The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-4-2018 Item 14 Reading File - Agricultural Master Plan - Calle Joaquin Ag ReserveAGRICULTURAL MASTER PLAN for the City of San Luis Obispo's CALLE JOAQUIN AGRICUL rURAL RESERVE City of San Luis Obispo Natural Resources Protection Program Agricultural Master Plan for the City of San Luis Obispo's Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Neil Havlik, Ph.D. Natural Resources Manager Freddy Otte City Biologist Pamela Ricci Senior Planner Britni Parsons Intern January 2011 Agricultural Master Plan for the City of San Luis Obispo's Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Table of Contents 1. Introduction 4 1.1 History 1.2 Background of the Master Plan 1.3 Public Input 1.4 Access 1.5 Legal Agreements 1.6 Title Dispute 2. Inventory 11 2.1 General Description 2.2 Cultural! Historical Resources 2.3 Soils 2.4 On-Site Water Resources 2.5 Plants and Wildlife 3. Goals and Policies 16 3.1 "Stakeholder" Process 4. Agricultural Master Plan 17 4.1 Phasing Areas and Land Use Designations 4.2 Consistency with Current Zoning 4.3 Resource Enhancement 4.4 Wildfire Preparedness 5. Implementation Strategy 22 6. Fiscal Statement 23 6.1 Contingency Plan: In the Event of Breach or Failure of the Non-Profit Operation 7. Monitoring 24 8. Site Photos 25 Appendix A. Plant and Animal Species of Concern 30 Appendix B. Initial Study 34 Agricultural Master Plan for the City of San Luis Obispo's Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve "This approximately 180-acre area ofprime farm land bounded by Madonna Road, Highway 101, Central Coast Plaza, and Prefumo Creek is in three ownerships. The City intends to preserve at least one-half of this signature working agricultural landscape at the southern gateway to San Luis Obispo as it existed in 1994. " ---City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Land Use Element, Policy 8.8 The above constitutes a vision statement for the ultimate preservation and sustainable utilization of an important visual, cultural, agricultural and ecological asset to the City of San Luis Obispo. The Agricultural Master Plan that follows spells out the actions and expectations involved in implementing this vision. 1. Introduction The Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve is currently an area of approximately 25 acres located at the end of the street known as Calle Joaquin North in the City of San Luis Obispo (Figures 1,2). The property consists primarily of farmland that has been dedicated to the City of San Luis Obispo as the land surrounding it has been developed. The City of San Luis Obispo's 1994 General Plan required that approximately 50% of the propelties in this area be preserved as permanent open space and retained in agriculture. To date of this requirement has been the creation of the existing 25 acre Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve, as two of the three agricultural properties there have annexed into the City and been approved by the City Council for commercial development. The City General Plan's "50% preservation" requirement also extends to the third and largest property in the area, known as the Dalidio property (approximately 130 acres). Upon development of that propelty, an additional 65 acres will be potentially added to the Agricultural Reserve. The ultimate size of the Reserve is therefore anticipated to be approximately 90 acres. Most, but not all, of this land is or was farmland. A pOltion of Prefumo Creek, plus a sizable constructed drainage channel and large eucalyptus grove are included within the preservation area required by the General Plan, so that ultimately this 90 acre site will include about 70 acres of land that is farmed or is famlable. The balance will be "wild" lands of the eucalyptus groves, the riparian corridor of Prefumo Creek and of the drainage channel. Therefore, the term "Master Plan Area" as used in this document refers to the entire 90 acre site. The term "Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve" will refer to the existing 25 acre property currently in City ownership. 4 Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Vicinity Map 1.1 History The land in and around the Master Plan Area has been fanned for many years, even as the City of San Luis Obispo has slowly grown up around it. Soils in the area are rich and productive, and, because of the area's mild climate, year-round farming can take place. The area was part of the Mexican land grant known as Rancho La Laguna. In 1850 California became a state, and many people began to come here for the economic opportunities that the new state provided. In 1868 Rancho La Laguna was united with a neighboring rancho and the two ranchos, known as Ranchos Canada de Los Osos and La Laguna, were subdivided into numerous agricultural parcels ranging in size from 50 acres to over 2,000 acres (Figure 3). Many of these parcels still exist in the Los Osos Valley, but over the years the growth of the San Luis Obispo area led to further subdivision of the land there. By 1994 much of the land around the Master Plan area had been subdivided into small parcels for residential, commercial, and some industrial uses. At that time there were only three remaining agricultural parcels: the 26 acre McBride property, the 31 acre Madonna "Gap" property (so-called because it was a "gap" in the city limits along Los Osos Valley Road), and the largest, the nO-acre Dalidio propel1y. All three parcels were being farmed by a lessee, Hayashi Brothers of Arroyo Grande. As part of the General Plan Update approved by the City Council in 1994, properties in the "Dalidio-Madonna-McBride" area were subject to the following specific requirement: "This approximately l80-acre area ofprime farm land bounded by Madonna Road, Highway 101, Central Coast Plaza, and Prefumo Creek is in three ownerships. The City intends to preserve at least one-half of this signature working agricultural landscape at the southern gateway to San Luis Obispo as it existed in 1994. " ---City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Land Use Element, Policy 8.8 In 2006 the first of these three properties (now referred to as GearhartlMcBride property) was annexed into the City of San Luis Obispo and granted entitlements. As part of that process, 13 acres of the property was dedicated to the City of San Luis Obispo, which served to initiate the existence of the Agricultural Reserve. In 2010 a second property (Madonna Gap) was annexed, granted entitlements and dedicated an additional 12 acres to the Reserve. The owners of the third, 130 acre property, the Dalidio family, are considering development options both within and outside of the City of San Luis Obispo. That property is not yet annexed into the City. Assuming that annexation does take place, approximately one-half (65 acres) of the property is expected to be set aside for pennanent agricultural or open space use (Figure 4). Thus the three properties will ultimately total approximately 90 acres of open space. Of this total, about 20 acres are occupied by Prefumo Creek and its riparian corridor, the eucalyptus groves, and several smaller areas unsuitable for agricultural use. Taking this into account, approximately 70 acres of prime farming land will ultimately be available for continued agricultural use. 1.2 Background of the Agricultural Master Plan In November 2008 a proposal for a five year hay lease for the 13 acre McBride/Gearhart property was presented to the City Council. The Council, however, determined that a preferred 7 Calle Joaquin Agricultural Master Plan Phasing Areas course of action was to undertake planning for eventual use of not only the 13 acre site but the additional acreage that was expected to be dedicated to create the Agricultural Reserve. Therefore the 13 acres was put into a cover crop situation; that is, the property had a crop consisting of various grasses and legumes seeded onto the site, then plowed under the following spring simply as a holding action. This has been repeated in fall 2009 and fall 2010. The purpose of the cover cropping is (1) to hold the property until a final decision could be made about the proper long-term approach to the agricultural operations on the property, (2) to allow a reasonable period of time for that decision to be made, and (3) to improve soil conditions while doing so. 1.3 Public Input Beginning in October 2009 a series of public "stakeholder" meetings were held to provide a framework for discussion about the Master Plan area and provide a forum for public input into the planning process. This was necessarily different than the normal "conservation plan" process wherein the City undertakes a planning effort for open space lands which it fully owns or controls. In the present situation the City owns about 30% of the total area being planned, and there is no timetable for when or even if the remaining lands will come into City ownership or control. Nevertheless, the stakeholder meetings proved to be a successful approach and by the last meeting in March 2010 a vision for the property had developed, and a group of citizens had stepped forward to offer their services as an organization that would undertake to implement the Master Plan upon its adoption by the City Council. 1.4 Access At the present time legal access to the Calle Joaquin AgIicultural Reserve exists at the end of Calle Joaquin North. Future pedestrian access from residential areas to the west, and from the Dalidio prope1ty when it is developed, is anticipated. A portion of the property may possibly need to be used for a road connecting Dalidio DIive to Los Osos Valley Road; however, there is no timetable for this connection and the project is not included in the City's 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan, being dependent upon future development of the Dalidio property. 1.5 Legal Agreements The Master Plan area is subject to several legal agreements affecting it, including: • A City sewer easement running through the Dalidio portion of the site; • A PG&E power easement running across a portion of the property from Calle Joaquin, then along the boundary between the cunent city property and the Dalidio property; • A channel easement located on the Dalidio portion of the site that crosses a portion of Phase 2 of this plan; • Creek or drainage easements covering portions of Prefumo Creek; and • A landscaping easement in favor of the commercially zoned lots on Calle Joaquin. None of these legal agreements significantly restrict the use of the land for agricultural, environmental, or recreational purposes. 10 1.6 Title Dispute Ownership of a three-acre portion of the McBride/Gearhart property is currently the subject of a title dispute. In 2008, the City discovered that there was a pre-existing deed of trust that was not reconveyed when the property was dedicated to the City. The City Attorney's office is currently working to eliminate this "cloud" on the property's title. This Master Plan assumes that the title dispute will be resolved in a manner satisfactory to the City. Pending such elimination, the three acres have been assigned to a new Phase of the Master Plan independent of the current City owned land and the Dalidio property. 2. Inventory 2.1 General Description The overall character of the Calle Joaquin site is an undeveloped, relati vel y flat area that has gone through a lengthy period of farming and tilling of the soil. The site is identified in the City's General Plan as prime agricultural land. Prefumo Creek and its associated riparian corridor are located along the western portion of the site. The site is very visible from both northbound and southbound travelers on Highway 101. Locations of existing features of the Master Plan Area are shown in Figures 5 and 6. 2.2 Cultural/Historical Resources There are no known features of major cultural or historical significance on the current City property. The Dalidio property contains a structure known as the "grandstand" which once served as a reviewing stand for dog races that used to be held there, and is currently used on the Dalidio property as a bam. The structure is in reasonably sound condition, and has been proposed for preservation by the Dalidio family if the propelty is developed for urban uses. This could involve moving the building to a location within the Master Plan Area. There is also a large eucalyptus grove on the Dalidio property which is a local landmark and the majority of the grove has previously been identified in planning documents for preservation. It has been identified in several planning documents as a significant heron and egret rookery. There are no known prehistoric cultural sites or archeological resources on the propelty. However, areas within 150 feet of Prefumo Creek are considered sensitive archeological sites and City policy requires a Phase 1 Archeological Resources Inventory to be prepared prior to the permitting of any construction. The Master Plan does anticipate construction of a portion of the Bob Jones Bike Trail within this distance from Prefumo Creek and therefore such an inventory will be necessary prior to construction of the trail in that area. However, no other construction or excavation for building foundations within this sensiti ve area is expected. 2.3 Soils According to the United States Depaltment of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service's Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County (Coastal Part), the Master Plan area is composed of mostly Cropley clay and Salinas silty clam loam. The Cropley clay is a Class II soil and the Salinas silty clay loam is a Class I soil. Both of these soils are considered "prime" 11 Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Phase 1 --Existing Features Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Phase 2 --Existing Features soils, and the City of San Luis Obispo considers their loss to be a significant environmental impact requiring mitigation. Preservation of an approximately equal area of such soils in perpetuity was considered to be appropriate mitigation in the City's 1994 General Plan Update and is the legal basis for the requirement of such preservation in conjunction with development of the surrounding land with urban uses. As Pait of the development plan for the McBride property, the 13 acre open space portion was graded to avoid displacement of flood capacity. This was a City requirement imposed upon the project. This grading was performed in a manner that retained the top three feet of soil while removing approximately two feet of subsoil, and was done to retain a slope of 2% or less, 2% being the maximum slope considered acceptable for falIDing soils. The Madonna Gap portion of the site was not graded; however, a number of actions were undertaken (as mitigation for the loss of permeable soil area) in order facilitate on-site retention of stOlID flows and to speed up flows downstream of the property where some flow constrictions exist. These actions were required as mitigation for the potential for increase of stormflows caused by the construction of the Prefumo Creek Commons site and its attendant (newly) impervious surfaces. 2.4 On-Site Water Resources The most important and notable natural feature of the Master Plan area is a portion of a local stream known as Prefumo Creek. This stream has a healthy but simple riparian cover, consisting of nearly 85%-90% cover of a single species, arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), with cover of a non-native tree, Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis) between 5%-10%. Prefumo Creek is seasonal over that length of stream behind Oceanaire Avenue and perennial below that point, where it lies on the former Madonna Gap property and the existing Auto Park properties. The creek has been realigned over much of its length within the City of San Luis Obispo. The portion on the Madonna Gap property is the only area believed to be in its original location. The creek has water quality issues, being an urban stream receiving considerable urban inflow during the wintertime and into the spling, with smaller flows and a more sluggish character to that flow later in the season. The creek was realigned above Laguna Lake in the 1950's or 1960's in order to deliver water into Laguna Lake for recreational purposes, and realigned at the same time below the lake to deliver flows back into the natural streambed at the Madonna Gap property. Although the riparian corridor is considered healthy, water quality in the creek suffers at times from low flows and apparently poor oxygenation in the water, particularly in the summer. There are at least three water wells located within the Master Plan area. One of these is in the northeastern portion of the existing reserve. This well was used to provide water for irrigation and possibly for drinking to the former Border Patrol building which was located there and which was demolished as part of the development of the Gearhart-McBlide property. Water quality of this well has been tested and no significant contaminants were found, although there were slightly elevated amount of nitrates, presumably from past use of fertilizers by agricultural operators at the site. A second well exists on the Madonna Gap property near Oceanaire Drive. This well is currently being pumped to provide water for dust control and other construction activities at the Prefumo Commons site; however, the well is unsuitably located to provide water to the Agricultural Reserve and is not expected to be used significantly in the future. 14 The Prefumo Creek Commons project carries with it an obligation to provide an additional well, to be located by the City of San Luis Obispo at a future time, and installed as part of the Prefumo Creek Commons project. This well is anticipated to be located in a location central to the land currently in City ownership and will be a resource for future agricultural operations; however, an exact location for this well has not yet been identified. A third well exists on the Dalidio property adjacent to the property line between the existing Reserve and the Dalidio property; this well is currently used for aglicultural operations on the Dalidio property and is expected to remain as a viable water source into the future. Groundwater is found at around 12-15 feet below ground sUlface over much of the Master Plan area. 2.5 Plants and Wildlife As a farming area, the Master Plan area is not lich in native plants or wildlife species. Prefumo Creek is the most important natural feature, and the riparian area of the creek is known to contain a number of wildlife species. Prefumo Creek is considered a migration corridor for southern steeJhead, as the water quality there leaves habitat of inferior quality for the steelhead and they do not appear to remain within this portion of the creek. When winter rains cause the creek to flow, it is used by steelhead moving into the upper watershed of the creek where the aquatic habitat is better suited to them, or by smolts moving out to sea. The dominant plant of the riparian conidor is the arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). This small tree species forms 85%-90% of the ripalian cover on much of the length of the creek. The second most common tree in the riparian area is the non-native Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis). Other species which are found within the corridor include black walnut, coast live oak, and toyon. A few black cottonwoods and western sycamores also occur here. The understory is sparse and includes California blackberry and some poison oak. The eucalyptus groves are sparse in terms of wildlife and are not diverse, although the trees' great size makes them favored roosting and sometimes nesting sites for large birds such as turkey vultures, great blue herons, egrets, and hawks. It is possible that in the future some significant thinning, pruning, crown reduction, or other management activities will be necessary for the groves. At the present time, however, management consists plimarily of annual site visitation to those parts of the grove in public ownership or control, and undertaking actions considered necessary by such visits (chiefly pruning), as well as by response to citizen requests or inquilies. Studies undertaken in conjunction with the environmental impact report of the Prefumo Creek Commons project (June 2009) identified a total of twelve sensiti ve plant species that could potentially be found within the Master Plan area or within the Prefumo Commons project site; however, none were actually observed (see Appendix A). The Prefumo Commons studies also indicated potential occurrence of twenty-nine sensitive animal species. This included sixteen species of birds whose ranges included foraging habitat within the Master Plan area or within the Prefumo Commons project site. Of these bird species, four (loggerhead shrike, Califomia homed lark, tri-colored blackbird, and great blue heron) were known to occur here; presence of others ranged from unlikely to possible. Other sensitive 15 species included monarch butterflies (possibly overwintering in the eucalyptus groves), California red-legged frog (suitable habitat), southern steelhead (known to occur at times in Prefumo Creek), and southwestern pond turtle (suitable habitat). Two-striped garter snake and pallid bat were considered to have good habitat here and to be possible inhabitants. The remaining seven species were considered to be unlikely to occur here due to poor or unsuitable habitat. Lists of both sensitive plant and sensitive animal species in the area as identified in the Prefumo Creek Commons studies are included as Appendix A. 3. Goals and Policies The General Plan of the City of San Luis Obispo includes discussion about the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve. As noted earlier, the 1994 update of the General Plan states that it was the City of San Luis Obispo's intention to preserve significant patts of "this signature working agricultural landscape" at the city's southern gateway. The General Plan further states that "Publicly owned agricultural lands should be leased back to farmers, or used as demonstration projects that will benefit local farmers" The more recently updated and adopted Conservation and Open Space Element to the General Plan (adopted in 2006) includes more detail as to the approach and expected outcomes of land management decisions for City-owned lands, including the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve. Specifically, the Element describes the decision-making process that should be followed to develop appropriate land management practices for City-owned lands, noting especially that input from both the general public and from knowledgeable expelts should be solicited. These statements provided the overall framework for the permanent conservation and proper management of the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve and ultimately the entire Master Plan area, as well as a methodology for arriving at those decisions. 3.1 "Stakeholder" Process At the direction of the City Council, a stakeholder process was used to solicit citizen input for the Master Plan beginning in October 2009, and continuing through March 2010. Because of the unusual nature of the Agricultural Master Plan in comparison to other City-owned open space lands, a special format was implemented to obtain input relevant to the specific issues and constraints facing future agricultural uses of this City-owned land. The public was invited to a series of meetings held at City Hall, and, after City staff described the properties involved and certain parameters established by the City Council were explained, ideas for the establishment and operation of the Agricultural Reserve were put forward by citizens attending the sessions. A total of four sessions were held, and out of this process there developed a consensus among the stakeholders as to the appropriate direction of the Master Plan. The present document is the result of the stakeholder process. 16 4. Agricultural Master Plan The overall goal of the Agricultural Master Plan is to retain as much as reasonably possible of the Master Plan Area in production agriculture, consistent with General Plan policy. This may include but is not limited to: a private, community-supported agricultural operation; individual garden plots; "incubator" plots leased to indi viduals for small-scale operations; and commercial scale agricultural operations. Lands not suited for agriculture or ultimately needed for other purposes will be addressed independently, and they may be used temporarily for agricultural operations if appropriate. Examples of such lands include the riparian corridor of Prefumo Creek and planned expansion thereof; a possible wetland swale in the southern comer of the site; the route of the Bob Jones Trail; and management and maintenance of the eucalyptus groves and the drainage channel extending southwesterly from Dalidio Drive. The Plan allows for agricultural operations to include one or more buildings to provide for "light processing" (i.e., washing) of produce, storage, and a site for educational programs for the public. This will require a small parking facility and extension of urban services to those buildings, which are currently available at the end of Calle Joaquin. (Use of untreated well water for drinking water or "light processing" uses is not considered appropriate, since the site will ultimately conduct public educational sessions, etc.) Establishment and growth of the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve will be predicated upon certain events over which the City does not have full control. Therefore, the Agricultural Master Plan calls for a phased approach to the operations; these are discussed in more detail below. It is important to note that the City of San Luis Obispo does not anticipate being the primary operator of the Agricultural Reserve. That operation will be in the hands of a nonprofit entity which, pursuant to an agreement with the City of San Luis Obispo, will be responsible for the overall capital improvements, operation, and maintenance of the agricultural operations of the site. The City of San Luis Obispo will retain responsibility for the management and maintenance of the Prefumo Creek area, the Bob Jones Trail, and other small areas not directly involved with the agricultural operations. In the event that the nonprofit entity should fail for any reason, the City of San Luis Obispo will retain the right to take over operation of the property, assign the agreement with the nonprofit entity to another entity of the City's own choosing, or to temporarily or permanently close the facility. Details of this condition and its implementation would be spelled out in a formal agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo as owner of the land in question and the nonprofit entity which would be operating it. 4.1 Phasing Areas and Land Use Designations Phasing for the implementation of the Agricultural Master Plan is split in two main parts, Phase 1 and Phase 2, and these phases are further split into sub-phases. Phase 1 consists of lands currently owned or controlled by the City of San Luis Obispo, including the 3 acre portion with a cloud on title. This area totals about 25 acres. 17 Phase IA constitutes the initial fanning area. This area of approximately 20 acres will be leased to a nonprofit entity whose primary purpose will be to return the site to production agriculture, and to oversee and manage agricultural production and agricultural education programs and activities there. This would be done pursuant to a capital improvement, management and maintenance plan agreed to between the City of San Luis Obispo and the nonprofit entity. The entity is expected to wish to pursue the development of an educational and "light processing" facility that would pennit the washing of produce for sale to local institutions such as schools or prisons. This facility is envisioned as a group of one or more structures following an agricultural motif that ultimately would house areas for processing and storage of produce, a classroom or classrooms and small amphitheatre, a teaching kitchen, various demonstration gardens, and minor support facilities (office, restrooms, etc.). The facility is not expected to generate significant traffic volumes, as no on-site sales are anticipated. With up to ten seasonal employees, occasional visits from schools groups, and no on-site sales, traffic volume is anticipated at 100 vehicle trips per day, or 12 vehicle trips per business hour with little vehicle traffic at other times. Funding for the facility is expected to come through grants and other fundraising, with no significant expenditures planned by the City. Timing of these improvements is uncertain but it is expected to take up to ten years to fully fund and develop the site improvements. The nonprofit entity may wish in the future to engage in on-site sales either seasonally or year round; however, the decision to do so shall constitute a request for amendment of this Plan and shall be subject to full analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) especially as to its potential traffic impacts, and may be subject to other City fees and charges, including but not limited to business license fees. Phase IB includes improvements and activities in areas that are City controlled or maintained. These may include but are not limited to: • Initial extension of the Bob Jones Bike Trail from Calle Joaquin to Oceanaire Drive via a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Prefumo Creek, with ultimate connection to either Madonna Road or Dalidio Drive (possibly both); • Possible community garden or native plant nursery; • Possible wetland meadow at the southern corner of the property; and • Riparian enhancement plantings along Prefumo Creek and the fill area at the south end of the property, along with control of the date palms and other non-native vegetation. Phase Ie includes the three acres where City ownership is the subject of a title dispute. If this matter is not successfully resolved by the time this plan is ready for implementation, Phase lC will consist of simple additions to the adjacent crop areas, and, where the disputed area intersects Prefumo Creek, additional enhancements to the creek corridor, once the matter is finally resolved. In the meantime, either continued cover cropping, fallowing, or other benign activities will take place there wi th no capital improvements placed thereon, so as not to prejudice the ultimate outcome of the dispute. Proposed activities for the Phase 1 area are shown in Figure 7. Proposed activities for Phase 2 are not shown because of the uncettainty of timing and final details of Phase 2. 18 Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve Phase 1 --Plan Phase 2 includes lands not owned or controlled by the City of San Luis Obispo and in which such ownership or control is a longer-tenn or uncertain proposition. This is basically those portions of the Dalidio property whose long tenn future is uncertain at this time, but for which the City of San Luis Obispo has indicated long-term conservation in open space and agriculture in conjunction with development of other portions of the property upon future annexation. Phase 2A will be the expansion of fanning activities onto the Dalidio property if and when the Dalidio property develops in the City of San Luis Obispo. This area may include uses such as Fanner's Market stands, "incubator" leaseholds, and expanded and/or relocated fanning operations from the Phase I area. This would be done pursuant to a capital improvement, management and maintenance plan agreed to between the City of San Luis Obispo and the nonprofit entity. Phase 2B will include extension of the Bob Jones Bike Trail to Madonna Drive and/or Dalidio Drive when agreements are in place and funding is available to do so. In addition, this area will have limited new landscaping and moderate to extensive safety pruning and other arboricultural activities in the eucalyptus grove. Each of these phasing areas can move forward independently of the others. It is anticipated that it may take several years before any significant actions take place in Phases 2A or 2B. In addition, it is anticipated that it may take one to two years before Phase IA activities can begin to take place due to infrastructure and funding constraints. Any extension of Froom Ranch Way across Prefumo Creek in conjunction with development of the Dalidio property will be evaluated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) at the time a fonnal proposal for such an extension is made. It is not a proposal of the Agricultural Master Plan, merely an acknowledgement that the concept exists. 4.2 Consistency with Current Zoning The existing Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve is zoned Conservation and Open Space (C-OS) under the City of San Luis Obispo's zoning ordinance. This zone allows for a maximum pavement and building area of three percent (3%) of a site area or parcel of ten acres or larger. For the existing Reserve of approximately 25 acres, this requirement would translate to an allowable building and pavement area of 0.75 acre or approximately 32,670 square feet. The buildings will be subject to review by City staff, the public, and appropriate commissions prior to final approval of the design features of the site. Although the buildings will be situated within an area subject to flooding (i.e., the 100-year flood plain), City regulations require that the floor of the buildings be at least one foot above the identified or calculated flood level. This is expected to ameliorate the potential for flood damage to the structures. The development concept for the building area is shown in Figure 8. 4.3 Resource Enhancement Those portions of the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve not suited for agricultural activities or needed for other uses are identified in Phases IB and 2B above. Those activities that fall into the category of resource enhancement include: enlargement and diversification of the riparian 20 conidor of Prefumo Creek and the drainage channel; control of the date palms; new plantings adjacent to the to-be-developed properties fronting on Calle Joaquin and on the fill area at the sOllthern edge of the property; management activities within the eucalyptus grove; development of a small wetland at the sOllthern end of the property; and plantings along the Bob Jones Trail extension when it is constructed. The purpose of these is to improve habitat quality along Prefumo Creek and nearby; screen the future development on Calle Joaquin to a reasonable degree; make beneficial use of the currently weed-dominated fill area and the potential wetland area; and encourage native plant species alongside the Bob Jones Trail. Activities within the eucalyptus grove will be aimed at long-term retention of the grove for its visual qualities and value for large birds, while addressing problems and potential hazards associated with aging of the trees. 4.4 Wildfire Preparedness Most of the Master Plan Area will consist of cropland, which is generally not susceptible to wildfires. The areas most susceptible to wildfire are the riparian areas and especially the eucalyptus groves. Wildfire preparedness will consist of annual weed abatement on the edges of the riparian areas and at least annual as-necessary treatments in and around the eucalyptus groves once they have entered into public ownership or control. Treatment may include but will not be limited to: removal or mulching of forest litter where accumulations are excessive; removal of down wood; thinning or removal of hazardous or dead trees; and maintenance of a fire road or other way with vehicle capacity around the edge or the grove to provide rapid access to the grove in the event of a fire. 5. Implementation Strategy The City will implement this Master Plan in the following manner, upon adoption of the Master Plan by the City Council: Years 1-2. • Conclude an agreement with a qualified non-profit organization which will have responsibility for day-to-day management for the majority of the propelty. • Assist said organization with effOlts to locate and install the required well, and with other small-scale improvements to the site, including sub-leasing if appropriate. • Support efforts by the organization to raise funds for the buildings deemed necessary to the proper functioning of the site; and provide assistance in obtaining necessary pennits from the City and other agencies where necessary. • Implement enhancements to Prefumo Creek and its riparian corridor, the fill area and proposed wetland area, as funding and resources permit. • Continue efforts to settle the title dispute affecting the three acre portion of the property. • Seek grants and other funding sources to provide for the construction of the Bob Jones Trail's initial course between Calle Joaquin and Oceanaire Dtive • Seek agreement with the Dalidio family to permit extension of the Bob Jones Trail to Madonna Avenue and/or to Dalidio Drive. 22 Years 3-4. • Continue the above actions to completion. Years 5-6. • Continue the above actions to completion. 6. Fiscal Statement The fiscal impact of adoption of the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Master Plan is anticipated to be minor to moderate. This is because the City Council has directed that the primary implementation of the Master Plan, especially as it involves the currently City-owned lands, is to be undertaken by a local, recognized non-profit organization that will pursue fundraising and other efforts at implementation. The City Council may elect at a later date to include City funds for individual projects such as the Bob Jones Trail extension, or for continued enhancement of the Prefumo Creek riparian corridor, as well as for agricultural or educational activities; however, such expenditures will be made on their own merits and in the context of overall City budgeting decisions. Major cost considerations include: 1. Building design and construction; 2. Extension of urban services (water and sewer) to the site; 3. Establishing a small parking area; 4. Installation of a new well and ilTigation system; 5. Initial establishment of the Bob Jones Trail section; and 6. Future extension of the trail. No funding is cUlTently available for the first three items above, and it is anticipated that two to three years may be needed to successfully accomplish the necessary fundraising to begin any significant construction. Funding for the fourth and fifth item above is available as mitigation requirements for certain impacts of the Prefumo Commons development project, and those funds are expected to be able to be made quickly available when the two projects are desired. No funding is cUlTently available for the sixth item above, and the necessary land tenure has not been secured; therefore this expenditure is not foreseen as being available in the immediate future. It is believed that many of these projects will prove to be attractive for grant funding, and such grants are anticipated to be the primary source of funds for them. Maintenance costs are expected to be minor and can be absorbed by modest growth of the Ranger Service and Natural Resources program funds consistent with the continued growth and service of those programs to our citizens. 23 6.1 Contingency Plan: In the Event of Breach or Failure of the Non-Profit Operation In the event of a breach of agreement or failure for any reason of the operation of the site by the non-profit entity, the City shall retain the right to enter the property and take immediate control of the property and the operation thereof. However, in such event it would be the intention of the City to permit reorganization of the nonprofit entity to take over the operation again, or to transfer operation to another qualified entity. The basic procedure in event of failure or evident failure by the nonprofit entity to perlonn will be: 1. The City will inform the entity of the claim of breach of agreement or of failure to perform, detailing the factors leading to this conclusion; and allow a reasonable time period for the entity to respond and correct the matters at issue. 2. If, after such time period, the City in its sole judgment remains convinced that such breach still exists or that failure of the operation has occurred or is imminent, then it shall direct the entity to either (a) turn over interim operation of the site to the City, or (b) close down the operation, secure the buildings, and turn over the "mothballed" site to the City. In such circumstance any tenants growing crops on the site will be pennitted to continue until such time as they can harvest their crop. 3. The City will then determine the most appropriate course of action to meet the intent of the Agricultural Master Plan in seeking reorganization of the nonprofit entity or entering into a similar agreement with a new entity. 7. Monitoring Monitoring will consist of regular observation of the agricultural area and improvement thereon, and regular meetings with representatives of the nonprofit entity operating the site. Monitoring of the City-managed portions of the property will include at least annual inspections of the riparian area, the Bob Jones Trail area once established, and at least annual survey of the eucalyptus grove once it is in public ownership or control. The riparian area will also be monitored at least annually for issues related to stormwater management. Monitoring for weed abatement and within the eucalyptus groves will be done in the late spring prior to the fire season, and monitoring of Prefumo Creek and the drainage channel will be done in the summer to determine necessary activities prior to the rainy season. 24 Appendix A. Plant and Animal Species of Concern in the Master Plan Area (from the Environmental Impact Report for the Prefumo Creek Commons Project, June 2009) 30 Table 3.4-1. Sensitive Plants that are Known or Have the Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the Project Site C"{ ;',¥4).'0;;;?~fSp~~ie$~~·)'~"'f-' ..)~; ,:'.:..~ :'jT'~~~."':"',': /St~t~s:~'~c,;""":; .,\? "~ :'<i~< ';,:'::1~_O:f~~/Qcidrrerice/i"':>~",' Obispo Manzanita Arctostaphylos obispoensis CNPS4 Low potential due to lack of habitat Club-haired Mariposa lily Calochortus clavatus vaL clavatus CNPS4 Low potential due to lack of habitat San Luis Mariposa lily Calochortus obispoensis CNPS IB Low potential, known 0,75 miles northeast and southwest of the site Cambria morning glory Calystegia subacaulis ssp.episcopalis FSC, CNPS lB Low potential due to lack of habitat San Luis Obispo sedge Carex obispoensis CNPS lB Medium,potential, known 1.5 miles west of the site; potentially suitable habitat exists along Prefumo Creek Brewer's spineflower Chorizanthe breweri CNPS lB Low potential, known < 0.5 miles south of the site 'Chorro Creek bog thistle Cirsium fontinale vaL obispoensis I SE, FE, CNPS lB Moderate potential, known < 0,5 miles southwest of site; found in wetland! riparian habitats Congdon's tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii FSC,CNPSlB High potential to occur on-site; found in agricultural and ruderal areas in the project vicinity Jones's layia Layia jonesii FSC, CNPS lB Potential to occur on-site, known 0.5 miles northwest Adobe sanicle Saniculamaritima FSC,CNPSlB Low potential to occur on-site, known 0.5 miles northwest at Laguna Lake Park Rayless ragwort Senecio aphanactis CNPS2 Possible, known about 0.5 miles northeast of site San Luis Obispo dudleya Dudleya abramsii ssp, murina CNPS IB Low potential to occur due to lack of habitat CNPS 1B = "rare, threatened, or endangered" by the California Native Plant Society CNPS 2 = rare or endangered in California, more common elsewhere by the California Native Plant Society CNPS 4 = plant of limited distribution by the California Native Plant Society FE = Federal F..ndangered FSC = Federal Species of Concern SE = California Endangered Source: City of San Luis Obispo 2003b; 2004; CDFG 2003; City of San Luis Obispo 2006b, 31 Table 3.4-2. Sensitive Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur on the Project Site }~~~;~ri1~'~,J~~~A~~«:~lt;s'rite~I~~;f~~~4Tt;:~f5/$t;~ f:~~<~:£r;Staf~1;~1.ffE'~'~ t!';t~'E:~~~b)]ll'{~~Ail'!f¢.\o;?"'i;e,':~*rt~t.Jft(; • ...·.~..u-.;.", .,' , ~';":\:'" .•~ ,,,•..•.••:1 ,:••', ,lJ);" I .g.~..,~.ftC-1c• . ~'t"~""i! Northern harrier Circus cyaneus CSC Unlikely to nest in study area; forage habitat present Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia CSC, FSC (Burrowing site), MBTA No observations on-site; low quality potential nesting habitat at Prefum9 Creek banks; known to occur at Laguna Lake Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus CSC (Breeding site), MBTA Unlikely to nest in study area; forage habitat present Long-billed curlew Numenius americanus WL Forage area on-site in fall and winter months Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus CSC Common to area Southwestern wWiIlow flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus FE (Nesting) PotentiallY sSuitable migratory habitat exists; no nesting recorded within the watershed; presence unlikely due to edge of range Yellow-breasted chat CSC Suitable migratory habitat exists; no nesting recorded within the watershed California horned lark Eremophila alpestris WL Common to area , Tri-colored blackbird Agelaius tricolor CSC (Nesting colony), FSC, MBTA Potentially suitable habitat within. Prefwpo Creek Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus WL Forage habitat present Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii WL Forage habitat present Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis WL Forage habitat present White-tailed kites Elanus leucurus Fully Protected Forage habitat present Western yellow bill cuckoo Coccucus american us SE (Nesting), MBTA Unlikely to nest on-site; known in San Luis Obispo Least Bell's vireo FE Suitable habitat present. Unlikely to Vireo bellii pusillus occur on-site as it is not known to OCCLl! in San Luis Obispo COlmty Great blue heron Ardea herodias META Forage area in PrefUIDO Creek and wetland areas; potential roost and nest sites upstream Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus CNDDB G5 S3 (Wintering sites) Possible wintering sites in eucalyptus grove upstream 32 Table 3.4-2. Sensitive Species with Potential to Occur on the Project Site (Continued) .. ,.,.; .... r . . Sp'~c'es < , ,"." '. St~tus' ! N9tes/ Occurrence. Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta longientenna FT Unlikely due to lack of suitable habitat, past agricultural development and ongin disturbance. Known to occur 2 miles from project site. Longhorn fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi FE Unlikely due to Jack of suitable habitat, limits of range, past agricultural development and ongoing disturbance. California tiger salamander Ambysloma californiense CSC,FC Unlikely to occur on-site due to unsuitable habitat Western spadefoot toad Scaphiopus hammondi CSC, FSC Unlikely to occur on-site due to unsuitable habitat Coast horned lizard Phrynosoma coronatum frontale CSC Unlikely to occur on-site due to unsuitable habitat Two-striped garter snake Thamnophis hammondii CSC Excellent habitat in Prefumo Creek and wetland areas California red-legged frog Rana aurora draytonii FT,CSC Suitable habitat in Prefumo Creek and wetland areas Southwestern pond turtle Clemmys marmorata pallida CSC, FSC Suitable habitat in Prefumo Creek and wetland areas Steelhead-South/Central California Coast Oncorhynchus mykiss CSC, FT Known to occur in Prefumo Creek Pallid bat Anlrozous pallidus CSC Common to area; potential noctumal feeding site Monterey dusky-footed wood rat Neotomafuscipes luciana CSC Not likely to occur on-site due to unsuitable habitat Townsend's western big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii CSC Potential noctumal feeding site CNDDB G5 S3 = California Natural Diversity Data Base, Global rank: demonstrably secure, common; State rank: California restricted range, rare. CSC = California Species of Concern FE = Federal Endangered FSC = Federal Species of Concern MBTA = Migratory Bird Treaty Act SE = California Endangered WL = CDFG Watch list Source: CDFG 2009; City of San Luis Obispo 2006b. 33 Appendix B. Initial Study 34 city o~ san lUIS OBISpO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER # 44-10 1. Project Title: Agricultural Master Plan for the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner (805) 781-7168 4. Project Location: oCalle Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, CA. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: C-R/C-OS-20 7. Zoning: C-R (Retail-Commercial)/C-OS-20 (Conservation-Open Space -20 Acres Required) 8. Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve is an area of approximately 25 acres located at the end of the street known as Calle Joaquin North within the City of San Luis Obispo. The property consists primarily of farmland, portions of which have also been identified in the City's General Plan for Urban Development. That development is now occuning on two properties, and one of the requirements of that development is that approximately 50% of the properties involved shall be preserved as permanent open space and retained in agriculture. The result of this is the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve, which currently occupies 25 acres. 35 The City's General Plan extends the "50% preservation" requirement to the third and largest property in the area, known as the Dalidio property. Upon development of that property (which is outside the scope of this project), another 65 acres is expected to be added to the Agricultural Reserve. The ultimate size of the Agricultural Reserve is therefore anticipated to be approximately 90 acres. Most, but not all of this land is farmland. A reach of Prefumo Creek, a fairly large drainage channel, and a large eucalyptus grove are included within the preservation area required to be preserved by the General Plan, so that ultimately about 70 acres of land that is faImed or farmable will be permanently preserved. The balance will be the "wild" lands of the eucalyptus groves or of the liparian cOlTidor of Prefumo Creek. Therefore the telTIl "Master Plan Area" will refer to the entire 90 acre site. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings (Briefly describe the project's surroundings): The project area is surrounded by urban uses: on the east is U. S. Highway 101, which is a four lane limited access freeway in this location; on the south and southwest it is bounded by existing commercial development including numerous automobile sales dealerships, with a major shopping center currently under construction. On the west there is a residential area largely of single family homes; and to the north is additional commercial development, including numerous general retail stores and a large U. S. Post Office. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): The only anticipated outside public agency approval needed is from the California Department of Fish and Game, which will have permitting authority over a portion of the proposed Bob Jones Bike Trail extension between Calle Joaquin and Oceanaire Drive where the trail will cross Prefumo Creek on a pedestrian/bike bridge. 36 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 201 0'::aj CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 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. --x-Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population / Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Recreation Transportation I Traffic Utilities / Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality -x-Biological Resources Land Use I Planning Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Geology / Soils Noise FISH AND GAME FEES The Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat (see attached determination). -x- The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of 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 Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE -x- This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, 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 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 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, --X- 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 ENVlRONMENTAL 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 ENVlRONMENTAL 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 ElR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ElR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 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. 39 tIlIIIIIllI INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 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 40 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? --X- b) Substantially damage scenic resources. including, but not limited --X- to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of --X- the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would --x- adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Evaluation a,c) The view of the existing agricultural fields and Cerro San Luis Obispo as seen by northbound traffic on U.S. Highway 101 at the site is considered a gateway into San Luis Obispo and as such is a significant community resource. Building within this area has the potential to impact that vista and degrade the visual character of the site unless such building is carefully designed and is appropriate to the site. To this end, the project proposes to maintain a low profile and an agricultural motif to any buildings, so that they will appear appropriate in an agricultural setting, and this requirement will be enforced by review of building design by the City of San Luis Obispo's Architectural Review Commission. It is anticipated that such review, undertaken in a public forum, will provide the expertise and guidance needed to ensure conformance to community standards for the site. This review will constitute mitigation of the potential impact. Conclusion: Impact less than significant after mitigation. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of --x-IStatewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a --x- Williamson Act contract? --X- their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Evaluation c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to 1 a-c) The property currently consists primarily of farmland, portions of the land have been indentified in the City's General Plan for urban development. That development is currently occurring on two properties, one of the requirements of development is that approximately 50% of the properties shall be preserved as permanent open space and retained in agriculture. The result of this requirement was the creation of the Calle Joaquin Agricultural Reserve. The ultimate size of the agricultural reserve is anticipated to be 90 acres (pending the acquisition of the Dalidio property). Ultimately 70-75 acres of the land will remain farmed or farmable. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district mav be relied upon to make the followin~ determinations. Would the project; a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air --X- quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an --X- existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria --X- pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an 41 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 201 0 ~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less TIlan Significant Impact No Impact applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant --x- concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of --x- people? Evaluation a-e) Conclusion: No impact. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the pro.iect: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through --x- 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? b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or i --x- other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands --x- as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident --x- or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting --x- biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation --x- Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Evaluation a, b) As a farming area, the Master Plan area is not rich in native plants or wildlife species. Prefumo Creek is the most important natural feature. Prefumo Creek is considered a 'migration corridor' for southern steelhead, as the water quality there leaves habitat of inferior quality for the steelhead. When winter rains cause Prefumo Creek to flow, the creek is known to be used by steelhead as a corridor when they migrate into the upper watershed of the Prefumo Creek where the habitat is better suited to them. Although not found here in recent (2009) surveys, there is the possibility of occurrence of red-legged frog (Rana catesbiana) in Prefumo Creek and its environs. Therefore, in those areas where the frogs could be present, conslruclion aClivities will include pre-construction surveys for the presence of red-legged frogs and training in the recognition of red-legged frogs for construction workers. The arroyo willow is the dominant species found in this stretch of Prefumo Creek; it accounts for close to 100% of the riparian cover. The plan will impact a small portion of this cover where the proposed Bob Jones Trail crosses Prefumo Creek. However, the plan also calls for a significant expansion of the riparian corridor of Prefumo Creek, and thus any losses from 42 .~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 201 0 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact the bike trail and bridge are offset by the much larger expansion of the riparian area there. Conclusion: Impact less than siJ!nificant after miti~ation. S. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a --x- historic resource as defined in §15064.5. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an --x- archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource --x- or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of --x- formal cemeteries? Evaluation a-d) The site contains no known features of major cultural or historical significance. The Dalidio property contains a structure known as the "Grandstand," which once served as a reviewing platform for dog races that were once held on the property. The structure is in reasonably sound condition and has been proposed for preservation by the Dalidio family if that property is developed for urban uses. The possible movement of this structure, however, is not proposed as part of this project. Conclusion: No impact. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse --x- effects, including the_risk of loss, injury or death involving: I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the --x- 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. II. Strong seismic ground shaking? --x- III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? --x- IV. Landslides? --x- b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? --x- c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that --x- would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide, latenll spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the --x- California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic --x- tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? , Evaluation a-e) Conclusion: No impact. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, --X- that may have a significant impact on the environment? I 43 IIIII1t INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted --X- for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Evaluation a-b) No long term greenhouse gas emissions are anticipates as a direct result of this project. Conclusion: No impact. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MA TERIALS. Would the proiect: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment --X- through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment --X- through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely --X- hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous --X- 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? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where --X- such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the --X- project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted --X- emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a signiticant risk of loss, injury, --X- or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Evaluation a-h) Conclusion: No impact. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the proiect: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge --X- requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere --X- substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or --X- 44 ~ '~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 201 0 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or --X- area. including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface I runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the --X- capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? t) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? --X- g) Place housing within a lOO-year flood hazard area as mapped on --X- a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a lOO-year flood hazard area structures which --X- would impede or redirect tlood flows? i) Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss. injury or --X- death involving flooding. including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? i) Inundation by seiche. tsunami, or mudflow'? --X- Evaluation a-j) Conclusion: No impact. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community'? --X- b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan. policy. or regulation --X- of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan. specific plan. local coastal program. or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural II --X- community conservation plan? Evaluation a-c) The Calle Joaquin Community Farm will not directly impact land use and planning; it is an implementation activity for, and consistent with, existing policy. Conclusion: No impact. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource --X- that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral --X- resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan. specific plan or other land use plan? Evaluation a-b) There are no known mineral resources present on the property. Conclusion: No impact. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 201 0_AI 45 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than SignifIcant Impact No Impact Would the project result in: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to Would the project: Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly proposing new homes and busi nesses) or extension of roads or other Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? obiectives for any of the public services: 12. NOISE. a) b) vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) d) project? e) f) , excessive noise levels? Evaluation noise levels. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 13. POPULAnON AND HOUSING. a) (for example, by indirectly (for example, through infrastructure)? b) c) Displace Evaluation is no nearby housing. Conclusion: No impact. a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Evaluation --x- --X- --x- --X- --X- --X- I a-f) Periodically noise from the project may exceed ambient levels, due to the necessary use of heavy machinery or farm equipment. However, given the site's proximity to the freeway, this would not be considered likely or to result in unexpected --X- I --X- --x-I a-c) The implementation of the Calle Joaquin Community Farm will have no direct impact on population or housing, as there 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance --X- --x- I --X- I --X- --X- 46 ~ INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 201 0 ..... CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # . Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incomorated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a-d) No new public facilities would be required as a direct result of the implementation of the Calle Joaquin Community Farm. Conclusion: No impact. 15. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or --x- regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or I be accelerated? b) Does the project)nclude recreational facilities or require the --x- construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Evaluation a-b) The Calle Joaquin Community Farm will have no direct impact on recreational facilities, except to eventually provide for a planned and anticipated recreational feature crossing a portion of it (Bob Jones Trail). Conclusion: No impact. 16. TRANSPORTA TIONffRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy --x- establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict_with an applicable congestion management program, --x- including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county I congestion management agency for designated roads or I highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an --x- increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., --X- sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? --X- f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding --X- public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Evaluation a-f) The project will generate only small volumes of traffic, well within the capabilities of nearby intersections. Conclusion: No impact. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable --x- Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water --x- or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant 47 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Issues. Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact , environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water --x- drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project --X- from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider --x- 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? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to --x- Iaccommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations --x- related to solid waste? Evaluation a-g) There is a well located at the northeastern portion of the site. The water has been tested for water quality and no significant contaminants were found. Also, the adjacent Prefumo Creek Commons project carries with it an obligation to provide an additional well to be located by the City at a future time and installed at the Reserve as part of the Prefumo Commons project. This well is anticipated to be located in a central location to the land currently in City ownership; however no specific site has yet been identified. Conclusion: No impact. 18. MANDA TORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the --X- 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 Icommunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of Ithe maior periods of California history or prehistory? The project site contains a small stretch of Prefumo creek as well as a eucalyptus grove; both of which are intended to be preserved. No potential exists for the degradation of the environment or substantial reduction of habitat of fish and or wildlife. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but --x- cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? The impacts identified in this initial study are specific to this project and would not be cate nificant. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause orized as cumulatively si --X- substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? With the incorporation of mitigation measures, the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on humans. 48 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010~ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact