Agenda packet — Pismo Beach City Council, May 19, 2026

Page 1 of 6 ends

AGENDA
Pismo Beach City Council
Tuesday, May 19, 2026
City Hall None
Council Chamber, City Hall https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84823715585 1 Live virtual viewing is offered via Zoom.
2 Broadcast meeting also available for viewing on cable Channel 20 and online at pismobeach.org/agenda.

0.MEETING INSTRUCTIONS:

These meetings are being conducted in a hybrid format with both in-person and virtual options. Ways to watch these meetings and submit public comment are provided below.

Watch and participate in person:
•Regular Meeting: Visit the Council Chamber at City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449. •To make Regular Meeting public comment, please submit an optional blue “speaker slip” to staff; the Mayor will ask you to approach the lectern to speak during the public comment period on your item of interest. •To make Closed Session public comment, please be present in the Council Chamber when the Closed Session is publicly convened; the Mayor will call for public comment prior to commencing the closed proceedings.

Watch via Zoom:
•Regular Meeting only: Click this link on any computer or mobile device:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84823715585 . This URL may also be typed into a web browser.

Listen via telephone:
•Regular Meeting only: Call 1-669-900-6833 to join by telephone audio only. Enter Meeting ID 848 2371 5585 when prompted.

Watch online:
•Regular Meeting only: Visit www.pismobeach.org/agenda and scroll to “Upcoming Events.” When the live broadcast begins, an “In Progress” link will appear; click this link to watch the livestream. A recording of the meeting will be available on demand shortly after the meeting ends.

Watch on Channel 20:
•Regular Meeting only: Tune to local cable channel 20 in Pismo Beach; the meeting will be broadcast live.

Meetings are also replayed at 9:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m., and 1:00 a.m. each day the following week.

Submit written comment prior to, or during, the meeting:
•Regular Meeting and Closed Session: In advance of the meeting, written comments may be emailed to [email protected] or mailed or delivered to the City Clerk’s Office, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449. During the Regular Meeting no later than the start of the comment period for your item of interest, written comment may be hand-delivered to staff in the Council Chamber. Emails and other written comment submitted after the start of the meeting may not be fully considered prior to any action taken on the item.

Submit voicemail comment:
•Regular Meeting and Closed Session: Call 805-773-7005 and leave a voicemail before the meeting.

Voicemails submitted after the start of the meeting may not be fully considered prior to any action taken on the item. This automated voicemail line will not be answered or monitored for other purposes.

Please note:
•In the event a Council Member participates in this meeting by teleconference under the provisions of Government Code Section 54953(f), public comment will be accepted via Zoom, including by telephone audio, as required by law. However, the timing of a request by a Council Member to participate remotely may not allow sufficient time to post an agenda containing information on how the public may participate via Zoom or telephone. In such instances, the City Clerk or another staff member will orally provide such information at the meeting. •Meetings may begin a few minutes after the scheduled start time. •Meetings will be recorded, except closed sessions; these recordings are public record. •Phone numbers of call-in attendees may be visible to other meeting attendees, or in meeting recordings. •Phone numbers of voicemail commenters may be visible in the public record along with transcripts.

Please contact City Clerk Erica Inderlied at [email protected] with questions.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026

Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 19, 2026

Page 2 of 6 ends

Special Closed Session—5:00 p.m.

City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Waage

1.ROLL CALL:

Mayor: Waage
Mayor Pro Tem: Reiss
Council Members: Guthrie, Inman, Newton

2.ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) – Council Chamber Item 2.A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code §54956.9) Name of Case: Spanish Vineyards, LLC v. City of Pismo Beach, et al.

San Luis Obispo County Superior Court Case No. 25CV-0680

3.PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD – Council Chamber
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item appearing on the agenda.

Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
•Please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less.
•Unduly disruptive behavior will not be permitted.

Documents submitted to the Council become public record unless otherwise exempt from disclosure.

4.CLOSED SESSION – Closed Meeting Room
The City Council will convene in Closed Session to discuss the items listed under Item 2 above. In accordance with the Brown Act, public access is not permitted for this portion of the meeting.

5.CLOSED SESSION REPORT – Council Chamber
If a regular meeting immediately follows this Closed Session, the Closed Session Report will be made during the regular meeting.

6.ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Time Date Location
5:30 p.m. Council Chamber, City Hall
Council Agenda 5-19-2026

Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 19, 2026

Page 3 of 6 ends

Regular Meeting—5:30 p.m.

Council Chamber, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Waage

1.ROLL CALL:

Mayor: Waage
Mayor Pro Tem: Reiss
Council Members: Guthrie, Inman, Newton

2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3.ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA

4.PRESENTATIONS
Item 4.A: Proclamation: Recognizing May 17–23, 2026 as National Public Works Week (Gaglione)
Item 4.B: Proclamation: Recognizing May 2026 as National Foster Care Month (San Luis Obispo County Department of Social Services)

5.PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item NOT appearing on the agenda. For items appearing on the agenda, including the Consent Calendar, the public will be invited to make comments during Council consideration of the item. In accordance with state law, matters raised as part of this comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon by the City Council at this time.

However, in response to a matter raised as part of this comment period, the Council may, during Item 13, City Council Comments and Requests, direct staff to assist a speaker, or schedule the matter for consideration on a future agenda.

Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council: •Please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less. •Unduly disruptive behavior will not be permitted.

Documents submitted to the Council become public record unless otherwise exempt from disclosure.

6.CITY MANAGER’S REPORT - No action to be taken

7.CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT / CLOSED SESSION REPORT - No action to be taken

8.COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS

1.Air Pollution Control District, SLO County (Newton/Reiss)

2.California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (Reiss/Inman) Central Coast Blue Regional Recycled Water Authority
(Waage/Guthrie)
Chapman Estate Foundation (Liaison) (Reiss)
Coastal Cities Group, League of CA Cities (Waage)
Conference and Visitors Bureau / LBID Board (Liaison) (Inman) Friends of Price House Liaison (Waage)
Hazard Mitigation & Fire Safety (Inman/Waage)

Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Subcommittee (Inman/Waage) Regional Transit Authority, SLO (Waage/Reiss)
Shell Beach Improvement Group Liaison (Inman/Reiss)
SLOCOG (Waage/Reiss)
South County Chambers Gov’t Affairs (Guthrie/Inman)
Visit SLO CAL Advisory Committee (Inman)
Water Resources Advisory Committee, SLO (Guthrie/Inman) Zone 3 Water Advisory Committee, SLO (Guthrie/Inman)
(Govt Code Section 53232.3)
Council Agenda 5-19-2026

Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 19, 2026

Page 4 of 6 ends

9.CONSENT CALENDAR
All Consent Calendar items will be acted upon by a single action of the City Council unless otherwise requested by an individual Council Member for separate consideration. Public comment on Consent Calendar items will be invited prior to action on the Calendar.

Item 9.A: Adoption of Meeting Minutes (Inderlied)
Recommendation:

Adopt Minutes of the May 5, 2026 Regular Meeting.

Item 9.B: Payroll Register and Register of Demands (Feeser) Recommendation:

1.Approve the Summary of Payroll Register for May 3, 2026;

2.Approve the Register of Demands for April 24, 2026 and May 1, 2026.

Item 9.C: Purchase of Replacement Polaris Cart Vehicle for Fire Department (Craig) Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of one 2026 Can-Am Defender PRO XT from Central Coast Yamaha Polaris Suzuki Can-Am in the amount of $32,605.88.

10.ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR

11.PUBLIC HEARINGS - No earlier than 6:00 p.m.

GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS (Mayor/Presiding Officer reserves discretion to set speaking allowances):

1. City staff will present the staff report and recommendation, and respond to technical/clarifying questions from Council;

2. Mayor will open the public hearing, and invite the project applicant, or representative, to present the project (Limited to 10 mins);

3. In an Appeal Hearing, the Mayor will then invite the appellant, or representative, to present their appeal (Limited to 10 mins);

4. Mayor will then ask other interested persons to testify regarding the project (Limited to 3 mins per speaker);

5. Mayor will invite the project applicant, or representative, to make a rebuttal if desired (Limited to 5 mins);

6. In an Appeal Hearing, the Mayor will then invite the appellant, or representative, to make a rebuttal if desired (Limited to 5 mins);

7. Mayor will close the public hearing, following which the Council will deliberate and act on the matter.

Item 11.A: General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update and Final Environmental Impact Report, including Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project Is Within the Coastal Zone and Requires Certification by the Coastal Commission. (Graham)
Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution adopting the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan Update and certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), including Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026

Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 19, 2026

Page 5 of 6 ends

12. BUSINESS ITEMS - May be reordered and heard prior to Public Hearings

Item 12.A: Job Vacancy Report in Compliance with Assembly Bill 2561 (Clarke)

Recommendation:

No action recommended; for information only.

13. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS - No action to be taken

14. ADJOURNMENT

To the following meeting(s). Special and Closed Session times may be subject to change, as noticed. Meetings will be held in a hybrid in-person / virtual format unless otherwise noted:

Regular Meeting Tuesday, June 2, 2026
Regular Council meetings will adjourn by 11:00 p.m. unless four-fifths of the Council votes to continue past that time. If the meeting is adjourned at 11:00 p.m., any remaining agenda items will be continued to the next regular meeting (R-97-04).

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Erica Inderlied, City Clerk for the City of Pismo Beach, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the May 19, 2026 meeting(s) of the Pismo Beach City Council was posted on May 14, 2026, at

Meeting Schedule: The City Council of Pismo Beach regularly meets on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 5:30 p.m., unless otherwise noticed. Closed and Special sessions will be duly noticed as needed.

Council Agendas: Agendas for Regular Meetings are available for public review on the City’s website at pismobeach.org/agenda and upon request from the City Clerk’s Office, typically by 4:00 p.m. on the Thursday prior to the meeting, but no later than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Agendas for Closed Sessions and other Special meetings are made available at least 72 hours prior to the meeting when possible, but no later than 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Related Materials: All materials submitted to the Council relating to items on this agenda are open for public inspection unless otherwise exempt by law. Staff reports and attachments published as part of this agenda packet, as well as copies of correspondence received relating to these agenda items and materials distributed at the meeting, may be obtained 1) in the consolidated online Agenda Center at pismobeach.org/agenda, 2) in the Access Pismo public records portal at pismobeach.org/accesspismo, 3) by request from the City Clerk at [email protected], or 4) in person at the City Clerk's Office, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, Mon–-Fri 8:00 a.m.–-5:00 p.m. Please call (805) 773-7003 with any questions.

Broadcasting: Regular (televised) City Council meetings are available for viewing 24/7 at pismobeach.org/agenda, broadcast live on Channel 20, and re-broadcast during the week following the meeting on Channel 20 at 9:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m., and 1:00 a.m. each day.

Use of Equipment: Please contact the City Clerk’s Office if requesting to use the chamber equipment during public comment or as part of a scheduled presentation, 24 hours prior to the meeting at (805) 773-7003.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026

Pismo Beach City Council Agenda May 19, 2026

Page 6 of 6 ends

Notice Regarding Americans with Disabilities Act
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting or if you need agenda documents provided in an alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 773-7003 as soon as possible prior to the meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made (28CFR 35.102-

35.104 ADA Title II).

Council Agenda 5-19-2026

A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA RECOGNIZING MAY 17–23, 2026 AS NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK WHEREAS, the staff of the City of Pismo Beach Public Works Department focus on maintaining infrastructure, facilities, and services that are of vital importance to the community; and WHEREAS, these infrastructure, facilities, and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of the City of Pismo Beach Public Works personnel, who take great pride in maintaining the physical appearance and safety of the parks and other infrastructure of the City of Pismo Beach for residents, businesses and visitors; and WHEREAS, the members of the City of Pismo Beach Public Works Department continuously strive to meet the Standard of Excellence that is Pismo Beach; and WHEREAS, Public Works Professionals everywhere build and maintain the foundation for people to lead lives of purpose and possibility; and
WHEREAS, the year 2026 marks the 66th annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association and the theme this year is “Rooted in Service, Powered by Community”.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby designates the week of May 17–23, 2026 as National Public Works Week, recognizing the substantial contributions made by administrative, engineering, maintenance, and management personnel, and water and wastewater operators in delivering these vital public services.

Dated this 19th day of May, 2026
________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 4.A-1
Packet Page 1

A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA RECOGNIZING MAY AS “NATIONAL FOSTER CARE MONTH” WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach is committed to ensuring all children have safe, stable, and loving homes when they cannot remain with their biological families; and WHEREAS, more than 420,000 children nationwide, including over 28,000 in California, are currently in the foster care system; and
WHEREAS, over 200 children and youth in the County of San Luis Obispo are in foster care; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Social Services continues to actively recruit more resource families to ensure children have nurturing homes in which they can heal, grow, and thrive; and WHEREAS, National Foster Care Month recognizes the critical role of resource families in providing nurturing, stable homes and highlights the ongoing need for more families to support local children; and
WHEREAS, this month-long effort which is mirrored across all 50 states and the District of Columbia, celebrates resource families and encourages more individuals to positively impact a child’s life through foster care.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby proclaims May as “National Foster Care Month” and encourages all residents to join in raising awareness and supporting foster care and resource families in our community.

Dated this 19th day of May, 2026
________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 4.B-1
Packet Page 2

PISMO BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #9.A
May 19, 2026
TITLE:

Adoption of Meeting Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Minutes of the May 5, 2026 Regular Meeting.

DISCUSSION:

Attached for the Council’s consideration are the draft minutes of the subject meetings for review and adoption.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the preparation or adoption of meeting minutes.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.Draft Minutes of the May 5, 2026 Regular Meeting
Submitted by:

Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
City Manager Approval:

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-1
Packet Page 3

DRAFT MINUTES
Pismo Beach City Council
Tuesday, May 5, 2026
Regular Meeting—5:30 p.m.

Council Chamber, City Hall, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449 The City Council of the City of Pismo Beach met this date in a regular session with Mayor Waage presiding.

CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 p.m.

1.ROLL CALL:

Present: Absent:

Mayor Ed Waage None
Mayor Pro Tem Mary Ann Reiss
Council Member Marcia Guthrie
Council Member Stacy Inman
Council Member Scott Newton
Staff Present:

Silas Clarke, Assistant City Manager
Travis Craig, Division Chief
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
Rosemarie Gaglione, Director of Public Works
Jorge Garcia, City Manager
Scot Graham, Community Development Director
Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Gordon Jackson, Director of Tourism and Events
Dean Pucci, City Attorney
Jeff Smith, Chief of Police

2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Waage led the Pledge of Allegiance.

3.ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA
No requests to reorder the agenda.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-2
Attachment 1
Packet Page 4

4.PRESENTATIONS
None.

5.PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Call for public comment: No comment.

6.CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Garcia commented on various topics, including the May 11, 2026 ribbon- cutting event for the new Public Safety Facility.

7.CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT / CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Pucci had nothing to report.

8.COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
The Council reported on recent and upcoming meetings of various external bodies:

Mayor Waage:

San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (SLO LAFCO).

San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Board / Executive Committee.

San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA).

9.CONSENT CALENDAR
Call for public comment: No comment.

Action: Adopt Consent Calendar (Items 9.A through 9.J).

Motion: Inman
Second: Guthrie
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote:

Ayes: 5 Inman, Guthrie, Newton, Reiss, Waage
Noes: 0

Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 0
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-3
Attachment 1
Packet Page 5

Item 9.A: Adoption of Meeting Minutes (Inderlied)
Recommendation:

Adopt Minutes of the April 21, 2026 Regular Joint Meeting.

Item 9.B: Payroll Register and Register of Demands (Feeser) Recommendation:

1.Approve the Summary of Payroll Register for April 19, 2026;

2.Approve the Register of Demands for April 17, 2026.

Item 9.C: Monthly Investment Transaction Report of the City’s Cash and Investments for March 2026 of Fiscal Year 2026 (Feeser) Recommendation:

No action recommended; for information only.

Item 9.D: Update on January 9, 2023 and January 12, 2017 Emergency Proclamations (Inderlied)
Recommendation:

1.Review the need for continuing currently active local emergency proclamations;

2.Provide direction to staff if desired.

Item 9.E: Fiscal Year 2026 Third Quarter Financial Status Report (Feeser) Recommendation:

No action recommended; for information only.

Item 9.F: Quarterly Investment Report for the Three Months of January through March 2026 – the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 (Feeser)
Recommendation:

No action recommended; for information only.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-4
Attachment 1
Packet Page 6

Item 9.G: Award of Contract to Water Systems Consulting, Inc. for the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Master Plan
Update (Gaglione)
Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Water Systems Consulting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $221,703 for the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Master Plan Update.

Legislative Record: Resolution R-2026-026 adopted.

Item 9.H: Approval of the Routine Street Maintenance Project for Proposed Fiscal Year 2027 Road Maintenance and
Rehabilitation Account Funding (SB 1); Making a Determination of Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (Feeser)
Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution approving the Routine Street Maintenance project for proposed Senate Bill 1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account funding for Fiscal Year 2027 and making a Determination of Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Legislative Record: Resolution R-2026-027 adopted.

Item 9.I: Purchase of Replacement Vehicle for Fire Department; Related Budget Adjustments (Craig)
Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution:

1.Authorizing the purchase of one 2026 Yamaha FX Cruiser HO from PCP Motorsports in the amount of $18,308.18 and one Tilt Trailer from Southwest Trailer Sales in the amount of $6,690.77;

2.Accepting $14,000 in future grant revenues in Fiscal Year 2027 to reimburse the Motor Vehicle Replacement Fund; and

3.Appropriating related budget adjustments in Fiscal Years 2026 and 2027.

Legislative Record: Resolution R-2026-028 adopted.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-5
Attachment 1
Packet Page 7

Item 9.J: Purchase of Replacement Vehicle for Public Works Department Wastewater Division (Gaglione)
Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of one replacement Public Works Wastewater vehicle (WW122) from Altec Industries, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $231,683.45 in Fiscal Year 2026.

Legislative Record: Resolution R-2026-029 adopted.

10.ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT
None.

11.PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.

12.BUSINESS ITEMS
Item 12.A: Fire Department Semi Annual Report (Craig)
Recommendation:

Receive Fire Department briefing. No action recommended; for information only.

Presenting staff:

Travis Craig, Division Chief
Jorge Garcia, City Manager
Supplemental material submitted into the record.

Call for public comment: No comment.

Action: No action.

Item 12.B: Annual Military Equipment Report Per California Assembly Bill 481 (Smith)
Recommendation:

1.Receive the Annual Report on the City’s Military Equipment Use Policy;

2.Adopt a Resolution renewing the City’s Military Equipment Use Policy and Ordinance pursuant to Government Code §§7070–7075.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-6
Attachment 1
Packet Page 8

Presenting staff:

Jorge Garcia, City Manager
Jeff Smith, Chief of Police
Call for public comment:

Cynthia Replogle commented.

Action: Adopt a Resolution renewing the City’s Military Equipment Use Policy and Ordinance pursuant to Government Code §§7070–7075.

Motion: Waage
Second: Inman
Vote: The motion passed on the following vote:

Ayes: 5 Waage, Inman, Guthrie, Newton, Reiss
Noes: 0

Absent: 0
Abstain: 0
Recused: 0
Legislative Record: Resolution R-2026-030 adopted.

13.CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
Consensus to direct staff to return to the Parking Advisory Committee with agenda items allowing the Committee to render a recommendation on the issuance of “unassigned” parking permits, limited to one permit per licensed business, that would be valid downtown, east of Dolliver Street, but excluding Pomeroy Avenue; and the potential increase of Monday – Thursday timed parking limits to three hours.

14.ADJOURNMENT
At 6:10 p.m.

APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________________________ Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.A-7
Attachment 1
Packet Page 9

PISMO BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #9.B
May 19, 2026
TITLE:

Payroll Register and Register of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve the Summary of Payroll Register for May 3, 2026;

2. Approve the Register of Demands for April 24, 2026 and May 1, 2026.

DISCUSSION:

Attached are the Summary of Payroll Register(s) and Register(s) of Demands (Check Registers) noted above, provided for Council approval.

FISCAL IMPACT:

As demonstrated in the attached payroll and check registers.

ATTACHMENTS:

1.Payroll Summary

2. Registers of Demands
Submitted by:

Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director/City Treasurer City Manager Approval:

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.B-1
Packet Page 10

FOR PERIOD ENDING 05/03/26
CHECKS DATED 05/08/26

PAYROLL CHECKS AND DIRECT DEPOSIT TRANSACTIONS
Checks 577276-577284 9
ACH 150

EARNINGS
REGULAR 459,346.48
HOLIDAY 5,908.40
OVERTIME (Includes Comp Time Payouts)10,345.77
Administration 129.93
Building -
Conference & Visitors Bureau -
Police Department 4,713.40
Parking -
Planning -
Fire -
Recreation -
Public Works 639.72
Water 1,718.22
Wastewater 3,144.50
Motor Vehicles -
Subtotal-Overtime 10,345.77$
SALARY ADJUSTMENTS 207.00
TRAINING / UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 1,100.26
OTHER EARNINGS 11,408.33
FEDERAL WITHHOLDING TAX 43,787.03
FICA & MEDICARE 37,727.52
STATE INCOME TAX 17,554.26
STATE DISABILITY INSURANCE 6,107.54
GARNISHMENTS 2,628.79
HEALTH 4,081.08
SUPPLEMENTAL DISABILITY 1,207.67
SECTION 125 3,277.10
PERS 43,524.80
DEFERRED COMPENSATION 15,202.38
ADDITIONAL LIFE INSURANCE 345.01
UNION DUES 2,546.25
PISMO ATHLETIC CLUB 475.00
OTHER
DIRECT DEPOSIT DEDUCTION 303,091.53
NET PAYROLL AFTER ACH DEPOSIT 6,760.28

SUMMARY PAYROLL REGISTER
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.B-2
Attachment 1
Packet Page 11

ACH/ Vendor Check
Check# Number Payee Amount Description
ACH 10002 Internal Revenue Service 120,188.47 Federal Income Tax PD 04/24/26 ACH 11208 SEIU Local 620 AFL/CIO 853.17 SEIU Dues PD 04/24/26 ACH 11305 Public Employees Retirement System 90,697.64 PERS Retirement EE & ER PD 04/24/26 ACH 12017 Vantagepoint Transfer Agents 9,616.85 Retiree Healthcare Trust MGMT - PD 04/24/26 ACH 12211 CA. Public Emp Retirement Sys 154,465.66 Medical Insurance - May 2026 ACH 12260 dba: Mission Square ICMA Retirement Trust - 457 32,556.26 ICMA 457 Deferred Comp EE & ER PD 04/24/26 ACH 12305 Franchise Tax Board 24,008.72 SDI & State Income Tax PD 04/24/26 ACH 12636 CALPERS 1,000,000.00 Unfunded Accrued Liability ACH 12708 dba: Mission Square ICMA Retirement Trust-Roth IRA
676.25 ICMA Roth IRA PD 04/24/26
ACH 12944 Leaf 1,236.91 Monthly Copier Lease - Apr 2026 ACH 14257 Igoe Administrative Services 148.50 Medical/Dependent Care FS Monthly Participation Fee ACH 14595 Missouri Div. of Employment Security 205.92 2026 Q1 MO State Unemployment Taxes ACH 14596 Missouri Dept. of Revenue - Taxation Division 275.90 2026 Q1 Withholding Taxes ACH 10371 Visit SLO County 112,343.01 TMD Payments Feb 2026 ACH 14257 Igoe Administrative Services 9,075.50 IGOE FSA & DDS Reimbursement - Apr 2026 137131 10446 Achievement House, Inc.6,854.55 Litter Removal And Clean Up Services - March 2026 137132 13158 Advantage Technical Services, Inc 10,971.24 Bello Reservoir Emergency Dive 3/28/26 137133 10695 AFLAC 2,505.17 Supplemental Disability Insurance - Apr 2026 137134 11382 Applied Technology Group, Inc.473,902.20 PD Radio Equipment, RGB Spectrum & Avtec Radio Consoles 137135 13460 AT&T Mobility 287284035974 1,245.12 Phone Service - March 2026 137136 14363 AT&T Mobility 287314925891 234.89 iPad Tablet Service - Mar 2026 137137 13382 Axon Enterprises Inc.25,084.22 PD Equipment & Training 137138 10435 Berchtold Equipment Company 83.95 Vehicle Maintenance 137139 11852 Bill Gaines Audio Inc 1,912.50 Audio Tech - Mother's Day Concert 5/10/26 137140 12098 Burke & Pace Lumber of Arroyo Grande 299.05 Maintenance Supplies 137141 14402 Carol A. Burner 966.67 900 Bello Lease - May 2026 137142 14766 C&M Western, Inc 300.00 Safety Boots FY26
137143 13852 California Diesel & RV LLC 254.02 Vehicle Maintenance 137144 14414 California State Disbursement Unit 415.38 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137145 14771 California State Disbursement Unit 16.15 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137146 14995 California State Disbursement Unit 325.38 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137147 14855 California's Best Janitorial 21,170.16 Janitorial Services - March 2026 137148 10085 Cannon Corp 4,932.87 Constructability Review - Cliff/Ocean Storm Drain - Mar 2026 Ocean Blvd CM - March 2026
137149 14027 Central Coast Landscape Products, Inc.411.08 WWTP Maintenance 137150 14889 Central Coast Security 247.00 Security Services - PBVH Rental 3/28/26 137151 11451 Channel Islands Technology Integrators' Group 29,882.95 PSF Networking Equipment Monthly Infrastructure Mgmt & Help Desk - Apr 2026
Monthly Backup Subscriptions/ IT Services - Mar 2026
Microsoft O365- Phone- MDM & Storage Licenses - Mar 2026 137152 14247 Coastal Tree Experts, Inc.3,200.00 Tree Maintenance 137153 14071 Cross Connections Emergency Services, Inc 3,618.53 Equipment Maintenance 137154 12224 Delta Dental Of California 7,487.87 Dental Premiums - May 2026 137155 11222 Drive Customs 70.69 Vehicle Maintenance
137156 15257 MACKENZIE DUBOW 31.48 Processing Fee Refund - Cancelled Rec Class 137157 11469 Eikhof Design Group Inc 7,312.50 Development Review - Feb & March 2026 Pier Ave Storm Drain Repair - March 2026
137158 12123 Farm Supply 117.32 Parks Maintenance
137159 10191 Nadia Feeser 97.00 M&IE: CMTA 4/28-5/1/26
137160 15213 FLEX TECHNOLOGY GROUP LLC 194.80 Monthly Copier Usage - Mar 2026 137161 14231 Franchise Tax Board-Tax Withholding-4 554.20 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137162 10149 Heacock Trailers & Truck 163.13 Vehicle Maintenance 137163 12599 ICMA 1,200.00 ICMA Membership FY27 137164 11993 Information Technology 1,081.77 Data Lines & External User Access: Jan 2026 - Mar 2026 137165 14660 Interwest Consulting Group 24,795.00 Plan Inspection - Public Safety Facility - Mar 2026 137166 13385 IPS Group, Inc.5,995.15 Parking Meters 137167 12255 Iron Mountain Information Mgmt, Inc 37.99 Shredding Services - PD 02/25/2026 - 03/24/2026 137168 10760 Johnboy's Towing 450.00 Towing Services
137169 12483 KCI Environmental Inc.1,116.00 Ocean Blvd Habitat Mitigation - March 2026 137170 UB*01266 KATE & ASHER KLEINSMITH (T)36.41 Refund Check 019455-000, 178 LEEWARD 137170 14277 Kyle Laughlin 904.00 M&IE: Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Course 5/3-5/14/26 137172 15021 Wendy Lawton 1,150.00 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137173 14401 Barbara L. Maraist 966.66 900 Bello Lease - May 2026 137174 UB*01267 ALLISON & KEVIN MCDONALD (T)44.24 Refund Check 019716-000, 218 INDIO City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 04/24/2026

US BANK
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.B-3
Attachment 2
Packet Page 12

ACH/ Vendor Check
Check# Number Payee Amount Description
City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 04/24/2026

US BANK
137175 14042 Merjan Enterprises, Inc.11,307.75 Pier Utility Box Replacement 137176 14739 Mike's Coffee and Tea Co.64.00 Coffee
137177 10097 Miners Hardware 2,672.08 Maintenance Supplies 137178 15048 Mission Canines LLC 675.00 K9 Training December 2025 - February 2026 Kylo 137179 13493 Heidi Jane Moller 50.00 Instructor: Free Pickleball Clinic 4/11/26 #11840 137180 11172 Mullahey Ford 1,423.58 Vehicle Maintenance 137181 14878 Nevada State Treasurer 2.00 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137182 12199 Noble Saw, Inc 387.98 Equipment Maintenance 137183 15255 NORTHWEST RIVER SUPPLIES, INC 2,337.54 Rescue Gear 137184 14343 ODP Business Solutions, LLC 456.95 Kitchen & Office Supplies 137185 12315 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 47,419.41 Electricity 03/10/26 - 04/13/26 137186 12022 Pismo Beach Police Officer's Association 1,656.00 POA Dues PD 04/24/26 137187 14403 BETTY J PRATT 966.67 900 Bello Lease - May 2026 137188 14740 Premier Supply, LLC 20.18 Parks Maintenance 137189 12335 Procare Janitorial Supply Inc 1,162.31 Janitorial Supplies 137190 10817 PRP Co Dba PRP Companies 449.66 Printing Services 137191 10452 Richard Rolson 770.00 Stage Rental - Pacific Breeze Concert 5/10/26 137192 11266 San Luis Auto Parts Inc 632.53 Vehicle Maintenance 137193 10731 Santa Maria Motorcycles LLC 3,624.93 Vehicle Maintenance 137194 12108 Santa Maria Tire, Inc.279.68 Vehicle Maintenance 137195 11648 Patience Santos 400.00 Instructor: Youth Tennis Camp 4/6-4/9/26 #11871 137196 13994 SBRK Finance Holdings, Inc.360.00 TCP Import & Testing for E-Timesheets - Dec 2025 - Jan 2026 137197 14738 SCA OF CA, LLC 13,662.62 Street Sweeping Services - March 2026 137198 14877 SCaDU 230.76 Tax Withholding Order PD 04/24/26 137199 14557 Securitas Technology Corporation 450.00 Service Call 137200 10913 Siteone Landscape Supply LLC 385.89 Parks Maintenance 137201 10533 SLO County Sheriff Department 4,600.00 Annual Bomb Task Force Contribution FY26 137202 10532 SLO County Sheriff-Coroner 923.00 Crime Lab Tests 137203 11412 Jennifer Franco Smith 950.08 Portable Restrooms 137204 11722 SP Maintenance Services Inc 5,157.67 Parking Lot & Street Sweeping Services - March 2026 137205 14757 Quincy Storm 1,955.00 Design Services 137206 15256 MICHAEL TAYLOR 4,101.44 Vehicle Maintenance 137207 13530 TCA Tools Inc 21.54 MVR Tools
137208 13243 The J. F. Will Company 42,336.75 Ventana Sports Courts - March 2026 137209 13097 The Standard 1,614.70 Life & Additional Life Insurance Premiums - May 137210 13442 Thorn Run Partners 5,500.00 Federal Lobbying Services - Apr 2026 137211 14639 TimeClock Plus, LLC 3,997.50 Enterprise License Annual Charge 07/01/2025-06/30/2026 137212 12860 Townsend Public Affairs 5,000.00 State Lobbying Services - Apr 2026 137213 14821 Traffic Management Products Inc 73.01 Street Signs 137214 13905 Tripepi, Smith and Associates, Inc 1,360.00 On-call Communication Support Services - Mar 2026 137215 14746 Trojan Petroleum, Inc.10,149.22 Diesel & Unleaded Fuel Delivery 4/10/26 137216 12041 United Rentals Northwest, Inc 3,077.20 Equipment Rental 137217 13073 VSP- Vision Service Plan (CA)1,761.36 VSP Vision Coverage May 2025 137218 13678 Wallace Group 24,627.87 Shell Beach Rd Shared Use Path - Feb 2026 2025 SSMP Audit & 2026 SSMP Update - Feb 2026
137219 12132 White Flag Pest Control Inc 517.00 Pest Control Total:2,408,558.91$
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.B-4
Attachment 2
Packet Page 13

City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 05/01/2026

US BANK
ACH/ Vendor Check
Check# Number Payee Amount Description
ACH 11224 Richards, Watson, Gershon Attorneys At Law 118.50 Professional Legal Services - Council & Admin Mar 2026 137221 10434 Abalone Coast Analytical Inc 288.00 Water Analysis 137222 11382 Applied Technology Group, Inc.10,720.50 Encryption Migration Project 137223 12624 AT&T 9391012187 5,643.03 Internet Service - 03/10/2026 - 04/09/2026 137224 12623 AT&T 9391012188 7,304.79 Phone Service - 03/10/2026 - 04/09/2026 137225 13278 AT&T 9391059148 1,846.87 Phone Service - 03/10/2026 - 04/09/2026 137226 14865 AT&T Mobility 287341782965 134.16 Internet Service - Mar 2026 137227 11501 Backyard Improvement Center 9.70 Parks Maintenance 137228 UB*01271 DARREN BELLO (T)81.63 Refund Check 017380-000, 736 SHAMROCK 137229 13976 Brax Company, Inc 7,624.00 WW System Maintenance 137230 11392 Brenntag Pacific Inc.566.99 Sodium Bisulfite 137231 10281 City of Arroyo Grande 6,727.43 Activity Guide Printing & Postage - Summer 2026 137232 10379 City Of San Luis Obispo 473.00 Pool Rental - Jr Lifeguard Tryouts 137233 14415 CLAD Consulting, Inc.2,985.00 On-Call Construction Inspection Services - Feb 2026 Public Safety Facility CM - March 2026
137234 10894 Consolidated Electrical Dist.212.04 Equipment Maintenance 137235 12516 County of San Luis Obispo Health Agency 5,014.20 Animal Shelter Adjusted Debt Service Installment #2 FY 25/26 137236 12628 Dell Marketing LP 4,164.39 Computer Workstation & Accessories 137237 12541 Engel & Gray Inc 7,131.11 Composting Biosolids - March 2026 137238 11868 FGL Environmental 1,173.00 Water Analysis
137239 14206 Filippin Engineering, Inc.24,573.50 Pier Ave Stair Removal CM - Feb 2026 Ventana Courts CM - Feb/Mar 2026
137240 13371 GHD Inc.89,127.20 Central Coast Blue Owner's Advisor - Mar 2026 137241 12952 GSI Water Solutions Inc 4,763.68 NCMA 2025 Annual Report - Mar 2026 137242 UB*01272 TIFFANY HERNANDEZ (T)151.34 Refund Check 017788-000, 600 PRICE 137243 13276 InfoSend, Inc.2,405.06 Processing-Printing-Mailing Utility Bills & Inserts: 4th of July Tickets & Weed Abatement
137244 12255 Iron Mountain Information Mgmt, Inc 84.09 Shredding Services 137245 12279 McMaster Carr 308.13 WW System Maintenance 137246 14042 Merjan Enterprises, Inc.1,954.37 Pier Camera Repair & Equipment 137247 15017 Mid-Coast Fire Protection, Inc 1,500.00 Fire Hydrant Flow Tests 137248 14739 Mike's Coffee and Tea Co.142.00 Coffee
137249 10097 Miners Hardware 1,042.39 Maintenance Supplies 137250 13964 MNS Engineers, Inc.894.00 Clarifiers CM - Feb & Mar 2026 137251 11172 Mullahey Ford 71.10 Vehicle Maintenance
137252 10753 Nick's Telecom 150.00 Equipment Maintenance 137253 12199 Noble Saw, Inc 9.91 Equipment Maintenance
137254 14343 ODP Business Solutions, LLC 682.33 Office Supplies 137255 10728 Oilfield Environmental & Compliance, Inc.3,566.50 Lab Analysis - March 2026 137256 UB*01270 BRITTANY OMUNDSON (T)105.85 Refund Check 019892-000, 871 VISALIA 137257 UB*01269 PACIFIC COAST PLAZA, LLC 119.67 Refund Check 019980-000, 531 FIVE CITIES 137258 12070 Michelle Pearson 522.35 M&IE/Mileage: 2026 AFSS ED Forum 5/5-5/8/26 137259 14550 Phillco 161.90 Soft Water
137260 13613 Pismo Beach Veterinary Corp 195.00 Physical Exam & Vaccinations 137261 UB*01268 GRANT & JAYME POGGENPOHL (T)14.56 Refund Check 019900-000, 117 SEAVIEW #B 137262 12335 Procare Janitorial Supply Inc 1,207.08 Janitorial Supplies 137263 15111 PSD Citywide (US) Inc.6,292.80 Citywide Enterprise Asset Management Program - March 2026 137264 13201 Rincon Consultants, Inc.12,691.75 PEIR Report GP/LCP - Mar 2026 CEQA/NEPA for Central Coast Blue Feb-Mar 2026
137265 14794 Ruff Ruff Pet Products Inc 4,166.44 Dog Waste Bags 137266 15034 Safe Sidewalks Incorporated 13,426.50 Downtown Sidewalk Repair 137267 14320 Joey Salazar 208.00 M&IE: CVU 101 Meter Training 5/12-5/14/26 137268 11266 San Luis Auto Parts Inc 1,118.10 Vehicle Maintenance 137269 12680 Brandon Shea 208.00 M&IE: CVU 101 Meter Training 5/12-5/14/26 137270 10913 Siteone Landscape Supply LLC 556.02 Parks Maintenance 137271 10093 SLO County Auditor-Controller 7,460.00 Phoenix Parking Surcharges - Jan 2026 137272 15082 James Robert Soderborg 88.00 Instructor: Advanced Beginner Pickleball Clinic 4/18/26 #11845 137273 14426 Steltec Inc 1,419.34 WW System Maintenance 137274 UB*01273 MARY SWARBRICK (T)8.97 Refund Check 019612-000, 484 STIMSON 137275 12321 The Gas Company 1,497.31 Gas Service - 03/17/26 - 04/20/26 137276 13392 Urban Planning Concepts 13,440.00 GP/LCP 23-04 Services - March 2026 GP/LCP 25-01 Services - March 2026
137277 12622 USA Bluebook Acct: 82507 1,295.31 WW System Maintenance & WWTP Lab Supplies 137278 14115 Vanir Construction Mgmt, Inc.61,346.00 Public Safety Facility CM - March 2026 137279 13678 Wallace Group 4,338.00 Sewer Master Plan Update - Feb 2026 137280 13617 Debra Warden 108.75 PSF - Dedication Plaque Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.B-5
Attachment 2
Packet Page 14

City of Pismo Beach
Final Disbursement List Check Date 05/01/2026

US BANK
ACH/ Vendor Check
Check# Number Payee Amount Description
137281 12132 White Flag Pest Control Inc 305.00 Facilities Maintenance 137282 12074 Zoll Medical Corporation 207.71 Medical Supplies Total:326,152.35$
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.B-6
Attachment 2
Packet Page 15

PISMO BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAF REPOR
Agenda Item #9.C
Meetin Date: Ma 19, 2026
TITLE:

Purchase of Replacement Polaris Cart Vehicle for Fire Department RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of one 2026 Can-Am Defender PRO XT from Central Coast Yamaha Polaris Suzuki Can-Am in the amount of $32,605.88.

DISCUSSION:

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Motor Vehicle Replacement (MVR) Fund budget includes $56,000 for the replacement of the Fire Department’s Polaris Cart 64 (vehicle FDCart64) and additional equipment needed to place the vehicle into service. This vehicle is partially supported by an $18,500 2024 Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) grant. Due to ongoing electrical issues and transmission failures, continued repairs to Polaris Cart 64 are no longer fiscally responsible. Staff recommends replacing the current vehicle to ensure reliable operation, reduce maintenance costs, and support ongoing departmental needs.

A quote from Central Coast Yamaha Polaris Suzuki is provided as Attachment 2.

Cart 64 helps emergency crews reach people faster, start care sooner, and move patients out of crowded areas when larger vehicles can’t get through. It’s a simple, effective way to improve response in busy situations, making it essential for public safety in the city’s event-oriented environment. The purchase of the Polaris Cart (representative vehicle type shown as Figure 1 below) is vital in getting the quickest transportation to victims who are hard to access and may need critical medical care.

In October 2024, the City’s Lifeguard Program applied for the 2024 OHV grant in the amount of $18,500 for the replacement of the Cart 64. The San Luis Obispo County Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that the County Board of Supervisors approve the $18,500 2024 OHV grant, and those funds were available July 1, 2025.

During the City’s Mid-Cycle Budget process, the grant revenues were added to the MVR Fund for the replacement of Cart 64.

Figure 1. Representative cart type
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.C-1
Packet Page 16

Conclusion and Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) authorizing the purchase of one 2026 Can-Am Defender PRO XT from Central Coast Yamaha Polaris Suzuki Can-Am in the amount of $32,605.88.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact of adopting the subject Resolution is an additional expenditure of $32,605.88, offset by grant revenues of $18,500.00, for a net cost of $14,105.88. The $18,500 OHV grant funds were appropriated in FY 2026 MVR Fund state government grants account to reflect these grant revenues.

The FY 2026 Motor Vehicle Replacement (MVR) Fund budget includes $56,000 to replace Cart 64 (vehicle number FDCart64) including additional equipment needed to place the vehicle into service and $18,500 of grant revenues.

The available budget, costs, and proposed grant revenues are shown in the Table 1 below.

Table 1. Fiscal Impact
Item Fiscal Impact
Budget
FY 2026 Motor Vehicle Replacement Fund RWC-Boat 64 Budget $56,000.00 Estimated Cost
2026 Can-Am Defender PRO XT $32,605.88
Remaining Budget Surplus / (Shortfall) $23,394.12
Revenues
2024 OHV Grant Funds $18,500.00
Net Fiscal Impact (Revenues less Estimated Cost) ($14,105.88) The remaining budget surplus of $23,394.12 is expected to be used for additional equipment necessary to place the vehicle into service.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Central Coast Yamaha Polaris Suzuki Can-Am Quote
Prepared by: Michelle Pearson, Analyst I
Submitted by: Travis Craig, Division Chief
City Manager Approval:

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.C-2
Packet Page 17

RESOLUTION NO. R-2026-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE 2026 CAN-AM DEFENDER

PRO XT FROM CENTRAL COAST YAMAHA POLARIS SUZUKI CAN-AM IN THE AMOUNT OF $32,605.88
WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Motor Vehicle Replacement (MVR) Fund budget includes $56,000 for the replacement of the Fire Department’s Polaris Cart 64 (vehicle FDCart64) and additional equipment needed to place the vehicle into service; and WHEREAS, due to ongoing electrical issues and transmission failures, continued repairs to Polaris Cart 64 are no longer fiscally responsible, therefore, staff recommends replacing the current vehicle to ensure reliable operation, reduce maintenance costs, and support ongoing departmental needs; and
WHEREAS, in October 2024, the City’s Lifeguard Program applied for the 2024 Off- Highway Vehicle (OHV) grant in the amount of $18,500 for the replacement of the Polaris Cart 64; the San Luis Obispo County Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that the County Board of Supervisors approve the $18,500 2024 OHV grant, which was available July 1, 2025; and
WHEREAS, during the City’s Mid-Cycle Budget process, the grant revenues were added to the MVR Fund for the replacement of Cart 64, and there is therefore sufficient budget to support this request.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach hereby authorizes the purchase of one 2026 Can-Am Defender PRO XT from Central Coast Yamaha Polaris Suzuki Can-Am in the amount of $32,605.88, in accordance with the quotation attached to staff’s report dated May 19, 2026.

UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 19th day of May 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.C-3
Attachment 1
Packet Page 18

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal of the City of Pismo Beach on _______________________.
________________________
Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.C-4
Attachment 1
Packet Page 19

#
#
#
#

#
#

#
"#

# !

7g
/8^y;qg
-!!7gyyP
Lq~7g^bn86-&''-
,!(+',
)+$+
_gl~^5kgcl
H]u
Ur0
9
7g
1

:]g
!( #% %!%)
:g]x
$&$')
Q]ygg

CgpLd
QavYg]
H]vg
86I!"!&!%!%)8^
6~
Hegz
:gihfgLNJXR

&C7+D6X%XRD""&!
HQOM:QM
%')--" %')--"
Grg@{eg1
S]egA2
QawYg]H]vgHeg|Vs6zy]agM]
Kj
W]
]VgnrazgMrag1%')."
gg/,(
!!
Q]|gT]/%'-%-'
7g
/ZZZZZ[[ZZZZZ\:]g2

&%)!(
,,
S]eg
A62
:]g3 Og`]gBagrg4!
"
M]g1
:]g/

&%)!(,,
9

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 9.C-5
Attachment 2
Packet Page 20

PISMO BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAF REPOR
Agenda Item #11.A
Meetin Date: Ma 19, 2026
TITLE:

General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update and Final Environmental Impact Report, including Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project Is Within the Coastal Zone and Requires Certification by the Coastal Commission.

RECOMMENDATION:

DISCUSSION:

The Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Update project started in 2017 and includes an update of the City’s General Plan and Local Coastal Program (LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) and the ongoing update of the City’s Zoning Code/Coastal Implementation Plan. The goal of the GP/LCP Update is to improve ease of use, update policies to reflect both current practice and new state laws, and most importantly reflect the goals and vision of the community. The City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan is a broad long-term planning document designed to guide future development and includes goals, policies, and actions to achieve the community’s vision.

Required by state law, it provides the basis for decision-making on land use and development within the community. Because two-thirds of the city is within the coastal zone, the city’s General Plan is combined with its Coastal Land Use Plan. An LCP consists of both a Land Use Plan (LUP) and an Implementation Plan (IP), also referred to as a Zoning Code. The City’s certified LCP implements the Coastal Act at the local level and contains policies and actions that guide development and protection of coastal resources in the coastal zone portion of the city.

The GP/LUP Update project includes an update of the Land Use, Conservation and Open Space, Noise, and Circulation Elements as well as the Introduction and Glossary sections. The proposed GP/LCP reflects a series of refinements over time. For clarity, changes to the document can be generally grouped into and are described in the staff report as follows:
The original draft prepared between 2017 and 2023 was reviewed and favorably recommended for adoption by the Planning Commission in 2023. Additional revisions made since 2023 to address removal of the draft Safety Element, public comments, Coastal Commission coordination, and incorporation of updates to comply with state law.
2017–2023 Updates and Planning Commission Review
The existing 1992 General Plan Elements have been reorganized to combine certain optional Elements and consolidate others which include combining the Design Element Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-1
Packet Page 21

into the Land Use Element and removing the Facilities Element to incorporate it into both the Land Use and Conservation and Open Space Elements. The Growth Management Element was removed due to conflicts with state housing laws. The GP/LUPis is a more user-friendly document that contains current planning principles and addresses new state law requirements.

Other key updates include:
Consolidating eighteen neighborhood planning areas into ten An emphasis on multi-modal transportation
New mixed-use policies to encourage residential development on upper stories Updated maps and exhibits
Since 2017, the GP/LCP Update has involved extensive public outreach and engagement, including advisory committee meetings, public workshops, stakeholder outreach, joint study sessions with the Planning Commission and City Council, and multiple public hearings.

In July and August of 2023, the Planning Commission held public hearings to review and consider recommendation of adoption of the GP/LUP to the City Council which at that time also included a planned update of the Safety Element. At the conclusion of the August 22, 2023 hearing, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, adopt the required CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve the General Plan/Local Coastal Program update.

Subsequent to the August 22, 2023 hearing, the City received public and stakeholder concerns regarding new policy language in the draft Safety Element which were viewed as limiting the ability of residents, business owners, and the City to protect public/private improvements along the bluff areas. The community concern regarding policies in the Safety Element along with staffing vacancies led to a pause in the project. After coordination with Coastal Commission staff, the City Council gave direction on May 21 2024 to proceed with the GP/LCP update by extracting the draft Safety Element to be updated as a separate project.
2024–2026 Revisions
Since the 2023 Planning Commission hearings, staff has worked to incorporate input from the public, Coastal Commission staff, public agencies, and Planning Commission. Key revisions since the 2023 Planning Commission hearings include:

1. Removal of the draft Safety Element from the GP/LCP update to be processed as a separate effort. Until that process is complete, this Public Draft remains consistent with the currently adopted Safety Element.

2. Close coordination with Coastal Commission staff to better align LUP policy requirements with the Coastal Act and revisions to the document to clearly identify which portions are part of the LUP and which are not.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-2
Packet Page 22

3. New Goals, Policies, and Actions have been added to ensure compliance with recent State legislative updates and Coastal Act requirements.

4. Reformatting and editing the document to improve organization and readability and to better align General Plan and Zoning policies.

5. A “park-once” strategy has been introduced to promote parking in a central location and walking to various services and attractions downtown. This is consistent with City Council and Parking Advisory Committee direction/recommendations.

6. Encouragement of the use of parking in-lieu fees for commercial uses in the downtown to encourage investment and to promote new construction and reconstruction.

7. Policy and actions that collectively aim to increase the City’s long-term resilience to sea-level rise by requiring the use of the best available science, careful siting and design of new development, ongoing monitoring of changing coastal conditions, and preparation of an updated sea level rise adaptation plan.

8. New environmental justice policies related to accessible services in open space and recreational areas in compliance with SB 1425.

9. Incorporation of minimum and maximum residential densities within commercial and mixed-use land use designations to ensure consistency with the adopted 2020–2028 Housing Element and State law.

10. Mapping edits to reflect current conditions and/or consistency with the existing Land Use Map.

The Planning Commission held public hearings to review and provide comment on the draft General Plan/LUP Update document on December 9, 2025, January 13, 2026, March 24, 2026, and April 28, 2026. At the conclusion of the March 24, 2026 hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-R-2026-005 recommending that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopt the required CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) update. On April 28, 2026 the Planning Commission held another adoption public hearing to consider additional public comment provided by Surfrider in a February 2026 letter which was inadvertently excluded from the March public hearing. The Planning Commission accepted two of the Surfrider requested edits related to environment justice and equitable access to the coast along with miscellaneous grammatical edits. At the conclusion of the April 28, 2026 hearing, Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-R-2026-009.

Revised Documents for Review
For Council review, both clean and tracked-changed versions of the Final GP/LUP are available on the City’s website at www.pismobeach.org/gplcp (Attachments 2 and 3).

The final document incorporates recommendations made by Planning Commission. The website includes previous document versions as well as all supporting technical documents.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-3
Packet Page 23

The tracked-changed version includes use of highlighting to indicate the source of the proposed changes as noted below.
Green highlighted text indicates edits based on Planning Commission direction since the December 2025 public hearing.
Blue highlighted text indicates edits coordinated with Coastal Commission staff to ensure consistency with Coastal Act requirements.
Yellow highlighted text indicates edits from City-initiated revisions to improve clarity, address key issues, incorporate legislative updates since 2023, and policy revisions based on City Council direction provided since 2023. Red underline/strikethrough text edits indicate non-substantive edits such as organizational edits, minor text edits to add greater clarity to policy language, addition of new definitions, mapping updates, and other miscellaneous refinements.

Public Comments
Staff prepared a spreadsheet which summarizes and responds to all comments received on the GP/LCP from property owners, non-profits agencies, public agencies, and Planning Commissioners (Attachment 4). Many of the comments included in the spreadsheet reflect concerns regarding shoreline protection policies contained in the Draft Safety Element. The Draft Safety Element has since been removed from this Update and is currently being updated as a separate project along with the Parks, Recreation, and Access Element. Policies related to sea level rise and coastal hazard planning are addressed in the Land Use Element, and existing adopted Safety Element.

Final Environmental Impact Report
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in 2021, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project and circulated through the State Clearinghouse for a public review and comment period from February 1, 2022 through March 18, 2022 (SCH#2021010158). A Final EIR was prepared and presented to the Planning Commission during the 2023 hearings.

In 2025, the City prepared a Recirculated Draft EIR to provide the public with the opportunity to comment on changes made to the Draft EIR in response to changes to the GP/LCP Update, including the removal of the draft Safety Element and Facilities Element and changes to goals, policies, and actions included in the GP/LCP Update. The Recirculated Draft EIR was circulated through the State Clearinghouse for a new 62-day public review period from December 11, 2025 through February 11, 2026.

The Final EIR (FEIR) incorporates the changes made to the 2022 Draft EIR in the Recirculated Draft EIR. The FEIR is comprised of the revised Draft EIR, in combination with responses to all comments received on the Draft EIR. The Response to Comments is in Chapter 7 of the FEIR. The FEIR has been posted on the City’s website at www.pismobeach.org/gplcp with copies available at City Hall and the Shell Beach Library.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-4
Packet Page 24

The changes made to the EIR do not result in any new significant environmental impact or mitigation measure, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts, or a new feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from those previously analyzed. The changes to the FEIR do not constitute “significant new information” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

Prior to considering approval of the GP/LCP, the City, as Lead Agency, and more specifically the City Council, must review and certify the FEIR. Once the FEIR is certified, the City Council may consider adoption of the Plan.

Program EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15168)
The EIR prepared by the City is a Program EIR. As a programmatic EIR, the FEIR for the proposed GP/LCP Update provides an analysis of potential impacts of all construction, operational and routine maintenance actions and activities reasonably foreseeable with implementation of the GP/LCP. The FEIR is an informational document for use in the City’s review and consideration of the proposed GP/LCP Update. As a programmatic document, the EIR presents and discloses a region-wide assessment of the environmental impacts of the GP/LCP Update. The Final EIR identifies environmental impacts for each environmental topic described in the State CEQA Guidelines, any required mitigation measures, and the level of significance after mitigation. This includes Class 1 – Significant and Unavoidable Impacts, Class II – Significant but Mitigable Impacts and Required Mitigation, and Class III – Less than Significant Impacts. An Alternatives Analysis was also prepared and evaluated in the FEIR.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations The Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations are included as Exhibit A to the resolution in Attachment 1 and have been prepared for the project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093. This step includes reviewing the CEQA Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Significant and Unavoidable Impacts of the project (Class I Impacts), which are Air Quality and Transportation impacts, as discussed in the EIR. Mitigation Measures for environmental impacts for each issue area studied in the EIR and are included in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program which is part of the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Public Notification
A Notice of Public Hearing was posted at City Hall, on the City’s website, and published in the New Times on April 30, 2026. The meeting agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Alternatives

1. Adopt the GP/LUP with direction to staff on additional specific policy edits

2. Direct the Planning Commission to provide additional review in response to public comments received or Council desired changes.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-5
Packet Page 25

Conclusion and Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) adopting the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan Update and certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), including Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Upon adoption of the GP/LCP and certification of the EIR, the General Plan portion of the document would be effective in 30 days and the LUP portion of the document would be sent to the California Coastal Commission for certification.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The GP/LCP Update project started in 2017 with multiple rounds of state grant funding received from the Coastal Commission and Department of Housing and Community Development. Grant funding awards totaled $980,000, which paid for direct costs of consultant expenses and reimbursement of staff time.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

1.A. Exhibit A to Resolution: Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations

1.B. Exhibit B to Resolution: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

2. General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan – Final Adoption Hearing Draft, May 2026 https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=781443&repo=r- f36a9aa0

3. General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan – Final Adoption Hearing Draft with tracked changes, May 2026
https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=781444&repo=r- f36a9aa0

4. Spreadsheet Matrix Summary of Public Comments and Responses

5. Final Environmental Impact Report
https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=781452&repo=r- f36a9aa0

6. Environmental Impact Report Appendices
https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=781454&repo=r- f36a9aa0
REFERENCE:

All previous project documents including previous drafts of the GP/LCP and technical studies completed are available online at www.pismobeach.org/gplcp .

Prepared by:

Cindy Jacinth, Planning Manager and Brian Schwartz, Contract Planner Submitted by: Scot Graham, Community Development Director City Manager Approval:

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-6
Packet Page 26

RESOLUTION NO. R-2026-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH,

CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM

COASTAL LAND USE PLAN UPDATE AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR), INCLUDING FINDINGS OF FACT AND

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, on January 15, 2021, the City issued a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan/ Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan Update project, (“Project”) for a 30-day period from January 15, 2021 to February 15, 2021; and
WHEREAS, a public scoping meeting was held on January 28, 2021 via teleconference; due to public gathering restrictions as a result of the Covid-19 virus; and WHEREAS, on February 1, 2022, a Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR (SCH#2021010158) for the Project was posted with the State Clearinghouse; it was also circulated to federal, state, and local agencies and interested parties requesting a copy; copies of the Draft EIR were also made available to the public at the following locations:
City of Pismo Beach website
City Community Development Department, 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Shell Beach library, 230 Leeward Avenue, Pismo Beach, CA 93449; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period from February 1, 2022, to March 18, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2023 and August 22, 2023 the Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings, received staff presentations, and provided opportunity for all interested persons to be heard; and
WHEREAS, Responses to Comments were prepared for all comments received on the Draft EIR and a Final EIR for the General Plan/ Local Coastal Program Update project which incorporates the DEIR and responses to written comments on the DEIR, was completed and released for public review; and
WHEREAS, at the August 22, 2023 hearing, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. PC-R-2023-020 to recommend the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, adopt the Mitigation and Monitoring Program, and adopt the City of Pismo Beach General Plan / Local Coastal Program Update; and
Attachment 1
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-7
Packet Page 27

WHEREAS, following the August 22, 2023 Planning Commission hearing, the City Council at a meeting on May 21, 2024 directed staff to remove the Draft Safety Element from the Project to be updated as a separate project; and WHEREAS, a revised Draft GP/LUP was produced which extracted the Draft Safety Element, replacing it with the 1993 Safety Element and incorporating additional edits to improve clarity, address key issues and legislative updates, and also ensure consistency with Coastal Act requirements; and
WHEREAS, a Recirculated Draft EIR was produced and was released for a 62-day public review period between December 11, 2025 and February 11, 2026; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held duly-noticed public hearings on December 9, 2025, January 13, 2026, March 24, 2026, and April 28, 2026 for the purpose of reviewing the revised Draft GP/LUP and providing opportunity for public comment; and WHEREAS, Responses to Comments were prepared for all comments received on the Recirculated Draft EIR and a Final EIR for the City of Pismo Beach General Plan / Local Coastal Program Update project which incorporates the Recirculated DEIR and responses to written comments on the Recirculated DEIR was completed and released for public review; and
WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution PC-R- 2026-006 and on April 28, 2026, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution PC-R- 2026-009 both of which forwarded a favorable recommendation to the City Council to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, adopt the Mitigation and Monitoring Program and adopt the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing on May 19, 2026, at which all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was provided at the time and in the manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the written and oral staff report, presentation, public testimony on the FEIR and the Project, and whether the FEIR should be certified and whether the Project should be approved; and WHEREAS, the written staff report regarding the FEIR and the Project are found to be true and accurate and is incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, prior to the final consideration and any possible approval of any and all physical aspects of the proposed Project, as analyzed by the FEIR, the City Council and all City legislative bodies involved with the proposed Project have considered the FEIR Attachment 1
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-8
Packet Page 28

and the City Council recommends all other governmental agencies and legislative bodies that must review or approve, if at all, the proposed Project do the same; and WHEREAS, the City Council has completed review of the FEIR and related materials.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach as follows:

SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.

SECTION 2: Based on substantial evidence, both written and oral, from the public meeting and in the record of proceedings, and the City Council’s independent judgment, the City Council makes the following findings and takes the following actions with respect to the FEIR:

A. The City Council has independently reviewed and considered the FEIR, including the comments received on the FEIR during the public review, and the responses to those comments.

B. The FEIR reflects the City’s and the City Council’s independent judgment and is found and determined to have been completed in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and is adequate for the Project.

C. The FEIR is found and determined to have demonstrated, with implementation of the mitigation measures described in the FEIR, the Project, if approved by the City Council and all other required governmental agencies and legislative bodies, will have no significant effect on the environment, except as discussed in Section 2. F., below.

D. The FEIR is found and determined to have satisfied the requirements of CEQA and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP, Exhibit B) has been prepared to ensure effective implementation and enforcement of all adopted mitigation measures for the Project.

E. The MMRP for the Project is hereby adopted, in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment, and further, the City Council:
a. Commits the MMRP will be included, as conditions of approval, expressly or by reference, for all approvals, if any, of the Project by the Pismo Beach City Council, Planning Commission, and other City legislative bodies and staff; and
b. Recommends all other governmental agencies and legislative bodies that must review, approve, or issue permits, for the Project do so as well.

F. As analyzed and determined in the FEIR, the project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality and transportation that would not be reduced to less than significant levels even with mitigation.

Based on that analysis, as required by CEQA section 15093, a statement of overriding consideration (SOC) (Exhibit A) has been prepared.

Attachment 1
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-9
Packet Page 29

SECTION 3: The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which adoption of this Resolution is based, are in the custody of the City of Pismo Beach, 760 Mattie Rd, Pismo Beach, CA 93449. The custodian of those documents is Erica Inderlied, City Clerk, or successor.

SECTION 4: Based upon all the foregoing, pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopts:

A. The CEQA Findings of Fact, attached hereto as part of the Resolution (Exhibit A), and incorporated herein by this reference, B.the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached hereto as part of this Resolution (Exhibit A), and incorporated herein by this reference, C. The MMRP (Exhibit B), attached hereto as part of this Resolution, and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 5: Based upon all the foregoing, the City Council hereby certifies the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as being in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq. and State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code Regulations, section 15000 et seq.) (collectively, CEQA).

SECTION 6: Action. Based upon all the foregoing, the City Council hereby adopts the General Plan and Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan Update.

SECTION 7: Based upon all the foregoing, the City Council directs staff to file a Notice of Determination (NOD) with the County Clerk within five (5) working days of the Project approval and submit an application for LCP amendment to the California Coastal Commission.

UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 19th day of May 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal of the City of Pismo Beach on _______________________.
________________________
Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 1
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-10
Packet Page 30

EXHIBIT A
General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) – California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations R-2026-XX

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND OBJECTIVE:

The project analyzed is the proposed City of Pismo Beach GP/LCP Update, which includes updates to the Land Use, Conservation and Open Space, Noise, and Circulation Elements of the City’s 1992 GP/LCP. The GP/LCP Update does not include updates to the Parks, Recreation, and Access Element, Safety Element, and Housing Element. The Facilities Element is being eliminated and incorporated into other elements. The Design Element is being eliminated and incorporated into the Land Use Element. The Growth Management Element is being removed due to updates to California Housing Element Law and implementation of Senate Bill 330. With the GP/LCP Update, the City GP/LCP will consist of the following seven elements: 1) Circulation, 2) Conservation and Open Space, 3) Housing, 4) Land Use, 5) Noise, 6) Parks, Recreation, Access, and 7) Safety.

The GP/LCP Update presents the community’s vision for Pismo Beach through the GP/LCP horizon (year 2040). The land use classifications included in the GP/LCP define the basic categories of land use allowed in the City and are the basis for the zoning districts established in the City Municipal Code, which contain more specific regulations and standards governing development on individual properties. To maintain consistency with the GP/LCP Update, the project includes a Zoning Code Update which includes the Coastal Implementation Plan. Please refer to Section 2, Project Description, of the March 2026 Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a detailed project description.

The GP/LCP Update vision and guiding principles, and thus the project objectives, are contained in the Land Use Element and are described in detail Section 2.4.1, Objectives of the GP/LCP Update, of the March 2026 Final EIR. The GP/LCP Update sets the guiding planning and land use principles for the City. The following vision has been reconfirmed for Pismo Beach that serves to guide the GP/LCP Update:
•Provide a safe place
•Maintain the City’s small beach town character
•Manage growth effectively
•Enhance a vibrant tourist-based economy, while becoming a world-renowned tourist destination
The GP/LCP Land Use Element has been drafted to implement the community vision through its goals, policies, and actions, which are built around the following GP/LCP Update guiding principles:
•Preserve the historic ambiance of Pismo Beach
•Support the visitor population while enhancing the quality of life for all residents •Manage growth effectively
Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-11
Packet Page 31

•Preserve and protect natural resources
Another objective of the GP/LCP Update is to ensure that the City’s land use plan meets the fair share housing needs allocation established in the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP).

OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS:

The GP/LCP Update EIR, consisting of the January 2022 Draft EIR, the December 2025 Recirculated Draft EIR and the March 2026 Final EIR, including all appendices, identified significant impacts associated with project approval. Approval of a project with significant impacts requires that findings ("findings") be made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3) Sections 15043, 15091 and 15093. Significant impacts of the project would either: 1) be mitigated to a less than significant level pursuant to the mitigation measures identified in the EIR or 2) have a residual significant impact, mitigation measures notwithstanding, that requires a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 requires lead agencies to make one or more of the following written findings with regard to the project's significant impacts:
•Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.
•Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. •Specific economic, social or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

These findings accomplish the following:
•Address the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR for the project; •Incorporate by reference all mitigation measures associated with these significant impacts identified in the EIR
•Indicate whether a significant effect is avoided or reduced by the adopted mitigation measures to a less-than-significant level, or remain significant and unavoidable, either because there are not feasible mitigation measures or because, even with implementation of mitigation measures, a significant impact will remain; and,
•Address the feasibility of all project alternatives identified in the EIR.

Because the GP/LCP Update EIR identified impacts that will remain significant and unavoidable, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is also presented. The conclusions presented in these findings are based on the Final EIR and other evidence in the administrative record.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-12
Packet Page 32

CEQA Guidelines Section 15364 defines “feasibility” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social and technological factors.” “Feasibility" under CEQA encompasses "desirability" to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of relevant economic, legal, social, technological and/or other considerations. Thus, an agency's decision-makers are free to reject proposed mitigation measures and/or alternatives that they consider undesirable from a policy standpoint, provided that any such decision reflects reasonable balancing of relevant policy considerations, and that appropriate findings are made to that effect. Further, factors to be considered when defining project alternatives include economic viability, availability of infrastructure, and general plan consistency.

To the extent that these findings conclude that the proposed mitigation measures outlined in the EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City of Pismo Beach hereby binds itself to implement the mitigation measures. The mitigation measures are not merely informational but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City of Pismo Beach, acting as the Lead Agency, approves the GP/LCP Update. The mitigation measures identified as feasible and within the City's authority to implement become express conditions of approval which the City binds itself to upon project approval (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6[b]). The City of Pismo Beach, upon review of the Final EIR, which includes the Draft EIR, and based on all the information and evidence in the administrative record, hereby makes the findings set forth herein.

CEQA PROCESS OVERVIEW:

The City of Pismo Beach is the lead agency for the GP/LCP Update. All issues included in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines were examined in the EIR. The City distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR (State Clearinghouse [SCH] # 2021010158) for a 30-day agency and public review period starting on January 15, 2021 and ending on February 15, 2021. The purpose of the NOP was to inform other public agencies, interest groups, and the public in general of the City's intent to prepare an EIR. The NOP also provided an opportunity for those interested in the GP/LCP Update to comment on the contents of the proposed EIR. The NOP was also sent to the SCH, which is responsible for forwarding it to State agencies that might be affected. In addition, as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(c)(1), the City held a virtual EIR Scoping Meeting on January 28, 2021. In addition to the required CEQA Scoping Meeting, the City held a virtual workshop, focused on the Zoning Code and Implementation Plan, on February 25, 2021.

On April 27, 2021, the City Council and Planning Commission also held virtual a Special Joint GP/LCP Update Workshop. Additional City Council and Planning Commission study sessions were held on March 29, May 26, June 30, July 28, and August 25, 2022 and January 31, March 23, and April 27, 2023. The City issued a Notice of Availability and Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and circulated the Draft EIR (titled “Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report”) from February 1, 2022 to March 18, 2022 for a 45-day public and agency review period from pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15105(a). Three comment Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-13
Packet Page 33

letters were received on the Draft EIR, and responses to comments were provided in a Final EIR. A Final EIR was completed and released on July 14, 2023. The Planning Commission hearings for the Final EIR were held on July 25 and August 22, 2023. The City Council hearing for the Final EIR was scheduled for October 2023. However, prior to the City Council hearing, the City determined that the Safey Element would also be removed from the GP/LCP Update. The City opted to prepare a Recirculated Draft EIR to address changes to the GP/LCP Update following the closure of the 45-day public review period of the Draft EIR in March 2022. These changes include: (1) the removal of the Facilities Element and incorporation of Facilities Element policies into other elements, (2) the removal of the Safety Element from the GP/LCP Update, and (3) changes to the GP/LCP Update, including to the goals, policies, and actions within the GP/LCP Update.

The Recirculated Draft EIR was released for a 62-day public review period between December 11, 2025, and February 11, 2026.

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD:

The environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR, Final EIR, and the findings provided herein are based on and are supported by the following documents, materials and other evidence, which constitute the Administrative Record for the GP/LCP Update, and are hereby incorporated by reference:

1.GP/LCP Update, including the Land Use, Conservation and Open Space, Noise, and Circulation Elements

2.All public notices issued by the City in relation to the EIR, including the January 2021 NOP, comments received on the NOP, the February 2022 Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR, and the December 2025 NOA of the Recirculated Draft EIR.

3.The January 2022 Draft EIR, including all associated references, appendices, and technical materials cited in the document;

4.The December 2025 Recirculated Draft EIR, including all associated references, appendices, and technical materials cited in the document;

5. The March 2026 Final EIR, including comment letters received on the Recirculated Draft EIR and the responses to those comments, and all associated references, appendices, and technical materials cited in the Final EIR;

6.Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP)

7. Minutes, transcripts, and recordings of the discussions regarding the project and its environmental impacts at the scoping meetings, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City of Pismo Beach for the project; and

8.Staff reports associated with Planning Commission and City Council meetings on the project and written and oral testimony submitted at these meetings.

The City Clerk is the custodian of the Administrative Record. The public notices, GP/LCP Update, the Draft EIR, the Recirculated Draft EIR, and the Final EIR are available for review online at https://pismobeach.org/901/General-PlanLocal-Coastal-Plan-Update .

All other materials that constitute the Administrative Record relied upon to support the decisions related to the project are located at the City offices at 760 Mattie Road Pismo Beach, CA 93449.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-14
Packet Page 34

DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION:

The findings are organized into the following sections:

1. Findings Associated with Impacts Found to be Less than Significant or No Impact without Mitigation

2.Findings Associated with Significant, Potentially Significant, and Cumulative Significant Impacts that Can Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level

3.Findings Associated with Significant Impacts that Cannot Feasibly Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level

4.Findings Regarding Alternatives

5.Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects; Growth Inducement.

6.Statement of Overriding Considerations for Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Note: The MMRP as required by CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6[a][1]) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(d), is attached as Exhibit B and adopted concurrently with these findings and is incorporated herein by reference. The MMRP identifies impacts of the proposed project, corresponding mitigation, designation of responsibility for mitigation implementation, and monitoring actions.

Findings Associated with Impacts Found to be Less than Significant or No Impact without Mitigation
Certain impacts were found to not be significant or to have no impact due to the inability of a project to create such impacts, the absence of project characteristics producing effects of this type, or due to the absence of certain environmental characteristics or resources within the City. The City of Pismo Beach, having received, reviewed, and considered the entire record, both written and oral, related to the GP/LCP Update and Final EIR, finds that the following impacts would not be significant adverse impacts or would create no impact and therefore no additional findings are needed.

Aesthetics
Impact AES-1 Compliance with the GP/LCP Update policies, zoning code, downtown strategic plan and the Shell Beach Design Standards and Guidelines would protect visual and aesthetic resources in the City, such as scenic vistas and scenic resources, from potential aesthetic impacts resulting from development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update. Impacts to scenic vistas and scenic resources would be less than significant.

Impact AES-2 Compliance with existing standards and GP/LCP Update goals, policies, and actions would ensure that new development and redevelopment complements the existing visual character and quality of Pismo Beach, and does not conflict with zoning and regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts to visual character and quality would be less than significant.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-15
Packet Page 35

Impact AES-3 New development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be subject to regulations in the City’s Zoning Code, and GP/LCP Update policies, to protect skyward nighttime views and to lessen or prevent glare. Impacts to daytime and nighttime views from new sources of light or glare would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact Compliance with City and County policies and standards for the protection of visual resources, compatible design for new development, maintaining visual character, and preserving dark skies would ensure that the combination of forecasted development in the City and planned development in
neighboring communities would not result in substantially different visual environment than currently exists. Cumulative impacts associated with changes in the visual environment would be less than significant and the GP/LCP Update’s
contribution to these impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
No Impact The City of Pismo Beach does not contain Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide importance, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Local Importance. The City also does not contain any forest or timberland. The GP/LCP would not convert or conflict with existing zoning for agricultural resources, forest, or timberland in the City. No impacts related to agricultural or forestry resources would occur as a result of the GP/LCP Update.

Air Quality
Impact AQ-3 The GP/LCP Update to the conservation and open space element includes policies intended to minimize adverse effects associated with Toxic Air Contaminants through local actions and interagency coordination. The GP/LCP Update would not generate levels of traffic that would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations or result in new development that would expose sensitive receptors to hazards associated with naturally occurring asbestos.

Impacts to sensitive receptors from substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant.

Impact AQ-4 Implementation of the GP/LCP Update would not create objectionable odors that would impact a substantial number of people. Future development in Pismo Beach would be required to comply with SLOAPCD regulations prohibiting nuisance emissions, including odors.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-16
Packet Page 36

Impacts from other emissions, including odors, would be less than significant.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1 New development facilitated by the GP/LCP would occur as redevelopment and infill within developed areas of the City, not in existing Open Space, and could result in isolated impacts to special status species, habitat for special-status species and migratory bird nest sites. However, such new development would be required to comply with existing regulations and implementation of the GP/LCP Update policies designed to avoid and reduce any such impacts. Impacts to special status species, habitat for special status species and migratory bird nest sites would be less than significant.

Impact BIO-2 The GP/LCP Update would facilitate development that could result in construction within riparian habitat, and direct placement of fill in wetlands. However, such new development would be required to comply with existing regulations, and implementation of GP/LCP Update polices designed to avoid and reduce any such impacts. Potential impacts to riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, drainages, wetlands or other aquatic habitats would be less than significant.

Impact BIO-3 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP could result in construction within streams and associated riparian zones that serve as wildlife movement corridors. However, such new development would be required to comply with GP/LCP policies preserving streams, wetlands and wildlife corridors and open space. Impacts to wildlife movement corridors and native wildlife nursery sites would be less than significant.

Impact BIO-4 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update may result in the removal of trees. However, the GP/LCP policies require new development to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance, and other applicable City Codes. Impacts to biological resources would be less than significant as the GP/LCP update would not conflict with applicable local policies and regulations to protect biological resources.

Impact BIO-5 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would not conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan. Impact would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact Buildout of the GP/LCP would incrementally contribute to cumulative impacts to biological resources but such impacts would not be cumulatively considerable because
implementation of the GP/LCP Update would conserve
Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-17
Packet Page 37

existing natural resources and limit impacts on special status species and habitats for those species. Cumulative impacts to biological resources would be less than significant.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CR-1 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update has the potential to impact historical resources. Implementation of applicable GP/LCP actions, state and federal regulations, and the Pismo Beach Municipal Code would minimize or avoid potential adverse impacts to historical resources. Impacts to historical resources would be less than significant.

Impact CR-2 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update has the potential to impact unique archaeological resources. Implementation of applicable GP/LCP Update goals, state and federal regulations, and the Pismo Beach Municipal Code would minimize or avoid potential adverse impacts to archaeological resources. Impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant.

Impact CR-3 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update has the potential to adversely affect previously unknown human burials, but such development would be required to adhere to existing regulations regarding the treatment of human remains. Impacts to human remains would be less than significant.

Impact CR-4 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update may involve excavation, which has the potential to impact previously unidentified tribal cultural resources, but such development would be required to comply with AB 52 and the GP/LCP Update goals, policies and actions designed to protect tribal cultural resources. Impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact Compliance with applicable regulations and implementation of GP/LCP Update goals and policies would minimize
cumulative impacts to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources. The GP/LCP Update includes policy language and actions to address potential impacts to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources on a project-by-project basis.

Cumulative impacts to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.

Energy
Impact E-1 Construction and operation of future development under the GP/LCP Update would require temporary and long-term consumption of energy resources. However, buildout of the GP/LCP Update would not result in Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-18
Packet Page 38

the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy would be less than significant.

Impact E-2 The GP/LCP Update would not conflict with the energy efficiency goals in the Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan. Construction and operation of projects facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would comply with relevant provisions of the State’s CalGreen program and Title 24 of the California Energy Code. Impacts would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact Energy demand associated with GP/LCP Update buildout would result in a decrease in cumulative energy demand over the life of the GP/LCP Update. The GP/LCP Update would not be expected to contribute substantially to a cumulative increase in energy demand, result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or result in the need for construction of new major facilities or substantial alteration of existing facilities to meet projected energy demands.

Cumulative impacts related to energy would be less than significant.

Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1 Construction of new buildings under the GP/LCP Update would not exacerbate seismic hazards, but improperly constructed buildings may exacerbate landslide risk. Adherence to requirements of the California Building Code and implementation of the goals and policies of the existing Safety Element would minimize the potential for loss, injury, or death following a seismic event, landslide, liquefaction, or other geologic hazards. Impacts related to such geologic hazards would be less than significant.

Impact GEO-2 Construction of new development under the GP/LCP Update would include ground disturbance that would result in loose or exposed soil that could be eroded by wind or during a storm event, resulting in the loss of topsoil. Compliance with applicable regulations, including the Clean Water Act, and implementation of goals and policies of the GP/LCP Update and existing Safety Element would minimize the potential for erosion and loss of top soil. Impacts to from soil erosion and loss of top soil would be less than significant.

Impact GEO-3 New development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would occur where existing sewer systems are in place, minimizing the need for development of new wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact to soils that are incapable of supporting septic tanks for alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-19
Packet Page 39

Impact GEO-4 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update has the potential to result in impacts to paleontological resources as paleontological resources may be encountered during any ground-disturbing activities associated with construction (e.g., grading, excavation, or other ground disturbing construction activity) in areas with high paleontological sensitivity. However, GP/LCP actions implement measures to protect paleontological resources when encountered during construction.

Impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact The GP/LCP Update would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative geology,
paleontology, soils, or seismicity impacts because existing regulations minimize effects from construction of new
structures to related to geology, soils and seismicity and existing regulations and the policies and goals of the GP/LCP Update ensure that paleontological resources encountered during construction are property recovered and curated.

Cumulative impacts related to geology, paleontology, soils, and seismicity would be less than significant.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1 Buildout of the GP/LCP Update would result in new GHG emissions that may exceed applicable GHG reduction targets established by SB 32.

However, the GP/LCP update identifies policies that would reduce GHG emissions, including setting reduction targets consistent with statewide GHG reduction goals and updating the climate action plan to ensure future development is consistent with statewide targets. Impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact GHG emissions are, by definition, cumulative impacts, as they add to the global accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. GP/LCP policies would reduce GHG emissions
associated with buildout of the GP/LCP Update and contribute to the Pismo Beach’s fair share of statewide reduction targets.

The GP/LCP Update would establish GHG reduction goals
consistent with the State’s 2030 and 2050 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals, and the GP/LCP Update would be consistent with regional and State plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG
emissions. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update’s contribution to cumulative GHG and climate change impacts would be less than significant.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-20
Packet Page 40

Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire
Impact HAZ-1 Implementation of the GP/LCP Update could result in an incremental increase of the overall routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. Compliance with applicable regulations related to the handling, transport, disposal, and storage of hazardous materials and adherence to existing Safety Element policies would minimize the risk of spills and the public’s potential exposure to these substances and reduce the risk of adverse impacts of hazardous materials. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact HAZ-2 New development of residential and commercial uses facilitated by the GP/LCP Update could result in increased use and storage of hazardous materials within one quarter mile of existing schools. Compliance with regulatory requirements of the San Luis Obispo County EHS and existing applicable state and federal regulations would ensure that risks from hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste near existing or proposed schools would remain less than significant.

Impact HAZ-3 Implementation of the GP/LCP Update could result in development of sites contaminated with hazardous materials. However, compliance with applicable regulations relating to site cleanup and adherence to existing Safety Element policies would minimize the impacts related to development on listed contaminated site. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact HAZ-4 Population growth and increased development in coastal areas as a result of the GP/LCP Update could impact evacuation routes in the event of a coastal hazard or radiation hazard event in the City.

Proposed policies and mapped evacuation routes in the GP/LCP Update would ensure effective emergency response following a natural or human caused disaster. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would not result in interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact HAZ-5 The City includes a designated very high fire hazard area and is adjacent to fire hazard areas in the County. Goals and policies included in the existing Safety Element would minimize exposure of people or structures to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildfire and wildland fires. This impact would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact Cumulative impacts related to the transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials, upset conditions, hazardous emissions near schools, project locations on known or
Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-21
Packet Page 41

unknown hazardous materials sites, airport hazards,
emergency response, and fire hazards would be less than significant.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HWQ-1 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update could disturb soil during construction; increase impervious surfaces, stormwater runoff, erosion, and pollutants in stormwater; and/or alter drainage patterns.

Compliance with NPDES permit requirements, city municipal code requirements, and existing Safety Element policies and actions would reduce impacts related to water quality, erosion and siltation, stormwater runoff, discharges of pollutants, and changes to flood flows.

This impact would be less than significant.

Impact HWQ-2 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would incrementally increase the amount of impervious surface in the City and increase water use which could reduce the potential for groundwater recharge from infiltration and decrease groundwater supplies. Compliance with the City municipal code, Central Coast RWQCB’s post construction requirements for stormwater management, and GP/LCP Update goals and policies would ensure that new impervious surfaces and increased water use would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge or decrease groundwater supplies. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact HWQ-3 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update may occur in areas with potential for inundation by flooding, tsunami, and/or dam failure.

Compliance with applicable municipal code requirements would ensure development within areas subject to inundation would be sited, designed and constructed as to not exacerbate risks from release of pollutants from inundation. These impacts would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact The GP/LCP Update would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to hydrology and water quality, and the cumulative impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-22
Packet Page 42

Land Use

Impact LUP-1 Implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update would provide for orderly development in Pismo Beach and would not physically divide an established community. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact LUP-2 With an Update to the City’s zoning ordinance and zoning map in conjunction with the GP/LCP Update, implementation of the GP/LCP Update would be consistent with applicable regional land use plans, policies, and regulations, such as the SLOCOG 2019 RTP/ SCS and City zoning districts and standards. This impact would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact The GP/LCP Update would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to the physical division of any established community and land use plan consistency, and the cumulative impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Mineral Resources

No Impact The City has no active mineral operations or any lands classified as a grade II machine-readable zone for containing concrete-grate aggregate within its jurisdiction. There are no oil fields or active offshore oil drilling operations in Pismo Beach. The GP/LCP Update would have no impact from the loss of availability of mineral resources.

Noise

Impact N-1 Construction of individual projects facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would temporarily produce high noise levels, affecting nearby noise- sensitive land uses. compliance with existing Municipal Code standards and the GP/LCP Update’s policies and actions would ensure construction activity associated with new development would limit noise disturbance at noise-sensitive receivers in the City. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Impact N-2 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would incrementally increase traffic and associated noise in Pismo Beach, exposing noise- sensitive land uses located near roadways to incrementally greater noise levels. However, implementation of Goals, policies, and actions in Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-23
Packet Page 43

the GP/LCP Update would ensure that traffic noise would have a less than significant impact.

Impact N-3 New development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would introduce operational noise sources associated with residential and non- residential land uses. The continued regulation of on-site noise, consistent with the Pismo Beach Municipal Code, would minimize disturbance to adjoining uses. Therefore, on-site operational noise would have a less than significant impact.

Impact N-4 Construction of individual projects facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would temporarily generate groundborne vibration. Estimated vibration levels would not exceed applicable Caltrans criteria for human annoyance and structure damage, and the Pismo Beach Municipal Code’s timing restrictions on construction activity would limit vibration disturbance. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Impact N-5 Pismo Beach is located outside of noise contours associated with the nearest airports. Therefore, the impact from exposure to aircraft noise in the City would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact The GP/LCP Update would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to noise and vibration, and the cumulative impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Population and Housing
Impact PH-1 The GP/LCP Update would not result in growth in the City that is substantially greater than projected in the SLOCOG regional growth forecast. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact PH-2 Implementation of the GP/LCP Update would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Impacts would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact The GP/LCP Update would not contribute to cumulative impacts related to displacement in the greater cumulative impact analysis area (San Luis Obispo County), and would not result in significant cumulative population growth impacts beyond the City. The incremental population impacts of the Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-24
Packet Page 44

proposed GP/LCP Update would not be cumulatively
considerable.

Public Services and Recreation
Impact PUB-1 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase in the City’s population. This would increase demand for fire, police, school, and other City services and potentially create the need for new police, fire, school, or other service facilities. However, payment of City required public facilities impact fees, and management of future growth would avoid adverse environmental effects associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire, police, school, or other public facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact PUB-2 Development associated with the GP/LCP Update would add population to the City that would increase use of parks and recreation facilities.

However, park facilities have adequate capacity and with compliance with the GP/LCP Update policies impacts related to construction of park facilities would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impacts The GP/LCP Update would result in less than significant impacts to fire, police, school, parks and recreational facilities, and other public services and facilities. Growth anticipated under the GP/LCP Update would be within SLOCOG
projections. Therefore, although the GP/LCP Update would have an incremental contribution to cumulative impacts
associated with public services and recreation, the
contribution would not be cumulatively considerable.

Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Transportation
Impact T-1 Implementation of the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Update would increase vehicle traffic volumes which has the potential to interfere with pedestrian and bicycle travel on or along roadways.

However, the GP/LCP Update includes goals and policies to improve safety, access, and performance of transit, vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian transportation modes, consistent with the SLOCOG 2019 RTP Pismo Beach Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and Pismo Beach Complete Street Master Plan. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact T-3 The GP/LCP Update is a program-level plan that does not implement specific design features. Future roadway improvements and site access Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-25
Packet Page 45

measures would be designed and reviewed in accordance with federal, state, and city standards. This impact would be less than Significant.

Impact T-4 The proposed GP/LCP Update includes a program-level Circulation Element Update that identifies circulation improvements and policies to support emergency access throughout the City. This impact would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impact: There are existing federal, State, and local regulations that govern potential transportation hazards and emergency
access associated with development and infrastructure
projects. Regulations and oversight would effectively reduce the potential for individual projects to create a transportation hazards or emergency access impact within the City as well as in San Luis Obispo County. Thus, cumulative impacts
related to the transportation hazards and emergency access would be less than significant.

Utilities and Service Systems
Impact U-1 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would increase the demand for water supply and water infrastructure. However, the City of Pismo Beach projects that City water supply is sufficient to meet the projected water demand under buildout associated with the GP/LCP Update. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact U-2 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would increase demand for wastewater collection and treatment. However, replacement of old sewer lines and lift equipment under the City’s Capital Improvement Plan and implementation of the goals and policies of the GP/LCP Update to ensure sufficient wastewater treatment capacity would generally occur in previously disturbed or developed areas. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact U-3 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would increase the demand for electric power, natural gas, telecommunications, and stormwater facilities. However, development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would occur in developed areas of the City where these facilities exist and relocation, if applicable, would generally occur in previously disturbed or developed areas. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact U-4 Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would increase waste sent to area landfills. However, Cold Canyon Landfill would have Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-26
Packet Page 46

capacity to serve the development envisioned in the GP/LCP Update.

This impact would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impacts The GP/LCP Update the project would not result in a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts related to physical disturbance for new or expanded wastewater
systems and infrastructure, water supply impacts, the
provision of electrical power, natural gas, telecommunication, and storm drain facilities, or solid waste.

Findings Associated with Significant, Potentially Significant, and Cumulative Significant Impacts that Can Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level The City of Pismo Beach hereby adopts and makes the following findings related to its approval of the project. Having received, reviewed, and considered the entire record, both written and oral, related to the GP/LCP Update and Final EIR, the City makes the following findings associated with potentially significant impacts that can be mitigated to a less- than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.

Project-Level Air Quality
Impact AQ-2 Buildout of the GP/LCP Update would result in short-term emissions of criteria pollutants. Construction emissions from future projects in the planning area would be quantified once project details are known and evaluated for potential impacts in accordance with San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) guidance. SLOAPCD provides standard emissions reduction measures for construction emissions impacts which are included as required mitigation. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Finding: Mitigation Measure(s) Feasible and Required; Impact Reduced to Less- than-Significant Level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.

Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 “Standard Mitigation for Construction Equipment,” listed below, has been adopted to reduce construction-related emissions to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1 Standard Mitigation for Construction Equipment.

construction equipment. Mitigation measures shall be listed on project construction plans and the project proponent shall perform periodic site inspections during construction to ensure that mitigation measures are being implemented. •Maintain all construction equipment in proper condition according to manufacturer’s specifications
•Fuel all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment with California Air Resource’s Board (CARB)-certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road)
•Use diesel construction equipment meeting CARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State off-road Regulation
•Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On- Road Regulation
•Construction or trucking companies with fleets that that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance
•All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes.

Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit •When feasible for project-specific occasions, diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted
•When feasible for project specific occasions, staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors •Electrify equipment when feasible
•Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible
•Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.

Support for Finding: Buildout of the GP/LCP Update would result in short-term emissions associated with construction activities, such as construction worker travel to and from project sites, delivery and hauling of construction supplies and debris, fuel combustion by on-site construction equipment, and application of architectural coatings and other products. These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dust, equipment exhaust, and other air contaminants, particularly during site preparation and grading. The SLOAPCD provides standard mitigation measures for construction in their CEQA Air Quality Handbook, which are included as Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Future development projects in Pismo Beach would be evaluated for air quality impacts once project-level details are known and would be required to incorporate additional mitigation if construction emissions from individual development projects would exceed applicable project-level thresholds established by SLOAPCD. Because individual projects would be Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-28
Packet Page 48

required to evaluate and mitigate potential air quality impacts resulting from construction emissions and mitigate emissions as required by SLOAPCD guidance, air quality impacts from construction of the GP/LCP Update would be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-19 through 4.2-20
Findings Associated with Significant Impacts that Cannot Feasibly Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level
The City of Pismo Beach hereby adopts and makes the following findings related to its approval of the project. Having received, reviewed, and considered the entire record, both written and oral, related to the GP/LCP Update and Final EIR, the City makes the following findings associated with significant, unavoidable impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.

Project-Level Air Quality
Impact AQ-1 The GP/LCP Update would result in an increase in projected population that would exceed the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) projections for Pismo Beach, which would produce long-term operational criteria pollutant emissions beyond those planned for the region. This inconsistency with the SLOAPCD CAP would be significant and unavoidable.

Finding: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the GP/LCP Update policy framework. Specific economic, social or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measure or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the GP/LCP Update policy framework.

Support for Finding: The GP/LCP Update would comply with applicable GP/LCP Update goals and policies and applicable land use and transportation control measures contained in the SLOAPCD 2001 CAP to the extent feasible. However, the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase in projected population that would exceed the 2001 CAP growth projection assumptions for Pismo Beach, which would produce long-term operational criteria pollutant emissions beyond those planned for the region. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would conflict with SLOAPCD’s assumptions for population growth. As a result, the GP/LCP Update could result in long-term operational criteria pollutant emissions that may obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, which would be a significant impact. No additional policy-oriented mitigation is available that would reduce projected population increase such that it would not exceed projected population growth for Pismo Beach, particularly in the context of the GP/LCP objective of ensuring that the City’s land use plan meets the fair share housing needs allocation established in the San Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-29
Packet Page 49

Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP).

Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would be inconsistent with the 2001 CAP, and the impact to regional air quality associated with long-term operational emissions in Pismo Beach would remain significant and unavoidable.

Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.2-9 through 4.2-19
Cumulative Air Quality
Cumulative
Impact Buildout of the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase of population growth that exceeds the population projections used in the most recent SLOAPCD CAP for the same area. The population increase would result in individual development projects that may exceed regulatory thresholds. The 2001 CAP is intended to bring the County into attainment of the State ozone standard. Because the GP/LCP Update would be inconsistent with the CAP, the GP/LCP Update’s contribution to cumulative regional air quality impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the GP/LCP Update policy framework.

Support for Finding: Implementation of the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase of population growth that exceeds the population projections used in the most recent SLOAPCD CAP for the same area. Individual development projects may exceed regulatory thresholds due to this population increase. The 2001 CAP is intended to bring the County into attainment of the State ozone standard. The GP/LCP Update would be inconsistent with the CAP and therefore the GP/LCP Update’s contribution to cumulative regional air quality impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Cumulative impacts associated with potential increases in Toxic Air Contaminants, Carbon Monoxide hot spots, and odor nuisances are addressed with implementation of GP/LCP Update goals, policies and actions to minimize these effects.

Reference: Final EIR, Page 4.2-23
Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-30
Packet Page 50

Project-Level Transportation
Impact T-2 The GP/LCP Update anticipates growth that would result in an overall increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the region. The GP/LCP Update Circulation Element includes goals and policies that would establish local screening thresholds for streamlining VMT analysis. However, future development in Pismo Beach would result in an overall net increase in regional VMT as well as residential VMT per capita. No feasible mitigation is available that would fully address the anticipated increase in VMT. As a result, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the GP/LCP Update policy framework.

Support for Finding: The GP/LCP Update is projected to increase total regional VMT, daily VMT per capita, and daily VMT per employee, which would exceed the VMT thresholds identified in the Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR’s) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts. Implementation of the goals and policies in the GP/LCP Update would contribute to reducing VMT in Pismo Beach. The potential VMT reduction that may result from implementation of the GP/LCP Update policies is not quantifiable in the context of the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model/ 2014 SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand Model, and therefore is speculative. No feasible mitigation beyond the policies already included in the GP/LCP Update Circulation Element is available that would fully address the anticipated increase in VMT resulting from the GP/LCP Update. Therefore, impacts associated with increased VMT would remain significant and unavoidable after implementation of all applicable policies in the GP/LCP Update, including but not limited to:

Goal CE-1 A circulation system that supports safe and efficient travel for all modes of transportation.

Goal CE-2 The City’s pedestrian and bicycle facilities encourages and meets the walking and bicycling needs of the city.

Goal CE-4 Use of public transit and seasonal shuttle services is promoted to meet the needs of residents and visitors
Policy CE-1.5: Vehicle Miles of Travel. Maintain and reduce average regional vehicle miles of travel in accordance with State Senate Bill 743 and California Office of Planning & Research Technical Guidance.
Action CE-1.5b: Implement Mitigation Measures. New development that is projected to exceed average regional vehicle miles of travel shall be required to implement mitigations or modify the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-31
Packet Page 51

a.Assess OPR Technical Guidance Thresholds of Significance and develop local City thresholds of significance if unacceptable.
Action CE-1.5c: Screening Thresholds. Develop screening thresholds to streamline VMT Analysis include metrics such as:
a.Screening Threshold for Small Projects
b. Map-Based Screening for Residential & Office Projects c.Screening Thresholds for Projects near High Quality Transit d.Screening Thresholds for Affordable Housing
Policy CE-1.6: Neighborhood Context. Support safe, complete and well-connected neighborhoods for street, bicycle, and pedestrian access. Connections should balance circulation needs within the neighborhood context. Action CE-1.5a: Complete Streets. When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit, bicyclists and pedestrians appropriate for the road classification and adjacent land use.
a)Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users are given equal level of consideration to motor vehicle operators.
b)Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing development or transportation infrastructure projects.
c)Consider roundabouts or other innovative designs as alternatives to stop signs and traffic signals when studying intersection configuration options. d)Require sidewalks on all streets where possible. Where feasible, separate sidewalks from streets on arterials and collectors with landscaping including a tree canopy to create shade.
e)Improve the existing street network to minimize travel times and improve mobility for transit, bicycle, and walking trips between new projects and surrounding land uses to reduce vehicle trips.
Policy CE-6.1: Traffic Calming. Traffic calming techniques may be employed to mitigate the traffic effects of new development on minor and major collector streets.

The City shall adopt and maintain Traffic Calming Handbook adopted 10/19/21 for application and design of traffic calming measures.
Policy CE-6.2: Update and Adopt Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines. Update and adopt Transportation Impact Analysis guidelines consistent with State Assembly Bill 743 and maintain a local LOS assessment methodology for the evaluation of potential transportation impacts and local policy inconsistency resulting from new development.
Policy CE-2.1: Promote Walking and Biking. Promote walking and bicycle riding for transportation, recreation, commuting, and improvement of public and environmental health. Make downtown more functional and enjoyable for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-32
Packet Page 52

Pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths shall receive at least the same emphasis and attention in future planning as facilities designed for the automobile.  Policy CE-2.4: Existing Facilities. Maintain and improve existing multimodal circulation and transportation systems and facilities, to maximize alternatives to new street and highway construction. Complete a network of bicycle lanes and paths, sidewalks and pedestrian paths within existing developed parts of the City and extend the system to serve new growth areas.
 Action CE-2.1c: Bikeways Encouraged. Bikeways shall be encouraged within the City and adjoining jurisdictions as a complement to Pismo Beach's visitor and recreation emphasis, to reduce automobile trips and for the convenience of visitors and residents. The City's bikeway plan will be coordinated with the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council and Regional Transportation Agency, and the County of San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Plan.
 Action CE-2.2d: Bicycle Use by City Employees. Establish a program to encourage bicycle use among City employees.
 Action CE-2.1g: Pedestrians Connections to Employment Destinations.

Encourage the development of a network of continuous walkways within new commercial, town center, public, and industrial uses to improve workers’ ability to walk safely around, to, and from their workplaces. Where possible, route pedestrians to grade separated crossings across US 101.
 Policy CE-4.1: Promote Safe, Efficient, and Convenient Public Transportation.

Promote the use of public transportation for daily trips, including to schools and workplaces, as well as other purposes.
 Policy CE-4.2: Work with Multiple Agencies and Jurisdictions. Continue to cooperate with other agencies and jurisdictions to promote local and regional public transit.
 Action CE-4.1a: Comprehensive Transit Services. The City shall support the availability of transit service as a means to reduce automobile congestion, to provide transportation for those who have no other form of transportation, as a means to reduce air pollution, and as a service to visitors. Such support should include, but not be limited to, SCT, Greyhound bus service, vanpools, shuttle bus systems, dial-a-ride services, and cab services.
 Action CE-4.1c: Vanpools and Ride Sharing. The City shall encourage and support vanpools and ride sharing. A special program should be developed in cooperation with the visitor industry to encourage vanpools and ride sharing for hotel and related workers. Appropriate locations shall be designated for ride share parking lots.  Action CE-4.2h: Transit Usability. Work with SLORTA to situate transit stops at locations that are convenient for transit users and promote increased transit ridership through the provision of shelters, benches, bike racks on buses, ADA compliance, and other amenities.
 Action CE-4.1d: Transit Services Marketing. Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing and promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit services available for local and regional trips.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-33
Packet Page 53

Reference: Final EIR, Pages 4.14-13 through 4.14-17
Cumulative Transportation
Cumulative Impact The cumulative growth evaluated under GP/LCP Update Buildout Conditions would result in an increase in the total regional VMT, daily VMT per capita, and daily VMT per employee. The individual potential impacts of future development in Pismo Beach are speculative; however, the cumulative impact of the increase in VMT in Pismo Beach and in San Luis Obispo County identified for the GP/LCP Update would be potentially significant. Future
development in Pismo Beach would result in increased long-term VMT, even with implementation of identified goals and policies that would incrementally reduce VMT. Future individual development projects in Pismo Beach would require focused, project-level environmental review, and would require project-specific mitigation to reduce VMT where potential environmental impacts are identified. Implementation of the goals and policies in the GP/LCP Update would contribute to reducing VMT in Pismo Beach, but no additional feasible mitigation is available that would fully address the anticipated increase in VMT resulting from the GP/LCP Update.

Therefore, cumulative transportation impacts from new VMT in the region would remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation strategies are available to reduce this impact, beyond the GP/LCP Update policy framework.

Support for Finding: The cumulative growth evaluated under GP/LCP Update Conditions would result in an increase in the total regional VMT, daily VMT per capita, and daily VMT per employee. The individual potential impacts of future development in Pismo Beach are speculative; however, the cumulative impact of the increase in VMT in Pismo Beach and in San Luis Obispo County identified for the GP/LCP Update would be potentially significant. Future development in Pismo Beach would result in increased long- term VMT, even with implementation of identified goals and policies that would incrementally reduce VMT. Future individual development projects in Pismo Beach would require focused, project-level environmental review, and would require project-specific mitigation to reduce VMT where potential environmental impacts are identified.

Implementation of the goals and policies in the GP/LCP Update would contribute to reducing VMT in Pismo Beach, but no additional feasible mitigation is available that would fully address the anticipated increase in VMT resulting from the GP/LCP Update.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-34
Packet Page 54

Therefore, cumulative transportation impacts from new VMT in the region would remain significant and unavoidable.

Reference: Final EIR, Page 4.14-24

Findings Regarding Alternatives

CEQA requires that an EIR evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to a project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly obtain most of the basic project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6). The No Project alternative must be evaluated, and if it is the environmentally superior alternative, another environmentally superior alternative must be identified among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[e]).

The Final EIR presented four alternatives to the GP/LCP Update. The alternatives presented included the statutorily-mandated "No Project/Continue Using 1992 General Plan and Local Coastal Plan" alternative, as well as a "Reduced Residential Buildout" alternative, a "Reduced Commercial Floor Area" alternative, and a “Proposed General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Update with Expanded Sphere of Influence” alternative.

As discussed in Section 6.1.1 of the Final EIR, alternatives were considered but rejected from further consideration or analysis in the EIR included alternate locations for the project, and a more narrow GP/LCP update including fewer elements. An alternate location is not feasible because the GP/LCP Update is a plan guiding the growth and development of areas that are located specifically within the jurisdiction of Pismo Beach.

However, within Pismo Beach, the alternatives analyzed in the EIR consider different patterns of land use and infrastructure to accommodate forecasted future growth and regional housing needs, as well as development within the Sphere of Influence (SOI).

A focused update to the GP/LCP that would not include changes to the Circulation Element was also considered as an alternative. However, the City determined that changes anticipated to the Land Use Element and resulting buildout scenario would also require a comprehensive update that included updates to the Circulation Element.

Therefore, focused update to the GP/LCP was rejected from further consideration.

Each of the four alternatives presented and analyzed in the Final EIR are rejected as infeasible. The City Council makes this determination after taking into account economic, legal, social, technological and/or other considerations, including the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers. The justifications for rejecting the Final EIR alternatives as infeasible are explained below for each separate alternative.

Alternative 1: No Project/Continue Using 1992 General Plan and Local Coastal Plan The "No Project" alternative is mandated by CEQA. It allows for an assessment of what the environmental consequences would be of not moving forward with a proposed project.

The No Project Alternative (Alternative 1) is comprised of a land use pattern that reflects the land use identified in the existing 1992 GP/LCP, most recently updated in 2018 (Land Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-35
Packet Page 55

Use and Circulation Elements). Under this alternative, the GP/LCP Update would not be adopted and the existing GP/LCP, including the land use map and all of the GP/LCP goals and policies, would remain in place through the horizon year of 2040. Thus, any new development in Pismo Beach would occur consistent with the existing land use designations and the allowed uses within each designation. Similarly, any new infrastructure would occur as envisioned in the existing 1992 General Plan. Development under this alternative is anticipated to be generally similar to the proposed General Plan Update in much of the City but would not include mixed-use development in the downtown area, a focus on affordable housing and other updates to comply with current State law, lower-cost visitor-serving accommodations, or updates to address sea level rise and resiliency. Buildout of the existing 1992 GP/LCP was estimated as part of the 2018 Circulation Element Update, and was found to provide for the growth of 476 new residential units and 690 jobs as compared to an estimated 1,111 new residential units and 545 jobs under the GP/LCP Update. As a result, overall residential development and anticipated population growth would be reduced under Alternative 1 compared to the GP/LCP Update, whereas overall non-residential (commercial, mixed use, and public/semi-public) development and anticipated jobs growth would be increased under Alternative 1 compared to the GP/LCP Update.

Alternative 1 would have lesser, and less than significant impacts than the Project in the areas of aesthetics; biological resources; cultural/tribal cultural resources; energy; geology and soils; hazards, hazardous materials, and wildfire; hydrology and water quality; noise; public services and recreation, and utilities and service systems. Further, Alternative 1 would have similar, and less than significant, impacts as the Project with respect population and housing.

Alternative 1 would avoid significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality because it would result in less population growth and associated new vehicle traffic and would, therefore, be more consistent with the assumptions in the SLOAPCD’s 2001 CAP than the GP/LCP Update, and less than significant. Alternative 1 would also reduce project- level and cumulative impacts associated with increased VMT, but transportation impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 1 would result in increased impacts to greenhouse gases, which would have the potential to be significant and unavoidable due to inconsistency with the Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan. Alternative 1 would also result in increased impacts to land use and planning, although these impacts use would remain less than significant; however, impacts related to greenhouse gases may be potentially significant .

Alternative 1 is rejected as infeasible because it fails to meet any of the project objectives, including the Project’s objective to guide land use decisions within the city planning area through the year 2040, consistent with the community vision and guiding principles.

Alternative 1 would not implement new policy language included in the GP/LCP Update, such as policies intended to provide guidance for future development and effectively manage growth. Alternative 1 would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable project- level or cumulative impacts associated with increased VMT, and would increase impacts in the areas of greenhouse gas emissions, and land use and planning.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-36
Packet Page 56

Alternative 2: Reduced Residential Buildout
Under the Reduced Residential Buildout Alternative (Alternative 2), the maximum residential buildout that would occur within the 2040 planning horizon is assumed to be reduced by 50 percent for all residential land use designations (low-density, medium- density, high density, very high-density, and mobile home park). Development under Alternative 2 would be subject to all goals and policies put in place by the GP/LCP Update.

Buildout under Alternative 2 would result in approximately 556 new residential units constructed in the City limits compared to approximately 1,111 new residential units under the GP/LCP Update. This would be a reduction in new residential development potential of approximately 555 units as compared to the GP/LCP Update.

Alternative 2 would result in a 50 percent reduction in overall planned residential land use capacity in Pismo Beach, resulting in a reduction in overall population growth through 2040 as compared to the Project. As a result of this reduction in future development and growth, Alternative 2 would result in reduced impacts to issue areas including aesthetic resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, geology and soils, energy, hazards/wildfire, hydrology, noise, public services/recreation, and utilities/service systems. Alternative 2 would have impacts similar to those of the Project in the areas of land use and planning, and population and housing. Alternative 2 would reduce project-level and cumulative impacts to air quality to a less than significant level due to the overall reduction in residential development that would result in consistency with the 2001 CAP and a reduction in total VMT. However, Alternative 2 would still result in local and regional VMT growth. Therefore, project-level and cumulative transportation impacts under Alternative 2 would remain significant and unavoidable.

Alternative 2 is considered the environmentally superior alternative because it would be most effective in eliminating or reducing the anticipated adverse environmental effects of the project, in that it would have similar or lesser impacts in all issue areas. However, Alternative 2 is rejected as infeasible because reducing the overall residential development in Pismo Beach would be inconsistent with the objective of the GP/LCP Update to ensure that the City’s land use plan meets the fair share housing needs allocation established in the SLOCOG RHNP, and this alternative would not meet the basic project objective to manage growth in Pismo Beach. Additionally, Alternative 2 would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable project-level or cumulative impacts associated with increased VMT.

Alternative 3: Reduced Commercial Floor Area Ratio
Under the Reduced Commercial Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Alternative (Alternative 3), the maximum allowable FAR for new Commercial land use designations would be reduced from 2.0 to 1.5 and new Central Commercial land use designations would be reduced from 1.25 to 1.0 to reduce commercial density. Because Pismo Beach is a jobs-rich Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-37
Packet Page 57

environment and a regional tourism destination, reducing visitor-serving commercial density is expected to reduce the estimate of overall VMT in the regional traffic model.

Approximately 85 percent of the potential new non-residential development identified for the GP/LCP Update is comprised of Commercial and Central Commercial land uses (approximately 420,000 square feet of Commercial and approximately 250,000 square feet of Central Commercial), with the remaining 15 percent being comprised of mixed-use and public/semi-public land uses. Development under Alternative 3 would be subject to all goals and policies put in place by the GP/LCP Update.

Under Alternative 3, approximately 630,000 square feet of new non-residential development could be constructed in the City limits compared to approximately 780,000 square feet of new non-residential development under the GP/LCP Update. This would be a reduction in new commercial development potential of approximately 150,000 square feet as compared to the GP/LCP Update.

Alternative 3 would result in less new commercial and visitor-serving development due to the reduction in commercial FAR. However, Alternative 3 would not result in a reduction in residential development or potential population growth. Overall, Alternative 3 would result in reduced impacts to issue areas including aesthetic resources, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, utilities/service systems, and energy. Alternative 3 would have impacts similar to those of the Project in the areas of biological resources, cultural/tribal cultural resources, geology/soils, hazards/wildfire, hydrology/water quality, land use and planning, population and housing, and public services/recreation. Further, although population growth under Alternative 3 would be similar to the population growth under implementation of the GP/LCP Update, Alternative 3 would reduce, but not eliminate the project-level and cumulative significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality and transportation.

After Alternative 2, Alternative 3 is the next most environmentally superior alternative when considering overall environmental impacts relative to the performance metrics.

However, Alternative 3 is rejected as infeasible because reducing visitor-serving commercial density under this alternative would be inconsistent with Pismo Beach’s community vision to enhance a vibrant tourist-based economy and guiding principle to support the visitor population. Additionally, Alternative 3 would reduce, but not avoid the significant and unavoidable project-level or cumulative air quality and transportation impacts associated with the population growth and increased VMT that would be expected under this alternative.

Alternative 4: Proposed General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Update with Expanded Sphere of Influence Development

Under the Proposed GP/LCP Coastal Plan Update with Expanded Sphere of Influence (SOI) Development Alternative (Alternative 4), the project area would include expanded development potential within the City’s SOI. The SOI includes 1,282 acres of land in Price Canyon and along Oak Park Boulevard and a small area along Mattie Road. Future land use designations within the SOI are not specifically defined or included within the buildout Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-38
Packet Page 58

assumptions of the GP/LCP Update; therefore, this alternative assumes up to 10 percent of the City’s 1,282 acres of SOI area (128 acres) would be developed during the 2040 planning horizon with a mix of single- and multi-family residential land uses reflecting a mix of densities similar to existing residential development throughout the City.

Under Alternative 4 the City would annex portions of the SOI planned for urban land use development and provide municipal services. Up to 128 acres of new residential land use area in the Price Canyon and Los Robles del Mar areas of the SOI would become available for development, which may accommodate approximately 1,800 new single- and multi-family residential units. Assuming that new residential development in the SOI areas would be at a similar density to anticipated new residential development throughout the City, full buildout of Alternative 4 would result in a population increase of approximately 5,185 and a total City-wide population of up to 13,422 in 2040. This would be approximately 3,000 more residents compared to the year 2040 population under full implementation of the GP/LCP Update. Overall, Alternative 4 would increase the growth in population in Pismo Beach through the year 2040 by approximately 30 percent compared to the GP/LCP Update. Due to the increase in overall growth, this alternative would also increase new vehicle traffic. Development under Alternative 4 would be subject to all goals and policies put in place by the GP/LCP Update.

Alternative 4 would result in an increase in overall development in currently undeveloped space within the City’s SOI. Therefore, overall population growth would be greater under this alternative and would worsen the project-level and cumulative significant and unavoidable impacts associated with air quality and transportation. Alternative 4 would result in increased impacts to greenhouse gases, which would remain less than significant. Alternative 4 would also result in greater, but less than significant, impacts in the issue areas of aesthetics, energy, geology/soils, hazards/wildfire, hydrology/water quality, land use and planning, noise, and public services/recreation. Alternative 4 would also result in greater and significant and unavoidable impacts not present with the project in the issue areas of biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, population and housing, and utilities and service systems.

Alternative 4 is rejected as infeasible because this alternative would generally result greater environmental impacts than the proposed project in several issue areas.

Alternative 4 would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable project-level or cumulative impacts to air quality and transportation and would result in additional significant and unavoidable impacts to other resources. Also, growth facilitated by Alternative 4 would potentially conflict with policies intended to effectively manage growth and to preserve and protect resources in the City.

Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects; Growth Inducement.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires a discussion of any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused by the proposed project should it be implemented. Such significant irreversible environmental changes may include the following:

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-39
Packet Page 59

•Use of non-renewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project that would be irreversible because a large commitment of such resources makes removal or non-use unlikely
•Primary impacts and, particularly secondary impacts (such as highway improvements that provide access to a previously inaccessible area) that generally commit future generations to similar uses
•Irreversible damage which may result from environmental accidents associated with the project
As discussed in Section 5, Other CEQA Required Discussions, of the Final EIR, construction of the proposed project would require the use of building materials and energy, some of which are non-renewable resources. Consumption of these resources would occur with any development projects in the region and are not unique to the Pismo Beach or the GP/LCP Update. Growth facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would require an irreversible commitment of law enforcement, fire protection, water supply, wastewater treatment, and solid waste disposal services. As discussed in Sections 4.13, Public Services and Recreation, and 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Final EIR, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would significantly affect public services or utilities with implementation of the policies included in the GP/LCP Update.

The anticipated increase in vehicle trips associated with buildout of the GP/LCP Update would incrementally contribute to local traffic, air quality emissions, and greenhouse gas emissions. As described in Section 4.14, Transportation, projected future development within the City would increase regional VMT. Consistent with GP/LCP Update Circulation Element Action CE-1.5b, future development that is projected to exceed the average regional VMT would be required to implement VMT-reducing mitigations or modify the proposed development to reduce VMT to the maximum extent feasible. While the potential impacts of individual future development projects in the City are speculative, the overall potential project-level and cumulative impacts of the increase in VMT in the City and County identified for the GP/LCP Update would be significant and unavoidable. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of this EIR, the additional population growth associated with buildout of the GP/LCP would be inconsistent with assumptions on which the CAP is based, and project-level and cumulative impacts related to CAP consistency would be significant and unavoidable.

Buildout of the GP/LCP Update could accommodate an estimated 1,111 new dwelling units and 1,979 new residents in the City beyond 2019 existing conditions. Additionally, anticipated population and housing growth in the City through 2040 under the General GP/LCP Update is similar to the SLOCOG population and housing growth projections for the City. Furthermore, the land use plan and policies in the GP/LCP Update focus on development in underutilized sites within City boundaries, with limited vacant land, to support growth in areas already well-served by existing public facilities and services.

The GP/LCP Update would result in an increase of approximately 783,268 square feet of nonresidential development that would generate approximately 545 permanent employment opportunities in the City. Additionally, the GP/LCP Update would generate Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-40
Packet Page 60

temporary employment opportunities during construction of future residential and nonresidential projects. As construction workers would be expected to be drawn from the existing regional work force, construction of future development projects would not be considered growth-inducing.

The City contains 288 vacant or underutilized parcels, with the rest of the City occupied by development or open space. With a lack of substantial developable area, any economic expansion induced by the GP/LCP Update is not anticipated to result in direct physical environmental effects beyond those described throughout Section 4 of the Final EIR, or as a result of development expected to occur under the GP/LCP Update.

Moreover, the environmental effects associated with future development in or around Pismo Beach as a result of the GP/LCP Update would be fully addressed as part of the CEQA environmental review for individual development projects as they are considered by City decisionmakers.

The GP/LCP Update encourages mixed-use development, particularly in the Downtown Core of the City, which currently consists of resort commercial, commercial, public/semi- public, open space, high-density residential, and low density residential uses. Thus, despite this anticipated land use change in the Downtown Core, the GP/LCP Update would generally preserve the existing pattern of land uses in the City. By focusing development within already urbanized areas, implementation of the GP/LCP Update would reduce growth pressure in undeveloped areas along the periphery of the City. This constrained growth pressure would reduce the potential for impacts relating to issues such as biological resources, regional traffic, and air quality as compared to development on lands beyond urban limits.

Future land use designations within the SOI are not specifically defined or included within the buildout assumptions of the GP/LCP Update. Because the GP/LCP Update does not include any future development, utilities, or transportation improvement in the SOI, the GP/LCP Update would not result in the removal of an obstacle to growth.

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR SIGNIFICANT AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
In approving the GP/LCP Update, which is evaluated in the Final EIR, the City makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of its findings on the Final EIR. After review of the entire administrative record, the City Council finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other anticipated benefits of the project outweigh its significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts and therefore justify the approval of the project. The City Council finds that the project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible, and finds that, on balance, the remaining significant and unavoidable impacts of the project are acceptable because the benefits of the project outweigh them. The City Council finds that each of the overriding considerations set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for such a finding.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-41
Packet Page 61

The Project’s environmental impacts are further articulated under Findings Associated with Significant, Potentially Significant, and Cumulative Significant Impacts that Can Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level and Findings Associated with Significant Impacts that Cannot Feasibly Be Mitigated to a Less-than-Significant Level, above. The City Council has balanced the project’s significant irreversible impacts against the project’s benefits and, based on the entire record before it, hereby determines that the identified impacts are acceptable in light of the project’s benefits.

Required Findings
Project Benefits Outweigh Unavoidable Impacts
The City hereby finds that the remaining significant and unavoidable impacts of the project are acceptable in light of the following substantial benefits of the project, which constitute the specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations that justify the approval of the project.

The GP/LCP Update is intended to function as a policy document to guide land use decisions within the City through the year 2040, consistent with the community vision and guiding principles that serve as the project objectives. Another key objective of the GP/LCP Update is to ensure that the City’s land use plan meets the fair share housing needs allocation established in the SLOCOG RHNP. Based on the most recent community outreach and engagement, the GP/LCP Update was prepared with the following vision:
• Provide a safe place
• Maintain the City’s small beach town character
• Manage growth effectively
• Enhance a vibrant tourist-based economy, while becoming a world-renowned tourist destination
The GP/LCP Update was built around the following guiding principles:
• Preserve the Historic Ambiance of Pismo Beach. The Land Use Element sets forth the tools for preservation of historic neighborhood character and retention of the classic downtown setting framed by original landmark architecture and character properties. The historic character provides the setting to attract vibrant downtown uses that serve the needs of residents and visitors. • Support the Visitor Population While Enhancing the Quality of Life for all Residents. The Land Use Element provides the tools for an economy built on visitor-serving uses that balances commercial and residential development.

Through protection of existing visitor-serving overnight accommodations, promoting the development of new overnight accommodations, and attracting focused retail and services, the City can best support the visiting population that is so essential to the Pismo Beach economy, while also enhancing the quality of life for residents with a healthy year-round economy. The Land Use Element also provides policy for the health and well-being of local residents and visitors alike.

These policies strive to be the catalyst for healthy and desirable living Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-42
Packet Page 62

environments through the use of design guidelines, appropriate zoning, transit accessibility, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
•Manage Growth Effectively. To provide a high quality of life for Pismo Beach citizens and visitors and protect the community’s natural and coastal resources, the Land Use Element strives to provide a high level of service and infrastructure, and plan for new development that is thoughtfully concentrated within its urban boundaries. The Land Use Element also provides the tools and incentives for the City to direct new development that responsibly concentrates development in areas where infill and adaptive reuse will contribute to a high quality of life for the entire community.
•Preserve and Protect Natural Resources. The Land Use Element provides the tools to direct new development to preserve and enhance the natural resources of Pismo Beach, including the ocean and beaches, hills, valleys, canyons and cliffs, and the Pismo and Meadow Creek streams, marsh and estuaries. The Land Use Element provides policies that further enhance the requirements provided within the Coastal Act. The Land Use Element guides planning decisions in the Coastal Zone that ensure public coastal access, while maintaining coastal preservation and protection.

The GP/LCP Update directs the way in which development in Pismo Beach will occur to accommodate future growth and trends while maintaining the character of Pismo Beach consistent with these objectives.

In this regard, the project objectives of the GP/LCP Update are reflected in the following GP/LCP Update goals:

Land Use
•Goal LU-1 A community with a variety of well-regulated land uses that support the diverse needs of both residents and visitors.
•Goal LU-2 A community that strives to maintain a classic California and small- town beach atmosphere.
•Goal LU-3 City Design. A functional community that is designed with compatible facades, architectural styles, and colors.
•Goal LU-4 A community economy built on visitor-serving uses while maintaining services for year-round community members.
•Goal LU-5 A community that supports the health, safety, and sustainability of all residents, visitors and structures.
•Goal LU-6 A community that provides and maintains a high level of service and infrastructure to all development.
•Goal LU-7 A community where growth is concentrated in corridors and neighborhood centers where adaptive land reuse will contribute to a high quality of life for the entire community.
•Goal LU-8 A community that protects and enhances natural and coastal resources within Pismo Beach.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-43
Packet Page 63

Land Use – Neighborhood Planning Areas
• Goal LU-9 Sunset Palisades/The Bluffs/South Palisades. An ocean-oriented residential neighborhood with an emphasis on preservation of natural resources, open space, coastal views and scenic corridors.
• Goal LU-10 North Spyglass/Spyglass. A planning area with a mix of visitor- serving hotel uses and a variety of housing types, with access to parks, the beach and neighborhood shopping.
• Goal LU-11 St. Andrews Tract/Spindrift. A residential neighborhood where new additions and replacements are compatible with the scale and character of the existing development and where bluff tops, coastal access, trees and bird habitat are protected.
• Goal LU-12 Terrace Avenue/Shell Beach/Dinosaur Caves. A planning area focused on conserving the existing housing stock and character and improving the commercial and pedestrian environment of Shell Beach to enhance this beach community.
• Goal LU-13 Motel District. A planning area that serves as a key focus for Pismo Beach's visitor-serving industry with special consideration given to retaining and upgrading existing motel uses and preserving ocean views and bluff access. • Goal LU-14 Downtown Core. A vibrant Downtown area that acts as a destination for all, providing motel and hotel uses, as well as supporting uses such as commercial, mixed use, high-density residential, and recreation. • Goal LU-15 Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh. A planning area oriented to visitor- serving activities, regional commercial uses, mobile home park, industrial and open space with a focus on protecting Pismo Creek, the marsh habitat, and coastal views.
• Goal LU-16 Oak Park Heights. A planning area with a mix of residential, open space, commercial and resort commercial uses with a focus on preserving open space, ocean views and views of Oak Park Heights.
• Goal LU-17 Pismo Heights/Industrial Area. A planning area with a mix of residential housing types, as well as the Judkins Middle School, the Public Safety Facility, Boosinger Park, and Industrial Area.
• Goal LU-18 Freeway Foothills/Mattie Road. A planning area with a mix of housing types, open space and commercial uses with an emphasis on preservation of the spectacular views and foothills that provide an important visual and open space backdrop for the entire northern one-half of the City.

Noise
• Goal N-1 A quiet and healthful environment with minimal noise intrusion. • Goal N-2 A pattern of land uses that protects residents and other sensitive receptors from excessive noise.

Conservation and Open Space
• Goal COS-1 A community that builds resilience to climate change by prioritizing nature-based solutions and ensuring equitable access to healthy open spaces and recreational resources for all residents and visitors, regardless of income, race, Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-44
Packet Page 64

ability, or neighborhood, while supporting ecological health and community well- being.
• Goal COS-2 A community that conserves the important natural resources of Pismo Beach for the community’s health, safety and enjoyment, including air quality, renewable energy, geology and soils, minerals, water quality and supply, and dark skies.
• Goal COS-3 A community that protects and enhances scenic roadways and vistas.
• Goal COS-4 A community that provides and protects a variety of conservation areas such as the ocean and beaches, bluffs, dunes, foothills, marshes, creeks, and wetlands that act as suitable coastal and inland habitat, migratory corridors, and ecologically valuable topography.
• Goal COS-5 A community that celebrates and protects its historical, tribal cultural, archaeological, and paleontological resources.

Circulation
• Goal CE-1 A circulation system that supports safe and efficient travel for all modes of transportation.
• Goal CE-2 The City’s pedestrian and bicycle facilities encourages and meets the walking and bicycling needs of the City.
• Goal CE-3 Pismo Beach has convenient parking that enables access to local and visitor serving businesses and amenities, recreational opportunities, and the coastline.
• Goal CE-4 Use of public transit and seasonal shuttle services is promoted to meet the needs of residents and visitors to the community. • Goal CE-5 A well connected City that has safe rail and truck movement of people and goods.
• Goal CE-6 A balanced, multimodal transportation network that supports the local economy while maintaining community character and an aesthetically pleasing street design.
• Goal CE-7 Promote the consistency between local and regional planning and explore funding opportunities for local and regional operations and improvements.

The GP/LCP Update Land Use Element directs the way in which development in Pismo Beach will occur to accommodate future growth and trends while maintaining the character of Pismo Beach, consistent with these goals. The Noise Element identifies and analyzes the major noise sources in the community and provides data and guidance to inform a pattern of land uses that minimizes exposure of community residents to excessive noise. The Conservation and Open Space Element guides the protection of natural, scenic, and cultural resources and conservation areas important to the environment and sustained economic prosperity of Pismo Beach. The Circulation Element identifies a comprehensive plan for multimodal transportation improvements that will maintain consistency with the concurrent update of the City’s Land Use Element.

The mixed-use nature of the GP/LCP Update encourages diversification and development of the City’s economic base. Within additional residential uses, there will be additional property tax revenues available that will provide additional benefits.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-45
Packet Page 65

Additionally, within the commercial uses there is a broad diversification of uses that range from the provisions of various types of sales taxes (restaurants, entertainment, etc.) to potential transient occupancy taxes (hotel uses). Further, the GP/LCP Update will provide significant benefits to the City and community in terms of creating both short and long- term employment opportunities for the residents of the City including construction work and long-term jobs in the commercial sector, which are reasonably expected to result in more personal income likely to be spent locally, resulting in additional tax revenues and economic development.

The City has more residents to serve, but the cost of doing so has increased. The City finds that the opportunity to realize additional property, sales and transient occupancy tax revenues is an important consideration for the City.

Consequently, it is reasonably expected that the City and its residents will enjoy the economic and social benefits from the diversity of the economic benefits provided by the GP/LCP Update. This promotes the economic well-being of the City, including the funding of essential services provided by the City.

Each of these benefits provides a separate and independent basis for overriding the significant environmental effects of the GP/LCP Update.

Balance of Competing Goals
The City hereby finds it is imperative to balance competing goals in approving the project and the environmental documentation of the project. Not every environmental concern has been fully satisfied because of the need to satisfy competing concerns to a certain extent. The City has chosen to accept certain environmental impacts because of the many benefits inherent in the attainment of City, regional, and State goals as described above, as well as the implementation of required mitigation measures, would balance the potential for environmental impacts to occur.

The City hereby finds and determines that the project and the supporting environmental documentation provide for a positive balance of the competing goals and that the economic, social and other benefits to be obtained by the project outweigh any remaining environmental and related potential detriment of the project.

Overriding Considerations
Based upon the objectives identified for the project, the City has determined that the project should be approved and that any remaining unmitigated environmental impacts attributable to the project are outweighed by the specific economic, social and other overriding considerations as described above.

The City has determined that any environmental detriment caused by the project has been minimized to the extent feasible through mitigation measures identified herein, and, where not feasible, has been outweighed and counterbalanced by the project’s significant social benefits to be generated to the City, its residents, and the region.

Attachment 1.A
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-46
Packet Page 66

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update Attachment 1.B
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-47
Packet Page 67

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
CEQA requires that a reporting or monitoring program be adopted for the conditions of project approval that are necessary to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code 21081.6). This mitigation monitoring and reporting program is intended to track and ensure compliance with adopted mitigation measures during the project implementation phase. For each mitigation measure recommended in the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR), specifications are made herein that identify the action required, the monitoring that must occur, and the agency or department responsible for oversight.

Attachment 1.B
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-48
Packet Page 68

City of Pismo Beach
General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update
2 Mitigation Measure/
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
Air Quality
AQ-1: Standard Mitigation for Construction Equipment
AQ-1 Standard Mitigation for Construction Equipment.

Proponents of individual land use projects, or other projects requiring grading or building permits, shall require
construction contractors to incorporate the following
standard mitigation measures, as applicable, to reduce
reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from
construction equipment. Mitigation measures shall be listed on project construction plans and the project proponent shall perform periodic site inspections during construction to ensure that mitigation measures are being implemented. Maintain all construction equipment in proper
condition according to manufacturer’s specifications
Fuel all off-road and portable diesel-powered
equipment with California Air Resource’s Board
(CARB)-certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed
version suitable for use off-road)
Use diesel construction equipment meeting CARB's
Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State off-road
Regulation
Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet CARB’s 2007
or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-
duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-
Road Regulation
Construction or trucking companies with fleets that
that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the
engine standards identified in the above two
measures (e.g. captive or NOx exempt area fleets)
may be eligible by proving alternative compliance
All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the
designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind
drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit

1. Include standard
mitigation
measures on
project construction
plans

2. Field verify
compliance with
standard mitigation
measures

1. Prior to start of
construction

2. During all
construction
activities

1. Once for each
set of project
construction
plans

2. Periodically
City of Pismo
Beach
Attachment 1.B
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-49
Packet Page 69

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3
Mitigation Measure/
Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
When feasible for project-specific occasions, diesel
idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not
permitted
When feasible for project specific occasions, staging
and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000
feet of sensitive receptors
Electrify equipment when feasible
Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-
powered equipment, where feasible
Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-
site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas
(CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or
biodiesel.

DPM = Diesel Particulate Matter; NOX = Nitrogen Oxide; ROG = Reactive Organic Gases Attachment 1.B
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-50
Packet Page 70

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
Commentor - Surfrider Foundation Comment Letter 2/10/26 Summary of Comment received Staff Response:

General Comment
Safety Element updates, is is difficult to determine consistency with SB 272.

Comment noted. The Safety Element is being updated along with the Parks Recreation and Access Element separate from this update.

Policy LU-4.3 and Action LU-4.3c - Public
Recreational Opportunities
loss of coastal access or recreation and recommends revising Action LU-4.3 to prioritize us of coastal-dependent and coast-related lands regardless of opportunities elsewhere.

This will be addressed in the Safety Element/Parks Rec & Access Element. No change recommended at this time.

Engagement and Environmental Justice
Commentor believes the term "meaningfully engage" is not specific enough and recommends the following lanuage "Engage affected communities through early, ongoing, and transparent participation processes that include accessible outreach, timely disclosure of decisions, and documented responses to public input.”Requested language has been added to LU-5.4.

Policies LU-15.1, COS-2.5, COS-4.8) - Pismo
Creek
Commentor recommends establishing timelines and benchmarks for water quality and habitat performance objectives through non- structural restoration and monitoring of adaptive management.

Preservation of Pismo Creek is of high importance to the City and its residents. Water quality in Pismo Creek is adequately addressed through Policies COS 2.5 and COS-4.8 and associated actions. including applying ESHA and/or wetland protection policies to Pismo Creek as well as preserving the river outlet and sand spit. Combined with the City's stormwater runoff regulations in compliance with the RWQCB requirements, the policies and action items within the document serve as an overarching framework for water quality protection. Regulations that further implement these policies and action items will be included in the City's upcoming Zoning Code/Coastal Implementation Plan update.

COS-2, Section 1.3 - Equitable Access to
Coastal Resources
residents' to "all people, including residents and visitors" to underscore coastal access for all persons.This requested language has been added on bottom of page COS-2.

Policy COS-1.1 - Open Space and Climate
Resiliency
coastal development permits can be appropriately used to fund nature based adaptation measures. Comment noted. No revision requested.

General Comment
formally evaluate the managed retreat project at Surfers Point in Ventura.

Comment noted. This example will be taken into consideration as part of the Safety Element/Parks Rec & Access Element Update project.

Action COS-4.1i – Beach Access
Commentor states shoreline conditions are continually evolving and limiting vertical access only to locations with sandy beaches is unrealistic and not consistent with Coastal Commission Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance. Commentor recommends revising this Action to allow vertical access where safe regardless if a sandy beach is present or not.recommended at this time.

Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-51
Packet Page 71

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
Action COS-4.1j - Beach Grooming.

Commentor recommends prohibiting beach grooming using
mechanical equipment and prioritize manual cleanup methods, seasonal protections, and science based thresholds in order to maintain beach wrack.

The City has a pending CDP application for mechanical beach cleaning. The proposed projects biological evaluation concluded impacts would be mimimal with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures including: Beach grooming proposed to be limited to dry sand areas only with seasonal variations where beach cleaning can occur; minimize kelp wrack removal and retain organic material supporting invertebrate and shorebird communities wherever feasible.

Action COS4.1-j recognizes the importance of beach wrack and the proposed beach cleaning program is designed to maintain beach wrack. No change recommended at this time.

Commentor - Planning Commissioner - Chair Prichard-Malone Letter Dated 12/2/25 and 3/23/26 Throughout document
Page LU-5 Table LU-1
Page LU-11
Last paragraph states that each parcel in the area includes 60% open space. This may have been true before the parcels were subdivided, but now doesn’t apply to all parcels.

Text have been revised to note the area has minimum open space requirements. This is specified in the applicable specific plans.

Page LU-12
Shell Beach/Dinosaur Caves: Dinosaur Caves park is specifically mentioned; should Eldwayen and Margo Dodd also be mentioned? Revised as requested Page LU-13 Oak Park Heights, second paragraph
The commercial uses listed along Highway 101 should also include restaurants (Yanagi). The Church should also be mentioned.added restaurants as a clarification, not church

Page 18 ends

here in the because doing so duplicates information located in Table LU-3
Density and FAR to remain per the requirements of a General Plan through the State's Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) agency.

Page 18 ends

The sentence: “FAR applies to the entire development on a site…although parking garages are subject to various other development standards…” seems very specific. Can we just refer to the zoning ordinance for definitions of what is and is not included in Density and FAR to remain per the requirements of a General Plan through the State's Land Use and Page LU-19 Table LU-3:
we have a footnote or a notation in each of the residential/mobile home designations stating that their FAR is established in the Zoning Ordinance?Not needed, reader can assume densities are located in the Zoning Ordinance.

Page LU-21 Figure LU-6:

Page LU-26, Action LU-1.2d reason for this?including screeening have been incorporated.

Page LU-27 Action LU-1.3b
minimum, be located on the first floor” to “the uses of first floor spaces should be prioritized as active commercial uses”?Wording accomplishes the same intent. No change recommended.

Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-52
Packet Page 72

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
Page LU-30
been implementing this when the street in question is one of the named protected viewsheds. If so, the language should be modified to reflect that this doesn’t apply to all streets. Also, (although this is identified as CCC language), should “existing structures” be changed to “existing structures legally constructed”? And, was there any development prior to the 1993 GP whose entitlements included a view corridor? If so, we would need to add language clarifying that the exemption for existing structures doesn’t apply to those Page LU-30 Action LU-2.1e existing or natural/original conditions.This will be addressed in the Zoning Code.

Page LU-30
Page LU-33 LU-3.1c
: In the first sentence, should we add “and bulb-outs or other design features, where appropriate” after “Curb radius”? In the second, should we delete “to reduce curb radius as much as possible” ? Otherwise we’re implying that curb radius is the only important These are general site standards pulled from the former Design Element.

Pages LU-33-34 Action LU-3.1g
Page LU-36 Action LU-4.2 l
and improvements. Clarify that the City’s role is encouragement and/or enforcement?This should be LU 4.2k.

Page LU-37 Policy LU-4.4 This is language from the existing General Plan. Action items are broader as requested.

Page LU-39 Action 5.2f
Page LU-40 Action LU-5.3d should identify it as such in this document."Station" will be changed to "stops". This also better aligns with Housing policies.

Page LU-43 Action LU-7.1a
Page LU-43,Action LU-7.2a:

Page LU-46 Action LU-8.1a This policy applies citywide. No change recommended.

Page LU-47 Action LU-8.1g
Page LU-47 Action LU-8.2b
in the GP, or is it referring to the Zoning Ordinance? It would be This would be shown in the Zoning Code.

Page LU-48 Action LU-8.2f This is CCC language to be clear that this is part of the Local Coastal Program.

Page LU-52 Policy LU-9.2
Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-53
Packet Page 73

Page LU-52 Action LU-9.3d Should “Develop” be changed to “Maintain”?Action LU-9.3d. Action should remain as "maintain" since the existing access is not fully developed.

Page LU-54 Policy LU-10.1
I believe the intent is similar to Policy LU-9.3. These policies should be reviewed/revised to be consistent with each other as applicable Comment noted Page LU-55 Policy LU-11.1
Page LU-58 Action LU-12.4a
adopted by Council? And can we provide a reference so that readers can locate it?Yes, plan was previously adopted by council. No reference is needed.

Page LU-60 Action LU-13.1b This will be addressed in the Zoning Code Page LU-61
Why is there no mention of downtown historic preservation? Page 43 of the current Land Use Element contains such language.Historic preservation policies and actions are largely located under goal 2.

Page LU-65 Action LU-15.2k Yes, we will add the Hacienda Del Pismo reference and property address Page LU-67 Figure LU-14 Its commercial for now to allow more varied uses if redeveloped.

Page LU-68 Action LU-16.1b This is a carry - over from existing GP. It would not limit one to only these trees.

Page LU-71 Action LU-18.1a to delete this reference, or retain it for some future opportunity?Action item is recommended to retain as a tool for preserving open space, and allow for flexibility Commentor - Planning Commissioner - Jimmy Summer email dated 12/9/25 General Comment
Requested clarification regarding implementation of goals, policies, and actions that are either within or outside of the LCP If the City were to make any changes to the LCP portion of the document, as opposed to the GP portion, it would require Coastal Commission approval/certification. page LU-34 LU-4.2
Provide additional clarification on this policy, is this a Coastal Act requirement?
provide equitable coastal access. The City prepared a technical memo on this subject to provide the basis for the policy.

General Comment
Can you provide more background on the removal of the Growth Management Element and its conflicts with State housing laws? The Growth Management Element was pretty outdated, and with the numerous legislation that has been passed in the last few years seeking more housing to be built creates an inherent conflict, especially with growth management policies that put a limit on residential growth. In addition, HCD would not certify our (or any city’s) Housing Element if that city had policies that were viewed as limiting or restricting new housing.

Commentor - Chapman Estate Foundation - Letter Dated 12/2/25 page LU-22 Figure LU-6, Figure LU-10
Commentor states the current land use designation of the Chapman estate is Medium Density residential designation and requests that the Chapman Estate be assigned the LCP land use designation of “Public/Semi-Public”.

The GP/LCP shows the Chapman Estate having a proposed land use designation of public/semi- public.

Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-54
Packet Page 74

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
page LU-28
Requests that Policy LU-1.5 and Action LU-1.5a be revised to reflect semi-public uses by non-profits or similar. Revised language request is as follows in underlined font: Public/Semi-Public. The Public and Semi-Public category shall designate land in public ownership that should be developed or to be developed for public use and various public facilities. Such land may be in public ownership (“Public”) or may be land owned by “semi-public” entities such as non-profits or Commentor requests minor edits to Policy LU-1.5 to include non-profits or other private parties in the description of the public/semi public land use designation. Staff has made the requested page LU-12
Commentor requests the following descriptive language be added to the description of Terrace Avenue/Shell Beach/Dinosaur Caves planning area.
also located in Shell Beach, including Margo Dodd park , Boeker Street linear access and overlook, Eldwayen Ocean Park and beach access at Vista Del Mar, Cuyama and Pier Ave, the Shell Beach library and the Chapman Estate, a 1.42 acre ocean bluff front historical Commentor - Andrew Grow - Letter Dated 2/11/2026
Various comments submitted as part of the Recirculated Draft EIR See Final EIR Response to Comments.

Commentor - Andrew Grow - Letter Dated 12/6/25
General Comment
Commentor requests a specific workshop for the east side of Shell Beach Rd within the Sunset Palisades area Comment noted Commentor - Andrew Grow - Letter Dated 1/8/24
General Comment
Commentor requests City disclose intention for the land uses and zoning of the Shell Beach Rd/101 area
The intention for the lands located between north Shell Beach Road and Hwy 101 has not changed.

The General Plan designation is currently Open Space and has been Open Space for decades. The General Plan is the overarching document for the City's land use and development patterns. page LU-45 LU-8.1a.Identify and Map natural resources the Open Space designation following action LU-8.1a.Comment noted page LU-29
The term “permanent open space” is not defined in the General Plan/LCP documents. Is this referring to the GP designation? Or referencing that current vacant lots cannot be developed? It would The Open Space designation allows a limited amount of residential development. Not every phrase Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-55
Packet Page 75

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
General Comment
Restricting all development (for those parcels in between Shell Beach Road and US 101) in lieu of applying a reasonable height restriction is an arbitrary restriction giving rise to takings and other constitutional concerns, and not substantiated in the record and in fact in conflict with other General Plan/LCP policies.per parcel. This is consistent with the City's long-term vision for this area.

Commentor - Andrew Grow - Letter Dated 8/22/23
General Comment
Commentor notes that allowing development does not conflict with several policies in the COS Element to protect open space and scenic General Comment
Restrictive policies contained in the Land Use Element are not needed to protect the scenic view corridor
and only serve to restrict private property rights, limit the long- term viability of the existing
homes, and restrict additional residential development Comment noted General Comment
different ways. The General Plan
policies protecting scenic views in the Shell Beach Road area be limited to those identified within the Conservation and Open Space Element.Comment noted
page LU-9
General Comment
Designation of this area ( where the property is privately owned) back to a residential designation with the appropriate overlay for view protection Comment noted. Correspondence has been included with the Planning Commission record General Comment
area should be limited to those
identified within the COS Element.Comment noted
Commentor - Mary Rowan Isikawa - Email dated 12/9/25
page 49
utilities being screened from public view, in this case an above Commentor - Norbert Dall - Email dated 12/3/25
Land Use Element Figure LU-1
the exhibit. as well as the authority for LAFCO to determine City boundary within coastal waters. City boundary has been adjusted to match current LAFCO boundary.

The LCP’s jurisdiction is not intended to be coterminous with city boundaries.

Commentor - Sierra Club Comment Letter 1/5/24
Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-56
Packet Page 76

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
General Comment Commentor reminds City about SB 1425 and AB 1889 Requirements SB1425 requirements have been incorporated. AB 1889 requirements not required until 2028 Commentor - State Parks Comment Letter 1/5/24
General Comment a new operating agreement. This work is in progress.

CO-6, 10, 11, and 15
Commentor states the use of terms Pismo Marsh, Pismo Lake and reqeusts the the following terms are used: Pismo Lake Ecological Pismo Lake Ecological reserve is identified as such in the beginning of the document, but is also referred to as Pismo Lake or Pismo Marsh. Pismo State Beach Monarch Butterfly Grove is identified COS-44
appropriate contact for any collaboration or future planning The document currently states "in coordination with applicable resource agencies" not specifically page LU-65
Reserve be appropriately titled and reviewed by State Parks, Oceano designations for the North Beach Campground and Pismo State Commentor is requesting revisions to the zoning designations. Zoning revisions will be evaluated in COS-3.2c-ESHA Buffers, Action COS-3.2d-
Existing Development Within ESHA Buffers,
Action COS-3.2h- Monarch Butterfly Habitat
Protection, Action COS-3.7a-Streamside
Protection Zone, Action COS-3.5d-Wetland
Buffers, and Action COS-3.5e-Existing
The state requests the City to consider the development limitations of the state to maintain, improve and propose new State Parks These policies and actions are designed to comply with Coastal Act requirements, no changes have Draft Safety Element Action 2.5b-Restrictions
on Development Within the 100-Year
Floodplain, Action 2.5c-Shoreline Setbacks, Commentor requests the City to consider the development Commentor requests any proposed Projects, for those portions of Pismo State Beach operated by the City of Pismo Beach under a Lease Agreement, be discussed in advance with the State, in order to As outlined on page CO-10 "The City will make best efforts to consult with applicable agencies including the State Parks Department on any planned improvements… including those portions of Commentor - Rik Frazer - Email dated 1/8/24
Do not adopt the proposed GP/LCP, keep the exisiting document in place. Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Julie Ceasar - Email dated 1/11/24
Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-57
Packet Page 77

City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program (GP/LCP) Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) Update Summary of Public Comments Received and Response to Comments, May 2026 Page
Please do not adopt any language that would limit any homeowner from maintaining or repairing their property or the bluff of their Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Doug Brown - Email dated 1/9/24
Concerns raised regarding inability to construct sea wall at property. Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Tim Dyson - Email dated 1/9/24
Concens raised about bluff protection policies. Commentor urges City to hold more public hearings prior to adoption.Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Doug Garland - Email dated 1/8/24
Concens raised about ability for sea wall repairs Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Eric Simon - Email dated 1/4/24
Concens raised about policies affecting oceanfront property owners. Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Jim Rice- Email dated 1/11/24
Create more public workshops to discuss policies that would limit landowners ability to protect their structures. Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Thomas Roth for Rick Loughead- Email dated 1/8/24 Comments related to coastal impact policies Comment applies to previous version of GP/LCP.

Commentor - Gary Grossman- Letter dated 10/10/23
Comments related to coastal impact policies Comments apply to previous version of GP/LCP.

Attachment 4
Council Agenda 5-19-2026 11.A-58
Packet Page 78

PISMO BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAF REPOR
Agenda Item #12.A
Meetin Date: Ma 19, 2026
TITLE:

Job Vacancy Report in Compliance with Assembly Bill 2561 RECOMMENDATION:

No action recommended; for information only.

DISCUSSION:

Following the enactment of Assembly Bill 2561 (AB 2561), signed by the California Governor in September 2024, this report is presented to comply with state requirements focused on transparency in staffing vacancies. The law amends the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act and requires public agencies to conduct an annual public hearing prior to budget adoption to review vacancy levels, recruitment and retention efforts, and to allow input from recognized bargaining groups. The legislation aims to address workforce shortages affecting public services and requires agencies to report on vacancies and related strategies, identify barriers to hiring and retention, and provide additional details when vacancy rates for any bargaining unit reach or exceed twenty percent.

In May 2025, staff presented the first annual report on vacancy levels and recruitment and retention efforts following the adoption of AB 2561; this report represents the second annual update.

Workforce Overview
The City of Pismo Beach has three bargaining groups: two represented groups, consisting of the Police Officers Association (POA) and Service Employees International Union, Local 620 (SEIU), and one unrepresented group. The number of positions in each group is shown in Table 1 below. For purposes of this report, only full-time positions are included.

Table 1. Regular Full-Time Posiitons by Bargaining Group as of May 1, 2026 Employee Group # of Budgeted FT
Positions
POA 30
SEIU 36
Non-Represented 36
On April 7, 2026, the City Council authorized the reestablishment of the Engineering Technician position as a budgeted position. The position is represented by SEIU and reflected within the table above.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 12.A-1
Packet Page 79

As of May 1, 2026, no bargaining groups currently meet or exceed the 20% vacancy threshold that would trigger additional reporting under AB 2561. The City’s overall vacancy rate is 3.92%.

Vacancy rates are calculated as follows: Vacancy Rate (%) = (Number of Vacant Positions in Bargaining Group / Total Number of Authorized Positions) X 100. Table 2 below summarizes the City’s vacancies by employee group as of May 1, 2026.

Table 2. Vacancy and Rate by Bargaining Group
Employee Group Vacancies Vacancy Rate
5/2026
Vacancy Rate 5/2025
(Last Year’s Rate
POA 3 10%10%
SEIU 1 2.77%5.12%
Non-Represented 0 0% 0%
The POA group currently has three vacant positions, all of which are in the process of being filled pending completion of the hiring process, which includes background investigations. The vacancies consist of two sworn police officer positions, which will be filled through the hiring of Police Recruits who will attend the police academy, and one Public Safety Dispatcher position.

Within the SEIU-represented group, the City is currently recruiting for an Engineering Technician position. Although this position is currently being reported as vacant through Table 2, it was only recently reauthorized as an additional position within the Engineering Division; accordingly, the City has initiated recruitment and hiring efforts to fill the position.

Recruitment Activity
City vacancies occur for a variety of reasons, including employee retirements, promotions, resignations, and separations from service. During 2025, the City successfully filled 15 full-time positions. In support of these recruitments, Human Resources staff reviewed over 500 applications for full-time employment opportunities, reflecting continued interest in City positions.

While recruitment efforts continue to generate a significant number of applications, the size of the applicant pool does not always correspond to the number of qualified candidates. The City receives applications from individuals nationwide, including applicants seeking remote or flexible work arrangements or those who do not meet the minimum qualifications for the position. In addition, some otherwise qualified candidates elect not to continue through the recruitment process due to factors such as regional cost- of-living considerations.

In response, Human Resources is continuing to strengthen recruitment efforts to ensure that open positions are both highly visible and appealing to qualified candidates. Staff are working to streamline hiring timelines by improving internal coordination and refining the Council Agenda 5-19-2026 12.A-2
Packet Page 80

screening and selection process, while also prioritizing clear and consistent communication with applicants throughout each stage of recruitment. These efforts are intended to improve the overall candidate experience and foster a sense of connection to the City, helping applicants feel engaged and valued as part of the City’s workforce from the initial application through final selection.

Employee Separations
In 2025, nine full-time employees separated from the City of Pismo Beach. Five employees resigned for various reasons, including relocation outside the area and a decision not to continue shift work. Three employees were released during their probationary period after not meeting the performance standards required for the position, and one employee retired from City service.

Retention
Employee retention is essential to maintaining operational continuity, preserving institutional knowledge, and ensuring the consistent delivery of high-quality public services. The City is committed to fostering a work environment that supports employee success, encourages professional growth, and promotes long-term job satisfaction. To strengthen recruitment and retention, the City continues to invest in compensation, benefits, recognition, wellness, and career development initiatives, including the following:
Successful negotiation and implementation of three-year successor Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) for both represented bargaining groups, incorporating equity adjustments based on the 2025 adopted Compensation Study. Continued access to comprehensive and competitive employee benefits, including increased health benefit contributions.
Addition of a longevity-based incentive designed to support employee retention and recognize long-term service.
Completion and adoption of the citywide Classification Study, a collaborative initiative involving input from employees across all departments to ensure positions are aligned with current and future operational needs.

In an increasingly competitive labor market, agencies are expanding compensation structures, offering flexible work arrangements, and enhancing fringe benefits to attract and retain qualified employees. As a smaller agency, City employees often serve in multifaceted roles that require adaptability, a broad skill set, and the ability to manage diverse responsibilities, making retention efforts especially critical. The City remains committed to continuously evaluating and refining its recruitment and retention strategies to ensure they remain effective, equitable, and aligned with organizational goals. This includes ongoing review of workforce trends, employee feedback, and peer agency practices to identify opportunities for improvement and implement targeted actions that support employee retention, engagement, and long-term organizational resilience.

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 12.A-3
Packet Page 81

Conclusion and Recommendation
The City of Pismo Beach is committed to maintaining a strong workforce through effective recruitment and retention. This report and public input process meet the requirements of AB 2561 and confirm that all bargaining groups are below the 20% vacancy threshold. Staff will continue to monitor staffing levels and address workforce needs as they arise. With ongoing City Council support and investment in its workforce, Pismo Beach remains a competitive employer in the region.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. Any budget impacts associated with staff position changes are analyzed at the time the changes are considered by the Council.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.

Prepared by:

Bianka Buchanan, Human Resources Officer
Submitted by: Silas Clarke, Assistant City Manager
City Manager Approval:

Council Agenda 5-19-2026 12.A-4
Packet Page 82

Pismo Beach City CouncilMay 19, 2026

Pismo Beach City Council
May 19, 2026