Pismo Beach City Council
May 19, 2026

Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.6-21
that a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Plan, adequate to protect the paleontological resource and prepared by a qualified paleontologist, be submitted for review and, if approved, be implemented as part of the project.  Action COS-5.3c: Paleontological Monitoring. Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified paleontologist for ground disturbing construction activities in previously undisturbed sediments with high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., Qoa, QTp, Tsqw, Tp, Tps, Tm, Tml, Qa, Qbs, Qa, Qbs) where the qualified paleontologist has determined construction activities have the potential to encounter paleontological resources.  Action COS-5.3d: Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP).

Where construction activities have the potential to encounter paleontological resources as identified by the qualified paleontologist, a Paleontological WEAP shall be developed and implemented by the qualified paleontologist prior to ground disturbing activities. The training for construction personnel shall include training on the appearance of fossils and the procedures for halting construction activities and notifying paleontological staff if unanticipated fossils are discovered by construction staff.  Action COS-5.3e: Construction Suspension. Should paleontological resources be encountered during any construction activity, all activity that could damage or destroy the resources shall be suspended until a qualified paleontologist has examined the site.

Construction shall not resume until mitigation measures included in the Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Plan are carried out to address the impacts of the project on these resources.

The City would abide by Actions COS-5.3a through COS-5.3e in the GP/LCP Update, which require paleontological resource studies for projects that involve ground disturbance in project areas mapped as high paleontological sensitivity at the surface (i.e., Qoa, QTp, Tsw, Tp, Tps, Tm, Tml) or subsurface (i.e., Qa, Qbs). Additionally, these measures require suspension of construction activity in the event that a paleontological resource is disclosed, retention of a qualified paleontologist to examine the site, and implementation of measures to protect the paleontological resource.

Compliance with the GP/LCP Update policies and actions would ensure that construction impacts related to paleontological resources and unique geologic features would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required

4.6.4 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative geology, soils, and seismicity impacts may be related to exacerbation of seismic hazards and increased erosion and/or loss of topsoil. These effects occur independently of one another, and result from site-specific and project-specific characteristics and conditions. In addition, existing regulations, such as the CBC, specify mandatory actions that must occur during project development, which minimize effects from construction of new structures related to geology, soils and seismicity as discussed above.

Cumulative development under the GP/LCP Update could disturb areas that may potentially contain paleontological resources. The potential for impacts from individual developments is site-specific and depends on the location and extent of ground disturbance associated with each individual development proposal. All future development projects would continue to be subject to existing state and local requirements and discretionary projects may be subject to project-specific mitigation

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.6-22
requirements under CEQA. In addition, future development in the City would comply with GP/LCP Update policies and goals to ensure that paleontological resources encountered during construction would be properly recovered and curated. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to the destruction, damage, or loss of undiscovered scientifically important paleontological resources would be less than significant. Cumulative impacts related to geology, paleontology, soils, and seismicity would be less than significant, and the GP/LCP Update would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative geology, paleontology, soils, or seismicity impacts.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-1

4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change
This section discusses the potential for the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update to contribute to impacts related to climate change. The analysis includes an estimate of GHG emissions generated by development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update and evaluates the GP/LCP Update’s consistency with applicable GHG reduction plans, policies, and regulations, including the Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan (PBCAP). Potential flooding effects associated with sea level rise are discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality.

4.7.1 Setting
a. Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases
Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period. The term “climate change” is often used interchangeably with the term “global warming,” but climate change is preferred because it conveys that changes are occurring in addition to rising temperatures. The baseline against which these changes are measured originates in historical records that identify temperature changes that occurred in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The global climate is changing continuously, as evidenced in the geologic record which indicates repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling. The rate of change has typically been incremental, with warming or cooling trends occurring over the course of thousands of years. The past 10,000 years have been marked by a period of incremental warming, as glaciers have steadily retreated across the globe. However, scientists have observed acceleration in the rate of warming over the past 150 years. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has expressed a high degree of confidence (95 percent or greater chance) that the global average net effect of human activities has been the dominant cause of warming since the mid-twentieth century (IPCC 2014a).

Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called GHGs. The gases widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation, largely determine its atmospheric concentrations.

GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and methane are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are usually by-products of fossil fuel combustion, and methane typically results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills as well as leakages in the extraction and distribution of natural gas. Human- made GHGs, many of which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and sulfur hexafluoride (United States Environmental Protection Agency [U.S. EPA] 2020).

Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWP). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emitted, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2e), and is the amount of GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a 100-year GWP of one. By contrast, methane has a 100-year GWP of 25, meaning its global

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-2
warming effect is 25 times greater than carbon dioxide on a molecule per molecule basis (IPCC 2014b).1
The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the Earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat-trapping effect of GHGs, the Earth’s surface would be about 33 degrees Celsius (°C) cooler (World Meteorological Organization 2020). However, emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, are believed to have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of concentrations that occur naturally.
b. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
California Emissions Inventory
Based on the California Air Resource Board’s (CARB) California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000- 2019, California produced 418.2 MMT of CO2e in 2019. The major source of GHG emissions in California is transportation, contributing 40 percent of the state’s total GHG emissions. The industrial sector is the second largest source, contributing 21 percent of the state’s GHG emissions while electric power accounts for approximately 14 percent (CARB 2021). California emissions are due in part to its large size and large population compared to other states. However, a factor that reduces California’s per capita fuel use and GHG emissions, as compared to other states, is its relatively mild climate. In 2016, the State of California achieved its 2020 GHG emission reduction targets as emissions fell below 431 MMT of CO2e (CARB 2019).

Local Emissions Inventory
In May 2014, Pismo Beach adopted a PBCAP, which includes a 2005 baseline inventory of GHG emissions resulting from community-wide activities and City government facilities and operations within Pismo Beach (Pismo Beach 2014). The PBCAP also includes a 2020 business-as-usual forecast of how emissions would change over time as a result of population and job growth if consumption trends and efficiencies remained at their 2005 levels, absent any new policies or actions that would reduce emissions. Since 2005, several State regulations and local initiatives such as The Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Solar Energy Installations, and Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion have been implemented that would reduce Pismo Beach’s GHG emissions in comparison to the 2020 business-as-usual forecast. The PBCAP GHG emissions inventory also included a 2020 adjusted forecast to account for the impact of these measures to provide a more accurate picture of future emissions growth in 2020.

The community-wide GHG emissions inventory identified that the City’s 2005 GHG emissions were 87,077 MT CO2e (Pismo Beach 2014). The 2020 adjusted forecast, which accounted for growth from 2005 to 2020, but also anticipated GHG reductions from State and local emissions reduction measures, estimated that the City’s 2020 GHG emissions would be 95,782 MT CO2e.

1 The IPCC’s (2014b) Fifth Assessment Report determined that methane has a GWP of 28. However, modeling of GHG emissions was completed using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2020.4.0, which uses a GWP of 25 for methane, consistent with the IPCC’s (2007) Fourth Assessment Report.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-3
c. Potential Effects of Climate Change
Globally, climate change has the potential to affect numerous environmental resources through potential impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. Scientific modeling predicts that continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the twenty-first century than were observed during the twentieth century.

Each of the past three decades has been warmer than all the previous decades in the instrumental record, and the decade from 2000 through 2010 has been the warmest. The observed global mean surface temperature (GMST) from 2015 to 2017 was approximately 1.0°C higher than the average GMST over the period from 1880 to 1900 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2020).

Furthermore, several independently analyzed data records of global and regional Land-Surface Air Temperature (LSAT) obtained from station observations jointly indicate that LSAT and sea surface temperatures have increased. Due to past and current activities, anthropogenic GHG emissions are increasing global mean surface temperature at a rate of 0.2°C per decade. In addition to these findings, there are identifiable signs that global warming is currently taking place, including substantial ice loss in the Arctic over the past two decades (IPCC 2014a and 2018).

According to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, statewide temperatures from 1986 to 2016 were approximately 0.6 to 1.1°C higher than those recorded from 1901 to 1960. Potential impacts of climate change in California may include reduced water supply from snow pack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more large forest fires, and more drought years (State of California 2018). While there is growing scientific consensus about the possible effects of climate change at a global and statewide level, current scientific modeling tools are unable to predict what local impacts may occur with a similar degree of accuracy. A summary follows of some of the potential effects that could be experienced in California as a result of climate change.

Air Quality
From 1950 to 2005, average annual maximum temperature in the Bay Area increased by approximately 0.95°C, consistent with the global mean temperature change attributable to anthropogenic influences over a similar time period. Even with significant efforts to mitigate climate change, the Bay Area will likely see annual mean warming of approximately 1.8°C by 2050 as compared to 2005 (State of California 2018). Higher temperatures are conducive to air pollution formation and could worsen air quality in California as they rise. Climate change may increase the concentration of ground-level ozone, but the magnitude of the effect, and therefore its indirect effects, are uncertain. As temperatures have increased in recent years, the area burned by wildfires throughout the state has increased, and wildfires have occurred at higher elevations in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (State of California 2018). If higher temperatures continue to be accompanied by an increase in the incidence and extent of large wildfires, air quality would worsen, but if higher temperatures are accompanied by wetter, rather than drier conditions, the rains would tend to temporarily clear the air of particulate pollution. This would effectively reduce the number of large wildfires, thereby ameliorating the pollution associated with them. Severe heat accompanied by drier conditions and poor air quality could increase the number of heat-related deaths, illnesses, and asthma attacks throughout the state (California Natural Resources Agency 2009).

Water Supply
Analysis of paleoclimatic data (such as tree-ring reconstructions of stream flow and precipitation) indicates a history of naturally and widely varying hydrologic conditions in California and the West, including a pattern of recurring and extended droughts. Uncertainty remains with respect to the

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-4
overall impact of climate change on future precipitation trends and water supplies in California.

Year-to-year variability in statewide precipitation levels has increased since 1980, meaning that wet and dry precipitation extremes have become more common (California Department of Water Resources 2018). This uncertainty regarding future precipitation trends complicates the analysis of future water demand, especially where the relationship between climate change and its potential effect on water demand is not well understood. The average early spring snowpack in the western U.S., including the Sierra Nevada Mountains, decreased by about 10 percent during the last century.

During the same period, sea level rose over 0.15 meter along the central and southern California coasts (State of California 2018). The Sierra snowpack provides the majority of California's water supply, as snow that accumulates during wet winters is released slowly during the dry months of spring and summer. A warmer climate is predicted to reduce the fraction of precipitation that falls as snow and result in less snowfall at lower elevations, thereby reducing the total snowpack (State of California 2018). Projections indicate that average spring snowpack in the Sierra Nevada and other mountain catchments in central and northern California will decline by approximately 66 percent from its historical average by 2050 (State of California 2018).

Hydrology and Sea Level Rise
Climate change could affect the intensity and frequency of storms and flooding, and the Bay Area’s largest winter storms are likely to become more intense and potentially more damaging in future decades (State of California 2018). Furthermore, climate change could induce substantial sea level rise in the coming century. Rising sea level increases the likelihood of and risk from flooding. The rate of increase of global mean sea levels over the 2001-2010 decade, observed by satellites, ocean buoys, and land gauges, was approximately 3.2 millimeters per year, double the twentieth century trend of 1.6 millimeters per year. Global mean sea levels averaged over the last decade were about

0.20 meter higher than those of 1880 (World Meteorological Organization 2013). Sea levels are rising faster now than in the previous two millennia, and the rise will probably accelerate, even with robust GHG emission control measures. The most recent IPCC report predicts a mean sea-level rise of 0.25 to 0.94 meter by 2100 (IPCC 2018). Over the past century, the sea level in the Bay Area has risen by over 0.2 meter. A rise in sea levels could erode 31 to 67 percent of southern California beaches and cause flooding of approximately 370 miles of coastal highways during 100-year storm events. This would also jeopardize California’s water supply due to saltwater intrusion and induce groundwater flooding and/or exposure of buried infrastructure (State of California 2018). Increased storm intensity and frequency could affect the ability of flood-control facilities, including levees, to handle storm events.

Agriculture
California has an over $50 billion annual agricultural industry (approximately $2.2 billion of which is from the Bay Area) that produces over a third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of the country’s fruits and nuts (California Department of Food and Agriculture 2020). Higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-use efficiency, but if temperatures rise and drier conditions prevail, certain regions of agricultural production could experience water shortages of up to 16 percent. This would increase water demand as hotter conditions lead to the loss of soil moisture; crop-yield could be threatened by water-induced stress and extreme heat waves; and plants may be susceptible to new and changing pest and disease outbreaks (State of California 2018). Temperature increases could change the time of year certain crops bloom or ripen, thereby affecting their quality (California Climate Change Center 2006). In particular, nearly 70 percent of California’s existing area of wine production will be vulnerable under future climate change

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-5
projections by 2050, and wine grape production in the Bay Area could suffer from extreme temperatures and temperature-related water scarcity (State of California 2018).

Ecosystems and Wildlife
Climate change and the potential resulting changes in weather patterns could have ecological effects on the global and local scales. Increasing concentrations of GHGs are likely to accelerate the rate of climate change. Scientists project that the annual average maximum daily temperatures in California could rise by 2.4 to 3.2°C in the next 50 years and by 3.1 to 4.9°C in the next century (State of California 2018). Soil moisture is likely to decline in many regions, and intense rainstorms are likely to become more frequent. Rising temperatures could have four major impacts on plants and animals: timing of ecological events; geographic distribution and range of species; species composition and the incidence of nonnative species within communities; and ecosystem processes, such as carbon cycling and storage (Parmesan 2006; State of California 2018). In the Bay Area, the future climate will become less suitable for evergreen forests such as redwoods and Douglas fir and more favorable for heat-adapted vegetation such as chaparral shrubland (State of California 2018).

Local Effects
Rising temperatures affect local and global climate patterns, and these changes are forecasted to manifest themselves in a number of ways that may impact the Central Coast region. Potential climate changes that could occur in Pismo Beach by the end of this century are discussed in detail in the Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan (PBCAP) and the Integrated Climate Change Adaptation Planning in San Luis Obispo County report:
 Increased temperatures – Average temperatures in San Luis Obispo County may increase by 2 to 4 degrees by mid-century and up to 4 to 8 degrees by late century. Greater warming is expected to occur in the summer months compared to winter.
 Pismo Beach may experience more significant temperature increases if coastal fog decreases.
 Pismo Beach should anticipate more frequent heat waves, with at least one more per year by 2050 and four to eight more per year by 2100.
 A secondary impact of increased temperatures is poorer air quality, largely due to increased ground level ozone and potentially increased particulate matter levels and allergens, such as pollen.
 Changed precipitation – Precipitation, except during winter months, is anticipated to change little in the near future. However, climate models forecast drier conditions throughout San Luis Obispo County by 2075 as a result of a five to fifteen percent reduction in average annual rainfall. As a result, droughts may become more frequent, longer, and more severe. Models also show that when rainfall does occur, it is likely to fall in the form of more intense rainstorms.

Increased drought conditions are contributing to longer and more intense fire seasons. Fires in the vicinity of Pismo Beach could potentially result in the temporary closure of U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101), preventing its use as an evacuation route.
 Sea level rise – According to Cal-Adapt land in Pismo Beach is vulnerable to a 100-year flood event as sea level rises will increase thirteen percent. Secondary impacts of sea level rise include increased erosion of coastal bluffs and beaches, coastal flooding, permanent inundation of coastal wetlands, and saltwater intrusion into coastal freshwater wells.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-6
 Storm surges – Sea level rise combined with the tidal effect of larger and more intense oceanic storms is expected to create higher periodic storm surges. These extreme “high tides” can cause impacts over and above those predicted to occur as a result of sea level rise mentioned above.

Impacts from storm surges may include the following: flooding of low-lying coastal areas, beach and cliff erosion, and inundation of infrastructure and wetlands.

The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment prepared for the GP/LCP Update finds that some transportation infrastructure in Pismo Beach is, or could become, vulnerable to extreme flood events and sea level rise. U.S. 101 and Dolliver Street may be currently vulnerable to extreme flood impacts where they cross Pismo Creek. U.S. 101 is the primary evacuation route in Pismo Beach. The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment does not identify sea level rise or storm surge as threats to U.S. 101, due to the highway’s higher elevation in Pismo Beach. The vulnerability of Price Street, situated between U.S. 101 and eroding bluffs, has motivated an in-progress bluff armoring and stabilization project. Increased erosion of unarmored bluffs is predicted to threaten the stability of several local roadways in Pismo Beach. City-owned parking lots, the region’s primary railway, and County regional transit stops are also within erosion and flood risk zones from downtown to near the City’s southern boundary. In extreme sea level rise scenarios, nearly the entire railway segment from U.S. 101 to the southern city limit is predicted to be subject to tidal flooding.

4.7.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Federal Clean Air Act
The U.S. Supreme Court determined in Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. ([2007] 549 U.S. 05-1120) that the U.S. EPA has the authority to regulate motor vehicle GHG emissions under the federal Clean Air Act. The U.S. EPA issued a Final Rule for mandatory reporting of GHG emissions in October 2009. This Final Rule applies to fossil fuel suppliers, industrial gas suppliers, direct GHG emitters, and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off-road vehicles and vehicle engines and requires annual reporting of emissions. In 2012, the U.S. EPA issued a Final Rule that established the GHG permitting thresholds that determine when Clean Air Act permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities.

In Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency (134 S. Ct. 2427 [2014]), the U.S.

Supreme Court held the U.S. EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source can be considered a major source required to obtain a Prevention of Significant Deterioration or Title V permit. The Court also held that Prevention of Significant Deterioration permits otherwise required based on emissions of other pollutants may continue to require limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best Available Control Technology. b. State
The CARB is responsible for the coordination and oversight of state and local air pollution control programs in California. There are numerous regulations aimed at reducing the state’s GHG emissions. These initiatives are summarized below.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-7
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 32)
The “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” Assembly Bill (AB) 32, outlines California’s major legislative initiative for reducing GHG emissions. AB 32 codifies the statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and requires the CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for reducing GHG emissions to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. Based on this guidance, CARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG level and 2020 target of 431 MMT of CO2e. CARB approved the Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008 and the Plan included measures to address GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among others (CARB 2008). Many of the GHG reduction measures included in the Scoping Plan (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Car standards, and Cap-and-Trade) have been adopted since the Plan’s approval.

The CARB approved the 2013 Scoping Plan update in May 2014. The update defined the CARB’s climate change priorities for the next five years and set the groundwork to reach post-2020 statewide goals. The update highlighted California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original Scoping Plan. It also evaluated how to align the State’s longer term GHG reduction strategies with other State policy priorities, including those for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use (CARB 2014).

On September 8, 2016, the governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 32 into law, extending the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 by requiring the State to further reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). On December 14, 2017, the CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 target. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap-and-Trade Program, and implementation of recently adopted policies and legislation, such as SB 1383 (discussed later). The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2013 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project- level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it recommends that local governments adopt policies and locally appropriate quantitative thresholds consistent with statewide per capita goals of six MT of CO2e by 2030 and two MT of CO2e by 2050 (CARB 2017). As stated in the 2017 Scoping Plan, these goals may be appropriate for plan-level analyses (city, county, sub-regional, or regional level), but not for specific individual projects because they include all emissions sectors in the state (CARB 2017).

Senate Bill 375
SB 375, signed in August 2008, enhances the State’s ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing the CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035. SB 375 aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and affordable housing allocations. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are required to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which allocates land uses in the MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Qualified projects consistent with an approved SCS or Alternative Planning Strategy (categorized as “transit priority projects”) would receive incentives to streamline CEQA processing.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-8
On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) were assigned targets of a 10 percent reduction in per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicle sources below 2005 levels by 2020 and a 19 percent reduction in per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicle sources below 2005 levels by 2035. MTC and ABAG adopted Plan Bay Area 2040 in July 2017, which includes the region’s SCS and meets the requirements of SB 375 in place at its time of adoption (i.e., a 7 percent reduction by 2020 and a 15 percent reduction by 2035) (MTC and ABAG 2017a and 2017b). The updated 2018 SB 375 targets will be addressed in the next plan update, Plan Bay Area 2050.

Senate Bill 1383
Adopted in September 2016, SB 1383 requires the CARB to approve and begin implementing a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants. SB 1383 requires the strategy to achieve the following reduction targets by 2030:
 Methane – 40 percent below 2013 levels
 Hydrofluorocarbons – 40 percent below 2013 levels
 Anthropogenic black carbon – 50 percent below 2013 levels SB 1383 also requires the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, in consultation with the CARB, to adopt regulations that achieve specified targets for reducing organic waste in landfills.

Senate Bill 100
Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the State’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

Executive Order B-55-18
On September 10, 2018, the former Governor Brown issued Executive Order (EO) B-55-18, which established a new statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. This goal is in addition to the existing statewide GHG reduction targets established by SB 375, SB 32, SB 1383, and SB 100.

California Building Standards Code
California Code of Regulations, Title 24 – California Building Code The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 is referred to as the California Building Standards Code, or CBC. It consists of a compilation of several distinct standards and codes related to building construction including plumbing, electrical, interior acoustics, energy efficiency, and handicap accessibility for persons with physical and sensory disabilities. The CBC’s energy-efficiency and green building standards are outlined below.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-9
Part 6 – Building Energy Efficiency Standards/Energy Code CCR Title 24, Part 6 is the Building Energy Efficiency Standards or California Energy Code. This code, originally enacted in 1978, establishes energy-efficiency standards for residential and non- residential buildings in order to reduce California’s energy demand. The Energy Code is updated periodically (currently every three years) to incorporate and consider new energy-efficiency technologies and methodologies as they become available. New construction and major renovations must demonstrate their compliance with the current Energy Code through submittal and approval of a Title 24 Compliance Report to the local building permit review authority and the California Energy Commission (CEC).

Pismo Beach has adopted the 2019 California Energy Code in Section 14.04.010 of the Pismo Beach Municipal Code (Pismo Beach 2020). In general, under the 2019 Standards, non-residential buildings will be 30 percent more energy-efficient compared to the 2016 Standards (Energy CodeAce 2019).

In addition, per Section 110.10 of the 2019 Standards, non-residential buildings must incorporate a solar zone area with a minimum area of 15 percent of the total roof area excluding any skylight area for nonresidential buildings with three habitable stories or fewer (other than healthcare facilities) (see the 2019 Standards for exceptions). Solar zones must be comprised of areas that have no dimension less than five feet and are no less than 80 square feet each for buildings with roof areas less than or equal to 10,000 square feet or no less than 160 square feet each for buildings with roof areas greater than 10,000 square feet. See the 2019 Standards for additional requirements regarding the azimuth, shading, interconnection pathways, and electrical service panels of solar zones.

PART 11 – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS/CALGREEN
The California Green Building Standards Code, referred to as CALGreen, was added to Title 24 as Part 11, first in 2009 as a voluntary code, which then became mandatory effective January 1, 2011 (as part of the 2010 CBC). The 2019 CALGreen institutes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of non-residential and residential structures. It also includes voluntary tiers (I and II) with stricter environmental performance standards for these same categories of residential and non-residential buildings. Local jurisdictions must enforce the minimum mandatory CALGreen standards and may adopt additional amendments for stricter requirements.

The 2019 mandatory standards require:
 20 percent reduction in indoor water use relative to specified baseline levels;2  65 percent construction/demolition waste diverted from landfills;  Inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency;  Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particleboards;
 Dedicated circuitry to facilitate installation of electric vehicle charging stations in newly constructed attached garages for single-family and duplex dwellings; and

2 Similar to the compliance reporting procedure for demonstrating Energy Code compliance in new buildings and major renovations, compliance with the CALGreen water reduction requirements must be demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms.

Buildings must demonstrate a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent reduction in the overall baseline water use as identified in CALGreen or a reduced per-plumbing-fixture water use rate.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-10
 Designation of at least ten percent of parking spaces for multi-family residential developments as electric vehicle charging spaces capable of supporting future electric vehicle supply equipment
 PV systems battery, storage systems, and solar ready for newly constructed residential dwellings, including single-family, and low-rise (three or fewer habitable floors) multifamily buildings.

The voluntary standards require:
 Tier I: stricter energy efficiency requirements, stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 65 percent reduction in construction waste with third-party verification, 10 percent recycled content for building materials, 20 percent permeable paving, and 20 percent cement reduction.
 Tier II: stricter energy efficiency requirements, stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 75 percent reduction in construction waste with third-party verification, 15 percent recycled content for building materials, 30 percent permeable paving, and 25 percent cement reduction
Similar to the compliance reporting procedure for demonstrating Energy Code compliance in new buildings and major renovations, compliance with the CALGreen water-reduction requirements must be demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms for new non-residential buildings. Buildings must demonstrate a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent reduction in the overall baseline water use as identified in CALGreen or a reduced per- plumbing-fixture water use rate.
c. Regional and Local
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments 2019 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) is required by State and federal law to prepare, update, and adopt a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) every four years. Senate Bill (SB) 375, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, was enacted in 2008, requiring all RTPs to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that reduces GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. The most recent update to the RTP was completed by SLOCOG in 2019. The 2019 RTP/SCS builds on prior plans and the Preliminary Sustainable Communities Strategy (PSCS) developed in the 2010 RTP/PSCS and 2014 RTP/PSCS and serves as the blueprint for the region’s transportation system over the next 20 years. The 2019 RTP/SCS identifies active transportation projects, non-highway system projects, highway system projects, and a park and ride project in Pismo Beach. The 2019 RTP/SCS includes Policy 6.3 to “reduce GHG emissions from vehicles and improve air quality in the region.”
Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan
In 2014, Pismo Beach adopted the PBCAP to guide the reduction of GHG emissions in accordance with AB 32. The PBCAP describes community and municipal GHG emissions, compares future emissions to state-designated targets, and defines actions and strategies the City will take to meet both state and local GHG reduction goals. Both community-wide and government operations emissions were inventoried for the PBCAP, studying emissions from energy use, transportation,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-11
waste, water, and off-road emissions, resulting in specific and attainable goals for GHG reductions.

The PBCAP was developed to be consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 and SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook to mitigate emissions and climate change impacts and serves as a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy for Pismo Beach. The PBCAP’s target mirrors that of AB 32, setting a goal of 15 percent below baseline (2005) levels by 2020. The City has not yet formally initiated an update of the PBCAP to address updated statewide targets for 2030 associated with SB 32 and the 2017 Scoping Plan.

4.7.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology
Operational emissions for buildout of the GP/LCP Update were modeled based on the potential development capacity in 2040 relative to existing conditions using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2020.4.0. Information presented in Table 2-6 in Section 2.0, Project Description, was used to determine the proposed project’s land uses, number of residential units, and non-residential areas, which were entered into CalEEMod. A detailed accounting of the methods and assumptions used to derive these inputs, along with the CalEEMod outputs, are provided in Appendix F.

Because project-level details are not currently known and it was assumed that full buildout of the proposed GP/LCP Update land use plan would occur, the operational emissions as modeled provide a conservative estimate of future GHG emissions in Pismo Beach and are included in this EIR for informational purposes. Construction emissions were not modeled due to the high dependence of emission estimates on project-level construction details, which are not known at this time for future land use development that may potentially occur under the land use scenario envisioned by the proposed GP/LCP Update.

Operational emissions for buildout of the GP/LCP Update would comply with SLOAPCD rules, such as Rule 504, which restricts residential wood burning. Individual development projects that are subject to CEQA would be required to provide a project-specific analysis to estimate their potential GHG emissions and incorporate mitigation measures to reduce their emissions as necessary. b. Significance Thresholds
Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant if the project would:

Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; and/or
Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

The vast majority of projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to directly influence climate change. However, physical changes caused by a project can contribute incrementally to cumulative effects that are significant, even if individual changes resulting from a project are limited. The issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether a project’s contribution towards an impact would be cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-12
effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064[h][1]).

According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, project analysis can tier off of a qualified GHG reduction plan, which allows for project-level evaluation of GHG emissions through the comparison of the project’s consistency with the GHG reduction policies included in a qualified GHG reduction plan. This approach is considered by the Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) in their white paper, Best Practices in Implementing Climate Action Plans, to be the most defensible approach presently available under CEQA to determine the significance of a project’s GHG emissions (AEP 2018). However, the PBCAP only contains targets to meet AB 32 2020 reduction goals, and Pismo Beach has not published a qualified GHG reduction plan that is consistent with SB 32 and 2017 Scoping Plan goals. Therefore, this approach is not currently feasible for this analysis.

In the absence of a qualified GHG reduction plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan recommends statewide targets that are appropriate at the plan level. As discussed in the 2017 Scoping Plan goals, local jurisdictions may demonstrate consistency with Scoping Plan goals (i.e., SB 32’s emission reduction target) by establishing communitywide emissions targets tied to the statewide per capita goals of 6 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT of CO2e) per capita by 2030 The project’s service population was determined by summing the number of residents and employees that would be accommodated by the project (Appendix F). As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, the proposed Specific Plan would accommodate approximately 1,875 residents and approximately 545 employees. Therefore, the project’s service population would be 2,420 persons (1,875 residents + 545 employees). As shown in Table 4.7-1, the communitywide emissions target of 6.0 MT of CO2e may be equated to approximately 4.6 MT of CO2e per service population (SP) in the year 2030. However, the project would not reach buildout until 2040. Thus, the 2040 GHG emissions target was linearly interpolated using the derived 2030 per capita emission target of

4.6 MT of CO2e/SP in 2030 and the CARB recommended statewide target of 2 MT of CO2e per capita by 2050. The interpolated 2040 community wide emissions target would be 3.3 MT of CO2e/SP/year.

This adjusted service population threshold is used in the analysis to determine whether the proposed GP/LCP Update would result in a significant GHG impact.

Table 4.7-1 GHG Performance Threshold Determination
Metric Quantity
Service Population
2030 Population 1,875 persons
2030 Employment 545 jobs
2030 Service Population 2,420 SP
2040 Communitywide Target Derivation
Per Capita Target 6.0 MT of CO2e per capita
Mass Emissions Target1 11,250 MT of CO2e
2030 Service Population Target2 4.6 MT of CO2e/SP
Interpolated 2040 Service Population Target3 3.3 MT of CO2e/SP MT of CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; SP = service population. 1 6.0 MT of CO2e per capita * 1,875 persons = 11,250 MT of CO2e 2 11,250 MT of CO2e/2,420 SP = 4.6 MT of CO2e/SP
3 Linearly interpolated between 2030 4.6 MT of CO2e and 2050 2.0 MT of CO2e

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-13
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Threshold 2: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 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. 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. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

General Plan/LCP Update Emissions Inventory
Table 4.7-2 provides an annualized estimate of potential new GHG emissions within the planning area that may result from implementation of the GP/LCP Update. This estimate was modeled using CalEEMod based on methods described in Section 4.7.3. Individual project-level details regarding new development that may occur under the GP/LCP Update are not known at this time. As a result, this analysis conservatively assumes that maximum build-out of the proposed land use plan would occur by 2040.

Table 4.7-2 GP/LCP Update Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Source Annual Emissions (MT of CO2e per year)
Operational
Area 25
Energy 2,542
Mobile 3,467
Solid Waste 660
Water 297
Total Emissions 6,991
GHG Emissions Efficiency Estimates
Pismo Beach New Service Population
(Residential Population + Employment)
2,420
GP/LCP Update 2040 MT CO2e per Service Population 1 2.9 2040 Interpolated Plan-level Service Population GHG threshold 3.3 Exceed Threshold? No
Notes: Emissions were modeled in CalEEMod. See Appendix F for modeling worksheets. Some numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding. Emission data is from “mitigated” results, which account for compliance with regulations and project design features. 1 Project specific 2040 population increase (1,875) and new employment 2040 increase (545) from Section 2, Project Description divided by total operational emissions (6,991) from CalEEMod Appendix F.

As shown in Table 4.7-2, buildout of the GP/LCP Update would result in 2040 emissions that would not exceed the 2040 Interpolated Plan-level Service Population GHG threshold of 3.3 MT per service population.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-14
Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan Consistency
The PBCAP contains climate action measures, which includes reduction measures used by the City to demonstrate project-level compliance with the PBCAP. The City requires applicants for new development to comply with mandatory measures from the PBCAP. Mandatory measures in the PBCAP include:
 City Government Energy Efficiency Retrofits and Upgrades;  City Government Energy Efficient Public Realm Lighting;  Energy Efficiency Requirements for New City-owned Buildings;  Renewable Energy Systems on City Property;
 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program for City Employees;  Zero-and Low-Emission City Fleet Vehicles;
 City Government Solid Waste Reduction;
 Energy Efficiency Outreach and Incentive Programs;
 Energy Audit and Retrofit Program;
 Income-Qualified Energy Efficient Weatherization Programs;  Incentives for Exceeding Title 24 Energy Efficiency Building Standards;  On-Site Small-Scale Solar PV Incentive Program;
 Income-Qualified Solar PV Program;
 Bicycle Network;
 Pedestrian Network;
 Expand Transit Network;
 Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed;
 TDM Incentives;
 Parking Supply Management;
 Public Parking Pricing;
 Electric Vehicle Network and Alternative Fueling Stations;  Smart Growth;
 Off-Road Equipment Upgrades, Retrofits, and Replacements;  Solid Waste Diversion; and
 Tree Planting Program.

For projects that are not found consistent with the PBCAP, project applicants are required to demonstrate that the project’s GHG emissions fall below applicable GHG significance thresholds, and that the project would not substantially interfere with implementation of the PBCAP.

The GP/LCP Update would revise and update the land use designations and policy provisions of the City’s General Plan and would result in new development within the City limit that would be located close to existing transit connections, City services, and employment centers. PBCAP Climate Action Measure TL-9 recognizes that energy-efficient project design or growth that facilitates mixed-use, higher density, and infill development near existing or planned transit stops, in existing community centers/downtown, and in other designated areas to improve city wide efforts to reduce GHG emissions (City of Pismo Beach 2014). Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would facilitate the

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-15
consistency of future development projects with both mandatory and voluntary measures of the PBCAP.

General Plan/LCP Update Policies to Reduce GHG Emissions The GP/LCP Update includes goals and policies intended to reduce GHG emissions from future development in Pismo Beach by promoting mixed-use and compact development and supporting bike, pedestrian, and mass transit. Implementation of the policies and actions in the GP/LCP Update Land Use and Community Design, Circulation, and Conservation and Open Space Elements listed below would minimize adverse effects associated with GHG emissions. The Land Use and Community Design Element policies and actions include:
 Action LU-2.1h: Compatible Uses. Enforce buffers and screening techniques to reduce the impact of noise, air pollution, traffic, or other nuisances from industrial or certain commercial uses.
 Policy LU-5.1: Pedestrian Orientation and Safety. Through appropriate zoning and discretionary approvals, strive to create safe, walkable environments that include elements such as good lighting, safe crosswalks, and street trees that allow people of all ages and abilities to exercise and safely access public transportation, community centers, recreation, schools, and goods and services.
 Action LU-5.2d: Pedestrian-Oriented Development. Discourage new “strip” commercial development with large street-fronting parking lots. New commercial developments should address enhancing the pedestrian environment through buildings oriented and accessible from the sidewalk, transparent ground-floor facades, pedestrian lighting and pedestrian- scaled buildings.
 Policy LU-5.3: Sustainable Community Strategies. Ensure land uses decisions and community strategies are designed to reduce energy and water consumption, waste and noise generation, air quality impacts; and support multimodal transport for a sustainable Pismo Beach.  Action LU-5.3c: Sustainable Design Incentive Program. Consider the feasibility of providing incentives for new and renovated projects that incorporate sustainable design features such as the construction of new buildings that reduce energy demand though natural features, such as green roofs and walls or energy efficiency above and beyond the current building code. Inform applicants of the benefits and incentives for green building practices and pursuit of LEED certification.

The Circulation Element policies include:
 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.
 Policy CE-2.1: Promote Walking and Bicycling. 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. Pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths shall receive at least the same emphasis and attention in future planning as facilities designed for the automobile.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-16
 Policy CE-2.4: Maintain and Improve 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-2.1a: Integration of Land Use Planning. Implement land use policies designed to create a pattern of activity that makes it easy to shop, recreate, commute, and conduct personal business without driving.
 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-2.1e: Pedestrian Circulation. Sidewalks shall be required for all new developments in residential (other than individual single family residential) and commercial areas. Generally, the sidewalk shall be located so that a landscape strip or trees are located between the sidewalk and the vehicular travelled way. Techniques shall be encouraged to create a pleasant walking experience including concern for views, paving materials, landscape, street furniture, and pedestrian scaled lighting. The City encourages the use of flashing beacons or lighted crosswalk systems, especially in highly trafficked areas. All new sidewalk areas shall be designed to accommodate the handicapped, compliant with the ADA. Also, the City shall install (or cause to be installed) sidewalks or footpaths along all collector or arterial streets that connect with commercial centers, public gathering areas and schools.
 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.
 Action CE-2.2c: Pedestrian Connections to Schools. Continue developing the existing network of walkways between schools and residential uses and encourage the development of new continuous walkways between schools and residential uses. 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.

The Conservation and Open Space Element policies and actions include:
 Policy COS-2.1: Improve Air Quality. The City shall support health and enjoyment for those who live or work in the City and for visitors.
 Action COS-2.1a: Community Trip Reduction. In order to reduce pollution, the City shall emphasize various procedures to reduce the number of vehicle trips and the number of vehicle miles traveled in the community. Techniques shall include, but not be limited to, transportation management measures such as vanpools, carpools, and subsidized transit

Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.7-17
passes; jobs/housing balance; bikeways and facilities; pedestrian facilities; electric vehicles and related infrastructure and transit improvements.
 Action COS-2.1b: City Employee Trip Reduction. Develop, implement, and promote a TDM program for City employees that includes incentives to reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips, such as ride matching services and assistance, flexible work schedules or telecommuting opportunities, end of trip facilities (parking, showers, lockers), subsidized transit passes, etc.
 Action COS-2.1c: Electric Vehicles. Establish electric vehicle parking spaces and charging requirements to lower pollution and reduce the City’s reliance on gasoline.  Action COS-2.1d: City Fleet Replacement. Develop and adopt a low- and zero- emissions replacement/purchasing policy for official City vehicles and equipment. This would not apply to vehicles with special performance requirements.
 Policy COS-2.2: Renewable Energy. Support and incentivize renewable energy and non- renewable energy consumption.
 Action COS-2.2a: Solar Incentives. The City shall promote and inform development applicants and existing home-owners and businesses of the following solar incentives and other incentives as may be appropriate:
− California Solar Initiative Rebate Program
− California Alternative Rates for Energy Program
− California Energy Commission – New Solar Homes Partnership − GRID Alternatives - Single-Family Affordable Solar Housing Program − Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo Energy Services  Action COS-2.2c: Energy Efficient Upgrades. Establish a prioritized list of energy efficiency upgrade projects and implement them as funding becomes available.

In addition to these policies to directly reduce energy and mobile GHG emissions from future development in the planning area, updates to the Conservation and Open Space Element includes actions that require the city to update and refine existing GHG planning efforts and thresholds.

These include:
 Action COS-2.1h Emissions Reduction Target. By 2040, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by

53.33 percent below the 2020 target, to place the community on a path to meet the state’s 2050 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals.
 Action COS-2.1i Climate Action Plan. Update the 2014 Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan and greenhouse gas inventory to evaluate progress, celebrate successes, and adjust strategies as needed to meet emissions goals.
 Action COS-2.1j Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Continue to update the greenhouse gas inventory to determine whether emissions are within recommended levels.  Action COS-2.1k Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies. Pursue a variety of greenhouse gas reduction strategies across the transportation, residential, waste, and commercial sectors, commensurate with their share of the community’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The GP/LCP Update includes goals and policies that would reduce GHG emissions from future development in Pismo Beach, and would not conflict with regional and State plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Implementation of GP/LCP Update

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.7-18
Conservation and Open Space Element Action COS-2.1h would establish GHG reduction goals consistent with the State’s 2030 and 2050 greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. Conservation Element Actions COS-2.1i, COS-2.1j, and COS-2.1k would require the City to update the CAP to comply with evolving state goals and requirements and would ensure that the CAP continues to provide measures for future development projects in the planning area to assess their consistency with City GHG reduction goals. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would be consistent with regional and State plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, and this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

4.7.4 Cumulative Impacts
GHG emissions are, by definition, cumulative impacts, as they add to the global accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The policies listed above 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. As discussed in Impact GHG-1, new individual development projects in Pismo Beach could result in GHG emissions that would be inconsistent with statewide per capita emissions goals established in the 2017 Scoping Plan and may exceed applicable SLOAPCD or City thresholds on a project-by-project basis. However, 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.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-1

4.8 Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire
This section addresses impacts associated with hazardous materials use and transportation, the accidental release of hazardous materials, new development or re-development on contaminated sites, air traffic hazards, interference with emergency response and evacuation plans, and the risk of exposure to wildland fires.

4.8.1 Setting
a. Definition of Hazardous Materials
A material is considered hazardous if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a federal, state, or local agency, or if it has characteristics defined as hazardous by such an agency. A hazardous material is defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations as follows:
“A substance or combination of substances which, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may either (1) cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed of or otherwise managed (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66261.10).”
Chemical and physical properties cause a substance to be considered hazardous. Such properties include toxicity, ignitability, corrosiveness, and reactivity. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.20 through 66261.24 defines the aforementioned properties. The release of hazardous materials into the environment can contaminate soils, surface water, and groundwater supplies.
b. Land Use Patterns
Past and present land use patterns are good predictors of the potential for past contamination by hazardous materials and the current use and storage of hazardous materials. Military, industrial, and certain commercial land uses, such as dry cleaners and auto service, are more likely to use and store large quantities of hazardous materials than residential land uses. Small quantities of hazardous materials are also routinely used and stored in other commercial and retail businesses, educational facilities, medical facilities, and households. Commercial land uses in the City of Pismo Beach (City) are scattered throughout all neighborhood planning areas, but are most concentrated in the Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh, Downtown Core, Oak Park Heights, and Freeway Foothills/Mattie Road. Light industrial uses are located in the Downtown Core, the Bluffs/Sunset Palisades/South Palisade, and Terrace Avenue/Shell Beach/Dinosaur Caves neighborhood planning areas.

Land use patterns are also useful for identifying the location of sensitive receptors, such as schools, day-care facilities, hospitals, and nursing homes. Shell Beach Elementary School is located within the Terrace Avenue planning area and the Francis Judkins Junior High School is located within the Pismo Heights planning area. Happy Time Co-op Preschool is located within the Freeway Foothills/Mattie Road planning area. There are no hospitals or nursing homes within the City.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-2
c. Existing Hazardous Material Contamination
The following databases were searched in March 2021 for records related to any known hazardous materials contamination within the City:
 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Superfund Enterprise Management System database (U.S. EPA 2021);
 California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB 2019a) GeoTracker search for leaking underground fuel tanks;
 California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC 2019) EnviroStor database;  SWRCB (2021b) solid waste disposal sites, active Cease and Desist Orders (CDOs), and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAOs); and
 Cortese list (California Environmental Protection Agency 2021).

The City does not contain any active CDOs and CAOs from the SWRCB, military cleanup sites or Federal Superfund sites. According to the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database, the City does not have any leaking underground storage tanks (UST) sites. No other active hazardous materials contamination sites within the planning area were identified. DTSC maintains a list known as the Cortese List, which identifies sites where hazardous materials are present and cleanup activities are necessary. There are no facilities in Pismo Beach on the Cortese List.

Additionally, the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, located about 3 miles north of Pismo Beach, may pose a hazardous materials risk to the City. Diablo Canyon is the one remaining operational nuclear power plant in California, and is expected to remain in operation until its license expires in 2030.

PG&E is also pursuing relicensing which would extend the plant operations. The facility is built on a fault line and is located on the coast, exposing it to seismic hazards and coastal hazards such as tsunamis, although Diablo Canyon is designed to be highly resilient to these emergency situations.

Additionally, the PG&E's Pismo Beach Materials Handling Facility is located within the City along Price Canyon Road. The Pismo Beach Materials Handling Facility supports PG&E’s operations and has been used for various equipment and material storage and transport needs in support of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. During decommissioning of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, hazardous materials will be trucked to the Pismo Beach Materials Handling Facility and transferred to rail for disposal (PG&E 2021).
d. Airports and Airport Hazards
Airport-related hazards can occur if departing or landing aircraft pose a safety risk to nearby development, or vice versa. The nearest public airports to the study area are the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport located approximately 5 miles due northwest, and the Oceano County Airport located approximately 2 miles to the south. The City is located outside of the existing and proposed safety zones associated with runway activities at these airports (San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission 2005).
e. Emergency Response Plans
The City of Pismo Beach developed its own Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) in 2014. Although the plan is meant to be a multi-hazard plan, its primary function is to address mitigation for natural hazards and other environmentally related, human caused events or incidents (Pismo Beach 2014).

The goals of the 2014 HMP intend to reduce the possibility of damage associated with hazards,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-3
promote disaster-resistant development. The 2014 HMP incorporates all applicable operations plans and geo- technical reports in relevant hazard mitigation ordinances, regulations, and plans. The 2014 HMP coordinates activities between agencies, provides safety information and establishes training and exercise goals related to emergency management. In 2019 Pismo Beach participated in the development of the County of San Luis Obispo Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP; County of San Luis Obispo 2019). The County Multi-Jurisdictional HMP refers to other emergency response plans developed by the County of San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services and other County municipalities and special districts.

In addition, the City of Pismo Beach is included in the Emergency Operations Plan, which was revised in 2016 and developed by the County of San Luis Obispo. The Emergency Operations Plan covers policies and concepts for responding to any and all emergencies that could affect the health, safety, and property of the public within city limits, including earthquakes, hazardous materials, multi-casualty events, storms and floods, wildland fires, terrorism, nuclear power plant events, and tsunamis (County of San Luis Obispo 2016). The City is also included in the County’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The County is currently updating the 2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

In addition, the City of Pismo Beach is included in the Tsunami Emergency Response Plan, which was revised in 2016 and developed by the San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services. The Tsunami Emergency Response Plan identifies potential tsunami inundation zones and covers warning messages, reverse 911 messages, and warning news releases in the event of a tsunami inundation, which could affect the health, safety, and property of coastal areas in San Luis Obispo County, including the City of Pismo Beach (County of Pismo Beach 2005). f. Wildland Fire Hazards
Fires in wildland areas can destroy vegetation and wildlife, and threaten urban areas located on the fringe of wildland areas. Wildland fires can also have serious impacts on downstream development and water supplies. When vegetation is burned away, erosion becomes a more serious problem, especially during the rainy season. Consequently, mudslides and landslides can threaten downhill development as a result of wildland fires.

Wildland fire risk is determined by a combination of factors including precipitation, winds, temperature, and landscape and vegetation conditions. CAL FIRE determines fire hazard severity zones based on the potential fire hazard that is expected to prevail there. Factors in determining fire hazard severity zones include fuel (material that can burn), slope, and weather. CAL FIRE identifies three zones, based on increasing hazard severity: moderate, high, and very high. Moderate hazard zones are typically identified as either wildland areas supporting areas of typically low fire frequency and relatively modest fire behavior, or are developed/urbanized areas with a very high density of inflammable surfaces including roadways, irrigated lawn/parks, and low total vegetation cover (less than 30 percent) that is highly fragmented and low in flammability (e.g., irrigated, manicured, managed vegetation). There are major fire hazards surrounding Pismo and along the northern and western portions of the City. Pismo Beach is bordered to the north and west with open space. These open spaces are more at risk of burning, and much of the native vegetation relies on fire to reproduce. The majority of the developed portion of Pismo Beach is located outside of a mapped fire hazard severity zone. Figure 4.8-1 below illustrates Fire Hazard Severity zones in the City. The areas of greatest risk to fire hazards in Pismo Beach are the northern portion of the City reaching into the foothills, northeast near Price Canyon, and northwest toward Avila Beach. Approximately 26 percent of the City is in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Additionally, as human development continues to encroach on natural areas, human life and property are more susceptible

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-4
Figure 4.8-1 Fire Hazard Severity Zones

Source: CAL FIRE 2007.

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-5
to fire hazard. The risk of wildland fires is greatest near the City limits where development meets rural areas of combustible vegetation (County of San Luis Obispo 2019). This encroachment occurs in areas called the wildland-urban interface (WUI), where structures and human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels that experience elevated risks of wildfire.

Development within very high fire hazard areas is unsafe where fire suppression is impeded by lack of water, rugged terrain, and delayed response times. The City is designated as a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), wherein the local government has responsibility for fire protection (CAL FIRE 2009). The San Luis Obispo County Fire Department is responsible for fire protection in Pismo Beach. There are two fire stations in Pismo Beach which are located at 760 Mattie Road and 2555 Shell Beach Road. In 2023, the City Council approved a contract to demolish an existing vacant building on Bello Street and replace the building with a new fire station and police station. This project is currently under construction.

Climate change is expected to exacerbate periodic drought conditions, potentially increasing the frequency of wildfires and altering the distribution and character of natural vegetation. The California Climate Change Center reported a projected increase wildfire frequency, statewide, between 11 percent under a lower-range warming scenario and 55 percent under a medium-range warming scenario (California Climate Change Center 2006).

CAL FIRE works in cooperation with the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, formerly California Emergency Management Agency [CalEMA]), as well as neighboring state governments through a network of mutual aid agreements to fight wildland fires. CAL FIRE is also a dedicated firefighting partner to the federal government, with experience contributing to firefighting efforts on the 45 million acres of federal lands in California. CAL FIRE is the largest multipurpose fire protection agency in the United States, responsible for wildland fire protection of over 31 million acres of California’s privately owned watershed lands, as well as services in 150 counties, cities, and districts via contracts with local governments.
g. Coastal Hazards
Coastal hazards in Pismo Beach pose a threat due to risk of coastal flooding. Storm events and, tsunamis may occur along the shore, although the risk of a serious tsunami for Pismo Beach remains low. The northwestern portion of Pismo Beach coastline consists of steep bluffs, while the southern shoreline is characterized by wide, sandy beaches. The small Meadow Creek and larger Pismo Creek meet to form a lagoon behind the beach in the southern portion of Pismo Beach. The northern, bluff portion of the City is referred to as the Bluffs and the southern area abutting Meadow Creek and Pismo Creek is referred to as the low-lying area. Downtown Pismo Beach is located between the Bluffs and the low-lying areas. The Bluffs are currently exposed to coastal erosion, especially during extreme storm events. Seawalls and other bluff stabilization measures have previously been constructed in some sections of the Bluffs. The downtown area is currently exposed to coastal erosion, wave runup, and flooding during extreme events, although a sea wall offers some protection. The low-lying area is most prone to coastal and riverine flooding.

Flood potential could increase substantially in this area due to sea level rise, if left unmitigated.

Although sea levels have generally not risen enough to pose a substantial threat to Pismo Beach, future sea level rise may be great enough to create hazardous conditions. A Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment was prepared for the City in 2019, which evaluated sea level rise scenarios between 1.6 feet to 9.8 feet. According to the Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment, incremental

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-6
sea level rise will exacerbate existing erosion hazards to the first row of development in the Bluffs area. However, additional parcels beyond the first row of development in the Bluffs are not projected to be exposed to erosion hazard until the extreme sea level rise scenarios of 8.2 feet and

9.8 feet rise. Sea level rise hazard to the Downtown area is projected to be limited to temporary flooding during large storm events for sea level rise below the extreme sea level rise scenarios of 8.2 feet and 9.8 feet. However, temporary flooding hazards are a concern because even minor flooding of the developed areas could lead to extensive structural damages. In the low-lying areas, shoreline erosion and increased water surface elevations in Pismo Creek from sea level rise is projected to increase coastal flooding risks to development southeast of Pismo Creek. Tidal flooding of the recreational vehicle (RV) facilities southwest of Dolliver Street is predicted to occur by the 3.3 feet sea level rise scenario. In addition, tidal flooding is predicted to affect development northeast of Dolliver Street at the 6.6 feet sea level rise scenario. For more information on flood hazards related to tsunami and seiches, refer to Section 4.9, Hydrology.

4.8.2 Regulatory Setting
The management of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes is regulated at the federal, state, and local levels, including through programs administered by the USEPA; agencies within the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), such as the DTSC; Federal and State occupational safety agencies; and the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services (EHS), Hazardous Materials Program, which is designated as the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA).
a. Federal Regulations
The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA)
These acts established a program administered by the USEPA for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes. Among other things, the use of certain techniques for the disposal of some hazardous wastes was specifically prohibited by HSWA.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (enacted 1980), amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) (1986)
This law provides broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. Among other things, CERCLA established requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites, provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites, and established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified.

CERCLA also enabled revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP), which provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List (NPL).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-7
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) FIFRA (7 USC 136 et seq.) provides Federal control of pesticide distribution, sale, and use. USEPA was given authority under FIFRA not only to study the consequences of pesticide usage, but also to require users (farmers, utility companies, and others) to register when purchasing pesticides. Later amendments to the law required users to take exams for certification as applicators of pesticides.

All pesticides used in the United States must be registered (licensed) by USEPA. Registration assures that pesticides will be properly labeled and that, if used in accordance with specifications, they will not cause unreasonable harm to the environment.

Lead-Based Paint Elimination Final Rule 24 Code of Federal Regulations Regulations for Lead-Based Paint (LBP) are contained in the Lead-Based Paint Elimination Final Rule 24 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 33, governed by the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which requires sellers and lessors to disclose known LBP and LBP hazards to perspective purchasers and lessees. Additionally, all LBP abatement activities must be in compliance with California and Federal OSHA and with the State of California Department of Health Services requirements. Only LBP-trained and -certified abatement personnel are allowed to perform abatement activities. All LBP removed from structures must be hauled and disposed of by a transportation company licensed to transport this type of material at a landfill or receiving facility licensed to accept the waste.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USEPA is the agency primarily responsible for enforcement and implementation of Federal laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous materials. Applicable Federal regulations pertaining to hazardous materials are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Titles 29, 40, and 49.

Hazardous materials, as defined in the CFR, are listed in 49 CFR 172.101. The management of hazardous materials is governed by the following laws:
 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) (42 U.S. Code [USC] 6901 et seq.); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA, also called the Superfund Act) (42 USC 9601 et seq.);
 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 USC 136 et. Seq.); and  Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 (Public Law 99 499).

These laws and associated regulations include specific requirements for facilities that generate, use, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous materials. USEPA provides oversight and supervision for Federal Superfund investigation/remediation projects, evaluates remediation technologies, and develops hazardous materials disposal restrictions and treatment standards.

National Fire Plan
The National Fire Plan was developed under Executive Order 11246 in August 2000, following a historic wildland fire season. Its intent is to establish plans for active response to severe wildland fires and their impacts to communities while ensuring sufficient firefighting capacity. The plan addresses firefighting, rehabilitation, hazardous fuels reduction, community assistance, and accountability.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-8
b. State Regulations
Department of Toxic Substances Control
As a department of the CalEPA, the DTSC is the primary agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, cleans up existing contamination, and looks for ways to reduce the hazardous waste produced in California. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code.

DTSC also administers the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) to regulate hazardous wastes. While the HWCL is generally more stringent than RCRA, until USEPA approves the California program, both state and federal laws apply in California. The HWCL lists 791 chemicals and approximately 300 common materials that may be hazardous; establishes criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes; prescribes management controls; establishes permit requirements for treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identifies some wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills.

Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the DTSC, the State Department of Health Services, the SWRCB, and CalRecycle to compile and annually update lists of hazardous waste sites and land designated as hazardous waste sites throughout the state. The Secretary for Environmental Protection consolidates the information submitted by these agencies and distributes it to each city and county where sites on the lists are located. Before the lead agency accepts an application for any development project as complete, the applicant must consult these lists to determine if the site at issue is included.

If any soil is excavated from a site containing hazardous materials, it would be considered a hazardous waste if it exceeded specific criteria in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations.

Remediation of hazardous wastes found at a site may be required if excavation of these materials is performed, or if certain other soil disturbing activities would occur. Even if soil or groundwater at a contaminated site does not have the characteristics required to be defined as hazardous waste, remediation of the site may be required by regulatory agencies subject to jurisdictional authority.

Cleanup requirements are determined on a case-by-case basis by the agency taking jurisdiction.

Hazardous Waste Control Act
The hazardous waste management program enforced by DTSC was created by the Hazardous Waste Control Act (California Health and Safety Code Section 25100 et seq.), which is implemented by regulations described in CCR Title 26. The State program is similar to, but more stringent than, the Federal program under RCRA. The regulations list materials that may be hazardous, and establish criteria for their identification, packaging, and disposal. Environmental health standards for management of hazardous waste are contained in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22, Division 4.5. In addition, as required by California Government Code Section 65962.5, DTSC maintains a Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List for the State called the Cortese List.

California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Department of Food and Agriculture, and the Department of Public Health
The California Department of Pesticide Regulations (DPR), a division of CalEPA, in coordination with the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), a division of Measurement Standards and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) have the primary responsibility to regulate pesticide use, vector control, food, and drinking water safety. CCR Title 3 requires the coordinated

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-9
response between the County Agricultural Commissioner and SBDEH to address the use of pesticides used in vector control for animal and human health on a local level. DPR registers pesticides, and pesticide use is tracked by the County. Title 22 is used also to regulate both small and large CDPH water systems.

California Fire Code (2019)
The 2019 California Fire Code is based on the 2018 International Fire Code. The Fire Code establishes the minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practices to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare for the hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to provide safety and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provisions of this code apply to the construction, alteration, movement enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal, and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such building structures throughout the State of California.

The California Fire Plan
The Strategic Fire Plan for California is the State’s road map for reducing the risk of wildfire. The most recent version of the Plan was finalized in January 2019 and directs each CAL FIRE Unit to prepare a locally specific Fire Management Plan (CAL FIRE 2019). In compliance with the California Fire Plan, individual CAL FIRE units are required to develop Fire Management Plans for their areas of responsibility. These documents assess the fire situation within each of the 21 CAL FIRE units and six contract counties. The plans include stakeholder contributions and priorities and identify strategic areas for pre-fire planning and fuel treatment as defined by the people who live and work with the local fire problem. The plans are required to be updated annually.

Wildland Urban Interface Building Standard
On September 20, 2007, the Building Standards Commission approved the Office of the State Fire Marshal emergency regulations amending the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, known as the California Building Code. These codes include provisions for ignition-resistant construction standards in the wildland urban interface.

State Emergency Plan
The foundation of California’s emergency planning and response is a statewide mutual aid system which is designed to ensure that adequate resources, facilities, and other support is provided to jurisdictions whenever their own resources prove to be inadequate to cope with a given situation.

The California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement (California Government Code Sections 8555–8561) requires signatories to the agreement to prepare operational plans to use within their jurisdiction, and outside their area. These plans include fire and non-fire emergencies related to natural, technological, and war contingencies. The State of California, all state agencies, all political subdivisions, and all fire districts signed this agreement in 1950.

Section 8568 of the California Government Code, the “California Emergency Services Act,” states that “the State Emergency Plan shall be in effect in each political subdivision of the state, and the governing body of each political subdivision shall take such action as may be necessary to carry out the provisions thereof.” The Act provides the basic authorities for conducting emergency operations

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-10
following the proclamations of emergencies by the Governor or appropriate local authority, such as a City Manager. The provisions of the act are further reflected and expanded on by appropriate local emergency ordinances. The Act further describes the function and operations of government at all levels during extraordinary emergencies, including war.

All local emergency plans are extensions of the State of California Emergency Plan. The State Emergency Plan conforms to the requirements of California’s Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), which is the system required by Government Code 8607(a) for managing emergencies involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies (California Emergency Management Agency [CalEMA] 2009). The SEMS incorporates the functions and principles of the Incident Command System (ICS), the Master Mutual Aid Agreement (MMAA), existing mutual aid systems, the operational area concept, and multi-agency or inter-agency coordination. Local governments must use SEMS to be eligible for funding of their response-related personnel costs under state disaster assistance programs. The SEMS consists of five organizational levels that are activated as necessary, including: field response, local government, operational area, regional, and state. CalOES divides the state into several mutual aid regions. The City of Pismo Beach is located in Mutual Aid Region I, which includes San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange Counties (CalEMA 2011).
c. Regional Regulations
County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Services Hazardous Materials Program
San Luis Obispo County EHS’s, Hazardous Materials Program is designated as the local CUPA. This agency is responsible for inspecting facilities in the County to verify proper storage, handling and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. The Hazardous Materials Program administers programs for Hazardous Materials Business Plans, hazardous waste generator requirements, USTs, above ground petroleum storage, prevention of accidental releases (California Accidental Release Prevention program), and hazardous materials management plans.

County of San Luis Obispo Emergency Operations Plan
The San Luis Obispo County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) addresses the planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting San Luis Obispo County (County of San Luis Obispo 2016). A key intent of the County’s EOP is to explain how overall emergency management is coordinated countywide, to address concerns related to continuity of government for the County of San Luis Obispo, and related emergency management issues. The EOP is also intended to serve as a policy and planning reference. The EOP also identifies roles for departments within the County of San Luis Obispo and other local governments and encourages these agencies to develop and implement supporting emergency plans, standard operating procedures (SOPs) or emergency response checklists based on the provisions of the EOP.

County of San Luis Obispo Tsunami Emergency Response Plan The County of San Luis Obispo Tsunami Emergency Response Plan establishes and defines emergency management procedures, organizational response and coordination related to receipt of a tsunami information statement, watch, advisory, or warning or an actual tsunami along the San Luis Obispo County coastline. This plan is a component of the San Luis Obispo County EOP in order

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-11
to provide initial response action. The administrative portion of the plan contains an overview, hazard assessment, explains the emergency management system, and explains the concept of operations.
d. Local Regulations
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans
The Section 65302.3 of the Government Code requires general plans and applicable specific plans to be consistent with amended Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plans (CALUP). The nearest public airports to the study area are the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport located approximately 5 miles due northwest, and the Oceano County Airport located approximately 2 miles to the south.

The City is not located in the airport land use plan area for either of these airports.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan/Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The 2014 HMP is a plan to improve resiliency in the community by identifying natural hazards present in Pismo Beach, determining the community’s vulnerability to each hazard, and identifying development mitigation strategies to reduce vulnerability before emergency situations develop. The 2014 HMP identifies earthquakes (including fault rupture and liquefaction), floods, landslides, bluff erosion, and hazardous material releases as the most significant hazards present in the community, and includes goals, objectives, and mitigation to improve resiliency to these hazards.

In 2019 Pismo Beach participated in the development of the County of San Luis Obispo Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP; County of San Luis Obispo 2019). The County of San Luis Obispo HMP was originally developed in 2005, updated in 2011 and 2013, and underwent a comprehensive update in 2019. A significant change to the plan in 2019 was the inclusion of other County municipalities and special districts, broadening it from a County-specific plan to a multi- jurisdictional document prepared in coordination with the participating entities and input from the public. The County Multi-Jurisdictional HMP entails adopting, implementing, assigning responsibility, monitoring, and reviewing this hazard mitigation plan over time, to ensure the goals and objectives are being achieved and the plan remains a relevant document.

4.8.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology
This section describes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project relevant to hazards and hazardous materials. The impact analysis is based on an assessment of baseline conditions in the City, including locations of hazardous materials use and storage, existing contaminated sites, air traffic hazards, emergency response and evacuation plan requirements, and the risk of exposure to wildland fires. This analysis identifies potential impacts based on the predicted interaction between the affected environment and construction, operation, and maintenance activities related to the predicted development that would occur under the proposed project. This section describes impacts in terms of location, context, duration, and intensity. b. Significance Thresholds
The following thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For the purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact if it would do any of the following:

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-12

1. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials

2. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment

3. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school

4. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment

5. Be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area

6. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan

7. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

Additional hazard related issues are addressed in other sections of this EIR. Hazards associated with tsunamis, seiches, and floods are addressed in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality.

This section also analyzes threshold related to wildfire. For the purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact if it would do any of the following:

1. If located in or near a state responsibility area, substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan

2. If located in or near a state responsibility area, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire

3. If located in or near a state responsibility area, require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk

4. If located in or near a state responsibility area, expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

The nearest public airports to the study area are the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport located approximately 5 miles due northwest, and the Oceano County Airport located approximately 2 miles to the south. The City is located outside of the existing and proposed safety zones associated with runway activities at these airports (San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission 2005). Therefore, there would be no impacts related to airport-related hazards, and Threshold 5 is not discussed further below.

This section does not analyze the exposure of future development within the City to hazards because it is an impact of the environment on the project. The California Supreme Court held in a December 2015 opinion (BIA v. BAAQMD) that an analysis of impacts of the environment on a project is not required for CEQA compliance.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-13
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Threshold 2: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
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 THE 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.

Implementation of the GP/LCP Update would facilitate new development in the City, increasing the residential and commercial uses in Pismo Beach. An additional 1,979 residents and 783,268 square feet of commercial uses may be added to the City by the year 2040. New residential and commercial development may involve the routine use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. Additional development in the City could increase transport of hazardous materials along the transportation corridors within the City. The additional development may result in and increased risk of accidental release of hazardous materials on a transportation route and exposure to hazardous materials to existing development within the City.

As stated above, buildout of the City envisioned in the GP/LCP Update would facilitate up to 783,268 new square feet of non-residential land uses by the year 2040. New commercial land uses could require use and storage of hazardous materials in proximity to residential uses. Additionally, mixed use areas that are identified in the City may result in new residential units adjacent to commercial and industrial land uses. Mixed use areas would be located mostly in the Downtown Core (Figure 2-6).

Hazardous Materials Storage and Disposal
Although the overall quantity of hazardous materials and waste generated in the City could incrementally increase as a result of implementation of the GP/LCP Update, all new developments that handle or use hazardous materials would be required to comply with the regulations, standards, and guidelines established by the USEPA, the State of California, San Luis Obispo County, and the City of Pismo Beach related to storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. The San Luis Obispo County EHS is designated as the local CUPA and performs inspections to prevent exposure to environmental health hazards for businesses and residents in San Luis Obispo County, including in the City of Pismo Beach.

California Building Code requirements prescribe safe accommodations for materials that present a moderate explosion hazard, high fire or physical hazard, or health hazards. Compliance with all applicable federal and State laws related to the storage of hazardous materials would maximize containment (through safe handling and storage practices described above) and provide for prompt and effective cleanup if an accidental release occurs.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-14
CalEPA requires all businesses that handle more than specified amounts of hazardous materials to submit business plans through the California Environmental Reporting System (CERS). Specifically, any new business that meets the specified criteria must submit a full hazardous materials disclosure report that includes an inventory of the hazardous materials generated, used, stored, handled, or emitted; and emergency response plans and procedures to be used in the event of a significant or threatened significant release of a hazardous material. The report must identify the procedures to follow for immediate notification to all appropriate agencies and personnel in the event of a release, identification of local emergency medical assistance appropriate for potential accident scenarios, contact information for all company emergency coordinators of the business, a listing and location of emergency equipment at the business, an evacuation plan, and a training program for business personnel.

For those employees that would work with hazardous materials, the amounts of hazardous materials that are handled at any one time are generally relatively small, reducing the potential consequences of an accident during handling. Business-specific practices would be required to comply with federal and State laws to eliminate or minimize the potential consequence of hazardous materials accidents. For example, employees who would work around hazardous materials are required to wear appropriate protective equipment, and safety equipment is routinely available in all areas where hazardous materials are used.

The San Luis Obispo County EHS allows businesses that handle and store hazardous materials above threshold quantities and are regulated by EHS through certification of Hazardous Materials Handler Annual Business Plan (San Luis Obispo County EHS 2018). CalOES provides emergency response to hazardous materials incidents in the City. Additional emergency response capabilities are not anticipated to be necessary to respond to the potential incremental increase in the number of incidents that could result from implementation of the GP/LCP Update. Furthermore, adherence to applicable regulations as discussed above would be required to reduce any potential consequences of a hazardous materials operational accident.

Demolition Activities
Demolition activities related to future development and re-development projects in the City would potentially result in emission of lead and asbestos. Lead-based materials and asbestos exposure are regulated by the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal OSHA). The California Code of Regulations (CCR), §1532.1, requires testing, monitoring, containment, and disposal of lead- based materials such that exposure levels do not exceed Cal OSHA standards. Under this rule, construction workers may not be exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an eight-hour period and exposure must be reduced to lower concentrations if the work day exceeds eight hours. Similarly, CCR §1529 sets requirements for asbestos exposure assessments and monitoring, methods of complying with exposure requirements, safety wear, communication of hazards, and medical examination of workers.

The San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) enforces Asbestos National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), which regulate the control of asbestos during the renovation and demolition of buildings under the Federal Clean Air Act (FCCA; SLOAPCD 2018a; SLOAPCD 2018b). The FCAA requires a thorough inspection for asbestos where demolition will occur and specifies work practices to control emissions, such as removing all asbestos-containing materials, adequately wetting all regulated asbestos-containing materials, sealing the material in leak tight containers and disposing of the asbestos-containing waste material as expediently as practicable (USEPA 2016).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-15
Hazardous Materials Transport
Hazardous materials may be transported into and throughout the City on State Route 1 (SR 1) or United States Highway 101 (US 101), and accidents on these roadways could result in the release of hazardous materials. Additionally, hazardous materials may be transported via aircraft or watercraft in the City, resulting in potential for hazardous materials release from accidents involving such vessels.

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Office of Hazardous Materials Safety regulates the transportation of hazardous materials, as described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and implemented by Title 13 of the CCR. Documentation of compliance with hazardous materials regulations codified in Titles 8, 22, and 26 of the California Code of Regulations, and their enabling legislation set forth in Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code, is required for all hazardous waste transport. In addition, individual contractors and property owners are required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations pertaining to the transport, use, disposal, handling, and storage of hazardous waste, including but not limited to, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

The San Luis Obispo County Fire Department provides emergency response to hazardous materials incidents in the City. Major hazardous materials accidents associated with residential, industrial, and retail-commercial uses are infrequent, and additional emergency response capabilities are not anticipated due to implementation of the GP/LCP Update.

The goals and policies in the existing Safety Element listed below would minimize any impacts related to the use, storage, transport, and release of hazardous materials in the City. These policies direct the City to develop and maintain a multi-hazard emergency response plan, make mutual aid agreements with other agencies, and regulate use, location, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials.
 S-19: Emergency Disaster Programs. The city shall develop and maintain a multi-hazard emergency response plan, which conforms to state and federal requirements. Objectives of the plan should be:

To save lives and protect property;
To provide a basis for direction and control of emergency operations; To provide for the continuity of government;
To repair and restore essential systems and services;
To provide for the protection, use and distribution of remaining resources; To coordinate operations with the civil defense emergency operations or other jurisdictions; To enable the City to be self-sufficient in the weeks following a severe earthquake, such as a magnitude 8.5 event on the San Andreas Fault;
To provide for emergency medical facilities, temporary shelter, emergency communications equipment and emergency water and food supplies.

To establish a priority system for roads, services and other vital needs in the event of an earthquake disaster.

To train volunteers to assist police, fire, and civil defense personnel after an earthquake.

The City should annually review its Emergency Plan to anticipate emergency services, which may be required under mutual aid agreements and in the event of major accidents, including a radiological accident at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Generating Station. The city's

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-16
Emergency Plan should also be reviewed and revised to anticipate an accident during the transportation of hazardous materials. Primary emphasis should be given to responding to an accident on the Southern Pacific rail line or U.S. Highway 101..  S-22: Hazardous Materials. A use permit shall be required for any commercial or industrial use involving potentially hazardous materials. Hazardous waste management plans shall be required as a condition of approval for such permits.

Compliance with existing applicable regulations and existing Safety Element policies would minimize risks from routine use, transport, handling, storage, disposal, and release of hazardous materials.

Oversight by the appropriate federal, State, and local agencies and compliance by new development with applicable regulations related to the handling and storage of hazardous materials would minimize the risk of the public’s potential exposure to these substances. Therefore, impacts from a hazard to the public or the environmental through routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 3: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school?
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.

Under the GP/LCP Update, new development of residential and commercial uses could result in increased use and storage of hazardous materials within one quarter mile of existing or proposed schools. Commercial uses that may use or store hazardous materials include gas stations, dry cleaners, auto-body shops, and medical laboratories. Schools in the City are discussed in Section

4.13, Public Services and Recreation, and as stated therein, there are two schools located in Pismo Beach: Shell Beach Elementary School and Judkins Middle School.

Since the GP/LCP Update does not include any specific development projects, the precise quantity of hazardous materials proposed for use by future commercial developments within the City is currently unknown. Accidental release or combustion of hazardous materials at new commercial developments could endanger residents or students in the surrounding community.

Hazardous materials and waste generated from future development would not pose a substantial health risk to nearby schools because all businesses that handle or have on-site storage of hazardous materials would be regulated by the San Luis Obispo County EHS and any additional elements as required in the California Health and Safety Code Article 1 Chapter 6.95 for Business Emergency Plan. As described in Section 4.6.1(h), both the federal and State governments require all businesses that handle more than a specified amount of hazardous materials to submit a business plan to San Luis Obispo County EHS. Compliance with regulatory requirements of the San Luis Obispo County EHS and existing applicable State and federal regulations would minimize the risks

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-17
associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to hazardous materials. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 4: Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 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 THE EXISTING SAFETY ELEMENT POLICIES WOULD MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT ON LISTED CONTAMINATED SITE. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

The DTSC maintains the Cortese List, which identifies sites where hazardous materials are present and cleanup activities are necessary. There are no facilities in the City on the Cortese List (DTSC 2018).

In the event that an unidentified underground storage tank (UST) is uncovered or disturbed during construction activities of future development envisioned in the GP/LCP, it would be closed and abandoned in place or removed, consistent with applicable regulations. Tank removal activities could pose both health and safety risks, such as the exposure of workers, tank handling personnel, and the public to tank contents or vapors. Potential risks, if any, posed by USTs would be minimized by managing the tank according to existing standards contained in Division 20, Chapters 6.7 and

6.75 (Underground Storage Tank Program) of the California Health and Safety Code as enforced and monitored by the Environmental Programs Division.

Existing federal and State regulatory requirements associated with hazardous waste contamination would minimize this impact. New development on documented hazardous materials sites in the City would be preceded by remediation under the supervision of applicable regulatory agencies.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-18
Threshold 6: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
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.

The GP/LCP Update would facilitate increased urban development and population growth in the City. Increased development in coastal areas would increase the number of residents in areas susceptible to coastal hazards described in the County of San Luis Obispo Multi-Hazard Emergency Response Plan or 2014 HMP, such as tsunamis, as well as radiation hazards from the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Population growth would incrementally increase traffic which could impacting evacuation routes in the City. As described under Impact HAZ-1, the existing identifies policies to protect and maintain public safety in the event of an emergency.

Until 2030, Diablo Canyon will continue to receive radioactive material and the risk of release of these materials would to remain the same as existing conditions. However, even after Diablo Canyon closes, nuclear material would still be stored on-site and (at least temporarily), and so some degree of risk of nuclear materials release would continue, although potentially at lower levels.

Additionally, during decommissioning hazardous materials may be transported within the City to the Pismo Beach Materials Handling Facility.

Although the Diablo Canyon Power Plant will not be relicensed to operate after 2030, there will continue to be some risk of nuclear material release from the site. The United States lacks a long- term repository for high-level radioactive waste produced by nuclear power plants; thus, this material is stored on a power plant site, even after the plant has ceased operations. While the Diablo Canyon facility and its on-site storage containers have a number of systems to prevent the release of radioactive material and are built to withstand natural disasters such as earthquakes, a radiation event is nevertheless possible.

Beyond advocating for policies that reduce the amount of nuclear material at the Diablo Canyon site or increase the safety standards that apply to the facility and any storage sites, the City cannot affect the chances of a release of radioactive material from Diablo Canyon. The odds of such an event are low, and the GP/LCP Update would not increase the likelihood of such an event.

Fire Department review of new development applications for adequate emergency access and evacuation routes, in addition to implementation of the existing Safety Element policies listed above, would ensure adequate emergency response. Therefore, potential impacts to emergency response and evacuation would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-19
Threshold 7: If located in or near a state responsibility area, would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
Threshold 8: If located in or near a state responsibility area, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Threshold 9: If located in or near a state responsibility area, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Threshold 10: If located in or near a state responsibility area, would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk?
Threshold 11: If located in or near a state responsibility area, would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? 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.

The City of Pismo Beach has been identified by CAL FIRE as being within a wildland-urban interface (CAL FIRE 2018), which includes areas where homes or other structures are built near or among lands prone to wildland fire. Pismo Beach’s proximity to undeveloped natural areas increases the potential for exposure to wildland fire.

The majority of the developed portion of Pismo Beach is located outside of a mapped fire hazard severity zone. However, as shown in Figure 4.8-1, within Pismo Beach, there are Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the northern portion of the City reaching into the foothills, northeast near Price Canyon, and northwest toward Avila Beach, as shown on Figure 4.8-1. Development within a very high fire hazard zone is unsafe when fire suppression activities would be impeded by lack of water, rugged terrain, or delayed response times. The majority of the areas mapped as very high fire hazard zones would be designated as Open Space under the GP/LCP Update, as shown in Figure 2-2.

The Open Space land use designation specifies that open space lands, including public and private parks, shall not be developed intensively with buildings or other structures. Therefore, the majority of the very high fire hazard zone would not be developed with residential dwelling units or other uses subject to substantial wildfire risk.

However, some areas in the very high fire hazard severity zone would be redesignated for low- density residential use. All development located in a very high fire hazard zone within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) would be required to comply with standards in California Government Code 51182 to minimize fire risk. These standards include maintaining a firebreak of at least 30 feet, removing all flammable vegetation and combustible growth, and additional firebreaks within 100 feet by the removal of all brush, flammable vegetation, or combustible growth. In addition, prior to construction of a new dwelling that requires a building permit, California Government Code 51182 requires that the owner obtain certification from the local building official that the building complies

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-20
with all applicable state and local fire standards. New development also would be subject to statewide standards for fire safety in the California Fire Code.

The GP/LCP Update would result in an increase in population that would result from project implementation is within the anticipated growth forecasts by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, as described in Section 4.12, Population and Housing. Therefore, the population increase encouraged by the project would not impair adopted emergency response and emergency evacuation plans, as it is within the growth projections of adopted plans. Additionally, as described in Section 4.13, Public Services, the project would not result in the need for new or expanded emergency services, including police and fire protection. Therefore, the implementation of emergency response procedures would not be affected. The project would not impair an emergency response or emergency evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant.

Prevailing winds in Pismo Beach are generally from the west off the Pacific. Therefore, the prevailing winds would generally move wildfire in the northeastern area and the related smoke and air pollutants, eastward, away from the urbanized areas of the City. Additionally, fire tends to burn and spread uphill, and the hillside area generally slopes uphill toward the east, away from the developed areas of the City.

As previously stated, the GP/LCP Update would result in infill development, and the majority of roads and utility infrastructure required for growth facilitated by project would be existing or would occur in currently developed areas, resulting in negligible temporary or ongoing environmental impacts. Because this development would occur in urbanized areas of Pismo Beach, where large tracts of vegetation cover are not present, the risk of wildfire would not be exacerbated.

Severe wildfires damage the forest or shrub canopy, the plants below, as well as the soil. This can result in increased runoff after intense rainfall, which can put homes and other structures below a burned area at risk of localized floods and landslides. Slopes at risk of wildfire in Pismo Beach are limited to the foothill and canyon areas on the eastern border of the City. If a severe wildfire were to occur in the foothill area, structures downslope would be at risk of flooding or landslides.

However, the GP/LCP Update would not change zoning this area or otherwise intensify uses to this downslope area that would increase risk of wildfire in the area. Other areas of Pismo Beach are generally flat to gently sloping, and developed with little to no wildfire fuels or vegetation cover prone to ignition. If a structural fire or large urban fire were to occur in the more flat and urbanized areas of Pismo Beach, the risk of flooding or landslides afterward would be negligible because of the nearly flat topography and because little soil would be exposed due to the developed conditions.

The following existing Safety Element policy provides guidance for conducting wildland fire analyses to avoid and minimize wildland fire risks.
 S-18: Wildland Fire Analysis. The City shall require a wildland fire analysis and plan as part of all future annexations. Additionally, the city shall prepare a wildland fire analysis and plan prior to implementation of the required open space/park, Conservation Element Policy CO-8. At a minimum these plans shall specify:

Appropriate fuel clearance areas
Building set-backs from undeveloped areas
Access to high hazard areas
Standards for evaluation of areas Identified turnouts and helispots in road system Water supplies
Manpower and equipment requirements.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.8-21
Compliance with the policy listed above would minimize potential wildfire and wildland fire impacts to future growth associated with the GP/LCP update, particularly in the open space areas of Pismo Beach. Additionally, with implementation of State requirements for very high fire hazard areas, California Fire Code standards for new structures, and fire hazard policies in the GP/LCP Update that apply to fire hazard areas, the impact of wildland fire hazards would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

4.8.4 Cumulative Impacts
The analysis in this section examines impacts of the GP/LCP Update on hazards and hazardous materials throughout the County of San Luis Obispo (the cumulative impact analysis area), and is cumulative in nature. Some types of hazards and hazardous materials impacts are related to site- and project-specific characteristics and conditions, and would not be significantly affected by other development outside of the City. As discussed in Impacts HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, there are existing federal, State, and local regulations that effectively reduce the inherent hazard associated with routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. Regulations and oversight, as outlined in the impacts analysis above, would also effectively reduce the potential for individual projects to create a hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, within the City as well as in San Luis Obispo County. Thus, cumulative impacts related to the transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials, upset conditions, hazardous emissions near schools, and project locations on known or unknown hazardous materials sites, would be less than significant.

The project would have no impact related to airport hazards, and would not contribute to a cumulative impact in this area.

Emergency response plans are generally specific to a particular city or county or parts thereof. For example, in the event of an imminent emergency in Pismo Beach, emergency response would typically be from police, ambulance and fire departments local to the City or County (through mutual aid agreements), and not from areas outside of San Luis Obispo County. Thus, the cumulative impacts related to conflict with emergency response plans would be less than significant.

The land use plan in the GP/LCP Update would facilitate development near areas mapped as very high fire hazards. The risk of loss from existing development and the anticipated growth within San Luis Obispo County would result in cumulative impacts related to wildland fire hazards due to development in or near fire hazard zones. As described in Impact HAZ-5, the project would result in a less than significant impact to wildfire, and compliance with City and County policies related to fire protection, as well as implementation of State requirements for very high fire hazard areas, California Fire Code standards for new structures, and fire hazard policies in the existing Safety Element, would minimize potential cumulative wildland fire impacts. Therefore, the project would not have a considerable contribution to cumulative wildland fire risk.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.8-22

This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-1

4.9 Hydrology/Water Quality
This section evaluates the potential environmental effects of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update related to water quality, drainage, groundwater, and flooding. The analysis includes a review of surface water, groundwater, inundation zones, and water quality. Water supply is discussed in Section 4.15, Utilities/Service Systems. Issues regarding wetlands and waters of the United States are discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources.

4.9.1 Setting
The City of Pismo Beach (City) is located on the Central Coast of California, midway between San Francisco and Los Angeles. Weather in the City is characterized by a typical Mediterranean coastal climate, which is generally dry in the summer with mild, wet winters. Rainfall is concentrated in the winter months with the wettest months being January, February, and March, which have average monthly rainfall totals of 3.58, 3.86, and 3.46 inches, respectively (U.S. Climate Data 2021). a. Surface Water
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) divides surface watersheds in California into 10 hydrologic regions. The City lies within the Central Coast hydrologic region, a large coastal region in central California that consists of approximately 7.22 million acres (DWR 2003). The hydrologic region includes all of Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara counties, most of San Benito County, and parts of San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Ventura counties (DWR 2003).

DWR subdivides hydrologic regions into hydrologic units. Within the Central Coast hydrologic region, the City is located entirely in the Estero Bay hydrologic unit (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2002). The Estero Bay hydrologic unit is an area that corresponds to the coastal watersheds west of the Coastal Range and stretches roughly 80 miles between the Santa Maria River and the Monterey County line. The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) governs basin planning and water quality within this hydrologic unit (Central Coast RWQCB 2019).

Within the Estero Bay hydrologic unit, the City extends across three watersheds: the San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed, Pismo Creek Watershed, and Arroyo Grande Creek Watershed (refer to Figure 4.9-1). The northwestern portion of the City is within the San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed.

The San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed drains approximately 83 square miles. San Luis Obispo Creek originates in the Santa Lucia Ranges and flows into the Pacific Ocean at the unincorporated community of Avila Beach. Land use in the San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed is dominated by agricultural land uses including ranches and open space, but also includes the urban core of the City of San Luis Obispo (SLO Watershed Project 2021).

The central portion of the City is within the Pismo Creek Watershed. The Pismo Creek Watershed drains approximately 41 acres. Pismo Creek originates in the Santa Lucia Ranges, generally follows Price Canyon Road, and flows to the Pacific Ocean at the Pismo Creek Estuary within the southeastern portion of the City of Pismo Beach. Land uses in the upper reaches of the Pismo Creek watershed are dominated by agricultural uses including vineyards, ranches, and row crops (SLO Watershed Project 2021).

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-2
Figure 4.9-1 Watersheds

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-3
The southeastern portion of the City is within the Arroyo Grande Creek Watershed. The Arroyo Grande Creek Watersheds drain approximately 95,998 acres. Arroyo Grande Creek originates in the Santa Lucia Ranges and flows into the Pacific Ocean through an estuary adjacent to the Oceano lagoon at Pismo State Beach. Land uses within the upper reaches of the Arroyo Grande Creek Watershed are dominated by agricultural land uses including vineyards, ranches and row crops. The urban cores of the cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach are located in the lower reaches of the watershed (SLO Watershed Project 2021).

Surface waters within the City are shown in Figure 4.9-2. The major surface water bodies in the City are Pismo Creek, Pismo Creek Estuary, and Meadow Creek, which are within the Pismo Creek Watershed in the southeastern portion of the City (SLO Watershed Project 2021). b. Groundwater
The southeastern portion of the City overlies the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. Figure 4.9-3 shows the boundaries of the underlying groundwater basin. There is no designated groundwater basin beneath the remainder of the City. The Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is an approximately 175 square mile alluvial basin that underlies the Santa Maria Valley, Nipomo Mesa, Tri-Cities Mesas, Arroyo Grande Plain, Nipomo Valley, Arroyo Grande Valley, and Pismo Creek Valley. The Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is bounded on the north by the San Luis and Santa Lucia Ranges, on the east by the San Rafael Mountains, on the south by the Solomon Hills and the San Antonio Creek Valley Groundwater Basin, on the southwest by the Casmalia Hills, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. The total storage capacity of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is greater than 14.9 million acre-feet. Natural recharge to the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is primarily from percolation of flow from the major streams, percolation of rainfall, and subsurface flow (DWR 2004).

Beginning in the late 1990s, groundwater pumping rights in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin were contested in court. The physical solution set forth in the Superior Court of California’s 2005 Stipulation and 2008 final order (“Adjudication Judgment”) established requirements and goals for the management of the entire Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. The Court defined three separate basin management areas: the Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA), Nipomo Mesa Management Area, and Santa Maria Valley Management Area. The southeastern portion of the City is located in the NCMA, which consists of the northwestern portion of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. The agencies that manage groundwater in the NCMA consist of the cites of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District. The Adjudication Judgment established a groundwater safe yield of 9,500 acre-feet per year (AFY) for the NCMA portion of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. It provides allotments of 5,300 AFY for agricultural irrigation, 4,000 AFY for urban use, and 200 AFY for subsurface outflow to the ocean (NCMA Technical Group 2019).

In the NCMA, water supply aquifers are located within alluvial deposits of the Paso Robles Formation, Careaga Formation, and Pismo Formation. Recharge to the NCMA comes primarily from precipitation, agricultural return flows, seepage from stream flow, and subsurface inflow from adjacent groundwater management areas. In addition, some imported water return flows occur from Lopez Lake and the California State Water Project (NCMA Technical Group 2019). Recharge in the City is primarily provided by percolation of flow from Pismo Creek (DWR 2004).

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-4
Figure 4.9-2 Surface Waters

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-5
Figure 4.9-3 Groundwater Basins

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-6
Water availability in the NCMA is constrained by water rights and water quality issues. Groundwater elevations along the coastline have dropped due to changing climatic conditions, including more frequent periods of extended drought resulting in reduced inflow into the groundwater basin, and increased demands on groundwater supplies resulting in a higher rate of groundwater extraction.

These lower groundwater levels decrease the flow of freshwater out toward the ocean, which reduces the effectiveness of groundwater as a barrier to seawater. From 2007 to 2009, groundwater production in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin peaked in comparison to the previous 30 years, contributing to a seawater intrusion event in the coastal wells in 2009. From 2011 to 2016, a period during which annual precipitation levels were consistently lower than average, groundwater elevations exhibited a steady decline to near or below sea level (NCMA Technical Group 2019).

As discussed in more detail in Section 4.15, Utilities/Service Systems, the City is currently working jointly with the cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach, and community of Oceano to develop Central Coast Blue. Central Coast Blue is a local recycled water sustainability project that will create a new, high quality, and reliable water supply. In addition to a new recycled water facility in the City of Grover Beach and process upgrades to the Pismo Beach wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District WWTP, the Central Coast Blue facility would include injection wells located outside the City to recharge the groundwater basin with purified water and a piping network to carry the purified water from the advanced treatment process to the injection wells. As of the date of this EIR, the Groundwater Basin Evaluation is currently underway.

The project is expected to be completed in 2023.
c. Water Quality
Surface Waters
Water quality in the City is governed by the Central Coast RWQCB, which sets water quality standards in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin (Basin Plan, Central Coast RWQCB 2019). The Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses for surface water and groundwater and establishes water quality objectives to attain those beneficial uses. The identified beneficial uses and water quality objectives to maintain or achieve those uses are together known as water quality standards. The Central Coast RWQCB designates beneficial uses for some individual water bodies in the Central Coast Basin. All other water bodies not designated individually are assigned the designated uses of municipal and domestic water supply and protection of recreation and aquatic life. Table 4.9-1 presents the designated beneficial uses listed in the Basin Plan for the surface waters in the City.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-7
Table 4.9-1 Beneficial Uses for Surface Waters in the City Water Body Beneficial Uses
Pismo Creek Municipal and Domestic Supply; Agricultural Supply; Industrial Service Supply; Groundwater Recharge; Water Contact Recreation; Non-Contact Water Recreation; Wildlife Habitat; Cold Freshwater Habitat; Warm Freshwater Habitat; Migration of Aquatic Organisms; Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development; Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance; Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species; Fresh Water Replenishment; Commercial and Sport Fishing Pismo Creek Estuary Groundwater Recharge, Water Contact Recreation, Non-Contact Water Recreation, Wildlife Habitat, Cold Freshwater Habitat, Migration of Aquatic Organisms; Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development; Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance; Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species; Estuarine Habitat; Commercial and Sport Fishing; Shellfish Harvesting
Meadow Creek Municipal and Domestic Supply, Agricultural Supply, Groundwater Recharge, Water Contact Recreation, Non-Contact Water Recreation, Wildlife Habitat, Cold Freshwater Habitat, Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance, Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species, Commercial and Sport Fishing
Source: Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board 2019 In the City, stormwater runoff transports pollutants from urban development. streets, parking lots, and other sources to creeks, estuaries, and the Pacific Ocean. Natural flow from headwaters located inland also contribute stormwater runoff with elevated concentrations of pesticides and nutrients from upstream agricultural activities. Activities such as land clearing, excavation and filling, illegal dumping, municipal operations, improper disposal of pet waste, and use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides can generate stormwater pollution. Water quality concerns resulting from stormwater pollution include suspended sediment, nutrients, pathogens, nitrates, chlorides, sodium, heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and low dissolved oxygen levels (City of Pismo Beach 2011).

When designated beneficial uses of a particular water body are compromised by poor water quality, Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify and list that water body as impaired. Once a water body has been deemed impaired, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) must be developed for each impairing water quality constituent. A TMDL is an estimate of the total load of pollutants from point, nonpoint, and natural sources that a water body can receive without exceeding applicable water quality standards (often with a “factor of safety” included, which limits the total load of pollutants to a level well below that which could cause the standard to be exceeded). Once established, the TMDL is allocated among current and future dischargers into the water body. In the City, Pismo Creek is listed on the 2014/2016 303(d) list as impaired as impaired for sodium, fecal coliform, turbidity, chloride, Escherichia coli (E. coli), and dissolved oxygen. There are no approved TMDLs for surface waters within the City.

Groundwater
As designated in the Basin Plan, beneficial uses of groundwater in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin include agricultural water supply, municipal and domestic water supply, and industrial use.

The primary constituents of concern in groundwater in the NCMA, as well as the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin as a whole, are total dissolved solids, including nitrates, which are primarily associated with agricultural activities (SLO County FCWCD 2019).

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-8
d. Flooding
Flooding during storm events occurs when the amount of rainfall exceeds the infiltration capacity of the surrounding landscape or the conveyance capacity of the storm water drainage system. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) delineates regional flooding hazards on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) as part of the National Flood Insurance Program. Higher flood risk zones are called Special Flood Hazard Areas; these areas have a 1 percent chance or greater of flooding in any given year (also called the 100-year floodplain). Areas have a 0.2 percent chance of flooding in any given year are called the 500-year floodplain. There are several flood-prone areas in the City, which are generally located in low-lying areas near Pismo Creek and the coastline.

Figure 4.9-4 shows the portions of the City that are located within the 100-year and 500-year FEMA designated flood hazard zones.

Inundation can also occur as a result of tsunamis and seiches. A tsunami is a wave generated by the sudden displacement of a large amount of water. Tsunamis can be triggered by earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or similar events that occur under the water or the shore. Impacts of tsunamis can be both immediate and long-term. While tsunamis are relatively rare, they pose risks to the entire waterfront and other low-lying areas of the City. These risks are generally greater in the southeastern portion of the City near the Pismo Beach Estuary. Figure 4.9-5 shows the potential tsunami inundation zone in the City. The majority of the tsunami inundation zone within the City lies with the Downtown Core and Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh planning areas.

Pismo Beach has had a history of tsunami events, with eight events occurring in the last 141 years.

Most of these events resulted in little to no wave run-up, except during the 1927 tsunami which resulted in 6-foot waves and the 1960, 2010, and 2011 tsunamis which resulted in 4-foot waves.

Much of the City is protected from tsunami inundation by the high bluffs, dunes, and wide beaches; however, the low-lying areas near Pismo Estuary are considered to be at moderate risk of tsunami inundation. With sea level rise, tsunami inundation areas could increase in the future.

Seiches are a related hazard that can occur when a sudden displacement event or very strong winds happen in an enclosed or semi-enclosed body of water such as a lake. Due to the lack of large lakes within the City, inundation by seiche is not a potential hazard within the City.

Lopez Lake is a reservoir near the City of Arroyo Grande and is formed by Lopez Dam, an earthen dam located along Arroyo Grande Creek. As shown in Figure 4.9-6, inundation of the southern portion of Pismo Beach within the Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh planning area could occur as a result of failure of Lopez Dam.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-9
Figure 4.9-4 Flood Hazard Zones

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-10
Figure 4.9-5 Tsunami Inundation Zones

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-11
Figure 4.9-6 Dam Inundation Zones

Source: County of San Luis Obispo 2019
Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-12
e. Sea Level Rise
Flood potential could increase substantially in the City due to sea level rise. Although sea levels have generally not risen enough to pose a substantial risk of flooding to Pismo Beach, future sea level rise may be great enough to exacerbate existing flooding and erosion. A Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment was prepared for the City in 2019, which evaluated sea level rise scenarios between 1.6 feet to 9.8 feet. According to the Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment, incremental sea level rise is anticipated to exacerbate existing erosion to the first row of development in the Bluffs area.

However, additional parcels beyond the first row of development in the Bluffs are not projected to be exposed to increased erosion until the extreme sea level rise scenarios of 8.2 feet and 9.8 feet rise. Sea level rise effects in the Downtown area is projected to be limited to temporary flooding during large storm events for sea level rise below the extreme sea level rise scenarios of 8.2 feet and

9.8 feet. In the low-lying areas, shoreline erosion and increased water surface elevations in Pismo Creek from sea level rise is projected to increase coastal flooding at the developments southeast of Pismo Creek. Tidal flooding of the recreational vehicle (RV) facilities southwest of Dolliver Street is predicted to occur by the 3.3 feet sea level rise scenario. In addition, tidal flooding is predicted to affect development northeast of Dolliver Street at the 6.6 feet sea level rise scenario.

4.9.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act (Clean Water Act), enacted by Congress in 1972 and amended several times since, is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the United States and forms the basis for several State and local laws throughout the country. The Clean Water Act established the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act gave the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) the authority to implement federal pollution control programs, such as setting water quality standards for contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry categories, and imposing requirements for controlling nonpoint-source pollution.

At the federal level, the Clean Water Act is administered by the U.S. EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. At the state and regional levels in California, the Clean Water Act is enforced by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the nine RWQCBs.

Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify water bodies that do not meet water quality objectives and are not supporting their beneficial uses. Each state must submit an updated biennial list, called the 303(d) list, to the U.S. EPA. In addition to identifying the water bodies that are not supporting beneficial uses, the list also identifies the pollutant or stressor causing impairment and establishes a priority for developing a control plan to address the impairment. If a water body is designated as “impaired,” then a TMDL is developed and identified for the affected water body. A TMDL establishes the maximum daily amount of a pollutant allowed in an identified water body and is used as a planning tool in addressing water quality impairments and improving water quality.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-13
Clean Water Act Section 401
Under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the RWQCBs have regulatory authority over actions in waters of the United States and/or the State of California through the issuance of water quality certifications, which are issued in conjunction with any federal permit (e.g., permits issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, described below). Section 401 of the Clean Water Act provides the SWRCB and the RWQCBs with the regulatory authority to waive, certify, or deny any proposed activity that could result in a discharge to surface waters of the State. To waive or certify an activity, these agencies must find that the proposed discharge would comply with State water quality standards, including those protecting beneficial uses and water quality. If these agencies deny the proposed activity, the federal permit cannot be issued. This water quality certification is generally required for projects involving the discharge of dredge or fill material to wetlands or other bodies.

Clean Water Act Section 402
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act requires that all construction sites on an acre or greater of land, as well as municipal, industrial and commercial facilities discharging wastewater or stormwater directly from a point source (e.g., pipe, ditch, or channel) into a surface water of the United States must obtain permission under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.

All NPDES permits are written to ensure that the surface water receiving discharges will achieve specified water quality standards.

According to federal regulations, NPDES permit coverage for stormwater discharges associated with construction activity can be obtained through individual state permits or general permits. Individual permitting involves the submittal of specific data on a single construction project to the appropriate permitting agency that will issue a site-specific NPDES permit to the project. NPDES coverage under a general permit involves the submittal of a Notice of Intent by the regulated construction project that they intend to comply with a general permit to be developed by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or a state with delegated permitting authority. In California, the NPDES program is administered by the SWRCB through the nine RWQCBs. Further discussion of the NPDES program and permits in California relevant to the City is provided in discussion of State regulations, below.

Clean Water Act Section 404
Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, proposed discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States require U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorization. Waters of the United States generally include tidal waters, lakes, ponds, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), and wetlands (with the exception of isolated wetlands).

National Flood Insurance Program
The National Flood Insurance Program is a program administered by FEMA to provide subsidized flood insurance for property owners in communities. The National Flood Insurance Program established regulations that limit development in flood-prone areas. The boundaries of flood-prone areas are delineated on FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rates Maps, which provide flood information and identify the flood hazard in the community. In certain high-risk areas, federally regulated or insured lenders require property owners to have flood insurance before issuing a mortgage.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-14
b. State
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970
The federal Clean Water Act places the primary responsibility for the control of water pollution and planning the development and use of water resources with the states, although it does establish certain guidelines for the states to follow in developing their programs. California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Porter-Cologne Act). The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs broad powers to protect water quality and is the primary vehicle for the implementation of California’s responsibility under the federal Clean Water Act. The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and RWQCBs the authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, to regulate discharges to surface water and groundwater, to regulate waste disposal sites, and to require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, oil, or petroleum product. Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan for its region. The regional plans are to conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and established by the SWRCB in its State water policy. The Porter-Cologne Act also provides that an RWQCB may include in its region a regional plan with water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste. The City is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Central Coast RWQCB (Region 3).

California Toxics Rule
Because California had not established a complete list of acceptable water quality criteria for toxic pollutants, EPA Region IX established numeric water quality criteria for toxic constituents in the form of the California Toxics Rule (CTR). The CTR provides water quality criteria for certain potentially toxic compounds for inland surface waters, enclosed bays, estuaries, and waters designated for human health or aquatic life uses. The CTR is often used by the RWQCBs when establishing water quality objectives and TMDLs. Although the CTR criteria do not apply directly to discharges of storm water runoff, they are utilized as benchmarks for toxics in urban runoff. The CTR is used as a benchmark to evaluate the potential ecological impacts of storm water runoff to receiving waters. The CTR establishes acute and chronic surface water quality standards for certain water bodies. Acute criteria provide benchmarks for the highest permissible concentration below which aquatic life can be exposed for short periods of time without deleterious effects. Chronic criteria provide benchmarks for an extended period of time (i.e., 4 days or more) without deleterious effects. The acute CTR criteria have a shorter relevant averaging period (less than 4 days) and provide a more appropriate benchmark for comparison for storm water flows.

CTR criteria apply to the receiving water body and are calculated based on the probable hardness values of the receiving waters. At higher hardness values for receiving waters, certain constituents (including copper, lead, and zinc) are more likely to be complexed (bound with) components in the water column. This in turn reduces the bioavailability and resulting potential toxicity of these metals.

Phase II Municipal Storm Water Permit
The Municipal Storm Water Permitting Program regulates storm water discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). The NPDES MS4 permits in California are issued in two phases by the SWRCB and RWQCBs. Phase I MS4 permits are issued by the RWQCBs to medium (i.e.,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-15
serving between 100,000 and 250,000 people) and large (i.e., serving more than 250,000 people) municipalities. Most of these permits are issued to a group of co-permittees encompassing an entire metropolitan area. The Phase II MS4 Permit is issued by the SWRCB and is applicable to smaller municipalities (i.e., populations of less than 100,000 people) and nontraditional small MS4s (e.g., military bases, public campuses, and prison and hospital complexes). The Phase II MS4 Permit (Waste Discharge Requirements [WDRs] for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems [MS4s] General Permit], Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000004) became effective on July 1, 2013 and covers Phase II permittees statewide, including the City of Pismo Beach. The Phase I and Phase II MS4 Permits require the permittees to develop a storm water management program and individual dischargers to develop and implement Storm Water Quality Management Plans (SWMP) to manage discharges to municipal storm drain systems.

Construction Activity General Stormwater Permit
The General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002 (Construction General Permit), adopted by the SWRCB, regulates construction activity that includes clearing, grading, and excavation resulting in soil disturbance of at least one acre of total land area. The Construction General Permit authorizes the discharge of stormwater to surface waters from construction activities. The Construction General Permit requires that all developers of land where construction activities will occur over more than 1 acre do the following:
 Complete a Risk Assessment to determine pollution prevention requirements pursuant to the three risk levels established in the General Permit;
 Eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the United States;
 Develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that specifies BMPs that will reduce pollution in stormwater discharges to the Best Available Technology/ Economically Achievable/Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology standards;  Perform inspections and maintenance of all BMPs; and
 Conduct stormwater sampling, if required based on risk level.

To obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit, a project applicant must electronically file all permit registration documents with the SWRCB prior to the start of construction. Permit registration documents must include a:
 Notice of Intent (NOI),
 Risk Assessment,
 Site map,
 SWPPP,
 Annual fee, and
 Signed certification statement.

Typical BMPs contained in SWPPPs are designed to minimize erosion during construction, stabilize construction areas, control sediment, and control pollutants from construction materials. The SWPPP must also include a discussion of the program to inspect and maintain all BMPs.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-16
California Coastal Act
The California Coastal Act of 1976 (Coastal Act) and the California Coastal Commission (CCC), the state’s coastal protection and planning agency, were established by voter initiative in 1972 to plan for and regulate new development, and to protect public access to and along the shoreline. The Coastal Act considers water quality and water-related public safety concerns as issues of public importance. To provide maximum public access to the coast and public recreation areas, the Coastal Act directs each local government located within the coastal zone to prepare a Local Coastal Program consistent with Section 30501 of the Coastal Act, in consultation with the Coastal Commission and with public participation.

California Ocean Plan
The Ocean Plan is one of five statewide water quality control plans established by the SWRCB to preserve and enhance California’s territorial ocean waters for the use and enjoyment of the public.

The Ocean Plan provides control for the discharge of waste to ocean waters and ensures the protection of beneficial uses of ocean waters. Discharge of waste can include stormwater runoff, municipally-treated sewage outflow, and other discharges by industry under RWQCB and SWRCB permits. The Ocean Plan sets forth water quality objectives for protection of marine aquatic life as well as objectives for bacterial, physical, chemical, and biological characteristics for ocean waters (SWRCB 2019).

The Ocean Plan is reviewed every three years to guarantee its water quality objectives are adequate to prevent degradation of marine species and protect public health. The Ocean Plan was first adopted by the SWRCB on July 6, 1972 and has been amended several times. The most recent amendment to the Ocean Plan was in 2019 to incorporate revised statewide bacteria water quality objectives and implementation options to protect recreational users from the effects of pathogens (SWRCB 2019).

The water quality objectives in the Ocean Plan are applicable to all point source discharges to the ocean, including effluent from the Pismo Beach WWTP. The effluent limits are imposed such that the Ocean Plan water quality objectives are not exceeded in the receiving water upon completion of initial dilution. If a conflict exists between the Ocean Plan water quality objectives and the NPDES permit effluent limits, the more stringent provision apply.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 is a comprehensive three-bill package that Governor Jerry Brown signed into California state law in September 2014. The SGMA provides a framework for sustainable management of groundwater supplies by local authorities, with a limited role for State intervention, if necessary, to protect the resource. The plan is intended to ensure a reliable groundwater supply for California for years to come. The SGMA requires governments and water agencies of high- and medium-priority basins to halt overdrafts of groundwater basins. The SGMA requires the formation of local groundwater sustainability agencies that are required to adopt groundwater sustainability plans to manage the sustainability of the groundwater basins.

Adjudicated basins, such as the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, are exempt from forming a groundwater sustainability agency and developing a groundwater sustainability plan (County of San Luis Obispo 2021). However, SGMA requires that watermasters or managers of adjudicated groundwater basins annually submit information to DWR on groundwater elevations,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-17
groundwater production, surface water supply used or available for groundwater recharge, total water use, change in groundwater storage, and annual report submitted to court.

Assembly Bill 70
Assembly Bill 70 requires cities and counties that have “unreasonably approved” development in an area with known flood risks to share liability for flood control damage with State entities.

Assembly Bill 162
Assembly Bill 162 requires cities and counties to address flood-related matters in the land use, conservation, safety, and housing elements of their general plans. The general plan must contain a statement of development policies and include a diagram or diagrams and text setting forth objectives, principles, standards, and plan proposals. The land use element must identify and annually review those areas covered by the plan that are subject to flooding identified by flood plain mapping prepared by FEMA. The conservation element must identify rivers, creeks, streams, flood corridors, riparian habitats, and land that may accommodate floodwater for the purposes of groundwater recharge and stormwater management. The safety element is required to identify information regarding:
 Flood hazards, including flood hazard zones
 National Flood Insurance Program maps published by FEMA  Information about flood hazards that is available from the United States Army Corps of Engineers
 Dam failure inundation maps
 Awareness Floodplain Mapping Program maps
 Levee protection zone maps
 Historical data on flooding
 Existing and planned development in flood hazard zones, including structures, roads, utilities, and essential public facilities
 Local, State, and federal agencies with responsibility for flood protection.  The safety element must establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, objectives, and feasible implementation measures based on the information identified above for the protection of the community from unreasonable risks of flooding, including but not limited to:
 Avoiding or minimizing the risks of flooding to new development  Evaluating whether new development should be located in flood hazard zones, and identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if new development is located in a flood hazard zone
 Maintaining the structural and operational integrity of essential public facilities during flooding  Locating, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of flood hazard zones  Establishing cooperative working relationships among public agencies with responsibility for flood protection.

California Drainage Law, Government Code 65302
Government Code Section 65302(a) requires cities and counties to review the Land Use, Conservation, and Safety elements of the general plan "for the consideration of flood hazards,

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-18
flooding, and floodplains" to address flood risks. The code also requires cities and counties to annually review the land use element within “those areas covered by the plan that are subject to flooding identified by floodplain mapping prepared by FEMA or the California DWR.” c. Regional and Local
Water Quality Control Plan
The Central Coast RWQCB has adopted a Basin Plan for their region of responsibility that delineates water resource area boundaries based on hydrological features. For the purposes of achieving and maintaining water quality protection, specific beneficial uses have been identified for each of the surface waters and groundwater management zones described in the Basin Plan. Once beneficial uses are designated, appropriate water quality objectives are established, and programs that maintain or enhance water quality are implemented to ensure the protection of beneficial uses.

The Basin Plan also established implementation programs to achieve water quality objectives to protect beneficial uses and require monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of the programs. These objectives must comply with the State antidegradation policy (SWRCB Resolution No. 68-16), which is designed to maintain high-quality waters while allowing some flexibility if beneficial uses are not unreasonably affected.

Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements
The Central Coast RWQCB adopted the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (Resolution R3- 2013-0032) in July 2013, which outlines runoff reduction and treatment requirements. Specifically, Resolution R3-2013-0032 outlines post-construction requirements (PCRs) for development projects in the Central Coast Region. The PCRs mandate that development projects use Low Impact Development (LID) to detain, retain, and treat runoff. LID incorporates and conserves on-site natural features, together with constructed hydrologic controls to more closely mimic pre-development hydrology and watershed processes. Regulated projects include all new development or redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surfaces.

Low Threat Discharge Permit
The Central Coast RWQCB has a general permit for discharges that pose a low threat to water quality (Waste Discharge Requirements National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Discharges with Low Threat to Water Quality; Order No. R3-2017-0042, NPDES No. CAG993001). Its provisions cover discharges of untreated wastewater streams that will not affect receiving water quality, including groundwater dewatering during construction. This permit specifies the discharge prohibitions, receiving water limitations, and monitoring and reporting program requirements for discharges. Permittees are required to monitor their discharges to ensure that water quality standards are not exceeded.

Pismo Beach Stormwater Management Program
The Pismo Beach Stormwater Management Program (SWMP) serves as a guide for developing and implementing the Phase II MS4 Permit requirements for stormwater discharges and describes recommended BMPs that address the six required minimum control measures required by the Phase II MS4 Permit. The SWMP also describes the reporting and monitoring plan the City will follow to verify the objectives of the plan are being met.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-19
The Phase II MS4 Permit requires the City to develop a Program Effectiveness Assessment and Improvement Plan (PEAIP), which tracks and assesses the long-term effectiveness and success of the City's stormwater program. Additionally, the Phase II MS4 Permit requires the City to submit an annual summary that describes the implementation of the PEAIP, summarizing data obtained through effectiveness assessment measures, describes short and long term progress of the stormwater program, and provides an analysis of the data to improve program effectiveness in order to protect water quality.

In compliance with the Phase II MS4 Permit, the City of Pismo Beach developed a Stormwater Program Guidance Document. Under this program, the City educates the community in stormwater pollution prevention, regulate stormwater run-off from construction sites, investigate non- stormwater discharges and reduce non-stormwater run-off from municipal operations.

Pismo Beach Municipal Code
Section 13.14.210 of the City Municipal Code prohibits unauthorized discharges to the City’s storm drain system. Section 13.28.150 requires preparation of a SWPPP for any activity that may contribute pollution to the City storm drain system, and implementation of BMPs for new development and redevelopment projects.

Section 16.52.020 requires that parcel and tentative maps comply with requirements for grading and erosion control. Section 17.078.020 includes requirements for drainage, runoff, and erosion controls in for projects within areas with slopes greater than 10 percent.

Chapter 15.44 of the Municipal Code regulates development within flood hazard areas, including requirements that new development be elevated above the base flood elevations.

4.9.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology
This section describes the potential environmental impacts of implementation of the GP/LCP Update associated with hydrology and water quality. The impact analysis is based on an assessment of baseline conditions for the City, including watersheds and surface waters, groundwater, and inundation areas, as described above under Section 4.9.1, Setting. This analysis identifies potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality resulting from construction, operation, and maintenance activities of future development that could occur under the GP/LCP Update. Potential impacts to hydrology and water quality are evaluated based on the adherence to local, State, and federal standards and implementation of BMPs for control of surface runoff and reduction of pollutants in stormwater runoff.
b. Significance Thresholds
The following thresholds of significance are based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. For the purposes of this EIR, implementation of the GP/LCP Update may have a significant impact if it would:

Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface of ground water quality;
Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin;

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-20
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; (iv) Impede or redirect flood flows
In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan
The Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is designated as very-low threat by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) pursuant to the SGMA. In addition, the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is adjudicated and exempt from forming a groundwater sustainability agency and developing a groundwater sustainability plan pursuant to SGMA. Because there is not an applicable sustainable groundwater management plan, conflict with sustainable groundwater movements plans (Threshold 5) is not discussed further.
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Threshold 3(i): Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Threshold 3(ii): Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Threshold 3(iii): Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Threshold 3(iv): Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Threshold 5: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan?

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-21
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 ELELMENT 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.

Construction
Construction activities for new development and redevelopment under the GP/LCP Update could result in the alteration of existing drainage patterns and soil erosion due to earth-moving activities such as stockpiling, excavation, trenching, dredging, paving, soil compaction, cut and fill activities, and grading. Disturbed soils would be susceptible to erosion from wind and rain, resulting in sediment transport via stormwater runoff from the construction sites. The types of pollutants contained in runoff from construction sites would be typical of urban and suburban areas, and may include sediments and contaminants such as oils, fuels, paints, and solvents. Additionally, other pollutants, such as nutrients, trace metals, and hydrocarbons, can attach to sediment and be transported to downstream drainages and ultimately into collecting waterways, contributing to degradation of water quality.

Potential water quality impacts would be specific to individual construction locations. Local topography, the amount of soil disturbance, the duration that disturbed soil would be exposed, the amount of rainfall and wind that would occur during construction, and the proximity of the nearest water body all affect the potential for water quality degradation during construction.

Individual construction activities that disturb one or more acres would be subject to the requirements of the General Construction Permit. The General Construction Permit requires development and implementation of a SWPPP, which describes the erosion and sediment controls BMPs, good housekeeping BMPS, runoff water quality monitoring, BMP inspections, means of waste disposal, maintenance responsibilities, and non-storm water management controls to be implemented during construction. Inspection of construction sites before and after storms is also required to identify storm water discharge from the construction site, required BMP maintenance, and to identify and additional erosion and sediment controls that may be needed. Compliance with the Construction General Permit is reinforced through the City Municipal Code (Sections 13.28.150 and 16.52.020) and the City’s Stormwater Management Program. Pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code, all construction activities requiring a grading permit shall implement a SWPPP and erosion and sediment BMPs during construction.

In addition, the City Director of Public Works, or designee, has the authority to inspect construction sites, including the erosion and sediment control measures. The City Director of Public Works is authorized to issue a notice of violation and/or stop work order for violations of the City’s grading, erosion control, and stormwater discharge requirements. Likewise, the Central Coast RWQCB or its designee may conduct periodic monitoring of construction sites for compliance with the Construction General Permit, including inspections of the construction BMPs and erosion control measures implemented pursuant to the SWPPP.

Projects requiring excavation have the potential to encounter groundwater, particularly in the southeastern portion of the City above the Santa Maria groundwater basin. Excavation in the remainder of the City may encounter perched groundwater (i.e., subsurface water not associated with a groundwater basin). If groundwater is encountered during construction, it may be discharged to the storm drain system which can degrade water quality. Any groundwater dewatering would be

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-22
required to comply with the Waste Discharge Requirements National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Discharges with Low Threat to Water Quality; Order No. R3-2017-0042, NPDES No. CAG993001). This permit requires testing of discharge to ensure water quality standards are not exceeded.

In addition to the regulatory requirements discussed above, implementation of GP/LCP Conservation and Open Space Element policies listed below would also reduce the potential for water quality degradation, including from erosion, during construction activities.  Policy COS-2.7: Minimization of Water Quality Impacts During Construction. Development shall minimize water quality impacts during construction by minimizing land disturbance and soil compaction, minimizing erosion and sedimentation, and minimizing the discharge of other pollutants resulting from construction activities.
 Action COS-2.7b: Minimize Land Disturbance During Construction. When reviewing development applications, the City shall require applicants to exemplify how the development minimizes land disturbance activities of construction (e.g., clearing, grading, cut-and-fill, and soil compaction), especially in erosive areas (including steep slopes, unstable areas, and erosive soils), to avoid detrimental water quality impacts caused by increased erosion or sedimentation.
 Action COS-2.7c: Minimize Erosion and Sedimentation During Construction. Require that construction be conducted using measures to minimize soil erosion and off-site transport of sediment and debris originating at the construction site.  Action COS-2.7d: Minimize Discharge of Construction Pollutants. Development shall minimize pollution of runoff and coastal waters by construction chemicals and materials through waste management BMPs and “good housekeeping” BMPs.  Action COS-2.7e: Avoid Construction Staging on the Beach. The City shall require any construction occurring on the beach or beach fronting lots to provide the location of their staging areas within their project plans prior to the issuance of a grading permit.

Construction on or adjacent to the sandy beach shall avoid staging/material storage on sandy beaches or within any other biological resource area.  Action COS-4.10e: Erosion Control Measures. Any development within the ESHA buffer shall incorporate erosion control measures such as distillation basins and energy dissipaters, within grading plans, as necessary.

Compliance with the regulations and GP/LCP Update goals and policies discussed above would reduce the risk of water degradation within the City from soil erosion and other pollutants related to construction activities. Because violations of water quality standards would be minimized through compliance with existing regulations and the GP/LCP Update goals and policies, impacts to water quality from construction activities facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Operation
Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would result in long-term alterations to drainage patterns in the City, such as changes in ground surface permeability due to new paving, and changes in topography due to grading and excavation. If uncontrolled, operation of future development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update could result in increased stormwater runoff and the addition of sediment, silt, and contaminants such as oil, grease, metals, and landscaping chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, etc.) into the City’s stormwater drainage system, and ultimately untreated

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-23
discharge into surface waters and the Pacific Ocean. Such a discharge could be a potential violation of the Clean Water Act and NPDES regulations, depending on the pollutant and quantity discharged.

Discharges to the City’s storm drain system is regulated by the Phase II MS4 Permit. The purpose of this permit is to require implementation of BMPs to reduce the discharge of stormwater and pollutants into the City’s storm drain system. To ensure compliance with the permit requirements and conditions of the Phase II MS4 Permit, Section 13.14.210 of the City Municipal Code prohibits unauthorized discharges to the City’s storm drain system. Section 13.28.150 requires implementation of BMPs for new development and redevelopment projects. Section 17.078.020 includes requirements for drainage, runoff, and erosion controls in for projects within areas with slopes greater than 10 percent.

Post-construction stormwater management requirements for new development were adopted by the Central Coast RWQCB in 2013. These requirements are applicable to development and redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface.

Post-construction requirements include low impact design measures, treating runoff before discharge from a project site, prevention of off-site discharge up to the 95th percentile rainfall event, and controlling off-site discharge so that peak flows do not exceed pre-existing flows for the 2-year and 10-year event. The post-construction requirements also require routine maintenance of permanent BMPs intended to reduce stormwater runoff, protect water quality, and prevent discharges of pollutants to the municipal stormwater system. Compliance with these requirements would also minimize erosion and siltation that could adversely affect water quality in the City.

The policies and actions of GP/LCP Conservation and Open Space Element policies listed below would also reduce the potential for hydrology and water quality impacts during operation of new development or redevelopment within the City.
 Policy COS-1.5: Water Quality: The City shall protect and restore the City’s water quality through identifying and managing point sources and non-point sources.  Action COS-2.5a: Meadow Creek Watershed Protection. Runoff from any new development projects within the Meadow Creek watershed, which drains to the marsh, shall be evaluated with a hydrology report to determine if its runoff exceeds the existing volume rate of flow or suspended solids content. Existing rates should not be exceeded unless restoration plans are developed. The utilization of permeable ground materials to the greatest extent possible is encouraged as one method of limiting increased runoff. Erosion control measures, such as distillation basins and energy dissipaters, shall be incorporated within any grading plan, as necessary.
 Action COS-2.5b: Watershed Protection. Existing and new development shall not degrade Pismo Beach’s coastal resources or water quality. The City shall require development projects to comply with water quality and watershed protection requirements per the 2013 Phase II Small MS4 General Permit (Order No. 2013-0001 DWQ, effective July 1, 2013, or any amendment to or re-issuance thereof), approved by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The City shall continue collaborations with other San Luis Obispo County jurisdictions on the development and implementation of watershed protection principles and implementation of best management practices for specific land uses.  Action COS-2.5c: Minimize Adverse Impacts from Stormwater Outfall Discharges. Avoid construction of new stormwater outfalls, and direct stormwater to existing facilities with appropriate treatment and filtration, where feasible. Where new stormwater outfalls

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-24
cannot be avoided, plan, site, and design outfalls to minimize adverse impacts to coastal resources from outfall discharges.
 Policy COS-2.6: Coastal Waters. The biological productivity of coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marine organisms and for the protection of human health shall be maintained and, where feasible, restored through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of waste water discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion of ground water supplies and substantial interference with surface waterflow, encouraging waste water reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas that protect riparian habitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.
 Action COS-2.6a: Transport of Pollutants from Development. Plan, site, and design development to minimize the transport of pollutants from development into runoff and coastal waters. The City shall require adequate provision of erosion control measures as part of new development to minimize sedimentation of streams and drainage channels.  Action COS-2.6b: Minimize Changes in the Site’s Runoff Flow Regime. Plan, site, and design development to minimize post-development changes in the site’s runoff flow regime (i.e., volume, flow rate, timing, and duration), to preserve the pre-development hydrologic balance and prevent adverse changes in the hydrology of coastal waters (i.e., hydromodification).
 Action COS-2.6c: Address Runoff Management Early in Site Design Planning. Address runoff management early in site design planning and alternatives analysis, integrating existing site characteristics that affect runoff (such as topography, drainage patterns, vegetation, soil conditions, natural hydrologic features, and infiltration conditions) in the design of strategies that minimize post-development changes in the runoff flow regime, control pollutant sources, and, where necessary, remove pollutants.  Action COS-2.6d: Low Impact Development Strategies. New development and redevelopment shall give precedence to the use of a Low Impact Development (LID) approach to stormwater management, which integrates site design strategies (e.g., minimizing the building footprint, preserving vegetation, and protecting natural drainage features) with small-scale, distributed Best Management Practices (BMPs) (e.g., permeable pavement surfaces, rain barrels and cisterns, and bioretention techniques) to replicate the site’s natural hydrologic balance through infiltration, evapotranspiration, harvesting, detention, or retention of stormwater close to the source, to the maximum extent appropriate and feasible.
 Action COS-2.6e: Protect and Restore Hydrologic Features. Plan, site, and design development to protect and, where feasible, restore hydrologic features such as stream corridors, drainage swales, topographical depressions, groundwater recharge areas, floodplains, and wetlands.
 Action COS-2.6f: Preserve or Enhance Vegetation. Plan, site, and design development to preserve or enhance non-invasive vegetation, to achieve water quality benefits such as transpiration, interception of rainfall, pollutant uptake, shading of waterways to maintain water temperature, and erosion control.
 Action COS-2.h: Infiltration. Modify the Stormwater regulations in the Municipal Code maintain or enhance on-site infiltration of runoff, where appropriate and feasible. If on-site infiltration of runoff may potentially result in adverse impacts, including, but not limited to, geologic instability, flooding, or pollution of coastal waters, the development shall

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-25
substitute alternative BMPs (e.g., flow-through planter box, green roof, or cistern) that do not involve on-site infiltration in order to minimize changes in the runoff flow regime to the extent appropriate and feasible. Alternative BMPs shall also be used where infiltration BMPs are not adequate to treat a specific pollutant of concern attributed to the development, or where infiltration practices would conflict with regulations protecting groundwater.  Action COS-2.6g: Impervious Surfaces. New development shall be planned, sited and designed to minimize the installation of impervious surfaces, where feasible, especially impervious areas directly connected to the municipal storm drain system, in order to minimize increases in stormwater or dry weather runoff. Redevelopment projects shall, where feasible, increase the area of pervious surfaces.  Action COS-2.6i: Priority Development Projects. Require a Water Quality Management Plan for Priority Development Projects, (PDPs) as defined in the NPDES MS4 Permit, that includes permanent post-construction treatment control BMPs to address pollutants of concern specific to the PDP’s land use and impairments of surface waters to which the project drains. PDPs will also require post-construction runoff control BMPs to minimize adverse changes in the PDP’s runoff flow regime. The Water Quality Management Plan will provide for the operation and maintenance of the permanent treatment control and runoff control BMPs and shall be implemented for the life of the development.  Action COS-2.7a: Use Source Control BMPs. Require new development to incorporate Source Control BMPs, which can be structural features (such as a roof over an outdoor storage area) or operational actions (such as proper application of pesticides and fertilizers) to control pollutant sources and keep pollutants segregated from runoff, in order to minimize the transport of pollutants in runoff from the development.  Action COS-2.7f: Manage BMPs for the Life of the Development. Modify the Stormwater regulations in the Municipal Code to include to implement appropriate protocols to manage BMPs (including installation and removal, ongoing operation, inspection, and maintenance) in all development, to protect coastal water resources for the life of the development.  Policy COS-2.8: Water Quality BMPs in New Development and Redevelopment. All Coastal Development Permits (CDPs) shall incorporate Best Management Practices in new development and redevelopment.
 Action COS-2.8a: Stormwater Runoff Plans. All projects that require a CDP and have the potential for adverse water quality or hydrology impacts to coastal waters shall prepare both a construction-phase and a post-development runoff plan that includes drainage plans and sediment- and pollution-control measures. To the maximum extent feasible, development shall include specific measures to help reduce potential pollutants and water quality impairment, including controlling the disposal of chemicals and hazardous materials, controlling the use of pesticides and herbicides, maintaining existing storm water capture programs, applying low impact development designs and requiring on-site retention and/or reuse of runoff. The City shall utilize ecologically responsible pest control methods and integrated pest management to the extent feasible on public property and encourage this practice on private property. Drainage plans and erosion, sediment and pollution control measures shall be required as conditions of approval of every application for new development that has the potential to impair water quality.  Action COS-2.8b: Runoff Plan Requirements. Runoff management shall be addressed early in the development’s planning and design stages. As part of CDP approval, the City shall require that the runoff plans include stormwater pollution control and runoff control

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-26
measures or systems, and a maintenance program, as necessary, for both the construction- phase and post-development runoff plans including erosion controls, sediment traps and filtering of off-site storm water flows, capture of site-generated pollutant sources, street sweeping of dirt tracked off-site, litter control, post-construction monitoring, and other best management practices. Construction-phase water quality impacts shall be avoided by minimizing the disturbed area, phasing grading activities, implementing soil stabilization and pollution prevention measures, and preventing unnecessary soil compaction. Development that has the potential for water quality impairment shall, at a minimum, be designed to meet National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System stormwater runoff requirements. The post-development maintenance program shall be for the life of the development. The level of detail provided to address the plan’s requirements shall be commensurate with the type and scale of the development, and with the potential for adverse water quality and hydrology impacts to coastal waters.

In addition, implementation of the following existing Safety Element goals and policies regarding bluff erosion would also apply in relevant areas:
 S-3: Bluff Set-Backs. All structures shall be set back a safe distance from the top of the bluff in order to retain the structures for a minimum of 100 years, and to neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability or destruction of the site or require construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs. The City shall determine the required setback based on the following criteria:
a. For development on single-family residential lots subdivided prior to January 23,1981, the minimum bluff setback shall be 25 feet from the top of the bluff (bluff-top is defined as the point at which the slope begins to change from near horizontal to more vertical).

A geologic investigation may be required at the discretion of the City Engineer, and a greater setback may be applied as the geologic study would warrant. b. For all other development, a geologic study shall be required for any development proposed.
 S-4 Bluff-top Guidelines/Geologic Studies. Site-specific geologic reports shall incorporate the information requirements contained in the State Coastal Commission's guidelines for Geologic Stability of Bluff-top Development, as adopted May 3, 1977 and updated on December 16, 1981. This guideline is included in the Appendix. The report shall consider, describe and analyze the following:

A site-specific erosion control plan to assure that the development would not contribute to the erosion or failure of any bluff face shall be prepared by a licensed engineer qualified in hydrology and soil mechanics for all bluff-top development.

Cliff geometry and site topography, extending the surveying work beyond the site as needed to depict unusual geomorphic conditions that might affect the site. (See guidelines in the Appendix.)
Historic, current and foreseeable cliff erosion, including investigation of recorded land surveys and tax assessment records in addition to the use of historic maps and photographs where available and possible changes in shore configuration and sand transport.

Geologic conditions, including soil, sediment and rock types and characteristics in addition to structural features, such as bedding, joints, and faults.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-27
Evidence of past or potential landslide conditions, the implications of such conditions for the proposed development and the potential effects of the development on landslide activity.

Impact of construction activity on the stability of the site and adjacent area.

Ground and surface conditions and variations, including hydrologic changes caused by the development (i.e., introduction of irrigation water to the ground water system); alterations in surface drainage.

Potential erodibility of the site and mitigating measures to be used to ensure minimized erosion problems during and after construction (i.e., landscaping and drainage design).

Effects of marine erosion on seacliffs;
Potential effects of seismic forces resulting from a maximum credible earthquake; and Any other factors that might affect slope stability.
 S-5: Development on Bluff Face. No additional development shall be permitted on any bluff face, except engineered staircases or access-ways to provide public beach access, and pipelines for scientific research or coastal dependent industry. Drain- pipes shall be allowed only where no other less environmentally damaging drain system is feasible and the drainpipes are designed and placed to minimize impacts to the bluff face, toe and beach. Drainage devices extending over the bluff face shall not be permitted if the property can be drained away from the bluff face, toe and beach.
 S-6: Shoreline Protective Devices. Shoreline protective devices, such as seawalls, revetments, groins, breakwaters, and riprap shall be permitted only when necessary to protect existing principal structures, coastal dependent uses, and public beaches in danger of erosion. If no feasible alternative is available, shoreline protection structures shall be designed and constructed in conformance with Section 30235 of the Coastal Act and all other policies and standards of the City's Local Coastal Program. Devices must be designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply, and to maintain public access to and along the shoreline. Design and construction of protective devices shall minimize alteration of natural landforms, and shall be constructed to minimize visual impacts. The city shall develop detailed standards for the construction of new and repair of existing shoreline protective structures and devices. As funding is available, the city will inventory all existing shoreline protective structures within its boundaries.
 S-7 Hazards Overlay Zone. Areas where bluff-top hazards exist shall be included within and subject to the requirements of the Hazards Overlay Zone.

The projected growth from new development envisioned in the GP/LCP Update would increase wastewater generation and increase treatment demand at the Pismo Beach WWTP. However Central Coast Blue, anticipated to be completed in 2023, would assist with the treatment of wastewater and capture of water for recharge of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin and would provide a new source of recycled water. The Pismo Beach WWTP currently treats and discharges an average of 0.9 million gallons per day (mgd) and is permitted to discharge up to 1.9 mgd to the Pacific Ocean under its existing Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Order No. R3-2015-0016 as of February 2016 (City of Pismo Beach 2015). The permit requires that discharges from the plant meet applicable water quality standards before release into the Pacific Ocean. Required compliance with applicable WDRs would ensure that wastewater discharged to the ocean are properly and effectively treated to meet or exceed discharge requirements so as to not degrade water quality.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-28
Compliance with the regulations, GP/LCP Update policies and actions, and existing Safety Element policies discussed above would reduce discharge of additional stormwater runoff and associated pollutants from new development and redevelopment within the City. Because violations of water quality standards would be minimized through compliance with existing regulations and the GP/LCP Update policies and actions, impacts to water quality facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 2: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
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.

Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update in the southeastern portion of the City, which is located above the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, would incrementally increase the amount of impervious surface within the City, which could reduce the potential for groundwater recharge from infiltration. However, the majority of the City is not located above a designated groundwater basin and would not affect recharge to the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. Compliance with the City Municipal Code, as well as the Central Coast RWQCB post-construction requirements for stormwater management would maximize the on-site infiltration capacity for new development and redevelopment projects within the southeastern portion of the City. This would reduce the quantity of stormwater runoff that enters the storm drainage system and discharges to surface waters and the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the incremental increase of impervious surface would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge.

For the existing conditions of the City’s groundwater supply, and the expected effects of increased water demand from development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update, refer to Section 4.15, Utilities/Service Systems. Although development within the City would increase water demand, including demand for groundwater, the agencies managing groundwater in the NCMA, including Pismo Beach, are responsible for ensuring the basin is sustainably managed. The GP/LCP Update Conservation and Open Space Element also includes the following actions and polices for groundwater management:
 Policy COS-2.4: Water Supply. The City shall provide residents and visitors of Pismo Beach a reliable and sustainable water supply through the use of new or enhanced water supply programs, water conservation efforts, and routine reporting.  Action COS-2.4h: Groundwater Management Plan. The City may consider coordination with other agencies within the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin to develop a more comprehensive groundwater management plan.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-29
 Action COS-2.4c: Seawater Intrusion into Groundwater Aquifers. The City shall continue to implement best practices to prevent seawater intrusion into groundwater aquifers, by installing monitoring wells for saline levels and implementing other measures as necessary.

For these reasons, development under the GP/LCP Update would not substantially interfere with groundwater supplies. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Threshold 4: In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
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.

The majority of the City is located within the coastal zone and adjacent to the Pacific Ocean. As shown in Figure 4.9-4, the coastline and southeastern portions of the City are subject to inundation from flooding during storm events. As shown in Figure 4.9-5 and Figure 4.9-6, the southeastern portion of the City is subject to inundation from tsunami or dam failure. Existing land uses in the areas subject to inundation include residential and commercial developments.

The GP/LCP Update designates a large portion of the area subject to inundation as open space and does not facilitate development of the area. However, the areas subject to inundation also include mixed-use, mobile home park, and resort commercial land use designations. These areas could experience development or redevelopment under the GP/LCP Update.

Facilities that use or store large quantities of hazardous materials could harm the environment if inundated by a flood. However, the hazardous materials used for residential and commercial uses in the areas subject to inundation would be products typically used for cleaning and landscaping and would not be used or stored hazardous materials in large quantities.

Additionally, the California Building Code and Chapter 15.44 of the Municipal Code contain guidelines for development within flood hazard areas, including requirements that new development be elevated above the base flood elevations. Elevating new development above the areas subject to inundation would minimize the risk of release of pollutants.

The following policy within the GP/LCP Update Land Use Element would reduce the risk of pollutant release in areas of flood hazard by restricting development within the Floodplain Overlay Zone.  Action LU-8.1f: Floodplain Overlay Zone. Continue to implement the Floodplain Overlay Zone to restrict, prohibit or condition development within hazardous floodplain areas to assure that the type and intensity of use are consistent with the protection and preservation of people, property and significant resources and consistent with all policies of the GP/LCP, including but not limited to the policies of the Safety Element.

Additionally, the following policy within the existing Safety Element would also reduce the risk of pollutant release in areas of flood hazard by restricting development within the 100-year flood

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-30
plain, requiring continuous risk identification by the City, and requiring review of new development in sites with high flood hazard areas.
 S-1: Risk Identification. The City shall continually provide for the identification and evaluation of existing structural hazards, and abate those hazards to acceptable levels of risk. Specifically:

Structures within the City's jurisdiction that are old, or suspect of hazards from fire, flooding and geologic events, including bluff retreat, should be inspected by qualified personnel to determine the degree of the hazards. Critical facilities should be inspected prior to non- critical facilities, and public-owned facilities prior to private owned facilities. Structural inspections are a major seismic concern. Susceptibility to damage from flooding should be determined based on the 100- year flood. Fire hazards are best evaluated on a building- bybuilding basis, by qualified inspection personnel.

CALTRANS should review its facilities and roadways within the area to determine the potential impact of expected earthquakes and floods and should forward comments to the City.

The Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the Southern California Gas Company should continue the review of their facilities and distribution/transmission networks and centers, especially with regard to fire and earthquake hazards to ensure adequate and safe service pursuant to the standard of construction, operation and maintenance mandated by the California Public Utilities Commission. Where local standards differ significantly with those of the Commission, the City should inform the commission accordingly in order that such differences be taken into consideration.

Structures, which have been inspected and found to have a high degree of hazard from earthquake, landslide, fire or flooding should be brought up to an acceptable level of risk or mitigated to reduce the level of risk. Programs used to bring structures up to standards should include, but not be limited to, structural rehabilitation, flood proofing, occupancy reduction, and demolition and reconstruction.

The City shall initiate abatement proceedings against structures found to be unsafe.  S-2: New Development. New development within the City's jurisdiction shall be designed to withstand natural and man-made hazards to acceptable levels of risk by:

Adoption of the most recent safety requirements in the Building and Fire Code.

Using the planning and technical criteria presented in the Safety Element, as basic guidelines for all new public facilities.

Evaluating new development, particularly industrial, commercial or utility development, to ensure that construction or operation of the project will not cause hazardous conditions at an unacceptable level of risk.

Requiring new development to avoid portions of sites with high hazard levels.  S-9: Restrictions on Development Within the 100-Year Flood Plain.

No habitable structure shall be approved for construction within the area of the 100-year flood plain unless the applicant demonstrates that the finished floor elevations are at least one foot above the projected elevation of the 100-year flood, except as allowed by FEMA regulations.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology/Water Quality

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.9-31
No new fill, structure, or other obstruction shall be permitted to be placed or constructed within a flood-way unless a detailed hydrologic study has been prepared and approved by the City Engineer ensuring that the proposed project will not obstruct, in any way, passing floodwaters.

No new development shall be allowed in the 100-year flood plain which will contribute to or increase flood hazards on the same or other properties or which would require construction of flood control devices.

Any application for development on a parcel any portion of which is within the boundary of the 100-year floodplain shall be required to submit a hydrological engineer's report which assesses the nature of the flood risks, identifies the boundary of the 100-year flood plain and specifies the protective measures that should be undertaken to attain compliance with the city's flood plain zoning and with FEMA regulations.

Adherence to the GP/LCP actions, existing Safety Element policies and compliance with applicable laws and regulations would minimize the potential impact of pollutant release in the event of inundation of structures in areas subject to inundation. Impacts would be less than significant.

As a result of the Supreme Court decision regarding the assessment of the environment’s impacts on projects (California Building Industry Association [CBIA] v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District [BAAQMD], 62 Cal. 4th 369 [No. S 213478] issued December 17, 2015), it is not considered the purview of the CEQA process to evaluate the impact of existing environmental conditions on a proposed project. Therefore, the following discussion of sea level rise is provided solely for informational purposes.

As discussed in Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, climate change has the potential to induce substantial sea level rise in the coming century. The rising sea level increases the likelihood, frequency, and risk of flooding and release of pollutants due to inundation, including pollutants associated with increased erosion. Sea levels are rising faster now than in the previous two millennia, and the rise is expected to accelerate, even with robust greenhouse gas emission control measures. Sea level rise could affect flooding along the creeks in the City and at the development in the southeastern portion of City. Additionally, loss of the City beaches from sea level rise would reduce the natural wave buffer and exacerbate flooding in the downtown area. The City prepared a Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment (City of Pismo Beach 2019), consistent with the CCC’s adopted Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance (CCC 2018). The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment used a range of sea level rise projections, based on multiple greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment used the sea level rise projections, combined with coastal hazard models, to map areas that may be subject to coastal hazards with sea level rise.

Compliance with NPDES permits requirements, City Municipal Code requirements, existing Safety Element policies, and GP/LCP Update goals and policies would reduce the risk of discharge of pollutants from inundation, including inundation due to sea level rise. Furthermore, existing Safety Element Policies S-1 and S-2 (listed above) require the City to continually identify and abate potential flooding hazards and avoid placing new development in areas with high flood hazard levels. As individual development projects facilitated by the GP/LCP Update are proposed, the City would continue to review individual projects in accordance with Safety Element Policies S-1 and S-2 for the potential to be inundated due to flooding, including from sea level rise, and abate potential flooding risks if necessary. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.9-32
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

4.9.4 Cumulative Impacts
The analysis in this section examines impacts of the GP/LCP Update on hydrology and water quality throughout the cumulative impact analysis area, which for hydrology and water quality is San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed, Pismo Creek Watershed, Arroyo Grande Creek Watershed, and Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. Cumulative development in combination with the GP/LCP would gradually increase development and population and would therefore gradually increase the potential for impacts to hydrology and water quality, including increased stormwater runoff, erosion, pollutant discharge to waterbodies, increased risk of release of pollutants from inundation, and decreased groundwater infiltration capacity.

Some types of impacts to hydrology and water quality that may be additive in nature, and thus cumulative, include violation of water quality standards, interference with groundwater recharge, increased erosion, increased non-point source pollution, and increased runoff. Cumulative development would increase erosion and sedimentation resulting from grading and construction, as well as changes in drainage patterns which could degrade surface and ground water quality.

Cumulative development overlying the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin would increase the amount of impervious surfaces, and could combine with the effects of the development within the southeastern portion of the City to potentially reducing groundwater recharge to the basin.

Cumulative development relying on groundwater as a source of water supply could also combine with increased development within the City to decrease available water supplies in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. In addition, new development would increase the generation of urban pollutants that may adversely affect water quality in the long term.

Development of individual projects in the cumulative impact analysis area would be required to comply with applicable water quality regulations, as discussed in Impact HWQ-1 above. Compliance with these existing requirements would require implementation of BMPS to reduce impacts associated with stormwater and pollutant discharge during construction and operation of projects and reduce adverse changes to hydrology water quality throughout the cumulative impact area.

Therefore, cumulative impacts related to water quality and drainage patterns would be less than significant.

As discussed in Impact HWQ-2, development of individual projects throughout the cumulative impact area would increase impervious surfaces and reduce groundwater recharge, but compliance with applicable policies related to impervious surfaces would reduce impacts throughout the cumulative impact area. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to groundwater recharge would be less than significant. Although cumulative development would increase demand for groundwater, the agencies managing groundwater in the NCMA, including Pismo Beach, are responsible for ensuring the basin is sustainably managed. Groundwater management takes into consideration increased demand from anticipated development to ensure groundwater is not over drafted.

Therefore, cumulative impacts related to groundwater supplies would be less than significant.

Similarly, as discussed in Impact HWQ-3, compliance with applicable laws and regulations would regulate development in flood prone areas and minimize the potential for release of pollutants from inundation. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to risk of release of pollutants would be less than significant.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-1

4.10 Land Use and Planning
This section summarizes Pismo Beach’s land use characteristics and analyzes existing plans and focus areas with development potential in order to determine the potential environmental effects of the proposed General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update related to land use and planning.

This section also analyzes the General Plan/LCP Update’s consistency with applicable local, regional, and State land use policies. Consistency with the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for the San Luis Obispo County region is discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality. Land use compatibility conflicts associated with growth facilitated by the GP/LCP Update are discussed in other sections of this EIR, including Sections 4.1, Aesthetics, 4.2, Air Quality, 4.8, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire and 4.11, Noise.

4.10.1 Setting
a. Existing Land Use Patterns
Pismo Beach’s existing land use form is shaped by its topography, linear coastal orientation, natural resources, and circulation patterns. The City is served by four main arteries: U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101), Cabrillo Highway (State Route 1), Shell Beach Road, and Price Street, which all run generally northwest–southeast through the City. Residential and commercial uses are mostly concentrated southwest of U.S. 101, and are interspersed with some commercial and hotel/motel uses that directly abut Highway 101 in the southeastern portion of the City. Mobile Home Park uses are also concentrated in the southeastern portion of the City. Open spaces are interspersed throughout the City but are primarily clustered in the eastern portion of the City. Northeast of U.S. 101, the area is characterized by a mix of residential, public/semi-public, and industrial uses.

The City adopted a Sphere of Influence Update in September 2019. The SOI includes approximately 1,230 acres outside of the City limits but within Pismo Beach’s Sphere of Influence (SOI). The SOI includes land in Price Canyon and along Oak Park Boulevard and a small area along Mattie Road. The SOI defines the area to which the City intends to provide municipal services and allow the development of some urban land uses for the lifetime of the GP/LCP Update. The GP/LCP Land Use Element guides the future development of Pismo Beach by establishing the allowable distribution, location, and extent of development across the City for residential, commercial, open space, public and semi-public facilities, and other uses. The local controls in the Land Use Element include restrictions on land uses and parcel sizes in the SOI. Figure 2-2 in Chapter 2, Project Description shows the Pismo Beach City limits and the Coastal Zone boundary in the City. Figure 2-3 in Chapter 2, Project Description, shows the Pismo Beach City limits and SOI.

As shown in Table 4.10-1, Pismo Beach includes an assortment of residential, commercial, office, public and open space uses. Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2, Project Description, shows the City’s existing on-the-ground distribution of land use in Pismo Beach.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-2
Table 4.10-1 Pismo Beach Existing On-The-Ground Land Use Distribution Land Use Designation
Residential Units
Single-Family Residential 4,981
Multi-Family Residential 418
Mobile Home 515
Visitor Serving Rooms
Resort Commercial 1,980
Retail, Service, Office Square Footage (1,000 square feet) Commercial 9,594.9
Industrial 1,315.5
Public/Semi-Public 321.1
Open Space Acreage
Open Space 808.9
Source: Land Use Element of the GP/LCP Update
Neighborhood Planning Areas
As described in Chapter 2, Project Description, Pismo Beach is organized into 10 neighborhood planning areas, each with its own name and unique characteristics. Refer to Figure 2-5 in Chapter 2, Project Description, which shows the location of each planning area. The neighborhood planning areas are identified as follows:
 Sunset Palisades/The Bluffs/South Palisades: The planning area is almost totally developed with low density residential use with a few scattered vacant residential lots.  North Spyglass/Spyglass: The North Spyglass planning area consists of three large parcels with three major hotels. The Spyglass planning area is a fully developed residential area with multiple housing types, a small commercial center, and the Spyglass Public Park.  St. Andrews/Spindrift: The St. Andrews Tract is comprised of predominantly low-density residential uses, with open space along the northern border, and high-density residential uses.

The Spindrift planning area is a planned residential community consisting of multifamily housing uses in the larger southern parcel and single-family residential and open space/recreational uses to the north, west, and east.
 Shell Beach/Dinosaur Caves: The planning area is comprised of a mix of low. medium, and high- density residential uses and the Dinosaur Caves Park.
 Motel District: The Motel District is comprised of resort commercial uses (primarily hotel and restaurant) with some medium-density residential uses along Franklin Drive, Wilmar Avenue, and Harbor View Avenue.
 Downtown Core: The Downtown Core consists of a variety of land uses, including resort commercial, commercial, public/semi-public, open space, high-density residential, and low- density residential uses.
 Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh: The Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh planning area is comprised of mobile home park, commercial, open space, and industrial uses.  Oak Park Heights: The Oak Park Heights planning area consists of low-and medium-density residential uses with open space areas surrounding the residential, and some commercial uses.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-3
 Pismo Heights: The Pismo Heights planning area is almost entirely built out and is comprised of low-density residential uses with some medium-density residential uses and high-density residential uses.
 Freeway Foothills/Mattie Road: The Freeway Foothills/Mattie Road planning area is comprised of low and medium density residential neighborhoods, planned residential, commercial areas, and some undeveloped areas.
b. Existing Plans and Studies
City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Program
State law (Government Code Section 65300) requires that each city and county adopt and periodically update a comprehensive general plan. The California Coastal Act requires that each city or county within the Coastal Zone prepare an LCP. The City addresses both the California general plan law and the California Coastal Act requirements by integrating the GP and the LCP into one combined plan. Pismo Beach adopted its existing GP/LCP in 1992, which was most recently updated in 2014.

The City is currently preparing an update to the GP/LCP, which includes updates to the Land Use, Conservation and Open Space, Noise, and Circulation Elements of the City’s GP/LCP. This Program EIR (PEIR) is intended to review the update of the City’s GP/LCP. As such, this PEIR identifies revised and refined goals, policies, and implementation programs as appropriate, which are designed to avoid or mitigate environmental impacts of the GP/LCP Update. c. Proposed GP/LCP Update
The proposed GP/LCP Update would update the Land Use Conservation and Open Space, Noise, and Circulation Elements and would supersede the 1992 General Plan. The description of each land use designation includes allowed maximum density or intensity of development and specific guidance on the intended physical character of future development, including building placement on a lot, lot coverage, building frontage, streetscape character, and parking location and access. Table 2-4 in Chapter 2, Project Description, describes the 12 proposed land use designations.

A principal intention of the GP/LCP Update is to guide land use decisions within the City through the year 2040 while helping the community enhance and maintain its small beach town character, manage growth effectively, provide a safe community, and enhance the City’s tourist-based economy. The GP/LCP Update contains the goals listed in Table 4.10-2 related to land use planning.

The GP/LCP Update also includes goals specific to each of the 10 neighborhood planning areas related to land use planning and the vision for development within these areas

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-4
Table 4.10-2 GP/LCP Update Goals
General Plan Chapter 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.

4.10.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Coastal Zone Management Act
The Coastal Zone Management Act was passed by Congress in 1972. It provides for management of coastal resources and aims to protect, restore, and enhance coastal resources through three programs administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in partnership with coastal States. In California, the Coastal Zone Management Act is administered in partnership with the California Coastal Commission. The National Coastal Zone Management Program balances competing land and water issues. Programs under the Coastal Zone Management Act include the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, which protects estuaries for use as field laboratories that improve understanding of estuaries, and the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program, which assists with acquisition of coastal property or easements for conservation purposes. b. State
General Plan Law (California Government Code Section 65300) California Government Code Section 65300 regulates the substantive and topical requirements of general plans. State law requires that each city and county adopt a general plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning.” The California Supreme Court has called the general plan the “constitution for future development.” The general plan expresses the community’s development goals and embodies public policy relative to the distribution of future land uses, both public and private.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-5
California Government Code Section 65301
Section 65301 of the California Government Code requires a general plan to address the geographic territory of the local jurisdiction and any other territory outside its boundaries that bears relation to the planning of the jurisdiction. The jurisdiction may exercise their own judgment in determining what areas outside of its boundaries to include in the planning area. The State of California General Plan Guidelines denotes that the planning area for a city should include (at minimum) all land within the city limits and all land within the city’s SOI.

California Government Code Section 65860
In charter cities with a population of more than two million, counties, and general law cities, zoning provisions must be consistent with the general plan. Charter cities with a population of under two million are exempt from the zoning consistency requirement unless their charters provide otherwise. The City of Pismo Beach is a general law city and is, therefore, required to have zoning consistency with its general plan.

California Coastal Act
The California Coastal Commission currently regulates coastal development in the State. Local municipalities such as the City of Pismo Beach may elect to prepare their own LCPs and, once the LCP is certified, development control reverts to the local government. However, action taken by the City on a coastal development permit application following certification of the LCP may still be appealed to the California Coastal Commission. Amendments to the City’s land use plan (LUP) must also be approved by the California Coastal Commission.

An LCP consists of City land use plans and land use controls that implement the provisions of the CCA. The CCA (Public Resources Code Section 30000 et seq.) is intended to “protect, maintain, and where feasible, enhance and restore the overall quality of the coastal zone environment and its natural and artificial resources.” All development in the coastal zone requires approval of a coastal development permit, which are issued by the California Coastal Commission, in compliance with the LCP.

The City’s LCP consists of two parts as required by the Coastal Act: a Land Use Plan (LUP), which was last updated in 1993, and the Implementation Plan, which was last updated in 1983, with several amendments to both documents occurring since. The LUP consists of goals, policies and actions that address the requirements of the Coastal Act and are integrated into applicable elements of the General Plan. The Implementation Plan provides the zoning regulations that implement the LUP goals, policies and actions and serves as the City’s Coastal Zoning Ordinance. As a package, these documents implement the CCA at the local level in Pismo Beach. The adopted and certified LCP forms the legal standard of review for issuance of Coastal Development Permits (CDP) within the City’s coastal zone and is legally binding on the City. The LCP may be amended to stay up to date with state laws and to continue to reflect the vision of the community. The LUP applies to all areas of the City in the coastal zone. Any future development resulting from the GP/LCP Update would be subject to the requirements of the CCA, Pismo Beach LCP, and the Zoning Code.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-6
Cortese Knox Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 The Cortese Knox Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (CKH Act) established procedures for local agency changes of organization, including city incorporation, annexation to a city or special district, and consolidation of cities or special districts (Section 56000, et seq.). Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs) have numerous powers under the CKH Act, but the most important are the power to act on local agency boundary changes and to adopt SOIs for local agencies. The law states that in order to update a SOI, LAFCOs are required to first conduct a review of the municipal services provided by the local agency. The CKH Act requires LAFCOs to update SOIs for every city and special district every five years. The original deadline was January 2006, five years following the CHK Act becoming State law. That deadline was extended two years to January 2008.

Every SOI update must be accompanied by an update of the municipal services review (MSR). San Luis Obispo LAFCO completed a MSR for Pismo Beach in 2019. San Luis Obispo LAFCO has a goal to update SOIs every five years or as necessary. The next MSR for Pismo Beach will occur whenever an amendment is considered.
c. Regional and Local
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments 2019 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) is required by State and federal law to prepare, update, and adopt a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) every four years. Senate Bill (SB) 375, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, was enacted in 2008, requiring all RTPs to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that reduces greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. The most recent update to the RTP was completed by SLOCOG in 2019. The 2019 RTP builds on prior plans and the Preliminary Sustainable Communities Strategy (PSCS) developed in the 2010 RTP/PSCS and 2014 RTP/PSCS, and serves as the blueprint for the region’s transportation system over the next 20 years. The 2019 RTP identifies active transportation projects, non-highway system projects, highway system projects, and a park and ride project in Pismo Beach.

The 2019 RTP includes the following goals:
 Preserve the transportation system.
 Improve intermodal mobility and accessibility for all people.  Support a vibrant economy.
 Improve public safety and security.
 Foster livable, healthy communities and promote social equity.  Practice environmental stewardship.
 Practice financial stewardship.

Pismo Beach Municipal Code
The Zoning Code (Title 17 of the Municipal Code) is the primary tool used by the City to carry out the goals, objectives, and policies of the Pismo Beach General Plan by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City, consistent with the General Plan. Zoning is the instrument that implements the land use designations of a general plan. In addition to establishing permitted uses, zoning may also establish development standards relating to issues such as intensity, setbacks,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-7
height, and parking. Projects submitted to the City for review and approval are generally evaluated for consistency with the zoning designations.

The City’s Subdivision Ordinance, Title 16 of the Municipal Code, provides standards for the processing of subdivision requests, including new tract maps, parcel maps, and lot line adjustments.

The Zoning Code describes various types of zoning districts and land use classifications, land use regulations, development standards, and environmental performance standards. The Zoning Code applies to all land uses and development within the City of Pismo Beach. The zoning ordinance is adopted to:
“protect and promote the public health, morals, safety, peace, comfort, convenience, prosperity and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Pismo Beach. More specifically, the zoning ordinance is adopted to achieve the following objectives:

A. To provide a precise guide for the physical development of the City and to achieve the progressive arrangement of land uses as depicted in the general plan/local coastal program land use plan;
B. To foster a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses; C. To ensure that public and private lands ultimately are used for the purposes which are most appropriate and most beneficial for the City as a whole; D. To facilitate the appropriate location of community facilities; E. To minimize congestion by promoting a safe, effective traffic circulation system and to foster the provision of adequate off-street parking and loading facilities; F. To provide for adequate light, air, privacy and open space; G. To protect residential and commercial properties from noise, odor, dust, dirt, smoke, vibration, heat, glare, and other objectionable influences, and from fire, explosion, noxious fumes and other hazards;
H. To preserve the natural beauty and quality of the City's site as well as other desirable environmental features.

I. To protect public views from scenic highways;
J. To ensure the implementation of goals, policies, programs and land use designations certified in the City's local coastal program land use plan including the maximum protection and provision of public access and recreational opportunities along the coast.” (Section

17.003.010).”
As shown in Table 4.10-3, the Zoning Code update would divide the City into 12 primary zoning districts with several special treatment overlays. Existing on-the-ground land uses in the City are shown in Figure 2-4.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-8
Table 4.10-3 Zoning Districts that Apply to Property within the City of Pismo Beach District Abbreviation Name of District
Primary Districts
R-1 One-family Residential
R-2 Two-Family Residential
R-3 Three-family Residential
VL Visitor Lodging
R-R Resort-Residential
C-R Commercial Recreation
M-H Mobile Home
C-1 Retail Commercial
C-2 General Commercial
SI Service Industrial
OS Open Space
PF Public Facilities
Special Treatment Overlay
A Archaeology – Historic Sites
AC Coastal Access
CA Coastal Appeal
F Floodplain
H Hazards and Protection
HL Height Limitations
P Public or Visitor Parking
V View Considerations
Source: Lisa Weiss Consulting, December 2021

4.10.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
The analysis in this section focuses on the compatibility of land uses identified in the proposed GP/LCP Update with existing and planned land uses in the City, as well as consistency with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations. The following thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For purposes of this PEIR, implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update may have a significant adverse impact if it would do any of the following:
 Physically divide an established community; and/or
 Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-9
b. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project physically divide an established community? 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.

Based on the buildout capacity of the City under the GP/LCP Update, an estimated 1,979 new residents, 1,111 new dwelling units, and approximately 783,268 square feet of non-residential development could be added to Pismo Beach. The overall residential growth is roughly equivalent to an annual growth rate of approximately 1 percent through the year 2040.

The City of Pismo Beach Housing Element identified 56 acres of Pismo Beach as vacant land which could accommodate approximately 332 residential units. The GP/LCP Update would result in the development of 288 vacant or underutilized properties. As a result, new growth would likely involve increased development density in developed areas, redevelopment of existing developed parcels, or annexation of new land into the City. Specifically, the GP/LCP Update calls for redevelopment of the Downtown Core and along Highway 101 in the Shell Beach planning areas which would primarily consist of infill development and redevelopment or development of vacant or underutilized sites.

The projected growth and redevelopment of these areas would not physically divide the City of Pismo Beach.

The GP/LCP Update does not include substantial land use or circulation changes that would physically divide an established community, residential, or otherwise (for example, no major roads or other facilities would be constructed that would physically divide an established community). The goals and policies in the Land Use Element would increase the connectivity of the City’s circulation network. The GP/LCP Update Land Use Element includes the following goals, policies, and actions that would facilitate connectivity throughout the City and to the coast:

Goal LU-5: A community that supports the health, safety, and sustainability of all residents, visitors and structures.
 Policy LU-5.1: Complete Neighborhood. Provide well-connected and complete neighborhoods that enable healthy lifestyles and provide for the daily needs of residents.  Action LU-5.2a: Mixed-Use Neighborhoods. Create standards for each commercial zone to allow for mixed-use residential areas within proximity and walking distance of commercial, office, recreation, and public uses. Furthermore, identify opportunities to provide a mix of commercial- and recreation uses within walking distance of residential neighborhoods to enable and encourage walking and biking between uses.
 Action LU-5.2b: Transit Accessibility. Locate and design all new commercial and high- density residential development to facilitate provision or extension of transit service to the development to the extent feasible. Major employment, retail, visitor-serving facilities, and entertainment districts and major coastal recreational areas should be well served by public transit and easily accessible to pedestrians and people who bike.  Policy LU-5.1: Pedestrian Orientation and Safety. Through appropriate zoning and discretionary approvals, strive to create safe, walkable environments that include elements such as good lighting, safe crosswalks, and street trees that allow people of all ages and abilities to exercise

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-10
and safely access public transportation, community centers, recreation, schools, and goods and services
 Action LU-5.2f: Pedestrian-Scaled Street Lights. Pedestrian-scaled streetlights shall be used throughout the community in new developments except for safety lighting used for intersection lighting. The City shall also consider a pedestrian scaled streetlight program for each planning area, as done for the Shell Beach planning area.  Policy LU-5.3: Sustainable Community Strategies. Ensure land uses decisions and community strategies are designed to reduce energy and water consumption, waste and noise generation, air quality impacts; and support multimodal transport for a sustainable Pismo Beach  Action LU-5.3b: Trail and Bikeway System. Update and expand the trail and bikeway system to connect residential uses to commercial uses, and workplace and recreation nodes. Such trails and bikeways shall consider following natural features like Pismo Creek and the shoreline, while avoiding adverse impacts to the natural features.  Action LU-5.3d: Transit Oriented Development. Support the development of multifamily residential and mixed-use projects around the City’s transit station, by allowing a reduction in the parking requirements or other development standards, and require new development to incorporate or improve pedestrian, bicycle, and where applicable, transit facilities.

These goals and policies would facilitate connectivity and mobility by providing for a balanced land use pattern and access throughout the City. This connectivity would be provided through equitable access for residents, employees, and tourists to daily needs, strategic land use planning for new development and redevelopment, reduction in conflict between land uses, and preservation and provision of lateral and vertical access points and multimodal access.

The GP/LCP Update includes strategies, goals, and policies that would provide for orderly development and would not physically divide an established community. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
No mitigation is required.

Threshold 2: Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
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 AND CITY ZONING DISTRICTS AND STANDARDS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Several regionally- and locally-adopted land use plans, policies, and regulations apply to development under the GP/LCP Update. These include the SLOCOG 2019 RTP and the SLOAPCD 2001 CAP for San Luis Obispo County. Consistency of the GP/LCP Update with the 2001 CAP is discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality.

The SLOCOG 2019 RTP is a long-range land use and transportation plan for the San Luis Obispo region. The 2019 RTP includes nine goals, with respective objectives and policies to meet these

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-11
goals, which are expected to result in significant benefits to the region, not only with respect to transportation and mobility, but also economic activity, safety, and social equity. Table 4.10-4 includes the 2019 RTP goals, objectives, and policies related to land use, and describes consistency of the proposed land use designations and patterns in the GP/LCP Update with these goals, objectives, and policies.

Table 4.10-4 GP/LCP Update Land Use Consistency with the SLOCOG 2019 RTP SLOCOG 2019 RTP Goals and Policy
Objectives GP/LCP Update Consistency
Goal 2 Mobility
Objective 2.2: Improve opportunities for
businesses and citizens to easily access
goods, jobs, services, and housing.

Objective 2.5: Support cooperative
planning activities that lead to an
integrated intermodal transportation
system.

Consistent. The Land Use Element of the GP/LCP Update include goals and policies that support equitable access for residents and employees to the coast, visitor amenities and services, housing, employment, retail, services, education, and recreation.

Goal LU-1 is to support the diverse needs of both residents and visitors.

All of the policies under Goal LU-1 support accessibility in the community.

Goal LU-5 is to ensure that the community form of Pismo Beach supports the health, safety, and sustainability of all residents, visitors and structures. The following policies support accessibility in the community:
 Policy LU-5.2 – Complete Neighborhood
 Policy LU-5.1 – Pedestrian Orientation and Safety
 Policy LU-5.3 – Sustainable Community Strategies
Goal LU-6 is to ensure that the community provides and maintains a high level of service and infrastructure to all development; the following policies supports this goal:
 Policy LU-6.1 – Community-Serving Facilities
Goal LU-7 is to provide a high quality of life for the entire community through concentrating growth in corridors and neighborhood centers with adaptive land reuse. All of the policies under Goals LU-6 and LU-7 are generally intended to provide equitable access to goods and spaces in the planning area.

Goal 5 Healthy Communities
Objective 5.1: Reflect community values
while integrating land use and
transportation planning to connect
communities through a variety of
transportation choices that promote
healthy lifestyles.

Objective 5.2: Integrate public health and
social equity in transportation planning and
decision-making.

Objective 5.3: Support efforts to increase
the supply and variety of housing, jobs, and
basic services in locations that reduce trips,
travel distances, and congestion on U.S.

Route 101.

Objective 5.4: Make investments and
develop programs that support local land
use decisions that implement the SCS and
other strategies to reduce GHG emissions
and make our communities more healthy,
livable, sustainable, and mobile.

Consistent. The GP/LCP Update has been developed through an extensive public outreach and involvement process and following careful analysis by an advisory committee, commissions, City staff, elected officials, and the community. This approach is intended to provide a plan that encompasses community values and captures the community vision for the planning area.

Goal LU-1 is to support the diverse needs of both residents and visitors.

All of the policies under Goal LU-1 support accessibility in the community.

Goal LU-5 is to ensure that the community form of Pismo Beach supports the health, safety, and sustainability of all residents, visitors and structures. The following policies support accessibility in the community:
 Policy LU-5.2 – Complete Neighborhood
 Policy LU-5.1 – Pedestrian Orientation and Safety
 Policy LU-5.3 – Sustainable Community Strategies
Goal LU-6 is to ensure that the community provides and maintains a high level of service and infrastructure to all development; the following policies supports this goal:
 Policy LU-6.1 – Community-Serving Facilities

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-12
SLOCOG 2019 RTP Goals and Policy
Objectives GP/LCP Update Consistency
Goal LU-7 is to provide a high quality of life for the entire community through concentrating growth in corridors and neighborhood centers with adaptive land reuse. All of the policies under Goals LU-6 and LU-7 are generally intended to provide equitable access to goods and spaces in the planning area.

Goal 6 Environment
Objective 6.1: Integrate environmental
considerations in all stages of planning and
implementation.

Objective 6.2: Preserve aesthetic resources
and promote environmental
enhancements.

Objective 6.3: Reduce GHG emissions from
vehicles and improve air quality in the
region
Objective 6.4: Conserve and protect
natural, sensitive, and agricultural
resources.

Consistent. The Land Use and Conservation and Open Space Elements of the GP/LCP Update include goals and policies that support environmental protection in the planning area. The Land Use Element provides the framework for the future layout of the community and includes policies that would promote development in a manner that protects environmental resources in the planning area. Conservation and Open Space Element goals and policies relate to the conservation of natural resources using open space areas within the planning area. The Conservation and Open Space Element addresses the protection of natural habitat and wildlife by designating open space areas throughout the community.

Policy LU-5.3 – Sustainable Community Strategies is to ensure land use decisions and community strategies are designed to reduce energy and water consumption, waste and noise generation, air quality impacts; and support multimodal transport for a sustainable Pismo Beach.

Goal LU-8 of the Land Use Element is to protect and enhance natural and coastal resources within Pismo Beach. The following policies support Goal LU-8 and protection and enhancement of the environment.  Policy LU-8.1 – Natural Resources Compatibility
 Policy LU- 8.2 – Maximizing Public Access
Goal COS-2 of the Conservation and Open Space Element is to conserve the 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. The following policies support Goal COS-1 and protection and enhancement of the environment:
 Policy COS-2.1 – Improve Air Quality
 Policy COS-2.2 – Renewable Energy
 Policy COS-2.4 –Water Supply
 Policy COS-2.5 – Water Quality
 Policy COS 2.6 – Coastal Waters
 Policy COS 2.9 – Minimization of Lighting Impacts
Goal COS-3 of the Conservation and Open Space Element is to ensure that scenic roadways and vistas are protected and enhanced. The policy and actions under Goal COS-3 support the protection of scenic roadways and vistas.

Goal COS-4 of the Conservation and Open Space Element is to ensure the protection of conservation areas such as the ocean and beaches, bluffs, dunes, foothills, marshes, creeks, and wetlands. All ten of the policies under Goal COS-4 support the preservation of natural and sensitive resources.

Source: SLOCOG 2019

Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.10-13
As summarized in Table 4.10-4, the proposed land uses and land use patterns in the GP/LCP Update are consistent with the related goals and policies in the SLOCOG 2019 RTP. The determination of GP/LCP Update consistency is within the discretion of the City Council. The GP/LCP Update is consistent with the SLOCOG 2019 RTP.

The Pismo Beach Municipal Code is one of the primary means of implementing the General Plan.

Adoption of the GP/LCP Update would requires a review of the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map to ensure that it is consistent with the GP/LCP Update. Specifically, revisions to the Zoning Map will be consistent with the GP/LCP Update, incorporating revisions to the land use categories and other recommended design and development standards. The land use designations in the Land Use Element of the GP/LCP Update have been updated from the City’s 1992 General Plan to better match the existing, on-the-ground land uses and established land use pattern in the City as well as meet the vision and future needs of the community. These designations include allowable uses and building density, but also address building placement on individual lots, parking location and access, building frontage, and streetscape design. As described in the GP/LCP Update, this land use update is consistent with the community’s desire to ensure equitable access to the coast, visitor amenities and services, and housing, employment, retail and services, education, and recreation for residents and employees, and allows the City to establish zoning designations that similarly communicate these desires.

For each land use designation, the uses allowed and the standards for development intensity (dwelling units per acre for residential development, and floor area ratio [FAR] for non-residential development) are specified. While land use designations are broad, the zoning districts set forth specific allowances and prohibitions of uses (including conditional uses), dimensional requirements, such as building setbacks, parking standards, and building heights. While land use designations and zoning districts must be compatible, they need not be exactly identical. Zoning districts must be within the range of allowed intensity and uses found in the GP/LCP Update.

Required updates to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map in the Pismo Beach Municipal Code would be to ensure consistency with the GP/LCP Update, will ensure compatibility between the land use designations and zoning districts and standards within the City. Therefore, impacts related to policy consistency would be less than significant. As noted previously, the above discussion is intended to guide policy interpretation, but is not intended to replace or supplant City decision- makers. The final determination of consistency will be made by City decision-makers when they act on the proposed project.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

4.10.4 Cumulative Impacts
Planned growth in the County of San Luis Obispo surrounding Pismo Beach in combination with development proposed under the GP/LCP Update may have significant cumulative land use impacts related to either physical division of communities or conflicts with land use goals, policies, and plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environment effects. To achieve the growth management policies established in the GP/LCP Update, the City would coordinate closely with other agencies, particularly San Luis Obispo County. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact relative to the physical division of any established communities.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.10-14
The cities and communities surrounding the City are subject to the applicable City or County zoning standards. Additionally, the goals, policies, programs and regulations in the 2019 RTP apply to surrounding communities in the same manner as they apply to Pismo Beach, thereby avoiding potential for cumulative considerable conflict between the land use and planning for the City and these communities. Therefore, the cumulative impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update related to conflict with plans, policies and regulations would be less than significant.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-1

4.11 Noise
This section analyzes noise impacts from buildout of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update. Impacts related to construction, traffic, trains, on-site equipment, aircraft, and vibration are addressed. The environmental setting relies on data presented in the Technical Background Report prepared by Dudek for the proposed Noise Element update in October 2021 (Appendix C).

4.11.1 Setting
a. Overview of Noise and Vibration
Noise
Sound is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source, which is capable of being detected by hearing organs (e.g., the human ear). Noise is defined as sound, which is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and, in the extreme, hearing impairment (Caltrans 2013).

Noise levels are commonly measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A-weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound pressure levels to be consistent with the human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (Hz) and less sensitive to frequencies around and below 100 Hz (Kinsler et al. 1999). Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale, which quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquake magnitudes. A doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as a doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB; similarly, dividing the energy in half would result in a decrease of 3 dB (Crocker 2007).

Human perception of noise has no simple correlation with sound energy; the perception of sound is not linear in terms of dBA or in terms of sound energy. Two sources do not “sound twice as loud” as one source. It is widely accepted the average healthy ear can barely perceive an increase (or decrease) of up to 3 dBA in noise levels (i.e., twice [or half] the sound energy); a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible (8 times the sound energy); and an increase (or decrease) of 10 dBA sounds twice (or half) as loud (10.5 times the sound energy) (Crocker 2007).

Sound changes in both level and frequency spectrum as it travels from the source to the receiver.

The most obvious change is the decrease in sound level as the distance from the source increases.

The manner by which noise reduces with distance depends on factors such as the type of noise source (e.g., point or line), the path the sound will travel, site conditions, and obstructions. Noise levels from a point source (e.g., construction, industrial machinery, ventilation units) typically attenuate, or drop off, at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from a line source (e.g., roadway, pipeline, railroad) typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance (Caltrans 2013). Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; the amount of attenuation provided by this “shielding” depends on the size of the object and the frequencies of the noise levels. Natural terrain features, such as hills and dense woods, and man-made features, such as buildings and walls, can substantially alter noise levels. Generally, any large structure blocking line of sight will provide at least a 5-dBA reduction in source noise levels at the receiver (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011). Structures can substantially reduce occupants’ exposure to

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-2
noise as well. The FHWA’s guidelines indicate modern building construction generally provides an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of 20 to 35 dBA with closed windows.

The time of day when noise occurs and the duration of the noise are also important. Most noise lasting for more than a few seconds is variable in its intensity. Consequently, a variety of noise descriptors have been developed. One of the most frequently used noise metrics is the equivalent noise level (Leq), which considers both duration and sound power level. Leq is defined as the single steady A-weighted level equivalent to the same amount of energy contained in the actual fluctuating levels over a period of time (essentially, the average noise level). Typically, Leq is summed over a one-hour period (1H). Lmax is the highest root mean squared (RMS) sound pressure level within the sampling period, and Lmin is the lowest RMS sound pressure level within the measuring period (Crocker 2007). Normal conversational levels are in the 60 to 65 dBA Leq range; ambient noise levels greater than 65 dBA Leq can interrupt conversations (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018).

Noise occurring at night tends to be more disturbing than noise occurring during the day.

Community noise is usually measured using Day-Night Average Level (Ldn), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). Community noise can also be measured using Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a +5 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (Caltrans 2013).

Noise levels described by Ldn and CNEL usually differ by about 1 dBA. Quiet suburban areas typically have CNEL noise levels in the range of 40 to 50 CNEL, while areas near arterial streets are in the 50 to 60+ CNEL range.

Vibration
Groundborne vibration of concern in environmental analysis consists of the oscillatory waves that move from a source through the ground to adjacent structures. The number of cycles per second of oscillation makes up the vibration frequency, described in terms of Hz. The frequency of a vibrating object describes how rapidly it oscillates. The normal frequency range of most groundborne vibration that can be felt by the human body starts from a low frequency of less than 1 Hz and goes to a high of about 200 Hz (Crocker 2007).

While people have varying sensitivities to vibrations at different frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency vibration. Vibration in buildings, such as from nearby construction activities, may cause windows, items on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle. Vibration of building components can also take the form of an audible low-frequency rumbling noise, referred to as groundborne noise. Groundborne noise is usually only a problem when the originating vibration spectrum is dominated by frequencies in the upper end of the range (60 to 200 Hz), or when foundations or utilities, such as sewer and water pipes, physically connect the structure and the vibration source (FTA 2018). Although groundborne vibration is sometimes noticeable in outdoor environments, it is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants and vibration-sensitive land uses.

Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration level to diminish with distance away from the source. High-frequency vibrations diminish much more rapidly than low frequencies, so low frequencies tend to dominate the spectrum at large distances from the source. Discontinuities in the soil strata can also cause diffractions or channeling effects that affect the propagation of vibration over long distances (Caltrans 2020). When a building is impacted by

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-3
vibration, a ground-to-foundation coupling loss will usually reduce the overall vibration level.

However, under rare circumstances, the ground-to-foundation coupling may actually amplify the vibration level due to structural resonances of the floors and walls.

Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or RMS vibration velocity.

The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second. PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is often used in monitoring of blasting vibration because it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings (Caltrans 2020).
b. Noise-Sensitive Land Uses/Sensitive Receivers
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land. Places where people live, sleep, recreate, worship, and study generally are considered to be sensitive to noise because intrusive noise can be disruptive to these activities. When community noise interferes with human activities or contributes to stress, public annoyance with the noise sources increases, and the acceptability of the environment for people decreases. The City defines noise-sensitive land uses as including the following:
 Residential uses
 Visitor lodging – hotels, motels, inns
 Schools
 Libraries
 Places of religious worship
 Hospitals
 Assisted living facilities
 Public parks
Figure 4.11-1 shows the locations of noise-sensitive land uses in the City, which include residences, Shell Beach Elementary School, Judkins Middle School, Shell Beach Library, and several parks and churches. Residences located near U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) and Cabrillo Highway (State Route 1) and other major arterial routes in the City are currently exposed to elevated noise levels.

Vibration-sensitive receivers, which are similar to noise-sensitive receivers, include residences and institutional uses, such as schools, churches, and hospitals. However, vibration-sensitive receivers also include fragile/historic-era buildings and buildings where vibrations may interfere with sensitive equipment that is affected by vibration levels that may be well below those associated with human annoyance (e.g., recording studies or medical facilities with sensitive equipment).

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-4
Figure 4.11-1 Noise-Sensitive Land Uses and Major Noise Sources Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Noise Element.

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-5
c. Existing Noise Conditions and Major Noise Sources in the Community Transportation Noise Sources
Roadways
The City’s primary source of noise is traffic along U.S. 101, State Route 1, and arterial roads (Appendix C). Vehicular noise has three main component sources: engine/ transmission noise, exhaust noise, and tire noise. U.S. 101 is the loudest roadway in the City because it carries the highest traffic volumes. Since the highway roughly bisects Pismo Beach in the southern and central portions of the City, it produces traffic noise that affects much of the area within the City. State Route 1 is a separate two-lane at grade highway only within the southern section of the City, joining with U.S. 101 in the vicinity of Pismo Preserve. With more limited traffic and only two travel lanes, State Route 1 produces less traffic noise than U.S. 101. Arterial roadways including Price Canyon Road, Ocean Boulevard, North 4th Street, Mattie Road, North Oak Park Boulevard, and Shell Beach Road also contribute to ambient traffic noise. While traffic speeds are lower on these facilities than on highways, setback distances from travel lanes to adjacent uses tend to be less, and therefore noise from arterial roadways can result in unacceptably high noise levels at adjacent noise-sensitive land uses. Figure 4.11-1 shows the locations of major roadway noise sources in the City.

Trains/Railroads
The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) owns rail lines that traverse Pismo Beach, carrying UPRR freight trains and Amtrak passenger trains (Appendix C). The UPRR line extends from the Bello Street industrial area at the City’s northern boundary, due south to the vicinity of Pismo State Beach before continuing south to the City of Grover Beach. Two northbound and two southbound trains on Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner route pass through Pismo Beach on a daily basis. Although trains run intermittently, they are a major source of noise due to their volume and groundborne vibration.

Train noise consists of the sounds of the locomotive engine, wheel-on-rail noise, and train whistles near at-grade roadway crossings. For train horns to be an effective warning device for motorists, they must provide a sound level capable of initiating a response from the driver as the train approaches the crossing. Figure 4.11-1 shows the locations of UPRR railroad noise sources in the City.

Aviation
The nearest public airports are the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport located approximately 5 miles due northwest, and the Oceano County Airport located approximately 2 miles to the south.

According to the Airport Land Use Plan (Airport Land Use Commission of San Luis Obispo County [ALUC] 2005) the mapped 60 dB noise contour for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport extends no further than 1,000 feet from the runways in the direction of Pismo Beach; this 60 dB contour is therefore located more than 4.5 miles from Pismo Beach. According to the ALUP for Oceano County Airport (ALUC 2007), the 65 dB noise contour for Oceano Airport extends no closer to Pismo Beach than approximately Farroll Road in Grover Beach (approximately one mile south of the Pismo Beach City limits). High-altitude overflights for aircraft using the San Luis Obispo County Airport occur over the study area, but do not contribute substantially to the ambient noise environment within the study area.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-6
Industrial-Commercial Noise Sources
Industrial Sites
Industrial operations often involve the use of mechanical equipment, generators, and vehicles that contribute to noise levels at industrial sites, particularly if operations occur outdoors (Appendix C).

Pismo Beach has one area designated for industrial uses; the area is situated east of Price Canyon Road, generally north of Bello Street, and along the west side of the UPRR alignment. Currently this area serves as storage and staging for Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E).

Commercial Sites
Most of the commercial businesses in Pismo Beach are aligned along Price Street, Shell Beach Road, 5 Cities Drive, and Hinds Avenue/Price Canyon Road. The Pismo Beach Premium Outlets represents the largest commercial use, by size and in relation to traffic generation. Commercial uses typically generate noise from heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, on-site truck deliveries, trash hauling, and parking lot activity.

Noise Measurements
Existing noise conditions were inventoried by Dudek in October 2019 (Appendix C). Two types of sound-level measurements were taken: short-term (varying from 5 to 30 minutes) measurements along highways and major local roadways; and 24-hour measurements adjacent to the railroad, in the vicinity of the Price Canyon Road industrial area, and adjacent to the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets. Figure 4.11-2 shows the locations of noise measurements. Sound-level measurements were performed using two different integrating sound-level meters: a Rion Model NL-32 (American National Standards Institute [ANSI] Type I) meter, and three SoftdB Piccolo II Model (ANSI Type II) meters. ANSI Type I and Type II sound-level meters both have sufficient accuracy to be used for environmental noise evaluation.

Short-Term Measurements
Since roadway traffic is often a primary contributor to the noise environment in any community, short-term noise measurements were conducted adjacent to selected roadways in Pismo Beach (Appendix C). A total of 10 short-term noise measurements were conducted. Table 4.11-1 shows the noise measurement results. Field data for the noise measurements is provided in Appendix C.

As presented in Table 4.11-1, recorded traffic noise levels range from a high of 73 dBA Leq to a low of 43 dBA Leq. The highest traffic noise levels are associated with U.S. 101, North 4th Street, and Price Canyon Road, with each of these roadways carrying a large number of vehicles at higher speeds.

Dugan Road (ST3) had the lowest recorded noise level; no vehicles passed the measurement point during the measurement. Although no vehicles passed the measurement point on Seacliff Drive (ST1) during the measurement, background surf noise was dominant at this measurement point along the sea cliff, which resulted in a moderate recorded noise level of 55 dBA Leq.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-7
Figure 4.11-2 Noise-Measurement Locations
Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Technical Background Report. (Appendix C) Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-8
Table 4.11-1 Short-Term Sound Level Measurements
Measurement
Number1
Date
Measured2
Measurement Time
Period Leq dBA3 Lmax dBA Lmin dBA Roadway
ST1 10/22/19 11:35 –11:50 a.m. 55 62 50 Seacliff Drive (between Paddock and Baker)
ST2 10/22/19 12:30 – 12:45 p.m. 54 61 49 Ocean Blvd (between Palisade and Seaview)
ST3 10/22/19 2:05 – 2:20 p.m. 43 46 41 Dugan Road (between Christine and Elaine)
ST4 10/22/19 9:40 – 9:45 a.m. 72 76 69 U.S. 101 (at southbound 5 Cities Drive ramps)
ST5 10/22/19 1:00 – 1:10 p.m. 69 83 51 State Route 1 (between Park and Addie)
ST6 10/22/19 10:10 – 10:20 a.m. 73 82 49 North 4th Street (south of 5 Cities Drive)
ST7 10/22/19 10:50 – 11:20 a.m. 66 80 62 Mattie Road (between Foothill and Bayfront)
ST8 10/22/19 1:50 – 2:00 p.m. 67 79 45 North Oak Park Blvd (south of Dell Ct.)
ST9 10/22/19 1:20 – 1:30 p.m. 71 86 48 Price Canyon Road (south of Meadowlark)
ST10 10/22/19 12:00 – 12:15 p.m. 66 83 55 Shell Beach Road (south of Ebb Tide Lane)
1 Figure 4.11-2 shows the locations of short-term noise measurements. 2 Field visit on October 22, 2019, using ANSI Type I integrating sound level meter. 3 The single steady A-weighted level over a 15-minute period.

Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Technical Background Report. (Appendix C) Long-Term Measurements
Three long-term (24-hour) measurements were conducted to characterize environmental noise associated with industrial, commercial, and railroad operations. Table 4.11-2 summarizes the minimum (Lmin) and maximum (Lmax) sound levels recorded for each monitor location during the 24- hour measurement, as well as the calculated 24-hour weighted average noise level (CNEL).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-9
Table 4.11-2 Long-Term Sound Level Measurements
Measurement
Number1 Location2 Noise Source Dates1 CNEL
Lmax
dBA3
Lmin
dBA3
LT1 Closest residences west
of Price Canyon
Industrial Area
Price Canyon
Industrial Area
10/22/19-10/23/19 56 83 37
LT2 Adjacent to UPRR
alignment, vicinity of
Park View Avenue
UPRR train
operations
10/22/19-10/23/19 66 95 43
LT3 Near closest
residences, southwest
corner of Pismo
Premium Outlets
Pismo Premium
Outlets
10/22/19-10/23/19 64 93 43
1 Figure 4.11-2 shows the locations of long-term noise measurements. 2 Field visit from October 22 to 23, 2019, using ANSI Type II integrating sound level meter. 3 Lmax and Lmin values are rounded to the nearest integer.

Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Technical Background Report. (Appendix C) Industrial Noise Sources (LT1)
The only area designated for industrial uses in Pismo Beach is located along the west side of the UPRR alignment, north of Bello Street and east of Price Canyon Road. To characterize industrial noise levels, a 24-hour measurement was conducted along Dell Court, between two widely-spaced residences closest to the western boundary of the industrial area (LT1 in Table 4.11-2). The measurement location is approximately 300 feet from the western boundary of the industrial area.

A 24-hour weighted noise level of 56 CNEL was calculated at this location based on measured hourly average noise levels.

Railroad Noise Sources (LT2)
To characterize community noise levels from train operations, a 24-hour measurement was conducted along the UPRR tracks, in the vicinity of Park View Avenue (LT2 in Table 4.11-2). The measurement location is approximately 40 feet from the center of the tracks. A 24-hour weighted noise level of 66 CNEL was calculated at this location based on measured hourly average noise levels.

Commercial Noise Sources (LT3)
The Pismo Beach Premium Outlets represents the largest commercial use, by size and in relation to traffic generation. To characterize noise levels associated with major commercial operations, a 24- hour measurement was conducted at the southwest corner of the Pismo Premium Outlets, near the closest adjacent residences (LT3 in Table 4.11-2). The measurement location is approximately 55 feet from the southern boundary of the Pismo Premium Outlets site. A 24-hour weighted noise level of 64 CNEL was calculated at this location based on measured hourly average noise levels.

Existing Noise Contours
The TNM 2.5 Traffic Noise Model (FHWA 2004) was used to model existing traffic noise (CNEL) along the roadway segments near the short-term measurement locations ST-2 and ST4 through ST10

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-10
(Appendix C). Traffic counts, vehicle speeds, roadway configuration, and noise levels recorded during the measurements were used to set up and calibrate the model (Appendix C). The model used average daily trip (ADT) data from the Citywide Transportation Model and Circulation Study, Final Report (City of Pismo Beach 2016) for each of the selected highway and roadway segments.

The distances from roadway centerlines to the 70, 65, and 60 CNEL contours were modeled, based on an outdoor attenuation rates of 3 dBA per doubling of distance for a line source. This calculation ignores topography, the presence of structures or walls, and the presence of vegetation, and is therefore very conservative (i.e., the presence of buildings along a roadway would partially or fully block the propagation of sound, reducing the distance from the roadway to the calculated noise contour boundary). Figure 4.11-3 shows existing noise contours.

4.11.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal Regulations
There are no federal noise requirements or regulations that apply directly to the implementation of the GP/LCP Update. However, there are federal regulations that influence the audible landscape, especially for projects where federal funding is involved. For example, FHWA requires abatement of highway traffic noise for highway projects through rules in the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR Part 772), the FTA, and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Each agency recommends thorough noise and vibration assessments through comprehensive guidelines for any highway, mass transit, or high-speed railroad projects that would pass by residential areas. b. State Regulations
California Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations establishes residential insulation standards to be implemented during the building permit and construction process. Title 24 establishes an interior noise standard of 45 dBA for multiple unit residential structures and hotel/motel structures.

Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (Section 2 of Chapter 30:

Highway Traffic Noise Abatement) and 23 CFR 772
These documents specify the Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) for noise-sensitive land uses. The NAC are applicable to new highways and changes to the horizontal or vertical alignment of existing highways and are required for Caltrans and local agency projects that receive Federal funding or require Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approval action. The NAC is an exterior noise level of 67 dBA CNEL for noise sensitive land uses (i.e., picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals).

Caltrans has also published applicable guidelines for vibration annoyance caused by transient and intermittent sources, as shown in Table 4.11-3.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-11
Figure 4.11-3 Existing Noise Contours
Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Noise Element.

Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-12
Table 4.11-3 Caltrans Criteria for Vibration Annoyance
Human Response
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources1 Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources1 Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.9 0.10
Severe 2.0 0.4
1 Caltrans defines transient sources as those that create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls.

Continuous/frequent intermittent sources can include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

Source: Caltrans 2020
In addition, Caltrans has published guidelines for structural damage from vibration, as shown in Table 4.11-4.

Table 4.11-4 Caltrans Criteria for Vibration Damage
Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25
Older residential structures 0.5 0.3
New residential structures 1.0 0.5
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5
Source: Caltrans 2020
c. Local Regulations
City of Pismo Beach General Plan Noise Element
The GP/LCP Update includes updates to the current City of Pismo Beach General Plan Noise Element (2014). The Noise Element is intended to reduce the exposure of people to excessive noise through proactive long-range planning. It sets standards for the compatibility of land uses with ambient noise from transportation sources (identified as “community noise”). Under Policy N-2 of the current Noise Element, the City requires that all new development meet the noise compatibility guidelines shown in Table 4.11-5. Changes to the noise compatibility guidelines proposed as part of the GP/LCP Update are shown in underline and strikethrough in Table 4.11-5. These guidelines describe the ranges of community noise exposure that are acceptable, conditionally acceptable, or unacceptable for various noise-sensitive land uses in the City. For areas where the noise environment is conditionally acceptable for a particular land use, the City only allows development after noise mitigation has been incorporated into the project’s design to reduce noise to acceptable levels.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-13
Table 4.11-5 Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Development Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure (CNEL or Ldn dBA)
Acceptable1
Conditionally
Acceptable2 Unacceptable3
Single-Family Residential4, Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls, Meeting Halls, Churches
65 Multi-Family Residential, Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels
70 Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65
Playgrounds and Parks 75
Schools, Libraries, Museums, Office Buildings 70
1 Acceptable: specified land use is satisfactory. No noise mitigation measures are required. 2 Conditionally acceptable: use should be permitted only after careful study and inclusion of protective measures as needed to satisfy the policies of the Noise Element.
3 Unacceptable: development is usually not feasible in accordance with the goals of the Noise Element. 4 New single-family residences (individual parcel development) are to be exempt from noise studies but shall require a buyer beware notice that acknowledges the residence may experience noise higher than City standards. New single-family subdivision developments (such as the creation of multiple new residential lots) are subject to the noise study requirements and identified exterior noise exposure limits.

Source: City of Pismo Beach 2023 Noise Element
Additionally, the Noise Element sets limits to noise exposure from stationary sources, which apply when a new noise-sensitive land use is proposed, as shown in Table 4.11-6. These noise limits are applied at the property line of the proposed noise-sensitive land use. New development of noise- sensitive land uses may be permitted only where location and design allow the development to meet the daytime and nighttime standards listed in Table 4.11-6. The GP/LCP Update would not change the noise standards for stationary sources shown in Table 4.11-6.

Table 4.11-6 Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure for Noise-Sensitive Uses: Stationary Noise Sources1
Metric
Daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
Hourly Leq dBA2 50 45
Maximum level dBA2 70 65
Maximum level, dBA-Impulsive Noise3 65 60
1 As determined at the property line of the receiving land use. When determining the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the standards may be applied on the receptor side of noise barriers or other property line noise mitigation measures. 2 Sound level measurements shall be made with slow meter response. 3 Sound level measurements shall be made with a fast meter response.

Source: City of Pismo Beach 2023 Noise Element
The Noise Element also prohibits new development where the maximum existing or projected noise levels from transportation exceed the limits shown in Table 4.11-7. Changes to the allowable noise exposure levels proposed as part of the GP/LCP Update are shown in underline and strikethrough in

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-14
Table 4.11-7. For most noise-sensitive land uses, the maximum allowable noise exposure from transportation sources in outdoor activity areas is 60 CNEL or Ldn. The maximum allowable interior noise exposure from transportation noise sources at residential, transient lodging, hospital, and nursing home uses is 45 dBA Ldn.

Table 4.11-7 Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure for Noise Sensitive Users:

Transportation Noise Sources
Outdoor Activity Areas1 Interior Spaces
Land Use Ldn/CNEL dBA CNEL or Ldn dBA Leq dBA2
Single-Family Residential 603 45 −
Transient Lodging, Multi-Family Residential 65 45 −
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 604 45 −
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls 604 − 35
Churches, Meeting Halls 604 − 45
Office Buildings 605 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums 605 − 45
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 − −
1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land use.
2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use. 3 New single-family residences (individual parcel development) are to be exempt from noise studies but shall require a buyer beware notice that acknowledges the residence may experience noise higher than City standards. New single-family subdivision developments (such as creation of multiple new residential lots) are subject to the noise study requirements. For new multi-lot single-family residential development, where is it not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dBA Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best-available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level up to 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. This determination will be made as the result of an acoustical study. 4 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dBA Ldp/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA Ldp/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. This determination will be used as the result of an acoustical study.
will be used as the result of an acoustical study.
5 Where is it not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dBA Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best- available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level up to 70 dBA Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. This determination will be made as the result of an acoustical study.
6 Where is it not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best- available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level up to 70 dBA Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. This determination will be made as the result of an acoustical study.
7 Where is it not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 70 dBA Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best- available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level up to 75 dBA Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. This determination will be made as the result of an acoustical study.

Source: City of Pismo Beach 2023 Noise Element

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-15
Noise Ordinance (Pismo Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 9.24 Noise Control) The Pismo Beach Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.24 Noise Control of the Municipal Code) sets limits to noise generated on properties to protect noise-sensitive land uses. Section 9.24.060 establishes maximum permissible sound levels at receiving land uses. Table 4.11-8 shows exterior noise limits not to be exceeded more than 30 minutes in any hour.

Table 4.11-8 Exterior Noise Limits (Levels Not to be Exceeded More than 30 Minutes in Any Hour)
Zoning Category Time Period Noise Level (dBA)
R1, R2, OSR, OS1, Low Density Residential 10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 50 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 55
R3, R4, RR High Density Residential 10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 50 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 55
C-1, C-2, C-M, C-R Commercial 10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 60 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 65
1 As determined at the property line of the receiving land use. When determining the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the standards may be applied on the receptor side of noise barriers or other property line noise mitigation measures. 2 Sound level measurements shall be made with slow meter response. 3 Sound level measurements shall be made with a fast meter response.

Source: City of Pismo Beach 2014
In addition to the above exterior noise limits, Section 9.24.060 prohibits noise generated on a property from exceeding the following limits when measured on any other property.  The noise standard shown in Table 4.11-8 plus 5 dB for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour; or
 The noise standard shown in Table 4.11-8 plus 10 dB for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour; or
 The noise standard shown in Table 4.11-8 plus 15 dB for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or
 The noise standard shown in Table 4.11-8 plus 20 dB for any period of time.

Section 9.24.050 provides noise standards for loading activity, construction, and mechanical equipment. Loading activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 p.m. is prohibited if it causes a noise disturbance across a residential or visitor serving real property line, or if it exceeds the exterior noise standards in Section 9.24.060. Construction activity is prohibited between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and anytime on weekends and holidays if it creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line. Table 4.11-9 shows the City’s standards for noise generated by mobile and stationary construction equipment, as received at residential properties.

The mobile noise standards apply to equipment used less than 10 days, while the stationary noise standards apply to equipment used for 10 days or more.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-16
Table 4.11-9 Construction Noise Limits at Residential Properties Equipment Time
Single-Family
Residential Zone
(R-1)
Multi-Family
Residential Zones
(R-2, R-3, R-4, R-R,
OSR, OS1)
Mixed Residential/
Commercial
(C-R, C-1, C-2, C-M)
Mobile 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily,
except Sundays and legal
holidays
75 dBA 80 dBA 85 dBA
7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. daily and
all day Sunday and legal holidays
60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
Stationary 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily,
except Sundays and legal
holidays
60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. daily and
all day Sunday and legal holidays
50 dBA 55 dBA 60 dBA
Source: City of Pismo Beach 2020
Section 9.24.050 also sets standards for construction noise received at business properties. Noise levels from mobile equipment are limited to 85 dBA, while noise levels from stationary equipment may not exceed 75 dBA. All mobile stationary equipment or machinery powered by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with suitable exhaust and air-take silencers in proper working order.

This section also prohibits noise generated by residential air-conditioning and air-handling equipment from exceeding 55 dBA at neighboring property lines and 50 dBA outside the windows of neighboring living areas.

In addition, Section 9.24.050 prohibits the use of devices that generate vibration above the perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property or at 150 feet if on a public space or right-of-way.

4.11.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
In accordance with Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a significant noise impact would occur if new development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would:

1. Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;

2. Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or

3. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-17
This section does not analyze the exposure of new noise-sensitive land uses to ambient noise because it is an impact of the environment on the project. The California Supreme Court held in a December 2015 opinion (BIA v. BAAQMD) that an analysis of impacts of the environment on a project is not required for CEQA compliance. It should also be noted that the GP/LCP Update is a programmatic land use plan update and does not propose specific new development. A qualitative discussion is provided to determine whether the GP/LCP Update would facilitate new development that would result in noise conflicts that would impact the environment.

Construction Noise
This section estimates construction noise from development facilitated by the proposed GP/LCP Update based on reference noise levels reported by the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) for various pieces of construction equipment. This analysis makes a conservative assumption that construction equipment typically operates as close as 50 feet from the nearest receptors when construction activity occurs adjacent to sensitive receivers. Construction activity would usually occur farther from the property lines of sensitive receivers. Construction noise level estimates also do not account for the presence of intervening structures or topography, which could reduce noise levels at receptor locations. New development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would have a significant impact if temporary construction noise during permitted daytime hours could expose sensitive receivers to noise levels that exceed the City’s standards shown in Table 4.11-9, or that substantially exceed existing ambient noise levels.

Groundborne Vibration
Although Section 9.24.050 of the Pismo Beach Municipal Code prohibits the generation of vibration above the perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary, it does not provide a specific numeric threshold. This analysis assumes that Caltrans’ criteria for distinctly perceptible vibration, as shown in Table 4.11-3, are representative of the Municipal Code’s perception threshold. In addition, this analysis applies Caltrans’ criteria for structural damage caused by vibration, as shown in Table 4.11-4. If development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update could generate vibration levels exceeding Caltrans’ criteria for human annoyance or structural damage, a significant impact would occur.

As discussed above, train activity is a major operational source of vibration in Pismo Beach. Because the GP/LCP Update would not facilitate an increase in train activity or allow for the introduction of other major operational sources of vibration, this analysis focuses on potential vibration impacts during construction activity.

On-site Operational Noise
New development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would include on-site noise sources such as HVAC equipment, delivery trucks, and trash hauling. On-site equipment and activities would have a significant impact if such activities would expose neighboring noise-sensitive land uses to noise levels exceeding applicable City’s noise standards. Section 9.24.050 of the Municipal Code prohibits noise generated by residential air-conditioning and air-handling equipment from exceeding 55 dBA at neighboring property lines and 50 dBA outside the windows of neighboring living areas.

Table 4.11-8 shows the City’s limits for exterior noise generated on properties, as measured at receiving property lines.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-18
Increase in Traffic Noise
This analysis relies on noise contour modeling prepared in the Technical Background Report for the GP/LCP Update (Appendix C). Highway noise contours for the year 2040 were modeled using forecasted average daily traffic in the Citywide Transportation Model and Circulation Study (City of Pismo Beach 2016) for each of the selected highway segments. City street noise contours for the year 2040 were modeled using forecasted average daily traffic in the proposed Circulation Element and Technical Background Report prepared by Dudek for the proposed Noise Element update (Appendix C) for each of the selected roadway segments. In order to extend the forecast to Year 2040, Dudek applied the annual growth rate of 0.053 percent indicated in the 2019 Regional Transportation Plan (SLOCOG 2019). To assess the increase in noise-sensitive receivers’ exposure to traffic noise during buildout facilitated by the GP/LCP Update, existing and future noise contours are compared. Proposed GP/LCP Update policies are then evaluated to determine their ability in protecting noise-sensitive receivers from excessive increases in ambient noise. b. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
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.

Noise from individual construction projects carried out under buildout of the GP/LCP Update would temporarily increase ambient noise levels near construction sites. Full buildout of the GP/LCP Update would involve substantial construction activity through the year 2040, adding an estimated 1,111 housing units and 783,268 square feet of non-residential building area in Pismo Beach. Since there are no specific plans or time scales for individual development projects at this time, it is not possible to determine exact noise levels, locations, or time periods for construction of such projects.

However, sites adjacent to vacant and underutilized properties where development is anticipated to occur, especially in downtown Pismo Beach, would be exposed to the highest levels of construction noise for the longest duration.

Major noise-generating construction activities would include demolition of existing buildings and structures, site preparation, grading and excavation, building construction, and paving. Construction noise would vary based on the type of construction equipment, the location and sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities at each individual project. Table 4.11-10 shows typical noise levels generated by common types of construction equipment at distances of 50, 100, and 200 feet from the source (FTA 2018).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-19
Table 4.11-10 Noise Levels Generated by Common Construction Equipment Equipment
Typical Noise Level 50 Feet
from Source (dBA)
Typical Noise Level 100 Feet
from Source (dBA)
Typical Noise Level 200 Feet
from Source (dBA)
Air Compressor 80 74 68
Backhoe 80 74 68
Compactor 82 76 70
Concrete Mixer 85 79 73
Concrete Pump 82 76 70
Concrete Vibrator 76 70 64
Crane, Derrick 88 82 76
Crane, Mobile 83 77 71
Dozer 85 79 73
Generator 82 76 70
Grader 85 79 73
Jack Hammer 88 82 76
Loader 80 74 68
Paver 85 79 73
Pneumatic Tool 85 79 73
Roller 85 79 73
Scraper 85 79 73
Truck 84 78 72
Source: FTA 2018
As shown in Table 4.11-10, noise levels produced by individual construction equipment would reach an estimated 88 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source (e.g., cranes, jack hammers). This is representative of the exposure of sensitive receivers on adjacent properties to construction sites.

Noise from stationary sources of equipment typically drops off at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Therefore, noise levels would be about 6 dBA lower at 100 feet from the noise source and 12 dBA lower at a distance of 200 feet from the noise source, in comparison to the minimum distance of 50 feet. In addition to the typical equipment listed in Table 4.11-10, pile drivers are sometimes used in construction of multi-story buildings (especially six stories or higher) with pile foundations. Pile drivers, if used, are the loudest construction equipment. As noted in Section 2, Project Description, the GP/LCP Update would not allow new buildings more than 45 feet tall. Because of height restrictions, this analysis assumes that pile drivers would not be required for new construction or redevelopment in Pismo Beach.

Construction noise generated by individual developments under buildout of the GP/LCP Update would be regulated by the allowed hours of operation and noise limits set by the Pismo Beach Municipal Code. Section 9.24.050 of the Municipal Code prohibits construction activity between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and anytime on weekends and holidays if it creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line. In addition, construction activity would be subject to the City’s standards for noise generated by mobile and stationary construction equipment, as shown in Table 4.11-9.

The following policies and actions of the Noise Element of the GP/LCP Update would minimize the potential impacts associated with construction noise within the City:

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-20
 Action N-1.1b Enforce Construction Noise Standards. Enforce the construction noise standards as outlined in the Pismo Beach Noise Ordinance (Pismo Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 9.24 Noise Control) and identify applicable restrictions and controls for meeting these requirements with each building permit application.  Policy N-1.2 Noise Mitigation and Attenuation. Mitigate the effect of noise from new commercial uses, project-generated traffic, and short-term construction on residential and other noise-sensitive land uses by applying feasible noise mitigation measures.

Pursuant to Action 1.1b (Enforce Construction Noise Standards), the City would continue to apply its existing Municipal Code standards for construction noise and would “identify applicable restrictions and controls for meeting these requirements with each building permit application.” Policy 1.2 in the Noise Element also would require the use of feasible noise mitigation measures to control short- term construction noise at sensitive receivers.

The temporary nature of construction noise and the City’s restrictions on the timing and manner of construction activities described in the Pismo Beach Municipal Code would reduce noise impacts at nearby noise-sensitive receivers. Policies and actions in the GP/LCP Update Noise Element would further reduce potential impacts to noise-sensitive receivers from temporary construction noise, ensuring that construction noise does not exceed the City’s standards. Therefore, the impact of construction noise from development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 1: Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
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 THE GP/LCP UPDATE WOULD ENSURE THAT TRAFFIC NOISE WOULD HAVE A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.

Full buildout of the GP/LCP Update, over a period of 20 years, is anticipated to add 1,111 housing units and 783,268 square feet of non-residential building area in Pismo Beach. Much of the growth and change in Pismo Beach would occur in vacant and underutilized sites in the Downtown Core and along the U.S. 101 corridor. New development on a given site would typically cause a net increase in vehicle trips, relative to trips generated by existing uses. By generating new vehicle trips, new development would incrementally increase the exposure of land uses along roadways in Pismo Beach to traffic noise.

Figure 4.11-4 shows the predicted noise contours from traffic activity in the year 2040. The U.S. 101 and Price Canyon Road corridors would be within the 65 CNEL contour. Most of the City would be within the 60 CNEL contour associated with traffic on U.S. 101.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-21
Figure 4.11-4 2040 Noise Contours
Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Noise Element
Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits. .

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-22
These noise levels are a conservative estimate of future noise levels because they do not account for site-specific conditions that may reduce exposure to ambient noise, such as intervening structures and topography between noise sources and receivers. Table 4.11-11 shows the modeled change in distances to the 65 and 60 CNEL noise contours associated with studied roadway segments, comparing existing conditions to the year 2040.

Table 4.11-11 Existing and 2040 Roadway Noise Contours
Roadway
Existing
Distance to 65
CNEL (feet)
Year 2040
Distance to 65
CNEL (feet)
Existing
Distance to 60
CNEL (feet)
Year 2040
Distance to 60
CNEL (feet)
State Route 1 70 79 223 250
U.S. 101: Price St to Mattie Rd 561 629 1,774 1,991
U.S. 101: north of Avila Beach Dr 574 644 1,815 2,037
U.S. 101: south of Oak Park Blvd 574 644 1,815 2,037
U.S. 101: Price St South to Price St North 574 644 1,815 2,037 U.S. 101: Mattie Rd to Spyglass Dr 587 659 1,858 2,084
U.S. 101: Spyglass Dr to Avila Beach Dr 601 674 1,901 2,133 U.S. 101: Oak Park Blvd to Fourth St 723 811 2,285 2,564 US. 101: Fourth St to Price St 792 889 2,506 2,812
Ocean Blvd N/A N/A N/A N/A
North Fourth St 137 161 434 510
Mattie Rd/Noyes Rd N/A N/A N/A N/A
North Oak Park Blvd 112 134 353 425
Price Canyon Rd 100 125 315 396
Shell Beach Rd N/A N/A N/A N/A
Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Technical Background Report. (Appendix C) As shown in Table 4.11-11, the noise contours associated with major roadways in Pismo Beach would incrementally expand during buildout of the GP/LCP Update. For example, the modeled 65 CNEL noise contour along the segment of U.S. 101 from Fourth Street to Price Street currently extends 792 feet from the highway’s centerline, but it would extend to 889 feet in the year 2040 (an increase of approximately 100 feet). This would expose additional noise-sensitive land uses to increases in traffic noise. The changes to the allowable noise levels from transportation sources (Table 4.11-7) in the GP/LCP Update would generally be more restrictive, with the exception of noise levels at transient and multifamily residential uses where the allowable outdoor noise level would increase from 60 to 65 Ldn/CNEL dBA.

The GP/LCP Update Noise Element includes the following goals, policies, and actions intended to reduce exposure to traffic noise.

Goal N-1: A quiet and healthful environment with minimal noise intrusion.  Policy N-1.2 - Noise Mitigation and Attenuation. Mitigate the effect of noise from new commercial uses, project-generated traffic, and short-term construction on residential and other noise-sensitive land uses by applying feasible noise mitigation measures

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-23
 Action N-1.2d - Attenuate Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts Near Sensitive Uses.

Proposed discretionary developments that may result in an increase in traffic on roadways near existing noise-sensitive uses above levels allowed in the General Plan, should include, as appropriate and feasible, traffic calming design, low-noise pavement surfaces, sound barriers, or vegetated berms in order to minimize motor vehicle traffic noise. Traffic calming design could include:
– Digital speed monitors
– Flashing crosswalk beacons
– Reduced speed limits
 Policy N-1.3 - Existing Land Use Incompatibilities. Help mitigate noise levels among existing incompatible land uses, as feasible, to enhance quality of life for noise impacted residents and other sensitive receptors.
 Action N-1.3c - Support Attenuation of Highway Noise. The City should support efforts to reduce traffic noise levels on Highway 1 and Highway 101 along sections in proximity to concentrated residential development through prioritized roadway surface maintenance, use of noise-reducing surface treatments, traffic-safe tree or shrub plantings, window upgrades in facades of buildings facing the freeway, or, in cases of significant noise exposure, use of lower speed limits, as preferred alternatives over potential construction of sound walls. The City should advocate for Caltrans to contribute to the cost of these improvements, where feasible. Pismo Beach should also encourage enforcement of California Vehicle Code sections relating to adequate mufflers and modified exhaust systems.

Goal N-2: A pattern of land uses that protects residents and other sensitive receptors from excessive noise.
 Policy N-2.1 - Land Use Planning. Create general plan land use and zoning patterns that prevent or buffer community residents and other sensitive receptors from incompatible land uses.  Action N-2.1a - Consider Noise Compatibility in Land Use Planning. The City shall consider the compatibility of proposed land uses and the noise environment when revising the General Plan and zoning documents and when reviewing development proposals. Noise levels for proposed land uses shall be consistent with the noise levels presented in Table N-5 (general noise exposure guidelines), Table N-6 (stationary noise source limits), and Table N- 7 (transportation noise exposure limits).
 Action N-2.1b - Prohibit or Attenuate New Sensitive Uses in Noise-Impacted Areas. .

Prohibit new development of transient lodging and multi-family residences in transportation noise impacted areas (as generally depicted by the limit of the 65 dBA CNEL contours illustrated on Figure N-4, 2040 Noise Contours) unless the project design includes effective noiseattenuation measures that (a) reduce exterior noise to 70 dB Ldn/CNEL or less in exterior activity areas; and (b) prohibit new development of single-family residential subdivisions or other noise-sensitive land uses with a maximum exterior noise exposure level of 60 dB Ldn/CNEL (Table N-7) in noise-impacted areas (as generally depicted by the limit of the 60 dBA CNEL contours illustrated on Figure N-4, 2040 Noise Contours) unless the project design includes effective noise-attenuation measures that reduce exterior noise to the conditionally acceptable dB Ldn/CNEL or less in exterior activity areas and that are no greater than the applicable interior limit in Table N-7 in interior spaces with windows and

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-24
doors closed, by using the best available noise-reduction technology, which may include the following techniques:
– Increase the distance between noise generators and noise-sensitive uses through the use of increased building setbacks and/or the dedication of noise easements. – Place noise-tolerant land elements of the site plan such as parking lots, maintenance facilities, and utility areas between vicinity noise generators and on-site receivers. – Use noise-tolerant structures, such as garages or carports, to shield noise-sensitive areas.
– Orient buildings so that the noise-sensitive portions of a project, including outdoor areas, are shielded from noise sources.
– Use berms and heavy landscaping to reduce noise levels. – Use sound-attenuating architectural design and building features, such as:
 Courtyards
 Oriented openings and windows away from roadways
 Double and triple paned windows
 Additional layers of insulation, plywood, and drywall in the exterior building shell construction
 Mechanical ventilation where feasible
Noise reductions associated with exterior traffic noise exposure are heavily dependent upon the configuration of site improvements with respect to the traffic noise source.

Locating the primary exterior use area on the opposite side of a structure from the roadway can typically achieve a noise exposure level compliant with the 60 dBA CNEL recommended maximum exposure. With regard to building construction to achieve adequate interior noise attenuation, Pismo Beach shall enforce the State Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) and Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code. Refer also to Table N-8 (above) which identifies construction- related noise controls for residences, as a function of exterior noise level exposure from transportation sources.
 Action N-2.1c - Highway Noise. Minimize vehicular and noise exposure for residents and occupants of noise-sensitive uses by planning land uses compatible with transportation corridors, and applying noise attenuation designs and construction standards.

Implementation of the above goals, policies, and actions would require attenuation of traffic noise generated by projects near sensitive uses (e.g., traffic calming, sound barriers, vegetated berms), and siting and design of new land uses to prevent exposure to excessive noise. In addition, pursuant to Policy 4.1.98 in the Circulation Element, the City would continue to designate truck routes as Price Canyon Road, State Route 1, and U.S. 101, providing clear signage from regional gateways to the City. Maintenance of truck routes would reduce the exposure of residences on local streets to traffic noise. Therefore, buildout of the GP/LCP Update would avoid generation of excessive traffic noise. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-25
Threshold 1: Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
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.

Full buildout of the GP/LCP Update would involve substantial construction activity through the year 2040, adding an estimated 1,111 housing units and 783,268 square feet of non-residential building area in Pismo Beach. This new development would introduce on-site activities that generate operational noise. Typical noise sources at new development would include parking lot activity, rooftop-mounted HVAC equipment, truck deliveries, and trash hauling. To protect new noise- sensitive land uses from excessive exposure to stationary noise, the GP/LCP Update would maintain existing standards shown in Table 4.11-6: new development of noise-sensitive land uses would only be allowed where its location and design ensure attainment of daytime and nighttime standards.

Existing noise limits in the Pismo Beach Municipal Code for stationary equipment, as shown in Table 4.11-8, also would continue to apply to new development. In addition, new development would be required to comply with the land use compatibility guidelines shown in Table 4.11-6. The changes to the land use compatibility guidelines in the GP/LCP Update would generally be more restrictive, with the exception of noise levels at transient and multifamily residential uses where the allowable outdoor noise level would increase from 60 to 65 Ldn/CNEL dBA.

The following goals, policies, and actions in the GP/LCP Update Noise Element would ensure continued application of local standards for on-site noise.

Goal N-1 - A quiet and healthful environment with minimal noise intrusion.  Policy N-1.1 - Noise Generation Standards. Minimize the impact of noise generators by applying clear and appropriate standards during permit review and subsequent monitoring.  Action N-1.1a - Enforce Stationary Noise Source Levels. Enforce maximum and average noise level limits on permitted stationary sources based upon their impact on the property line of the nearest noise-sensitive receptor as outlined in Table N-6 [see Table 4.11-6 of this EIR].
 Policy N-1.2 - Noise Mitigation and Attenuation. Mitigate the effect of noise from new commercial uses, project-generated traffic, and short-term construction on residential and other noise-sensitive land uses by applying feasible noise mitigation measures.  Action N-1.2a - Attenuate Project-Related Stationary Source Noise Impacts. After the applicable environmental review is finished, the City shall work with project applicants to attenuate stationary source noise impacts. Projects shall be designed to avoid long-term noise impacts or reduce those impacts using the following methods, or similar methods, as appropriate to meet the applicable noise levels presented in Table N-6 [see Table 4.11-6 of this EIR]:
– Create a distance buffer between stationary mechanical equipment and noise-sensitive receivers by placing parking lots, storm drain facilities, and landscaping between major stationary equipment and adjacent receivers.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-26
– Provide sound barriers or enclosures for equipment with significant sound-generation – Where possible, place on-site buildings between major noise-generating equipment and the location of the closest adjacent noise-sensitive land use. – Where possible, locate/orient/direct/face/position noise-generating use in such a way that minimizes noise for noise-sensitive receivers.
– Use facility perimeter sound barriers (i.e., solid walls) or landscaped berms to reduce noise levels at immediately adjacent noise-sensitive uses.  Action N-1.2b - Require Noise Studies for Proposed Commercial Developments (CEQA).

When a proposed commercial development has the potential to generate noise levels that exceed the standards presented in Table N-6 [Table 4.11-6], a noise study and acceptable noise attenuation techniques to assure compliance with Table N-6 shall be required. For such commercial projects, the environmental review process required by CEQA shall be employed to identify the required analysis and determine appropriate mitigation. For the purpose of completing CEQA review, future noise levels shall be predicted for a period of at least 10 years from the beginning of environmental document review process. Adherence to mitigation required to address significant noise impacts (as identified in the CEQA review document) shall be ensured via their incorporation in a required Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), to be adopted concurrent with approval of permits for the project. Adherence to mitigation described above shall also be ensured through conditions of approval. New single-family residences are to be exempt from noise studies, but shall require a buyer beware notice that acknowledges the residence may experience noise higher than City standards.
 Action N-1.2c - Noise Study Requirements. When a commercial project has the potential to generate noise levels in excess of Plan standards, a noise study and acceptable plans to assure compliance with the standards shall be required. The noise study shall measure or model the following, as appropriate: CNEL, Leq, and Lmax levels at property lines and, if feasible, receptor locations. Noise studies shall be prepared by qualified individuals using calibrated equipment under currently accepted professional standards and include an analysis of the characteristics of the project in relation to noise levels, all feasible mitigations, and projected noise impacts. Noise studies shall:
– Be the responsibility of the applicant, but accepted by the Planning Department. – Include representative noise level measurements with sufficient sampling periods and locations to adequately describe local conditions.
– Estimate existing and projected (10 years) noise levels in terms of CNEL standards in Table N-6 or Table N-7 [see Table 4.11-6 and Table 4.11-7 of this EIR], and compare predicted noise levels against such standards.
– Recommend appropriate mitigation to achieve compliance with the adopted policies and standards of the Noise Element and Noise Ordinance. – Predict noise exposure at the property line after the prescribed mitigation measures have been implemented (quantify the noise reduction achieved by the mitigations). If the project does not comply with the adopted standards of the Noise Element and Noise Ordinance, the analysis must provide acoustical information for a statement of overriding considerations for the project.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-27
 Policy N-1.3 - Existing Land Use Incompatibilities. Help mitigate noise levels among existing incompatible land uses, as feasible, to enhance quality of life for noise impacted residents and other sensitive receptors.
 Action N-1.3a - Mitigate Stationary Source Noise Impacts on Existing Residential and Other Sensitive Uses as Feasible. Upon receiving noise complaints, City Planning staff shall investigate the noise source associated with the complaint to determine if a violation of ordinance-specified noise limits is occurring. Such investigation may include the direct measurement of sound levels using a sound-level meter, or requiring the operator of the sound source to retain an acoustical professional to complete such measurements and analysis. Where sound levels exceed noise limits for stationary sound sources (i.e., Table N-6 [Table 4.11-6]) the operator shall be required to install controls or alter operations in order to achieve compliance with the noise limits. Where sound levels investigated as the result of a complaint are in compliance, City Planning staff or the retained acoustical consultant may provide recommendations for reducing sound level annoyance in exterior or interior areas of the property for which the complaint has been submitted. The recommendations may be followed on a voluntary basis, but cannot be used to compel the noise generator into reducing sound levels to less than those required in Table N-6.  Action N-1.3b - Noise Complaint Investigation. When a noise complaint is submitted, City Planning staff shall investigate the noise source associated with the complaint to determine if a violation of noise ordinance limits is occurring. If the noise level from the offending source is clearly audible over the background noise levels at the property line of the complainant, an investigation would assume to be warranted. Such investigation may include the direct measurement of sound levels by City staff using a sound-level meter or requiring the operator of the sound source to retain an acoustical professional to complete such measurements and analysis. The investigation shall include:
– Completion of sound level measurements using a sound-level meter meeting American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Type 1 or Type 2 specifications. – A measurement location at the property line of the receiving property located closest to the noise source associated with the complaint.
– Measurements for an appropriate duration to assess compliance with the applicable standard (for Leq based standard, the measurement shall be no less than one hour, while the noise source is operating; for the CNEL standard, the sound measurement shall be not less than 24 hours in duration). Periodic measurements for temporary events or non-standard operating circumstances may be warranted to ensure compliance.
– Reporting that includes Leq and Lmax values, as well as calculated CNEL levels (where appropriate) associated with the noise measurements, and comparison of these noise levels with the Noise Element Policy and Noise Ordinance Standards. – Recommendations for the operator of the noise source to achieve compliance (if a violation is occurring), or guidance for the receiving property to reduce noise exposure (if the noise is within allowable limits). The City can provide good neighbor policies to the noise generating properties, however, if the noise is within allowable limits, these suggestions shall not be enforceable.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-28
Implementation of the above goals, policies, and actions in the GP/LCP Update would provide for compliance with and enforcement of the City’s noise standards for stationary noise sources. The continued regulation of on-site noise, consistent with the Municipal Code, would minimize disturbance to new and existing noise-sensitive land uses. Therefore, on-site operational noise at new development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would have a less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 2: Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
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.

Construction of individual projects facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would intermittently generate vibration on and adjacent to construction sites. Typical construction equipment that produces vibration includes vibratory rollers for paving, caisson drills, bulldozers, loaded trucks, and jackhammers. This analysis assumes that construction activity would not involve the use of vibration-generating pile drivers, as discussed in Impact N-1. Table 4.11-12 shows estimated maximum vibration levels from potential construction equipment at noise-sensitive receivers located 25, 50, 100, and 200 feet from the source equipment.

Table 4.11-12 Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment at Noise-Sensitive Receivers Estimated PPV (in/sec) at Nearest Sensitive Receivers
Equipment 25 Feet 50 Feet 100 Feet 200 Feet
Caisson Drill 0.089 0.042 0.019 0.009
Vibratory Roller 0.210 0.098 0.046 0.021
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.042 0.019 0.009
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.035 0.017 0.008
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Sources: FTA 2018
The vibration sources shown in Table 4.11-12 may move back and forth near a property line for a few hours at a time but do not generate intermittent vibration from a single location for an extended period of time. Therefore, this analysis defines them as “transient” sources under the Caltrans vibration criteria. Based on Table 4.11-12, vibration levels from vibratory rollers used in paving activity could reach 0.210 PPV at a distance of 25 feet from the source and 0.098 PPV at 50 feet. This would not exceed Caltrans’ criterion of 0.25 PPV for distinctly perceptible vibration from transient source (see Table 4.11-3). Transient vibration-generating equipment also would not result in vibration levels exceeding Caltrans’ criterion of 0.5 PPV for damage to historic and older buildings (see Table 4.11-4).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.11-29
Compliance with Section 9.24.050 of the Municipal Code would prohibit construction activity between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and anytime on weekends and holidays if it creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line. This requirement for new development would protect residents from exposure to vibration during normal sleeping hours.

Because estimated vibration intensities would not exceed applicable criteria for human annoyance and structure damage, and City requirements would limit the timing of vibration exposure, the impact related to vibration would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 3: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
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.

As discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the nearest public airports to the City are the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport located approximately 5 miles due northwest, and the Oceano County Airport, located approximately 2 miles to the south. The City is located outside of the mapped noise contours associated with aircraft departures and landings at these airports (ALUC 2005, 2007). The mapped 60 dB noise contour for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport extends no further than 1,000 feet from the runways in the direction of Pismo Beach; this 60 dB contour is therefore located more than 4.5 miles from Pismo Beach. High-altitude overflights for aircraft using the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport occur over Pismo Beach, but do not substantially contribute to the ambient noise environment in the City. In addition, the 65 dB noise contour for Oceano County Airport extends no closer to Pismo Beach than approximately Farroll Road in Grover Beach (approximately one mile south of Pismo Beach City limits). Therefore, development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would have a less than significant impact from exposure to aircraft noise.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

4.11.4 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative development near Pismo Beach would generate noise and vibration. However, noise and vibration are localized and rapidly attenuate in an urban environment. Therefore, this subsection assumes defines the area of analysis for cumulative noise impacts as Pismo Beach and immediately surrounding lands in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County and the cities of Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande. Although construction of cumulative projects outside Pismo Beach would generate temporary, localized noise and vibration, construction would typically not occur at the same time and sufficiently close to projects within the city to result in a greater cumulative impact.

Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would not considerably contribute to significant cumulative impacts related to construction noise and vibration.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.11-30
Cumulative development also would add sources of on-site operational noise in and near Pismo Beach. It is expected that new residential, commercial, and other development would involve parking lot activity, the operation of HVAC equipment, and loading and trash hauling trucks. As discussed in Impact N-3, implementation of goals, policies, and actions in the GP/LCP Update would provide for compliance with and enforcement of the City’s noise standards for stationary noise sources. Similarly, cumulative development outside City limits would be subject to corresponding local regulations of San Luis Obispo County and the cities Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande to protect sensitive receivers from exposure to excessive noise levels. Therefore, on-site operational noise generated by development under the GP/LCP Update would not considerably contribute to a significant cumulative impact.

Cumulative development in and near Pismo Beach would generate vehicle trips that increase traffic noise levels. The predicted noise contours for the year 2040, as shown in Figure 4.11-4, account for regional growth in traffic volumes. They are based on an annual growth rate identified in SLOCOG’s 2019 Regional Transportation Plan. Therefore, the traffic noise analysis in Impact N-2 accounts for traffic noise generated by cumulative growth. As discussed in Impact N-2, implementation of GP/LCP Update policies for transportation-related noise would reduce noise and avoid generation of excessive noise from the local highways and City streets, which would minimize the exposure of sensitive receivers to traffic noise. Therefore, the overall contribution of the GP/LCP Update to cumulative traffic noise would not be cumulatively considerable.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.12-1

4.12 Population and Housing
This section evaluates the potential population growth and potential displacement of housing impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update.

Population and housing data are available on a city, county, regional, and state level. This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) uses data collected and provided at the City level in comparison to County and State trends.

4.12.1 Setting
a. Population
As shown in Table 4.12-1, the City of Pismo Beach had an estimated 2019 population of 8,237 (California Department of Finance [DOF] 2020). Table 4.12-1 also shows population growth in the unincorporated County. Between 2010 and 2019, the City’s population grew at a higher rate than the County and grew at a slightly greater rate than the State. The City’s 2019 population represents approximately 0.03 percent of the County’s 2019 population.

Table 4.12-1 Population Growth in the City, County, and State Year Pismo Beach San Luis Obispo County California
2010 7,655 269,637 37,253,956
Existing (2019)1 8,237 278,355 39,695,376
Percent Change from 2010 to 2019 7.6% 3.2% 6.5%
1 The existing conditions used for GP/LCP Update buildout projections was based on the 2019 data from the San Luis Obispo County Assessor’s Office. Therefore, 2019 was used as the existing conditions year in the analysis for population and housing.

Source: DOF 2020
b. Housing
A household is defined as a group of people who occupy a housing unit (U.S. Census Bureau 2020). A household differs from a dwelling unit because the number of dwelling units includes both occupied and vacant dwelling units. Typically, not all of the population in a given area lives in households. A portion of the population lives in group quarters, such as board and care facilities, while others are homeless.

Housing Units
Table 4.12-2 shows the growth in number of housing units in the City and the State between 2010 and 2019. As shown in Table 4.12-2, between 2010 and 2019, 247 units were added to the City’s housing inventory resulting in overall growth of 4.4 percent during this period. Between 2010 and 2019, the County and State grew at a higher rate of 4.6 percent and 4.1 percent, respectively.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.12-2
Table 4.12-2 Housing Inventory

Pismo Beach San Luis Obispo County California
2010 2019 2010 2019 2010 2019
Total Housing Units 5,585 5,832 117,315 122,810 13,670,304 14,235,201 Occupied 3,834 4,215 102,016 108,062 12,568,167 13,188,852 Vacancy Rate 31.4% 27.7% 13.0% 12.0% 8.1% 7.4%
Growth from 2010 to 2019 4.4% 4.6% 4.1%
Source: DOF 2020
In 2019, approximately 3,413 of the housing units in the City were single-family detached homes, approximately 618 units were attached single-family homes, approximately 1,041 units were multi- family units (buildings of at least two units), and approximately 760 units were mobile homes.

Household Size
Small households (one to two persons per household [pph]) traditionally occupy units with zero to two bedrooms; family households (three to four pph) normally occupy units with three to four bedrooms. Large households (five or more pph) typically occupy units with four or more bedrooms.

The number of units in relation to the household size may reflect preference and economics. Many small households obtain larger units and some large households live in small units, for economic reasons. Table 4.12-3 compares the size of households in the City, County, and State in 2010 and 2019.

Table 4.12-3 Household Size in the City, County, and State Pismo Beach San Luis Obispo County California
Year 2010 2019 2010 2019 2010 2019
Household Size (pph) 1.99 1.95 2.48 2.43 2.90 2.95
Growth from 2010 to 2019 -2.0% -2.0% 1.7%
Source: DOF 2020
As shown in Table 4.12-3, the average household size in Pismo Beach decreased from 1.99 pph in 2010 to 1.95 pph in 2019 (a decrease of approximately 2 percent). Over the same period, household size in the County decreased from 2.48 to 2.43 pph (a decrease of approximately 2 percent) and household size in the State increased from 2.90 to 2.95 pph (an increase of approximately 2 percent). Between 2010 and 2019, the City maintained a lower average household size in comparison to the County and State average household sizes.

4.12.2 Regulatory Setting
a. State Regulations
State Housing Element Statutes
State housing element statutes (Government Code Sections 65580-65589.9) mandate that local governments adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The law recognizes that in order for the private market to adequately

Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.12-3
address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development. As a result, State housing policy rests largely upon the effective implementation of local general plans and in particular, housing elements. Additionally, Government Code §65588 dictates that housing elements must be updated at least once every eight years. b. Regional Regulations
Regional Housing Needs Assessment
California’s Housing Element law requires that each county and city develop local housing programs to meet their “fair share” of existing and future housing growth needs for all income groups, as determined by the DOF. The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) is tasked with distributing the total State-projected housing need for the San Luis Obispo Region among SLOCOG’s seven cities and the County’s unincorporated communities by four income categories (extremely low and very low, low, moderate, and above moderate). This fair share allocation is referred to as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process. This RHNA allocation represents the minimum number of housing units by income level each community is required to plan for through a combination of: 1) zoning “adequate sites” at suitable densities that foster affordability; and 2) housing programs to support retention, rehabilitation, and production of lower income units with a reasonable degree of entitlement certainty. Pismo Beach’s allocation from the SLOCOG Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP), covering 2014 through 2019 and distributed among the four income categories, is shown in Table 4.12-4.

Table 4.12-4 Regional Housing Needs Assessment 2014-2019 Income Group RHNA Allocation (units) % of Total
Very Low 113 25%
Low 71 15.5%
Moderate 82 18.0%
Above Moderate 193 41.9%
Total 459 100.0%
Source: SLOCOG 2019

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.12-4
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
As discussed in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, the City of Pismo Beach is located within the SLOCOG planning area. SLOCOG functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for San Luis Obispo County and the towns and cities therein, and is responsible for preparing and implementing the region’s RHNA and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS is a long-term blueprint of the region’s transportation system, requires updates ever four years, and plans for a 20-year or more timeframe. The plan identifies and analyzes transportation needs of the metropolitan region and creates a framework for project priorities. SLOCOG adopted an updated RTP/SCS on June 5, 2019. SLOCOG projections for the planning area consider regional, state, and national economic trends and planning policies. c. Local Regulations
City of Pismo Beach Housing Element
The Housing Element is one of the seven State-mandated elements of the General Plan (Government Code Sections 65300 through 65303.4). The Housing Element serves as a tool to identify and provide for the housing needs of the community. It identifies recent demographic and employment trends that may affect existing and future housing demand and supply. California law requires the Housing Element to establish policies and programs that will support the provision of an adequate housing supply for citizens of all income levels. The Housing Element is the only element that requires review by the State. The element addresses the City’s ability to meet the regional housing needs as determined by the State of California.

Pismo Beach adopted its current (6th cycle) Housing Element in 2020, covering the period 2020- 2028. The 6th cycle Housing Element was submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review and comment, and the City received certification of the Housing Element from HCD on November 17, 2020. The updated Housing Element includes a detailed analysis of housing needs, resources, and constraints; and a review of the current Housing Element goals, policies, and programs, which were used to develop new policies and implementation programs. Housing Element Goal 1 through Goal 5 are intended to preserve affordable units and prevent displacement in Pismo Beach as follows:
 Goal H-1: Identify sites with appropriate zoning and services to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of alternative housing types for all income levels.  Goal H-2: Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of lower-income and moderate-income households.
 Goal H-3: Address and, where appropriate and legally permissible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing for people of all income levels and needs.
 Goal H-4: Conserve and improve the conditions of the existing affordable housing stock, which may include addressing ways to mitigate the loss of dwelling units demolished by public or private action.
 Goal H-5: Promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, gender, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.12-5
In addition, Housing Element policies intended to preserve affordable units and prevent displacement in Pismo Beach as follows.
 Policy H-1: Provide a range of residential densities in the General Plan and Zoning Codes that permit a variety of housing types, including single-family homes, condominiums, rental apartments, mobile homes, and manufactured housing.
 Policy H-2: Promote efficient land use patterns and encourage more intense development near services.
 Policy H-4: Maintain an inventory of sites suitable for housing to accommodate the City’s share of regional housing needs.
 Policy H-5: Seek appropriate private, local, state, and federal funding to implement housing programs for extremely low-, very low, low-, and moderate-income households.  Policy H-6: Maintain and expand relationships with nonprofit housing agencies with the goal of providing more affordable housing
 Policy H-8: Offer incentives to developers (profit and nonprofit) for affordable housing, such as modified parking standards to minimize the cost of parking  Policy H-9: Consider programs to provide workforce housing in Pismo Beach, particularly for those in the service industry.
 Policy H-10: Utilize state and federal funds to assist in creating affordable housing and rehabilitating unsound housing structures
 Policy H-11: Promote smaller rental units and a variety of housing types, such as courtyard housing, studios, and live/work units.
 Policy H-12: Promote the continued maintenance of existing mobile home parks.  Policy H-13: Accommodate and promote the development of housing for those with special needs, such as shelters for the homeless; transitional housing; housing for seniors, extremely low-income households, large families, and female headed households; and housing for persons with physical, developmental, or mental disabilities.

The 6th cycle Housing Element is up-to-date and in compliance with current State law, and does not require updates or additional review as part of the GP/LCP Update.

4.12.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology
Population and housing trends in the City were evaluated by reviewing the most current data available from the U.S. Census Bureau, DOF, the current Pismo Beach Housing Element, and SLOCOG RHNA Plan. Impacts related to population are generally social or economic in nature. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a social or economic change generally is not considered a significant effect on the environment unless the changes are directly linked to a physical change.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.12-6
b. Significance Thresholds
The following thresholds are based on Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines. For purposes of this EIR, impacts related to population and housing are considered significant if implementation of the GP/LCP Update would:

1. Induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly.

2. Displace substantial numbers of people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

For purposes of this analysis, “substantial” population growth is defined as growth exceeding SLOCOG population forecasts for the City of Pismo Beach. “Substantial” displacement would occur if allowed land uses would displace more residences than would be accommodated through growth accommodated by the project.
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 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.

The GP/LCP Update would designate land uses and define the type of development that can occur throughout the City through the planning horizon year of 2040. Table 4.12-5 presents the 2019 and projected 2040 population and housing estimates for the City based on the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2050 Regional Growth Forecast for San Luis Obispo County and the proposed GP/LCP Update.

Table 4.12-5 Population and Housing Estimates
City of Pismo
Beach
Existing
(2019)a
General Plan
and
LCP Update
2040
Projectionsb
Change
2019 to
2040
Percent
Change
SLOCOG
Regional
Growth
Forecast
2040
Projectionsc
SLOCOG
Projected
Change
2020 to
2040d
SLOCOG
Projected
Percent
Change
Population
(# of residents)
8,237 10,216 1,979 24% 10,874 2,070 24%
Housing
(# of units)
5,832 6,943 1,111 19% 7,125 1,079 18%
Sources/Notes:
a. DOF 2020. The existing conditions used for GP/LCP Update buildout projections was based on the 2019 data from the San Luis Obispo County Assessor’s Office. Therefore, 2019 was used as the existing conditions year in the analysis for population and housing. b. DOF 2020 + Draft Pismo Beach GP/LCP Update
c. SLOCOG 2017. The GP/LCP Update buildout projections were based on a maximum buildout scenario. Therefore, the SLOCOG “high scenario” for population growth was used in this analysis. d. SLOCOG 2017. SLOCOG growth projections are based on five-year increments. Therefore, 2020 instead of 2019 information was used to calculate the projected change from existing conditions.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.12-7
As shown in Table 4.12-5, the GP/LCP Update projections anticipate that the City will grow by approximately 1,979 new residents and 1,111 new housing units while SLOCOG projects that the City will grow by approximately 2,070 new residents and 1,079 occupied housing units. Both the City and SLOCOG population projections are equivalent to an average annual population growth rate of approximately 1 percent through the year 2040. The GP/LCP Update projections anticipate overall growth in housing units by approximately 19 percent by 2040 and SLOCOG projections similarly anticipate overall growth in occupied housing units by approximately 18 percent by 2040. Overall, the anticipated population growth in the City through 2040 under the GP/LCP Update is similar to the SLOCOG population growth projections for the City.

The land use plan and policies in the GP/LCP Update focus on working within the existing framework of the City, with limited vacant land, to incorporating Smart Growth tools and incentivizing sustainable urban development, while providing for sufficient services that support anticipated population growth within existing developed areas. Opportunities to accommodate population growth through GP/LCP Update implementation include accommodating greater density in areas such as the Downtown Core planning area and along the Highway 101 corridor in the Shell Beach planning area.

The following goal and policies in the GP/LCP Update Land Use Element would ensure that growth in the City is managed and occurs in a manner consistent with community values and resources available.

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.  Policy LU-7.1: Growth Areas. Prioritize growth in areas that complement adjacent neighborhoods, consider market and policy demand for housing and commercial needs, and revitalize economically obsolete uses.
 Policy LU-7.2: Adaptive Reuse. Support and incentivize adaptive reuse of buildings and sites to utilize existing infrastructure while enhancing the character of the community.

Implementation of these GP/LCP Update policies would minimize potential adverse effects associated with substantial population growth facilitated by the GP/LCP Update by accommodating growth in complementary areas of the City and limiting growth to a level supported by available resources.

One of the fundamental purposes of the GP/LCP Update is to direct future development in such a way as to minimize the impacts of growth by emphasizing the intensification and reuse of already developed areas, thus minimizing pressure to develop near coastal resources in the City.

Development in accordance with the GP/LCP Update would not indirectly induce growth in the City by building roads or other infrastructure in new areas that would facilitate development. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are not required.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.12-8
Threshold 2: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 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.

As shown in Table 4.12-5, the GP/LCP Update would enable development in Pismo Beach through the year 2040 that could add up to 1,111 residential units to the City beyond the existing 2019 housing stock. The maximum possible number of residential units is determined by the maximum densities allowed for each land use designation and the amount of land area within that designation. However, the maximum number of units is unlikely to be reached because every residential parcel in Pismo Beach would need to be developed to its maximum potential to reach the maximum number of units.

Most of Pismo Beach is built out and existing buildings are generally in good condition. Therefore, consistent with GP/LCP Update Land Use Element Policy LU-7.2 to “Support and incentivize adaptive reuse of buildings and sites to utilize existing infrastructure while enhancing the character of the community,” development and redevelopment under the GP/LCP Update would occur primarily occur in the Downtown Core area and along Highway 101 in the Shell Beach planning area. Focusing development in these areas would maximize the use of vacant and underutilized parcels and minimize displacement of existing housing and people that could otherwise result in development pressure on open space areas or steep slopes and environmentally constrained sites. Additionally, directing new growth in these areas would utilize existing transportation, utility infrastructure, and community and commercial uses.

In addition to Goal LU-7 and Policies LU-7.1 and LU-7.2 listed under Impact PH-1, the following goals, policies, and actions of the Land Use Element of the GP/LCP Update would minimize the potential impacts associated with displacement of people and/or housing in the City:

Goal LU-1: A community with a variety of well-regulated land uses that support the diverse needs of both residents and visitors.
 Policy LU-1.1: Variety of Residential Uses. The City shall include land designations to accommodate all income groups and a wide variety of densities and housing types.  Action LU-1.1a Range of Housing Types. In order to provide a variety of housing choices for all income groups, the City shall modify the zoning code to ensure the available zoning is consistent with the adopted Housing Element, and create residential areas with a wide variety of densities and housing types.
 Action LU-1.1c Density Bonus. The City shall comply with density bonus requirements required by State law, while protecting coastal resources.  Action LU-1.1d Protection of Existing Mobile Home Park. The City shall retain the ordinance to protect the existing mobile home park in the Pismo Creek/Pismo Marsh planning area in order to retain its lower cost housing.

With incorporation of these goals and policies, the GP/LCP Update would result in a net increase in housing availability in the City and would provide housing to accommodate future growth.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.12-9
The City’s Housing Element serves as a tool to identify and provide for the housing needs of the community. It identifies recent demographic and employment trends that may affect existing and future housing demand and supply. California law requires the Housing Element to establish policies and programs that support the provision of an adequate housing supply for citizens of all income levels. The Housing Element addresses the City’s ability to meet the regional housing needs as determined by the State of California. As the Housing Element is up-to-date and in compliance with State law, it does not require updates or additional review as part of the GP/LCP Update, but may amended in the future. Nevertheless, any development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be required to be consistent with applicable policies in the Housing Element.

The GP/LCP Update would result in the rezone of one residential parcel to a public/semipublic use.

Such a change in zoning would result in the demolition of existing housing and a reduction of population by two. This would only occur when there is a new use proposed for the site and it is anticipated there would be sufficient available replacement housing available for the displaced residents. Displacement of additional existing residential units could also occur during redevelopment under the GP/LCP Update. If any such temporary displacement did occur, the 1,111 new residential units that could be added as a result of the GP/LCP Update, including a proportion of these as affordable housing in compliance with the City’s existing Housing Element and proposed Land Use Element policies, would accommodate displaced residences.

It is not known when or where displacement or construction of housing from redevelopment in the City would occur. Therefore, it cannot be determined what project-specific environmental impacts would result from the construction and operation of replacement housing. As potential residential development or redevelopment projects are identified, additional project specific environmental analysis, as necessary, would be completed at that time to evaluate project-specific impacts to displacement of existing residences. Because the GP/LCP Update and General Plan Housing Element include goals and policies to increase overall housing in the city, and there are no current plans for displacement of substantial numbers of housing, impacts related to displacement of existing residences from the GP/LCP Update would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

4.12.4 Cumulative Impacts
Growth facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would occur within the bounds of the City and would be consistent with the regional projections for the City. In addition, the GP/LCP Update would result in an overall increase of housing. Therefore, 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 and the incremental population impacts of the proposed GP/LCP Update would not be cumulatively considerable.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.12-10

This page intentionally left blank

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.13-1

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
This section assesses potential impacts to public services including fire and police protection, public schools, libraries, and parks and recreation, from the proposed General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update. Impacts to water, wastewater, and solid waste services are discussed in Section

4.14, Utilities. Impacts to wildfire are discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

4.13.1 Setting
a. Fire Protection
Fire protection, first response emergency medical services, ocean fire and rescue, and technical rescue services in Pismo Beach are provided by the City of Pismo Beach Fire Department (PBFD) in a cooperative agreement with CAL Fire. The PBFD provides a wide range of programs, which include fire suppression, emergency medical services, training disaster preparedness, fire prevention, weed abatement, cliff and ocean rescue, and hazardous materials response. In addition, the fire department runs a seasonal lifeguard program from May through September.

Personnel, Facilities, and Equipment
Fire protection services in the City of Pismo Beach (City) are provided through a cooperative fire protection agreement between the City and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). Two fire stations are maintained within the City: Pismo Beach Fire Station 63 and Shell Beach Fire Station 64. In 2023, the City Council approved a contract to design and build a new fire station on Bello Street.

Pismo Beach Fire Station 64, located at 990 Bello Street is fully staffed year-round. The City is also served by Shell Beach Fire Station 63, located at 2555 Shell Beach Road. The Shell Beach Fire Station is fully staffed during the fire season and is partially staffed by two professional firefighters during the winter months (CalFire SLO 2021a, 2021b).

PBFD operates as a combination full-time and paid call (volunteer) system. Fire personnel for the City of Pismo Beach include a Battalion Chief, six Fire Captains, six Fire Apparatus Engineers, and an Administrative Assistant (City of Pismo Beach 2021). In addition, PBFD employs 25 seasonal United States Lifeguard Association Certified Lifeguards. The part time positions are limited to less than 1,000 hours per year. In 2019, Fire Station 64 responded to 1,794 calls for service and Fire Station 63 responded to 641 calls for service. PBFD strives to maintain a minimum four minute response time for fire and emergency medical services and a five-minute response time for all other emergency service calls (City of Pismo Beach 2014).

Aid Agreements
PBFD participates in both mutual aid and automatic aid agreements with neighboring communities.

These reciprocal agreements give the PBFD authority to rapidly deploy resources to areas outside jurisdictional boundaries when the need arises. PBFD Firefighters and paramedics respond cooperatively with the U.S. Coast Guard to provide emergency services for incidents occurring offshore.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-2
Wildland Fire Hazards
Wildland fire hazards are discussed in more detail in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

Climate Change and Future Fire Potential
Climate change and future fire potential are discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
b. Police Protection
The Pismo Beach Police Department (PBPD) provides police protection services within the City.

PBPD has two divisions: the Operations Division which includes code enforcement, equipment/fleet management, investigations, patrol operations, special operations, and training programs; and the Support Services Division which includes business and support operations, public safety communications, police finances, police records, and property and evidence. PBPD also runs or participates in a variety of community-based programs, including a citizen volunteer program, and the My Cop program, which assigns the same officer to specific areas of the City.

Personnel, Facilities, and Equipment
The PBPD headquarters are located at 1000 Bello Street. The PBPD received 23,447 calls for service and 5,152 emergency calls in 2019 (City of Pismo Beach 2019). PBPD officers serve a variety of roles including patrol, S.W.A.T., K9, D.A.R.E., investigations, communications, or records technicians.

PBPD patrol services respond to calls for assistance and reports of criminal activity, act as a deterrent to crime, enforce state and local laws, identify community needs, provide support and assistance to the community and responds to emergencies (City of Pismo Beach 2019). The City strives to maintain a response time of five minutes to emergency situations (City of Pismo Beach 2014).
c. Schools
The Lucia Mar Unified School District (LMUSD) provides elementary school (Kindergarten through 12th Grade) public education services to Pismo Beach and one adult education program. There are 19 schools in LMUSD, two of which are City: Shell Beach Elementary School and Judkins Middle School. High School aged children (grades 9-12) attend Arroyo Grande High School, which is in the City of Arroyo Grande. LMUSD does not anticipate constructing a high school in Pismo Beach in the foreseeable future. Students residing north of Spyglass Park and west of United States Highway 101, including along Solano Road and Spyglass Drive, are served by the San Luis Obispo Unified School District (SLOUSD).

Enrollment
Table 4.13-1 identifies the enrollments and staffing for the 2019-2020 school year for the schools in the City. Table 4.13-2 shows enrollment trends for these two schools.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.13-3
Table 4.13-1 2019-2020 Enrollment for LMUSD Schools in Pismo Beach School Name Grades Enrollment Teachers
Shell Beach Elementary TK-6 400 17.5
Judkins Middle 6-8 481 24.3
Sources: National Center for Education Statistics 2021a, 2021b Table 4.13-2 Enrollment Trends for SLCUSD Schools in Pismo Beach School Name 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 % Change 2014-
2015 to
2018-2019
Shell Beach Elementary 433 423 423 430 400 -7.6%
Judkins Elementary 427 447 480 489 481 12.6%
Source: California Department of Education 2021
Based on the data presented in Table 4.11-1, the student to teacher ratio was approximately 19.8 to 1 at Judkins Middle and approximately 22.9 to 1 at Shell Beach Elementary during the 2019-2020 school year. As shown in Table 4.11-2, enrollment at Shell Beach Elementary School decreased but enrollment at Judkins Middle School increased between the 2014-2015 and 2018-2019 school years.

Facilities Master Plan
During the 2013-14 school year, LMUSD updated its Facilities Master Plan. This process included updating educational specifications, conducting a needs assessment, and developing a vision for potential facility plans throughout LMUSD. The Facilities Master Plan provides macro-level information about the buildings, grounds, existing conditions, and enrollment within LMUSD and uses this information to determine the most optimal facilities for teaching and learning for each of the schools in LMUSD.

According to the facility data and assessment for Shell Beach Elementary School in the LMUSD Facilities Master Plan, Shell Beach Elementary School facilities total 46,243 square feet and require additional classrooms, workspaces, and storage areas. As of 2019, Shell Beach Elementary School is undergoing phased improvements to the parking area, classrooms, workspaces, and outdoor play areas (Shell Beach Elementary School 2019). Approved, pending, or in-process projects for Shell Beach Elementary School include improvements to a Multi-purpose room, parking, learning commons, and the replacement of portables (LMUSD 2021). According to the LMUSD 2014 Facilities Master Plan, Shell Beach Elementary School had available school capacity for 486 students.

According to the facility data and assessment for Judkins Elementary School in the LMUSD Facilities Master Plan, Judkins Middle School facilities total 22,159 square feet, and require an additional 26,447 square feet to meet LMUSD’s standard elementary program model (LMUSD 2014). As of 2019, Judkins Middle School approved, pending, or in-process projects include the remodel of classrooms, windows, office areas, replacement of six portables, and roofing. Future projects for Judkins Middle include sewer improvements (LMUSD 2021). According to the LMUSD 2014 Facilities Master Plan, Judkins Middle School had available capacity for 586 students.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-4
d. Public Libraries
Library services in the City are provided by the San Luis Obispo City-County Library system at the Shell Beach Library. This small neighborhood library, located at 230 Leeward Ave, is part of the San Luis Obispo City-County Libraries network of information centers serving six of the seven incorporated cities and all of the unincorporated communities in the County. Shell Beach Library offers circulation of books, magazines, newspapers, government publications, and other special publications, in addition to providing free internet access on library computers and via Wi-Fi (County of San Luis Obispo 2021). More extensive library services are provided to Pismo Beach residents at the South County Regional Library, located in Arroyo Grande, approximately five miles southeast of Pismo Beach. The main library of the San Luis Obispo City-County Library system is located in the City of San Luis Obispo and provides a bookmobile and other outreach services as well as a larger collection and more extensive reference resources than are available at the South County branch. e. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
Open Space/Recreation areas within the City are comprised of the 17-mile strip of coast and approximately 60 acres of active recreational parkland within a total of 11 parks. In addition, the City contains numerous linear parks, open space areas, coastal trails, and beaches. The City active recreational areas are supplemented through joint-use agreements with the Pismo Beach sports complex and recreational facilities at schools. Parks within the City provide play fields, tennis courts, and space for a number of activities such as picnics, youth programs, and other outdoor recreational activities.

Community-Based Open Space
Community-based open space in Pismo Beach is designated for developed parks located in neighborhoods and commercial areas. Community-based open space is provided in approximately 11 parks in the City and includes playgrounds, picnic areas, outdoor shade shelters, playing fields and courts, and other man-made structures.

Under the California Quimby Act, cities can require land or in-lieu fees in order to achieve a minimum of three acres per 1,000 residents, with the possibility of increasing the requirement to a maximum of five acres per 1,000 residents if the City already provides more than three acres per 1,000 residents. The City owns and operates approximately 60 acres of accessible open space and parkland, with the City’s current population of 8,237 residents, the City of Pismo Beach exceeds this requirement.

Resource-Based Open Space
Resource-based open space in Pismo Beach is primarily managed to protect and preserve natural resources while providing scenic and passive uses for residents and visitors. These are generally unimproved areas that preserve open space, such as environmentally sensitive habitat areas, coastlines, and wetlands. Open space areas and conservation area locations are shown in Figure 4.13-1.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.13-5
Figure 4.13-1 Open Space and Conservation Areas
Source: City of Pismo Beach. 2021. Conservation and Open Space Element Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-6
Many of the bluff top open areas in Pismo Beach include pedestrian and bicycle paths, benches, barbeques, and are part of the California Coastal Trail. Resource-based open space areas can be City-owned, State-owned, or privately owned lands. The Pismo Preserve is an approximately 900- acre open space area located on the eastern portion of the Freeway Foothills, to the north of Highway 101. The area is managed by the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. The area includes 11 miles of trails for hiking, mountain biking, and horseback riding. Pismo Marsh is an approximately 54-acre wetland located in the southeastern portion of the City. The area is managed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and does not currently offer interpretive, educational, or passive recreational access to the marsh.

4.13.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Fire Protection
Disaster Mitigation Act (2000-Present)
Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390) requires a state mitigation plan as a condition of disaster assistance. There are two different levels of state disaster plans:
“Standard” and “Enhanced.” States that develop an approved Enhanced State Plan can increase the amount of funding available through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The Act has also established new requirements for local mitigation plans.

National Fire Plan (NFP) 2000
The National Fire Plan was developed under Executive Order 11246 in August 2000, following a landmark wildland fire season. Its intent is to actively respond to severe wildland fires and their impacts to communities while ensuring sufficient firefighting capacity for the future. The plan addresses firefighting, rehabilitation, hazardous fuels reduction, community assistance, and accountability.

California Fire Plan
The Strategic California Fire Plan is the State’s road map for reducing the risk of wildfire. The plan was updated in 2020, and directs each CAL FIRE Unit to prepare a locally specific Fire Management Plan. In compliance with the California Fire Plan, individual CAL FIRE units are required to develop Fire Management Plans for their areas of responsibility. These documents assess the fire situation within each of CAL FIRE’s 21 units and six contract counties. The plans include stakeholder contributions and priorities, and identify strategic areas for pre-fire planning and fuel treatment as defined by the people who live and work with the local fire problem. The plans are required to be updated annually.

California State Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, draft (updated 2013) The purpose of the State Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP) is to significantly reduce deaths, injuries, and other losses attributed to natural and human-caused hazards in California. The SHMP provides guidance for hazard mitigation activities emphasizing partnerships among local, state, and federal agencies as well as the private sector. The California Office of Emergency Services (OES) prepares the State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP). The SHMP identifies hazard risks, and includes a vulnerability analysis and a hazard mitigation strategy. The SHMP is Federally required under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 in order for the State to receive federal funding.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.13-7
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires a State mitigation plan as a condition of disaster assistance.

Wildland-Urban Interface Building Standards
Wildland urban interface building standards are discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

California Fire and Building Code (2019)
The 2019 Fire and Building Code establishes the minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practices to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare for the hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to provide safety and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provisions of this code apply to the construction, alteration, movement enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such building structures throughout the State of California.

Government Code 65302.5: General Plan Fire Safety Element Review This statute requires the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to provide recommendations to a local jurisdiction’s General Plan fire safety element at the time that the General Plan is amended.

While not a direct and binding fire prevention requirement for individuals, General Plans that adopt the Board's recommendations will include goals and policies that provide for contemporary fire prevention standards for the jurisdiction.

San Luis Obispo County and San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
The San Luis Obispo County and San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) identifies measures that the County will take to lower the hazard risk to property and life. Wildfire hazard mitigation features prominently in the plan due to the relatively rural nature of the County and its high fire risk, as identified by CAL FIRE.

City of Pismo Beach Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2007) The City of Pismo Beach Local Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies hazards specific to the City not included in the County LHMP. The City LHMP assesses risks posed by natural and human-caused hazards and develops a mitigation strategy for reducing the City’s risks.

CAL FIRE/San Luis Obispo County Fire Community Wildfire Protection Plan The CAL FIRE/San Luis Obispo County Fire Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

County of San Luis Obispo Emergency Operations Plan
The San Luis Obispo County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) addresses the planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting San Luis Obispo County (County of San Luis Obispo 2016). A key intent of the County’s EOP is to explain how overall emergency management is

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-8
coordinated countywide, to address concerns related to continuity of government for the County of San Luis Obispo, and related emergency management issues. The EOP is also intended to serve as a policy and planning reference. The EOP also identifies roles for departments within the County of San Luis Obispo and other local governments and encourages these agencies to develop and implement supporting emergency plans, standard operating procedures (SOPs) or emergency response checklists based on the provisions of the EOP. b. Police Protection
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) The California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) advocates for, exchanges information with sets selection and training standards for, and works with law enforcement and other public and private entities. POST was established by the Legislature in 1959 to identify common needs that are shared by representatives of law enforcement. c. Schools
California Code of Regulations
The California Code of Regulations, Title 5 Education Code, governs all aspects of education within the State.

California State Assembly Bill 2926 (AB 2926) – School Facilities Act of 1986 – was enacted by the State of California in 1986 and added to the California Government Code (Section 65995). It authorizes school districts to collect development fees, based on demonstrated need, and generate revenue for school districts for capital acquisitions and improvements. It also established that the maximum fees which may be collected under this and any other school fee authorization are $1.50 per square foot ($1.50/ft2) for residential development and $0.25/ft2 for commercial and industrial development.

AB 2926 was expanded and revised in 1987 through the passage of AB 1600, which added Section 66000 et seq. of the Government code. Under this statute, payment of statutory fees by developers serves as total mitigation under CEQA to satisfy the impact of development on school facilities.

However, subsequent legislative actions have alternatively expanded and contracted the limits placed on school fees by AB 2926.

California Senate Bill 50 (SB 50)
As part of the further refinement of the legislation enacted under AB 2926, the passage of SB 50 in 1998 defined the Needs Analysis process in government Code Sections 65995.5-65998. Under the provisions of SB 50, school districts may collect fees to offset the costs associated with increasing school capacity as a result of development. The fees (Level One fees) are addressed based upon the proposed square footage of residential, commercial/industrial, and/or parking structure uses. Level Two fees require the developer to provide one-half of the costs of accommodating students in new schools, while the state would provide the other half. Level Three fees require the developer to pay the full cost of accommodating the students in new schools and would be implemented at the time the funds available from Proposition 1A (approved in 1998) are expended. School districts must demonstrate to the State their long-term facilities’ needs and costs based on long-term population growth in order to quality for this source of funding. However, voter approval of Proposition 55 in

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.13-9
2004 precludes the imposition of the Level Three fees for the foreseeable future. Therefore, once qualified, districts may impose only Level Two fees, as calculated according to SB 50 (Greene 1998). d. Parks and Recreation
Quimby Act
The Quimby Act was established by the California legislature in 1965 to provide parks for growing communities in California. The Act authorizes cities to adopt ordinances addressing park land and/or fees for residential subdivisions for the purpose of providing and preserving open space and recreational facilities and improvements. The Act requires the provision of a minimum of three acres of park area per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision. The Act also specifies acceptable uses and expenditures of such funds.

State Public Park Preservation Act
This primary instrument for protecting and preserving parkland is the State Public Park Preservation Act. Under the Public Resource code, cities and counties may not acquire any real property that is in use as a public park for any non-park use unless compensation or land, or both, are provided to replace the parkland acquired. This provides no net loss of parkland and facilities.

State Street and Highway Code
The State Street and Highway Code assists in providing equestrian and hiking trails within the right- of-way of county roads, streets, and highways.

General Plan Parks, Recreation, & Access Element
The Parks, Recreation, & Access Element is an optional element of the General Plan which also includes an Access Component as required by the Coastal Act. The Parks, Recreation & Access Element was last updated in December 2013 and is not included in the GP/LCP Update. The purpose of Access Component is to implement the state Coastal Act shoreline access polities to ensure the public's right to gain access to the shoreline. The goals and policies considered in this element guide the City in providing parks, open space and trails, and in developing recreational facilities

4.13.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
According to Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines, impacts related to public services from the proposed project would be significant if it would:

1. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the need for or provision of new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other objectives for:
 Fire Protection;
 Police Protection;
 Schools;
 Parks; and
 Other Public Facilities.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-10
Impacts related to recreation from the proposed project would be significant if it would:

Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.

Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. b. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1a: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Threshold 1b: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? Threshold 1c: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, or the need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives?
Threshold 1e: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities, or the need for new or physically altered public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
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.

Development facilitated by the proposed GP/LCP Update would result in an increase to the City’s population, which would result in an incremental increase in demand for fire and police protection, schools, and other public services such as library services, potentially creating the need for new or expanded facilities supporting these public services.

The additional development and increased population in Pismo Beach resulting from the GP/LCP Update, would increase the demand for fire services. As future buildout occurs under the GP/LCP Update, the City would evaluate operations and deployment of fire services to efficiently use resources. New development would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing the provision of fire protection services, including adequate fire access,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.13-11
fire flows, and number of hydrants. This includes consistency with the current California Fire Code, which contains project-specific requirements such as construction standards in new structures and remodels, road widths and configurations designed to accommodate the passage of fire trucks and engines, and requirements for sprinkler systems and minimum fire flow rates for water mains. The PBFD would review building and facility plans through the City’s development review and building permit processes. PBFD personnel would also inspect new and remodeled buildings and facilities to ensure that the structures would meet State and local fire codes and standards.

The additional development and increased population in Pismo Beach resulting from the GP/LCP Update would also increase the demand for police protection services. The demand for police services in Pismo Beach is determined not only by the needs of the resident population, but by the exceptional circumstances created by the presence of a large fluctuating visitor population. This transient population consists of both overnight visitors residing in the hotels, motels, and recreational facilities within the City, adjacent cities, and county areas. Day visitors attending special events also contribute to the City’s service population.

Given the high demand for fire and police services in the City, fire and police staffing needs in Pismo Beach are likely to increase which could require the construction of new facilities. In 2023, the City Council approved a contract to design and build a new fire station and police station on Bello Street to accommodate anticipated increased demand for emergency services. The potential impacts of these new facilities are unknown at this time and separate environmental review would be required. An evaluation of the physical effects of such facilities would be speculative at this time.

The GP/LCP Update would facilitate development in areas of Pismo Beach that are currently developed. Therefore, construction of the new emergency service facilities would occur on previously disturbed or developed areas. Furthermore, the City has identified the requirements for additional personnel and equipment as functions of the capital improvement planning program.

New development is required to pay Capital Facilities fees and contribute their fair share to the cost of funding City fire and police services.

As shown in Table 4.13-3, development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase of approximately 78 K-12 age students. The generation rate used for this analysis is considered conservative, as it assumes all school-age children would attend public schools and does not account for private schools or homeschooling. These additional students would increase enrollment in schools in Pismo Beach, potentially requiring the construction of new or expanded existing school facilities. However, according to the LMUSD 2014 Facilities Master Plan Shell Beach Elementary School had available school capacity for 486 students and Judkins Middle School had available capacity for 586 students. Therefore, the 78 additional students would not exceed the capacity of the schools in the City. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would not be expected to directly result in the need for new or expanded schools, the construction of which could result in adverse impacts to the environment.

Table 4.13-3 Projection of Students from New Residential Development Grade Level Projected Number of New Units Student Yield Rates Projected Students K-12 1,111 0.7 78
Note: Student yield rates comprise the student generation rate for Unified school districts of 0.7 per single family residence set by the State of California Office of Public School Construction.

Source: California Department of General Services 2008

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-12
Nevertheless, all future development associated with the GP/LCP Update would be required to pay school impact feet which, pursuant to Section 65995(3)(h) of the California Government Code (SB 50, chaptered August 27,1998), are “deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization.” Payment of school impact fees would reduce impacts to less than significant.

The additional increase in population in Pismo Beach would also result in increased demand for public services such as libraries. The City of Pismo Beach does not provide library services to City residents. Library services are provided by the San Luis Obispo City-County library system, which maintains a neighborhood library in Shell Beach. Extensive library services are provided to Pismo Beach residents at the South County Regional Library, located in Arroyo Grande. The additional population in Pismo Beach could increase demand for library services. Property taxes fund the County libraries, which development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be required to pay.

Given the existing demand for library services in the County, County library staffing needs are likely to increase which could require the construction of new facilities. The location and potential impacts of new or expanded facilities are unknown at this time and separate environmental review would be required. An evaluation of the physical effects of such facilities would be speculative at this time. The GP/LCP Update would facilitate development in areas of Pismo Beach that are currently developed. Therefore, construction of new library facilities, if required, would likely occur on previously disturbed or developed areas. Furthermore, property taxes paid by new developments would reduce impacts to less than significant.

Payment of City-required public facilities and school developer fees, would offset the increased demand of developments on public services and facilities. New public service facilities that would be constructed in the City would require project-specific environmental analysis and implementation of any necessary project-specific mitigation prior to being considered for approval. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.13-13
Threshold 1d: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? Threshold 2: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Threshold 3: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
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.

Development facilitated by the proposed GP/LCP Update would result in an increase to the City’s population which would result in an incremental increase in demand on existing public parks or other recreational facilities. The City currently owns and operates approximately 60 acres of accessible open space and parkland, providing an existing park service ratio of approximately 7 acres per 1,000 residents for the existing population of 8,237. Although there are over 3,000 acres of State- and privately-owned parks and beaches in and around the City that provide additional recreational opportunities to City residents and visitors, State- and privately-owned facilities are not typically relied upon as City recreational facilities that count toward the applicable Quimby Act parkland standard of three acres per 1,000 residents. The GP/LCP Update would not expand the City-owned public parks and recreational areas. Therefore, based on the 2040 projected population of 10,216 the park service ratio would be reduced to approximately 6 acres per 1,000 people under buildout conditions.

The Community Vision section of the GP/LCP Update establishes a list of goals for the City to provide a comprehensive vision for Pismo Beach in the future and identify the community’s key priorities.

The community values include a goal for enhancing the tourist-based economy and maintaining the City’s small beach town character. The GP/LCP Update Conservation and Open Space Element includes the following goals and policies that would facilitate development in a manner that provides for the parks and recreational service needs while achieving the vision for the community.

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.  Policy COS-4.8: Pismo Creek. Pismo Creek shall be retained in its natural state and protected from significant alterations.
 Policy COS-4.9a: Price Canyon. Enhance the visual, recreational, and biological quality of Price Canyon.
 Policy COS-4.10: Pismo Lake Protection. Pismo Lake shall be retained in its natural state and protected from significant alteration.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-14
 Policy COS-4.11: Foothills. The coastal and upland foothills of Pismo Beach, located in the Freeway Foothills, Pismo Oaks, and Pismo Heights planning areas, shall be conserved and enhanced to provide valuable recreational and habitat resources.

In addition, the existing Parks, Recreation & Access Element (which is not part of the GP/LCP Update), includes the following policies for replacement and/or provision of parks associated with future development within the City:
 Policy PR-6 Retention of All Existing Parks and Dedicated Open Space. Any proposed loss of parks or dedicated open space areas shall be replaced at a minimum with the equivalent quality of acreage or facilities lost.
 Policy PR-9 Private Sector Open Space, Parks and Recreation. The City shall recognize the contribution of the private sector to parks and recreation and encourage cooperative continuation and expansion of such contributions. All new planned developments shall be required to provide either public and/or private parks and recreation facilities. When possible said areas shall connect with adjoining park and recreation areas, which are existing or planned.

All such development shall either be dedicated in fee to the public or have a dedicated open space easement placed upon the property to preclude future development.

Additionally, development under buildout of the GP/LCP Update would be required to pay impact fees pursuant to PBMC Section 15.10.050, for park and recreation improvements at the time of building permit applications which would pay for the capital costs of new or expanded park and recreational facilities. Implementation of these GP/LCP Update goals and policies, in addition to payment of required park impact fees pursuant to PBMC Section 15.10.050, would ensure that growth in the City would not result in adverse environmental effects associated with the physical deterioration of public parks and recreational facilities. The City of Pismo Beach currently exceeds the parkland ratio of 3 acres per 1,000 persons established by the Quimby Act, and would continue to exceed this ratio with buildout of the GP/LCP Update. Therefore, the GP/LCP Update would not contribute to the need for new or expanded park or recreational facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

4.13.4 Cumulative Impacts
The scope for potential cumulative impacts to public services and recreation includes all projects within the same service area. The analysis in this section examines the potential impacts to public services and parks and recreational facilities in Pismo Beach as a result of all potential buildout in the service areas for these resources. Therefore, the analysis of impacts to these services and associated facilities is cumulative in nature.

A cumulative impact to fire services would occur if growth in the service area requires physical expansion of facilities such as construction of new fire facilities that would result in adverse physical impacts. Fire protection services are maintained and expanded through property taxes and collection of fees that grow incrementally as development occurs within a service area. Growth projections in the GP/LCP Update would be within SLOCOG projections. Furthermore, the GP/LCP Update would include goals and policies to provide funding and reduce the demand for new or expanded fire protection facilities. However, it is likely that new or expanded fire protection

Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.13-15
facilities would be required to serve cumulative development in the County. As described under Impact PUB-1 above, the GP/LCP Update would generate additional demand for fire protection services. While development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would generate additional demand, the payment of fair share impact fees during the building permit process for all development under the GP/LCP Update would ensure fire departments are adequately funded to serve new developments. Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would have an incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with fire protection services but the contribution would not be cumulatively considerable.

Cumulative impacts to police protection services would occur if growth within the service area requires the construction of a new or the expansion of an existing police station that would result in significant adverse physical impacts. Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would result in the need for additional police officers to be added to the PBPD. The increase in staffing required to maintain service rations to serve cumulative development may require modifications or expansion of existing police facilities to accommodate the increased staff. The need for additional officers would be distributed throughout the service area. Additionally, development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be required to pay a fair share of impact fees during the building permit process to fund the provision of public services, including police protection services. Therefore, development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact related to police protection services.

Cumulative impacts to school facilities would occur if growth within a school district would result in significant adverse physical impacts with the provisions for, or the need for, new or physically altered school facilities. The GP/LCP Update anticipated the addition of approximately 1,111 new housing units in the City, which would generate an additional estimated 78 new students in the LMUSD and would incrementally increase demand for school facilities. As described under Impact PUB-1, schools within the City of Pismo Beach would be able to accommodate new and incoming students from new development in the City. Cumulative development, including development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update, would be required to pay school impact fees at the time building permits are issued. These fees are used by the local school district to maintain existing facilities and expand capacity to accommodate increased enrollment resulting from cumulative development within the LMUSD service boundaries. Because the LMUSD has adequate capacity to serve cumulative development, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and the GP/LCP Update would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact regarding school services.

Cumulative impacts to libraries would occur If growth within the library system would require the construction of new or the expansion of an existing library that would result in adverse physical impacts. Library services are maintained and expanded through collection of property taxes from developments within the service area. Growth projections within the GP/LCP Update would be within the SLOCOG growth projections. Growth facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would increase the demand for new libraries. However, cumulative projects are expected to utilize existing library facilities. Collection of property taxes from all new developments would ensure that County libraries are adequately funded to serve new development. Therefore, because new, unplanned, or expanded facilities would not be required, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and the GP/LCP Update would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact regarding library services.

Cumulative impacts to parks and recreational facilities would occur if development, and related population growth, within the City increases the use of existing facilities such that substantial

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.13-16
physical deterioration of those facilities would occur, or if new facilities would need to be constructed or existing facilities expanded that would have an adverse effect on the environment.

Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update, which would result in additional population growth, would be required to comply with the Quimby Act, which may require parkland dedication or an in- lieu fee and to provide on-site space and recreational amenities. Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities, but the payment of parkland fees would ensure cumulative projects are served by adequate park and recreational facilities. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to new or expanded park and recreation facilities, or the physical deterioration of existing park and recreation facilities, would be less than significant, and the GP/LCP Update would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact to park and recreation facilities.

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. Furthermore, 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.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-1

4.14 Transportation
This section summarizes Pismo Beach’s existing local and regional circulation system in order to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update related to transportation and traffic. This section specifically includes an analysis of the GP/LCP Update’s consistency with applicable local, regional and state land use plans, policies, and regulations and discusses the potential for the implementation of the GP/LCP Update to increase local and regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT), increase transportation hazards, or interfere with emergency access. Transportation data in this section is based on the City’s updated Circulation Element (2021), as well as the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) (GHD Inc. 2021; Appendix G) and the City of Pismo Beach Citywide Transportation Model and Circulation Study Final Report (Hatch Mott McDonald 2016; Appendix H).

4.14.1 Setting
a. Existing Roadway Network
Pismo Beach is located on the southern coast of San Luis Obispo County and is included as part of the “Five Cities” region, along with Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Shell Beach and Oceano. United States 101 (U.S. 101), an important route for state-wide travel, traverses through the center of Pismo Beach and provides direct access to the adjacent cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach, along with access to San Luis Obispo to the north and Santa Maria to the south. U.S. 101 provides nine full or partial access interchanges within the Pismo Beach city limits. Eight roadways provide access across U.S. 101 within the city. Pismo Beach’s roadways generally follow a cardinal grid system within downtown and the Shell Beach areas, which are parallel and perpendicular to U.S. 101. Other major routes through Pismo Beach that provide regional access include State Road (SR) 1 (Dolliver Street/Pacific Coast Highway), Price Canyon Road, Noyes Road, and SR 227. Pismo Beach also maintains a variety of arterial and collector roadways that provide local circulation routes.

The functional street classification system in the Pismo Beach is based on a hierarchy of street types organized by the service each provides. A route’s design is determined by its functional street classification and its projected traffic levels. The goal is to achieve safe and convenient movement at the development intensity planned, consistent with the General Plan’s Land Use and Community Design Element.

Roadways in Pismo Beach are classified as follows:
 Freeways. Freeways are intended to provide high-speed intra- and inter-regional mobility.

Access to freeways is usually restricted to arterial roads through interchanges that are spaced at least one mile apart. US 101 is the only freeway in the City of Pismo Beach with multiple full or partial interchanges.
 Arterials. Arterials are intended to connect areas of major activity within the urban and suburban area. They also work to distribute traffic between freeways and collector streets.

Arterials usually have limited direct access to adjacent land uses.  Collectors. Collectors are intended to function as connector routes between local and arterial streets. They provide access to residential, commercial, and industrial areas, and typically provide direct access to adjacent properties.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-2
 Local Streets. Local streets are intended to provide direct access to adjacent properties and allow for the localized movement of daily traffic. They are characterized by lower traffic volumes and low speed limits (25-30 miles per hour [mph]). Bike lanes are not required on local streets, but it is assumed that these roads are bike-friendly and may be informally considered a Class III Bike Route.
b. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
The city provides a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle paths that support commuter and recreational walking and biking. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities in Pismo Beach are described below.

Pedestrian Facilities
Existing pedestrian facilities in the city consist of sidewalks, shared use paths, curb ramps, and marked crosswalks. Most streets in Downton Pismo Beach have sidewalks on both sides of the street but there are streets in Shell Beach, Pismo Heights, along portions of Mattie Road, and within private mobile home parks, parks and gated communities where sidewalks are not provided or are only intermittently available. Curb ramps throughout the city provide wheelchair and stroller access to sidewalks at the corner of intersections. Truncated domes on sidewalks near most intersections alert visually impaired pedestrians as they approach a street crossing.

The city maintains two types of crosswalks. Controlled crosswalks are located at intersections with stop signs or traffic signals, requiring drivers to stop at pedestrian crossings. At uncontrolled crosswalks, drivers are legally required to yield to pedestrians, but drivers are not required to stop if a pedestrian is not present. The city also maintains several types of crosswalk enhancements in order to improve safety for pedestrians. For example, marked crosswalks provide specific striping that delineate a street crossing for pedestrians. Existing pedestrian facilities in Pismo Beach are shown in Figure 4.14-1.

Bicycle Facilities
The five types of bikeways identified by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the Highway Design Manual are identified below (Caltrans 2020).  Shared Roadway (No Bikeway Designation). A majority of bicycle travel throughout California occurs on streets and highways without specific bikeway designations. This trend may continue to be true in the future as well.
 Class I Bikeway (Multi-Use/Bike Path). A Class I bikeway is a multi-use facility that provides travel on a paved right-of-way completely separated from a street or highway. They usually either provide a recreational opportunity or serve as a direct high-speed commute route. Cross flow by motor vehicles is minimized to avoid conflict with bicycles and pedestrians.  Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane). A Class II bikeway provides a striped and stenciled lane for one- way travel on a street or highway and is intended to delineate the right of way, creating more predictable movements from both bicyclists and motorists. These bike lanes are usually established along streets in corridors where there is significant bicycle demand in order to improve conditions for bicyclists.
 Class III Bikeway (Bike Route). A Class III bikeway is a shared use facility (normally with motor vehicles) which serve to either provide continuity to other bicycle facilities or designate preferred routes through high demand corridors.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-3
 Class IV Bikeway (Cycle Tracks or Separated Bikeway). A Class IV bikeway is intended for the exclusive use by bicycles and features a separation between the bikeway and the through vehicular traffic.

Pismo Beach recognizes each of these five bikeways in addition to “Bicycle Boulevards,” which are streets with specific conditions created to enhance bicycle safety and optimize travel for bicycles rather than vehicles. Bicycle boulevards use traffic calming strategies such as diverters with bicycle cut-outs that allow cyclists to continue to the next block but discourage through traffic by vehicles.

Bicycle facilities in Pismo Beach can also be generally classified in one of two ways: 1) as bikeways or specific facilities provided for bicycle travel, and 2) as support facilities for use by bicyclists while travelling or once they have reached their destination. Support facilities in Pismo Beach include pedestrian and bicycle bridges and overpasses, short and long-term bicycle parking and gear storage, showers and changing stations, wayfinding signage, benches, water fountains, and restrooms. Existing bicycle facilities in Pismo Beach are shown in Figure 4.14-2. c. Public Transit
The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is a joint powers authority providing fixed- route regional service throughout San Luis Obispo County. RTA operates four transit routes through Pismo Beach, described below.

Regional Transit
RTA’s Route 10 is a regional route that runs between San Luis Obispo and Santa Maria, operating hourly on weekdays and every three hours on Saturday (RTA 2017). Route 10 takes 3 trips in each direction on Sunday. The only stop along this route in Pismo Beach is at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets. However, the remaining routes provide local service within Pismo Beach and to the surrounding communities. Routes 21 and 24 travel in opposite directions on overlapping portions of their routes (RTA 2020). Route 21 travels clockwise while Route 24 travels counterclockwise. Route 21 provides service to Shell Beach, downtown Pismo Beach, the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets, downtown Grover Beach, and eastern Arroyo Grande. Route 21 follows a similar route but does not serve Shell Beach and instead serves downtown Arroyo Grande. Both Route 21 and Route 24 operate hourly between 6:30 AM and 6:30 PM.

Local Transit
RTA operates a local bus in Pismo Beach, called the Avila to Pismo Trolley, that is designed to resemble a trolley car. The Avila to Pismo Trolley only operates between March and October and provides extended service in the peak summer months between June and September (RTA 2021).

During standard months, the trolley operates hourly between 10:00 AM and 4:00 PM on Saturday and Sunday only. During extended service in the summer months, the trolley operates between 10:00 AM and 6:00 PM Thursday through Sunday. The trolley ultimately runs on a loop between Avila Beach and Pismo Beach and makes many local stops within greater Avila Beach, Shell Beach, and downtown Pismo Beach.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-4
Figure 4.14-1 Existing Pedestrian Facilities

Source: City of Pismo Beach, Circulation Element (2023) Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-5
Figure 4.14-2 Existing Bicycle Facilities

Source: City of Pismo Beach, Circulation Element (2023) Note: For the purposes of this map, this figure does not include the submerged lands offshore that are within the Pismo Beach City Limits. See Figure LU-1 of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Land Use Element (Pismo Beach LAFCO-approved City Border) for the full Pismo Beach City Limits.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-6
Rail Service
A single railroad track, owned by the Union Pacific Railroad, extends through Pismo Beach between San Luis Obispo and Grover Beach. The nearest roadway crossing of the railroad in the vicinity of Pismo Beach is located south at Grand Avenue in Grover Beach, and the nearest rail station is located adjacent to the Grand Avenue crossing. The train is serviced four times a day by the Pacific Surfliner, operated by Amtrak, on its route between San Luis Obispo and San Diego. Additional buses serve this station three times a day, connecting to other train stations along the Pacific Surfliner route. Twice-daily round trip buses from the station service passengers to the Central Valley and Southern California.
d. Travel Characteristics
Travel Modes and Distance Travelled
U.S. Census Bureau data for mode of travel to and from places of employment provide general travel characteristics and patterns of Pismo Beach residents. As shown in Table 4.14-1, Pismo Beach residents have a lower rate of carpooling, walking to work, biking to work, and taking other modes of transportation to work such as taxicabs or motorcycles compared to the countywide average.

However, Pismo Beach residents have a lower rate of driving alone and a higher rate of utilizing public transit when travelling to work compared to the countywide average, and residents have a substantially higher rate of working from home compared to the countywide, statewide, and national averages.

In comparison to state and countywide trends, the mean travel time of Pismo Beach residents to work in 2019’s 5-Year Estimates was approximately 22.3 minutes, with San Luis Obispo County and state commute travel times averaging approximately 21.7 and 29.8 minutes, respectively (U.S.

Census Bureau 2019).

Table 4.14-1 Travel Mode Comparison for Work Trips
Percentage of Work Trips
Jurisdiction Drive Alone Carpool Transit Walk Bicycle
Work at
Home Other
Pismo Beach 72.1% 6.6% 3.7% 2.6% 0.6% 14.1% 0.3%
San Luis Obispo County 73.0% 10.8% 1.3% 4.6% 2.0% 7.4% 0.9% California 73.7% 10.1% 5.1% 2.6% 1.0% 5.9% 1.6%
United States 76.3% 9.0% 5.0% 2.7% 0.5% 5.2% 1.3%
Notes: Data is provided for 2019 for working age residents. Working age is considered 16 years old.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates Existing Traffic Volumes and Capacity
Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 743, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has replaced automobile delay, historically measured as level of service (LOS), as the appropriate metric for evaluating environmental transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). VMT measures the amount of travel on roadways by all types of motorized vehicles carrying passengers or cargo. Each mile traveled is counted as one vehicle mile regardless of the number of people in the

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-7

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
vehicle. VMT is typically expressed as VMT per day. The baseline (2019) VMT generated by the City, representing the existing regional land uses and transportation network, is 11,226,484 (Appendix G).

Traffic Safety
The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) compares collision rates for cities throughout the state.

There are 75 cities in the state that are in the same category as Pismo Beach with populations between 2,501 and 10,000. In 2018, the most recent year for which collision rate data is published, Pismo Beach was ranked 16th in its category for fatal and injury collisions, indicating that 15 similar- sized cities had higher collision rates and 59 had lower collision rates. The highest concentration of collisions in Pismo Beach occurs within the city’s downtown core, with the most common contributing factor being visibility for vehicles turning from side streets and intersections controlled by two-way stops (OTS 2018).

4.14.2 Regulatory Setting
a.Federal
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) provides a number of grant programs, primarily for the construction and upgrading of major highways and transit facilities. Many of these grants are administered by the state and regional governments. Use of federal grant funding also invokes the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) in some cases. b.State
Caltrans Authority over the State Highway System
Caltrans is responsible for the planning, design, construction and maintenance of all interstate freeways and state routes. It builds, maintains, and operates the State Highway System in California with a goal to facilitate the safe and efficient use of the state transportation system for all users.

Caltrans sets standards in its 2020 Transportation Impact Study Guide that focus on the VMT metric.

This document is often used by local governments to uniformly review transportation analysis and assess the operational standards of Caltrans-maintained facilities. The document is intended to be a reference and informational document that aligns with the standards and thresholds established in the State’s Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. The 2020 document acts as a replacement for the 2002 Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies but is only intended to be used with local land use projects and plans, not to be used for transportation projects on the State Highway System.

Caltrans has completed an Active Transportation Plan (2021), which identifies bicycle and pedestrian needs on, across, and parallel to the State Highway System throughout California’s Central Coast. The Active Transportation Plan also includes a prioritized list of Location Based Needs to identify high priority needs areas for new projects. In addition, Caltrans recently completed the US 101 Santa Maria to San Luis Obispo Multimodal Corridor Plan, which is a comprehensive multimodal corridor plan and concept of operations addressing regional and interregional safety, congestion, accessibility, goods movement, economic development, land use efficiency, public health, air quality, and greenhouse gas emissions for U.S. 101 from State Route (SR) 135 in Santa Maria to SR 58 near Santa Margarita, an overall corridor of about 37 miles which runs through the City of Pismo Beach. The US 101 Santa Maria to San Luis Obispo Multimodal Corridor Plan provides a range of proposed concepts, evaluates and prioritizes improvements within the study limits, and

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-8
sets a framework for implementing short- and long-term capital improvements supporting the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB 1) goals and priorities. Finally, in December 2021, Caltrans published the Director’s Policy on Complete Streets. The Director’s Policy establishes Caltrans' organizational priority to encourage and maximize walking, biking, transit, and passenger rail as a strategy to meet state climate, health, equity, and environmental goals and to foster socially and economically vibrant, thriving, and resilient communities. The Director’s Policy focuses on maximizing the use of design flexibility to provide context-sensitive solutions and networks for travelers of all ages and abilities.

Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan
The Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) is a capital improvement program that plans transportation projects related to state facilities in California for the next five years. The program is updated every two years with new construction projects as more funding is provided. The California Transportation Commission approves the fund estimate and then Caltrans and regional planning agencies submit plans for transportation improvement projects. If the projects are programmed in the STIP, then relevant agencies can begin the implementation process.

Senate Bill 743
SB 743, which was signed into law in 2013, tasked the OPR with establishing new criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA. SB 743 requires the new criteria to “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” It also states that alternative measures of transportation impacts may include “vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated.” SB 743 changes the way that public agencies evaluate the transportation impacts of projects under CEQA by recognizing that roadway congestion, while an inconvenience to drivers, is not itself an environmental impact (see Pub. Resource Code, § 21099, subd. [b][2]). In addition to new exemptions for projects that are consistent with specific plans, the draft SB 743 guidelines replace congestion-based metrics, such as auto delay and level of service, with VMT as the basis for determining significant impacts, unless the guidelines provide specific exceptions.

Statewide implementation of SB 743 is now required. Therefore, this PEIR relies on VMT to evaluate transportation impacts.

California’s Complete Streets Act
The Complete Streets Act was signed into law as Assembly Bill (AB) 1358 in 2008. It requires that cities and other public agencies incorporate “complete street” policies and principles into their General Plans and Updates within the Circulation Elements, so that the plan addresses the needs of all users, including bicyclists and pedestrians. Caltrans specifically adopted Deputy Directive 64, which addresses the needs of people of all ages and abilities concerning transportation planning. It also recognizes that transportation improvement projects are opportunities to improve safety, access, and mobility for motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users. The Complete Streets Implementation Action Plan provides an overview of the program (Caltrans 2010).

The current Pismo Beach General Plan was adopted in 1993, prior to the Complete Streets Act.

However, Pismo Beach adopted a Complete Street Master Plan in 2013. Of the improvements identified in the Complete Street Master Plan, the City completed the Shell Beach Streetscape Project in early 2021. The Shell Beach Streetscape Project included installation of a separated

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-9
bicycle and pedestrian path along Shell Beach Road from Cliff Avenue to Terrace Avenue.

Additionally, a stated goal of the GP/LCP Update is to plan for and provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities to encourage and meet the walking and bicycling needs of the city. The City also outlines a number of specific Complete Street policies in the Circulation Element of the GP/LCP update. c. Regional
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, Regional Transportation Plan The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) is required by state and federal law to prepare, update, and adopt a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) every four years. The most recent update to the RTP was completed by SLOCOG in 2019. The 2019 RTP addresses all modes of travel and identifies and prioritizes expenditures from anticipated funding for all modes of transportation including highways, streets and roads, transit, rail, bicycle, and pedestrian, as well as transportation demand management strategies. All transportation projects that use state and federal funds, or that could significantly affect transportation within the San Luis Obispo County, must be included in the RTP. The 2019 RTP identifies active transportation projects, non-highway system projects, highway system projects, and a park and ride project, including two lots in Pismo Beach. The 2019 RTP includes the following goals (SLOCOG 2019):
 Preserve the transportation system.
 Improve intermodal mobility and accessibility for all people.  Support a vibrant economy.
 Improve public safety and security.
 Foster livable, healthy communities and promote social equity.  Practice environmental stewardship.
 Practice financial stewardship.

SLOCOG has begun developing its updated RTP for the year 2023. This document is expected to provide a vision for future growth and development of the San Lois Obispo region through the year 2045. Although the full RTP has not been provided to the public, the SLOCOG Board published its visions and goals for the Plan in February of 2021. The SLOCOG has adopted the following goals for its 2023 RTP Update (SLOCOG 2021):
 Maintain and improve the effectiveness of the existing transportation system.  Improve intermodal mobility and accessibility for all people.  Support a vibrant, resilient economy.
 Improve public safety and security.
 Foster livable and healthy communities and promote equity.  Protect and enhance the environment.
 Practice financial stewardship.

4.14-10

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update
d.Local
2010 Pismo Beach Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
The Pismo Beach Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, adopted in 2010 and updated in 2015, describes existing conditions and identifies goals, policies, implementation actions, and priorities for the development of bicycling and walking facilities in Pismo Beach. The specific policies within the Master Plan are based on the overall goal of making Pismo Beach a city where both residents and visitors can safely walk, bicycle, or reach the beach with:
A well-defined network of Class I, II, and III bike facilities including sufficient end of-trip facilities.  A complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian walkways including frequent beach access points.
Access to information about bicycling and walking safely in the City.

The 2010 Pismo Beach Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan also lists a variety of new facilities and maintenance/upgrade projects planned for the city, along with essential education and outreach events.
2013 Pismo Beach Complete Street Master Plan
The Complete Street Master Plan provides design concepts, goals, and an overall framework to improve the city for bicyclists and pedestrians. The plan area extends approximately 5 miles through the city, from its northern boundary to Grover Beach, including Shell Beach Road, Price Street, and Dolliver Street (Highway 1/ Pacific Coast Highway). The plan intends to propose enhancements that promote safety, connectivity, and convenient walking and cycling for both residents and visitors in Pismo Beach.

4.14.3 Impact Analysis
a.Methodology
VMT estimates were evaluated with the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model, which was built based upon the 2014 SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand Model. The proposed GP/LCP Update’s planning horizon is 2040, while the travel demand model’s planning horizon is 2035. Although the two planning horizons are described with different future years, both represent buildout conditions and therefore are used congruently.

For the VMT analysis, a model scenario was created by modifying the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model forecasted land use data in order to include the full buildout development associated with the proposed GP/LCP Update (Appendix G). The VMT analysis consists of two parts: evaluating the change in total VMT and evaluating the change in VMT efficiency metrics. The change in total VMT (county-wide) was evaluated for the proposed GP/LCP Update against both the existing condition and buildout of the current General Plan Buildout condition. To fully capture the existing conditions, the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model year (“2010 Base Year”) was adjusted to match the CEQA baseline year of 2019. This methodology is consistent with the OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-11
b. Significance Thresholds
The following criteria are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Impacts would be significant if implementation of the GP/LCP Update would do any of the following:

1. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities;

2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts;

3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); and/or

4. Result in inadequate emergency access.

Pismo Beach has not adopted significance thresholds for evaluating potential VMT impacts or associated impact/mitigation policies. In the absence of a locally-adopted threshold, this analysis utilizes the OPR recommendations published in the Technical Advisory for Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (OPR 2018). The Technical Advisory recommends analyzing VMT outcomes of land use plans across the full area over which the plan may substantively affect travel patterns, including beyond the boundary of the plan or jurisdiction’s geography. The Technical Advisory recommends that general plans may have a significant impact on transportation if the total regional VMT increases, or if proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed a threshold of 15 percent lower per capita or per employee VMT than existing development. The Technical Advisory includes evidence connecting this level of reduction to the state’s emissions goals.
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Impact T-1 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GP/LCP 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.

Several regionally- and locally-adopted land use plans, policies, and regulations apply to development under the GP/LCP Update. These include the SLOCOG 2019 RTP for San Luis Obispo County, the Pismo Beach 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and the Pismo Beach 2013 Complete Street Master Plan.

The SLOCOG 2019 RTP is a long-range land use and transportation plan for the San Luis Obispo region. The 2019 RTP includes nine goals, with respective objectives and policies to meet these goals, which are expected to result in significant benefits to the region not only with respect to transportation and mobility, but also economic activity, safety, and social equity. As discussed under Impact LUP-2 in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, the proposed GP/LCP Update would not conflict or be inconsistent with the SLOCOG 2019 RTP for San Luis Obispo County. However, the

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-12
determination of GP/LCP Update consistency is within the discretion of the Pismo Beach City Council. Overall, the GP/LCP Update is consistent with the SLOCOG 2019 RTP.

The GP/LCP Update includes several goals and policies to ensure acceptable access and performance for all modes of travel. These goals and policies would enhance the City’s alternative transportation modes while continuing to accommodate automobile travel. The Pismo Beach 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is intended to amplify policies in the City’s General Plan and Local Coastal Plan that address bicycle and pedestrian opportunities by providing the implementation tools for many GP/LCP directives. Section 4 of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan includes policies that describe actions Pismo Beach can take to ensure safety and accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists. The GP/LCP Update Circulation Element includes specific goals and policies that implement of Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan policies and actions. Table 4.14-2 includes applicable Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan policies and describes the GP/LCP Update’s consistency with each.

Table 4.14-2 GP/LCP Update Consistency with Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan GP/LCP Update Consistency Policy BP-11: Encourages techniques to create a
pleasant walking and biking experience including
concern for views, paving materials, landscape,
street furniture and pedestrian scale lighting
Consistent. Policy CE-6.8 targets street trees for shade and comfort and ensures that planting plans for street trees take into consideration shade and comfort for pedestrians and bicyclists and traffic calming benefits. Action CE-2.1e focuses on pedestrian circulation and requires sidewalks be required for all new developments in residential and commercial areas with techniques that create a pleasant walking experience including concern for views, paving materials, landscape, street furniture, and pedestrian scaled lighting
Policy BP-12: Requires all new sidewalk areas to be
designed to accommodate the handicapped.

Consistent. Action CE-2.1e requires all new sidewalk areas to be designed to accommodate the handicapped, compliant with the ADA.

Policy BP-30: Encourages the Lucia Mar School
District to provide bike and pedestrian safety
programs at schools within City limits.

Consistent. Action CE-2.3a addresses bicycle safety and aims to increase the safety of those traveling by bicycle by specifically working with the Lucia Mar Unified School District to promote classes on bicycle safety in schools.

Source: Pismo Beach 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan As the proposed GP/LCP Update includes goals and policies designed to implement the policies, actions, and improvement projects in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the proposed GP/LCP Update would be consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

The 2013 Complete Streets Master Plan describes specific plans and projects that would enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety and connectivity in Pismo Beach. The Complete Streets Master Plan also provides a more general overview of concepts and goals to help guide future project planning.

For example, Section 5 of the Complete Streets Master Plan describes components that should be considered during project planning in order to result in a Complete Street with improved pedestrian, bicycle, and transit safety and improved vehicle circulation. The GP/LCP Update Circulation Element includes Action CE-1.5a, which focuses on Complete Streets and requires future projects be evaluated to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users are considered. As the proposed GP/LCP Update Circulation Element includes goals and

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-13
policies that mirror the vision of the Complete Street Master Plan, the proposed GP/LCP Update would be consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s Complete Street Master Plan.

The proposed GP/LCP Update would not conflict or be inconsistent with the SLOCOG 2019 RTP, the Pismo Beach 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, or the Pismo Beach 2013 Complete Street Master Plan. As a result, the GP/LCP Update would result in a less than significant impact regarding conflicts or inconsistencies with programs, plans, ordinances, or policies addressing the circulation system.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Threshold 2: Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
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 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.

Model Scenario VMT
Existing (2019)1 11,226,484
Buildout - Current General Plan (2040) 13,311,157
Buildout - GP/LCP Update (2040) 13,476,666
1 The “Existing (2019)” scenario refers to the 2010 Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model year, which was adjusted to account for the CEQA baseline year of 2019 in order to fully represent the existing regional land uses and transportation network.

Source: Appendix G
As shown in Table 4.14-3, the proposed GP/LCP Update is projected to increase regional VMT under 2040 buildout conditions, resulting in an increase of approximately 2.3 million VMT from the existing condition, and an increase of approximately 166,000 over buildout of the current GP/LCP.

This regional VMT increase would fail to meet the threshold identified in OPR’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts, which states a project may have a significant impact on transportation if it results in an increase in regional VMT.

For informational purposes Table 4.14-4 shows the residential VMT per capita model results comparing the existing 2040 GP forecast and the proposed 2040 GP/LCP Update forecast and The TIA (Appendix G) conducted for the proposed GP/LCP Update includes an analysis of the regional transportation system operation under Existing (2019), current General Plan buildout (2040), and proposed GP/LCP Update buildout (2040) conditions. Table 4.14-3 shows the estimated 2019 baseline VMT in the region and the projected 2040 VMT for buildout of the current GP and proposed GP/LCP Update.

Table 4.14-3 Total Regional VMT Results Summary

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-14
Table 4.14-5 shows the non-residential/work VMT per employee model results comparing the existing 2040 GP forecast and the proposed 2040 GP/LCP Update forecast.

Table 4.14-4 Regional Residential VMT Results Per Capita Summary Pismo Model Residential Trips
Average Trip
Distance Residential VMT1 Population
Residential
VMT per Capita2
Existing (2019)3 717,564 10.34 7,420,936 255,085 29.09
Existing 2040 GP4 861,337 10.08 8,684,684 282,559 30.74 Proposed 2040 GPU4 860,802 10.10 8,694,346 283,671 30.65 Difference from 2019 143,237 -2.34% 1,274,410 28,586 5.35% Difference from
Existing 2040 GP
(535) 0.17% 9,662 1,112 -0.28%
1 “Residential VMT” is derived by multiplying trips by distance. 2 “Residential VMT per capita” is derived by dividing residential VMT by population. 3 The “Existing (2019)” scenario refers to the 2010 Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model year, which was adjusted to account for the CEQA baseline year of 2019 in order to fully represent the existing regional land uses and transportation network. 4 The “2040 Year” refers to the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model buildout year. The proposed GP/LCP Update’s planning horizon is 2040, while the travel demand model’s planning horizon is 2035. Although the two planning horizons are described with different future years, both represent buildout conditions and therefore can be used congruently.

Source: Appendix G
Table 4.14-5 Regional Non-Residential/Work VMT Results Per Employee Summary Pismo Model Work Trips
Average Trip
Distance Work VMT1 Employment
Work VMT
per Employee2
Existing (2019)3 177,372 11.54 2,046,641 92,732 22.07
Existing 2040 GP4 197,741 11.43 2,206,727 113,867 19.85 Proposed 2040 GPU4 199,498 11.50 2,293,885 112,982 20.30 Difference from 2019 22,126 -0.35% 247,244 20,250 -8.01% Difference from
Existing 2040 GP
1,757 0.57% 33,158 (885) 2.26%
1 “Work VMT” is derived by multiplying trips by distance. 2 “Work VMT per employee” is derived by dividing work VMT by employment. 3 The “Existing (2019)” scenario refers to the 2010 Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model year, which was adjusted to account for the CEQA baseline year of 2019 in order to fully represent the existing regional land uses and transportation network. 4 The “2040 Year” refers to the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model buildout year. The proposed GP/LCP Update’s planning horizon is 2040, while the travel demand model’s planning horizon is 2035. Although the two planning horizons are described with different future years, both represent buildout conditions and therefore can be used congruently.

Source: Appendix G
As shown in Table 4.14-4, the residential VMT per capita from the proposed GP/LCP Update of is estimated to increase by 5.35 percent from the existing condition, but would decrease 0.28 percent in comparison to the existing General Plan’s regional residential VMT per capita. As shown in Table 4.14-5, the non-residential VMT per employee from the proposed GP/LCP Update is estimated to decrease 8.01 percent from the existing condition, but would increase 1.88 percent in comparison to than the existing General Plan’s regional non-residential VMT per employee. The proposed GP/LCP Update would not achieve the 15 percent reduction in per capita or per employee

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-15
VMT identified as an appropriate VMT threshold in OPR’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.

The proposed GP/LCP Update provides a framework to guide future development toward land uses that support walking, biking, and transit ridership. The following goals and policies are included in the GP/LCP Update Circulation Element, and are intended to reduce local VMT and improve access to bicycle and pedestrian, park and ride, and transit options in Pismo Beach:

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 to the community
 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. − 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 including 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.  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.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-16
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.  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. 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: Maintain and Improve 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, including SLORTA and SCT serving Pismo Beach.
 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

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-17
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.

While the proposed GP/LCP Update transportation-related policies are intended to reduce local VMT by improving access to bicycle, pedestrian, park and ride, and transit options in Pismo Beach, the potential VMT reduction that may result from implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update policies is not quantifiable in the context of the Pismo Beach Travel Demand Model/2014 SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand Model.

Potential future VMT impacts from individual development projects in Pismo Beach would be evaluated based on either OPR recommendations or local VMT thresholds established by the City.

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 Pismo Beach are speculative, the overall potential impacts of the increase in VMT in the Pismo Beach and in San Luis Obispo County identified for the GP/LCP Update would be significant.

Mitigation Measures
Future development generated by the GP/LCP Update in Pismo Beach would result in increased long-term VMT, even with implementation of GP/LCP Update goals and policies intended to reduce VMT and promote alternative transportation modes. The potential VMT reduction that may result from implementation of the proposed 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.

Significance After Mitigation
No feasible mitigation is available that would fully address the anticipated increase in VMT.

Therefore, impacts associated with increased VMT generated in Pismo Beach under GP/LCP Update buildout conditions would remain significant and unavoidable.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-18
Threshold 3: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)?
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 MEASURES WOULD BE DESIGNED AND REVIEWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND CITY STANDARDS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

The GP/LCP Update would not implement specific design features or specifications for new project- level development, roadways, or other transportation facilities. The proposed GP/LCP Land Use and Community Design Element does not change to the City’s roadway network and would not increase hazards due to geometric design features. Pismo Beach maintains standards for public improvements and private facilities (e.g., internal circulation, ingress/egress) that guide the construction of transportation facilities to minimize design hazards for all users of the transportation system. Land use proposals that would add traffic to streets not designed to current standards are evaluated through the project-level environmental review process. Mitigation measures for proposed projects would be identified as needed, but individual improvement projects are generally conditioned to construct or provide funding for physical improvements that would eliminate or minimize hazards.

In addition to goals and policies described in Impact T-2, above, which would reduce VMT by improving access to bicycle sharing, park and ride, and transit options, the GP/LCP Update Circulation Element establishes the following goals and policies that are intended to result in roadway designs that safely accommodate all users:

Goal CE-1 A circulation system that supports safe and efficient travel for all modes of transportation.
 Policy CE-1.1: Safe and efficient roadway system. Promote a safe and efficient roadway system for the movement of people and goods. This is achieved through a well-designed local roadway system that serves the City’s primary need for mobility and includes a hierarchy of roadways to meet that need.
 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.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-19
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-1.6: Neighborhood Context. Plan for safe, complete, well-connected neighborhood streets.
 Action CE-1.6a: Improve Circulation Connections. Modify the existing street network, where possible, to enable direct physical connections within and between neighborhoods, neighborhood-commercial areas, and commercial-commercial areas, including connections accessible only by pedestrians and bicycles on existing cul-de-sac streets.  Action CE-1.6b: Connect residential areas to parks and open space. Provide direct connection from residential areas to neighborhood parks and open space.  Action CE-1.6c: Pedestrian Crosswalks. Where feasible, provide pedestrian crosswalks on all intersection approaches.
 Action CE-1.6d: ADA Transition Plan. Implement projects identified in the City’s ADA Transition Plan.
 Action CE-1.6e: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Maintain and update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and work to fund and complete the planned bikeway and pedestrian system. The Plan indicates which streets in addition to arterials and collectors will install sidewalks and what other pedestrian facilities and amenities (such as ‘resting spots’) are needed to complete the pedestrian network. Sidewalk widths and shade coverage should also be addressed in the context of the adjacent land use, vehicle volumes, and vehicle speeds. The Plan also indicates proposed on- and off-street bikeways, pedestrian trails, and bike parking facilities within the City.
 Action CE-1.6f: Safe Routes to School. Maintain and complete implementation of the Safe Routes to School Plan. This effort should complement the ADA Transition Plan, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
 Action CE-1.2b: Following Adopted City Standards. Build arterials, collectors and local streets in accordance with adopted City standards. Improve existing facilities to conform to classification standards where possible. The cross-sections designated under this section will normally be required. Specific plan or special (alternative) section streets may also be adopted deviating from these standards. Wherever such alternative cross-section configurations are used, each will be so designed as to create an orderly transition from one to the next. Each alternative cross-section must further the goal of providing safe and efficient circulation, as well as an aesthetically pleasing urban form. Where streets are to be constructed by developers, the City shall not permit installation of less than a full street section. Exceptions to the standards may be allowed by the City Engineer where mitigation is infeasible or would conflict with other community values such as those listed below:
a) Impacts on general safety, particularly pedestrian, bicycle, and transit safety; b) The right-of-way needs and the physical impacts on surrounding private or public properties;
c) The visual aesthetics of the required improvement and its impact on community identity and character;
d) Environmental impacts including air quality and noise impacts; and e) Impacts on quality of life as perceived by residents.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-20
 Policy CE-6.4: Traffic and Accident Monitoring & Reduction. Implement and update the City’s Local Roadway Safety plan/program to help maintain satisfactory roadway performance at intersections and along roadway segments This may include the following:

1. Collect and analyze traffic volume data on a regular basis, and monitor current intersection and roadway segment LOS on a regular basis. This information may be used to update and refine the City’s travel forecasting model to improve estimates of future conditions.

2. Consider ways to shift travel demand away from the peak period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, especially in situations where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators (e.g. large retail developments on highway corridor, the Pismo Beach Pier). Strategies to consider include:
i. Encouraging employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use; ii. Providing shuttle service to major events and destinations; iii. Promoting shopping or entertainment events that are at off-peak hours; iv. Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large shopping or office centers; and,
v. Perform periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control system, with emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to optimize flow along collector and arterial corridors.
vi. Utilize alternative parking strategies as a means of managing transportation demand. vii. Manage, and when possible, reduce summertime visitor traffic impacts. viii. Support programs that reduce the interregional use of single-occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternative forms of transportation such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, bike share, and using car pools.
ix. Support and develop education programs directed at promoting types of transportation other than single-occupant vehicle.
 Policy CE-6.10: Medians. Medians shall be installed along arterials, as deemed necessary by the City engineer.
 Policy CE-7.2: Coordinate Standards. Continue to coordinate the City’s design standards for regional roadways with the standards of adjacent and overlapping agencies to provide smooth transitions for roadway users between jurisdictional boundaries.  Policy CE-2.3: Develop a Safe and Efficient Non-Motorized Circulation System. Provide safe and direct pedestrian routes and bikeways between places.
 Action CE-2.3a: Bicycle Safety. Increase the safety of those traveling by bicycle by:
a) Ensuring that bikeways are delineated and signed according to Caltrans or City standards, and that lighting is provided where needed;
b) Providing bicycle paths and lanes on bridges and overpasses; c) Ensuring that all new and improved streets have bicycle-safe drainage grates and are free of hazards such as uneven pavement or gravel;
d) Providing adequate signage and markings warning vehicular traffic of the existence of merging or crossing bicycle traffic where bike routes and paths make transitions into or across roadways; and
e) Work with the Lucia Mar Unified School District to promote classes on bicycle safety in schools.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-21
 Action CE-2.1e: Pedestrian Circulation. Sidewalks shall be required for all new developments in residential (other than individual single family residential) and commercial areas. Generally, the sidewalk shall be located so that a landscape strip or trees are located between the sidewalk and the vehicular travelled way. Techniques shall be encouraged to create a pleasant walking experience including concern for views, paving materials, landscape, street furniture, and pedestrian scaled lighting. The City encourages the use of flashing beacons or lighted crosswalk systems, especially in highly trafficked areas. All new sidewalk areas shall be designed to accommodate the handicapped, compliant with the ADA. Also, the City shall install (or cause to be installed) sidewalks or footpaths along all collector or arterial streets that connect with commercial centers, public gathering areas and schools.
 Action CE-5.1c: Truck Route Design. Ensure that truck routes are designed according to California Legal and where appropriate STAA standards for intersections and turning movements.

Development and infrastructure projects in Pismo Beach would be required to comply with the GP/LCP Update, Pismo Beach Municipal Code, and other applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Compliance with applicable regulations, as well as the identified goals and policies regarding infrastructure safety, would ensure that potential impacts associated with transportation hazards or incompatible uses would remain less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required
Threshold 4: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? 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.

The GP/LCP Update would not implement specific design features or building specifications for new project-level development or other transportation facilities. The proposed GP/LCP Land Use Element would not affect overall emergency access. The GP/LCP Land Use Element includes the following action intended to maintain and improve emergency access throughout Pismo Beach.  Action LU-3.1a: Zoning Ordinance Modifications. To allow for creative site planning, the Planning Commission shall allow modifications to the Zoning Ordinance so long as modifications are consistent with the GP/LCP goals and policies. Minimum access standards for emergency vehicles shall be maintained at all times. Specific criteria and findings shall be developed for when these modifications would be permitted.

In addition, the GP/LCP Update Circulation Element includes the following goals and policies intended to maintain and improve emergency access throughout Pismo Beach.

Goal CIR-1 Provide a circulation system that supports safe and efficient travel for all modes of transportation.
 Policy CE-1.1: Safe and efficient roadway system. Promote a safe and efficient roadway system for the movement of people and goods. This is achieved through a well-designed local roadway

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-22
system that serves the City’s primary need for mobility and includes a hierarchy of roadways to meet that need.
 Policy CE-1.9: Emerging Transportation Technology. Promote “green technology” efforts for emerging technological transportation advancements, including connected and autonomous vehicles, emergency vehicle pre-emption, sharing technology, electric car, bike and scooter parking and charging facilities, solar panels, downtown parking occupancy monitoring and innovative transit options.
 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-1.6: Neighborhood Context. Plan for safe, complete, well-connected neighborhood streets.
 Action CE-1.6a: Improve Circulation Connections. Modify the existing street network, where possible, to enable direct physical connections within and between neighborhoods, neighborhood-commercial areas, and commercial-commercial areas, including connections accessible only by pedestrians and bicycles on existing cul-de-sac streets.  Action CE-1.6b: Connect residential areas to parks and open space. Provide direct connection from residential areas to neighborhood parks and open space.  Action CE-1.6c: Pedestrian Crosswalks. Where feasible, provide pedestrian crosswalks on all intersection approaches.
 Action CE-1.6d: ADA Transition Plan. Implement projects identified in the City’s ADA Transition Plan.
 Action CE-1.6e: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Maintain and update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and work to fund and complete the planned bikeway and pedestrian system. The Plan indicates which streets in addition to arterials and collectors will install sidewalks and what other pedestrian facilities and amenities (such as ‘resting spots’) are needed to complete the pedestrian network. Sidewalk widths and shade coverage should also be addressed in the context of the adjacent land use, vehicle volumes, and vehicle speeds. The Plan also indicates proposed on- and off-street bikeways, pedestrian trails, and bike parking facilities within the City.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.14-23
 Action CE-1.6f: Safe Routes to School. Maintain and complete implementation of the Safe Routes to School Plan. This effort should complement the ADA Transition Plan, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
 Action CE-5.2a: Railroad Crossing Safety. Continue the ongoing comprehensive program to improve the condition and safety of existing railroad crossings. Special consideration must be given to improving east-west cross-town emergency access, potentially with a grade- separated crossing.

The GP/LCP Update would accommodate future traffic associated with anticipated growth in Pismo Beach. However, the GP/LCP Update includes goals and policies that describe procedures for reviewing project-level emergency access needs, including compliance with applicable state and city requirements. The identified goals and policies regarding the minimization of impacts related to emergency access would ensure that potential impacts related to emergency response would remain less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

4.14.4 Cumulative Impacts
The analysis in this section examines impacts of the GP/LCP Update on transportation and circulation throughout the cumulative impact analysis area, which consists of San Luis Obispo County, and is cumulative in nature. The traffic data for the existing condition, the current General Plan buildout conditions, and the proposed GP/LCP Update buildout conditions, which were used for this analysis, reflect cumulative development as part of the overall buildout conditions of the region in the future.

The goals, policies, programs and regulations in the 2019 RTP apply to surrounding communities in the same manner as they apply to Pismo Beach, thereby avoiding potential for cumulative considerable conflict between the transportation planning for the City and these communities.

Therefore, the potential cumulative impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update related to conflict with programs, plans, and ordinances or policies addressing the circulation system would be less than significant.

The cumulative traffic impacts of the GP/LCP Update were determined by a comparison of the existing conditions (2019) scenario and the proposed GP/LCP Update Conditions scenario. As shown in Table 4.14-3, Table 4.14-4, and Table 4.14-5, 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. As discussed in Impact T-2, 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

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.14-24
Update. Therefore, cumulative transportation impacts from new VMT in the region would remain significant and unavoidable.

Some types of transportation impacts are related to site- and project-specific characteristics and conditions and would not be significantly affected by other development outside of the City. As discussed in Impacts T-3 and T-4, 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, as outlined in the impact analysis above, 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.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-1

4.15 Utilities/System Services
This section evaluates potential effects on utilities related to adoption and implementation of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Update by identifying existing and planned service availability and anticipated demands and determining whether any necessary facility upgrades would result in adverse environmental effects. For purposes of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR), utilities include: a) water supply; b) wastewater; c) solid waste, d) stormwater facilities, e) electric power, f) natural gas, and g) telecommunications. Potential impacts related to stormwater runoff are further evaluated and discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality.

4.15.1 Setting
a. Water Supply
The City of Pismo Beach (City) is the primary water provider for residents and businesses in the City.

Pismo Beach Municipal Water System
The City manages the potable water systems within a service area that generally corresponds with the City limits. The City’s current water distribution system includes eight distribution zones, ten storage reservoirs, four Lopez Pipeline turnouts, and over 50 miles of distribution mains (City of Pismo Beach 2016). In 2018, residents and visitors of Pismo Beach used approximately 1,647 acre feet (AF) of water (City of Pismo Beach 2019).

Water Sources and Supply
The City serves as the primary water provider for residents and businesses in the City (City of Pismo Beach 2016).The City obtains water from a combination of three sources: the California State Water Project, Lopez Lake, and local groundwater. The City of Pismo Beach currently does not transfer or exchange water with its neighboring water suppliers.

State Water Project
The State Water Project (SWP), operated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), provides treated surface water to the region from Northern California through the Coastal Branch of the California aqueduct, which spans from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California (Water Education Foundation 2021). The Coastal Branch of the California aqueduct is a divergence of the main aqueduct which delivers water to Kern, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties (Water Education Foundation 2021). The San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) is a primary contractor of the SWP, and serves as the entity through which the City receives its SWP allocation of water. The Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA) treats water from the SWP at the Polonio Pass Water Treatment Plant which is located approximately 90 miles from the downstream terminus of the Coastal Branch, northeast of the City of Shandon. Water from the SWP for San Luis Obispo County is then distributed directly to contracted retailers, such as the City. The City’s current contractual water delivery allocation is 1,240 AF. However, 100 AF is subcontracted to the Central Coast Development Company and 40 AF is subcontracted to Pismo 98, LLC, which leaves the City a usable water allocation of 1,100 AFY (City of Pismo Beach 2015).

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-2
In addition to its SWP water allocation, the City holds 1,240 AFY of additional allocation with the District, usually referred to as a “drought buffer.” Drought buffer water is SWP water that has no pipeline capacity for delivery and is stored in the San Luis Reservoir for future use. Drought buffer water is only distributed to increase water delivery to contracted retailers when SWP allocations are affected by drought (City of Pismo Beach 2015).

Lopez Project
The Lopez Project consists of Lopez Lake, Lopez Dam, and a 3 mile 20-inch diameter buried steel transmission line for conveyance of raw water to the Lopez Terminal Reservoir and the Lopez Water Treatment Plant. The Lopez Project was established to operate the Lopez water supply system, and is a wholesale supplier of water (County of San Luis Obispo 2019). The contractors of the Lopez Project include the communities of Oceano, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and CSA 12 however, the Lopez Project is managed by the District.

The Lopez Lake is a reservoir located in the Arroyo Grande Creek watershed, approximately 8 miles northeast of the City of Pismo Beach. Lopez Lake has a total capacity of 51,990 AF and a storage capacity of 49,200 AF. Storage at the end of 2015 was 13,847 AF, or 28 percent, of total storage capacity. Out of the 4,530 AFY of water entitlements, the Lopez Project currently provides a contractual supply of up to 892 AFY to the City. However, water releases from Lopez Lake were limited in 2015 in compliance with the Low Reservoir Response Plan (LRRP), a plan created by the District which describes a set of actions to be implemented when the amount of water in storage within the Lopez Reservoir drops below 20,000 AF. The purpose of the LRRP is to limit downstream releases and municipal diversions from Lopez Lake during periods of low reservoir storage to preserve water within the reservoir for a minimum of 3 to 4 years under continuing drought conditions (County of San Luis Obispo 2014). The enactment of Stage 2 of the LRRP resulted in a 10 percent decrease in municipal and downstream releases in 2015 which would affect water supply in the City during the fourth year of a multiple dry years period (City of Pismo Beach 2015).

Groundwater
The southern portion of the City overlies the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. There is no groundwater basin underlying the remainder of the City. There are two boundaries currently in use for this groundwater basin: one defined by the DWR and one defined by the Superior Court of California for use in basin adjudication. As defined by DWR, the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin encompasses approximately 184,000 acres in the coastal portion of northern Santa Barbara and southern San Luis Obispo counties. The Santa Maria Groundwater Basin is bounded by the San Luis and Santa Lucia Ranges to the north, the San Rafael Mountains in the east, and Solomon Hills and the San Antonio Creek Valley Groundwater Basin in the south, and the Pacific Ocean in the west (City of Pismo Beach 2015). The Santa Maria Groundwater Basin consists of the following three sub- basins: Pismo Creek Valley (1,220 acres), Arroyo Grande Valley (3,860 acres), and Nipomo Valley (6,230 acres). Figure 4.8-3 in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, shows the City limits and the underlying groundwater basin.

Beginning in the late 1990s, groundwater pumping rights in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin were contested in court. The physical solution set forth in the Superior Court of California’s 2005 Stipulation and 2008 final order (“Adjudication Judgment”) established requirements and goals for the management of the entire Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. The Court defined three separate basin management areas: the Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA), the Nipomo Mesa Management Area, and the Santa Maria Valley Management Area. The City is located in the NCMA,

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-3
which consists of the northwest portion of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, bounded on the north by Highway 101, on the east by Mesa View Road, on the west by the Pacific Ocean, and on the south by the Nipomo Mesa Management Area, within the Cities of Grover Beach and Oceano (County of San Luis Obispo 2021a).

The Adjudication Judgment established a groundwater safe yield of 9,500 AFY for the NCMA portion of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin. It provides allotments of 5,300 AFY for agricultural irrigation, 4,000 AFY for urban use, and 200 AFY for subsurface outflow to the ocean (NCMA Technical Group 2019).

In the NCMA, water supply aquifers are within alluvial deposits of the Paso Robles Formation, the Careaga Formation, and the Pismo Formation. Recharge to the NCMA comes primarily from:
 Seepage from Arroyo Grande Creek, including releases from Lopez Lake;  Deep percolation of precipitation, including stormwater infiltration basins;  Subsurface inflow from the Nipomo Mesa with underflow from Pismo Creek, Meadow Creek, Arroyo Grande Creek, and Los Berros Creek alluvium; and  Residential and agricultural return flows (SLO County FCWCD 2014).

Water availability in the NCMA is constrained by water rights and water quality issues. The NCMA manages groundwater extraction in their portion of the basin to protect long-term sustainable use and to prevent seawater intrusion. Historically, elevated freshwater levels along the coastline and natural outflow to the ocean have prevented seawater from intruding into the groundwater basin.

However, groundwater elevations along the coastline have dropped due to changing climatic conditions, including more frequent periods of extended drought resulting in reduced inflow into the groundwater basin and increased demands on groundwater supplies resulting in a higher rate of groundwater extraction. These lower levels reduce the flow of freshwater out toward the ocean, which reduces the effectiveness of groundwater as a barrier to seawater and has increased seawater intrusion over the last decade.

For the NCMA portion of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, the safe yield from groundwater sources was determined to be 9,500 AFY. The 9,500 AFY safe yield provides groundwater allotments for agricultural irrigation in the NCMA area of 5,300 AFY, outflow to the ocean of 200 AFY, and urban use of 4,000 AFY. Of the 4,000 AFY allotment for urban use, the City receives 700 AFY (City of Grover Beach 2019).

Central Coast Blue
The City is currently working jointly with the cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach, and community of Oceano to develop Central Coast Blue. Central Coast Blue is a local recycled water sustainability project that will create a new, high quality, and reliable water supply. A new recycled water facility would be constructed in Grover Beach to create a high-quality water source to supplement local supplies. The recycled water facility would treat flows from the Pismo Beach Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District WWTP. This project would allow sufficient water supplies even in times of water shortage or drought.

Central Coast Blue would also include upgrades to the processes at the existing WWTPs. These upgrades include process upgrades collectively known as Advanced Treatment and include Microfiltration/Ultrafiltration, Reverse Osmosis, and Ultraviolet disinfection with Advanced Oxidation.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-4
In addition to the process upgrades, the Central Coast Blue facility would require injection wells located outside the City to recharge the groundwater basin with purified water and a piping network to carry the purified water from the advanced treatment process to the injection wells.

As of the date of this EIR, the Groundwater Basin Evaluation is currently underway. The project is expected to be completed in 2023.

Future Water Supply and Demand
The City’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) outlines projected water supply under dry-year drought conditions. Over the last decade the City of Pismo Beach has adequately provided water throughout the City. The City’s water supply is projected to increase from actual use in 2015 to projected available supply in 2035. The City’s current UWMP projects water supply and demand through the year 2035 however, the City is currently undergoing an update to the 2015 UWMP which would extend projections to the year 2040 (City of Pismo Beach 2020). Projected available supply is expected to remain constant from 2025 through 2035. The City is working on numerous projects to reduce its reliance on imported water through bolstering the groundwater basin and increasing the reliability of local groundwater sources and offsetting SWP deliveries. Surface water supply from the SWP is expected to decrease based on DWR reliability projections. The City is expected to have an available supply in excess of projected demand through 2035. Table 4.15-1 shows actual water supply and demand for the City in 2015 and projected water supply and demand for the City through 2035.

Table 4.15-1 Water Supply and Demand – Actual (2015) and Projected Actual Projected Supply/Demand
Supply/Demand Condition 2015 2020* 2025* 2030* 2035*
Supply Totals 2,832 3,477 3,494 3,512 3,530
Demand Totals 1,736 1,888 1,939 1,990 2,044
Supply and Demand Difference 1,096 1,589 1,556 1,521 1,486 Units in acre-feet per year (AFY)
*Includes 645-698 AFY of recycled water supply
Source: City of Pismo Beach 2016
b. Wastewater Collection and Treatment
The City’s wastewater disposal system is comprised of the Pismo Beach WWTP adjacent to Pismo Creek and the ocean outfall near Oceano, which is operated jointly with the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (City of Pismo Beach 2020). The Pismo Beach WWTP is owned and operated by the City and is permitted to discharge disinfected secondary treated wastewater to the Pacific Ocean.

The Pismo Beach WWTP currently treats and discharges an average of 0.9 million gallons per day (mgd) and is permitted to discharge up to 1.9 mgd to the Pacific Ocean via the existing SSLOCSD ocean outfall under its existing Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) Order No. R3-2015-0016 as of February 2016 (City of Pismo Beach 2015). However, certain deficiencies exist in the collection system within Pismo Beach. Old sewer lines are continuously being replaced and lift equipment upgraded as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-5
Recycled Water
Central Coast Blue would assist with the treatment of wastewater and capture of water for recharge of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin and potable water. As described above in Central Coast Blue, the project is expected to complete construction and be operational in 2023. c. Solid Waste
The City contracts with South County Sanitary Services to provide residential and commercial waste collection services in the City. South County Sanitary Services is a subsidiary of Waste Connections Incorporated, which serves the entire San Luis Obispo Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) jurisdictional area, which includes the cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, El Paso de Robles, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, and San Luis Obispo. South Coast Sanitary Services provides collection service for household trash, recyclable materials, and clean green waste, such as untreated wood and cut grass.

South County Sanitary Services deposits waste collected in Pismo Beach at the Cold Canyon Landfill, one of three landfills in the IWMA jurisdictional area. Cold Canyon Landfill is located an estimated 5 miles east of Downtown Pismo Beach. Solid waste transported to the landfill is either sorted and recycled or deposited into the landfill. The estimated permitted landfill capacity of the Cold Canyon Landfill is just over 23 million cubic yards and is estimated to have a remaining capacity of approximately 13,000,000 tons (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery 2021).

The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) reports per capita disposal rates, measures in pounds per person (both residential population and employed population) to establish compliance with Assembly Bill 939, which requires cities and counties to prepare integrated waste management plans and to divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills.

Disposal rates are in the San Luis Obispo IWMA are not separated by jurisdiction. In 2019, the County of San Luis Obispo disposed of 288,432 tons of solid waste dispersed between the three landfills in the IWMA jurisdictional area (CalRecycle 2019). d. Stormwater Facilities
Stormwater within the City that does not infiltrate into the ground becomes surface runoff, which either flows into surface waterways or is channeled into the City’s storm drains. The City's storm drain system is designed to route stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces including roofs, parking lots, roads, sidewalks, and other hardened surfaces to the Pismo Creek and the Pacific Ocean. The system is comprised of storm drains, cross gutters, and surface swales that are located on City roads, parking lots, freeways, and highways (City of Pismo Beach 2021b). The City of Pismo Beach Engineering and Planning staff are responsible for the maintenance, repair, mapping, and evaluation of drainage systems within the City. Discharges from the City’s storm drain system into the ocean and bay are permitted under the State Water Resources Control Board’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s), Order No. 2013-001-DWQ NPDES No.

CAS000004 (City of Pismo Beach 2021c).

The Central Coast Storm Water Program regulates stormwater discharges from municipalities, construction, and industrial activities. The Central Coast Stormwater Program regulates stormwater discharge from municipalities, including the City, as part of the Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit. The Central Coast Water Program requires the implementation of Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements to reduce

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-6
stormwater discharge for all development projects that would create and/or replace impervious surfaces greater than or equal to 2,500 sf (Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board 2021).

Pacific Gas & Electric
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is responsible for providing electric power supply to the City. PG&E is one of the nation’s largest electric and gas utility companies, and it maintains 106,681 circuit miles of electric distribution lines and 18,466 circuit miles of interconnected transmission lines (PG&E 2021). In 2018, PG&E’s power mix, including all PG&E-owned generation plus the company’s power purchases, consisted of 39 percent renewable resources (wind, geothermal, biomass, solar, and small hydro), 34 percent nuclear generation, 15 percent natural gas and other fuels, and 13 percent large hydroelectric facilities (PG&E 2019). According to PG&E’s 2020 Integrated Resource Plan, PG&E anticipates meeting a 2030 energy load demand of 28,907 gigawatt-hours (PG&E 2020).

Southern California Gas
The City is in the natural gas service area of Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), which spans central and southern California (CEC 2018a). SoCalGas’ service area is equipped with over 102,000 miles of gas transmission, distribution, and service pipelines (SoCalGas 2013). Natural gas supplied by SoCalGas is sourced from gas fields in several sedimentary basins in the western U.S. and Canada including supply basins located in New Mexico (San Juan Basin), West Texas (Permian Basin), Rocky Mountains, western Canada, and local California supplies (California Gas and Electric Utilities 2020). In 2018, SoCalGas customers consumed a total of approximately 8.8 million U.S. therms of natural gas, including residential and non-residential use, electricity generation, and wholesale purchases. Residential users accounted for approximately 27 percent of SoCal Gas’ natural gas consumption. From 2020 to 2035, SoCalGas expects residential use and core, non- residential use (including core commercial, industrial, and natural gas vehicles) to decline at an average annual rate of about 1 percent. The expected decline in residential use is primarily driven by aggressive energy efficiency goals and associated programs.

Telecommunications
Telecommunication services are provided to the City through third-party providers such as AT&T, Charter Spectrum, Dish Network, Frontier Communications, and Allconnect. Infrastructure capable of supporting telecommunications is currently present in the City.

4.15.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal Regulations
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act, enacted by Congress in 1972 and amended several times since, is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the United States and forms the basis for several State and local laws throughout the country. The Act established the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act gave the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency the authority to implement federal pollution control programs, such as setting water quality standards for contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry contaminants in surface water, establishing

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-7
wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry categories, and imposing requirements for controlling nonpoint-source pollution. At the federal level, the Clean Water Act is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. At the state and regional levels in California, the act is administered and enforced by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB).

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 258 (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Subtitle D), contains regulations for municipal solid waste landfills and requires states to implement their own permitting programs incorporating the Federal landfill criteria.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act, enacted by Congress in 2007, is designed to improve vehicle fuel economy and help reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil. It expands the production of renewable fuels, reducing dependence on oil and confronting climate change.

Specifically, it does the following:
 Increases the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard that requires fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022.  Reduces United States demand for oil by setting a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, an increase in fuel economy standards of 40 percent as compared to 2007 levels.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 also set energy efficiency standards for lighting (specifically light bulbs) and appliances. Development would also be required to install photosensors and energy-efficient lighting fixtures consistent with the requirements of 42 United States Code Section 17001 et seq.

Energy Policy and Conservation Act
Enacted in 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act established fuel economy standards for new light-duty vehicles sold in the United States. The law placed responsibility on the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) for establishing and regularly updating vehicle standards. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is responsible for administering the Corporate Average Fuel Economy program, which determines vehicle manufacturers’ compliance with existing fuel economy standards. In 2012, the U.S. EPA and National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration established final passenger car and light truck Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for model years 2017 to 2021, which will require a combined average fleet-wide fuel economy of 40.3 to 41.0 miles per gallon in model year 2021 (United States Department of Transportation 2014).

Energy Star Program
Energy Star is a voluntary labeling program introduced by U.S. EPA to identify and promote energy- efficient products to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The program applies to major household appliances, lighting, computers, and building components such as windows, doors, roofs, and heating and cooling systems. Under this program, appliances that meet specifications for maximum energy use established under the program are certified to display the Energy Star label. In

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-8
1996, the U.S. EPA joined with the Energy Department to expand the program, which now also includes certifying commercial and industrial buildings as well as homes (U.S. EPA 2021). b. State Regulations
Water Supply
Drinking water quality in the City is regulated by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), the SWRCB, and the Central Coast RWQCB. The California Code of Regulations, Title 22 (State Drinking Water Standards) is the primary body of State legislation providing water system standards, including those for water supply, storage capacity, and water quality. Other applicable regulations and policies include the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the SWRCB Non-degradation Policy.

California Department of Water Resources
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is responsible for preparing and updating the California Water Plan, which is a policy document that guides the development and management of State water resources. The plan is updated every five years to reflect changes in resources and urban, agricultural, and environmental water demands. The California Water Plan suggests ways of managing demand and augmenting supply to balance water supply with demand.

CALGreen Compliance
CALGreen is California’s first green building code and first in the nation state-mandated green building code. It is formally known as the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, of the California Code of Regulations. CALGreen also specifies requirements for applications regulated by the California Building Standards Commission (BSC), California Energy Commission (CEC), Division of the State Architect (DSA), Department of Public Health (CDPH), Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), and DWR. The purpose of CALGreen is to improve public health, safety, and general welfare through enhanced design and construction of buildings using concepts which reduce negative impacts and promote those principles which have a positive environmental impact and encourage sustainable construction practices including water efficiency and conservation, and environmental quality.

Urban Water Management Planning Act
The Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983 amended California Water Code to require all urban water suppliers in California to prepare and adopt an UWMP and update it every five years.

This requirement applies to all suppliers providing water to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 AFY of water.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
In September 2014, Governor Browned signed legislation requiring that California’s critical groundwater resources be sustainably managed by local agencies. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act gives local agencies the power to sustainably manage groundwater and requires groundwater sustainability plans to be developed for medium- and high-priority groundwater basins. The project site overlies the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, for which no groundwater sustainability agency has been established. Although the DWR designated Santa Maria Basin as a high priority basin, the SGMA provides exceptions for adjudicated basins, such as the Santa Maria

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-9
Basin, and would not apply to the adjudicated areas of the Santa Maria Basin, such as the NCMA (County of San Luis Obispo 2021b).

Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7)
Due to reductions of water available from the San Joaquin Delta, the Legislature drafted the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB X7-7) to protect statewide water sources. The legislation called for a 20 percent reduction in water use in California by the year 2020. The legislation amended the Water Code to call for 2020 and 2015 water use targets in the 2010 UWMPs, updates or revisions to these targets in the 2015 UWMPs, and allows DWR to enforce compliance to the new water use standards. Beginning in 2016, failure to comply with interim and final targets will make the City ineligible for grants and loans from the State. In addition to an overall statewide 20 percent water use reduction, the objective of SB X7-7 is to reduce water use within each hydrologic region in accordance with the agricultural and urban water needs of each region. Currently, DWR recognizes 10 separate hydrologic regions. Each hydrologic region has been established for planning purposes and corresponds to the State’s major drainage areas. The City of Pismo Beach is located in the Central Coast Hydrologic Region, which includes all of Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties, most of San Benito County, and parts of San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, and Ventura Counties (California DWR 2003).

Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Assembly Bill 1881) The updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance required cities and counties to adopt landscape water conservation ordinances by January 31, 2010 or to adopt a different ordinance that is at least as effective in conserving water as the updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO). The City adopted Water Efficient Landscape Standards and Requirements listed as Chapter 15.48 of the PBMC. This ordinance brings the City into compliance with California Assembly Bill 1881.

Executive Order B-29-15 required the State to revise the Model WELO to increase water efficiency standards for new and retrofitted landscapes through more efficient irrigation systems, greywater usage, on-site stormwater capture, and by limiting the portion of landscapes that can be covered in turf. It also requires reporting on the implementation and enforcement of local ordinances, with required reports due by December 31, 2015 (DWR 2017).

Senate Bills 610 and 221, Water Supply Assessment and Verification Senate Bills (SB) 610 and 221 amended the California Water Code to require detailed analysis of water supply availability for certain types of development projects. The primary purpose of SB 610 is to improve the link between the information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to city and county decision-makers prior to approval of specified large (greater than 500 dwelling units or 500,000 square feet of commercial space) development projects.

Both statutes also require this detailed information to be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. Under SB 610 water assessments must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects as defined in Water Code 10912 subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under SB 221 approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-10
Wastewater
California Code of Regulations Title 22
The California Department of Public Health sets specific requirements for treated effluent reuse, or recycled water, through Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. These requirements are primarily set to protect public health. The California Code of Regulations Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 3, Sections 60301 through 60355 regulate recycled wastewater. Title 22 contains effluent requirements for four levels of wastewater treatment, from un-disinfected secondary recycled water to disinfected tertiary recycled water. Higher levels of treatment have higher effluent standards, allowing for a greater number of uses under Title 22, including irrigation of freeway landscaping, pasture for milk animals, parks and playgrounds, and vineyards and orchards for disinfected tertiary recycled water.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) In California, the NPDES program is administered by the SWRCB through the RWQCBs and requires municipalities to obtain permits that outline programs and activities to control wastewater and stormwater pollution. Discharges from the City of Pismo Beach’s storm drain system are permitted under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges From Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s), Permit No. R3-2008-0065 (Small MS4 Permit). A discussion of the NPDES permit and other regulations and policies applicable to stormwater management and stormwater discharges is provided in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality.

Solid Waste
Assembly Bill 341
The purpose of Assembly Bill (AB) 341 is to reduce GHG emissions by diverting commercial solid waste to recycling efforts and to expand the opportunity for additional recycling services and recycling manufacturing facilities in California. In addition to Mandatory Commercial Recycling, AB 341 sets a statewide goal for 75 percent disposal reduction by the year 2020.

Assembly Bill 939
AB 939 (Public Resources Code 41780) requires cities and counties to prepare integrated waste management plans and to divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills beginning in calendar year 2000 and each year thereafter. AB 939 also requires cities and counties to prepare source reduction and recycling elements as part of the integrated waste management plans. These elements are designed to develop recycling services to achieve diversion goals, stimulate local recycling in manufacturing, and stimulate the purchase of recycled products.

Assembly Bill 1826
AB 1826 requires businesses that generate a specified amount of organic waste per week to arrange for recycling services for that waste, and for jurisdictions to implement a recycling program to divert organic waste from businesses subject to the law, as well as report to CalRecycle on their progress in implementing an organic waste recycling program. As of January 1, 2017, businesses that generate four cubic yards or more of organic waste per week shall arrange for organic waste recycling services.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-11
Assembly Bill 1016
SB 1016 requires that the 50 percent solid waste diversion requirement established by AB 939 be expressed in pounds per person per day. SB 1016 changed the CalRecycle review process for each municipality’s integrated waste management plan. After an initial determination of diversion requirements in 2006 and establishing diversion rates for subsequent calendar years, the Board reviews a jurisdiction’s diversion rate compliance in accordance with a specified schedule. Beginning January 1, 2018, the Board will be required to review a jurisdiction’s source reduction and recycling element and hazardous waste element once every two years.

Energy
Energy Action Plan
In 2003, the CEC and California Public Utilities Commission set forth their energy policy vision in the Energy Action Plan. The CEC adopted an update to the Energy Action Plan in February 2008 (EAP II) that supplements the earlier Energy Action Plan and examines the state’s ongoing actions in the context of global climate change. The nine major action areas in the Energy Action Plan include energy efficiency, demand response, renewable energy, electricity adequacy/reliability/ infrastructure, electricity market structure, natural gas supply/demand/infrastructure, transportation fuels supply/demand/infrastructure, research/development/demonstration, and climate change (California Public Utilities Commission 2008).

Senate Bill 350
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (SB 350) requires a doubling of the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas for retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation by December 31, 2030.

California Renewable Portfolio Standard and Senate Bill 100 Approved by former Governor Brown on September 10, 2018, SB 100 accelerates the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

California Energy Efficiency Action Plan
The CEC is responsible for preparing the California Energy Efficiency Action Plan, which covers issues, opportunities, and savings estimates related to energy efficiency in California’s building, industrial, and agricultural sectors. The 2019 California Energy Efficiency Action Plan focuses on three goals:

1. Doubling energy efficiency savings by 2030 (SB 350)

2. Removing and reducing barriers to energy efficiency in low-income and disadvantaged communities

3. Reducing GHG emissions from the building sector
The plan offers several recommendations to advance these goals, including expanding funding sources for energy efficiency programs beyond ratepayer portfolios, improving energy efficiency

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-12
data, integrating energy efficiency into long-term utility planning, enhancing the energy efficiency workforce, improving demand flexibility, and expanding building decarbonization (CEC 2019).

California Building Energy Efficiency Standards – California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, is California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-residential Buildings. The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Code), adopted on May 9, 2018, became effective on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Standards move toward cutting nonrenewable energy use in new homes by more than 50 percent and require installation of solar photovoltaic systems for single-family homes and multi-family buildings of three stories and less. The 2019 Standards focus on four key areas: 1) smart residential photovoltaic systems; 2) updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to exterior and vice versa); 3) residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements; 4) and nonresidential lighting requirements (CEC 2018). Section 15.04.010 of the Pismo Beach Municipal Code incorporates the 2019 edition of the California Energy Code by reference (City of Pismo Beach 2020).

California Green Building Standards Code – California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11
The California Green Building Standards Code, referred to as CALGreen, was added to Title 24 as Part 11, first in 2009 as a voluntary code, which then became mandatory effective January 1, 2011 (as part of the 2010 CBC). The 2019 CALGreen institutes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of non-residential and residential structures. It also includes voluntary tiers (I and II) with stricter environmental performance standards for these same categories of residential and non-residential buildings. Local jurisdictions must enforce the minimum mandatory CALGreen standards and may adopt additional amendments for stricter requirements.

The 2019 mandatory standards require:
 Inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency;  Dedicated circuitry to facilitate installation of electric vehicle charging stations in newly constructed attached garages for single-family, duplex dwellings, and nonresidential developments; and
 Designation of at least ten percent of parking spaces for multi-family residential developments and six percent for nonresidential developments as electric vehicle charging spaces capable of supporting future electric vehicle supply equipment
The Tier I and Tier II voluntary standards require stricter energy efficiency requirements and cool/solar reflective roofs. Section 15.04.010 of the Pismo Beach Municipal Code incorporates the 2019 CALGreen by reference (City of Pismo Beach 2020).
c. Local Regulations
City of Pismo Beach Urban Water Management Plan 2015
The City’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) (2015) serves as a foundational document and source of information for Water Supply Assessments (SB 610) and Written Verifications of Water

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-13
Supply (SB 221). The UWMP ensures the City as a water provider has adequate water supplies available or planned infrastructure improvements to meet future demand in the face of diminishing water resources.

Water demand projections described in the UWMP account for anticipated future water demands in Pismo Beach, and changes in land uses including but not limited to densification and associated increases in water usage. The City is currently undergoing an update to the 2015 UWMP (City of Pismo Beach 2020).

Pismo Beach Water Shortage Contingency Plan
The City promotes water conservation through the City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) which is found in Pismo Beach’s Urban Water Management Plan in Section 7 The Pismo Beach Water Shortage Contingency Plan features the following policies that affect the municipal water supply.

Stages of Action
STAGE – 1 NORMAL WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS
The activities performed by the City during this stage include: Outdoor water use for washing vehicles, boats, paved surfaces, buildings and other similar uses shall be attended and have hand- controlled water devices, typically including spring loaded shutoff nozzles; outdoor irrigation resulting in excessive runoff is prohibited; outdoor irrigation resulting in excessive gutter runoff is prohibited; water is supplied to customers at restaurants upon request only.

STAGE -2 MODERATELY RESTRICTED WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS
Includes actions taken in stage 1 and: any use that results in excessive gutter runoff is prohibited; water may be used for washing vehicles, boats and buildings with hand controlled watering devices, no water shall be used for cleaning driveways, patios, parking lots, sidewalks, streets, or other such uses except as found necessary by the City to protect the public health or safety; outdoor irrigation is restricted between 10:00 am and 4:00 pm and is only to be performed on designated days; irrigation of private and public landscaping, turf areas and gardens is permitted at even numbered addresses only on Mondays and Thursdays and at odd-numbered addresses only on Tuesdays and Fridays, water will be supplied to customers at restaurants only upon request and use of potable water for compaction or dust control purposes in construction activities is prohibited.

STAGE -3 SEVERELY RESTRICTED WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS
Use of water which results in excessive gutter runoff is prohibited, no water shall be used for cleaning driveways, patios, parking lots, sidewalks, streets or other such use except where necessary to protect the public health and safety; washing cars by use of a hose is prohibited, outdoor irrigation is prohibited between the hours of ten a.m. and four p.m., Irrigation of private and public landscaping, turf areas and gardens is permitted at even numbered addresses only on Mondays and Thursdays and at odd-numbered addresses only on Tuesdays and Fridays, restaurants shall serve drinking water only in response to a specific request by a customer, emptying and refilling swimming pools and commercial spas is prohibited except to prevent structural damage and/or to provide for the public health and safety, use of potable water for compaction or dust control purposes in construction activities is prohibited.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-14
STAGE -4 CRITICAL WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS
In addition to the conditions specified for Stage III, the City Council may impose any water rationing requirement as it deems appropriate to protect public health, safety, welfare, comfort, and convenience.

4.15.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Implementation of the GP/LCP Update could have a significant effect on water supplies, wastewater, solid waste, stormwater conveyance, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities if demand associated with projected growth would result in any of the following conditions, as listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:

Require or result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years
Result in a determination that the wastewater treatment provider does not have adequate capacity to serve projected demand in addition to existing commitments Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals Fail to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste Threshold 1: Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Threshold 2: Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
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 THAT SIGNIFICANT.

The following impact analysis is based on the City of Pismo Beach’s 2015 UWMP, which outlines the availability of water supplies for the City through 2035. The City is currently undergoing an update to the 2015 UWMP (City of Pismo Beach 2020). As of the date of this EIR, the City is under a “Normal Water Supply” condition and is currently implementing Water Conservation tactics which would aid in the reduction of water demand through the GP/LCP Update horizon year 2040 (City of Pismo Beach 2021d).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-15
Implementation of the proposed GP/LCP Update may result in changes to the City’s economy, demographics, and environment, resulting in increased strain on the City’s water supply. As shown in Table 2-4 and discussed in Section 2, Project Description, Pismo Beach’s population is estimated to be approximately 10,216 people in the year 2040 as a result of development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update. This represents an increase of 1,979 people (approximately 24 percent) from the estimated 2019 population of 8,237. Additionally, nonresidential square footage is estimated to increase by approximately 783,268 square feet under the GP/LCP Update. These increases to population and nonresidential uses would result in an incremental increase in the City’s water demand.

The UWMP provides estimates for water supply and demand for a period of 20 years from 2015 through 2035. Table 4.15-1, above, shows the water supply reliability in the City through a comparison of total projected water demand with the expected water supply in five year increments over the 20 years. The UWMP is based on the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2040 Population, Housing and Employment Forecast medium growth population projections through 2040. The projections in Tables 4.14-1 and 4.14-2 account for the water demand associated with the SLOCOG medium growth projected population of 8,605 people in 2035.

As shown previously in Table 4.15-1, the City’s projected water supply would meet projected demand through 2035 under normal conditions. Table 4.15-2 shows the City’s projected water supply compared to projected demand under multiple-dry-year conditions.

Table 4.15-2 Water Supply and Demand Comparison – Multiple Dry Years 2020 2035
First Year Supply totals 2,799 2,799
Demand totals 1,888 2,044
Difference 910 755
Second Year Supply totals 2,799 2,799
Demand totals 1,888 2,044
Difference 910 755
Third Year Supply totals 2,709 2,709
Demand totals 1,888 2,044
Difference 821 666
Note: Units in AFY
Source: City of Pismo Beach 2016
The water projections in the UWMP are based on SLOCOG population projections that forecast a population that is approximately 16% less than the projected population under buildout of the GP/LCP Update (8,605 versus 10,216 people). Assuming an 16% percent increased demand in the third-year of the multiple-dry year scenario (the year with the lowest available supply), total demand in 2035 would be 2,371 acre-feet, which would still be under the projected supply of 2,709 acre-feet. Therefore, the City of Pismo Beach would have sufficient water supply to accommodate the demand of development and the population increase facilitated by the GP/LCP Update through 2035 under multiple-dry year conditions.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-16
As discussed previously, the 2020 update to the UWMP is underway and would take into account SLOCOG’s current 2050 Population, Housing and Employment Forecast. The City uses the UWMP to ensure sufficient water supplies are available to the City. In addition, water demand will continue to be reduced through water conservation tactics imposed by the City on new development.

Additionally, as described above, the City, in collaboration with surrounding cities, is in the process of constructing a new recycled water facility, Central Coast Blue, which would treat a portion of wastewater from the City and would serve as an additional water supply. This project will provide additional water supplies even in times of water shortage or drought.

The GP/LCP Update identifies a series of major strategies to ensure a sustainable water supply to support economic development, land use changes, and development in the City through 2040 (the planning horizon). Specifically, the GP/LCP Update Land Use Element contains the following goals and policies, which are consistent with the purpose of the UWMP to encourage the sustainable use and management of water supplies and infrastructure in the City.

Land Use Element
 Policy LU-5.3: Sustainable Community Strategies. Ensure land uses decisions and community strategies are designed to reduce energy and water consumption, waste and noise generation, air quality impacts; and support multimodal transport for a sustainable Pismo Beach.  Action LU-5.3a: Sustainable Infrastructure. The City shall:

1. Promote infrastructure expansion where it will be more efficient and effective and does not promote growth inducement or result in adverse impacts to coastal resources. See Goal LU-7 for policies and actions related to growth management.

2. Focus infrastructure improvements in designated growth areas and contiguous to existing development.
 Policy LU-6.2: Maintenance of Infrastructure. Continue to regulate new and existing development and infrastructure so as not to overburden the City’s infrastructure.  Action LU-6.2c: Infrastructure for New Development. To balance the residential and commercial long-term needs, require new development to pay the full cost of additional infrastructure (sewer, water etc.) needed to support the new development either directly or through development impact fees.
 Action LU-6.2d: Annual Reporting. Require the Department of Public Works to prepare an annual or biannual report for the City’s water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure capacity.
 Action LU-6.2a: Infrastructure Improvements. The City shall give preference to infrastructure improvements that support or enhance desired land uses and projects and ensure that those improvements are consistent with Coastal Act and GP/LCP policies.

Based on the water supply projections presented in the UWMP, the City’s water supply would be sufficient to meet the projected demand of the development envisioned in the GP/LCP Update. In addition, project-specific WSAs would be required to be prepared by proponents of any future large-scale (greater than 500 dwelling units or 500,000 square feet of commercial space) development project in the City, in accordance with SB 610, to ensure adequate water supply is available to serve such projects.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-17
Existing user fees fund the operations and maintenance of the City’s water system. However, expansion to the existing water system may be needed to service new development, which is funded by connection and development fees. Impacts from any required expansion of existing infrastructure required by new development in the City would be further analyzed under separate CEQA review when determinations are made on the type, scope, and location of the infrastructure improvements.

In summary, compliance with applicable GP/LCP Update policies to encourage the sustainable use and management of water supplies in the City, completion of the Central Coast Blue project, and continued compliance with water conservation measures would ensure that impacts associated with water demand would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 1: Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Threshold 3: Would the project result in a determination that by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
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 PLANT 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.

The projected growth envisioned in the GP/LCP Update would require an increase in wastewater capacity to meet the collection and treatment demand from new development. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, the population of the City was estimated to be 8,239 in 2019. The increase of 1,979 residents proposed under the GP/LCP Update equates to a 24 percent increase above the existing population. The City’s WWTP has a design capacity of 1.9 mgd with a peak flow up to 6 mgd. The Pismo Beach WWTP currently treats and discharges an average of 0.9 mgd and is permitted to discharge up to 1.9 mgd to the Pacific Ocean via the existing SSLOCSD ocean outfall under its existing Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) Order No. R3-2015-0016 as of February 2016 (City of Pismo Beach 2015). Because approximately 53% of the WWTP capacity currently remains, the expected population growth of approximately 24% envisioned in the GP/LCP Update would not exceed the Pismo Beach WWTP capacity. Existing flows as well as future additional wastewater flows in the City as a result of population growth under the GP/LCP Update would be met by the exiting capacity of the Pismo Beach WWTP.

The sewer collection system within the City has deficiencies that limit the amount of wastewater that can be conveyed through the City. However, the City’s Capital Improvement Plan has ongoing plans for the replacement and upgrade of old sewer lines and lift equipment. User fees fund general

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-18
maintenance and the correction of deficiencies in the existing system. New development within the City as part of the GP/LCP Update would be required to pay impact fees for system expansion that would accommodate the increased growth of the City envisioned as part of the GP/LCP Update.

Impact fees on new development would ensure that the wastewater collection system within the City receives necessary upgrades to accommodate the additional population. Development under the Capital Improvement Plan and 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.

In addition, The following policies in the GP/LCP Update and Land Use Element would ensure proper management of wastewater systems and infrastructure for new development and redevelopment in the City.

Land Use Element
 Policy LU-5.3: Sustainable Community Strategies. Ensure land uses decisions and community strategies are designed to reduce energy and water consumption, waste and noise generation, air quality impacts; and support multimodal transport for a sustainable Pismo Beach.  Action LU-5.3a: Sustainable Infrastructure. The City shall:

1. Promote infrastructure expansion where it will be more efficient and effective and does not promote growth inducement or result in adverse impacts to coastal resources. See Goal LU-7 for policies and actions related to growth management.

2. Focus infrastructure improvements in designated growth areas and contiguous to existing development.
 Policy LU-6.2: Maintenance of Infrastructure. Continue to regulate new and existing development and infrastructure so as not to overburden the City’s infrastructure.  Action LU-6.2c: Infrastructure for New Development. To balance the residential and commercial long-term needs, require new development to pay the full cost of additional infrastructure (sewer, water etc.) needed to support the new development either directly or through development impact fees.
 Action LU-6.2d: Annual Reporting. Require the Department of Public Works to prepare an annual or biannual report for the City’s water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure capacity.
 Action LU-6.2a: Infrastructure Improvements. The City shall give preference to infrastructure improvements that support or enhance desired land uses and projects and ensure that those improvements are consistent with Coastal Act and GP/LCP policies.

On-going upgrades to the sewer system within the City under the Capital Improvement Plan and GP/LCP Update to ensure adequate wastewater systems and infrastructure would be available to meet future demands would generally occur in previously disturbed or developed areas. Therefore, impacts from physical disturbance for new or expanded wastewater systems and infrastructure would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-19
Threshold 1: Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
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 THAT SIGNIFICANT.

Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would create additional demand for electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities. Development under the 2040 GP/LCP Update would comply with existing energy efficiency regulations, and GP/LCP policies and actions would encourage new development to take advantage of voluntary energy efficiency programs. As described in Section 4.5, Energy, development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would not result in inefficient or wasteful use of energy. Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would occur within the already developed and urbanized areas of the City where electric, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure are present. Therefore, the GP/LCP would not require expansion or relocation of electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities such that significant environmental effects would result. However, individual projects developed under the GP/LCP Update would require new connections to the existing infrastructure, the impacts of which would be further analyzed under separate CEQA review as part of each individual project.

Additionally, the Land Use Element of the GP/LCP contains the following policies and actions that would minimize the potential for utility infrastructure to result in environmental impacts:
 Policy LU-5.3: Sustainable Community Strategies. Ensure land uses decisions and community strategies are designed to reduce energy and water consumption, waste and noise generation, air quality impacts; and support multimodal transport for a sustainable Pismo Beach.  Action LU-5.3a: Sustainable Infrastructure. The City shall:

1. Promote infrastructure expansion where it will be more efficient and effective and does not promote growth inducement or result in adverse impacts to coastal resources. See Goal LU-7 for policies and actions related to growth management.

2. Focus infrastructure improvements in designated growth areas and contiguous to existing development.
 Action LU-5.3c: Sustainable Design Incentive Program. Consider the feasibility of providing incentives for new and renovated projects that incorporate sustainable design features such as the construction of new buildings that reduce energy demand though natural features, such as green roofs and walls or energy efficiency above and beyond the current building code. Inform applicants of the benefits and incentives for green building practices and pursuit of LEED certification.
 Policy LU-6.2: Maintenance of Infrastructure. Continue to regulate new and existing development and infrastructure so as not to overburden the City’s infrastructure.  Action LU-6.2c: Infrastructure for New Development. To balance the residential and commercial long-term needs, require new development to pay the full cost of additional infrastructure (sewer, water etc.) needed to support the new development either directly or through development impact fees.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-20
 Action LU-6.2d: Annual Reporting. Require the Department of Public Works to prepare an annual or biannual report for the City’s water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure capacity.
 Action LU-6.2e: Regional Infrastructure Capacity. Coordinate with regional utility services when assessing Pismo Beach’s growth capacity and zoning.  Action LU-6.2a: Infrastructure Improvements. The City shall give preference to infrastructure improvements that support or enhance desired land uses and projects and ensure that those improvements are consistent with Coastal Act and GP/LCP policies.

As described in Impact HWQ-2 in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would create new impervious surfaces, which would result in increased stormwater runoff to the City’s municipal storm drain system. Because the GP/LCP Update is focused on infill development, the conversion of open space and permeable surfaces to impervious surfaces would be minimized. Additionally, the amount of new impervious surfaces would be reduced through implementation of Best Management Practices, including Low Impact Development (LID) approaches, aimed at reducing stormwater runoff to ensure downstream storm drain capacity is not exceeded.

The Open Space and Conservation Element of the GP/LCP contains the following actions that would minimize the potential for utility infrastructure to result in environmental impacts:
 Action COS-2.6d: Low Impact Development Strategies. New development and redevelopment shall give precedence to the use of a Low Impact Development (LID) approach to stormwater management, which integrates site design strategies (e.g., minimizing the building footprint, preserving vegetation, and protecting natural drainage features) with small-scale, distributed Best Management Practices (BMPs) (e.g., permeable pavement surfaces, rain barrels and cisterns, and bioretention techniques) to replicate the site’s natural hydrologic balance through infiltration, evapotranspiration, harvesting, detention, or retention of stormwater close to the source, to the maximum extent appropriate and feasible.
 Action COS-2.6h: Infiltration. Modify the Stormwater regulations in the Municipal Code maintain or enhance on-site infiltration of runoff, where appropriate and feasible. If on-site infiltration of runoff may potentially result in adverse impacts, including, but not limited to, geologic instability, flooding, or pollution of coastal waters, the development shall substitute alternative BMPs (e.g., flow-through planter box, green roof, or cistern) that do not involve on-site infiltration in order to minimize changes in the runoff flow regime to the extent appropriate and feasible. Alternative BMPs shall also be used where infiltration BMPs are not adequate to treat a specific pollutant of concern attributed to the development, or where infiltration practices would conflict with regulations protecting groundwater.  Action COS-2.6g: Impervious Surfaces. New development shall be planned, sited and designed to minimize the installation of impervious surfaces, where feasible, especially impervious areas directly connected to the municipal storm drain system, in order to minimize increases in stormwater or dry weather runoff. Redevelopment projects shall, where feasible, increase the area of pervious surfaces.  Action COS-2.6i: Priority Development Projects. Require a Water Quality Management Plan for Priority Development Projects, (PDPs) as defined in the NPDES MS4 Permit, that includes permanent post-construction treatment control BMPs to address pollutants of concern specific to the PDP’s land use and impairments of surface waters to which the project

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-21
drains. PDPs will also require post-construction runoff control BMPs to minimize adverse changes in the PDP’s runoff flow regime. The Water Quality Management Plan will provide for the operation and maintenance of the permanent treatment control and runoff control BMPs and shall be implemented for the life of the development.  Action COS-2.8b: Runoff Plan Requirements. Runoff management shall be addressed early in the development’s planning and design stages. As part of CDP approval, the City shall require that the runoff plans include stormwater pollution control and runoff control measures or systems, and a maintenance program, as necessary, for both the construction- phase and post-development runoff plans, including erosion controls, sediment traps and filtering of off-site storm water flows, capture of site-generated pollutant sources, street sweeping of dirt tracked off-site, litter control, post-construction monitoring, and other best management practices. Construction-phase water quality impacts shall be avoided by minimizing the disturbed area, phasing grading activities, implementing soil stabilization and pollution prevention measures, and preventing unnecessary soil compaction. Development that has the potential for water quality impairment shall, at a minimum, be designed to meet National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System stormwater runoff requirements. The post-development maintenance program shall be for the life of the development. The level of detail provided to address the plan’s requirements shall be commensurate with the type and scale of the development, and with the potential for adverse water quality and hydrology impacts to coastal waters.

Because development would occur within urbanized areas of the City, and Best Management Practices would be incorporated, the construction or expansion of existing storm drain facilities would not likely be required as a result of implementation of the GP/LCP Update. However, storm drain improvements or connections to existing storm drains required for each individual project developed under the GP/LCP Update would be further analyzed under separate CEQA review as part of each individual project. With implementation of the GP/LCP policies, impacts related to electric power, natural gas, telecommunication, and storm drain facilities would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Threshold 4: Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Threshold 5: Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Impact U-4 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE GP/LCP UPDATE WOULD INCREASE WASTE SENT TO AREA LANDFILLS. HOWEVER, COLD CANYON LANDFILL WOULD HAVE CAPACITY TO SERVE THE DEVELOPMENT ENVISIONED IN THE GP/LCP UPDATE. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

The City of Pismo Beach uses Cold Canyon Landfill for solid waste disposal. As of 2021, Cold Canyon Landfill has an estimated 130,000,000-ton remaining capacity for the region. Disposal rates of solid waste in the San Luis Obispo IWMA are not separated by jurisdiction and are measured in pounds per person. According to CalRecycle, between 2010 and 2014, annual disposal rates in the IWMA ranged from an estimated 4.3 to 4.9 pounds per person. As shown in Table 2-6 in Section 2, Project

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-22
Description, the estimated population of City would increase by approximately 1,979 through 2040, and result in a population of 10,216.

Based on an average daily residential waste generation of 4.6 pounds per person and the 2019 population of 8,237, existing solid waste generation in the City is approximately 37,890 pounds (approximately 19 tons) per day. Based on an average daily residential waste generation of 4.6 pounds per person and projected population of 10,216, the estimated daily solid waste generation in the City in 2040 would be approximately 46,994 pounds (approximately 23.5 tons) per day, or an increase of 9,104 pounds (approximately 4.5 tons) per day. Cold Canyon Landfill has a maximum daily throughput of 1,650 tons per day. Therefore, the projected increase in solid waste generation in the City would increase disposal at the Cold Canyon Landfill by approximately 0.28 percent. With a remaining capacity of 13 million cubic yards, the Cold Canyon Landfill would have sufficient capacity to accommodate this increase in solid waste generation.

Development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would be required to be constructed in compliance with the statewide goal for 75 percent disposal reduction by the year 2020 set by AB 341. The projected increase in solid waste generation as a result of development facilitated by the GP/LCP Update would not exceed the capacity of Cold Canyon Landfill, or result in a substantial reduction in the current remaining capacity for the region. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

4.15.4 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative development and redevelopment in the City would incrementally contribute to increased demand on wastewater treatment and conveyance facilities, and as planned cumulative development occurs throughout San Luis Obispo County, the amount of physical disturbance for new or expanded facilities would increase. Increased disturbance throughout the region for new or expanded wastewater facilities would potentially result in a cumulative environmental impact. On- going upgrades to the sewer system within the City of Pismo Beach under the Capital Improvement Plan would ensure adequate wastewater systems and infrastructure are available for future development within the City. These improvements would generally occur in previously disturbed or developed areas. Therefore, the project would not result in a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts from physical disturbance for new or expanded wastewater systems and infrastructure.

Cumulative development and redevelopment in the City would incrementally contribute to increased demand on existing water supply, and as planned cumulative development occurs throughout San Luis Obispo County, the amount of physical disturbance for new or expanded facilities would increase. The GP/LCP Update include goals and policies that would minimize increased water demand associated with new development, promote water conservation, and require new developments to incorporate water-efficient design features. With adherences to these GP/LCP Update goals and policies, the project would not result in a considerable contribution to cumulative water supply impacts.

Cumulative development and redevelopment in the City would incrementally contribute to increased demand of electrical power, natural gas, telecommunication, and storm drain facilities and, as planned cumulative development occurs throughout San Luis Obispo County, the amount of physical disturbance for new or expanded facilities would increase. However, all parcels within the

Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities/System Services

Final Environmental Impact Report 4.15-23
City have available existing infrastructure for electrical power, natural gas, telecommunication, and storm drain connections. Therefore, development under the GP/LCP Update would not result in a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts for the provision of electrical power, natural gas, telecommunication, and storm drain facilities.

Solid waste collected in the City is deposited at the Cold Canyon Landfill, one of three landfills in the IWMA jurisdictional area. The IWMA includes San Luis Obispo County, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, and San Luis Obispo, as well as numerous community service districts. Therefore, the cumulative impact area for solid waste includes all of these areas, which all contribute to the landfills in the IWMA jurisdictional area. The population increase from planned cumulative development and redevelopment throughout San Luis Obispo County would incrementally increase waste disposal and decrease capacity at landfills in the County. This would result in a potential cumulative impact on waste disposal services and facilities in the region. However, development under the GP/LCP Update would result in an increase of waste disposal at Cold Canyon Landfill by approximately 0.28 percent, which would not substantially increase daily or annual waste disposal, or result in exceedance of capacity at the Cold Canyon Landfill. Therefore, the project would not result in a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts to waste disposal services and facilities in the region.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.15-24

This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Less Than Significant Environmental Effects

Final Program Environmental Impact Report 4.16-1

4.16 Less Than Significant Environmental Effects
Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR briefly describe any possible effects that were determined not to be significant. The environmental factors discussed below are in response to the checklist questions listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines that were not discussed in the impact sections of the EIR.

4.16.1 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Thresholds of Significance
Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update would result in any of the following:

1. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use;

2. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract;

3. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104[g]);

4. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; and/or

5. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non- forest use.

Assessment of Impacts
Nearly all of the land in the City of Pismo Beach (City) is considered Urban and Built-Up Land. The City does not contain Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance. Therefore, the project would not convert or conflict with existing zoning for agricultural resources in the City.

As described in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, the City has a wide diversity of tree (hardwood and coniferous forests, oak woodlands), shrub (chaparrals, coastal scrubs), and herbaceous (grasslands) terrestrial habitat types. . These habitat types do not meet the definition of forest land as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), or timberland, as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526. Furthermore, the City does not contain any lands zoned for forest land or timberland production. Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timber land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impacts related to agricultural or forestry resources would occur as a result of the GP/LCP Update.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

4.16-2

4.16.2 Mineral Resources
Thresholds of Significance
Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G checklist, potentially significant impacts would occur if the proposed GP/LCP Update would result in any of the following:

1. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State; and/or

2. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.

Assessment of Impacts
The landscape of San Luis Obispo County contains a variety of mineral resources. Mining of copper and coal has occurred in the county since the mid-1800s, and chromite, manganese, and mercury were mined in the early 1900s. In recent years, the principal developed mineral resources of San Luis Obispo County have been gypsum, clay, natural gas, petroleum, mercury, construction stone, sand, and gravel. Of these, sand and gravel remain principal mineral resources to this day.

However, the City has no active mineral operations within their jurisdiction, nor does it have any land classified as a grade II machine-readable zone (MRZ-2) for containing concrete-grade aggregate within their jurisdiction. No oil fields lie within Pismo Beach, nor are there any active offshore drilling operations. Therefore, the project would have no impact from the loss of availability of mineral resources.

Other CEQA Required Discussions

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-1
5 Other CEQA Required Discussions
This section discusses other issues for which the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires analysis in addition to the specific issue areas discussed in Section 4, Environmental Impact Analysis. These additional issues include the project’s potential to induce growth and create significant and irreversible impacts on the environment.

5.1 Growth Inducement
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that EIRs discuss the potential for projects to induce population or economic growth, either directly or indirectly. CEQA also requires a discussion of ways in which a project may remove obstacles to growth.

5.1.1 Population and Economic Growth
As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, 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, Table 4.12-5 within Section 4.12, Population and Housing, indicates the 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 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.

As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, 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, Environmental Impact Analysis, 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 decision- makers.

5.1.2 Removal of Obstacles to Growth
The GP/LCP Update project area includes all area within City limits, which is an urbanized area that is served by existing infrastructure. As discussed in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, and Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, existing and planned infrastructure in Pismo Beach would be adequate to serve development under the GP/LCP Update. The GP/LCP Update encourages mixed-use development, particularly in the Downtown Core of the City, which currently consists of

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

5-2
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.

The GP/LCP Update does not include development within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI). Pismo Beach’s SOI includes approximately 1,100 acres in Price Canyon, 182 acres west of Oak Park Boulevard, and a small area along Mattie Road used for parking and restroom facilities (See Figure 2-3 in Section 2, Project Description, to view proposed SOI). The City’s SOI defines the area to which the City intends to provide municipal services and allow development of some urban land uses at a future date. Within the SOI areas, future uses may be developed subject to annexation to the City of Pismo Beach, in compliance with procedures identified by the San Luis Obispo County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). However, 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.

5.2 Irreversible Environmental Effects
When an EIR evaluates a project that would amend public plans, ordinances, or policies, the CEQA Guidelines require a discussion of significant irreversible environmental changes. CEQA also requires decision-makers to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve a project. This section addresses nonrenewable resources, the commitment of future generations to the proposed uses, and irreversible impacts associated with the development that would be facilitated by implementation of the GP/LCP Update.

Construction activity associated with planned development that would be accommodated under the GP/LCP Update would require the use of building materials and energy, some of which are nonrenewable resources. Consumption of these resources would occur with any development in the region and are not unique to 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, potential impacts to public services and utilities would be less than significant following implementation of 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 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Consistent with GP/LCP Update Circulation Element Policy 4.1.5, 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 impacts of the increase in VMT in the City and County identified for the GP/LCP Update would be significant and unavoidable. Impacts related

Other CEQA Required Discussions

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-3
to air quality were determined to be less than significant with mitigation, except for the impacts related to consistency of the GP/LCP Update with the Clean Air Plan. 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 Clean Air Plan is based, and this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

5-4

This page intentionally left blank.

Alternatives

Final Environmental Impact Report 6-1
6 Alternatives
As required by Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, this EIR examines a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed City of Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan (GP/LCP) Update that could feasibly achieve similar objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen significant adverse impacts associated with the GP/LCP Update.

The GP/LCP Update vision and guiding principles, and thus the project objectives, are contained in the Land Use Element and are described in Section 2.4.1, Objectives of the GP/LCP Update. 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
 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).

6.1 Alternatives Development and Screening Process
The analysis of alternatives for the GP/LCP Update focuses on land use scenarios that incorporate different assumptions regarding the combinations of future land uses in the City. Alternatives provided are intended to reduce or avoid significant and unavoidable impacts where the potential for impact reduction is feasible. As discussed in Section 4, Environmental Impact Analysis, the GP/LCP Update would have significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality plan consistency (Impact AQ-1), increased vehicle miles traveled (VMT) (Impact T-2), and cumulative air quality and transportation impacts.

6.1.1 Alternatives Considered but Rejected
Alternatives considered included alternate locations and a focused GP/LCP Update that would include fewer updated General Plan Elements. Several of the potential alternatives considered have been rejected on the basis that they are practically infeasible or would fail to accomplish the basic project objectives.

City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update

6-2
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 below 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.

6.1.2 GP/LCP Update Alternatives
Included in this analysis are four alternatives, including the CEQA-required “no project” alternative, that involve changes to the GP/LCP Update that may reduce the project-related environmental impacts identified in this EIR. Alternatives have been developed to provide a reasonable range of options to consider that would help decision makers and the public understand the general implications of revising or eliminating certain components of the proposed GP/LCP Update.

The following alternatives are evaluated in this EIR:
 Alternative 1: No Project/Continue using 1992 General Plan and Local Coastal Plan  Alternative 2: Reduced Residential Buildout
 Alternative 3: Reduced Commercial Floor Area Ratio
 Alternative 4: Proposed General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Update with Expanded Sphere of Influence Development
Table 6-1 describes the buildout characteristics of the GP/LCP Update in comparison to each alternative considered. Detailed descriptions of the alternatives are included in the impact analysis for each alternative. Each alternative is analyzed to determine whether environmental impacts would be similar to, less than, or greater than those of the preferred scenario in the GP/LCP Update in Sections 6.2.1 through 6.2.3. As required by CEQA, this section also includes a discussion of the “environmentally superior alternative” among those studied.