A 29

s 14, 18

APPLICANT:

CALENDAR ITEM

EXTENSION OF CONSTRUCTION-LIMITING DATES GEN~!

''"" - -.. ~"" ... ~t.!' ;. .. ~ ~t -

CALENDAR ITEM No.C ·o 9 (CONT'D)

PREREQUISITE CONDITIONS, FEES AND EXPENSES: ·Filing fee and pr9cessing costs have been 'received.

STATUTORY AND OTHER REFE~ENCES:

AB 884:

A. P.R.C.: Div. 6, Parts 1 and 2; Div. 13.

B. Cal. Code Regs.: Title 2, Div. 3; Title 14, Div. 6.

NIA.

OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION: 1. An EIR, SCH 8512-1816, was prepared,

circulated, and adopted for this project by ·th~ County of San Luis Obispo. The State Lands Commission's staff has reviewed the document and haue identified three

» significant environmental effects which result from that part of the project that the Commission will be considering for app~9ual. These are:

1. .Impact:

2. Impact:

3. Impact:

Planktonic organisms could suffer mortality due to reduction in water quality tjuring construction activities.

l~,otentially significant !ong-term impacts to the ·Pismo clam population may occur from construction of the intake · system; however, probability of occurrence is low due 'to. population depletion.

Potential erosion of the ·sandy: intertidal habitat from the jetting action of the · discharge of 20,000 gpm o'f seawater.

~. On August 10, 1988, the State Lands Commission authorized the issua~ce of a General Lease - Right-of-Way Use to Abalone Unlimited, Inc. to construct a sea water

-2-

:.t,: .. , - ,; : ;:, . ,,_ ..;_ -' 1 - 1 ~ ,~- "~";~~, ·~~. :·~~1.,~~i;r;~~!r~~;~~~~~~i~~!: ,'.:;:>.~{~:'\:· ~~·'.:;~:t~~~~~~r · · ...

CALENDAR ITEr~ NoC ·O 9 ccoNT'D)

intake pi~eline and a ·discharge pipeline for a mariculture facility. The lease provide~ th~t cons~ruction commence on July 1, 1989.

3. The Lessee has requested that the construction-limiting dates be extended to a beginning date of August 1, 1990 and a· completion date of May 3o. 1991. ;J"he. Lessee was unable to begin construction of the mariculture facilities until approvals were obtained from the State Department df Fish and Game and the California ·coast~l Commission. The Lessee has recently obtained· these approvals and will be ready to begin construction by.Auguit 1, 1990. The Department of Fish and Game does. not allow con~~ruction during· the months of June and July due to the nesting, season ·of the Califqrnia Least Tern, an ertdangered bid species.

APPROVALS OBTAINED: Department of F~sH a~d Game and Cali~ornia Coastal Commission.

FURTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED:

EXHIBITS:

San Luis Obispo County grading permit.

A. Land Description. B. Location Map. C. EIR Summary. ·6. CEQA Findings/and Statement of Overriding

Considerations Aqopted by Lead Agency, San Luis Obispo County.

E. CEQA Findings by State Lands Commission.

IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMMISSION:

1. FIND THAT AN EIR WAS PREPARED ANO ADOPTED FOR THIS P~OJECT BY THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THAT THE COMMISSION, HAS REVIEWE~ AND CONSIDERF.D THE INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN.

-3-

' ·,

; CAlENDARPI~ : .. · 1 ~ j t · MINµT'E.PAGE .....-..· _;.,:....._..._ __ 1

" '- .,_ .~ ' ..... -" '

CALENDAR ITEM No.C ()' 9 CCONt:'.fil.

2. AUTHORIZE THE AMENDMENT OF GENERAL LEASE - RIGHT-OF-WAY USE, p'Rc 1229, To ABALQNE UNLIMITED, INC. To 'CHANGE THE CONS~RUCTION-LIMITING DATES TQ A BEGINNING DATE OF AUGUST l, 1990 AND THE ·COMPLETION' DATE OF MAY 30, 1991 ON TH,E LAND 'DESCRIBED or~ EXHI;SIT "A" ATTACHED AND BY REFERENCED MADE ~ PART HEREOF.

-4-

. ~PAGE,;.:~ .. -:rc4 MfNuTE PAGE · · , , · ~-, ', .. --:~-:; - .. ~:" '.',. ~- ,

--~~l~.~).1~~~~.,.:~J ~ (c,

LJ\ND D~SCRIPTlON

P~C 1229

A strip of tide an~ submerged land 20 feet wide in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties. California. the centerline of said strip being described as follows:

c~:CING at a poiqt where the county line between San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties intersects the soutberly line of Lot 162 of Rancho Guadalupe as shown on the Record of survey Map recorded in Book 87 at Paqe es. records of Santa Bacbar:a-county, sai'd point beacs N 55011.1 24°' w. 829.26 feet from a 2 tnch Brass cap Monument marked ~*602. RE 2928 located on said southerly line at the intersection wi~h t~e easterly line of Lot 161 as shown~ on·aaid map; thence along said common county line N 37040'54M N, 3821.16 feet; thence N s2019 1 06N E. 54~.78 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: thence N 310i7'20" U, 201.14 feet: thence N 53010•47• Wa 499.97 feet: thence N 73010 1 47N w. 2399.84 feet t~ the end of the herein described line. :

EXCEPTING THEREFROM any portion thereof lying landward of the ordinary high water mark of the Pacific ocean.

This description is based on the California coordinate system of 1927. zone s. ,

END OV DESCRIPTION

PREeARED APRIL 18. igss BY BIU l.

0826b

=-·~·,:>.~.~~·h~- ~-~o;...~.,~~-'-"~_,,....,,_""ll_'!c..........- ••r_..,....,..,':' ___ ...,..>

··-· ... -- .,. . EI R SlJ~._,ARV

Thii> section is divided into two components: the Urst tsummari%es charac-teristics of the project site and the proposed development concept, and the second sumu~rizes environmental impacts and recomi'l\end~d mitigation measures for the pro-posed project.

PROJ'ECT SYNOPSIS .. -:;:;:,

ti" o Froject Title - Guadalupe Abalone \~1 ture Facility.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

File Reference - Conditional Use Permit BS-CP-80 CZ DER Log f 4069

Discretionary Action Requested - Approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission for the major portion of the project in Santa Barbrira COlllJ.ty. Approval of a DeV4!looment Plan from San Luis Obispo County for' the ihtake st~cture, rese~oir, and access roads. Approval of a Coastal Development Pennit and State tide-lands entitlements are also required from the California Coastal Com-mission and State Lands Cownission: from the California Departinent of Fish and Gaine for strea.!2'1 alteJ:ation and aquaculture permits; and.>the Regional Water Quality Control Board for di'scharge permits. A "404" Permit will also be required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for any work in a wetlando

Proposed Use - Construction of an abalone cultuFe facility as a commer-cial venture to satisfy the increasinq demand in the seafood industry. 'l'he 15. 2 acre graded site would include 7 .1 acres of abalone growing U.nks and raceways, two buildings (14, 500 sq ft) for a hatchery .and

""Jm%Sery. and a salt water .intake and .discharge .system. !r.he :tt>t31. l.ease mtel\ :Ls Q) .acres and lnclndes ,portians .in ~ .Santa :am-hara zma San Luis Obispo County •

• 'Location - At >the northern boundary of ,Slu:U:a Barnar.a ~unty.,. on the north .hank o£ 'the Santa ttarin River at its inouth.

Assessor's Parcel No. - Santa Barbara 'County portion of the property: 113-020-01 and 113-020-19. S~n Luis Obispo County portim> of the property is ·within l\PN 92-941-01.

Applicant/Landowner - Applieant: Abalone Unlimited, Inc., c/o Hugh Staton.. Landowner: • LeRoy "l'xust, Agri-Comm Management and Maretti and Minetti Ranch Company, c~o Clarence Minotti.

Project Engineer and Architect - Welch Surveys, Inc.

Current Use - Vacant open space used for 9razin9 and natural ha~itats. . ~astal Plan. Designation - Open Lands vi th Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area overlay.

o "Existing ~oning - RES (Resource Manaqement) •

. 69206A/R .. l l

·' ·-

e. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, ALTERNATIVES, i\ND GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY

In accordance with Santa Sarbara County's guidelines for implementing CEQA, the summary included in Table l, on page II-4, identifies significant impacts of the Guadalupe Abalone Culture Facility project fo~ which the County must issue a nstatemP.nt of overriding considerations." These impacts are significant unavoid-able advers~ impacts and axe identified as.£ "t!le .P1"D.P05ed project.

'

~s ll ~aFt-5 _X

-·---rn ··-·speei:fi"c ··et?onomic, s.ocil?l, or other coriBiderations snake --·- -·- ·· ·· infeasible the l'dtigation measures or project alterna-

" tives identified in the final· EIR.

(b) Thi findings· required by ~ubaection (a) shall be ~upported by substantial evidence in the r~C?ffi:~~

. .w:· . Cc) _The ·finding ~in subsection

r-;.. ·1 t =: • ";I' I --• C

I ~ ~ ~1

't&bte l. &.ssiiiaatf ~f Environ=ental Impacts, Hltlqatton Measures

,. Hit!qattcn Hea!IUres

iJnavoldable Adverse Impact

CRecldtuii lcpact) ~~~~~~~--~~~--------~----~-~--·· ................ ---~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~--~--~~~--~~~ A. CLASS 1 - . SIGdFICANT UHAVOtDABt.E ADVERS£ tMPAt'tt of tha proj~t for tihlch the decision !Hker rut ~ssue e "stat'eaent of overrt1Un9

COO!!l~ratlO'ii? under Sedlon 15093 of the .sble C~ GutdeUnes (u amended) 1f the project ls approved. · _ . .

Terrestrial Blol09t

A. Prlilll'f facllttles are located tn a pdustrine wtland habitat end would •lld-lnate approxiutelt 15.2 ecru of vetlend.

b. toss of caodl&le rare 8Dd· erl4an9ared plant ~cles ond tbtlr habitat.

c. 'lbe resenolr I.fa 1Geat0d lb lba tTJMS and 11111 n:sult 1n lM loss of one sere of tbls rare bab!tal.

Visual Resour02s

Intrusion of project into an ere~ of high DAtur4l scenic quality vith prominent vievs of ocean, vctlnnds, and coastal dunes. ·

.. .a. Manh~q of vUlovs alo119 proposed

• ·iev~ vould maintain some forested vet• land. l\trcbase 11nd set aside 'of equlv11-~lenl tsetbnt'l a.:reage or contributlon to a

•· wet1attds fund. Developacnt of e restora-- ~ion ~1a4 and bonding to provide for its J111p1~ntation. Fending of an er.vlron-~nt& 1 lllOnltor during construction.

ti. transplantlnq of La Graclosa thistle lo chOlher area. Reveqetalion of, t'l!s• lurbad areas uitb native plants tncludin9 btopa~ted rare plants and/or thclr secti. · beslqnatlon of cbnstn..-etion haul ro~ .•; llonc;I 1eveo ads. \:-. .. 'f

c:. No~ . •' r

bse ut ttalive plants for landscaping. l>1tinUd9 tacillty to blend in 11ith h4tura1 1And~cai)e. Use of gravel for ll&rkin4 areas to blend with landscapa. Qnderqroundlng of \\t111ty lines. Reloca-tioP Of bu11dlnqs to a site outside the tlvet .,lain.

a. Unavoidable, lons of 15.2'-acres. of wetland at the Santa Plaria·rtTermouth.

b •. Loss of h.oblt.at for the ta;.Grac10sa thistle due to·utn lacUstles, ,but · repla~nt in a.'lother ~~ea. · ·

Deqrad~Uon of l!atural landsca~ by intrusion of faclllty. ·

·,

table 1. (Conllnued) ,. Unavo1dabl~ A~erse · l•~cl ' ·mrnildual !~cu

B. cuss u - SIGUJFkANr ADVERSE fliVIROtmmtAL jKPAt:fs 11fAT Cl.N 8£ FEASIBLY MITIGATm OR AVOIDED, for whlch the 6eC1::slon sater nusl make .. f1nd1nqs 11 uiider S&Uon 15091. - , · ' · ·

Terrestrial Blol09f

•· Potential excess lurt>tdltt ln lagootl contalnln9 tldevater goby.

b. Salt water spUlage into beisb1fater s:arsh due to acc:1d.ental pipeline fallunt.

c. Ispact to nestlrnj of Smnry Plove!" • a candldat~ specles-

u. Re.oval. of ~talion aton9 pipellnt! corridors.

Ocea~_saphlc/nnr!ne '~loloqt

a. PlenklO.•!~ organl~s could s\ltf er "1>rta11ty due ~·.o redlll:tlon lrt ttater. quaUty duri!_!'j·, construct1011 ccthlUes.

b. Potentially $lqn1f1canl longftlen'! J.zipacts to the Pis:rio clan pcpulalion caay occur frcm COi'lstruction of lbe.intaJte system; however, probab1Ut1 of occurrence ls low due to population

1'-"'.-, .......

1_...~epleUon. ·

i; ' m ; c. Pctentilll erosion of thti sandy lntet• ~ ~1dal bllh1trit fros the jetUii9 scUon of

jl ~ the discharge of 20,000 qpm of seevater. Gl ' !

. m i! I

~d ' ' I

..._.. __ 69206A/S•2

" a. conshuctlon during lov vatu

. ~~~vatloH tthen f Jat_s are exposed.

·b.i tm?t~rk:J pc:M!r cut--off sv1tche:J for: pimps~ . , .

I' .c.,: Tie constructlcm to avoid Tl1!st1n9 sepsott. · ;; .. d.,1 Ree~lng Md rev1?9etat1on, pl~Une c:ottidorb vlth native plants.

a. 1lnslgniftcant •

c. Jnsl~lflcsnt.

d. Inslqnlflcant.

a. Cc»l.'1huct.tcm aet!'l1Ues shall Ho!~ .. Ji a. peak phyloplan!i:ton and iooplanklml pro--~"' .'if~ ductloti ber1ods (June-July ;ind Janunry- ··• Febnu\~l.

Inslqniflcant.

,--~~-·~~

b. soHtm surny to dell!ndne "11ether 3:.~ Philo .t:ll\!:I present. Construction of the • intake sll'1Jctu~1' shctild not be during spa\tlllhq periods (late·June to-early .1.ugust)t lf PiSGO cla:i in ar~a;

·c." t>bct11r9~ p!~Une to be fitted vlth a~ropri&te diffuser head to •1nla1ie both erosion iro~ discharge uater and aandinq tn ~f di*char9e p1p1nq •

\"

.·

8. CLASS II CCoaUmaedJ

~loqlc Hazard!l/Ctxlstral~ls

Ao Potential projkt il'iJICtS 111111: ttS\Jll from slope J.nstablhtr itl tbc, g>hnW ~eservolr uea, soil f?rodlblllty,, iY.ltcn• tiel bearinq capac!tr liltltattons for stri.icturee in tbe •aturat~ floi>dplaitt sous, ltqw.fac:Uoh and;~igretton oE .dune sand !n the project area,

tbe regulations Cf counlies of:Santa Barbara and San tub Obispo regulations.

b. The prr,~sed eQrth lavee desiqned to protect tile projed froa Ucol:I. lnundatlrm Nf alter stream »IOJ:llhology causing lb11gand entrc!~nt, le4dtn9 to abrasion. d.uiaqe to U1a projGCt purip syst~.

Table 1. (CooUnuedl

I

a. !nsiqnlftcant.

•a. :tile appHC/ilnt should p~ar-e a st!Jdy of b1o~ stability, soil ercdihllity,

. .' \beat1h9 capacity and liquefaction poten-JtiQl bftthe project site, prior to final :appto\'a of developaent plans, ar.d apply

,,. tapptoptiote mlUgaUon measure~. All ,gra~~~g should be conducted accordin91 to ·- .~ ., .. b •. th& bpplicant should fund a atudy

• 'of lhtt pote~Ual tor adverse i11pacts to the llest river bant and potent1a1 under-cutUng bf the levee to debralne appro-pri4l~ d!tigation eeasures to protect the/· l>Mk tt'oai erosion. \. . ..... _ t:. the Applicant proposes to constniCt en bh-sile sevage disposal systee in elie-vated sand dune deposits ne~r the pro- :... i>oscd teservolr slt-e. Site conditions ' bre a~qua~e to acC0111Dcdate sevage dis-S>aslil tequircGents of the project.

'· e. th&! SppUcant should prepare proce-dO'rt:s lo 11~1t the likelihood of pipeline leak o~ tupture in addltinn to clean-up ~lans lh the event a spill or leak of aeawat~t occurs.

b. 'i'll& ~pplicant ~hould prepare en9l-heet!n9 ~tudles of sedl~ent at the lntak~ 1ocdtion to detel"Zllne proper screen size lo pte,ent pump damage. ·

'b. tn~!gnlfie&nt.

"'~jt._ " ... ·~~ .

c. Insic.;nltieent.~ , ,, ..

'

a. Insigntficant~

b. Jnslgnifl~t •.

Rarlne B1ologr

a. l'klrlne :aamals &nd !'Jbcte blrda tloUtti be precl~ froa use of lhe nearahoro . end intertidal areas audntJ projed cen.:. stnJCtloo. This vou14 not be a sl~lf!canl impact due to slai!llT.' suitable habitats present in the re9t4da

b. Planktonlc cirqanlcas walc1 be • entrained lo the intake !'JfSlea tSurind operation of the intake ~· ~rill would not be n slqnlflcant iszpact &Kt to the relaUvelr lot1 'I01U7llrlit of Mawator intake and the pl&nktonlc organl8cs' e.blllty to survlvu transit lbrougb the Sf Stell.

Arcbneoloqy

No potential!y s1{ni1f1eant cu1td~a1 resources vere encountered bn-slte dtlrin~ an'intensive survey. -k~CTer, alluyiua and actl~e sand dunes nn site can indi• cate possible buried cultural resources.

*N' ttE

'•

j

table l. (Continued)

b ••• Nodd .. . " ...

eoiwt.tikuon personnel should be ,, . ~terted lo ltie Pssibillty uf encounter-. ~~' ln; cuU:.tirdl .resources,, end if encount· eredt 1f0rk·thould b9cbalted.l~dlately an4 c ~rofe~s1onal -archaeologist cion-Slltled. · C~Uance vlt\l ·such 111Casures would be ~1isured .ff rm envlronaental c:o:a-plle...~ ~tdlnator ls-retained to o~er• see alt lo!Uat construction phases. .. . . ...

\I

. ' '

CD

lssut:

Traff 1c/C1rcu!atltm

a. Ins1qn1ficant project tratflt: ~r4• t1on and lov traf~lc volua:!I !n tht!·la'e& wuld not change lhe current. adaf:pJcl.e levels of service oo the existing.toad .

• network. "

b. Lack of lefl·lum cbanneUHltozi fnd H19b\1a1 1 onto ThOmbe:ty PJ.ice frollld nol result in slqnU1cant. pt:ojecl ltzpoacts, due lo lov existing traf flc vo1ubel and acceptable sight dislanees.

c. Internal c1rcu1alto., conttlct~ tbrou'lb the Union OU Field vould be alnloal vlth DdeqUat~ negottati~ with lAndovn:u·s.

!!?!m a. Project e~rgf deubdi ot 6.d lo 6.S nllli«>n ltvb/year would be adaqualely served by P3clf 1c llas 4Hd Electric •

. Houslng!D:iptoyrienl/Grovlh tnducesrent

a. Project eaplortzent b te~td to drav frca tbe local labor supplr Vlt.h less than 10\ (3.S persons) llkeiy lo c:oce !~ outsida the area. Exlsttnq hwslo9 1n the general vicinUr U• expected to be adequate to house lbe ~loyees nev to the are&. !Ugh \ti.;lcattcy rates in atiUth San Lula C!>lspo tftl!Uld of f 0 cct. lo'Fl!r vacancy r4teu ~I? l>Mla Marita a.rec; Area population 9ravth'projuc-tlons would not be s19Jllftcontly oUected.

A/S•S

·.

Mlttgallon l!e4surct$

• 11. TtJ applicant should pay 4 IM!llk ~ , t~i~ •1tt9atlon lee.

.. , \ . t

· ... t , b. Nhile not required at thla ttse,

- ; letl•t.tlrn chsnnellnUon on Higbtfay l at .• 'niohlberry Place shculd be d1scwised vltb ·catlrads for pos$1ble futur~ needs. t

• I

c.l huJ/vanpool of employees frtlm·projtd en tanee to-site to reduce traffic

. wo1uaes on the Union CU prq>erty... • Sh4ted hmd maintenance to be negoO~lt-a/ v!lh IJnlon Oil. County TransportaUon . DeS>or~nt opproval of project o~ss plw. .

:'

a. iJrojli!Ct should use enerqy ef ftel~t e1ect.r1~ punps for intake systeg.

'~a. ~ou~ty efforts to provide of:fcJ:"dable houslnq in the cormunlUes s:urrouncUng the pr:o~ect ar~ reco:eraended to reduce the shortage of housing affordable to all area renidents.

Tab 1 et 1. (Contlnu

IssUe

D. CLASS IV~ B!HEFitIAt. PROO!Ct,mi'Actf:J

C~rc:lal .!\balone RAlslni

nie project would satlsfy deunds ln Uie seaf~ ~ndustrr.

Natural Rq>lenlsh::llent

The project 'll'OUld sat!~ry detlian~ fo~ seed anlzals for replehlshmt!nt proqr411! to reestablish the exlttence of wild, of fsbore populations.

!:ltl~ 'Zhe project vculd creale 30·3~ nett jobs.

E. CONSIS'mla ffITff PUNS ~"i> rot\icd!!i ' ' ..

ConfUcts vltb se-rer41 U:P pollclefj due to lntruslon into envlronmentatlr /sens! .. tl•e habitat area, and vlth-lnten~ of NatlOilal Natural Landmark status. Inablllty to l\8ke findlnqs·of "no ll!pdet.d required b7 RES ~one to grant CUP.

69206A/S~

••

..

..,. l\ !: .. ~ . ··-" f

" ·U

"

I'

~o.ble 1. CC~Unued)

hltlqatlon Heasures

{

...

·-~~ ,.,, -·~. ';(\ \!~

"

... 0

Table-1. (Contk~)

-. II. ffiOJl'r't ~LTEJl&Tlvts

A. No PrOjecl

.. n. ~ ln Proj~ t.tesl9ll

1. RelOC4lt1cn of b.ljor· faetiltteailllh!d lease arec. · ... ·'\

'-t

2. Ralot:ato resenoii' .. ' . ' • ·-•t .

'· l .. I

·c. Alternative ~tl0

AlletMltve

J. sues c·ana D - south 811d t:ast o~ rlvth wtsl&' dUne :s1ne;1a

,.

"

•'

.... \ I

... t

• ·- .~

Tcble 19 (Coot!nued}

,!I. PROJECT At~f,\TIVIS

3.

!£feet .

~rrenttr in eqrlcullural use, bolb su.es vlslble from ac:c:eas road to Cauntr P&rk, but not in a s191)lflcant vl'.?W'al'Efl. This 1l11Plld ill 111Uqable br lcndseape screening. Unknovn eff4!

·-·-·.~-;~:;:;~,~~~;·~::~F;~~~~:~;~~=~~:::~·-:~:~-~·······-·····-~~:· .. ""~~ ~ - ,, .

STATEMENT OF FINDINGS ABALONE UNLTD. OEVE[OPAENT PLAN

£086-154 (0860425: J)

I. THE RECORD -~.,, tit

For the purooses of CEQA and the '.findings identified' in Section II I. the record of the Board of Supervisors~·relating to the application includes:

A~ Doc~ntary and Qral evidence received and revieWed -~Y the Plannfng COl'l'!Mission during the public hearing en the oroject, in addition to that received and reviewed by the Board of SupervisoFs. ·

8. The Final Environmenta t lmP.!ct ~eport and Supplement orepared for Abalone Unlimited Oev~Jopn1en"t· Plan:. which is comp~ised of .the full Envfronrnenta l Impact Report ·prepared and circulated fn'. 1986, ·and the Supplement EIR prepared and circulated in 1987. and all appendices for the abcv~.

C.. Hatters of conmen knowledge to the Co1m1issicn which it ·Considers. such as:

a.

b. c. d.

The County General Plan. including the. Land Use Haos. ~nd A elements thereof; ~ The text of the Land Use Element. The County Land Use Ordinance. The County Code of San Luis Obispo County. The -C-0unty £11vfronw.enta t 'ilua 1ity ~ct ·Gui44!1 foes .. Gther fonuHy ad~ 110JiciES cmtJ 1'T'di1iances.

D. Tl}e Plani:Uo.s Oe~.a~~mgnt suff reports. including-:.aJ J. attachr:ients • . prepared f.or the Septeraber 10. 1987 Planning Cammission ff~aring and ~ Janu.ar_y J2'9 1988 l3oard af S~isors ~ari11Q ..

II. :gRTIFICATION OF. llfE fINAL EIR AND SUPPLEMEJ!!

The Board of Supervisors makes the following finding with respe~t to the Abalone Development Plan Final EIR"and Supplement.

A. The final EIR and Supplemi:!nt for the Abalone Unlimited Oeveloornent Plan has been completed in compliance with CEQA and .the CEQA Guidelines. ·

rJ. The Final EIR and Supplement and ail related public co111T1ents and responses hava been presented to the Board of Supervhors and the BoaY"d of Supervisors has considered the information contained in the Final EIR and Suoplement and oresented at the public he3rinqs prior to approvin9 the project. ·

-1-

III. FINDINGS --The Planning Department staff reports (and attachments) dated' September 10, 1987 and January 12, 1988 are hereby incorporated by reference into these ffodings~ ......

A. Unavoidable Significarit Adv:~e Impacts .,. 1. I~acts to Vegetation - During grading and construction

activities candfd,.,te rare and endangered La Graciosa thistle and its· habitat ttauld be affected. Development of the project site, especially the ten-foot wide construction corridor for the pipelines, wou'i,~ disturb dense concentrations of the La Graciosa thistle west of the raceway. (La Gracia~~ this~le is not present at the inain building facility site.J · ·

::i ... Development of the nsain building facility would result in the unavoidable loss of approximately 25,000 ~quare feet of coastll dune h~itat until the P.nd of the use~~l life of the project. ·

The impacts to La Graciosa thistle have been partially mitigated through severa 1 Conditions of Approva 1 which have been incorporated into the project. Condition 5 requires that all pireline routes st\all be staked in the field and surveyad by the environrnenta 1 ,;~:mi tor fer rare plants. In addition, this condition requires that the pipeline .£Drr.2dor

·sha 11 be rerouted around ccncentr.atioris of such :plants. tandition 12 'i!Stablisiles "the -r'equiT'em!nt for 'the applicant 'to sub"!it a. revegetation plan addressing con~truc:tion impacts.

-The-- pl an ·;is- · t9 - include a wopogat ion proqram for the La Graciosa ~histle. Condition 13 requires_that all la Graciosa "thistle in danger of being disturbed by development of the project shall be removed and replanted in a similar habitat onsite. ·This ·may be only a partial mitigation measure due to

-~the fact that tile Supplement points out that replanting is not ~ proven technology • . The unavoidable loss of approximately 25,000 square feet of coastal 1fune ttabitat has been part1a11y mitigated through project revisions and Conditions of Approval. The applicant has eliminated .the proposed reservoir from the project description. The reservoir would have disturbed approximately one acre of well developed coastal dune shrub.

The i~acts tO vegetation are considered acceptable because the project has been revised and all feasible mitigation measures have been required.

-2-I · ~-- , 67 \ ; t''\t.F.Ntlf.R p,,,,~ ·-m-1 ; MINUTE PAGE--·...;.·,..;..._ .;._--J L.._ - - .

8. .1_d••rse I "'1acts 1111 kb . Can Se Hi ti2a ted to Ins f 9n if fcan~ 1. Impacts to Wetland ffaQitat - The -raceways are located

partiaJJy in a transitional wetland habitat of approximately 33 acres. There is dis~g~!ement among experts reqarding the wetland status of the ~ceway site. Ourfng the public review period of the EIR Su~lement, we received letters from both ·-·~- --the u:'S. flsh and Wi1qlffe Ser-vice and the State Departm2nt of Fish and Game (s~e App~ndix B).

·Acco~ding to the letter of COl'lm@nt from the Fish and Wfldlffe Service, (see Appendix B. Final £IR Supplement). the presence of 'fetland indicator species and seasonaJJy ponded water leads the service to conclude that the racettay area is a wetland. The servt'ett. further believes -that the mitigation proposals for the loss of ~habitat at the raceway site, conversion of uplands to~wetlands, is inaporooriate,

"

Contrary to the o~inion of the Fish and Wildlife Servic~. the OepAf'tment of Fish and Game indicates that the· .

to be inadequate, the appJ icant sha 11 be f'equired to amend · -the ·study ·appropriately. Submitta'J of t'1e &!et~:\nds

Determination required for the "Army Corps .of Engine~~s Section 404 permit may be substituted for the above-mentioneo study. , · · . ,..·: .

~.Jr.

Based on the informat{on provided fn the Final £IR and Supp Jement (including l~tters of CO!MJentJ ft fs clear th~t mitigation of potential wetland impacts tti11 be necessary. These mitigations include rep Jacernent by the app?fcant of acr·eage of wet land defined by the study that fs , required by Condition 3; or the applicant sha 11 be required to redesign the raceway site to provide JOO foot setbacks from, Jdentfffod wetland areas. Imo.lementation of these rllftigations, will reduce the potentia~;iy-~fgniffcant fmoacts to a level of insi9nificance. In ,addition :to Condition 3, please see conrlftions z. iZ. J3, an~.JJ. .. -

2.. Saltwater S~itJage - There is ~t!:~ ootentia~. for saJt 1r;ater spillage itito the -freshwater marsb area due·. to accidental pipeline fai1ure. The potential occurreflce will be adequately miUgated to fosignificant levels by insta1Jation of emergency power cut-off switcttes for pumps. Please ~.ee Condition 18.

3.

4.

Snowy Plover - There is the potential for construction a~tivities to impact the nesting of Snowy Plover, a candidate species. Condition 7 wilt require that construction .qsctivit~es '"5flaH ~ot 1.1ttur i:luring "tnfs ne5ting perf()d... The SUSpension ~ O>n:struction activities during this period ~n1 adequately-mitigate i'r:pacts 'to the nesting Sn~! PJ~ver_

... ..- """··- .:- .-.· - -Dune ahd Wetland Vegetaticn - The removal of dune i2..2 .acrP.sJ and ~etland (l.7 acres) vegetation aloTlg pipeline corridors has been identified in the F.i na l £IR Suppl er.rent as a sf9n~ficant imp4ct. J?ie applicant tias aqr·eed to ,.eseeding

-

·and revegetation of piikHn~ .~.Qr-r-jdors w"fth native plants:-The site specific location of the oipeline ~lignment will b~ examined by the £nv-jromtental tionitor.. A1i9nment of the -pipelir.e corrlidor sha n be rerouted around rare and wetland_, species, , ;i ta be discussed in the reve~etation plan. These measures t~iH mitigate the impact of pipeline construct~on to insiqnifkant levels. Please .see conditions ·s. 6. 12. B. 14, and "30.

S. Pismo Clam Population - Potentially significant long~term ilfo'pacts to the Pismo Clam population 11'.ay occur from construction of the ·intake S.YStem.. The .Probability of this· occurrence is low due to population deoletfon. The applicant has agreed to provide a bottom survey whicti wf JJ Jndica~e t.he pre~ence of Pismo ClC!ins. ff oresenf. construct ion sha 1.1 oot ~c conducted during the Pf smo C·lam so•wnin9 periods (.lat• • !)=· July to early August). Ple.1se see Co11dit'~ .. ~ , · ~6

·•.-.u i:\l""',lP r ... ,.-:~ --..-(·tr- , -4- ~~~~!lE-- , .j. ' i

. . . ,_

3. ,pJanktonic Org.anisms - Construct ion activities could result in temporary interference with phytoplankton oroductivity and zooplanlcton feeding. Thjs is largely caused by decreased light transparency of• water due to suspended seair.~nt. tfowever, the ~l:.·_ · ._

.,/c-, /. 4. Other t-t.arine Organ:~sms · - Sm~ 11 fish, such as anchovy, s~rf

perch, and various juvenile com::iercial flatfish,. will ~2 entrained ttirough the t-inch by 2-i11ch opening! in intake. a~cause of t:ie low nurrbers of t'1ase fish expected to· be entrained, t~is is not considereq significant.

~ 5. Traffic/Circulation lnsiqnificant pr.oject .. traffic w gene rat ion and low traf fie vq fomes in the area would not change ~lie ._current adequate levels of servi

V. STA!EMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

The· unavoidable significant i~act~ of the project are found to he acceptable due to overriding .~onsiderations. It is recognized that the project may result in unavoidable en~jronmental impacts to biological re~ources. The poteflt ia l for the_y··· i'?pacts to . occur is substantially reduced through the redes19n of thf.~proJect and mltigation measures to be included in the project. Specif·u.:ally. the impact resulting fr~. tt; ... loss of coasta 1 dune habitat >has been substantially reduced , elimination of the originally proposed reservoir. The reservoir would have re:;ulted in tlie unavoidable loss of one acre of well-developed coastal dune scrub. Potential impacts to the I.a Graciosa thistle have beeti lessened by incorooratirig into the pr'oject a thistle pr.opogatia'! progra111. flagging of the. thistle ppultitions along the _r;~peline ro'.lte, and rerouting of the pioelinP. ro1.1..te in order to avoi(f derise thistle concentrations. ..... -~.

•/ .7 .. The project is considere& tv be one of the three envircn~~ntally superior project locations as compared to that originally propo~ed ih Santa Barbara County. The alternative of n reservoir wi~l result in fewer env ironmenta 1 impacts and is the env fronmenta 11y super'icr project alternative~ This alternative comes closest t~ meeting the .applicant's objectives while minimizing environmental impacts.

In balancing the oroject benefits against the unavoidab 1~ envircnfllenta 1 impacts, the aoard r~aches the following co~clusions:

. 4.

5.

OS20u

Impacts to biological resources have been substanti~ily reduced. Tbe ..or.nj&t :is '1:fJfl'i~der..ed .:t -{}e --t-tte ~viromnenta11y :oref-erTed alternati~~ as discussed in"ttle final ElR and Suppl~nt. itie . -project comes closest to ir.eeting the applicants ubject iV6 .~iJ~ u1ini.IJ!.iZ.i!1.9 ~fl~if'onlllental iif()acts. :.~ The· l)ioje~t .could ·satisfy demands for s-eed animals for r-ept-enishment Pf"'Wal!S 1:0 r-eestab11sb 't.tN! €xiS.-PTICe of. -wild. off stiore ~l)ulation~ r;f abalone. The project . .wiH 0'5ti! .30-35 new jobs.

-d-

EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT D860425:1A

,~NDITIONS OP l\PPROVAL

AUTHORIZED USE .. /~~:, ,.:Jt,f 'f''

l. /.;ff

This approval authorizes establish~nt of an aquaculture facility. This facility includes a 18,000 squarl? foot t11.11n building not to axce~d 20 feet in height; a 33-acre racevay; a six-foot high impervious core levee of approximately 2,260 feet in length; and intake :and discharge pipelines ·for saltvater circulation. The use shall be reviewed 20 years from the date- of approval to evaluate the compatibility of the project with surrounding usee. Thereafter, the· use shall be reviewed at five-year iD.tervals to evaluate .. compat!bilitye In the event that the oil facility is no longer operai:'hig at . .,the time of project ·review, the use shnll be deemed to be ~o longer appropriate for the site and shall have six months in ..,.-hich to ~remove all improvements and begin site restoration. ·.

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITOR

2. The county shall hir.e a qualified environmental monitor at the appli~ant' s expense to oversee construction activ.ities and mitigation measure imp+e~entation. The monitor shall submit a work program to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading/building permits. The work program shall include timing o_f proposed activities, methods used to monitor activities, criteria for evaluation~ and timing of .reports to .the county l>lanning .Department •. ·l'he .reporu shall detail 'the applicants compliance with. etmditions of approval and tile "JZdj:igation W!8SU1''2S ont:li:n~ iu 1:hi! 'P't'Oject ElR aud suppl~nt. .In J:he .e"(ent that fidd conditions wan:ant changes in

·• design~· die envi rghiiienta! ia6tilt:or shall 'have the autlu~ri ty to stop, woi-k on the project uiitU the re-design has been 1:1evi~~-and appmved .l>:v the Plauning Dep.crtmenL

CREATION OF 1'1ETLAlID ·.

3. The applicant sha11 submit an additiaaal detailed wetland study -to lJTOVide a site-specific · cbanct-eri:zation of tl1e -wetland or upland nature of the soils and vegetation throughout the t'a.ceway .site. The study and the qualifications of the consultant preparing the· ~tudy shall be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Coordinator's Office in consultation vith thke Department of Fish and Game and th:? U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? If the stady is determined to be inadequate, the applicant shall be required to amend the study appropriately. Submittal of the Wetlands ·Peter.mination required for the Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 P~rtd t may be substituted for the above mentioned study. The applicant s"all either replace the acreage of wetland, defined by the additional detailed 'wetland study,

'CALENDAR PAGE _-_..,;7~2;;_;..-_ l~~~~~-.-. .;.....;:3_8_.4.-·---I

at a ratio identified by the State 'Department of Pish and Game, or the applice.nt shall. redesign the racevay site to provide 100 font setbacks fr9m areas identifi£d as wetl.ando (as defined by the additionally ~quir!!d detailed wetland study). The fi~~ deoign of tbe raceway ehall bl! subject to review and approval by the Planning· Department prior to issuance of grading/building ~~~itso

-- -- --·· -- 1.if CONS'l'lUJCTION \ !

">i

4. The eaVironmental monit~~ shall oversee all initial grading. If archaeological: resources are discovered, a qualified a~chaeologist shall be contacted and 8ll activity shall cease until further authorized.

5. Pipeline routes sh&ll be staked in the field and surveyed by the environ.mental aonitor for rare plan~~nd·wetland specieo. The pipeline corridor shall be rerouted a.round concentrations of ouch plants. Specific location of the pipeline should avoid willow araas es much as feasible.

ii

6. Pipeline construction ·shall utilize existing roads for aecess't. The construction width shall uot exceed ten feet from the aide of existing roads, with the·exe~ption of an interval along the oil road adjacent to the fresh wnter ponds where the lines will be buried under the existing read. Pipelines shall be buried three fee~ deep.

7. ·'Construction activities shall not occur during spring months (May l ..;. July 31).. If a bott013 su'rvey indicates the presence of Pismo Clamst construction sbali not be conducted during PiSlaa Clam spawning periods -(1ate ~uly ~ ear1y ~t).

'8.. 'J!!xc4v;a;t1ou m 1>urla1 of, "tbe -p'l-pelbes at the f'oot ,t;if ibme lilopes "61:mll not disturb ther'1iu~e- sio~ - !the .en~ .monitor· ahall .DTerSee al.1 excavati4n. · " · : - ~ -

9. 'No bouw areas 'for •e:rtra fill- 13hal.l be ~tted "Without review and approval by the, Planning Department of precise -pla118 depicting the exact location and extent of excavation.

10 .. The 1:lll1n building site shall be. BX"ruled first Bud ,.uball serve .as, a staging area for equipment, pipes, and other -materialo.

11. The Division of Oil and Gas (DOG) nhall be consulted prior to issuance of grading ,permits. The applicant shall submit detailed plans and s'hall work wit'h t>OG to 1ocate any wells within areas proposed for construction or grading. If necessary, the wells shall be reabandoned in accordance with state guidelines. .

.~

iMt---.~A~..,-1\r='. • 7 3 ,

1 -1i:;~IN= ::Gr.E""-'-~-~ ..... _._._-_3_S __ 5_--_ _ N ... Ul!I;..-#"\ ... , . ~a• - .,..._ ' •l ..... •' ... ~ ~ ••

NATIVE PLANTS/REVEGETATION

12. The applicant shall submit a revegetation plan to address construction impacts for review and approval by the Planning Department arid the Environmental Coordinator's Office.~~~ prior to issuance of grading/building permits. The plan s~fili include the following:

a. Revegetation and stabilization o}Jdisturbed areas.

bo Propagation program for L& Gracioss Thistle.

13. All La Graciusa thistle in danger of being disturbed by the developl!leut sha~l be re:uoved and replanted in a s~milar ~bitat ilrmediately adjacent to the raceway site, within a site downstreaQ, or replrulted along the pipeline corridor. lhe lm.Yirouental Monitor shall oversee this activity. · - :~: 7J:.

14. Pipeline right-of-way and levee banks sbdl be re-seeded and re-planted' vith appropriate mixes of wetland and coastal dune plants· propagate~ from local native plants. Willova shall be re-planted .in loGations where disturbed by construction., No non-native species shall be used in this area. The Envircm:ienta.l Monitoa- ehall oversee this activity.

INV.KE/DISCHARGE STRUCTURES

15. Engineering studies shall be perf~med ou the sediment at tJle location of the proposed sea water inUke · otructures to determine;' the intak~ screen size needed to prevent sand damage to the pump works. Discharge pipeline ·shall -'he "titted "with a· ill?fuscr bud ::o Jflioi'nize erosion froa

·· ...... iU:srbarge :uuer au.a.~ bead st~ be 1=i.lt-ed ai: 151St 20 .~eti a"bove norl.'%ontal. -- -

~ ~ .:. .. .. ~":{ ~-: ~ ~ :::. . -i6. The sump for saltirate~ ib.tatce shall be buT.ied as l!l1lCh.Jls feasible,. nth

_ not: more t:Mt t:hree .feet: tD taJttend above ground .level.

17. 'Energy-efficient electric -pumps sha11 be used for the intake systee.

18. Procedures shall be developed and aubmit:ted for rede-w and approval to the Plaooing l>ep~nt:., to J.:imi~ 1:he likelihood of a spill from the proposed pipelines. These procedu-res may include the periodic inspection of -pit>eline.s BJUi .shal.1 include plans to facilitate cleanup of the .site 1:n the event of spillage or leakage fro;n the p:l.p~µne. 'Emergency cut-off switches to turn off' l:h.e ..sal:twiter pumps shall he located at the intake and main facilities.

';

~RCHAEOLOGY

19. The proposed construction area shall be flagged in the field within 100' feet of the Sensitive Archaeological Area outlined on Map 3 of the Spanne 'Report (1986). A Phase II pJ;ogram of archaeological teat.ing shall be conducted by qualified arc~ologist to Cietemine "if the e!te boundPey extends into the constru~l.on zone. If neceasary, a data recoverf program chall be impfemented. In the event that archaeological resources are disco'1ered, construction activities shall cease until further authorized by th~ Planning Department.

20. All utility lines -shall be underground, except where crossing the Santa Maria River or were existing pole'S,. and linee provide access to the

-~-site. ~

FIRE PROTECTION

21. The applicant shall install required fire improvements prior to finaJ.. inspection of the main building. The probable fire improvements are liste:d in the attached letter from the county Fire Captain.

SEWAGE,DISPOSAL

22. The applicant shall submit plans for th~ propo_sed sep~ic; e;et~ d~3igned by a registered engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of perm.its. Such p!ans shall certify that proper separatio.n

De .anl.ntained 'between groundwater s.nd le.acb. lines at all times. .I.ow . ~ug fixt:m:l!S ~ kt used .£ar misl!:-e ~- ''

,'I..'EVRE DESIGN

23. F..1na.l design -plmu3, :for ne 1fr0poscd earth 1evee Gha1l' demonst:mt~ -protection for the southerly rlver bank and the m?l:land& downstream.-The desi-gn 'Of 1.evee ohal1. 'be such that no other erosion ·control structures Will be necessary downstream, ~putream or along the southerly· river bank. The intent of this condition is t:o -'Protect the rlver and rlverb:s111cs and 1:he habitat values they provide. · 'Plaus ·shall· -ensure protection oi the site and stability uf the proposed 1:1 slope. lbese plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Division and by the Department of 1''ish and Game prior to issuance; of grading i!nd buildi1lg permits. · , ·

24. The applicant shall subtnit perlllits, or submit evidence that none are required, from the Army Corps of Engineers and the californla Department of, Fish and Game, to the Planning Department prior to issuance of grading and building pennits.

75 CALENDAR PAG~ , _ ;j 8 7 -. I MIN~PAOE---;·:~---..-.----!

· COASTAL APPROVAL

25. Subl'.llit a.. copy of a valid .. Coastal · Development Permit.. fl'.~il the California Coastal Commission, with any special cond!tiona of-ipproval and any project revisions in compli~~ with that permit-, to the Development Review Section of the P~ning Department be.f~re isauance of building and grading g>ermits. PtljVide a notice of e~emption .if. no coastal peI'l!lit is ?equired. ~

If the California Coastal Commission bas not approved the project. upon transfer of coastal development review authority to the county, tl;e applicant shall apply for and receive approval ~f a coastal developt!lent permit from the county prior to issu~nc~ of "iuilding or grading permits.

OPERATION :~ ... ""-, . :'r ... 26.

..... ·-The· applicant shall pi-ovide bus or~-::vgn pooling to the site once the number of employees exceeds ten. l?lanniog staff shall perform site visits after the first year cf ciper4tion and periodically thereafter to ensure compliance with this condit~on.

DRAJlfAGE AND EROSION CONTROL

2J •.. s_ubvdt grading, sedimeatation and erosion conti-ol, and drainage plaiis e prepared in accordance vith the requirements of Section: 22.05.024, 22.05.028, 22.05.036 and 22.CIS.044 of the county Land 'use Ordinance to the Planning Department for review and ap!Jroval before issunnce• of grading and buildirig permits. If so required, review of the .plan"sha:ll

''"'be .uu'bject .to .an .inGpeCticn and checking .agrE:ement: wit:b ,the ~ri'ng Department: anJI/oi: ~ -pl.an Jshal.1 h! pN;"~ Jly a xegiSt:ettd. civil engineer. ·

~ -:.. - .... ... -. -· - .. -· ·:· - -"\" 28. The grading and/Cir d'l:aiMge 'plans required by the 14.nd Use Condit:ion

No. .26 .shnll demonstrate to ~ County .F..cginecj;'ing Departtllent thai: the .follcnr..ng fact:oTS have ~ evaluated and :incoTporat:ed' :into 'the· final. design:

a. Flood ba:ard informatj,on as required by LUO Sections ?..:?.07.0~ and .22.07.066.

b. Slope stability and so!l e~odibility.

c.. llearillg upaclty.

~· Seismic loads.

e. Liquefaction potenttal and soil strength.

f. Wind and run-off erosion.

30. For construction in vegetated dun~ ar~ae, the e;:osion control plan shall include the ·folloving: ~/f · ·

. . ),·~ . a. Stockpiling of topsoil/topssnd .lfor respreading in co_natruction-

scarred ar~aa.

b. Prior to construction, re30Ve seeds from pl~nts thac will be lost to construction.

c~ Transplant seedlings ·of endeuic plants. to other. 1->Cations for use in revilgetntion. -~ ·'

..... _.. :~-.. "' d. Conduct floral recovery program· and invite· r&pteseotatives of

botanical organizations and other cotiaervatfon groups to rea

31.. ·A "recl.ai.8tion plan shall be submitted to the Plauning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading/building permtto. T'ne plan ehall include th~ following:

.-

.Restoration of all disturbed wetlands to p,revious condition tald:ns into account the clay content of soils supportiJ1,8 the vet.13nd · 'Plants.

:Jlu:riea p1pe11nes to 1>e dxai:led and abanilo.ued .:In ~~ l!!:cposed .pipelines to ·:ll~ -rem6vt!Sd .. -:-

r: . :! . ~ t!> bl! :removed .:fr.om :!bi1e2: facility mm ~ .uaaeed to ~ :Eac't helw 'the ground eurface and buried.

d. Metal sheds, concrete pads, :and r:oncrete raceways t:o he" .reoaoved from the site ..

e. Major building site to be acarifie~ to eno-;eet d~pth and - -·--· revegetated with a -mix of native dune plant seeds collected ;from/

the project vicinity.

f. 'P.emo-va1. of 1.evee.

32 •. Applicant shall enter into a perfot1!Ulnce agree~ent ~n a fol"!'ll accepta~le to County Counsel and submit a bond to ensure com~liance ~!th restoration/reclamation plan.

KR/cl/7075-1/127 l-lZ-88

EXHIBIT 11E11

T~e follo~inq potentially significant enviroL~ental effects have baen identified tn the final EIR for that part of the proja9t under the jurisdiction ,pf the Commission.

l. -~ ,,,

oceanographic/Marine Biologz 't:[ a. Planktonic or~anisms ·could suffer

mortality due to reduction in water quality during constru~tfon activities.

Mitigatio~: Construction activities shall avoid peak phytoplankton and zooplankton production P.~riods (June-.:l'\1ly and January-Februlh:y) , . ·~

Finding:

·-

·.-Cbanqes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the siqnif icant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.

'!'he proposed lease .tequires th9' Applica~t to schedule and ~onduct construction activities outsida the identified peak phytoplankton and zooplankton production periods •

...... __ ..... -- .. -: .-.· - .... . --

"·

032790C09-1032790C09-2