ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 1 OF 16
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
RICHARDS RANCH ANNEXATION, GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT,
AND PRE-ZONING
A. Findings that with regard to certain project and cumulative effects, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
The following topics were discussed in detail within the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Richards Ranch Annexation (July 2024) and were determined to result in less than significant impacts after implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
1. AIR QUALITY (AQ) AND GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) EMISSIONS
a. AQ Impact 2. The project could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants . These potential impacts will be reduced through Mitigation Measures AQ/mm-2.1 and AQ/mm-2.2. These measures will require construction measures to minimize short -term construction emissions. These include us ing water trucks or sprinkler systems to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site, minimizing the amount of disturbed area and reduc ing onsite veh icle speeds to 15 mph or less, covering soil stockpiles if they are present for more than two days, installing gravel pads at all access points to prevent tracking of mud onto public roads, and several other construction-period control measures. In additio n, to reduce mobile -source emissions, all portable diesel-powered construction equipment shall be registered with the state's portable equipment registration program or shall obtain a Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) permit.Current regulations for off -road diesel vehicles shall be followed, equipment shall be subject to existing regulations for heavy -duty diesel -fueled vehicle s, diesel equipment meeting CARB Tier 3 or higher emission standards for off-road heavy- duty diesel engines shall be used for construction activities, on -road heavy-duty equipment with model year 2010 engines or newer shall be used, diesel-powered equipment shall be replaced by electric equipment whenever available, and several other measure s to reduce vehic le exhaust. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures AQ/mm-2.1 and AQ/mm-2.2 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. AQ Impact 3. The project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. These potential impacts will also be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure s AQ/mm-2.1 and AQ/mm-2.2, described under AQ Impact 2. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
c. AQ Impact 5. The project’s air pollutant emissions could result in a cumulative contribution to air pollution in the region. These potential impacts will also be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure s
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 2 OF 16
AQ/mm-2.1 and AQ/mm-2.2, described under AQ Impact 2. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
d. GHG Impact 2. The project could conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures EN/mm-1.1, GHG/mm-2.1, and GHG/mm-
2.2. Mitigation Measure EN/mm-1-1 requires meeting or exceeding CalGreen Tier 2 standards at the time of development for building energy efficiency, meeting or exceeding CalGreen building standards at the time of develop ment for water conservation, built -in appliances to be Energy Star certified or equivalent, maximizing natural lighting buildings to minimize daytime lighting demand, and outdoor lighting that minimizes electrical demand. Mitigation Measure GHG/mm -
2.1 requ ires design features to encourage the use of alternate transportation modes and reduce mobile -source emissions. Mitigation Measure GHG/mm -2.2 prohibits the servicing of residential development by natural gas. In addition, natural gas service for commercial development shall only be allowed with significant restrictions, including the preparation and implementation of a GHG- reduction plan to fully offset GHG emissions associated with natural gas service to commercial land uses. Off -site mitigation measures m ay include “Direct Reduction Activities” or the purchase of “Carbon Offset Credits .” The measures identified in Mitigation Measures EN/mm-1.1, GHG/mm-2.1, and GHG/mm-2.2 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
e. GHG Impact 3 . The project could result in a cumulative contribution to GHG emissions in the region. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures EN/mm-
1.1, GHG/mm-2.1, and GHG/mm-2.2, described under GHG Impact 2, will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
2. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (BIO)
a. BIO Impact 1. The project could directly or indirectly impact special-status wildlife species during project construction. Mitigation Measures BIO/mm -1.1, BIO/mm-
1.2, BIO/mm-1.3, BIO/mm-1.4, and BIO/mm-1.5, provide for several measures to address construction-period impacts including the prohibition of invasive plants, a biological monitor to provide oversight to implementation of all the identified mitigation measures, implementation of a Worker Environmental Training Program, and ensure erosion control is biodegradabl e. As well, additional measures will be required under Mitigation Measures BIO/mm -2.1, BIO/mm-3.1, BIO/mm-4.1, BIO/mm 5.1, and BIO/mm -11.1. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures BIO/mm -1.1 through BIO/mm -1.5 and Mitigation Measures BIO/mm-2.1, BIO /mm-3.1, BIO/mm -4.1, BIO/mm 5.1, and BIO/mm -11.1 will reduce construction-period impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. BIO Impact 3. The project could directly and indirectly impact northern California legless lizards during project construction. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO/mm -
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 3 OF 16
1.1 through BIO/mm-1.5 and Mitigation Measure BIO/mm-3.1, which provides for specific measures to address northern California legless lizards , including pre - construction surveys for northern California legless lizards within suitable habitat areas within the development area. These measures will reduce potential impacts to the California legless lizards during project construction to less than significant.
Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
c. BIO Impact 4. The project could directly and indirectly impact nesting birds during project construction. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO/mm -1.1 through BIO/mm-1.5 and Mitigation Measure BIO/mm -4.1, which provides for specific measures to address nesting birds, including timing vegetation removal and initial site disturbance between September 1 and January 31 outside of the nesting season for birds and, if vegetation removal and site disturbance must be conducted during this tim e period , to require nesting bird surveys before construction and protect any identified nests. These measures will reduce potential impacts to the nesting birds during project construction to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
d. BIO Impact 5. The project could directly and indirectly impact roosting western red bats during project construction. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implem entation of Mitigation Measure BIO/mm -5.1, which provides for specific measures to address potential roosting western red bats, including pre-construction surveys and implementing protection measures if roosting western red bats are identified. These measu res will reduce potential impacts during project construction to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
e. BIO Impact 7. The development of the infrastructure improvements beyon d the
43.75-acre project site boundary could directly or indirectly impact special -status wildlife species. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO/mm-1.2 through BIO/mm-1.5, BIO/mm-3.1, BIO/mm -4.1, and BIO/mm -5.1. These measures will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
f. BIO Impact 11. The project could result in conflicts with City policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, specifically considerations under the City’s Resource Management Element (RME) of the General Plan and the Municipal Code. These potential impacts will be reduced with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO/mm-1.1 through BIO/mm-1.5, BIO/mm-2.1, BIO/mm-
3.1, BIO/mm-4.1, and BIO/mm-5.1. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO/mm-11.1 will require specific measures to address the City’s R ME and Municipal Code related to tree protection and replacement and R ME Goal 3 and Policy 3. In combination, these measures will address potential conflicts with City policies and ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 4 OF 16
3. CULTURAL (CR) AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES (TCR)
a. CR Impact 2 . The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an unknown archaeological resource. Mitigation Measure CR/mm-
2.1 provides for measures to address the unlikely discovery of archaeological resources during project implementation , including retaining a qualified archeologist to evaluate the find and recommend protection measures. In addition, if human remains are discovered, State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 is required to be followed . Mitigation Measure CR/mm-2.1 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. CR Impact 3. The project could disturb previously unidentified human remains if present within the project site. Mitigation Measure CR/mm-2.1, described under CR Impact 2, will reduce impacts to less than significant. The refore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
c. CR Impact 4 . The project will have the potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with cultural resources. Mitigation Measure CR/mm-2.1, described under CR Impact 2, will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
d. TCR Impact 1. While there are no resources listed in or eligible for listing in th e California Register of Historical Resources ( CRHR) or local register of historic resources, the project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an unknown tribal cultural resource determined by the City to be a significant resourc e to a California Native American Tribe. Mitigation Measure CR/mm-2.1, described under CR Impact 2, will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
4. ENERGY (EN)
a. EN Impact 1. The project could result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction and operation.
These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures EN/mm-1.1, GHG/mm-2.1, and GHG/mm-
2.2. Mitigation Measure EN/mm-1.1 requires meeting or exceeding CalGreen Tier 2 standards at the time of development for building energy efficiency, meeting or exceeding CalGreen building standards at the t ime of development for water conservation, built -in appliances shall be Energy Star certified or equivalent, maximizing natural lighting buildings to minimize daytime lighting demand, and outdoor lighting that minimizes electrical demand. Mitigation Measur e GHG/mm-
2.1 requires design features to encourage the use of alternate transportation modes and reduce mobile -source emissions. Mitigation Measure GHG/mm -2.2 prohibits the servicing of residential development by natural gas. In addition, natural gas servi ce for commercial development shall only be allowed with significant restrictions, including the preparation and implementation of a GHG - reduction plan to fully offset GHG emissions associated with natural gas service
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 5 OF 16
to commercial land uses. Off -site miti gation measures may include “Direct Reduction Activities” or the purchase of “Carbon Offset Credits.” The measures identified in Mitigation Measures EN/mm-1.1, GHG/mm-2.1, and GHG/mm-2.2 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. EN Impact 2. The project could conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures EN/mm-1.1, GHG/mm-2.1, and GHG/mm-2.2, as described under EN Impact 1, will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
5. GEOLOGY AND SOILS (GEO)
a. GEO Impact 2. The project could cause substantial adverse effects associated with strong seismic ground shaking. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO/mm-
2.1, GEO/mm-2.2, and GEO /mm-2.3. Thes e measures require a variety of engineering and design measures to be incorporated into the construction plans, to be incorporated prior to the issuance of building permits and verified by the City Building Division. The measures identified in Mitigation M easures GEO/mm-2.1 through GEO/mm-2.3 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. GEO Impact 3. Future development on -site could result in substantial adverse effects associated with liquefaction and seismically induced settlement. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO/mm-2.1 through GEO /mm-2.3 and GEO/mm -3.1 through GEO/mm-3.3. These measures require a variety of design measures to be incorporated into the construction plans and implemented, to be incorporated prior to the issuance of building permits and verified by the City Building Division.
The measures identified in Mitigation Measures GEO/mm-2.1 through GEO/mm-
2.3 and GEO/mm -3.1 through GEO/mm -3.3 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
c. GEO Impact 5. The project could result in substantial soil erosion and the loss of topsoil. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO/mm-5.1. These measures req uire a variety of design measures to be incorporated into the construction plans and implemented to address drainage and potential erosion. The measures identified in Mitigation Measure GEO/mm-5.1 will reduce impacts to less than significant.
Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 6 OF 16
d. GEO Impact 6. The project could result in substantial adverse effects associated with liquefaction, settlement, hydroconsolidation, and seismically induced settlement. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO/mm -2.1 through GEO/mm -2.3, GEO/mm-3.1 through GEO/mm-3.3, and GEO/mm-6.1. These measures require a variety of design measures to be incorporate d into the construction plans and implemented, to be incorporated prior to the issuance of building permits and verified by the City Building Division. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures GEO/mm-2.1 through GEO/mm -2.3, GEO/mm-3.1 through GEO/mm -
3.3, and GEO/mm-6.1 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
e. GEO Impact 9. Ground-disturbing activities could damage paleontological resources that may be present below the surface. This potential impact will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO/mm-9.1, which provides for the implementation of a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) to train the grading personnel/crew and address potential paleontological resource discoveries. In addition, an inadvertent discovery clause will be included in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Mitigation Measure GEO/mm -9.1 will reduce potential paleontological impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
f. GEO Impact 10. The project will have the potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with geology and soils. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO/mm-2.1 through GEO/mm -2.3, GEO/mm-3.1 through GEO/mm -
3.3, GEO/mm-5.1, GEO/mm-6.1, and GEO/mm-9.1. The measures identified will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
6. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (HAZ)
a. HAZ Impact 2. Construction of infrastructure associated with the project could result in the release of aerially deposited lead , a hazardous material, into the environment. No other potentially significant impacts related to ups et or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials will occur. These potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ/mm -2.1 and HAZ/mm -2.2, which will require soil sampling f or the presence of hazardous materials, including aerially deposited lead and hydrocarbons in areas where excavation is required within 30 feet of State Route 135 and appropriate abatement measures, if necessary. As well, a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan will be required and implemented for the infrastructure improvements that are located beyond the
43.75-acre site . The measures identified will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than signi ficant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. HAZ Impact 5. Future development may have the potential to be inconsistent with safety and/or compatibility policies of the Santa Maria Public Airport land use plan
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 7 OF 16
in effect at the time of building permit applications. This impact will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ/mm -5.1, which will require the demonstration of full compliance with the applicable safety standards and compatibility policies of the airp ort land use plan prior to the issuance of any building permits. This measure will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
c. HAZ Impact 7. While there is some potential for the project to result in cumulative considerable impacts related to safety and/or compatibility policies of the Santa Maria Public Airport land use plan, implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ/mm-5.1, which will require the demonstration of full compliance with the applicable safety standards and compatibility policies of the airport land use plan prior to the issuance of any building permits, will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than si gnificant with incorporation of mitigation.
7. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY (HYD)
a. HYD Impact 1. Construction of the project could violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. This impact will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO/mm -5.1, described under GEO Impact 5, and the implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD/mm -1.1 and HYD/mm-1.2, which require the development of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans and implementation of these plans during construction. Specif ic erosion control and grading requirements are provided in Mitigation Measures HYD/mm -
1.2 and will be installed prior to beginning of any construction or grading activities and are subject to review and approval by the City. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures GEO/mm -5.1, HYD/mm -1.1, and HYD/mm -1.2 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. HYD Impact 2. Operation of the project could violate wat er quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. This impact will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD/mm-2.1, HYD/mm-2.2 and HYD/mm-
2.3. These measures provide for the incorporation of low impact development best management practices (BMPs) and maintenance of post-construction stormwater controls. As required by HYD/mm -2.3, these measures will be incorporated into the stormwater quality system depicted in the erosion and sediment control plan.
The measures identified in Mitigation Measures HYD/mm -2.1, HYD/mm-2.2 and HYD/mm-2.3 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
c. HYD Impact 5. If the proper design measures and BMPs were not implemented, the project could alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or increase surface water runoff in a manner that could result in substantial erosio n, siltation, and/or loss of topsoil. These impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of previously identified and described Mitigation Measures
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 8 OF 16
GEO/mm-5.1, HYD/mm-1.1, HYD/mm-1.2, and HYD/mm -2.1 through HYD/mm -
2.3. The measu res will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
d. HYD Impact 7. Implementation of the project will not conflict with or obstruct implantation of a water quali ty control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. These impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of previously identified and described Mitigation Measures HYD/mm-1.1, HYD/mm -1.2, and HYD/mm -2.1 through HYD/mm -2.3. The measures will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
e. HYD Impact 8. The project could result in cumulatively considerable impacts to hydrology and water quality. These impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of previously identified and described Mitigation Measures GEO/mm-5.1, HYD/mm-1.1, HYD/mm-1.2, and HYD/mm -2.1 through HYD/mm-2.3. The measures will reduce impacts to l ess than significant.
Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
8. NOISE (NOI)
a. NOI Impact 1. The project could 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. This impact will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI/mm-1.1 and NOI/mm -1.2, which provide for the incorporation of control measures during construction, including compliance with the noise ordinance and limit ation on the timing of construction activity, and additional measures to limit long-term exposure to transportation and non-transportation noise. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures NOI/mm-1.1 and NOI/mm -1.2 will reduce impacts to less than sign ificant.
Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
b. NOI Impact 4 . The project will have the potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with noise. The measures identified in Mitigation Measures NOI/mm-1.1 and NOI/mm-1.2, as described under NOI Impact 1, will reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
9. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS (USS)
a. USS Impact 1. The project will require the construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. These impacts will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of previously identified and described Mitigation Measures AQ/mm-1.1 and AQ/mm-1.2; BIO/mm-1.1 through BIO/mm-
1.5, BIO/mm -2.1, BIO/mm -3.1, BIO/mm -4.1, BIO/mm -5.1, and BIO/mm -11.1; CR/mm-2.1; GEO/mm -5.1 and GEO/mm -9.1; HAZ/mm -2.1 and HAZ/mm -2.2; HYD/mm-1.1 and HYD/mm -1.2; and NOI/mm -1.1. These measures will reduce
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 9 OF 16
impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact will be Class II, less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.
B. Findings that with regard to certain project and cumulative effects, those changes or alterations which mitigate those effects, are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
No impacts were identified in the EIR for which mitigation measures were the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency.
C. Findings that with regard to certain project and cumulative effects, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other consid erations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
The EIR identified two (2) significant, una voidable a dverse project-specific or cumulative related environmental impacts associated with the proposed project that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels by the adoption of mitigation measures.
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council find that these impacts will be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible, but will still remain significant and unavoidable, consistent with the following findings.
1. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. BIO Impact 2. The future development of the property could directly impact monarch butterflies. This impact would be Class I, significant and unavoidable.
Required mitigation measures will help reduce this impact, but not to a less than significant level. The measures identified in Mitigation Measur es BIO/mm -1.1 through BIO/mm-1.5 will be implemented , as previously described . In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO/mm -2.1 will be required, which provides for a series of measures to reduce direct impacts to the monarch butterfly and compensate for the loss of monarch butterfly habitat. In summary, the measures incorporated into Mitigation Measure BIO/mm-2.1 include:
If possible, avoiding site disturbance and construction activity that would impact eucalyptus trees onsite during the monarch butterflies' fall and winter migration period (October 15 through February 29). If tree or vegetation removal or site disturbance is required during th e monarch butterflies’ fall and winter migration period (October 15 through February 29), a City -approved biologist familiar with monarchs and monarch overwintering habitat shall conduct focused surveys for monarch colonies within the identified overwinter ing site and will identify any colonies found within 7 days of proposed vegetation removal or site disturbance or when known monarch overwintering is occurring at other locations within the region. If monarch butterflies are detected,
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 10 OF 16
development shall be postponed until after the overwintering period or until the City-approved biologist determines monarch butterflies are no longer using the trees for overwintering.
To provide further protection to non -overwintering populations and/or adjacent over -wintering populations, no Asclepias curassavica (tropical milkweed) will be allowed in any planting palettes for the project. To contribute to local monarch butterfly conservation efforts, native nectar - providing plant species will be incorporated into landscaping following construction activities, such as those recommended in the Monarch Butterfly Nectar Plant List for Conservation Plantings, to enhance local nectar sources.
As a condition of approval for the Planned Development permit(s), the use of neonicotinoids and synthetic pesticides shall be prohibited in the initial project plantings and throughout the life of the project in open space, pocket parks, and other common landscaped areas. This condition shall apply to the common open spaces for the life of the project and shall be included in the CC&Rs which will be recorded against the property prior to the issuance of a first certificate of occupancy. In addition, future residents and occupants shall be encouraged to not used neonicotinoids, synthetic pesticides, and/or plants treated with these materials; residents and occupants will be provided educational materials describing 1) viable alternatives to these products, and 2) the detrimental effects of these products on butterflies and other pollinators.
Prior to the approval of a Planned Development permit and prior to the removal of any trees within the overwintering site, the developer shall hire a City -approved biologist familiar with monarchs and monarch overwintering habitat to prepare and implement a monarch butterfly habitat enhancement plan. At a minimum, the plan shall identify area(s) on the property appropriate for onsite habitat enhancement to partially address the direct impacts of tree removal. The recommendations in this plan shall be included within the project's future project's landscaping plans for review and approval by the City prior to implementation.
Prior to the approval of the first building permit for the project, the developer, in consultation with the City of Santa Maria Community Development Department, shall identify and provide a donation to a conservation entity for monarch habitat conservation that can receive financial support to further enhance and/or promote conservation efforts in the region. The developer shall provide a d onation in an amount required by the conservation entity to fund 5 years of conservation research, restoration, site protection, and/or maintenance and management activities to the benefit of overwintering monarch butterfly habitat.
The project site suppo rts stands of trees that have historically supported an aggregation of winter roosting monarch butterflies; this site is located to the south of UVP and is 7.63 acres. The recent counts at this grove have ranged between 0 and 34 butterflies. The recorded count for 2021/2022 was 34. Nevertheless, the Xerces Society and C a. Department of Fish and Wildlife have identified and
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 11 OF 16
mapped this grove as overwintering site #2688. Retaining the 7.63-acre grove at the project site would not be feasible because the grov e would be incompatible with the proposed residential development at the project site . An arborist assessment, which supported the EIR analysis, indicates that the eucalyptus grove that provides the overwintering habitat is an old windrow of trees that has been cut down in the past and allowed to regrow out of the remaining stumps. The trees are growing very close together and the branches of each tree tangle with one another. When eucalyptus grows in very close, like the trees at the project site, the root s fuse between trees, making them one biological entity. It is not possible to remove individual trees selectively. If single trees were to be removed, the sandy soil conditions would increase the possibility of the remaining trees falling over. The trees are essentially supporting each other.
There has been no regular maintenance of the trees on the project site. Due to the health of the trees, the arborist report recommends against protection for any of the trees. Development of the site with any comparab le project of a similar density would require the removal of the monarch overwintering site . Due to the central location of the eucalyptus grove, protection of this resource, and creation of an adequate buffer zone between the project development and the g rove for resource protection and hazard abatement, would require many more acres of the project site to remain in open space than the 7.63 -acre area that delineates the grove. This type of buffer zone and protection of the grove would render a project like Richards Ranch (of a similar size and density) as infeasible to develop.
Removal of this habitat would create a significant and unavoidable impact that cannot be fully mitigated. Impacts cannot not be fully mitigated because there are no known local mitigation banks for monarch butterfly overwintering habitat, there is significant risk that restored off -site habitat would not be used by the monarch for overwintering, and there would be a significant temporal loss of the habitat while potential created or restored overwintering habitat matures. For these reasons, while mitigation is available through supporting existing conservation efforts of established habitats that are actively managed by qualified conservation entities, the City determines that feasible mitigation measures are not available to fully reduce potentially significant impacts to the monarch butterfly from loss of habitat to a less-than-significant level.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO/mm -1.1 through BIO/mm -1.5 and Mitigation Measure BIO/mm-2.1 will reduce impacts to the monarch butterfly and monarch butterfly habitat. Residual impacts to monarch butterflies would continue to be significant and unavoidable . This impact would be Class I, significant and unavoidable.
b. BIO Impact 13, Cumulative Impacts to Biological Resources. The project could result in cumulatively considerable impacts to biological resources. These potential impacts will be reduced to with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO/mm-1.1 through BIO/mm-1.5, BIO/mm-2.1, BIO/mm-3.1, BIO/mm-
4.1, and BIO/mm-5.1. With implementation of the identified mitigation measures, most residual cumulative biological resource impacts would be less than significant. Howev er, development of the site under the Richards Ranch conceptual development plan or any project of a similar density would necessitate
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 12 OF 16
the removal of the 7.63-acre monarch overwintering site that exists on the project site. Removal of this habitat would cr eate a significant and unavoidable impact that cannot be fully mitigated. Impacts cannot be fully mitigated because there is a lack of information regarding the ability to develop off -site mitigation, there are no known local mitigation banks for monarch butterfly overwintering habitat, there is significant risk that restored off -site habitat would not be used by the monarch for overwintering, and there would be a significant temporal loss of the habitat while created overwintering habitat matures.
For these reasons, the City determines that feasible mitigation measures are not available to reduce potentially significant impacts to the monarch butterfly from loss of habitat to a less -than-significant level. Thus, residual cumulative impacts to monarch butterflies would continue to be significant and unavoidable with the build out of the Richards Ranch conceptual development plan. Although the project will incorporate feasible measures, the measures may not reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact would remain significant. This impact would be Class I, significant and unavoidable.
D. Findings that with regard to certain project effects, those effects found to be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required.
The EIR identified potential impacts within fifty-two (52) topics that were found to be less than significant or no impact.
1. AESTHETICS (AES)
a. AES Impact 1 . The project will not have a substantial effect on a scenic vista; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. AES Impact 2. The project will not substantially damage scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
c. AES Impact 3 . With adhere nce to the City’s development and landscape standards, the project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings, nor conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
d. AES Impact 4 . The project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare which will adversely affect day or nighttime views in the ar ea; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
e. AES Impact 5 . The project will not have potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with aesthetics; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
2. AIR QUALITY (AQ) AND GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG)
a. AQ Impact 1 . The project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable air quality plans. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 13 OF 16
b. AQ Impact 4. The project will not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
c. GHG Impact 1 . The project will not generate greenhouse gas emissions above greenhouse gas significance thresholds. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
3. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (BIO)
a. BIO Impact 6. Project operation will not directly or indirectly impact special-status wildlife species. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. BIO Impact 8. There is no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities located within the project site; no impacts will occur. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
c. BIO Impact 9. There are no jurisdictional wetlands located within the project site; no impacts will occur. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
d. BIO Impact 10 . No impacts will occur to migratory w ildlife corridors or native wildlife nurseries. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
e. BIO Impact 12 . The project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
4. CULTURAL (CR) AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES (TCR)
a. CR Impact 1 . The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
5. ENERGY (EN)
a. EN Impact 3 . The project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with energy. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS (GEO)
a. GEO Impact 1 . The project will not cause substantial adverse effects due to rupture of a known earthquake fault; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. GEO Impact 4 . The project will not cause potential substantial adverse effects involving landslides. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
c. GEO Impact 7 . The project will not result in substantial risks to life or property associated with expansive soils. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
d. GEO Impact 8. The project will not result in impacts associated with soil capability
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 14 OF 16
of supporting the use of wastewater disposal systems. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (HAZ)
a. HAZ Impact 1. The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. HAZ Impact 3 . The project will not introduce hazardous materials within 0.25 miles of an existing or proposed school; impacts related to hazardous emissions and handling of hazardous materials near schools will be less than significant.
This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
c. HAZ Impact 4. The project will not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
d. HAZ Impact 6. The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or emergency evacuation plan. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY (HYD)
a. HYD Impact 3 . Implementation of the project will not substantially decrease groundwater supplies and impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. HYD Impact 4 . The project will not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
c. HYD Impact 6 . The project site is not in a flood hazard zone, tsunami zone, or seiche zone and, therefore, there will be no risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation by these hazards. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING (LUP)
a. LUP Impact 1. The project will not include features that will physically divide an established community. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. LUP Impact 2. The project will not 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. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
c. LUP Impact 3 . The project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with land use and planning. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
10. NOISE (NOI)
a. NOI Impact 2. The project will not generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 15 OF 16
b. NOI Impact 3. The project will not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING (PH)
a. PH Impact 1 . The project will not result in substantial unplanned population growth; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. PH Impact 2 . The project will not displace substantial numbers of persons or housing; no impact will occur. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
c. PH Impact 3. Cumulative effects of the proposed project will not occur because the project will not displace persons or housing nor will result in unplanned growth; cumulative impacts related to population growth will not occur. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
12. PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION (PS)
a. PS Impact 1. The project will not require the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities; therefore, there will be no environmental impacts associated with the provision of fire protection facilities to serve the project site and environmental impacts will be considered less than significant. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
b. PS Impact 2. The project will not require the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
c. PS Impact 3. Implementation of the project will result in an increased demand on existing Orcutt Union School District ( OUSD) and Santa Maria Joint Union High School District ( SMJUHSD) facilities. However, the project will not require the provision of new or physically altered school facilities. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
d. PS Impact 4. The project will not require the provision of new or physically altered public library facilities. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
e. PS Impact 5. The project will not require the provision of new or physically altered park facilities beyond the 43.75 -acre project site that could result in additional environmental impacts. This impact will be Class IV, of no impact.
f. PS Impact 6 . The project will not result in substantial physical deterioration of existing parks and recreation facilities; the impact will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
g. PS Impact 7. The project will not include the development of recreational facilities that may have an adverse physical effect on the environment. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
h. PS Impact 8 . The project will not result in cumulatively considerable
ATTACHMENT D
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
PAGE 16 OF 16
environmental impacts related to the provision of public services and recreation.
This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
13. TRANSPORTATION (TR)
a. TR Impact 1. The project will not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. TR Impact 2. The project will not conflict or be inconsistent with State California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
c. TR Impact 3 . The project will not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
d. TR Impact 4 . The project will not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
e. TR Impact 5 . The project will not have potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts associated with transportation; impacts will be less than significant. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
14. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS (USS)
a. USS Impact 2. Golden State Water will have sufficient water supply to serve the water demand generated by the proposed project and the existing service area during normal, single dry year, and multiple dry years conditions. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
b. USS Impact 3. The Laguna County Sanitation District will have adequate capacity to serve the increase in wastewater flows generated by the project. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
c. USS Impact 4. The project will not generate solid waste in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure or otherwise impair state or local solid waste reduction goals.
This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
d. USS Impact 5. The project will comply with federal, state, and local solid waste reduction goals. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.
e. USS Impact 6. The project will not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to utilities and service systems. This impact will be Class III, less than significant.