems would occur; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.
20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
21, 37,
38 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 55 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
21, 37,
38 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
21, 37,
38 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
21, 37,
38 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City Safety Element identifies four policies to address the potential hazards associated with wildfire, included approving
development only when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available, classification of Wildland fire hazard
severity zones as prescribed by CAL FIRE, prohibition of new subdivisions located within “Very High” wildland fire hazard
severity zones, and continuation of enhancement of fire safety and construction codes for buildings. According to CAL FIRE,
the project site is located in the urban-wildland interface and has been mapped within a moderate FHSZ.
a) Project construction will not require temporary traffic control on public roadways. Emergency access and public
circulation would be maintained in the project area. Therefore, project implementation would not result in a significant
temporary or permanent impact on any adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans and impacts
would be less than significant.
b) The project would not substantially change existing slopes on-site or result in the removal of a natural or built wind
barrier. Furthermore, the project does not include the construction of any new structures for human occupancy. The
project would not result in the exacerbation of fire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors that would
expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
c) The project is temporary in nature and would not substantially increase wildfire risks in the long term; however,
construction activities have the potential to result in accidental ignition of onsite fires. Given the nature of construction
activities and the work requirements of construction personnel, OSHA has developed safety and health provisions for
implementation during construction which are set forth in 29 CFR, Part No. 1926. In accordance with these regulations,
construction managers and personnel would be trained in emergency response and fire safety operations, which include
the monitoring and management of life safety systems and facilities, such as those set forth in the Safety and Health
Regulations for Construction established by OSHA. Additionally, in accordance with the provisions of OSHA
regulations, fire suppression equipment (e.g., fire extinguishers) specific to construction would be maintained onsite.
Project construction would also occur in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements regarding
the handling, disposal, use, storage, and management of hazardous materials. Compliance with regulatory requirements
would effectively reduce the potential for project construction activities to exacerbate fire risk and impacts would be
less than significant.
d) The project site is generally flat and would not be located near a hillslope or in an area subject to downstream flooding
or landslides. The project site is not in a designated high or very high wildfire risk area and does not include any design
elements that would expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 56 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion
The project would not expose people or structures to new or exacerbated wildfire risks and would not require the development
of new or expanded infrastructure or maintenance to reduce wildfire risks. Therefore, potential impacts associated with wildfire
would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary.
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially 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, substantially 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?
n/a ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project may result in impacts to special-status wildlife, nesting birds, riparian habitat, designated critical habitat, and
jurisdictional water features and mitigation measures have been incorporated to avoid and minimize potential impacts to these
resources. Mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-10 have been identified to avoid potential impacts to special-status species
and to jurisdictional water features, including Old Creek and associated riparian habitat.
There are no known historic or prehistoric resources within the project site and mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-3 and
TCR-1 would reduce potential inadvertent discovery of these resources to less than significant. With implementation of
identified mitigation measures and standard requirements, the project would not have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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. Potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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 past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
When project impacts are considered along with, or in combination with, other reasonably foreseeable impacts, the project’s
potential cumulative impacts may be significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce project-
related impacts to a less than significant level. Based on implementation of identified project-specific mitigation measures and
the relatively limited number and extent of potential impacts, the cumulative effects of the proposed project would not be
cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 57 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project has the potential to result in significant impacts associated with air quality that, if left unmitigated, could result in
substantial adverse effects on human beings. Standard mitigation measures (AQ-1 and AQ-2) have been identified to reduce
these potential impacts to less than significant, including, but not limited to, standard idling restrictions, dust control measures,
implementation of BMPs, and compliance with the CARB Asbestos ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Mining Operations to avoid impacts related to naturally occurring asbestos. Mitigation has also been identified to reduce the
potential for construction-related hazardous substances to degrade off-site areas (mitigation measure BIO-2). With incorporation
of identified project-specific mitigation, potential environmental effects of the project would not directly or indirectly result in
any substantial adverse effects on human beings. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
22. 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.
Not applicable.
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.
Not applicable.
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.
Not applicable.
23. SOURCE REFERENCES
1.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Collection of America’s Byways Designated
by U.S. Secretary of Transportation. (2021). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/scenic_byways/designations/>.
2. City of San Luis Obispo. Community Design Guidelines (June 2010). Accessed August 2022, from
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/2104/635491488007630000
3.
City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Municipal Code: A Codification of the General Ordinances of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California (June 2022). Accessed August 2022, from
<https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code>.
4. California Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program. Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/>.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 58 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
5.
County of San Luis Obispo. Land Use View Mapping Application. Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://gis.slocounty.ca.gov/Html5Viewer/Index.html?configBase=/Geocortex/Essentials/REST/sites/PL_LandUse
View/viewers/PL_LandUseView/virtualdirectory/Resources/Config/Default>.
6. County of San Luis Obispo Code. Title 23 Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance. (June 2022). Accessed August 2022
from: <https://library.municode.com/ca/san_luis_obispo_county/codes/county_code?nodeId=TIT23COZOLAUS>.
7.
California State Public Resources Code Division 10.5, Article 3 § 12220. (2007). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PRC&division=10.5.&title=&part=&ch
apter=1.&article=3.>. Accessed
8. California Air Resources Board. (2020). Area Designation Maps / State and National. December. Accessed August
2022 from: <https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations>.
9.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook: A Guide for Assessing the Air
Quality Impacts for Projects Subject to CEQA Review. (April 2012). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/CEQA_Handbook_2012_v2%20%28Updated%20MemoTable1-
1_July2021%29_LinkedwithMemo.pdf>.
10. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. 2001 Clean Air Plan of San Luis Obispo County (March
2022). Accessed August 2022 from: <https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/clean-air-plan.php>.
11. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Map. Accessed August 2022
from: <https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos/noa.php>.
12.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District. Clarification Memorandum for the San Luis Obispo County
Air Pollution Control District’s 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook. (November 2017). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/FINAL_Clarification%20Memorandum%2020172.pdf>.
13.
California Air Resources Board. Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Construction, Grading, Quarrying,
and Surface Mining Operations. (2015). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/toxics/atcm/asb2atcm.htm>.
14. City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo Conservation & Open Space Element. (2006). Accessed August
2022 from: <https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6651>.
15. Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC. Biological Survey Results Memorandum for the Proposed Whale Rock
Reservoir Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project, 108 13th Street, Cayucos, California. (June 2022).
16.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Guidelines for Electrofishing Waters Containing Salmonids
Listed Under the Endangered Species Act (June 2000). Accessed April 2022 from:
<https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dammigration/electro2000.pdf.>.
17. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, Fourth
Edition. (2002). Accessed April 2022 from: <https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=105810>.
18. County of San Luis Obispo. Cultural Resource Maps. (2019). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/4599/635513822600970000>.
19. City of San Luis Obispo. Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery. (2021). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/27889/637339848332630000>.
20. California Building Code. (2019). Available at: <https://up.codes/viewer/california/ibc-2018>.
21.
San Luis Obispo County Department of Planning and Building. Safety Element: San Luis Obispo County General
Plan. (December 1999). Accessed August 2022 from: <https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Planning-
Building/Forms-Documents/Plans-and-Elements/Elements/Safety-Element.pdf>.
22. California Department of Conservation. Fault Activity Map of California. (2010). Accessed August 2022 from:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/>.
23. City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element. (2014). Accessed August 2022
from: <https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6645>.
24. United States Geological Survey. Areas of Land Subsidence in California Map. (2022). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.usgs.gov/centers/land-subsidence-in-california>.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 59 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
25. United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. (July 2019).
Accessed August 2022 from: <https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/>.
26. U.S. Geological Survey. Geologic Map of the San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County, California.
(2004). Accessed August 2022 from: <https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_71738.htm>.
27. City of San Luis Obispo Office of Sustainability. Community Green House Gas Emissions Inventory Update.
(2019). Available at: https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=23298
28. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan. Chapter 1: Land Use. (December 2014). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/6635/637878804756400000>.
29.
City of San Luis Obispo Office of Sustainability and Community Development Department. City of San Luis Obispo
California Environmental Quality Act Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds and Guidance. (June 2020). Accessed
August 2022 from: <https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/262717-
2/attachment/HpjyeXtjseSd6sgOjQ8ibamVeyXLd5jnvYpw5Vzpk6BpJ5Gd4sBJxrJoDVR7wOh3T6PvgZOggacACr
vx0>.
30. California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, Assembly Bill 32. (2006).
31.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. 2019 Regional Transportation Plan: Connecting Communities. (June
2019). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.dropbox.com/s/oc6i8wshikuirsh/__FINAL%202019%20RTP.pdf?dl=0>.
32. California Department of Toxic Substance Control. EnviroStor database. Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/>.
33.
United States Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration Process Safety Management
Standard, 29 CFR 1910.119 Process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals. Accessed August 2022,
from: <https://www.osha.gov/process-safety-management>.
34.
United States Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration Process Safety Management
Standard, 29 CFR, Part 1926 Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1926>.
35. California State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker database. Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.>
36. California Environmental Protection Agency. Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/>.
37. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. FHSZ Viewer. (November 2007). Accessed August
2022, from: <https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/>.
38.
County of San Luis Obispo. Community Wildfire Protection Plan. (July 2019). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/County-Fire-Department/Publications/Community-Wildfire-
Protection-
Plan.pdf#:~:text=This%20San%20Luis%20Obispo%20County,%2C%20firefighters%2C%20and%20the%20public.
>.
39.
Resource Conservation Districts of San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo County Watersheds Management
Plan. (July 2014). Accessed August 2022, from: <https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/getattachment/a9e4b1a1-8ad5-
40b2-8a1d-5fd6bca13813/2014-07-31-Watershed-Report.aspx>.
40.
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region, State Water Resources Control Board, & California
Environmental Protection Agency. Water Quality Control Plant for the Central Coast Basin. (June 2019). Accessed
August 2022, from:
<https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/publications_forms/publications/basin_plan/docs/2019_basin_plan_r
3_complete_webaccess.pdf>.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 60 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
41. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, AB 1739, SB 1186 & SB 1319. (2014).
42. California Department of Water Resources. California’s Groundwater (Bulletin 118). (2020). Accessed August
2022, from: <https://sgma.water.ca.gov/CalGWLive>.
43. United States Environmental Protection Agency. State General Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permit program. (2021). Accessed August 2022, from: < https://www.epa.gov/npdes>.
44. Federal Emergency Management Agency. National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer. Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home>.
45.
San Luis Obispo County Office of Emergency Services. Tsunami Emergency Response Plan. (April 2016).
Accessed August 2022, from: <https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Administrative-Office/Emergency-
Management/Forms-Documents/General-Emergency-Plans/Tsunami-Response-Plan.pdf>.
46. California Department of Conservation. Tsunami Area Maps and Data for San Luis Obispo County. (July 2021).
Accessed August 2022, from: <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps>.
47.
California Water Boards. Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the
Central Coast Region. (February 2013). Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/water_issues/programs/stormwater/docs/lid/hydromod_lid_docs/User
_Guide.pdf>.
48.
City of San Luis Obispo General Plan. Chapter 8: Water and Wastewater, Policy A2.2.1 Multi-Source Water Supply.
(24 February 1987). Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/22356/636821153318500000>.
49.
City of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works & County of San Luis Obispo Flood Control District. San Luis
Obispo Waterway Management Plan. (2002). Accessed August 2022, from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/4913/635554458090330000>.
50. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Title 9, Chapter 9.12 Noise Control. (June 2022). Accessed August 2022,
from: <https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code/9.12>.
51. City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element. (1996). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6643>.
52.
Federal Highway Administration. Construction Noise Handbook: Construction Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges.
(September 2017). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook00.cfm>.
53. California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual.
(September 2013). Accessed August 2022 from: <http://website.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tcvgm-sep2013.pdf>.
54.
City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Annual Report. (2021). Accessed August 2022
from:
<https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/32220/637878800806000000>.
55. City of San Luis Obispo. 2020-2028 General Plan Housing Element. (November 2020.) Accessed August 2022
from: <https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument?id=28839>.
56.
California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection & San Luis Obispo County Fire Department. Unit Strategic
Fire Plan. (May 2022). Accessed August 2022, from: <https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/xnpdccvy/2022-san-luis-
obispo-county-unit-fire-plan.pdf>.
57. County of San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo County Sheriff’s Office: About the SLO County Sheriff’s Office.
Accessed August 2022 from: <https://www.slosheriff.org/about.php>.
58. San Luis Obispo County Office of Education. Cayucos Elementary School District website. Accessed August 2022
from: <https://www.cayucosschool.org/>.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 61 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
59. San Luis Obispo County Office of Education. San Luis Coastal Unified School District: Our Schools. Accessed
August 2022 from: <https://www.slcusd.org/our-schools>.
60.
City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Element. (2021). Accessed August 2022
from:<https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/parks-and-recreation/parks-and-recreation-plan-
and-element-update>.
61. City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan. (2021). Accessed August 2022 from:
<https://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=29123>.
62. City of San Luis Obispo. City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element. (October 2017). Accessed August 2022
from: <https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=20412>.
63. City of San Luis Obispo. Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. 2nd edition. (June 2020).
64.
County of San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo County Public Works Traffic Count Data: Current Volumes. (January
2022). Accessed August 2022 from: <https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Public-Works/Forms-
Documents/Transportation/Traffic-Count-Data.pdf>.
Attachments
1. Biological Survey Results Memorandum for the Proposed Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin Dewatering and
Inspection Project (Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC, 2022)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 62 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
Air Quality
AQ-1 At the time of building and/or grading permit submittal, the following idling control techniques shall be shown on
all applicable plans and implemented during all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of
the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor
vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on
highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that
drivers of said vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as
noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system to power a heater, air conditioner, or any
ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5 minutes
at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the
regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit.
The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following
website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/capp-resource-center/heavy-duty-diesel-vehicle-idling-information.
AQ-2 At the time of building and/or grading permit submittal, the following particulate matter control measures
shall be shown on all applicable plans and implemented during all construction and ground-disturbing activities:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site
and from exceeding the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District’s limit of 20 percent opacity for
greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever
wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
When drought conditions exist and water use is a concern, the contractor or builder should consider use of a
dust suppressant that is effective for the specific site conditions to reduce the amount of water used for dust
control. Please refer to the following link from the San Joaquin Valley Air District for a
list of potential dust suppressants:
http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/PM10/Products%20Available%20for%20Controlling%20PM10%2
0Emi ssions.htm.
3. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed.
4. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible, and building
pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding, soil binders or other dust controls are
used.
5. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet
of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) or otherwise comply with
California Vehicle Code Section 23114.
6. “Track-Out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor
vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as described in
California Vehicle Code Section 23113 and California Water Code 13304. To prevent ‘track out’, designate
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 63 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install and operate a ‘track-
out prevention device’ where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The ‘track-out
prevention device’ can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at preventing track out,
located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices
need periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked out soils, the track-out prevention
device may need to be modified.
7. All fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans.
8. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons w hose responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust
emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution
Control District’s limit of 20 percent opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties
shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust
could be generated on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to
the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading,
earthwork, or demolition (Contact the Compliance Division at 805-781-5912).
9. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should
be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
10. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall be
sown with a fast-germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
11. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical binders, jute
netting, or other methods approved in advance by the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District.
12. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 miles per hour on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
13. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers
shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible.
14. Take additional measures as needed to ensure dust from the project site is not impacting areas outside the
project boundary.
AQ-3 Prior to the commencement of construction and grading activities, the City Public Utilities Department shall submit
the NOA Construction and Grading Project Form and a Mini Dust Control Measure Plan (as outlined in the Asbestos ATCM
for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations Section 93105.e.A-F), and the associated fees to the
SLOAPCD for review and approval.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. The Public Utilities Department and
Whale Rock staff shall verify compliance and shall inspect the site to ensure activities are completed in accordance with
approved plans, permits, and mitigation measures.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 An environmental awareness training shall be presented to all construction personnel by a qualified biologist prior
to start of project activities. The training shall include color photographs and a description of the ecology of all
special-status species known or determined to have potential to occur, including but not limited to CRLF, south-
central California coast steelhead, and southwestern pond turtle, as well as other sensitive resources requiring
avoidance near project impact areas. The training shall also include a description of protection measures required
by any discretionary permits, an overview of the Endangered Species Act, implications of noncompliance with the
Endangered Species Act, and required avoidance and minimization measures.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. The qualified biologist or
Environmental Monitor shall monitor environmental compliance of activities throughout the construction/activity period or as
stipulated in the species- or resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-2 The following measures shall be incorporated into the project to protect wetlands/waterways and special-status
species:
1. No refueling or maintenance of vehicles or equipment shall occur within 100 feet of the spillway/Old Creek.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 64 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
2. Spill clean-up kits and secondary containment shall be made available and used to prevent spills or leaks
from entering the drainage.
3. Secondary containment such as drop pans shall be used to prevent leaks and spills of potential
contaminants.
4. Washing of concrete, paint, or equipment, and refueling and maintenance of equipment shall occur only in
designated areas.
5. Sandbags and/or absorbent pads shall be available to clean up any spilled fuel, as needed.
6. Any chemicals used shall be prevented from entering the jurisdictional areas.
7. Construction equipment shall be inspected by the operator daily to ensure that equipment is in good working
order and no fuel or lubricant leaks are present.
8. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material will not be used on site due to
the potential to entangle special-status wildlife. Acceptable substitutes are coconut coir matting,
biodegradable fiber rolls, or tackified hydroseeding compounds.
9. During project activities, all trash that may attract predators or scavengers shall be properly contained,
removed from the work site, and disposed of at the end of each work week. Following construction, all
trash and debris shall be removed from work areas.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. The Environmental Monitor shall
monitor environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction/activity period or as stipulated in
the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-3 The following protection measures will be incorporated into the project to protect southwestern pond turtle during
project operations:
1. A qualified biologist shall complete a pre-construction survey for southwestern pond turtle within 48 hours
prior to the start of all work within 100 feet of suitable habitat. Surveys shall include an inspection of all
work areas, staging areas, and access routes. Further, daily site inspections shall be completed each morning
prior to the start of work within all work areas, throughout the dewatering and sediment removal phases.
All vehicles, equipment, and materials staged on site overnight shall be inspected during pre-activity
surveys and daily site inspections.
2. A qualified biologist shall monitor all initial equipment mobilization and staging activities within 100 feet
of the creek. If southwestern pond turtles are discovered in the work areas, they shall be allowed to leave
the area on their own volition or be relocated by a qualified biologist with appropriate authorization from
CDFW to pre-determined suitable habitat areas located outside the immediate impact area.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor
environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction period or as stipulated in the species- or
resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-4 The following protection measures will be incorporated into the project to protect California red-legged frog during
project operations:
1. To avoid the potential for take of CRLF that may disperse through the project area during the project, all
initial project activities associated with the dewatering and sediment removal will be completed in the dry
season (between April 15 and October 31) or when conditions are dry. During rain events or any day for
which the National Weather Service has predicted a 25% or more chance of at least 0.1 inch rain in 24
hours (Predicted Rain Event) construction activities below top of creek banks or in other waters of the State
may resume after the rain has ceased, the National Weather Service predicts clear weather for at least 24
hours, and site conditions are dry enough to continue work without discharge of sediment or other pollutants
from the project site.
2. During temporary dewatering activities, the intake screen will consist of wire mesh not larger than 0.20-
inch to prevent any CRLF from entering the pump system.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 65 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
3. If exotic species known such as bullfrogs, crayfish, or centrarchid fishes are observed in the project area, a
USFWS-approved biologist shall permanently remove these individuals from the project area to extent
possible.
4. To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the USFWS-approved biologist, the
following fieldwork practices will be implemented:
a. Mud, snails, algae, and other debris shall be removed from nets, traps, boots, vehicle tires, and all
other surfaces. Items will be rinsed cleaned with sterilized (e.g., boiled or treated) water before leaving
each work site or prior to equipment being used again.
b. Boots, nets, traps, and other types of equipment used in the aquatic environment shall be scrubbed
with 70 percent ethanol solution and rinsed clean with sterilized water (e.g., boiled or treated) between
sites.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor
environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction period or as stipulated in the species- or
resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-5 The following measures shall be implemented immediately prior to and during dewatering and sediment removal
activities within the project site for CRLF until completion:
1. A qualified biologist will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before the onset of work activities.
If the biologist finds any life stage of the CRLF which are likely to be killed or injured by work activities,
the biologist will be allowed sufficient time to move them from the site before work begins, assuming
authorization from USFWS has been granted. The biologist will relocate the CRLFs to a pre-designated
relocation site within the same drainage that contains suitable habitat and that will not be affected by
activities associated with the proposed project.
2. A qualified biologist will be present at the work site during all initial equipment mobilization and staging
activities and until all CRLFs have been relocated out of harm’s way and disturbance of suitable habitat
areas has been completed. After this time, the biologist will designate a person to monitor on-site
compliance with all minimization measures. The biologist will ensure that this monitor receives the training
outlined in BIO-1 and in the identification of CRLFs. If the designated CRLF monitor or the biologist
recommends that work be stopped because CRLFs would be affected in a manner not anticipated during
initial project review, they will notify the City immediately. The City will either resolve the situation by
eliminating the adverse effect immediately or require that all actions causing these effects be halted. If the
City halts work, the USFWS will be notified for further consultation.
3. The biological monitor will inspect the project site each morning prior to the onset of activities. The
biologist will relocate any CRLF found to the pre-designated relocation area.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor
environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction period or as stipulated in the species- or
resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-6 The following measures shall be incorporated as a part of the project to further protect fish and other aquatic
wildlife on site:
1. Prior to capture and relocation activities, the relevant regulator/resource agency shall be notified to allow
for an opportunity to provide watershed specific guidance.
2. In-stream work, including dewatering activities, shall take place between April 15 and October 31 in any
given year, when the surface water is likely to be at seasonal minimum. Deviations from this work window
will only be made with permission from the relevant regulatory/resource agencies.
3. During in-stream work, if pumps are incorporated to assist in temporarily dewatering the site, intakes shall
be completely screened with no larger than 0.2-inch wire mesh to prevent steelhead and other sensitive
aquatic species from entering the pump system. Pumps shall release the additional water to a settling area,
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 66 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
basin, or tank, allowing the suspended sediment to settle out prior to re-entering the stream(s) outside of
the isolated area. The form and function of all pumps used during the dewatering activities shall be checked
daily, to ensure a dry work environment and minimize adverse effects to aquatic species and habitats.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor
environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction period or as stipulated in the species- or
resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-7 The following measures shall be implemented immediately prior to and during all project work area dewatering
activities to further protect steelhead and other aquatic wildlife on site:
1. A qualified biologist(s) shall identify and evaluate the suitability of downstream and/or upstream steelhead
relocation habitat(s) prior to undertaking the dewatering activities that are required to isolate the work area
from standing/flowing water. This shall include an evaluation of potential relocation sites based on
attributes such as adequate water quality (a minimum dissolved oxygen level of 5 mg/L and suitable water
temperature), cover (instream and over-hanging vegetation or woody debris) and living space. Multiple
relocation habitats may be necessary to prevent overcrowding of a single habitat depending on the number
of steelhead captured, current number of steelhead already occupying the relocation habitat(s), and the size
of the receiving habitat(s).
2. Prior to dewatering, block nets shall be installed immediately downstream of the proposed work area. The
purpose will be to exclude fish from reentering the work area by blocking the stream channel below with
fine meshed nets or screens. Mesh will be no greater than 1/8-inch diameter. The bottom of the seine must
be completely secured to the channel bed to prevent fish from reentering the work area. Exclusion screening
must be placed in areas of low water velocity to minimize fish impingement. Block nets shall be placed
and maintained throughout the construction period at the lower extent of the areas where fish will be
removed. Block net mesh shall be sized to ensure steelhead upstream or downstream do not enter the areas
proposed for dewatering between passes with the electrofisher (if authorized) or seine.
3. The qualified biologist(s) shall lead all block netting, seining, electrofishing, and fish relocation activities
including the capture and relocation of steelhead prior to installation of block nets. This shall include the
documentation of the number of steelhead observed in the affected area, the number of steelhead relocated,
and the date and time of collection and relocation. The following requirements for capture and transport of
steelhead shall be adhered to during all operations:
a. Determine the most efficient means for capturing fish. Complex stream habitat generally requires the
use of electrofishing equipment, whereas in outlet pools, fish may be concentrated by pumping down
the pool and then seining or dip-netting fish.
b. Initial fish relocation efforts will be conducted several days prior to the start of construction. This will
provide the biologist(s) an opportunity to return to the work area and perform additional electrofishing
passes immediately prior to project implementation. In many instances, additional fish will be
captured that eluded the previous day’s efforts.
c. If the project site has high summer water temperatures, perform relocation activities during morning
periods.
d. Periodically measure air and water temperatures and monitor fish health. Temperatures will be
measured at the head of riffle tail of pool interface. Cease activities if health of fish is compromised
owing to high water temperatures, or if mortality exceeds three percent of captured steelhead.
4. The following methods shall be used if fish are removed with seines:
a. A minimum of three passes with the seine shall be utilized to ensure maximum capture probability of
steelhead within the area.
b. All captured fish shall be processed and released prior to each subsequent pass with the seine.
c. The seine mesh shall be adequately sized to ensure fish are not gilled during capture and relocation
activities.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 67 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
5. If standard fish capture methods are deemed ineffective due to environmental conditions, electrofishing
shall only be used following the methods listed below (assuming authorization):
a. All electrofishing will be conducted according to NMFS’ Guidelines for Electrofishing Waters
Containing Salmonids Listed Under the Endangered Species Act, including modifications for South
Central and Southern California streams including all voltage settings on the electrofisher which shall
not exceed 300 volts.
b. A minimum of three passes with the electrofisher shall be utilized to ensure maximum capture
probability of steelhead within the area proposed for dewatering.
c. Water temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity shall be recorded in an electrofishing
logbook, along with electrofishing settings.
d. A minimum of one assistant shall aid the NMFS/USFWS approved biologist(s) by netting stunned
fish and other aquatic vertebrates.
6. Steelhead relocation activities will be consistent with the measures presented below, which are excerpted
from Measures to Minimize Impacts to Aquatic Habitat and Species During Dewatering of Project Sites,
on pages IX-51 and IX-52 of the CDFW California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual:
a. All project site dewatering activities shall be coordinated with the qualified biologist and/or other
biologists qualified to perform fish and amphibian (i.e., CRLF) relocation activities.
b. Minimize the length of the dewatered stream channel and duration of dewatering.
c. The work area may often be periodically pumped dry of seepage. Place pumps in flat areas, well away
from the stream channel. Secure pumps by tying off to a tree or stake in place to prevent movement
by vibration. Refuel in an area well away from the stream channel and place fuel absorbent mats
under pump while refueling. Pump intakes should be covered with 1/8-inch wire mesh to prevent
entrainment of fish or amphibians that failed to be removed. Check intake periodically for
impingement of fish or amphibians.
7. In order to minimize injury or mortality of steelhead during fish relocation and dewatering activities,
additional measures are presented below consistent with the Measures to Minimize Injury and Mortality of
Fish and Amphibian Species During Dewatering, on pages IX-52 and IX-53 of the CDFW California
Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual:
a. Fish relocation activities will be led by the qualified biologist(s) who has experience in steelhead
biology and ecology, aquatic habitats, biological monitoring (including diversion/dewatering), and
capturing, handling, and relocating fish species.
b. The qualified biologist(s) will continuously monitor placement and removal of any required block
nets and will capture stranded steelhead and other native fish species and relocate them to suitable
habitat, as 14 appropriate. The biologist(s) will capture steelhead stranded as a result of dewatering
and relocate them to the nearest suitable instream habitat. The biologist(s) will note the number of
steelhead observed in the affected area, the number relocated, and the date and time of the collection
and relocation.
c. Minimize handling of salmonids. However, when handling is necessary, always wet hands or nets
prior to touching fish.
d. Discharge wastewater from project area to an upland location where it will not drain sediment-laden
water back to the stream channel. When the project is completed, the block nets shall be removed as
soon as possible in a manner that will allow flow to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate.
e. Fish shall not be overcrowded into buckets, allowing no more than 150 0+ fish (approximately six
cubic inches per 0+ individuals) per 5-gallon bucket and fewer individuals per bucket for larger/older
fish.
f. Every effort shall be made not to mix 0+ steelhead with larger steelhead, or other potential predators,
that may consume the smaller steelhead. Have at least two containers and segregate young-of-year
(0+) fish from larger age-classes. Place larger amphibians in the container with larger fish.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 68 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
g. Salmonid predators, including other fishes and amphibians, collected and relocated during
electrofishing or seining activities shall not be relocated so as to concentrate them in one area.
Emphasis shall be placed on avoiding relocation of predators into the steelhead relocation pools. To
minimize predation of steelhead, these species shall be distributed throughout the wetted portion of
the stream to avoid concentrating them in one area.
h. All captured steelhead shall be relocated, preferably upstream, of the proposed construction project
and placed in suitable habitat. All captured fish shall be placed into a pool, preferably with a depth of
greater than two feet with available instream cover.
8. NMFS shall be contacted immediately if one or more steelheads are found dead or injured. The purpose of
the contact shall be to review the activities resulting in take and to determine if additional protective
measures are required. All steelhead mortalities shall be retained, frozen as soon as practical, and placed in
an appropriate sized sealable bag that is labeled with the date and location of the collection and fork length
and weight of the specimen(s). Frozen 15 samples shall be retained by the biologist until additional
instructions are provided by NMFS.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor
environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction period or as stipulated in the species- or
resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-8 If work is planned to occur between February 1 and August 31, a qualified biologist shall survey the area for nesting
birds within one week prior to activity beginning on site. If nesting birds are located on or near the proposed project
site, they shall be avoided until they have successfully fledged, or the nest is no longer deemed active. A non-
disturbance buffer of 50 feet will be placed around non-listed, passerine species, and a 250-foot buffer will be
implemented for all raptor species. All activity will remain outside of the buffer until a qualified biologist has
determined that the nest is no longer active (e.g., young have fledged, nest failed, etc.) or that proposed construction
activities would not cause adverse impacts to the nest, adults, eggs, or young. If any active nests of listed, fully
protected, or otherwise special-status species are detected during the surveys, the appropriate wildlife protection
agency shall be contacted for guidance on how to proceed. No work would occur within the specified no-work
buffers unless previously coordinated with CDFW prior to initiation.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor
environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction period or as stipulated in the species- or
resource-specific mitigation measure and provide monitoring reports to the City.
BIO-9 Prior to project initiation, all applicable agency permits with jurisdiction over the project area (i.e., USACE, CDFW,
and RWQCB) should be obtained, as necessary. All additional mitigation measures required by these agencies
would be implemented as necessary throughout project activities.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. Any required permits shall be
obtained from the state and federal agencies prior to initiation of the project.
BIO-10 The following measures are provided to further protect drainage features and aquatic resources on site:
1. The limits of jurisdictional aquatic features shall be clearly shown on all site plans. Further, temporary
construction activities including access routes and staging areas shall be reduced to the smallest area required.
2. All equipment and materials shall be stored away from the edge of the spillway/creek to the maximum extent
feasible at the end of each working day.
3. Prior to project implementation, a Spill Contingency Plan shall be developed which outlines the procedures
for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of
preventing spills and of the appropriate measures should a spill occur.
4. All staged and stored equipment shall have secondary containment (i.e., drip pans) to prevent leaks and spills
of potential contaminants from entering the creek.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 69 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
5. Washing of concrete, paint, or equipment, and refueling and maintenance of equipment shall occur only in
designated areas with appropriate containment 16 (i.e., visqueen, temporary L-bracket berms). Sandbags
and/or absorbent pads shall be available to prevent water and/or spilled fuel from leaving the site.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. The Environmental Monitor shall
monitor environmental compliance of the construction activities throughout the construction/activity period or as stipulated in
the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan and provide monitoring reports to the City.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Prior to initiation of project activities, a City-qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural resource awareness
training for all construction personnel including the following:
8. Review the types of archaeological artifacts that may be uncovered;
9. Provide examples of common archaeological artifacts to examine;
10. Review what makes an archaeological resource significant to archaeologists and local Native Americans;
11. Describe procedures for notifying involved or interested parties in case of a new discovery;
12. Describe reporting requirements and responsibilities of construction personnel;
13. Review procedures that shall be used to record, evaluate, and mitigate new discoveries; and
14. Describe procedures that would be followed in the case of discovery of disturbed as well as intact human burials
and burial-associated artifacts.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. The qualified archaeologist shall
conduct the awareness training and provide documentation of compliance to the City Public Utilities Department.
CR-2 The following measure shall be shown on all applicable plans and implemented if cultural resources are encountered
during all construction activities:
If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all ground-disturbing activities within a
25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a
City-qualified archaeologist assesses the find and determines the need for further study. If the find includes Native
American-affiliated materials, a local Native American tribal representative will be contacted to work in conjunction
with the City-approved archaeologist to determine the need for further study. A standard inadvertent discovery
clause shall be included in every grading and construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any
previously unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department
of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified
archaeologist.
If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a
research design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American
representative(s) as necessary, that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The
archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the
Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the
permanent curation of the recovered materials.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. In the event of unanticipated
discovery, the qualified archaeologist shall submit an evaluation report for review and approval by the City Public Utilities
Department and Community Development Department. Compliance with any required subsequent actions shall be ensured by
the City.
CR-3 The following measure shall be shown on all applicable plans and implemented if human remains are exposed
during construction and ground-disturbing activities:
In the event that human remains are exposed during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an
immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director and locally affiliated
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 70 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
Native American representative(s) (as necessary) shall be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition
pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall
notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. In the event of unanticipated
discovery, the qualified archaeologist shall submit an evaluation report for review and approval by the City Public Utilities
Department and Community Development Department. Compliance with any required subsequent actions shall be ensured by
the City.
Geology and Soils
Implement mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Implement mitigation measure BIO-2.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Implement mitigation measure BIO-2.
Noise
N-1 The following noise reduction measures shall be shown on all applicable plans and adhered to during project activities:
6. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at the project
boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern noise control devices (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor
enclosures).
7. Impact tools (e.g., jackhammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall be
hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust
from pneumatically powered tools.
8. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used.
9. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed, such
as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
10. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and
presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on construction plans. The City Public Utilities Department
or their designee shall ensure compliance.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Implement mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2.
TCR-1 A qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be present during all project related construction
activities that result in disturbance of native soil that may contain tribal cultural resources. Monitoring activities
shall be conducted in accordance with a Monitoring Plan as approved by the City Community Development
Department. The plan shall include provisions such as:
1. List of personnel involved in the monitoring activities including a Native American monitor;
2. Description of how the monitoring shall occur;
3. Description of monitoring frequency;
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 71 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
4. Description of circumstances that would result in the “work diversion,” in the case of discovery, at the project
site;
5. Description of procedures for diverting work on the site and notification procedures;
6. Description of monitoring reporting procedures; and
7. Description of the procedures for reburial of artifacts and/or human remains within identified areas on the
project site or other suitable location.
Monitoring Program: All mitigation measures shall be shown on plans and materials. The Construction Monitoring
Treatment Plan shall be prepared in consultation with the Native American representative(s) and submitted to for review and
approval by the City Public Utilities Department and Community Development Department prior to initiation of project
activities. The City Public Utilities Department shall ensure compliance with this measure. The qualified archaeologist shall
submit the monitoring program report to the City Public Utilities Department and Community Development Department for
review and approval.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 72 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
ATTACHMENTS
Biological Survey Results Memorandum for the Proposed Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin
Dewatering and Inspection Project (Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC, 2022)
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 www.terraverdeweb.com
June 9, 2022
Mr. Noah Evans
Whale Rock Supervisor
City of San Luis Obispo, Public Utilities
108 East 13th Street
Cayucos, California 93430-1348
Sent via email to: nevans@slocity.org
RE: Biological Survey Results Memorandum for the Proposed Whale Rock Reservoir
Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project , 108 13th Street, Cayucos,
California
Terra Verde Environmental Consulting, LLC (Terra Verde) has prepared this memorandum
to document the results of a reconnaissance-level biological resources assessment and
jurisdictional delineation in support of the proposed Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin
Dewatering and Inspection Project (project) located at 108 East 13st Street, Cayucos, San
Luis Obispo County, California (see Attachment A – Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity
Map). The Whale Rock Reservoir is managed by the City of San Luis Obispo’s Public
Utilities Department (City). The proposed project is required by the State of California to
inspect the integrity of the concrete spillway basin below the Whale Rock Reservoir (see
Attachment A – Figure 2: Survey Area Map). The project will include temporary impacts
to waters associated with Old Creek, a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) blue line drainage.
In order to conduct the visual inspection, the City is proposing to use submersible pumps
to dewater the area of the concrete spillway basin, discharging the water to adjacent
upland areas. Temporary sediment catchments and dissipation devices, such as straw
bales and plastic sheeting, will be used to slow down and settle turbid water before it is
allowed to run overland. Additional devices (e.g., sandbags, silt fence, straw wattle, straw
bales) will be implemented as needed to ensure no erosion or sedimentation occurs to
the creek below. Once the area is dewatered, equipment such as a backhoe or skid steer
will be lowered down from the road above the spillway. A container will also be lowered
down. Materials will be placed in the container, and once filled, will be pulled back up and
emptied on site. Sediments or vegetation removed from the channel with be spread
2
locally above the spillway and in areas where the materials will not wash back into the
spillway or downstream to Old Creek. Once the area is accessible and the concrete
channel visible, an engineer or engineers will conduct the required inspection.
Terra Verde completed a desktop literature review and field survey s of the site, which
focused on the identification of sensitive biological resources that are present or have the
potential to occur in the vicinity of the proposed project site. This document is intended
to provide information about current site conditions and may be used to the support the
environmental review process and/or resource agency permitting.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located within the Cayucos USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle.
Topography at the base of the of the Whale Rock Reservoir’s dam consists of two
relatively flat terraces to the east and west of the spillway, with elevations ranging from
9 to 18 meters (30 to 60 feet). As it currently exists, the concrete spillway conveys water
from controlled dam releases when the reservoir has reached its capacity, as well as local
precipitation which directly enters the channel, into a rip-rap lined energy dissipation
basin (see Attachment B – Representative Site Photographs). The spillway and rip-rap
basin are an extension of Old Creek, a USGS blue line drainage. Vegetation within the
spillway, where present, is dominated by dense patches of common tule (Schoenoplectus
acutus var. occidentalis). The majority of the project site’s upland area consists of ruderal
grassland habitat that is regularly mowed and tilled.
METHODOLOGY
Prior to conducting field surveys, Terra Verde staff completed a backg round review of
relevant literature pertaining to sensitive resources known to occur in the project vicinity,
which included the following:
• Aerial photographs of the project site (Google Earth 1994 – 2022; UCSB 2022)
• USGS topographic map for the Cayucos 7.5-minute quadrangle (USGS 2022)
• Online Soil Survey for San Luis Obispo County, California (Natural Resources
Conservation Service 2022)
• Consortium of California Herbaria (CCH) online database of plant collections (CCH
2022)
• California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) list of state and federally listed
special-status species documented in the project vicinity (California Department
of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW] 2022)
• CNDDB map of special-status species that have been documented within a 2-mile
radius of the project site (CDFW 2022) (see Attachment A – Figure 3: 2-mile CNDDB
and Critical Habitat Map)
3
• California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants
documented in the project vicinity (CNPS 2022)
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Critical Habitat Portal (USFWS
2022a)
• USFWS National Wetland Inventory map (NWI) (USFWS 20 22b)
A list of regionally occurring special-status species was compiled based on records
reported in the scientific database queries. This species list was used to inform the field
survey effort.
Following the literature review and desktop analysis, Terra Verde completed a series of
surveys within the project site, which focused on the identification of sensi tive habitats
and special-status plant and wildlife species, as well as a delineation of jurisdictional
aquatic features. See Table 1: Summary of Field Surveys, for details.
Table1. Summary of Field Surveys
Date Survey Type Biologists
August 26, 2021 Habitat assessment, daytime survey for special-
status amphibians
Brooke Langle
Sara Snyder
August 30, 2021 Nighttime survey for special-status amphibians
Sara Snyder
Patrick Scott
Adam Yaney-Keller
April 12, 2022 Botanical and wildlife inventory, jurisdictional
delineation
Amy Golub
Patrick Scott
Field surveys included the entire proposed project area, and an approximate 100-foot
buffer, where access was feasible (see Attachment A – Figure 2). The habitat
requirements for each regionally occurring, special-status species and sensitive habitat
were analyzed and compared to the type and quality of habitats observed during the
August 26, 2021 field survey. The potential for many species to occur within the project
site was eliminated due to lack of suitable habitat, elevation, appropriate soils/substrate,
and/or known distribution of the species. Special-status species observed within the
project site and/or for which suitable habitat was identified on site are discussed in below,
and those determined to have no potential to occur based upon a lack of suitable habitat
are not discussed any further in this Biological Resources Assessment. Daytime and
nighttime surveys for special-status amphibians were focused on detecting the presence
of California red-legged frog (CRLF; Rana draytonii) (see Attachment C – CRLF Survey
Datasheets).
During the April 12, 2022 survey, all botanical and wildlife species encountered via direct
and indirect (e.g., scat, track, call) observation were documented. Botanical species
4
identifications and taxonomic nomenclature followed The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants
of California, 2nd edition (Baldwin et al. 2012), as well as taxonomic updates provided in
the Jepson eFlora (Jepson Flora Project 2022). The jurisdictional delineation focused on
mapping the outer extent of field indicators for waters of the state (i.e., top of bank, drip
line of riparian vegetation) and waters of the U.S. (i.e., ordinary high water mark [OHWM])
for the purpose of identifying likely permit triggers and agency jurisdiction for the CDFW,
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps).
RESULTS
The following summarizes the results of the field surveys that were conducted within the
proposed project area and provides further analysis of the data collected in the field.
Discussions regarding jurisdictional determinations, botanical and wildlife surveys, and
presence or absence of special-status species with potential to occur are presented
below.
Jurisdictional Determination
Old Creek is a USGS blue line drainage that historically flowed into traditionally navigable
waters (i.e., Pacific Ocean) from its headwaters in the Santa Lucia Mountains, northeast
of the proposed project site. The Whale Rock Reservoir was formed by construction of
the Whale Rock Dam in 1961 which impounded Old Creek, approximately 0.95-mile
upstream from its outlet to the Pacific Ocean (see Attachment D – Historical Aerial
Photographs).
During the field surveys, standing water was observed within the stilling basin and its
outlet, the rip-rap energy dissipator. The jurisdictional limits within the stilling basin are
defined by the vertical concrete channel walls. The natural channel bottom of Old Creek,
downstream of the constructed features, is higher in elevation and was dry at the time of
the surveys. At this location the dense patch of common tule transitions into an arroyo
willow (Salix lasiolepis) thicket within the channel. Connectivity between the stilling basin
and the waters of Old Creek occurs during water releases from the reservoir. Based on
the above, Terra Verde determined that the waters within the proposed project site
would likely be considered waters of the U.S. and waters of the State under the
jurisdiction of CDFW, RWQCB, and the Corps.
In addition to evidence of waters, portions of the stilling basin and energy dissipator
channel bottom support a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, indicating presence of a
potential in-channel wetland. Due to the design of the constructed features on site, water
appears to pond at the constructed outlet and potentially flow underground, through the
rip-rap energy dissipator structure. The dominant vegetation, common tule, observed in
5
patches within the channel feature is considered a typical wetland indicator. Terra Verde
determined that due to the constructed nature of the concrete stilling basin and rip-rap
outlet structure, that hydric soils, a required parameter for federal wetlands, were not
present. Based on the above, Terra Verde determined that no federal wetlands are on
site; however, based on the single parameter criteria for state wetlands, portions of the
areas mapped as state waters are also considered state wetlands.
An overview of jurisdictional waters and wetlands on site can be found in Attachment A
– Figure 4: Jurisdictional Delineation Map. The following table summarizes the results of
the jurisdictional waters and wetlands on site.
Table2. Extent and Location of Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands
Feature Type Jurisdiction Acres Length (feet)
Waters of the U.S. Corps 0.1 160
Waters/wetlands of the State CDFW, RWQCB 0.1 160
Wetlands of the U.S. Corps 0 0
Special-Status Botanical Species
The preliminary desktop review of the pertinent literature and agency resources (e.g.,
CNDDB) indicated that seven special-status plant species are known to occur within
vicinity of the project site (i.e., 2-mile) (see Attachment A – Figure 3), including:
• Miles' milk-vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus),
• San Luis Obispo owl's-clover (Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis),
• Betty’s dudleya (Dudleya abramsii subsp. bettinae),
• Mouse-gray dudleya (Dudleya abramsii subsp. murina),
• Blochman’s dudleya (Dudleya blochmaniae subsp. blochmaniae),
• Jones’ layia (Layia jonesii), and
• California seablite (Suaeda californica)
Due to the high degree of land manipulation and ongoing disturbance (i.e., frequent
mowing) occurring within the proposed project site, no suitable habitat is present for any
special-status plant species. Further, no special-status species were detected during the
appropriately timed 2021 and 2022 surveys. As such, no special-status plants are
expected to occur.
Special Status Wildlife Species
The preliminary desktop review of the pertinent literature and agency resources (e.g.,
CNDDB) indicated that four special-status wildlife species are known to occur within
vicinity of the project site (see Attachment A – Figure 3), including:
• Southwestern pond turtle (Actinemys pallida), State Species of Special Concern,
6
• Steelhead (south-central California coast DPS; Oncorhynchus mykiss), Federal
Threatened,
• Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi), Federal Endangered, State Species of
Special Concern, and
• CRLF, Federal Threatened, State Species of Special Concern
Additionally, USFWS-designated critical habitat for CRLF and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) -
designated critical habitat for steelhead occurs within the proposed project area.
Standing water was observed in the stilling basin during the 2021 and 2022 surveys.
Aquatic connectivity to the downstream portions of Old Creek, over the rise in the creek
bed’s elevation, typically only occurs during infrequent, periodic releases from the
reservoir. Local biological knowledge supports the presence of steelhead in the waters of
the Whale Rock Reservoir and downstream in Old Creek. As such, there is a low potential
for steelhead to occur in the waters of the stilling basin. Tidewater goby has been locally
extirpated from Old Creek since the 1980’s and there is a lack of regular connectivity
between the stilling basin and the Pacific Ocean (Rathburn 1991, Holland 1999, and
USFWS 2002). As such, tidewater goby is not expected to occur.
No special-status species were detected during the 2021 or 2022 surveys and bullfrogs
(Lithobates catesbeiana), a non-native predatory species that preys on and often
outcompetes CRLF, were observed (see Attachment C). However, due to the presence of
aquatic habitat and dense wetland vegetation there is a low potential for southwestern
pond turtle and CRLF to be present within or directly below the stilling basin. Additionally,
although the upland areas lack appropriate habitat for CRLF and southwestern pond
turtle, these species may utilize the immediate project area for dispersal movements
during and/or immediately after rain events.
The patches of common tule, arroyo willow thicket, and man -made structures within the
survey area may provide suitable habitat opportunities for a variety of common passerine
and raptor species during the typical avian nesting period (February 1 through August 31).
To avoid any inadvertent impacts to special-status species and nesting birds, avoidance
and minimization measures are recommended below for implementation prior to and
during maintenance activities.
Impact Assessment
Jurisdictional Waters
Based upon review of the project description and field determinations, the proposed
project will result in approximately 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to
waters of the state, including 0.10-acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to
7
waters for the U.S. (see Table 3). Specifically, temporary impacts are expected as a result
of dewatering and excavating accumulated sediment and vegetation. No permanent
impacts are currently proposed. As such, impacts to the spillway would require permits
from CDFW, RWQCB, and the Corps. Recommended avoidance and minimization
measures for temporary impacts to jurisdictional features are detailed below. However ,
each agency may require additional measures to be implemented prior to, during, and
following completion of the project.
Table 3. Summary of Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands
Location Jurisdiction Temporary
Impact (linear feet [LF])
Permanent
Impact (LF)
Tree
Removals
Waters of the U.S. Corps 4,356 sq. ft. / 160 LF 0 acres / 0 LF 0
Waters/Wetlands
of the State
CDFW,
RWQCB 4,356 sq. ft. / 160 LF 0 acre / 0 LF 0
Special-status Wildlife Species
Direct and indirect impacts may occur to a variety of common and special-status wildlife
species. Specifically, the proposed project may directly or indirectly impact CRLF,
southwestern pond turtle, and steelhead, as well as migratory nesting birds. CRLF and
southwestern pond turtle could be crushed or trampled by vehicles and equipment if they
are present during maintenance-related disturbances. Additional impacts could occur
during temporary alteration or removal of habitat. Steelhead may be stranded in portions
of the channel during dewatering operations, get caught in dewatering pumps, crushed
by equipment, and/or made vulnerable to predation from opportunistic foraging birds
and mammals. Potential indirect impacts from the project may occur and include
sediment deposition downstream of the work area, which may adversely impact
downstream water quality.
Additionally, the entire project area is within USFWS-designated critical habitat for CRLF
and the waters of Old Creek are NOAA/NMFS-designated critical habitat for steelhead.
Temporary construction activities to complete the project such as dewatering, equipment
access, and work within the spillway are considered temporary impacts since there is a
temporary disruption of service for species dependent on this portion of creek during the
maintenance work. The extent and effects of this are estimated to be minor, and
restricted to the driest months (e.g., June to October) outside of reproductive periods .
Recommended avoidance and minimization measures are detailed below to reduce the
anticipated impacts of the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible. Additional
measures may be required by the resource agencies (i.e., USFWS, NOAA/NMFS, and
8
CDFW) for potential impacts to special-status species and designated critical habitat
features.
RECOMMENDED AVOIDANCE and MINIMIZATION MEASURES
General Measures
• Measure 1: An environmental awareness training shall be presented to all
construction personnel by a qualified biologist prior to start of project activities. The
training shall include color photographs and a description of the ecology of all special-
status species known or determined to have potential to occur, including but not
limited to CRLF, steelhead, and southwestern pond turtle, as well as other sensitive
resources requiring avoidance near project impact areas. The training shall also
include a description of protection measures required by any discretionary permits,
an overview of the Endangered Species Act, implications of noncompliance with the
Endangered Species Act, and required avoidance and minimization measures.
• Measure 2:
o No refueling or maintenance of vehicles or equipment shall occur within 100
feet of the spillway/Old Creek.
o Spill clean-up kits and secondary containment shall be made available and
used to prevent spills or leaks from entering the drainage.
o Secondary containment such as drop pans shall be used to prevent leaks and
spills of potential contaminants.
o Washing of concrete, paint, or equipment, and refueling and maintenance of
equipment shall occur only in designated areas.
o Sandbags and/or absorbent pads shall be available to clean up any spilled fuel,
as needed.
o Any chemicals used shall be prevented from entering the jurisdictional areas.
o Construction equipment shall be inspected by the operator daily to ensure
that equipment is in good working order and no fuel or lubricant leaks are
present.
o Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material will
not be used on site due to the potential to entangle special-status wildlife.
Acceptable substitutes are coconut coir matting, biodegradable fiber rolls, or
tackified hydroseeding compounds.
o During project activities, all trash that may attract predators or scavengers
shall be properly contained, removed from the work site, and disposed of at
the end of each work week. Following construction, all trash and debris shall
be removed from work areas.
9
Special-status Wildlife Measures
• Measure 3:
o A qualified biologist shall complete a pre-construction survey for
southwestern pond turtle within 48 hours prior to the start of all work within
100 feet of suitable habitat. Surveys shall include an inspection of all work
areas, staging areas, and access routes. Further, daily site inspections shall be
completed each morning prior to the start of work within all work areas,
throughout the dewatering and sediment removal phases. All vehicles,
equipment, and materials staged on site overnight shall be inspected during
pre-activity surveys and daily site inspections.
o In addition, a qualified biologist shall monitor all initial equipment mobilization
and staging activities within 100 feet of the creek. If southwestern pond turtle
are discovered in the work areas, they shall be allowed to leave the area on
their own volition or be relocated by a qualified biologist with ap propriate
authorization from CDFW to pre-determined suitable habitat areas located
outside the immediate impact area.
• Measure 4: The following protection measures will be incorporated into the project
to protect CRLF during project operations:
o To avoid the potential for take of CRLF that may disperse through the project
area during the project, all initial project activities associated with the
dewatering and sediment removal will be completed in the dry season
(between April 15 and October 31) or when conditions are dry.
o During temporary dewatering activities, the intake screen will consist of wire
mesh not larger than 0.20-inch to prevent any CRLF from entering the pump
system.
o If exotic species known such as bullfrogs, crayfish, or centrarchid fishes are
observed in the project area, a service-approved biologist shall permanently
remove these individuals from the project area to extent possible.
o To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the service -
approved biologist, the following fieldwork practices will be implemented:
▪ Mud, snails, algae, and other debris shall be removed from nets, traps,
boots, vehicle tires, and all other surfaces. Items will be rinsed cleaned
with sterilized (e.g., boiled or treated) water before leaving each work
site or prior to equipment being used again.
▪ Boots, nets, traps, and other types of equipment used in the aquatic
environment shall be scrubbed with 70 percent ethanol solution and
10
rinsed clean with sterilized water (e.g., boiled or treated) between
sites.
• Measure 5: The following measures shall be implemented immediately prior to and
during dewatering and sediment removal activities within the project site for CRLF
until completion:
o A qualified biologist will survey the project site no more than 48 hours before
the onset of work activities. If the biologist finds any life stage of the CRLF
which are likely to be killed or injured by work activities, the biologist will be
allowed sufficient time to move them from the site before work begins,
assuming authorization from USFWS has been granted . The biologist will
relocate the CRLFs to a pre-designated relocation site within the same
drainage that contains suitable habitat and that will not be affected by
activities associated with the proposed project.
o A qualified biologist will be present at the work site during all initial equipment
mobilization and staging activities and until all CRLFs have been relocated out
of harm’s way and disturbance of suitable habitat areas has been completed.
After this time, the biologist will designate a person to monitor on-site
compliance with all minimization measures. The biologist will ensure that this
monitor receives the training outlined in Measure 1 above and in the
identification of CRLFs. If the designated CRLF monitor or the biologist
recommends that work be stopped because CRLFs would be affected in a
manner not anticipated during initial project review, they will notify the City
immediately. The City will either resolve the situation by eliminating the
adverse effect immediately or require that all actions causing these effects be
halted. If the City halts work, the USFWS will be notified for further
consultation.
o The biological monitor will inspect the project site each morning prior to the
onset of activities. The biologist will relocate any CRLF found to the pre-
designated relocation area.
• Measure 6: The following measures shall be incorporated as a part of the project to
further protect fish and other aquatic wildlife on site:
o Prior to capture and relocation activities, the relevant regulator/resource
agency shall be notified to allow for an opportunity to provide watershed
specific guidance.
o In-stream work, including dewatering activities, shall take place between April
15 and October 31 in any given year, when the surface water is likely to be at
11
seasonal minimum. Deviations from this work window will only be made with
permission from the relevant regulatory/resource agencies.
o During in-stream work, if pumps are incorporated to assist in temporarily
dewatering the site, intakes shall be completely screened with no larger than
0.2-inch wire mesh to prevent steelhead and other sensitive aquatic species
from entering the pump system. Pumps shall release the additional water to a
settling area, basin, or tank, allowing the suspended sediment to settle out
prior to re-entering the stream(s) outside of the isolated area. The form and
function of all pumps used during the dewatering activities shall be checked
daily, to ensure a dry work environment and minimize adverse effects to
aquatic species and habitats.
• Measure 7: The following measures shall be implemented immediately prior to and
during all project work area dewatering activities:
o A qualified biologist(s) shall identify and evaluate the suitability of
downstream and/or upstream steelhead relocation habitat(s) prior to
undertaking the dewatering activities that are required to isolate the work
area from standing/flowing water. This shall include an evaluation of potential
relocation sites based on attributes such as adequate water quality (a
minimum dissolved oxygen level of 5 mg/L and suitable water temperature),
cover (instream and over-hanging vegetation or woody debris) and living
space. Multiple relocation habitats may be necessary to prevent overcrowding
of a single habitat depending on the number of steelhead captured, current
number of steelhead already occupying the relocation habitat(s), and the size
of the receiving habitat(s).
o Prior to dewatering, block nets shall be installed immediately downstream of
the proposed work area. The purpose will be to exclude fish from reentering
the work area by blocking the stream channel below with fine meshed nets or
screens. Mesh will be no greater than 1/8-inch diameter. The bottom of the
seine must be completely secured to the channel bed to prevent fish from
reentering the work area. Exclusion screening must be placed in areas of low
water velocity to minimize fish impingement. Block nets shall be placed and
maintained throughout the construction period at the lower extent of the
areas where fish will be removed. Block net mesh shall be sized to ensure
steelhead upstream or downstream do not enter the areas proposed for
dewatering between passes with the electrofisher (if authorized) or seine.
o The qualified biologist(s) shall lead all block netting, seining, electrofishing, and
fish relocation activities including the capture and relocation of steelhead prior
12
to installation of block nets. This shall include the documentation of the
number of steelhead observed in the affected area, the number of steelhead
relocated, and the date and time of collection and relocation. The following
requirements for capture and transport of steelhead shall be adhered to
during all operations:
▪ Determine the most efficient means for capturing fish. Complex stream
habitat generally requires the use of electrofishing equipment,
whereas in outlet pools, fish may be concentrated by pumping down
the pool and then seining or dip-netting fish.
▪ Initial fish relocation efforts will be conducted several days prior to the
start of construction. This will provide the biologist(s) an opportunity
to return to the work area and perform additional electrofishing passes
immediately prior to project implementation. In many instances,
additional fish will be captured that eluded the previous day’s efforts.
▪ If the project site has high summer water temperatures, perform
relocation activities during morning periods.
▪ Periodically measure air and water temperatures and monitor fish
health. Temperatures will be measured at the head of riffle tail of pool
interface. Cease activities if health of fish is compromised owing to high
water temperatures, or if mortality exceeds three percent of captured
steelhead.
o The following methods shall be used if fish are removed with seines:
▪ A minimum of three passes with the seine shall be utilized to ensure
maximum capture probability of steelhead within the area.
▪ All captured fish shall be processed and released prior to each
subsequent pass with the seine.
▪ The seine mesh shall be adequately sized to ensure fish are not gilled
during capture and relocation activities.
o If standard fish capture methods are deemed ineffective due to environmental
conditions, electrofishing shall only be used following the methods listed
below (assuming authorization):
▪ All electrofishing will be conducted according to NMFS’ Guidelines for
Electrofishing Waters Containing Salmonids Listed Under the
Endangered Species Act (NOAA 2000), including modifications for
South Central and Southern California streams including all voltage
settings on the electrofisher which shall not exceed 300 volts.
13
▪ A minimum of three passes with the electrofisher shall be utilized to
ensure maximum capture probability of steelhead within the area
proposed for dewatering.
▪ Water temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity shall be
recorded in an electrofishing logbook, along with electrofishing
settings.
▪ A minimum of one assistant shall aid the NMFS/USFWS approved
biologist(s) by netting stunned fish and other aquatic vertebrates.
o Steelhead relocation activities will be consistent with the measures presented
below, which are excerpted from Measures to Minimize Impacts to Aquatic
Habitat and Species During Dewatering of Project Sites, on pages IX-51 and IX-
52 of the CDFW California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual
(CDFW 2004):
▪ All project site dewatering activities shall be coordinated with the
qualified biologist and/or other biologists qualified to perform fish and
amphibian (i.e., CRLF) relocation activities.
▪ Minimize the length of the dewatered stream channel and duration of
dewatering.
▪ The work area may often be periodically pumped dry of seepage. Place
pumps in flat areas, well away from the stream channel. Secure pumps
by tying off to a tree or stake in place to prevent movement by
vibration. Refuel in an area well away from the stream channel and
place fuel absorbent mats under pump while refueling. Pump intakes
should be covered with 1/8-inch wire mesh to prevent entrainment of
fish or amphibians that failed to be removed. Check intake periodically
for impingement of fish or amphibians.
o In order to minimize injury or mortality of steelhead during fish relocation and
dewatering activities, additional measures are presented below consistent
with the Measures to Minimize Injury and Mortality of Fish and Amphibian
Species During Dewatering, on pages IX-52 and IX-53 of the CDFW California
Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual (CDFW 2004):
▪ Fish relocation activities will be led by the qualified biologist(s) who has
experience in steelhead biology and ecology, aquatic habitats,
biological monitoring (including diversion/dewatering), and capturing,
handling, and relocating fish species.
▪ The qualified biologist(s) will continuously monitor placement and
removal of any required block nets and will capture stranded steelhead
and other native fish species and relocate them to suitable habitat, as
14
appropriate. The biologist(s) will capture steelhead stranded as a result
of dewatering and relocate them to the nearest suitable instream
habitat. The biologist(s) will note the number of steelhead observed in
the affected area, the number relocated, and the date and time of the
collection and relocation.
▪ Minimize handling of salmonids. However, when handling is necessary,
always wet hands or nets prior to touching fish.
▪ Discharge wastewater from project area to an upland location where
it will not drain sediment-laden water back to the stream channel.
When the project is completed, the block nets shall be removed as
soon as possible in a manner that will allow flow to resume with the
least disturbance to the substrate.
▪ Fish shall not be overcrowded into buckets, allowing no more than 150
0+ fish (approximately six cubic inches per 0+ individuals) per 5-gallon
bucket and fewer individuals per bucket for larger/older fish.
▪ Every effort shall be made not to mix 0+ steelhead with larger
steelhead, or other potential predators, that may consume the smaller
steelhead. Have at least two containers and segregate young-of-year
(0+) fish from larger age-classes. Place larger amphibians in the
container with larger fish.
▪ Salmonid predators, including other fishes and amphibians, collected
and relocated during electrofishing or seining activities shall not be
relocated so as to concentrate them in one area. Emphasis shall be
placed on avoiding relocation of predators into the steelhead
relocation pools. To minimize predation of steelhead, these species
shall be distributed throughout the wetted portion of the st ream to
avoid concentrating them in one area.
▪ All captured steelhead shall be relocated, preferably upstream, of the
proposed construction project and placed in suitable habitat. All
captured fish shall be placed into a pool, preferably with a depth of
greater than two feet with available instream cover.
o NMFS shall be contacted immediately if one or more steelhead are found dead
or injured. The purpose of the contact shall be to review the activities resulting
in take and to determine if additional protective measures are required. All
steelhead mortalities shall be retained, frozen as soon as practical, and placed
in an appropriate sized sealable bag that is labeled with the date and location
of the collection and fork length and weight of the specimen(s). Frozen
15
samples shall be retained by the biologist until additional instructions are
provided by NMFS.
• Measure 8: If work is planned to occur between February 1 and August 31, a qualified
biologist shall survey the area for nesting birds within one week prior to activity
beginning on site. If nesting birds are located on or near the proposed project site,
they shall be avoided until they have successfully fledged or the nest is no longer
deemed active. A non-disturbance buffer of 50 feet will be placed around non-listed,
passerine species, and a 250-foot buffer will be implemented for all raptor species. All
activity will remain outside of the buffer until a qualified biologist has determined that
the nest is no longer active (e.g., young have fledged, nest failed, etc.) or that
proposed construction activities would not cause adverse impacts to the nest, adults,
eggs, or young. If any active nests of listed, fully protected, or otherwise special-status
species are detected during the surveys, the appropriate wildlife protection agency
shall be contacted for guidance on how to proceed. No work would occur within the
specified no-work buffers unless previously coordinated with CDFW prior to initiation.
Jurisdictional Waters and Critical Habitat Measures
• Measure 9: Prior to project initiation, all applicable agency permits with jurisdiction
over the project area (i.e., Corps, CDFW, and RWQCB) should be obtained, as
necessary. All additional mitigation measures required by these agencies would be
implemented as necessary throughout project activities.
The following measures are provided to further protect drainage features and aquatic
resources on site:
o The limits of jurisdictional aquatic features shall be clearly shown on al l site
plans. Further, temporary construction activities including access routes and
staging areas shall be reduced to the smallest area required.
o All equipment and materials shall be stored away from the edge of the
spillway/creek to the maximum extent feasible at the end of each working day.
o Prior to project implementation, a Spill Contingency Plan shall be developed
which outlines the procedures for prompt and effective response to any
accidental spills. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing
spills and of the appropriate measures should a spill occur.
o All staged and stored equipment shall have secondary containment (i.e., drip
pans) to prevent leaks and spills of potential contaminants from entering the
creek.
o Washing of concrete, paint, or equipment, and refueling and maintenance of
equipment shall occur only in designated areas with appropriate containment
16
(i.e., visqueen, temporary L-bracket berms). Sandbags and/or absorbent pads
shall be available to prevent water and/or spilled fuel from leaving the site.
CONCLUSION
No special-status botanical or wildlife species were detected during surveys of the project
area. However, it was determined that low suitable habitat exists for four special-status
wildlife species as well as nesting birds within the project area. NOAA/NMFS and USFWS-
designated critical habitat for south-central California coast steelhead DPS and CRLF are
present within the project area. The waters within the stilling basin were determined to
be under the jurisdiction of CDFW, RWQCB, and the Corps. The dewatering and inspection
project is confined to the constructed concrete spillway basin. Based on the current
project description, it is expected that implementation of the recommended avoid ance
and minimization measures will avoid and/or minimize impacts to potentially occurring
special-status species and sensitive resources to a less than significant level.
If you have any questions regarding any of the information provided , please contact me
at pscott@terraverdeweb.com or (714) 362-6667.
Sincerely,
Patrick Scott
Biologist
Attachment A – Figures
Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Project Site and Survey Area Map
Figure 3: 2-mile CNDDB and Critical Habitat Map
Figure 4: Jurisdictional Delineation Map
Attachment B – Representative Site Photographs
Attachment C – CRLF Survey Data Sheets
Attachment D – Historical Aerial Photographs
17
REFERNCES
Baldwin, Bruce G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken.
2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University
of California Press. Berkeley, California.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2004. California Salmonid Stream
Habitat Restoration Manual, Fourth Edition. Available online at:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=105810. Accessed April
2022.
----------2022. California Natural Diversity Database: RareFind 5. Accessible online with
subscription at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp.
Accessed April 2022.
California Native Plant Society. 2022. Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants.
Sacramento, California. Available online at: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/.
Accessed April 2022.
Consortium of California Herbaria. 2022. Regents of the University of California. Available
online at: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/consortium/. Accessed April 2022.
Google Earth Pro V 7.3.4.8573 (March 2022). 1994-2022. San Luis Obispo, California.
35.445706, - 120.886679. DigitalGlobe. Accessed April 2022.
Holland, Dan. 1999. Professor, University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette, Louisiana.
Public comments on the proposed rule to remove the northern populations of the
tidewater goby from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife (50 CFR Part
17, June 24, 1999).
Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2022. Regents of the University of California, Jepson eFlora.
Available online at: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/. Accessed April 2022.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2022. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Web Soil
Survey. Available Online at:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed April
2022.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2000. Guidelines for Electrofishing
Waters Containing Salmonids Listed Under the Endangered Species Act, June
2000. Available online at: https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dam-
migration/electro2000.pdf. Accessed April 2022.
Rathbun, G. 1991. Status of declining aquatic reptiles, amphibians, and fishes in lower
Santa Rosa Creek, Cambria, California. Report to Greenspace; A land trust,
Cambria, California.
University of California, Santa Barbara. 2022. Geospatial Collection, UCSB Library.
Available at: https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. Accessed
April 2022.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants; Withdrawal of Proposed Rule To Remove the Northern Populations of the
Tidewater Goby From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Federal
Register Volume 67, Number 216, Pages 67803-67818 (November 7, 2002).
18
----------2022a. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Portal.
Available online at: http://crithab.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html.
Accessed April 2022.
----------2022b. National Wetland Inventory Mapper. Available online at:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Accessed April 2022.
United States Geological Survey. 2022. National Geologic Map Database, TopoView Map
Viewer. 35.4457, /-120.8866. Available at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/35.4457/-120.8866. Accessed
April 2022.
ATTACHMENT A – Figures
Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Survey Area Map
Figure 3: 2-mile CNDDB and Critical Habitat Map
Figure 4: Jurisdictional Delineation Map
This page intentionally left blank.
Maxar
California State Parks, Esri, HERE,
Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, Bureau of
Land Management, EPA, NPS, Esri,
USGS
23 May 2022
Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project
City of San Luis Obispo
Figure 1. Project Location and Vicinity Map
¯0 0.50.25
Miles
1
Whale Rock Reservoir
Cayucos
Project Location
State Highway 1
USGS Blue Line Drainage
County of San Luis Obispo, Maxar, Microsoft
23 May 2022
Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project
City of San Luis Obispo
Figure 2. Survey Area Map
¯0 250125
US Feet13th StreetOld CreekSurvey Area
USGS Blue Line Drainage
Access Road
12
10
12
12
11
12
11
11
8
12
9
8
12
8
12
11
11
4 5
7
4
2
1
1
1
1 4
1
4
2
2
3
6
Maxar
23 May 2022
Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project
City of San Luis Obispo
Figure 3. 2-mile CNDDB and Critical Habitat Map
¯0 10.5
Miles
Project Location
2-mile Buffer
CNDDB Occurrences
Botanical
1 - Betty's dudleya
2 - Blochman's dudleya
3 - California seablite
4 - Jones' layia
5 - Miles' milk-vetch
6 - mouse-gray dudleya
7 - San Luis Obispo owl's-clover
Wildlife
8 - California red-legged frog
9 - monarch - California overwintering population
10 - steelhead - south-central California coast DPS
11 - tidewater goby
12 - western pond turtle
USFWS-designated Critical Habitat
California red-legged frog
Western snowy plover
Steelhead
County of San Luis Obispo, Maxar, Microsoft
23 May 2022
Whale Rock Reservoir Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection Project
City of San Luis Obispo
Figure 4. Jurisdictional Delineation Map
¯0 10050
US Feet
Temporary Impacts (Dewatering and Sediment Removal)
Jurisdictional Boundaries
CDFW/RWQCB Jurisdiction
Top of Bank/Edge of Riparian
Wetland
Corps Jurisdiction
Ordinary High Water Mark
End of Survey
End of Survey
ATTACHMENT B – Representative Site Photographs
This page intentionally left blank.
Photo 1. View south/downstream of the stilling basin from the 13th street/access road
bridge (August 26, 2021).
Photo 2. View south/downstream of the stilling basin from the 13th street/access road
bridge (April 12, 2022).
Photo 3. View north/upstream of the stilling basin spillway from the 13th street/access
road bridge (April 12, 2022).
Photo 4. View north/upstream of the rip-rap energy dissipation structure, stilling basin,
and instream vegetation (April 12, 2022).
ATTACHMENT C – CRLF Survey Datasheets
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix E.
California Red-legged Frog Survey Data Sheet
Survey results reviewed by________________________ _________ __________________________________
(FWS Field Office)(date)(biologist)
Date of Survey: Survey Biologist:
(mm/dd/yyyy)(Last name)(first name)
Survey Biologist:
(Last name) (first name)
Site Location:
(County, General location name, UTM Coordinates or Lat./Long. or T-R-S ).
**ATTACH A MAP (include habitat types, important features, and species locations)**
Proposed project name:
Brief description of proposed action:
Type of Survey (circle one): DAY NIGHT BREEDING NON-BREEDING
Survey number (circle one): 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Begin Time: End Time:
Cloud cover: Precipitation:
Air Temperature: Water Temperature:
Wind Speed: Visibility Conditions:
Moon phase: Humidity:
Description of weather conditions:
Brand name and model of light used to conduct surveys:
Were binoculars used for the surveys (circle one)? YES NO
Brand, model, and power of binoculars:
08-26-21 Langle, Brooke
Snyder, Sara
Whale Rock Stilling Basin, Cayucos, San Luis Obispo County, CA, 35.445720, -120.886664
Whale Rock Stilling Basin Dewatering and Cleaning
The Stilling Basin will be dewatered and remaining sediment removed in order to accommodate
a required safety inspection by an engineer.
10:00 AM 11:00 AM
Clear None
0 mph Good
Unknown62 - 65 deg F
Waning crescent
Sunny, clear, warm, no breeze
NA
Eagle Optics Ranger 10 x 42,
Appendix E.
California Red-legged Frog Survey Data Sheet
AMPHIBIAN OBSERVATIONS
Species # of
indiv.
Observed (O)
Heard (H)
Life Stages Size Class Certainty of
Identification
Describe potential threats to California red-legged frogs observed, including non-native and
native predators such as fish, bullfrogs, and raccoons:
Other notes, observations, comments, etc.
Necessary Attachments:
1.All field notes and other supporting documents
2. Site photographs
3.Maps with important habitat features and species locations
Bullfrog 1 O Adult Large 100%
A bullfrog and a crayfish were observed.
Appendix E.
California Red-legged Frog Survey Data Sheet
Survey results reviewed by________________________ _________ __________________________________
(FWS Field Office)(date)(biologist)
Date of Survey: Survey Biologist:
(mm/dd/yyyy)(Last name)(first name)
Survey Biologist:
(Last name) (first name)
Site Location:
(County, General location name, UTM Coordinates or Lat./Long. or T-R-S ).
**ATTACH A MAP (include habitat types, important features, and species locations)**
Proposed project name:
Brief description of proposed action:
Type of Survey (circle one): DAY NIGHT BREEDING NON-BREEDING
Survey number (circle one): 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Begin Time: End Time:
Cloud cover: Precipitation:
Air Temperature: Water Temperature:
Wind Speed: Visibility Conditions:
Moon phase: Humidity:
Description of weather conditions:
Brand name and model of light used to conduct surveys:
Were binoculars used for the surveys (circle one)? YES NO
Brand, model, and power of binoculars:
08-30-21 Snyder, Sara
Whale Rock Stilling Basin, Cayucos, San Luis Obispo County, CA, 35.445720, -120.886664
Whale Rock Stilling Basin Dewatering and Cleaning
The Stilling Basin will be dewatered and remaining sediment removed in order to accommodate
a required safety inspection by an engineer.
7:45 PM 9:15 PM
Clear None
0-2 mph Good
Unknown 62 - 63 deg F
Waning crescent
Clear, warm, light breeze
MagLite ML300, NiteLite
Eagle Optics Ranger 10 x 42,
Scott, Patrick and Yaney-Keller, Adam
Appendix E.
California Red-legged Frog Survey Data Sheet
AMPHIBIAN OBSERVATIONS
Species # of
indiv.
Observed (O)
Heard (H)
Life Stages Size Class Certainty of
Identification
Describe potential threats to California red-legged frogs observed, including non-native and
native predators such as fish, bullfrogs, and raccoons:
Other notes, observations, comments, etc.
Necessary Attachments:
1.All field notes and other supporting documents
2. Site photographs
3.Maps with important habitat features and species locations
Bullfrog 1 O Adult Large 100%
A bullfrog and a crayfish were observed in Stilling Basin.
Sierran treefrog 1 O Adult Large 100%
Sierran treefrog 15 O Tadpole Medium 100%
ATTACHMENT D – Historical Aerial Photographs
This page intentionally left blank.
Historical Aerial Photograph 1. Photo taken on February 1, 1937, of Old Creek
(highlighted with a blue line) and the approximate location of the Whale Rock Reservoir
Dam (highlighted with a red line) prior to construction (UCSB 2022).
Historical Aerial Photograph 2. Photo taken on November 22, 1963, of the Whale Rock
Reservoir Dam, its spillway stilling basin, and rip-rap energy dissipator after the
completion of construction (UCSB 2022).
T 805.781.5912 F 805.781.1002 W slocleanair.org 3433 Roberto Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
VIA EMAIL ONLY
January 30, 2023
Shawna Scott
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
sscott@slocity.org
SUBJECT: APCD Comments Regarding the Whale Rock Stilling Basin Dewatering and
Inspection
Dear Shawna Scott:
Thank you for including the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) in
the environmental review process. We have completed our review of the Whale Rock
Stilling Basin Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND).
Project Description
The project includes dewatering, sediment removal, & visual inspection of the spillway
basin below Whale Rock Reservoir. The City of San Luis Obispo is required by the Division
of Safety of Dams to inspect the integrity of the spillway basin below Whale Rock Reservoir.
In order to conduct the visual inspection, the City must first dewater the lower section of
the basin, then remove accumulated sediments and vegetation from the area for an
engineer to gain & see the basin bottom. The project would result in approximately 0.10-
acre and 160 linear feet of temporary impacts to waters of the state & waters for the U.S.
No permanent impacts are currently proposed. Submersible pumps will be used to
dewater the area, discharging the water to the adjacent disturbed upland terraces, 50 feet
or greater from the spillway & top of bank. Temporary sediment catchments and
dissipation devices (e.g. straw bales & plastic sheeting), will be used to slow down and
settle turbid water before it is allowed to run overland. Additional devices (e.g., sandbags,
silt fence, straw wattle, hay bales) will be used to ensure no erosion or sedimentation
occurs. Once the area is dewatered, equipment such as a backhoe or skid steer and a
container will be lowered down from the 13th Street/access road bridge above the
spillway. Sediment & vegetation will be scooped up and placed in the container, and it will
be pulled back up to the bridge and spread onto the disturbed upland terraces, 50 feet or
greater from the spillway and top of bank (approx. 0.84 acre area) where the materials will
not wash back into the spillway or downstream to the creek. Once the area is accessible &
the concrete channel visible, an engineer or engineers will conduct the required
inspection.
APCD Comments for Whale Rock Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection
January 30, 2023
Page 2 of 3
APCD Comments
The applicant or agent should contact the APCD Engineering & Compliance Division regarding
Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) and related permits and plans. The lead agency may contact
the APCD Planning Division for questions and comments related to the other proposed mitigation
measures. Both Divisions can be reached at 805-781-5912.
Due to the relatively minor scale of this project, the construction phase air quality impacts from
criteria pollutants will likely be less than the APCD’s significance threshold values identified in Table
2-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 2012). With the implementation of mitigation measures
AQ-1, AQ-2 and AQ-3 as proposed in the IS/MND, impacts to sensitive receptors, impacts from
fugitive dust, and impacts due to NOA should be reduced to a level of insignificance. The following
guidance on NOA provides links to additional information and the necessary APCD forms.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos on Site
Naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) has been identified by the California Air Resources Board as a
toxic air contaminant. Serpentine and ultramafic rocks are very common throughout California and
may contain NOA, which may be released when land is graded for building purposes, or at quarrying
operations. The APCD has identified areas throughout the county where NOA may be present (NOA
Map). Because the project site is in a candidate area for NOA , a geologic evaluation must be
conducted by a registered geologist to determine if the area disturbed is or is not exempt from the
CARB Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (NOA ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (Title 17 CCR Section 93105) regulation. The geologic evaluation must be
submitted to the APCD Engineering Division prior to any grading activities at the site, with the
following documents:
• For grading projects qualifying for NOA ATCM exemption:
o Submit a completed APCD NOA Exemption Form with the geologic evaluation.
• For grading projects in serpentine rock less than 1 acre:
o Submit a completed APCD Project Form with the geologic evaluation; and
o Mini Dust Control Measures (93105.e.(A-F) as a condition of approval.
• For grading projects in serpentine rock greater than 1 acre:
o Submit a completed Project Form with the geologic evaluation; and
o An Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan as a condition of approval.
When submitting the Project or Exemption Form, please fill in all applicable contact information.
More information on NOA can be found on the APCD website at slocleanair.org/rules-
regulations/noa.php, on the California Geological Survey website at
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/minerals/hazardous_minerals/asbestos , or from CARB at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/toxics/asbestos/asbestos.htm.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. If you have any questions or
comments, feel free to contact me at 805-781-5912.
Sincerely,
VINCE KIRKHUFF
Air Quality Specialist
APCD Comments for Whale Rock Stilling Basin Dewatering and Inspection
January 30, 2023
Page 3 of 3
VJK/kaw
cc: Noah Evans, City of San Luis Obispo, (nevans@slocity.org)
Dora Drexler, APCD, (ddrexler@co.slo.ca.us)
Carissa Reynolds, APCD, (czaragoza@co.slo.ca.us)