Docstoc

MONTEREY COUNTY MINOR SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE

Document Sample
MONTEREY COUNTY MINOR SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE Powered By Docstoc
					        MONTEREY COUNTY MINOR SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
Meeting: June 11, 2009          Time: 9:00 A .M.           Agenda Item No . : 1
Project Description : Combined Development Permit consisting of: 1) a Minor Subdivision t o
divide a 334 .95 acre parcel into three lots of 20 acres each (Parcels `B-1 - B-3), one lot of 29 .9 acre s
(Parcel "B-4") and one remainder parcel (Parcel "A") of 245 .05acres ; 2) a Use Permit for
development on 30% slopes or greater (road) ; 3) an Administrative Permit to expand an existing small
water system at 376 Corral De Tierra Road (Assessor's Parcel Number 151-041-030-000) from fiv e
connections to nine connections, a 60-foor-wide road and utilities easement; a new 20-foot long
bridge across Watson Creek ; and grading for the road (approximately 21,240 cubic yards cut an d
14,690 cubic yards fill) .
Project Location : 376 Corral de Tierra Road,              APN: 151-041-030-000 and 151-041-031 -
Salinas                                                    000
                                                           Owner : Marize Briggs
Planning File Number : PLN020508
                                                           Agent : Tony Lombardo
Planning Area : Toro Area Plan                             Flagged and staked : No
Zoning Designation : : "Resource Conservation, 10 acres per unit, Zoning District, with a Visua l
Sensitivity Overlay Zoning District" ("RC/10-VS" )
CEQA Action : Mitigated Negative Declaration
Department: RMA - Planning Department

RECOMMENDATION :
Staff recommends that the Minor Subdivision Committee adopt a resolution (Exhibit C) to:
1.      Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Mitigation Monitoring an d
        Reporting Plan;
2.      Approve the subject Combined Development Permit (PLN020508) based on findings an d
        evidence and subject to conditions (Exhibit C)

PROJECT OVERVIEW :
The project consists of a Minor Subdivision to divide a 334 .95 acre parcel into three lots of 2 0
acres each (Parcels B-1, B-2 and B-3), one 29 .9 acre parcel (Parcel B-4) and one 245.05 acre
remainder parcel (Parcel A) ; a Use Permit for development on 30 percent slopes or greater
(access road) and an Administrative Permit to expand an existing small water system from fiv e
connections to nine connections . Each of the four new parcels is expected to be built out with a
single family dwelling and accessory structures as desired by the future purchasers . While the
remainder parcel is a buildable lot, a conditional certificate of compliance must be processe d
prior to any development (Condition 13) . Each parcel has the potential to have one single family
dwelling and, with discretionary permits, could be allowed additional habitable dwellings . The
Visual Sensitivity zoning on the property requires a discretionary permit for the first singl e
family dwelling on each lot . A new bridge will be constructed for the new road crossing o f
Watson Creek, located adjacent to Corral de Tierra Road . Construction of the road that wil l
provide access to the four new lots will entail 21,240 cubic yards of cut and 14,690 cubic yard s
of fill .

OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT : The following agencies and departments reviewed thi s
project:

        RMA - Public Works Department
  j     Environmental Health Divisio n
        Water Resources Agenc y
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                           Page 1
        Salinas Rural Fire Protection District
        Parks Department

Agencies that submitted comments are noted with a check mark ("\i") . Conditions recommende d
by the RMA-Planning Department, Environmental Health Division, Water Resources Agency ,
Salinas Rural Fire Protection District and Parks Department have been incorporated into th e
Condition Compliance/Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan attached as Exhibit 1 to the
draft resolution (Exhibit C) .

LUAC RECOMMENDATIO N
The Toro Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) reviewed this project on April 27, 2009 and
May 11, 2009. On April 27, 2009 the LUAC continued the item and requested staff to provid e
information regarding compliance with Policy 26 .1 .18.1 (T) of the Toro Area Plan that require s
development proposals on Corral de Tierra Road from Four Corners to Corral del Cielo b e
deferred until safety improvements are made by the developer, as provided for in Policy 39 .1 .1 . 1
(T) . At the meeting on May 11, 2009, staff presented information to the LUAC showing tha t
safety improvements have been made and are funded to be completed in the near future o n
Corral de Tierra Road, including safety improvements at the intersection of Highway 68 an d
Corral de Tierra Road . On May 11, 2009, the Toro LUAC voted 4-0 to recommend approval o f
the project.

Note : The decision on this project is appealable to the Board of Supervisors .



Bob Schubert, AICP, Senior Planner
(831) 755-5183, schubertbj@co .monterey .ca.us
June 4, 2009

  cc : Front Counter Copy; Minor Subdivision Committee ; Salinas Rural Fire Protection District; Public Work s
         Department ; Parks Department ; Environmental Health Division ; Water Resources Agency ; Carl Holm,
         Assistant Planning Director; Bob Schubert, Project Planner; Carol Allen, Senior Secretary; Marize
         Briggs, Owner; Tony Lombardo, Agent ; Planning File PLN020508 .

Attachments :    Exhibit A        Project Data Sheet
                 Exhibit B        Project Discussion
                 Exhibit C        Draft Resolution, including :
                                  1. Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progra m
                                  2. Tentative Map
                 Exhibit D        Vicinity Map
                 Exhibit E        Advisory Committee Minutes
                 Exhibit F        Mitigated Negative Declaration
                 Exhibit G        Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaratio n

This report was reviewed by Carl Holm, AICP, Assistant Planning Directo r




MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                                 Page 2
                                                           EXHIBIT A


                                            Project Information for PLN02050 8


                  Project Title : BRIGGS JOHN DAVID & MARIZE H


                      Location : 376 CORRAL DE TIERRA RD SALINAS                  Primary APN :     151-041-030-000-M
              Applicable Plan : Toro Area Plan                                   Coastal Zone :     No
                  Permit Type : Combined Development Permit                             Zoning : RC/10-V S
       Environmental Status : MND                                            Plan Designation :     RESOURCE CONSE
        Advisory Committee : Toro                                  Final Action Deadline (884) :    7/29/200 8


Project Site Data :

                                                                           Coverage Allowed : 25%
                       Lot Size : 10 ACRE S
                                                                        - Coverage Proposed : N/A
     Existing Structures (sf) : 0                                             Height Allowed :      35 FEET
   Proposed Structures (sf) : N/A                                            Height Proposed :      N/A
                  Total Sq . Ft . : N/A
                                                                                 FAR Allowed :      N/A
                                                                                FAR Proposed :      N/A




Resource Zones and Reports :

           Environmentally Sensitive Habitat: N o                        Erosion Hazard Zone :      HIGH
                         Biologica l Report #: LIB020508                        Soils Report # :    LIB03024 6
                  Forest Management Rpt. # : N/A

             Archaeological Sensitivity Zone : LOW                      Geologic Hazard Zone :      MODERATE
                   Archaeological Report # : N/A                           Geologic Report # :      LIB02050 8


                               Fire Hazard Zone : HIGH                         Traffic Report # :   LIB02050 8

Other Information :

                 Wate r Source : WELL                              Sewage Disposal (method) :       SEPTI C
                Wate r Dist/Co : N/A                                      Sewer District Name :     N/A
                   Fire District : SALINAS RURAL                          Grading (cubic yds .) :    35,930 .0
                Tree Removal : 0




  Date Printed : 06/05/200 9
                                         EXHIBIT B
                                    PROJECT DISCUSSION
                                        June 11, 2009

Project Location and Setting

The proposed project site is located within the Toro Area Plan boundaries, 8 .5 miles from
Salinas and 10 .5 miles from Monterey . The project site is designated as Resource Conservatio n
and contains a Visual Sensitivity designation . Zoning on the property requires ten acres per unit .
The property is visible from Laureles Grade Road for two seconds in one location (2-2 .5 miles
from Highway 68) and five seconds at another location (2 .7 miles from Highway 68) .

The project site is currently vacant . An adjacent parcel (APN 151-041-030-000) at 376 Corral
De Tierra Road is developed with a complex which consists of five houses and five barns ,
accessed from Corral de Tierra Road . Two wells serve the complex area . A 14,000 gallon water
tank exists on the upper portions of the adjacent property . The property was historically used fo r
grazing on the upper areas and cultivation on the alluvium adjacent to Watson Creek . The area
along Watson Creek is located within a floodplain . Surrounding land uses include large parcel s
zoned for grazing uses to the southwest, smaller parcels ranging in size from one to 40 acres t o
the north that contain residential and public use (elementary school), and residential parcels
ranging in size from two to 127 acres to the east and southeast .

Proposed Subdivision and Development

The Combined Development Permit consists of a Minor Subdivision to divide a 334 .95 acre
parcel into three lots of 20 acres each (Parcels B-1, B-2 and B-3), one 29 .9 acre parcel (Parcel B -
4) and a 245 .05 acre remainder parcel ; a Use Permit for development on 30 percent slopes o r
greater (access road) and an Administrative Permit to expand an existing small water system . A
proposed 5,400 foot long, 18-foot wide, road will be constructed to serve the proposed parcel s
from Corral de Tierra Road to Parcel B-3 . The road will run along the boundary between Parcel
A and each B parcel . The road will cover a 6 inch water main that will serve a series of fir e
hydrants along the road . A new water line would extend from the well on the adjacent parce l
(APNO51-041-030-000) to water storage tank(s) on the remainder parcel adjacent to Parcel B-3 .
An access easement is proposed from the new road across Parcel B-4 to the site of the existin g
14,000 gallon water tank . Septic systems would serve the individual lots .

Visual Impact s

The property is located in an area designated as visually sensitive by the Toro Area Plan and i s
within a Visual Sensitivity Zoning District pursuant to Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance) . County
staff conducted a visual reconnaissance of the project site in order to determine potential impact s
with regards to visual resources. Construction on the subject property has the potential to affect
a scenic vista, the existing visual character of the site and surroundings, and could affect day o r
nighttime views due to the creation of a new source of substantial light. However, each
construction project will require obtaining a discretionary permit under the Visual Sensitivity
zoning district regulations . The purpose of that district is to ensure protection of the publi c
viewshed in certain areas of the County . According to the project plans, building sites have bee n
located within the least steep portions of the property .


MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                        Page 3
Grading for the road will entail 21,240 cubic yards of cut and 14,690 cubic yards of fill . Water
tank(s) are proposed in order to provide storage capacity for fire suppression, as well as potabl e
water. The tank(s) would be located on the remainder parcel near Parcel B-3 . A condition of
approval (Condition 12) requires that the tank be painted an earth tone color and landscaped t o
blend into the area .

The proposed building sites would not be seen from Highway 68 or Corral de Tierra Road .
However, the property is visible from two locations along Laureles Grade Road . Structures on
the future parcels could be seen from Laureles Grade Road for a total of two seconds at on e
location . These are medium to long views that are partially screened by natural vegetation an d
topography, and by several Monterey Pines that have been planted along Laurales Grade Road . )

The other viewshed point is located approximately 2 .4 miles from the site in a sector of Laurale s
Grade Road is much more visible to the traveler . The viewshed area consists of approximately a
five second span, partially blocked by the guard rail, natural vegetation and topography .

The county has a policy that all lighting be shielded or directed to illuminate only the intende d
area. A lighting plan will be required as a condition (Condition 8). Because of the distance, the
extremely low density of one primary residence on a 20-acre parcel, the Visual Sensitivit y
zoning district requirements (requiring a discretionary permit for each residence), and the shor t
duration of views, this impact is considered to be less than significant.

In order to ensure that the project's visibility will be minimized, a condition (Condition 10)
requires that a conservation and scenic easement shall be conveyed to the County over thos e
portions of the property, outside of the proposed building sites and road improvement areas, o n
slopes of 30 percent or greater.

In 1968, approximately 13 miles of State Route 68, between State Route 1 and River Road, wer e
designated as a State scenic highway under California's Scenic Highway Programs . State Route
68 is major regional transportation route that connect the cities of Monterey and Salinas an d
would provide regional access to the project site . Based on a visual reconnaissance of the project
properties as well as their location two miles away from Highway 68, the project site would no t
be visible to those traveling on State Route 68 . The proposed project will result in the potentia l
for developing new structures on four new parcels . The project does not involve the demolitio n
of existing structures or the removal of trees . Construction of a 5,500 foot two-lane road will run
along most of the property, but will not involve damage to scenic resources . The road will not be
visible from Corral de Tierra or Highway 68, but will be visible from Laureles Grade Road, a
County road, at a distance . The project would not damage scenic resources within the sceni c
corridor, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway.

Services and Utilitie s

Water is proposed to be served by an existing well on an adjacent parcel located at 376 Corral d e
Terra Road (APN 151-041-030-000) . Sewage disposal for each residence is proposed throug h
individual septic tank and leach field systems designed in accordance with the specifications an d
recommendations of the soils percolation testing report, as required by the Environmental Healt h
Division.


MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                       Page 4
Fire protection service at the project site would be provided by the Salinas Rural Fire Protectio n
District (SRFPD) . The SRFPD provides firefighting, rescue and emergency medical service t o
approximately 21,000 residents district wide . The SRFPD service area is comprised of
approximately 250 square miles of predominantly rural and agricultural land uses, in addition t o
the community of Spreckels . The closest station to the project site is the Laureles Station
(Station #3) located at Highway 68 and Laureles Grade Road, Salinas .

The Monterey County Sheriff's Office is the main provider of law enforcement services to th e
unincorporated areas of Monterey County . The closest patrol station to the project site is th e
Central Station (formerly the Salinas Station) located at 1414 Natividad Road, Salinas .

Washington Union School District provides primary education to the project site, whil e
secondary education is provided by Salinas Union High School District . Within Washington
Union School District there are three schools, Toro Park Elementary, Washington Elementary ,
and San Benancio Middle School . Salinas Union High School District contains eleven school s
but students would only attend Salinas High School within this District.

Hydrology

The project site is located in the El Toro Groundwater Basin. The El Toro Groundwater Basin is
a much smaller basin than the three major basins in Monterey County (Salinas Valley, Canne l
River, and North County) . Groundwater flow generally follows the topography and exits th e
Toro Area Plan planning area to the northeast. Groundwater basins are often broken up int o
several subareas . Subareas often have aquifers that are interconnected and laterally continuou s
within their respective geologic units . Therefore, water levels in subareas can influence nearb y
well water levels in other subareas . In the vicinity of the project site, groundwater is pumped
from three water-bearing geologic units : the Aromas-Paso Robles Formation (also referred to a s
the Paso Robles Formation), the Santa Margarita Formation, and alluvium in local drainages .
Decline of groundwater in some Toro Area Plan wells during the 1980s resulted in the Count y
imposing a B-8 zoning overlay to portions of the Plan area due to potential water supply
limitations. The B-8 zoning limits development to single family dwellings on existing lots o f
record since 1991 . The proposed project is located outside the B-8 zoning overlay and is no t
subject to this restriction . In addition, the site is outside of the B-8 District that is proposed in
GPU-5.

The project proposes four additional parcels on the project site, which can each be develope d
with single family residences and accessory structures . The total net water demand for th e
proposed project (incorporating both existing and proposed water demand) is estimated to be 3 . 8
afy which should be available from groundwater recharge at the property (estimated to b e
approximately 28 afy) during years of average precipitation. Additionally, groundwater storag e
within the Monterey Shale Aquifer beneath the property (estimated to range from 430 to 3,00 0
acre-feet) could provide additional supply during drought years . The quantity of water currentl y
available from the Briggs well appears adequate to meet the projected requirements and deman d
for the proposed project and appears to represent an assured long term water supply, as defined
in Monterey County Code, Title 19 . (Source: 18, 19)

Traffic and Circulatio n

The project site is located on the southwest side of Corral de Tierra Road, approximately 1 .2 5
miles southeast of its intersection with Calera Canyon and Robley roads . The site has access to
MS Committee, 6/11/09
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                         Page 5
Corral de Tierra Road via a proposed private road . Regional access is provided by Highway 6 8
which is the main connector between Monterey County's two principal urbanized areas, Salina s
and the Monterey Peninsula . It serves as a commuter route between Salinas and the Montere y
Peninsula while providing access to the low density residential developments, schools an d
business parks adjacent to the corridor . The majority of traffic generated on Highway 68 is not
created by residents living along the corridor, but by commute trips and tourism coming to an d
from the Salinas Valley and the Monterey Peninsula .

The project will generate approximately 38 daily trips, of which, 3 trips (1 in & 2 out) would b e
generated during the AM peak hour and 4 trips (3 in & 1 out) during the PM peak hour. It is
assumed that 62% of the project trips would travel to/from east of Corral de Tierra (Salina s
destinations) and 38% of the project trips would travel to/from west of Corral de Tierr a
(Monterey Peninsula destinations) .

Intersection levels of service under background plus project conditions are as follows :

Highway 68/Laureles Grade Road Intersection - would continue to operate at LOS E during bot h
weekday AM and PM hours .

Highway 68/Corral de Tierra Road Intersection - would continue to operate at deficient LOS for
the weekday AM and unacceptable LOS E for the PM peak hour .

Highway 68/San Benancio Road Intersection - would operate at LOS F during both weekday
AM and PM peak hours .

According to Monterey County Public Works, in order to mitigate for incremental regional
impacts (includes Highway 68 transportation corridor), the project would be required to pay th e
Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) Regional Development Impact Fee (RDIF )
adopted by the County of Monterey, per Monterey County Ordinance 5110, adopted June 2008 .
The TAMC RDIF condition of approval below would reduce these impacts to a less tha n
significant level.

Use Permit for Development on Slopes Over 30 %

The project includes application for a Use Permit for development of an access road on slope s
exceeding 30% . Topography on the site consists of gentle to steep hills . The road has been
located to minimize the amount of development on slopes exceeding 30% in accordance with th e
applicable goals and policies of the Toro Area Plan and zoning codes . Building sites on the
individual lots have been designed to avoid development on slopes over 30% . The subject
project minimizes development on slopes exceeding 30% in accordance with the applicable goal s
and policies of the Toro Area Plan and zoning codes .

Administrative Permit for Small Water Syste m

The Combined Development Permit includes an application for a Use Permit to expand a n
existing small water system at 376 Corral De Tierra Road (Assessor's Parcel Number 151-041-030 -
000) from five connections to nine connections. The proposed small water system complies with
MCC Section 21 .70, is consistent with the Monterey General Plan, Toro Area Plan and is .
suitable for the site .

MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                        Page 6
                                           EXHIBIT C
                                   DRAFT RESOLUTIO N

               Before the Minor Subdivision Committee in and for the
                       County of Monterey, State of Californi a

In the matter of the application of:
BRIGGS (PLN020508)
RESOLUTION NO . ----
Resolution by the Monterey County Minor
Subdivision Committee :
        1) Adopting        a    Mitigated      Negative
           Declaration;
       2) Approving a Combined Development
           Permit consisting of: 1) a Minor
           Subdivision to divide a 334 .95 acre parcel
           into three lots of 20 acres each (Parcels `B -
           1- B-3), on lot of 29 .9 acres (Parcel "B-4")
           and one remainder parcel (Parcel "A") of
           245 .05 acres; 2) a Use Permit for
           development on 30% slopes or greate r
           (road); 3) an Administrative Permit to
           expand an existing small water system at
           376 Corral De Tierra Road (Assessor' s
           Parcel Number 151-041-030-000) fro m
           five connections to nine connections ; and
       3) Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring an d
           Reporting Plan .
(PLN020508, Marize Briggs, 376 Corral de Tierr a
Road, Salinas, Toro Area Plan, APN : 151-041-030-
000 and 151-041-031-000 )

The Briggs application (PLN020508) came on for public hearing before the Montere y
County Minor Subdivision Committee on June 11, 2008 . Having considered all the written
and documentary evidence, the administrative record, the staff report, oral testimony, an d
other evidence presented, the Minor Subdivision Committee finds and decides as follows :


                                            FINDINGS

1.    FINDING : CONSISTENCY - The Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the
                    applicable plans and policies which designate this area as appropriat e
                    for development.
     EVIDENCE : a) During the course of review of this application, the project has bee n
                    reviewed for consistency with the text, policies, and regulations in :
                        - the Monterey County General Plan ,
                            Toro Area Plan,
                        - Toro Area Plan Inventory and Analysis,
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                   Page 7
                                - Monterey County Zoning Ordinance (Title 21 )
                                - Monterey County Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19)
                           No conflicts were found to exist . No communications were received
                           during the course of review of the project indicating any inconsistencie s
                           with the text, policies, and regulations in these documents .
                     b)    The property is located at 376 Corral de Tierra Road, Salina s
                           (Assessor's Parcel Number 151-041-030-000 and 151-041-031-000 ,
                           Toro Area Plan . The parcel is zoned "Resource Conservation, 10 acre s
                           per unit, Zoning District, with a Visual Sensitivity Overlay Zoning
                           District" ("RC/10-VS") which allows for residential development .
                           Therefore, the project is an allowed land use for this site .
                     c)    The Combined Development Permit consists of a Minor Subdivision to
                           divide a 334 .95 acre parcel into three lots of 20 acres each (Parcels B-1 ,
                           B-2 and B-3), one 29 .9 acre parcel (Parcel B-4) and a 245 .05 acre
                           remainder parcel; a Use Permit for development on 30 percent slopes o r
                           greater (access road) and an Administrative Permit to expand a n
                           existing small water system from five to nine connections .
                     d)    The project planner conducted a site inspection on February 20, 2009 t o
                           verify that the project on the subject parcel conforms to the plans liste d
                           above.
                     e)    The project site is designated Resource Conservation and is designate d
                           as a visually sensitive area in the Toro Area Plan and General Plan . The
                           site is predominantly surrounded by rural residential and open spac e
                           uses. The project will not physically divide an established community ,
                           conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopte d
                           for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, o r
                           conflict with any applicant habitat or natural community conservatio n
                           plan. The project, as designed, conditioned, and mitigated, would no t
                           conflict with the General Plan, Toro Area Plan, or the Zonin g
                           Ordinance .
                      f)   The project was referred to the Toro Land Use Advisory Committe e
                           (LUAC) for review. Based on the LUAC Procedure guidelines adopte d
                           by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors per Resolution No . 08-
                           338, this application did warrant referral to the LUAC because i t
                           includes a minor subdivision. On May 11, 2009, the Toro LUAC vote d
                           4-0 to recommend approval of the project .
                     g)    The project is consistent with Policy 26 .1 .18.1 (T) of the Toro Area Pla n
                           that requires that development proposals on Corral de Tierra Road fro m
                           Four Corners to Corral del Cielo be deferred until safety improvement s
                           are made by the developer, as provided for in Policy 39 .1 .1 .1 (T) .
                           Monterey County Public Works Department researched and found tha t
                           safety improvements have been made and are funded to be completed in
                           the near future on Corral de Tierra Road, including safety improvement s
                           at the intersection of Highway 68 and Corral de Tierra Road .
                     h)    The proposed small water system complies with MCC Section 21 .70, is
                           consistent with the Monterey General Plan, Toro Area Plan and i s
                           suitable for the site . The Combined Development Permit includes an
                           application for a Administrative Permit to expand an existing small water
                           system at 376 Corral De Tierra Road (Assessor's Parcel Number 151-041 -
                           030-000) from five connections to nine connections .
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                          Page 8
                      i) The application, project plans, and related support materials submitte d
                           by the project applicant to the Monterey County RMA - Plannin g
                           Department for the proposed development found in Project Fil e
                           PLN020508 .

2.      FINDING :   SITE SUITABILITY - The site is physically suitable for the us e
                    proposed.
     EVIDENCE : a) The project has been reviewed for site suitability by the following
                    departments and agencies : RMA - Planning Department, RMA-Publi c
                    Works Department, Environmental Health Division, Water Resource s
                    Department, Parks Department and the Salinas Rural Fire District .
                    There has been no indication from these departments/agencies that th e
                    site is not suitable for the proposed development . Condition s
                    recommended have been incorporated .
                b) Staff identified potential impacts to aesthetics, air quality, biologica l
                    resources, geology/soils, hazards/hazardous materials, hydrology/wate r
                    quality, transportation/traffic and utilities/service systems . The project
                    is consistent with applicable policies and regulations . Technical report s
                    by outside consultants indicated that there are no physical o r
                    environmental constraints that would indicate that the site is not suitabl e
                    for the use proposed . County staff independently reviewed thes e
                    reports and concurs with their conclusions. The following reports have
                    been prepared :
                     1. Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Higgins Associates, date d
                    October 16, 2003 (LIB PLN020508) .
                    2. Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation Investigation Repor t
                    prepared by Soils Surveys Inc . dated April 6, 2003(LIB_PLN020508) .
                    3. Biological Assessment Update prepared by Dale Hameister of Rana
                    Creek Habitat Restoration dated November 10, 200 3
                    (LIB_ PLN020508) .
                    4. Project Specific Hydrogeologic Report prepared by PE S
                    Environmental dated December 21, 2007 (LIB_090125) .
                c) Staff conducted a site inspection on February 20, 2009 to verify that th e
                    site is suitable for this use .
                d) The application, project plans, and related support materials submitte d
                    by the project applicant to the Monterey County RMA - Plannin g
                    Department for the proposed development found in Project Fil e
                    PLN020508.

3.      FINDING :    HEALTH AND SAFETY - The establishment, maintenance, o r
                     operation of the project applied for will not under the circumstances o f
                     this particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals ,
                     comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in th e
                     neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental or injurious t o
                     property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the genera l
                     welfare of the County .
      EVIDENCE : a) The project was reviewed by RMA - Planning Department, RMA-
                     Public Works Department, Environmental Health Division, Wate r
                     Resources Department, Parks Department and the Salinas Rural Fir e
                     District. The respective departments/agencies have recommende d
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                        Page 9
                            conditions, where appropriate, to ensure that the project will not have a n
                            adverse effect on the health, safety, and welfare of persons eithe r
                            residing or working in the neighborhood . The applicant has agreed to
                            these conditions as evidenced by the application and accompanyin g
                            materials and conditions (Attachment 1) .
                         b) Necessary public facilities will be provided. The Combined
                            Development Permit includes an Administrative Permit to expand an
                            existing small water system at 376 Corral De Tierra Road (Assessor' s
                            Parcel Number 151-041-030-000) from five connections to nine
                            connections . The lots will be on individual septic systems.
                         c) The project site is located in the El Toro Groundwater Basin . Decline
                            of groundwater in some Toro Area Plan wells during the 1980s resulte d
                            in the County imposing a B-8 zoning overlay to portions of the Plan
                            area due to potential water supply limitations . The B-8 zoning limits
                            development to single family dwellings on existing lots of record since
                            1991 . The proposed project is located outside the B-8 zoning overlay
                            and is not subject to this restriction . In addition, the site is outside of
                            the B-8 District that is proposed in GPU-5 .
                         d) Preceding findings and supporting evidence for PLN020508 .

4.      FINDING :  NO VIOLATIONS - The subject property is in compliance with al l
                   rules and regulations pertaining to zoning uses, subdivision, and any
                   other applicable provisions of the County's zoning ordinance . No
                   violations exist on the property .
     EVIDENCE: a) Staff reviewed Monterey County RMA - Planning Department and
                   Building Services Department Monterey County records and is no t
                   aware of any violations existing on subject property .
               b) Staff conducted a site inspection on February 20, 2009 and researche d
                   County records to assess if any violation exists on the subject property .
               c) There are no known violations on the subject parcel .
               d) The application, plans and supporting materials submitted by the projec t
                   applicant to the Monterey County Planning Department for th e
                   proposed development are found in Project File PLN020508 .

5.      FINDING :   CEQA (Mitigated Negative Declaration) - On the basis of the whol e
                    record before the Monterey County Minor Subdivision Committee,
                    there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project as designed ,
                    conditioned and mitigated, will have a significant effect on th e
                    environment . The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects th e
                    independent judgment and analysis of the County .
      EVIDENCE: a) Public Resources Code Section 21080 .d and California Environmental
                    Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064 .a.1 require
                    environmental review if there is substantial evidence that the projec t
                    may have a significant effect on the environment .
                b) The Monterey County Planning Department prepared an Initial Stud y
                    pursuant to CEQA . The Initial Study is on file in the offices of th e
                    Planning Department and is hereby incorporated by referenc e
                    (PLN020508) .
                c) The Initial Study identified several potentially significant effects, bu t
                    the applicant has agreed to proposed mitigation measures that avoid th e
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                           Page 10
                              effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significan t
                              effects would occur . The Initial Study is on file in the RMA-Planning
                              Department and is hereby incorporated by reference (PLN020508) .
                         d)   Issues that were analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration
                              include: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology/soils ,
                              hazards/hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality ,
                              transportation/traffic and utilities/service systems .
                         e)   All project changes required to avoid significant effects on the
                              environment have been made conditions of approval . A Condition
                              Compliance and Mitigation Monitoring and/or Reporting Plan has bee n
                              prepared in accordance with Monterey County regulations and i s
                              designed to ensure compliance during project implementation and i s
                              hereby incorporated herein as Attachment 1 . The applicant must enter
                              into an "Agreement to Implement a Mitigation Monitoring and/or
                              Reporting Plan as a condition of project approval (Condition #5 )
                         f)   The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") for PLN02050 8
                              was prepared in accordance with CEQA and circulated for publi c
                              review from March 24, 2009 through April 24, 200 9
                              (SCH# :2009031088). Issues that were analyzed in the Draft Mitigate d
                              Negative Declaration ("MND")/Negative Declaration ("ND) include
                              aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology/soils ,
                              hazards/hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality ,
                              transportation/traffic and utilities/service systems .
                         g)   Evidence that has been received and considered includes : the
                              application, technical studies/reports (see Finding 2/Site Suitability) ,
                              staff reports that reflect the County's independent judgment, an d
                              information and testimony presented during public hearings (as
                              applicable). These documents are on file in the RMA-Plannin g
                              Department (PLN020508) and are hereby incorporated herein b y
                              reference.
                         h)   Staff analysis contained in the Initial Study and the record as a whol e
                              indicate the project could result in changes to the resources listed i n
                              Section 753 .5(d) of the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) regulations .
                              All land development projects that are subject to environmental revie w
                              are subject to a State filing fee plus the County recording fee, unless th e
                              Department of Fish and Game determines that the project will have n o
                              effect on fish and wildlife resources . The site supports Monterey
                              Manzanita and Coast Range Newt . For purposes of the Fish and Gam e
                              Code, the project will have a significant adverse impact on the fish an d
                              wildlife resources upon which the wildlife depends . State Department
                              of Fish and Game reviewed the MND to comment and recommen d
                              necessary conditions to protect biological resources in this area .
                              Therefore, the project will be required to pay the State fee of $1,993 .00
                              plus a fee of $50 payable to the Monterey County Clerk/Recorder fo r
                              processing said fee and posting the Notice of Determination (NOD) .
                         i)   The County has considered the comments received during the publi c
                              review period, and they do not alter the conclusions in the Initial Stud y
                              or the Mitigated Negative Declaration .
                         j)   The Monterey County Planning Department, located at 168 W . Alisal,
                              Second Floor, Salinas, California, 93901, is the custodian of document s
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                             Page 11
                             and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon whic h
                             the decision to adopt the negative declaration is based .

6. :    FINDING : USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT ON SLOPES OVER O F
                       30% OR GREATER - There is no feasible alternative which woul d
                       allow development to occur on slopes of less than 30% .
       EVIDENCE : a) In accordance with the applicable policies of the Toro Area Plan and th e
                       Monterey County Zoning Ordinance (Title 20/21), a Use Permit i s
                       required and the authority to grant said permit has been met .
                  b) The project includes a Use Permit application for development o n
                       slopes exceeding 30%. Topography on the site consists of gentle t o
                       steep hills . Portions of the road that will provide access to the lots i s
                       located on slopes over 30% . The road has been located to minimize th e
                       amount of development on slopes over 30% . The building sites on the
                       individual lots have been designed to avoid development on slopes over
                       30%.
                   c) The application, plans and supporting materials submitted by the project
                       applicant to the Monterey County Planning Department for th e
                       proposed development are found in Project File PLN020508 .
                  d) The project planner conducted a site inspection on February 20, 2009 .
                   e) The subject project minimizes development on slopes exceeding 30% in
                       accordance with the applicable goals and policies of the Toro Area Pla n
                       and zoning codes.

7. :     FINDING :           SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FINDINGS - None of the finding s
                             found in Section 19.04.025 .1 of the Subdivision Ordinance can be made .
       EVIDENCE: a)
                             Section 19 .04.025 .1 requires that the minor subdivision be denied if any
                             one of the findings is made . Staff has analyzed the project against the
                             findings for denial outlined in this section . The map and its design and
                             improvements are consistent with the County General Plan and the Tor o
                             Area Plan. The parcels will be served by a small water system and
                             individual septic systems and by a common road. No specific plan has
                             been prepared for this area . The site has been determined to b e
                             physically suitable for the type and density of development (see Finding
                             2). The design and improvements are not likely to cause substantial
                             environmental damage, substantially and avoidably injure fish or
                             wildlife or their habitat, or cause serious public health problems as
                             demonstrated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for thi s
                             project. The design and improvements will not conflict with easement s
                             for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.
                             Planning staff reviewed the Title Report and applicable recorde d
                             documents to identify all easements and ensure that the project does no t
                             conflict with existing easements .

                         b) The property provides for adequate building sites as evidenced by the
                             application materials submitted for the site The county has a policy that
                             all lighting be shielded or directed to illuminate only the intended area.
                             A lighting plan will be required as a condition (Condition 8) . Becaus e
                             of the distance, the extremely low density of one primary residence on a
MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                          Page 12
                            20-acre parcel, the Visual Sensitivity zoning district requirement s
                            (requiring a discretionary permit for each residence), and the shor t
                            duration of views, this impact is considered to be less than significant .
                            In order to ensure that the project's visibility will be minimized, a
                            condition (Condition 10) requires that a conservation and scenic
                            easement shall be conveyed to the County over those portions of the
                            property, outside of the proposed building sites and road improvemen t
                            areas, on slopes of 30 percent or greater.
                        c) The application, plans, and support materials, including the technica l
                            reports submitted by the project applicant to the Monterey County RMA-
                            Planning Department for the proposed development . The reports are a s
                            follows :
                            1. Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Higgins Associates, date d
                            October 16, 2003 (LIB PLN020508) .
                            2. Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation Investigation Repor t
                            prepared by Soils Surveys Inc . dated April 6, 2003(LIB_PLN020508) .
                            3. Biological Assessment Update prepared by Dale Hameister of Ran a
                            Creek Habitat Restoration dated November 10, 2003
                            (LIB PLN020508).
                            4. Project Specific Hydrogeologic Report prepared by PE S
                            Environmental dated December 21, 2007 (LIB _090125) .
                        d) The on-site inspection of the parcel by the project planner on Februar y
                            20, 2009.
                        e) Maps and application contained in the project file .
                        f) See Findings 1 and 2 .

8.      FINDING :           APPEALABILITY - The decision on this project maybe appealed to th e
                            Board of Supervisors .
9.   EVIDENCE:              The Monterey County Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19), Sectio n
                            19 .16 .020.B.

                                             DECISION

NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings and evidence, the Minor Subdivisio n
Committee does hereby :

       1. Adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration ;
       2. Approves a Combined Development Permit consisting of : 1) a Minor Subdivision to
          divide a 334.95 acre parcel into three lots of 20 acres each (Parcels `B-1 - B-3), on lo t
          of 29.9 acres (Parcel "B-4") and one remainder parcel (Parcel "A") of 245.05 acres; 2) a
          Use Permit for development on 30% slopes or greater (road) ; 3) an Administrativ e
          Permit to expand an existing small water system at 376 Corral De Tierra Roa d
          (Assessor's Parcel Number 151-041-030-000) from five connections to nin e
          connections ; and
       3. Adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (Attachment 1) .

PASSED AND ADOPTED this eleventh day of June, 2009 .



MS Committee, 6/11/09
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                         Page 13
                                                    Tom Moss, Chair, Minor Subdivision Committe e

COPY OF THIS DECISION MAILED TO APPLICANT ON

THIS APPLICATION IS APPEALABLE TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS .

IF ANYONE WISHES TO APPEAL THIS DECISION, AN APPEAL FORM MUST BE COMPLETE D
AND SUBMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION / CLERK TO TH E
BOARD ALONG WITH THE APPROPRIATE FILING FEE ON OR BEFORE [DATE]

This decision, if this is the final administrative decision, is subject to judicial review pursuant to Californi a
Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1094 .5 and 1094.6. Any Petition for Writ of Mandate must be filed with
the Court no later than the 90th day following the date on which this decision becomes final .

NOTES

1.      You will need a building permit and must comply with the Monterey County Building Ordinanc e
        in every respect.

        Additionally, the Zoning Ordinance provides that no building permit shall be issued, nor any us e
        conducted, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions and terms of the permit granted o r
        until ten days after the mailing of notice of the granting of the permit by the appropriate authority ,
        or after granting of the permit by the Board of Supervisors in the event of appeal .

        Do not start any construction or occupy any building until you have obtained the necessar y
        permits and use clearances from the Monterey County Planning Department and Buildin g
        Services Department office in Salinas .

2.      This permit expires 2 years after the above date of granting thereof unless construction or use i s
        started within this period .




MS Committee, 6/11/0 9
BRIGGS (PLN020508)                                                                 Page 14
    RESOLUTION #                 - ATTACHMENT 1                                                         Project Name : Briggs Minor Subdivision
     Monterey County Resource Management Agency
                                                                                                        File No: PLN020508                       APNs: 151-041-030-000 and 151-041-031-00 0
                 Planning Departmen t
   Condition Compliance & Mitigation Monitoring and/or                                                 Approval by : Minor Subdivision Committee                                   Date: June 11, 2009
                     Reporting Plan

  *Monitoring or Reporting refers to projects with an EIR or adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration per Section 21081 .6 of the Public Resources Code.


                                                                                                 (ontpliauce or Vlotriteritm o I Ltwn s
 Perin i                                                                                                                                              1`c>>~nnr~ihlc                    I   ~riJicatiou o
           1 > rt i        (' on di t i ons o I1 1r p romt ana of ri d l at l on M easures                  r
                                                                                               to b e 1rL f ornrc d. It h ere a1 1 y di ca bl c, a
  Co i
  Cond.                                                                                                                                                 Parts fo r       l7ntnr             ( 'utn rliar r c c
         1~Ju tu h cr l              an d K c!~/rons ihl c 1 _urtr ! ( se U cpartntc ~ rrt        crtrJ i c d prfdc%srona l i s requ i re d fo r                                                  1
 Numb r                                                                                                                                               (otnlrliauc c                         (name. Jan')
                                                                                                           action to b e accepte d.

                                                                                             RMA - PLANNING
                          PD001- SPECIFIC USES ONLY                                           Adhere to conditions and uses                           Owner/           Ongoing
                          This Combined Development Permit (PLN020508)                        specified in the permit .                              Applicant         unles s
                          consists of a Combined Development Permit                                                                                                    otherwise
                          consisting of: 1) a Minor Subdivision to divide a                                                                                            state d
                          334 .95 acre parcel into three lots of 20 acres eac h
                          (Parcels `B-1- B-3), on lot of 29 .9 acres (Parcel
                          "B-4") and one remainder parcel (Parcel "A") o f
                          245 .05 acres ; 2) a Use Permit for development o n
                          30% slopes or greater (road) ; 3) an Administrative
                          Permit to expand an existing small water system a t
                          376 Corral De Tierra Road (Assessor's Parcel
                          Number 151-041-030-000) from five connections
                          to nine connections, a 60-foor-wide road an d
                          utilities easement; a new 20-foot long bridge across
                          Watson Creek; and grading for the road
                          (approximately 21,240 cubic yards cut and 14,69 0
                          cubic yards fill) . Sewage would be by individua l
                          septic systems . The property is located on Corra l
                          de Tierra Road, southeast of Calera Canyon Roa d
                          (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 151-041-030-000 and
                           151-041-031-000), Toro Area. This permit was
                          approved in accordance with County ordinances
                          and land use regulations subject to the following

John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 1
                                                                                  Cote p lian(e or alotlitorinf.r 1( thin s
  Pctmit                                                                                                                      Responsibl e                      1 critic anon o f
             lliti~ .    Con(litions of tpproral and in lliti,atio n leasures    to be performed. !{here applicable, (1
   (ond.                                                                                                                        l (trtl' fo r      /nntltg         otnp/ianc e
            Vumbel              altd Responsible Land (se Departmen t            & chilled professional is required fo r
  Annlbc'1'                                                                                                                   C onlpltalrce                      (name (late)
                                                                                           K'liUt1 to he l7cCCptc(~
                        terms and conditions . Neither the uses nor the
                        construction allowed by this permit shall commenc e
                        unless and until all of the conditions of this permit
                        are met to the satisfaction of the Director of th e
                        RMA - Planning Department . Any use or
                        construction not in substantial conformance wit h
                        the terms and conditions of this permit is a violation
                        of County regulations and may result in
                        modification or revocation of this permit an d
                        subsequent legal action. No use or construction
                        other than that specified by this permit is allowed
                        unless additional permits are approved by the
                        appropriate authorities . To the extent that the
                        County has delegated any condition compliance or
                        mitigation monitoring to the Monterey Count y
                        Water Resources Agency, the Water Resource s
                        Agency shall provide all information requested b y
                        the County and the County shall bear ultimat e
                        responsibility to ensure that conditions and
                        mitigation measures are properly fulfilled . (RMA -
                        Planning Department)
     2.                 PD002 - NOTICE-PERMIT APPROVAL                          Proof of recordation of this notice           Owner/            Prior to th e
                        The applicant shall record a notice which states : "A shall be furnished to the RMA -                 Applicant         issuance of
                        permit (Resolution             ) was approved by the    Planning Department.                                            grading
                        Minor Subdivision Committee for Assessor's Parce l                                                                      and
                        Numbers 151-041-030-000 and 151-041-031-000                                                                             building
                        on June 11, 2009 . The permit was granted subjec t                                                                      permits or
                        to 49 conditions of approval which run with th e                                                                        com -
                        land . A copy of the permit is on file with th e                                                                        mence -
                        Monterey County RMA - Planning Department . "                                                                           ment of
                        Proof of recordation of this notice shall be furnishe d                                                                 use .
                        to the Director of the RMA - Planning Department
                        prior to issuance of building permits o r
                        commencement of the use . (RMA - Planning
                        Department)

John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 2
                                                                                   Conllllianccr or 1Ion/totin , 1 ctiutl s
  1'ernlit ~                                                                                                                  Keslnnlsibl e                       I   crification of
             liti,~.    Conditions of 1 pprorul and or 11iti;utio n ah'asurec     to be 11er/orntcrd. If here applicable, a     I ~rrtl' ,fo r      Timing            Curuplirnn e
  C ond. umber               and Responsible Land (se Departmen t                  certifie d professional is required fo r   ,
  Alimber                                                                                                                       0t1117ltanC'C                         (name(late )
                                                                                            action to he accepted.
    3.                 PD004 - INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT                         Submit signed and notarize d                 Owner/             Upon
                       The property owner agrees as a condition and in           Indemnification Agreement to the             Applicant          demand o f
                       consideration of the approval of this discretionary       Director of RMA - Planning                                      County
                       development permit that it will, pursuant to              Department for review and signatur e                            Counsel o r
                       agreement and/or statutory provisions as applicable ,     by the County.                                                  concur-rent
                       including but not limited to Government Cod e                                                                             with the
                       Section 66474 .9, defend, indemnify and hol d             proof of recordation of the                                     issuance of
                       harmless the County of Monterey or its agents ,           Indemnification Agreement, as                                   building
                       officers and employees from any claim, action o r         outlined, shall be submitted to the                             permits, us e
                       proceeding against the County or its agents, officer s    RMA - Planning Department .                                     of the
                       or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul thi s                                                                    property,
                       approval, which action is brought within the time                                                                         filing of th e
                       period provided for under law, including but not                                                                          fmal map ,
                       limited to, Government Code Section 66499 .37, as                                                                         which-eve r
                       applicable . The property owner will reimburse the                                                                        occurs firs t
                       county for any court costs and attorney's fees which                                                                      and as ap -
                       the County may be required by a court to pay as a                                                                         plicable
                       result of such action. County may, at its sole
                       discretion, participate in the defense of such action ;
                       but such participation shall not relieve applicant o f
                       his obligations under this condition. An agreement
                       to this effect shall be recorded upon demand o f
                       County Counsel or concurrent with the issuance of
                       building permits, use of the property, filing of th e
                       fmal map, whichever occurs first and as applicable .
                       The County shall promptly notify the property
                       owner of any such claim, action or proceeding and
                       the County shall cooperate fully in the defense
                       thereof. If the County fails to promptly notify the
                       property owner of any such claim, action or
                       proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defens e
                       thereof, the property owner shall not thereafter be
                       responsible to defend, indemnify or hold the county
                       harmless . (RMA - Planning Department)



John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 3
                                                                                          ( n/It/)liatlce or 1/onitoriii 1 et/ou s
  Pe! !ni t                                                                                                                           Respell slid e                    1 critic alien of
                       ( 'otiditiotls U~ .1/7/)rolal aa(I(lrllilt,ati071 llc'asttfes    to he per/otlned. 11 here unpin aide, a
  (ond.                                                                                                                                 Pam for           I /mint;        Cottililiauc e
            \uniher             and Respottsihlc' Laud 1 se Department                   certified pro/es%hula/ is required fo r
 \innher                                                                                                                              (otu/?/irutce                       (name date/
                                                                                                  action to he ai cc/tli't/.

    4.                PD005 - FISH AND GAME FEE-NE G                                   The applicant shall submit a check ,           Owner/           Within 5
                      DEC/EIR                                                          payable to the County of Monterey ,           Applicant         working
                      Pursuant to the State Public Resources Code §                    to the Director of the RMA -                                    days of
                      753 .5, State Fish and Game Code, and California                 Planning Department .                                           project
                      Code of Regulations , the applicant shall pay a fee ,                                                                            approval.
                      to be collected by the County, within five (5 )                  If the fee is not paid within five (5 )        Owner/           Prior to th e
                      working days of project approval . This fee shall b e            working days, the applicant shal l             Applicant        recorda-tion
                      paid before the Notice of Determination is filed . f             submit a check, payable to the                                  of the final
                      the fee is not paid within five (5) working days, th e           County of Monterey, to the Director                             map, the
                      project shall not be operative, vested or final unti l           of the RMA - Planning Department .                              start of us e
                      the filing fees are paid. (RMA - Planning                                                                                        or the
                      Department)                                                                                                                      issuance of
                                                                                                                                                       building or
                                                                                                                                                       grading
                                                                                                                                                       permits
    5.                PD006 - MITIGATION MONITORIN G                                   1) Enter into agreement with the               Owner/           Within 6 0
                      PROGRAM                                                          County to implement a Mitigatio n             Applicant         days after
                      The applicant shall enter into an agreement with th e            Monitoring Program.                                             project
                      County to implement a Mitigation Monitoring                                                                                      approval or
                      and/or Reporting Plan in accordance with Section                 2) Fees shall be deposited at th e                              prior to the
                      21081 .6 of the California Public Resources Cod e                time the property owner submits th e           Owner/           issuance o f
                      and Section 15097 of Title 14, Chapter 3 of the                  signed mitigation monitorin g                  Applicant        grading
                      California Code of Regulations . Compliance with                 agreement .                                                     and
                      the fee schedule adopted by the Board o f                                                                                        buildin g
                      Supervisors for mitigation monitoring shall b e                                                                                  permits,
                      required and deposit made to the County o f                                                                                      which-ever
                      Monterey at the time the property owner submit s                                                                                 occurs first .
                      the signed mitigation monitoring agreement .
                      (RMA - Planning Department)
    6.                PD007 - GRADING-WINTER RESTRICTION                               Obtain authorization from th e        Owner/                    Ongoing
                      No land clearing or grading shall occur on th e                  Director of RMA - Building Service s Applicant
                      subject parcel between October 15 and April 1 5                  Department to conduct land clearin g
                      unless authorized by the Director of RMA -                       or grading between October 15 an d
                      Building Services Department. (RMA - Plannin g                   April 15 .
                      Department and Building Services Department)

John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 4
                                                                                       olnpliance or 1/onitorin 1 ctiwrc
  Pet /ni t                                                                                                                     R(von slide                    1 ore tie at/on o/
             llititi.    (onditions of . 1 pproi al and or lliri,ation 1leasures    to he per/orinc'd. It here applicable, a       ,
                                                                                                                                  Party for       Unit! ,       C'oenplianc c
  Cond.                                                                              cur/ified pra/essional is required fo r
            ~umbcr             and Responslide Land 1 se Apartment                                                                                              (name date )
 \uruher                                                                                                                        (onrpliancc
                                                                                              action to he accLptcd.

    7.                  PD043 - GRADING PERMITS REQUIRE D                          If applicable, apply and receive the         Owner/        Prior to the
                        A grading permit is required for new private singl e       appropriate grading permit from              Applicant/    issuance of
                        family access driveways greater than fifty (50) fee t      Monterey County RMA - Buildin g              Engineer      grading or
                        in total length that require 100 cubic yards or mor e      Services Department .                                      building
                        of earthwork . An over the counter (OTC) grading                                                                      permits
                        permit may be issued for new private single famil y
                        access driveways greater than fifty (50) feet in tota l
                        length that require less than 100 cubic yards o f
                        earthwork. (RMA - Planning Department an d
                        Building Services Department)
    8.                  PDO14(A) - LIGHTING - EXTERIOR                             Submit three copies of the lighting          Owner/        Prior to th e
                        LIGHTING PLAN                                              plans to the RMA - Planning                 Applicant      issuance o f
                        All exterior lighting shall be unobtrusive, down-lit ,     Department for review and                                  building
                        harmonious with the local area, and constructed o r        approval . Approved lighting plans                         permits .
                        located so that only the intended area is illuminate d                          _
                                                                                   shall be incorporated into final
                        and off-site glare is fully controlled . The applicant     building plans .
                        shall submit 3 copies of an exterior lighting pla n
                        which shall indicate the location, type, and wattag e
                        of all light fixtures and include catalog sheets fo r
                        each fixture . The lighting shall comply with th e
                        requirements of the California Energy Code set
                        forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 24 ,
                        Part 6 . The exterior lighting plan shall be subject t o
                        approval by the Director of the RMA - Planning
                        Department, prior to the issuance of buildin g
                        permits. (RMA - Planning Department)
    9.                  PDSP02 - NOTE ON MAP - STUDIES (NON-                       Final recorded map with notes shal l         Owner/        Prior to
                        STANDARD)                                                  be submitted to the RMA - Plannin g         Applicant      recorda-
                        A note shall be placed on the final map or a               Department and Public Works for                            tion of fina l
                        separate sheet to be recorded with the final map           review and approval.                                       map
                        stating that : "The following reports have bee n
                        prepared for the development proposed on the
                        subject property:
                         1 . Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Higgin s
                             Associates, dated October 16, 2003 .

John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 5
                                                                                  ( (imp/lance or lfonitornr'talon s
  /'until                                                                                                                     Responsibl e                  ! critic_ ation of
             1lim .    (onditions of 1 pprovu! dntd or 1lhitiatimr llcasure s    to be pet/mined. If here applicable, a
                                                                                                                               Pam fo r        Y'inein        ( onip/tanc e
            Vanther           and Responsible Land L se Department                ec'rtifird profesS(Onal is reyrtired fo r
  \amber                                                                                                                      (ontp!lattce                    (name (late )
                                                                                            at ti0/1 to be atc(pled.

                      2.   Geotechnical Investigation and Percolatio n
                           Investigation Report prepared by Soil s
                           Surveys Inc. dated April 6, 2003 .
                      3 . Biological Assessment Update prepared b y
                           Dale Hameister of Rana Creek Habita t
                           Restoration dated November 10, 2003 .
                      4 . Project Specific Hydrogeologic Repor t
                           prepared by PES Environmental date d
                           December 21, 2007.
                      The recommendations contained in said reports
                      shall be followed in all further development of this
                      property ." The note shall be located in a
                      conspicuous location, subject to the approval of th e
                      County Surveyor . (RMA - Planning
                      Department)
   10.                PD022(A) - EASEMENT - CONSERVATIO N                       Submit the conservation and scenic            Owner/         Prior to
                      AND SCENIC                                                easement deed and correspondin g              Applicant/     issuance of
                      A conservation and scenic easement shall b e              map, showing the exact location o f           Certified      grading an d
                      conveyed to the County over those portions of the         the easement on the property along            Profes-        building
                      property where slopes are 30% or greater. Th e            with the metes and bound                      sional         permits
                      easement shall be developed in consultation with          description developed in
                      certified professional . An easement deed shall b e       consultation with a certifie d
                      submitted to, reviewed and approved by, th e              professional, to the RMA - Planning
                      Director of the RMA - Planning Department prio r          Department for review and approval .
                      to issuance of grading and building permits . (RMA
                      - Planning Department)
   11 .               STREAMBED ALTERATION (NON                                 Submit evidence to the RMA-                   Owner/         Prior to
                      STANDARD)                                                 Planning Department that permit(s )           Applicant      issuance of
                      Prior to approval of any improvement plans whic h         have been obtained or that permit(s)                         grading
                      would impact jurisdictional waters of the California      are not required ..                                          permit
                      Department of Fish and Game, the applicant shall
                      verify that the appropriate permits have been
                      obtained (e .g ., Streambed Alteration Agreement) o r
                      verification that such permit(s) is not required .
                      (RMA-Planning Department)
John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 6
                                                                                       ('c,ui/,lirntcx ur1/c,uiturm, Ictir,u s
 Perin i                                                                                                                             Responsible                    l crificatioii o f
             lliti «.      (ourlitious of l ppro 'al and or 1/in 'atu,n Uc a tire s   to he I ,carorrurc/. It hcrc aI pIlicable, a
                                                                                               _~                                                                     (oinnlirnrre
  Coitr~                                                                                                                              Pam, fn r        /irttirr
           I~rutri b er                                             p
                                   an d R esponsi bl e T_am l 1 sc De artmen t         certifier( p roJessioual is re q uired fo r
 Number                                                                                                                              Coity,liauce                     tnamelihue)
                                                                                               ucttontobe accepted .
   12.                    PD038 - WATER TANK APPROVA L                                Submit proposed color of wate r                Owner/         Prior to th e
                          The water tank shall be painted an earth tone colo r        tank and landscaping plans to the              Applicant      issuance o f
                          to blend into the area and landscaped (includin g           RMA - Planning Department fo r                                grading or
                          land sculpturing and fencing, where appropriate) ,          review and approval .                                         building
                          subject to the approval of the Director of the RMA -                                                                        ermits
                          Planning Department, prior to the issuance o f               Provide evidence to the Director o f          Owner/         Prior to the
                          building permits . (RMA - Planning Department)               the RMA - Planning Department                 Applicant      final
                                                                                       that the water tank has been painte d                        inspection
                                                                                       and the landscaping has been                                 or
                                                                                       installed according to the plan s                            occupancy .
                                                                                       approved by the RMA - Planning
                                                                                       Department .
   13 .                   PD045 - CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE                           The Surveyor shall prepare a legal             Owner/         Prior to th e
                          Prior to the issuance of grading or buildin g               description for the remainder parcel .         Applicant/     issuance o f
                          permits on the remainder parcel, the applicant              The legal description shall be                 Surveyor       grading or
                          shall request a conditional certificate o f                 entitled "Exhibit A". The legal                               buildin g
                          compliance for the configured remainder parcel .            description shall comply with th e                            permits on
                          (RMA - Planning Department)                                 Monterey County Recorder' s                                   the
                                                                                      guidelines as to form and content .                           remainder
                                                                                      The Applicant shall submit the lega l                         parcel .
                                                                                      descriptions with a check, payable
                                                                                      to the Monterey County Recorder ,
                                                                                      for the appropriate fees to record the
                                                                                      certificate .
   14.                    PDO35 - UTILITIES        1       •    1                     Install and maintain utility an d              Owner/         Ongoing
                          All new utility and d•               . placed               distribution       underground .               Applicant
                          underground . (RMA - Planning Department;
                          Public Works)




John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 7
                                                                                   C'onphance or .1 /olutorin' lemurs
 Perim'( 11it i ~.                                                                                                                 Responsibl e                    l   crt/icaticm o
  cond.                Cunditluns-o` / -1p ~rorrl/ and urb/Iriutnur 1/easnres
                                                              ,- - -             to he lcrJarnlcr/ _lL re applicable, a
        - ~ _-
                                                                                             I
                                                             `                                          .
                                                                                                       --    - - - -                /, [rrtl fo r     Timing           (onto/lanc e
           111nberi           and /lit on .sible Lane/ / Se Department      -     c ' c'r tl/lc'd professional is required fo r
   nt
 Nub :r                                I                                                                                           Compliant c                         (name/date)
                                                                                               action tube accepted.

                                                                       ENVIRONMENTAL HEALT H
    15 .              Eli - WATER SYSTEM PERMIT                                 Submit necessary application ,                    CA Licensed       Prior to
                      Obtain a new or amended water system permi t              reports and testing results to EH fo r             Engineer         issuance o f
                      from the Division of Environmental Health .               review and approval .                               /Owner/         grading/
                      (Environmental Health)                                                                                      Applicant         buildin g
                                                                                                                                                    permits
    16.               EH2 - WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT S                          Submit engineered plans for th e     CA Licensed                    Prior to
                      (CO. PERMITTED SYSTEM )                                   water system improvements ,           Engineer                      issuance o f
                      Design the water system improvements to mee t             including plans for secondary          /Owner/                      grading/
                      the standards as found in Chapter 15 .04 of the           treatment, and any associated fee s  Applicant                      buildin g
                      Monterey County Code, Titles 17 and 22 of th e            to EH for review and approval prio r                                permit
                      California Code of Regulations and as found i n           to installing (or bonding) the
                      the Residential Subdivision Water Supply                  improvements .
                      Standards . Submit engineered plans for the wate r
                      system improvements, including plans fo r
                      secondary treatment, and any associated fees t o
                      the Director of Environmental Health for revie w
                      and approval prior to installing (or bonding) th e
                      improvements . (Environmental Health)
    17.               EH4 - FIRE FLOW STANDARD S                                Submit evidence to the Division of                CA Licensed       Prior to
                      Design the water system improvements to mee t             Environmental Health that the                       Engineer        installing
                      fire flow standards as required and approved by           proposed water system                               /Owner/         or bonding
                      the local fire protection agency. (Environmental          improvements have been approved                   Applicant         water
                      Health)                                                   by the local fire protection agency .                               system im-
                                                                                                                                                    provements
    18.               EH5 - INSTALL/BOND WATER SYSTE M                          The developer shall install the wate r    CA Licensed               Prior to
                      IMPROVEMENT S                                             system improvements to and within the       Engineer                filing fmal
                      The developer shall install the water syste m             subdivision and any appurtenances           /Owner/                 map
                      improvements to and within the subdivision and an y       needed or shall enter into a Subdivisio n Applicant
                      appurtenances needed or shall enter into a Subdivisio n   Improvement Agreement with the
                      Improvement Agreement with the County to install th e     County to install the water syste m
                      water system improvements and provide security            improvements and provide security
                      guaranteeing the performance of the Agreement.            guaranteeing the performance of th e
                      (Environmental Health)                                    Agreement.


John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 8
                                                                                      (un t wit/dial/cc or .1lonttortm is/tons                                                         o/
  Permit                                                                                                                                   Responsibl e                   orificrttton
            llit i    ( i nr(rtions n 1l > >rorul unrL ur 11in noun llerrsurcr s
                                    or   !                                                                                ~
                                                                                    to he ! c r1nrmcr/. ll here a!!!lc ab(e, a
   ( otar~                                                                                                                                   Party fo r      I ntin~     (otnphrurc c
           Number              and Responsible Lath/ se Department                   cert i /ier l profess i ona l i s requ i re d fo r
  \umber                                                                                                                                   ( (nmllcntce                  Wattle date )
                                                                                                action to be accepted.

   19.               EH7 - ABANDONED WELL S                                        Prior to destruction, a permit fo r  CA Licensed                       Prior t o
                     Destroy the existing abandoned well(s) accordin g             the destruction of the well(s) shall   Engineer                        filing a
                     to the standards found in State of California                 be obtained by a CA licensed well      /Owner/                         final map
                     Bulletin 74 and all its supplements, and Chapte r             contractor from the Division o f     Applicant                         and/or
                      15.08 of the Monterey County Code . The well                 Environmental Health . After                                           issuance o f
                     shall not be considered abandoned if satisfactor y            destruction submit the Well                                            a building
                     evidence is provided that the well is functional, i s         Completion Report to the Division                                      permit
                     used on a regular basis, and does not act as a                of Environmental Health
                     conduit for contamination of groundwater .
                     (Environmental Health)
   20.               EHSP-01 - Payment of Fees                                     Submit fee payment to                                                  Prior to
                     All past due water system fees must be paid. As               Environment Health .                                                   filing of
                     of October 9, 2008 the required payment is                                                                                           final map
                     $1,305 . This and all other accrued charges at tim e
                     of payment must be paid prior to filing final map .
                     (Environmental Health)
   21 .              EHSP-02 - Water System Treatment                              Submit treatment plans to                               CA             Prior to
                     Installatio n                                                 Environmental Health for review                         License d      Building
                     Corral de Tierra Water System #40 must install a              and approval .                                          Engineer       Permits on
                     treatment system in order to bring water quality                                                                      /Owner/        parcels
                     into compliance with secondary standards as                                                                          Applicant       created by
                     found in Chapter 15 .04 of the Monterey County                                                                                       this
                                                                                   Install treatment system to the
                     Code, Titles 17 and 22 of the California Code o f                                                                                    subdivi -
                                                                                   satisfaction of Environmental
                     Regulations and as found in the Residential                                                                                          sion.
                                                                                   Health .
                     Subdivision Water Supply Standards .
                     (Environmental Health)
   22.               EHSP - 03 - Deed Notification - Secondary                     Record deed notification .                             CA License d    Prior to
                     Water Standard s                                                                                                      Engineer       final
                     The applicant shall record a deed notification wit h                                                                   /Owner/       occup-ancy
                     the Monterey County Recorder for each parce l                 provide proof to Environmental                         Applicant
                     indicating that: "The well water does not meet th e           Health that the deed notification ha s
                     secondary standards as required by Chapter 15 .04             been recorded .
                     of the Monterey County Code; the water exceeds
                     the State Maximum Contaminate Levels (MCL)
                     for secondary standards . The water system is
John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 9
,                                                                                                                                                   -     -         ~   ---                ,
                                                                                      ( onyrlirure c or 1Lritul rn, I et/on s
    Pernti                                                                                                                        l,esj,onsrhle
                                                                                                                                             --                         1 erificntion of
              1lrtr'i.    Conditions o/ I/1f)rolal am/ or 11/ligation 1lcasltre s    to he peyornrcll. It hereajrj)lrclrhle, a
                                                                                                                                    /aril :/o r _                       _
     COrd.                                                                                                                                              /rnrrrlg          ~on1j1/l(In' c
              umber             and Responsible Lam/ ( se Department                 certified praies,srnrral is required ./o r            -
    Nrrnrhe                                                                                                                       (onrhlirurce                            (rrante date)
                                                                                              action to he accepted.

                         required to install and maintain treatment to meet
                         standards ." (Environmental Health)
                                                                         WATER RESOURCES AGENC Y
      23 .               WR0032 NOTICE OF WATE R                                    The applicant shall record the notic e Applicant/O              Prior t o
                         CONSERVATION REQUIREMENTS (WR)                             on the deed for each lot.              wner                     filing fina l
                         A notice shall be recorded on the deed for each lo t                                                                       map
                         that all new construction shall incorporate the us e
                         of low water use plumbing fixtures and drough t
                         tolerant landscaping, in accordance with County
                         Water Resources Agency Ordinance #3932, or a s
                         subsequently amended . (Water Resources
                         Agency)
      24 .               WR0033 LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT S                           The applicant shall either install th e Applicant/O             Prior to
                         (WR)                                                       landscaping or record a notice o n      wner                    filing fma l
                         The front yards of all homes shall be landscape d          the deed for each lot.                                          map
                         at the time of construction. Low water use o r
                         drought tolerant plants shall be used together wit h
                         water efficient irrigation systems . This shall b e
                         the responsibility of the developer if the develope r
                         is also the builder . If not, a notice shall b e
                         recorded on the deed for each lot to inform future
                         builders of this requirement . (Water Resources
                         Agency)
      25.                FLOODPLAIN RECORDATION                                     Submit a floodplain notice, to b e     Owner/                   Prior to
                         The owner shall provide the Water Resource s               recorded concurrently with the fina l Applicant                 recorda-
                         Agency a completed Floodplain Notice, fo r                 map, to the Water Resource s                                    tion of the
                         newly created parcels 1 and A, stating : "The              Agency for review and approval.                                 final map
                         property is located within or partially within a           (A copy of the County's standar d
                         floodplain and may be subject to building and/o r          notice can be obtained at the Wate r
                         land use restrictions ." (Water Resources                  Resources Agency.)
                         Agency)




John David Briggs -PLN020508
Page 1 0
                                                                                   C uurhliallc c or llolritorim,, 1 c lion s                                                   o/
  Permit                                                                                                                         Responsibl e                   { Crl/ICwhin
             1/n1z.    ~ wulittolls of 1pproval and or 11a1cation 11c'asitre s    to be pet/wined. 11 here applicable, a
  Conan                                                                                                                           Pam ' /o 1       111111ti :    ( onlpliauc P
            Vumbel            and Responsible Lau(l C se Department                certified profc'ssiollnl is required fo r
  Vuniber                                                                                                                        Colupliauce                     (i/a tie (late )
                                                                                           ac 11o11 to 1)e at eptell.

   26.                BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION PLANS (NON -                           Submit a copy of the bridg e                    Owner/         Prior to
                      STANDARD WORDING)                                          construction plans to the Water                Applicant       issuance o f
                      The applicant shall provide the Water Resource s           Resources Agency for review an d                               any
                      Agency with bridge construction plans prepare d            approval .                                                     grading or
                      by a registered civil engineer showing no                                                                                 buildin g
                      encroachment in the FEMA-defined floodway .                                                                               permits
                      The approach and abutment fill material shall b e
                      properly compacted, and protected with armor, i f
                      necessary, to resist flow erosion. Plans shall
                      identify subsurface material under the abutment s
                      and the approaches, and how any fill material wil l
                      be keyed into the subsurface . The bridge shall be
                      constructed in accordance with plans approved b y
                      the Water Resources Agency . (Water Resources
                      Agency)
                                                                                 PUBLIC WORKS
   27.                PW0001- ENCROACHMENT (COM )                                Applicant shall obtain an                        Owner/        Prior to
                      Obtain an encroachment permit from the                     encroachment permit from DPW                    Applicant      Build-
                      Department of Public Works and construct a                 prior to issuance of building permit s                         ing/Gra-
                      commercial driveway connection to Corral De                and complete improvement prior to                              ding Permit
                      Tierra including acceleration and deceleration             occupying or commencement of use .                             Issuance .
                      tapers . The design and construction is subject to th e    Applicant is responsible to obtain al l
                      approval of the Public Works Director. (Publi c            permits and environmental
                      Works)                                                     clearances .
   28.                PW0015 - UTILITY'S COMMENT S                               Subdivider shall provide tentative               Owner/        Prior to Re -
                      Submit the approved tentative map to impacted              map to impacted utility companies               Applicant      corda-tion
                      utility companies . Subdivider shall submit utility        for review . Subdivider shall submit                           of Map
                      company recommendations, if any, to th e                   utility comments to DPW
                      Department of Public Works for all required
                      easements . (Public Works)




John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 11
                                                                                ( oinplicurcr ur Mtnritoriiv It don s             ,
 ferni -a                                                                                                                        hc~Jrunstb/ c                   1 erificution of
           ~ru~ .    (inrditiorrs o/ lhhrurul unrl or 11ur,irturn Ueusure s    to be pc°rfurnreil. {i here ippiicnble, a
  Cott d
 Numb r
          u
          N nibei                       s
                             am/ KeToii i b le Lurid 1 sc D epartment           cert / d profess i ona l i s requ i re d /o r
                                                                                     fle
                                                                                                                                    l urtl fo r
                                                                                                                                 Cirrrrpllonce
                                                                                                                                                     Tinrirrg     C ' onrlrlirrnc e
                                                                                                                                                                  (Hume hate )
                                                                                         action to be accepted.
   29.              PW0031- PARCEL MAP                                        Applicant's surveyor shall prepare                   Owner/         Prior to Re-
                    File a parcel map delineating all existing and            parcel map, submit to DPW fo r                     Applicant/       corda-tion
                    required easements or rights-of-way an d                  review and approval .                              Engineer         of Parce l
                    monument new lines . (Public Works)                                                                                           Map

   30.              PW0036 - EXISTING EASEMENTS AN D                          Subdivider's Surveyor shall includ e  Subdivider/                   Prior to Re-
                    RO W                                                      all existing and required easement s Surveyor                       corda-tio n
                    Provide for all existing and required easements o r       or rights of way on Parcel Map .                                    of Parcel
                    rights of way. (Public Works)                                                                                                 Map

   31 .             PW0037 - ROUTE 68 IMPROVEMENT FEE                         Applicant shall pay to DP W                         Owner/          Prior to
                    Contribute $60,836 to County of Monterey for              required Traffic Mitigation Fee .                  Applicant        Issuance of
                    future improvements to State Route 68 . (Public                                                                               Building
                    Works)                                                                                                                        Permits

   32.              STANDARD - TAMC FEE S                                     The applicant shall pay the fee .                 Applicant/        Prior to the
                    Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shal l                                                     Owner             issuance o f
                    pay the Regional Development Impact Fee (RDIF )                                                                               buildin g
                    pursuant to Monterey Code Chapter 12 .90. The fee                                                                             permits .
                    amount shall be determined based on the
                    parameters adopted in the applicable fee schedule .
                    (Public Works)
   33 .             NON-STANDARD - SIGHT DISTANC E                            The applicant shall provide and                   Applicant/        Ongoing
                    Project applicant shall provide and maintai n             maintain adequate sight distance at               Owner
                    adequate sight distance at the project driveway           the driveway .
                    per Caltrans highway design manual . (Publi c
                    Works)
   34.              NON-STANDARD - CONSTRUCTIO N                              Applicant shall submit a CMP fo r                 Applicant/        Prior t o
                    MANAGEMENT PLAN                                           review and approval by RMA -                      Owner             issuance of
                    Prior to issuance of Grading Permits or Building          Planning Department and Public                                      grading or
                    Permits, applicant shall submit a Constructio n           Works .                                                             building
                    Management Plan (CMP) to the RMA-Plannin g                                                                                    permits .
                    Department and the Department of Public Work s
                    for review and approval. The CMP shall include
John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 1 2
                                                                                         ( ompliance nr 1lonitorin ,r 1( /inn s
  Permit                                                                                                             ,             Responsibl e                  I critic talon o f
            lititi .    C7mditintre of . Ipproe al and or aliti~atio n llc'asur e s    t o he prr/ortned. If here applicable, a      ,
   ( ond.                                                                                                                           / ait ' fo r     I biting      (nlllhl/a11Cc'
          Vtnnher            and Respansinle Lund Lase Departmen t                      certifie d pro/essionol is required for
  \tunher                                                                                                                          Cnmplianc e                     I11(lmE' date)
                                                                                                 action 10 he accepted.

                       measures to minimize traffic impact s during the
                       construction/grading phase of the projec t and shall
                       provide the following information : Duration of
                       the construction, hours of operation, a n estimate                                                          Applicant/      During
                                                                                      Applicant shall implement approved
                       of the number of truck trips that will b e generated ,                                                      Owner           construc-
                                                                                      measure s during
                       truck routes, number of constructio n workers,                                                                              tion/grad-
                                                                                      construction/grading phase of the
                       parking areas for both equipment and workers,                                                                               ing
                                                                                      project.
                       and locations of truck staging areas . Approve d
                       measures included in the CMP shall b e
                       implemented by the applicant during the
                       construction/grading phase of the project . (Public
                       Works)
                                                              SALINAS RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRIC T
   35 .                FIRE002 - ROADWAY ENGINEERING                         Applicant shall incorporate                          Applicant or     Prior t o
                       The grade for all roads shall not exceed 1 5          specification into design and                        owner            issuance of
                       percent . Where road grades exceed 8 percent, a       enumerate as "Fire Dept . Notes" o n                                  gradin g
                       minimum structural roadway surface of 0 .17 feet plans.                                                                     and/or
                       of asphaltic concrete on 0 .34 feet of aggregate                                                                            buildin g
                       base shall be required . The length of vertical                                                                             permit .
                       curves in roadways, exclusive of gutters, ditche s    Applicant shall schedule fire dept .                 Applicant or     Prior to
                       and drainage structures designed to hold or diver t clearance inspection for each phas e                   owner            fina l
                       water, shall not be less than 100 feet . No           of development                                                        buildin g
                       roadway turn shall have a horizontal inside radiu s                                                                         inspection
                       of less than 50 feet . A roadway turn radius of 5 0
                       to 100 feet is required to have an additional 4 fee t
                       of roadway surface . A roadway turn radius of 10 0
                       to 200 feet is required to have an additional 2 fee t
                       of roadway surface . Roadway turnarounds shall
                       be required on dead-end roads in excess of 15 0
                       feet of surface length . The minimum turning
                       radius for a turnaround shall be 40 feet from the
                       center line of the road . If a hammerhead/T i s
                       used, the top of the "T" shall be a minimum of 6 0
                       feet in length . (Salinas Rural Fire District)


John David Briggs -PLN02050 8
Page 13
                                                                                    (nrrr1,liunc e or Uunitnrirr , )cticur c
  Permit                                                                                                                        Responsible                        1 crifica/ion o f
                Jrti .        (orrdrtrom 0/1n)roral and or llmgatnur llcasrrre s   to he per/orrncd. If here applicable, a
         d.                                                                                                                       /' rrrtl ' fn r     Ti rn i rt    C iu rr r(i une c
                                     cnnl Responsihlc Land ( i ce Department         et tilled profccshawl is required lo t
                         1'

              \urnher
  \ a rrrhe r                                                                                                                   (onrplrance                         (ncn me date )
                                                                                              retiun to be accepted.

 36 .                    FIRE009 - BRIDGE S                                      Applicant shall incorporat e                  Applicant o r        Prior to
                         All new and reconstructed bridges shall be at least specification into design and                     owner                issuance o f
                         the width of the roadbed and berms, but in no cas e enumerate as "Fire Dept . Notes" on                                    grading
                         less than 12 feet wide . Bridge width on all road s     plans .                                                            and/or
                         exceeding tertiary standards shall not be less tha n                                                                       buildin g
                         the width of the two lanes with berms . All                                                                                permit .
                         bridges shall be designed for HS 15-44loadin g
                         an d h ave guar d ra il s . A pp r opriate si g na g e,                           ---
                         including but not limited to, weight ratings o r        Applicant shall schedule fire dept .          Applicant or         Prior to
                         vertical clearance limitations, and one-way roa d       clearance inspection                          owner                final build-
                         or single-lane road conditions, shall be provide d                                                                         ing inspect-
                         at both entrances to any bridge . One-lane bridges                                                                         ion .
                         may be permitted if there is unobstructe d
                         visibility across the entire bridge, and turnouts ar e
                         provided at both bridge ends . The fire authority
                         may impose more stringent requirements for
                         bridges . (Salinas Rural Fire District)
 37 .                    FIRE010 -ROAD SIGN S                                    Applicant shall incorporate                   Applicant or         Prior t o
                         All newly constructed or approved roads an d            specification into design and                 owner                filing o f
                         streets shall be designated by names or numbers ,       enumerate as "Fire Dept . Notes" o n                               final map.
                         posted on signs clearly visible and legible fro m       improvement plans .
                         the roadway . Size of letters, numbers an d             Applicant shall schedule fire dept .          Applicant or         Prior t o
                         symbols for street and road signs shall be a            clearance inspection for each phase           owner                issuance of
                         minimum 4-inch letter height, 1/2-inch stroke, and of development.                                                         building
                         shall be a color that is reflective and clearl y                                                                           permit(s)
                         contrasts with the background color of the sign .                                                                          for devel-
                         All numerals shall be Arabic . Street and road                                                                             opment on
                         signs shall be non-combustible and shall b e                                                                               individual
                         visible and legible from both directions of vehicl e
                                                                                                                                                    lots withi n
                         travel for a distance of at least 100 feet . Height,                                                                       the phas e
                         visibility, legibility, and orientation of street an d                                                                     of the sub -
                         road signs shall be meet the provisions o f
                                                                                                                                                    division .
                         Monterey County Ordinance No . 1241 . This
                         section does not require any entity to rename or
                         renumber existing roads or streets, nor shall a
                         roadway providing access only to a single
John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 1 4
                                                                                            (oflf/7/iam t' of 1lonitorh           I (lion s
  PL'r/11 /                                                                                                                                      HeSj7ollSl/)/L'                   I critic alien of
            Vulg.      ( 1711(//t/on1 0 1[ 7 /doll!/ and -'"olalltigat/oli llUll'l!/'C'L             performed.
                                                                                                        /                   fl
   Cond.                                                                                                                                           P art' ' fo r      l'lIlllllt
                                                                                                                                                                              i      ( !711117 / lal1C e
           ~llnlheY            and llc'S17l/I1S/hlN l_(f/ld l 1c' ~)( ! ' 7(lrllnell t     tCC'/7t 1f    pi o/C'1 Iona/ i1 rPf'[J[YL'~ l fU r
                                                                                                          1   1
  'slumber                                                                                                                                       ((,fllpli(nce                       (name dale)
                                                                                                       action to he accepted.
                      commercial or industrial occupancy require                                                                                                   of the sub -
                      naming or numbering . Signs required under thi s                                                                                             division .
                      section identifying intersecting roads, streets an d
                      private lanes shall be placed at the intersection of
                      those roads, streets and/or private lanes . Signs
                      identifying traffic access or flow limitations (i .e.,
                      weight or vertical clearance limitations, dead-end
                      road, one-way road or single lane conditions, etc .)
                      shall be placed: (a) at the intersection preceding
                      the traffic access limitation ; and (b) not more than
                       100 feet before such traffic access limitation .
                      Road, street and private lane signs required b y
                      this article shall be installed prior to final
                      acceptance of road improvements by the
                      Reviewing Fire Authority. (Salinas Rural Fire
                      District)
 38 .                 FIRE012 - EMERGENCY WATER STANDARD S                          Applicant shall incorporate                                 Applicant or       Prior to
                      - WATER SYSTEMS                                               specification into design and                               owner              issuance o f
                      The provisions of this condition shall apply when ne w enumerate as "Fire Dept . Notes" on                                                   permit .
                      parcels are approved by a local jurisdiction . The            plans .
                      emer g enc y water s y stem shall be available on-site p rior
                      to the completion of road construction, where a               Applicant shall schedule fire dept .                        Applicant or       Prior to
                      community water system is approved, or prior to th e          clearance inspection for each phas e                        owner              fina l
                      completion of building construction, where a n                of development                                                                 buildin g
                      individual system is approved . Approved wate r                                                                                              inspection
                      systems shall be installed and made serviceable prior t o
                      the time of construction . Water systems constructed,
                      extended or modified to serve a new development, a
                      change of use, or an intensification of use, shall be
                      designed to meet, in addition to average daily demand ,
                      the standards shown in Table 2 of the Monterey
                      County General Plan, NFPA Standard 1142, or othe r
                      adopted standards . The quantity of water require d
                      pursuant to this chapter shall be in addition to the
                      domestic demand and shall be permanently an d
                      immediately available (Salinas Rural Fire District)


John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 1 5
                                                                                       (n111Ji 1ianc ' or 1l(I/llhlrin   c tioll S      ,
  Petnlit                                                                                                                             Responsible                         I   cri _ f/cuniolt of
             1lir , .    ( tulltlo111 of I Oro y al (!ndor 1/higatlon llcasttre s    to be pei fonned. It here applicable. a
  (°oll(l.                                                                                                                                Pam o r            l(Illlllti         0llll7l/N/ICc'
           ~tl111bC1'            and Responsible land 1!se lhparlntetlt               certified 17rofessionall .1 required fo r
  Number                                                                                                                              ( ' otllpl1t11lCe                       (11(/lll(' (l(1te )
                                                                                                 coon to he accc'/Ilc~l.
 39 .                   FIRE016 - SETBACKS                                          Applicant shall incorporate                      Applicant o r        Prior to
                        All parcels 1 acre and larger shall provide a               specification into design an d                   owner                issuance o f
                        minimum 30-foot setback for new buildings an d              enumerate as "Fire Dept . Notes" on                                   gradin g
                        accessory buildings from all property lines and/or          plans .                                                               and/o r
                        the center of the road . For parcels less than 1                                                                                  building
                        acre, alternate fuel modification standards or other                                                                              permit .
                        requirements may be imposed by the local fire               Applicant shall schedule fire dept .             Applicant or         Prior to
                        jurisdiction to provide the same practical effect .         clearance inspection                             owner                final build-
                         (Salinas Rural Fire District)                                                                                                    ing inspect-
                                                                                                                                                          io n
 40.                    FIRE030 - OTHER NON-STANDARD                                If roadway improvements are                      Applicant or         Prior to
                        CONDITIONS - DEAD END ROADS - For parcel s                  constructed prior to the approval of             owner                issuance of
                        greater than 20 acres, the maximum length of a dead -       the Final Map, the conditions                                         subdivision
                        end road, including all dead-end roads accessed fro m       regarding roadway improvement s                                       improve-
                        that dead-end road, shall not exceed 5280 feet .            shall be printed on the engineere d                                   ment s
                        However, the Salinas Rural Fire District has accepte d
                                                                                    roadway improvement plans .                                           gradin g
                        the proposal of a road that is approximately 5600 fee t
                        in return for the following mitigating fire safety                                                                                and/o r
                        measures : Additional road width as proposed shall b e                                                                            building
                        20 feet; a fire depai tment turnaround shall be provided                                                                          permit .
                        along each parcel boundary ; and a fire hydrant shall b e   If roadway improvements are                      Applicant or         Prior t o
                        provided at each driveway entrance . All other dead         bonded and constructed after the                 owner                approval of
                        end road requirements remain in effect as follows : All     approval of the Final Map, the                                        final map .
                        dead-end road lengths shall be measured from the edg e      conditions regarding improvement s
                        of the roadway surface at the intersection that begin s
                                                                                    shall be printed on the engineere d
                        the road to the end of the road surface at its furthes t
                                                                                    roadway improvement plans as well
                        point. Where a dead-end road serves parcels of
                        differing sizes, the shortest allowable length shal l       as the Final Map
                        apply . Each dead-end road shall have turnarounds a t       Construction of roadway                          Applicant or         Prior to
                        its terminus and at no greater than 1320-foot intervals .   improvements shall be approval and               owner                issuance o f
                        The minimum turning radius for a turnaround shall be        acceptance shall be obtained from                                     grading
                        40 feet from the center line of the road . If a                                                                                   and/or
                                                                                    the fire department
                        hammerhead/T is used, the top of the "T" shall be a                                                                               buildin g
                        minimum of 60 feet in length . (Salinas Rural Fir e                                                                               permits for
                        District)                                                                                                                         development
                                                                                                                                                          on the pro-
                                                                                                                                                          posed lots .


John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 1 6
                                                                                 ( 011(pl/(lfl L L' or llonlrorm" lc lion s
 Permit                                                                                                         °              Responsibly                   1 critic ation o f
         lliti *    ( onditions of lpproral an d or ;1/iri,,atinn lleasnres    t o he perforated. 11 here applicable, a
  Cond.                                                                                                                          Pam ' fo r      liming       Conlpliartce
        ~umbcr             and Responsible Land 1 se 1)epart/aent               certifie d professional is required fo r
 Number                                                                                                                        (0nrplialrcc                   (n(rnlcdate)
                                                                                         actio n to be accepted.

 41 .              FIRE030 - NON-STANDARD CONDITION -                         If roadway improvements are                     Applicant o r   Prior to
                   ROAD ACCES S                                               constructed prior to the approval o f           owner           issuance o f
                   Access roads shall be required for every buildin g         the Final Map, the conditions                                   subdivision
                   when any portion of the exterior wall of the first         regarding roadway improvements                                  improve -
                   story is located more than 150 feet from fir e             shall be printed on the engineered                              meats
                   department access . All roads shall be constructed         roadway improvement plans .                                     grading
                   to provide a minimum unobstructed vertica l                                                                                and/or
                   clearance of not less than 15 feet . The roadway                                                                           buildin g
                   surface shall provide unobstructed access to                                                                               permit .
                   conventional drive vehicles including sedans an d          If roadway improvements are                     Applicant o r   Prior to
                   fire apparatus and shall be an all-weather surfac e        bonded and constructed after th e               owner           approval of
                   designed to support the imposed load of fire               approval of the Final Map, th e                                 final map.
                   apparatus (22 tons) . Each road shall have an              conditions regarding improvements
                   approved name . (Salinas Rural Fire District)              shall be printed on the engineered
                                                                              roadway improvement plans as wel l
                                                                              as the Final Map
                                                                              Construction of roadway                         Applicant o r   Prior to
                                                                              improvements shall be approval and              owner           issuance o f
                                                                              acceptance shall be obtained fro m                              grading
                                                                              the fire department                                             and/or
                                                                                                                                              buildin g
                                                                                                                                              permits for
                                                                                                                                              develop -
                                                                                                                                              ment on th e
                                                                                                                                              proposed
                                                                                                                                              lots .
                                                                                   PARKS
 42 .              PKS002 - RECREATIO N                                   The Applicant shall comply with      Owner/                         Prior to the
                   REQUIREMENTS/FEE S                                     the Recreation Requirements          Applicant                      Recorda-
                   The Applicant shall comply with Section 19 .12.010 -   contained in Section 19.12.010 o f                                  tion of th e
                   Recreation Requirements, of the Subdivisio n           the Subdivision Ordinance Title 19 ,                                Final Map
                   Ordinance, Title 19, Monterey County Code, by payin g Monterey County Code .
                   a fee in lieu of land dedication. The Parks Department
                   shall determine the fee in accordance with provisions
                   contained in Section 19 .12.010(D) (Parks
                   Department)
John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 17
                                                                                         ( onrpliancc or llonitorift , I coon s
  l'crutlt                                                                                                                          Responsibl e                     I   crification of
                     C'onditions of Ipproral att(1or 1liti ntiott Measures              to be performed. II lucre applicable, a
   ( ottd.                                                                                                                            ['aril • fo r     l /mint'         ( ontpliance •
           \umber          and Responsible Land ( se Department                          eel tilled prolessional is required fo r
  liunher                                                                                                                           ( ontplianec                         (name date)
                                                                                                  at /ion to be acc ep ter!.

                                                                               MITIGATION MEASURES
 43.     MM1        In order to minimize short-term constructio n                       The applicant shall incorporate a        Applicant/           Prior to
                    emissions, the project shall implement th e                         "Fugitive Dust Control" note on th e Owner                    issuance o f
                    following MBUAPCD-recommended mitigatio n                           grading plans that includes, but i s                          grading
                    measures during grading and construction                            not limited to, the measures set                              permits
                    activities . The County's designated-constructio n                  forth in Mitigation Measure # 1 -
                    cont rac t or s h a ll mon it or gra di ng an d cons truc tion                    ng
                                                                                        Duri ng gradi operatio ns, th e
                    ac ti viti es on a d a il y b as i s t o ensure th a t these             n t      sa
                                                                                        c o t rac orh ll o btain a ny re qui red
                    measures are i mp l emen t e d.                                                        s
                                                                                        Air Dis trictperm it a nd c onduc t all
                    • W a t er a ll ac ti ve cons t ruc ti on areas a t l eas t             di                  on
                                                                                        gra ng andcons tructi acti itiesv
                          tw i ce d a il y. F requency s h ou ld b e b ase d on t h e                  y
                                                                                        as requ ire d b theAi rDi st rict .
                          type of operation, soil and wind exposure ;
                    • Prohibit all grading activities during period s
                          of high wind (over 15 mph);
                    • Apply chemical soil stabilizers on inactive
                          construction areas (disturbed lands withi n
                          construction projects that are unused for at
                          least four consecutive days) ;
                    • Apply non-toxic binders (e .g., latex acryli c
                          copolymer) to exposed areas after cut and fil l
                          operations and hydroseed areas ;
                    • Cover and maintain two feet of freeboard on
                          all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loos e
                          materials or require all trucks to maintain at
                          least 2 feet of freeboard ;
                    • Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply
                          non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles ,
                          such as dirt, sand, etc ;
                    • Cover inactive storage piles;
                    • Sweep streets daily, with water sweepers, if
                          visible soil materials are carried onto adjacent
                          public streets ;
                    • Install sandbags or other erosion control
                          measures to prevent silt runoff to publi c
                          roadways;
John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 18
                                                                                          ( onr/'lirnrce or aonitori FL, lction s
  Pet/ni t                                                                                                                           Revlon slide                    1critic ntion o f
               lrti,~ .       ( (minion s of l/Troi al and or llitd,ution 11eIrsrrrcs    to be pe'rforrned. II here twiicuble, a
  ( ondl.                                                                                                                              Part!' fo r      linriny       Cvnrpliunc e
             \zunbcr                and Rts/ nrsible Lana' (se Departmen t                codified pro/essioiiai Is requited fo r
  \nnlbd'r                                                                                                                           (otnp/n1RCC'                     (71(Inler'dale )
                                                                                                  action to he (IL L'Ly)te7/.

                          •    Install wheel washers at the entrance t o
                               construction sites for all exiting trucks;
                          • Pave all roads at construction sites;
                          • Construction equipment shall not be lef      t
                               idling for periods longer than 5 minutes whe n
                               not in use; an d
                          s Post a publicly visible sign which specifie s
                               the telephone number and person to contact
                               regarding emissions-related complaints . This
                               person shall respond to complaints and tak e
                               corrective action within 48 hours . The phone
                               number of the Monterey Bay Unified Ai r
                               Pollution Control District shall be visible t o
                               ensure compliance with Rule 402 (Nuisance) .
 44.         MM2          If tree removal or grading activities occu r                  A pre-construction raptor survey       Applicant/            Prior to the
                          between February 15 and August 15, in order t o               shall be submitted to the Planning     Owner                 issuance o f
                          adequately determine the presence of active raptor            Department for review and                                    a grading
                          nests within the oak woodland habitat, th e                   approval . If nesting birds are found,                       or buildin g
                          applicant shall arrange for a pre-construction                the biologist shall monitor the                              permit
                          raptor survey to be prepared by a County -                    nesting activities and provide
                          approved biological consultant within 30 day s                clearance for construction activitie s
                          prior to the initiation of development activities . If        after the young have fledged.
                          active raptor nests are found and the biologis t
                          determines that construction or development
                          activities would remove the nest or have th e
                          potential to cause abandonment, then thos e
                          activities shall be avoided until the raptor youn g
                          have fledged as determined through monitoring o f
                          the nest . Once the raptor young have fledged ,
                          development activities may resume . (RMA-
                          Planning Department)
 45 .        MM3          An erosion control plan shall be prepared prior t o           An erosion control plan shall b e           Applicant/0      Prior to the
                          the issuance of a grading or building permit . The            submitted to the RMA-Building               wner             issuance of a
                          erosion control plan shall include features ,                 Department for review and                                    grading or
                          techniques and facilities that reduce erosion                 approval . The approved erosion                              building
                                                                                                                                                     permit
John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 1 9
 --        -            - --                                   ----                         ( 'on/p11an('C or 1Jonitorin' I etion s
  /Win d                                                                                                                 ~             Responsibl e                   1 Cri/icatlolt of .
             lltd g.    Conditions id I pproi '(II (Itt(I Or llitt"(Ilio n 11i'awlre' c    to he performed. 11 here applicable, (1
     ond.                                                                                                                               Pam . fo r        Tinlini,     Complianc e
            Vtunher           and Rcspon,sihlr Land I' 's e Department                      ecrtificd professional is require(/ fo r
  \lullhcr                                                                                                                             ('otnpli(tnce                   Mottle date)
                                                                                                   (1('Il(lil 10 10' (1CCc'hit'(I .

                       potential to protect riparian areas and                            control plan shall be provided to al l
                       watercourses. All areas where water drains of f                    grading contractors on the site prio r
                       new roads and culverts shall have energ y                          to any grading activities .
                       dissipaters to help prevent and reduce potential
                       erosion . Subdivision improvement plans shall
                       include these facilities in the project design . A
                       note shall be included on the recorded parcel ma p
                       to ensure that future development of each parcel i s
                       aware of these requirements and includes thes e
                       facilities on all future development plans . (RMA
                       - Planning Department)
 46 .     MM4          The intent of this mitigation measure is to avoi d                 A pre-construction newt survey          Applicant/           Within 3 0
                       impacts to newt during grading and constructio n                   shall be submitted to the RMA-          Owner                days of
                       activities near the cattle pond found south of proposed            Planning Department for review an d                          construc -
                       parcels B-1 and B-4 . A biologist shall conduct a pre -            approval within 30 days o f                                  tion of th e
                       construction survey, within 30 days of construction o f
                                                                                          construction of the road . If newts                          road.
                       the road, identifying the possibility of newt impacts
                                                                                          are found , the biologist shall tak e
                       related to road construction near the pond . The
                       biologist shall recommend measures to avoid any newt               one of the actions listed in the
                       impacts, including the following :                                 mitigation measure. Such action
                       • delaying construction in the pond area until new t               shall be authorized by the Californi a
                            breeding season (spring) has been completed ; or              Department of Fish and Game an d
                       • relocating newt during construction activities, if               shall be provided to the grading
                            allowed by the Department of Fish and Game ; or               contractor, RMA - Planning
                            relocating the road alignment to any area                     Department, and project applicant
                            sufficiently distant, as determined by the biologist          in writing from the biologist prior t o
                            (in consultation with CA Department of Fish an d              grading or construction activities .
                            Game), from any newt breeding areas . Any roa d
                            relocation must be approved by the Monterey
                            County Planning, Building Services, and Publi c
                            Works Departments, and must be in substantia l
                            conformance with the approved road location.
                            Substantial road relocation would require an
                            amendment to the permit . (RMA-Plannin g
                            Department)



John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 2 0
                                                                                    Cotnplhmcc or alonitoring I( lion s
  Rona l                                                                                                                       Responsibl e                  I eh/Ration n t
             lili' .    C ondttiotls of 1pproral and u :11iligalioit 1leasure s    to he performed. Ober(' applicable, a
                                                                                                                                Party fo r       I ntinc       (ompilanc e
   lon(l.
          , umber             aiul Responsible Land (se Departmen t                 cerlified professional is required fo r
                                                                                                                               Compliance                      (name data)
  \u~uhcr                                                                                   ucto he «cccj~tcd.

 47.      MM5          The intent of this mitigation measure is to protect        A Streambed Alteration Permit                               Prior to the
                       riparian vegetation and water quality of Watso n           shall be obtained from the                                  issuance of
                       Creek. Prior to construction of the road crossin g         California Department of Fish an d                          a gradin g
                       of Watson Creek, the applicant shall obtain a              Game, if they determine one i s                             or build-
                       Streambed Alteration Permit (SAP) from                     necessary . Requirements of the                             ing permit
                       California Department of Fish and Game . All               Streambed Alteration Permit shal l                          for work
                       work done in the Streambed shall occur only afte r         be included as notes on any grading                         near, in or
                       the creek has dried up for the season and shall be         and building plans for the stream                           across
                       completed prior to October 1 of that year, or as           crossing of Watson Creek.                                   Watson
                       otherwise stated by the SAP . All work shall b e                                                                       Creek
                       completed in compliance with the terms an d
                       conditions of the SAP . (RMA-Plannin g
                       Department)
 48 .     MM6          In order to minimize geotechnical impacts, the             The applicant shall submit grading          Applicant/      Prior to
                       applicant shall adhere to the specia l                     and building plans that have been           Owner           issuance o f
                       recommendations contained in the Geotechnica l             reviewed and approved by a                                  grading or
                       Investigation and Percolation Investigation report s       registered geotechnical engineer ,                          buildin g
                       prepared by Soil Surveys, Inc . (April 2003) ,             and verified as consistent with the                         permits
                       including but not limited to the following                 recommendations of the
                       recommendations for development on Parcel B-2 :            Geotechnical Investigation an d
                        1 . Spread footings shall be constructed a                Percolation Investigation reports .
                            minimum of 18 inches below finished                   Accompanying the grading and
                            building pad subgrade, measured from th e             building plans shall be a letter
                            lower of the inside or outside soil grade             prepared by the consultin g
                            adjacent to the foundation, for both one an d         registered geotechnical engineer
                            two story portions of the new buildings, an d         stating that the plans are consistent
                            continuous footings shall be reinforced wit h         with the special recommendations
                            four #4 reinforcing bars, two placed near th e        described in the Mitigation
                            bottom and two near the top of footing .              Measure .
                       2 . Foundation excavations shall be flooded wit h
                            three to four inches of water at least 24 hours
                            prior to pouring concrete, and subgrade fo r
                            building slabs and foundations should b e
                            brought to the low plastic limit range o f
                            moisture (19% to 25%) for a depth of at least
                            eight inches prior to pouring concrete .
John David Briggs - PLN02050 8
Page 21
                                                                                 Compliance of ltnnitorm Action s                                                   of
  Pelme t                                                                                                                 Responsihlc                  I erifi whin
            11itig .    (onditions of 1pproral and orllitigatio n Veawl/es     to he pet/otmerl. If here applicable, a
  Cond.                                                                                                                    l urtv fo r     liming       Cunrplianc e
           Vumhc'r             and Responsible Lirnd 1 se Departmen t           (citified pto/esshind/ is required /o r
  A![nlhc~                                                                                                                 0NlpllaHCe                   (name &tie )
                                                                                         actin/ t0 he accepted.

                       3 . Concrete floor slabs-on-grade shall be at leas t
                           5 inches thick and shall be reinforced with a
                           minimum of #3 steel rebars placed 16 inche s
                           on center, or #4 steel rebars placed 24 inche s
                           on center, both ways .
                       4. No tree or high water using shrub should b e
                           planted within 15 feet of any buildin g
                           foundation .
                       5. Any lawns and landscaped strips near the
                           buildings should be well watered and
                           maintained after completion of the project .
                       6. Roof and site water should be directed awa y
                           from the building foundation; positiv e
                           drainage shall be established away from th e
                           building, and no water draining from up-slop e
                           of the building shall be allowed to flo w
                           against any part of the building foundation .
                       7. The subgrade for the access roads, driveway s
                           and parking areas in all parcels shall b e
                           prepared for aggregate base as specified in
                           Section VIII, "Recommended Specifications, "
                           of the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by
                           Soil Surveys, Inc . dated April 2003 .
 49 .     MM7          In order to mitigate construction and grading          The applicant shall submit a              Applicant/       Prior t o
                       truck impacts on Highway 68, the applicant shal l      construction management plan for          Owner            issuance of
                       arrange for the hauling of grading and                 review and approval by the RMA-                            a gradin g
                       construction materials pursuant to the                 Public Works Department . During                           permit
                                                                              construction and grading operations ,
                       recommendations prescribed by a constructio n
                                                                              the applicant shall submit monthly
                       and management plan . Hauling operations shal l        reports that include the daily truck trip
                       not occur on weekends and holidays . The only          log showing travel times to the
                       exception shall be structural concrete, which wil l    Planning Department for review and
                       be allowed to be hauled during the 7 :00 am to         approval . The contractor shall submit a
                       9:00 am time period on non-holiday weekday s           signed certification to contain an
                       only. (RMA-Planning Department)                        "under penalty of perjury" clause .
                                                                              Failure to comply shall caus e
                                                                              revocation of permit .
John David Briggs - PLN020508
Page 22
                                                                                                                     ATTACHMENT 2




                                                                                                                                                                              eUE0I,1001205 STATEMEN T
                                                                                                                                                                                  °.v"s-vs. E
                                                                                                                                                                                   v..n .rr O.E.l.a.,essAa vow... .v.vEu,. s_,
                LEG EA/ NO                                                                                                                                                    c . 4vonAE/sLwav .,s          oerr,v_EyEr....v.
                                                                                                                                                                                  . .vvv,.
        C            c,"rc .,/ 5..9/‘/                                                                                                                                        a Nor,.

                     J'iee O./Yo .q...A/7''                                                       >0:                                    -

                     /ko/Esep E.,aa /eEr,,(.54,.  4
                      /NO/GATES 7,756',/5 .Ee/e// /aA.5.4                         A.- .9.,ro"..         s   e
  ,,                                                                                                                                                     ,' .. t   \
                             ref, AREA         3014, 04.                                    \y-
  .,.                 /NO/CA
                                 a.,s.re.-v ,' 6,0.5

        ( 55 )                  o.,.e_./,..a avv a




                                         I
                                     7 .,' I                                                                                                      ;''
                                                                          y--                                                     "
                                                                                                                              ,,.,/-.y
                                                     --\N( .                                   't A.ty.              4                       /
                                               \1                )
                                                                                                                         p

                                                                      ,
            (        'Nt
                                                                                  _                                                                                ..... ..

                                                               44 .
                                                                                                                             .S.

                                                                                           i




                                                                                                                                                    .-                                                                                               E,-
                                                                                                                --                   .,,                                        .... .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     TENTATIV       PARCEL MA P
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   MINOR 5 s 0 ,s ,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 IN TH E
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ,CALIFORNI A
                      EECr/OA/      '/=r                                                                                                                                             a-
                                                                                                                                                                                                .    9E4.,                                                                GO .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     MAIgIZEE13.1555 4 SF.JGG5 INVESTMENT

                                                                                                                                                                                 Cit..;,Gtoa 54,•b
,Llli=                                                                                                                                                                                                                      MONTEREY COUNTY                                   /st/e .
                 METRICS                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           424/. /984.
                                                                                                                                                 AFTERMINOR 5V0D_                                                        Z35 54Z./E/A5 5TRE57; 5v°l/_/.t/.,15, CFI . 9390/ ph.53/.
                                                                            DeForvaMAJOR50E30.                                                                                                                                 , / ,200' ^ ONE 5,4/55T oA./I.Y         /'aEA/4'20146
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         5CALC
EXHIBIT D
                                              EXHIBIT E

                     Action by Land Use Advisory Committe e
                              Project Referral Shee t
                                             Monterey County Planning Department
                                                   168 W Alisal St 2 " Floor
                                                         Salinas CA
                                                       (831) 755-502 5


Advisory Committee : Toro
Please submit your recommendations for this application by April 27, 200 9
 Project Name : BRIGGS JOHN DAVID & MARIZE H
 File Number : PLN02050 8
 File Type : M S
 Project Planner : SCHUBERT
 Project Location : 376 CORRAL DE TIERRA RD SALINA S
 Project Description : COMBINED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONSISTING OF : 1) A MINO R
SUBDIVISION TO DIVIDE A 334 .95 ACRE PARCEL INTO FOUR LOTS OF (PARCELS "B-1" - "B-3) 2 0
ACRES EACH, (PARCEL "B-4") 29 .9 ACRES AND ONE REMAINDER PARCEL (PARCEL "A") OF 244 .1 2
ACRES ; 2) A USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT ON 30 PERCENT SLOPES OR GREATER (ROAD) ; 3) A N
ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING SMALL WATER SYSTEM AT 376 CORRAL D E
TIERRA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 151-041-030-000) FROM FIVE EXISTING CONNECTIONS T O
NINE CONNECTIONS, A 60-FOOT WIDE ROAD AND UTILITIES EASEMENT ; A NEW 20-FOOT LON G
BRIDGE ACROSS WATSON CREEK ; AND GRADING FOR THE ROAD (APPROXIMATELY 21,240 CUBI C
YARDS CUTAND 14,690 CUBIC YARDS FILL) . SEWAGE DISPOSAL WOULD BE BY INDIVIDUAL SEPTI C
SYSTEMS . THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON CORRAL DE TIERRA ROAD, SOUTHEAST OF CALER A
CANYON ROAD (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 151-041-030-000 AND 151-041-031-000), TORO ARE A

Was the Owner/Applicant/Representative Present at Meeting? Yes                         X

Owner Marize Briggs and her attorney, Tony Lombard o
Also, Monterey County Planner Bob Schubert as in attendance .

PUBLIC COMMENT :


                                                    Site Neighbor?                             Issues / Concern s
                    Name
                                                                                             (suggested changes)
                                                    YES              NO
 Mike Weaver                                                    X              Asks how many structures are currently on the
                                                                               former Early Ranch, which became the Brigg' s
                                                                               Ranch .

                                                                                   Marize Briggs responds there are fiv e
                                                                                   structures, four rented out, and she resides in
                                                                                   one. There are also five barns, four of whic h
                                                                                   are rented out to the accompanying residentia l
                                                                                   tenants.
                                                                 X                 Asks if Urban Lumberjacks, a commercia l
 Bonnie Baker                                                                      operation, works from there . Marize Brigg s
                                                                                   responds they store their equipment there.
                  X   Asks about the arsenic content of the existin g
Mike Weaver           well, seems that was a reason for a previou s
                      stop on a proposed subdivision on thi s
                      property.

                      Tony Lombardo responds that the Departmen t
                      of Environmental Health has determined an
                      arsenic treatment facility can be put in to treat
                      the groundwater . Lombardo explains the
                      pump test determined the existing wel l
                      produces 20 gpm and is enough for thi s
                      proposed four new lots and the existing lot an d
                      buildings project. The property is not in the B-
                      8 zoning area.

                      Weaver states that arsenic content o f
                      groundwater is high and gets highe r
                      as one passes four corners and proceeds up
                      Corral de Tierra Road next to Watson Creek.
                      The Washington Union School has thei r
                      students drink bottled water because of this .
                      It seems the wells keep getting drilled deepe r
                      which seems to bring forth greater levels of
                      arsenic contamination from these deep wells .
                      Also, he notes that although the property is not
                      in the B-8 overlay zone, the water fro m
                      Watson Creek flows into Corral de Tierra
                      Creek which is in the B-8 overlay zone. Thus
                      the B-8 Zone is "downstream" from thi s
                      proposed project.

                      Weaver asks if the pump test for the existin g
                      well that is planned to be utilized for thi s
                      project was for the required 72 hours?

                      Tony Lombardo responds that yes, it was a 72
                      hour pump test.

                      Mike Weaver asks if the applicant, Mariz e
                      Briggs intends to keep the current residentia l
                      structures and barns rented out in addition to
                      this project?

                      Marize Briggs responds that due to the
                      untimely death of her husband, this property i s
                      all she has left. It has been a difficult tim e
                      dealing with the other heirs to the property
                      and for the past two years Tony Lombardo ha s
                      been negotiating with them, in regar d
                      to the size and location of the remainde r
                      parcel. She wants these four new lots to sell s o
                      that her daughters will each have a bit of
                      inheritance to provide for things like schooling .

                      Weaver asks if she has four daughters ?

                      Mrs. Briggs responds that she has tw o
                      daughters .




              7
Phil Wood, neighbor, asks about the location of his house to the property and is shown on the map . Attendance today is
concern is location and visuals.

Robert Piini, neighbor, (344 Corral de Tierra) asks about the location of his house to the property and is shown on the map .
Attendance today is concern is location and visuals .

Marize Briggs responds to neighbors and the LUAC-Committee that an existing dirt road that is over a mile in length will be
improved, widened (to 18 feet), and paved to provide access to the four proposed lots . The lots are hidden from view from
Corral de Tierra.

Weaver asks about traffic . Lombardo responds that Keith Higgins did a traffic study .
Weaver states that the project is coming forward for review under the existing 1982 Monterey County General Plan and th e
included 1982 Toro Area Plan.
Lombardo concurs and says the project proposal would not be allowed under the proposed (working )
new Monterey County General Plan.

Weaver states that the Toro Area Plan, a part of the 1982 Monterey County general Plan has : 26 .1.8.1 (T) which says ,
"Development proposals on Corral de Tierra Road from Four Corners to Corral del Ciello shall be deferred until safet y
improvements are made by the developer, as provided for in policy 39 .1.1 (T), regardless of area plan land use designation ."

Monterey County Planner, Bob Schubert, and applicant's representative, Tony Lombardo, ask for the policy number again s o
that they may write it down .

Weaver continues that in his review of the reports associated with this project he could not find reference to this 26 .1.8.1 (T) .
This didn't surprise him too much as he spoke to an (unnamed) long term Monterey County Public Works employe e
approximately two years ago and asked about this.The response was that it had apparently been forgotten about an d
overlooked on other development proposals in the area .

Baker stated that she lives further up Corral de Tierra Road and that the road is a narrow and dangerous one, and becomin g
increasingly so with the amount of traffic increasing on it .

Varney asks about the existing well and asks for clarification as to whether this is the proposed well for the entire project .
The applicant and representative respond that yes, the current well is the one proposed for the entire project and that it ha s
been ok'd by the Department of Environmental Health.
Baker responds and asks what changed at Environmental Health? When a project was proposed before on this property sh e
remembers that it was the water issue that made it undoable .

LUAC AREAS OF CONCERN

                                                                                                   Suggested Changes -
           Concerns /Issue s
                                                Policy/Ordinance Referenc e                        to address concern s
 (e .g . site layout, neighborhoo d
                                                        (If Known)                           (e .g . relocate ; reduce height ;
compatibility ; visual impact, etc)
                                                                                                 move road access, etc )
Traffic                                      26.1.8 .1 (T)                                Clarification from the County :
                                                                                          Planning/PublicWorks/County Counsel




                                                                  8
ADDITIONAL LUAC COMMENTS

There is discussion primarily about the 26 .1.8.1 (T)
What might be safety improvements ?
General consensus we need feedback from the County of Monterey various Planning Department/Agencie s




RECOMMENDATION :

          Motion by Weaver                                                                   (LUAC Member's Name )


          Second by Baker                                                                    (LUAC Member's Name )

           Support Project as propose d

           Recommend Changes (as noted above )

      X     Continue the Ite m

          Reason for Continuance : Clarification of 26 .1 .8. 1
(T)

          Continued to what date :    Two weeks from today if possible, at the next scheduled meeting of the Tor o
LUAC.

AYES : Varney, Mueller, Baker, Weaver

NOES : None


ABSENT : Vandergrift, Marvin, Kennedy

ABSTAIN : None




                                                            9
                                             MINUTE S
                                  Toro Land Use Advisory Committe e
                                          Monday, May II 200 9
 .   Meeting called to order by Kerry Varney at 4 :30 p m

2.   Roll Cal l

     Members Present : Mueller, Vanderqrift, Marvin, Varne y


     Members Absent : Weaver, Baker, Kennedy


3.   Approval of Minute s

     A.      January 26, 2009 minutes

     Motion : Vandergrift(LUAC Member's Name )


     Second : Marvin              (LUAC Member's Nam e


             Ayes :         Marvin, Vanderqrift


             Noes :


             Absent: Weaver, Baker, Kenned y

             Abstain : Varney, Muelle r


     B.      April 27, 2009 minutes

     Motion : Varney(LUAC Member's .Name )


     Second : Mueller     (LUAC Member's Name)


             Ayes : Varney, Mueller


             Noes :           •


             Absent : Weaver, Baker, Kennedy


              Abstain : Marvin, Vanderqrift


                                                     1
5.     Public Comment: The Committee will receive public comment on non-agenda items that are withi n
the purview of the Committee at this time . The length of individual presentations may be limited by the Chair.

Non e




6.      Scheduled Item(s) - please refer to the Project Referral Sheets which follow for each separate file .


7.      Other Items                       .~   ~ ~!
        A) Preliminary Courtesy~Presentations by , Applicants Regarding Potential Projects




        B)      Announcements, if any - next meeting date

        C)      Varney discussed the upcoming members who need to renew their term which expires June 30 ,
                2009 . Members must respond to the County on or before May 22 .
                a. Rick Marvin will NOT be renewing his term due to the recent passing of his spous e
                b. Vandergrift already sent in his renewal reques t
                c. Mueller will send i n
                d. Weaver - not present




8.      Meeting Adjourned : 5 :30 p m


Minutes taken by: Vandergrift



                                                               2
                 Action by Land Use Advisory Committe e
                          Project Referral Shee t
                                   Monterey County Planning Departmen t
                                         168 W Alisal,St2"~ Floor., . :, .. .:   :
                                              -Salinas CA .
                                             (831) 755-5025 ;,


Advisory Committee : Toro
Please submit your recommendations for this application by May 11, 2009
  Project Name : BRIGGS JOHN DAVID & MARIZE:;H:. '
 File Number: PLN020508                                   continued from April 27, 200 9
 File Type: MS
 Project Planner : SCHUBERT
 Project Location : 376 CORRAL DE TIERRA RD SALINA S                     -
 Project Description : COMBINED DEVELOPMENT : PERMIT CONSISTING OF: 1) A MINOR
SUBDIVISION TO DIVIDE A 334 .95 ACRE PARCEL INTO FOUR LOTS OF (PARCELS "B-1" - "B-3) 2 0
ACRES EACH, (PARCEL "B-4") . 29.9 ACRES AND. ONE REMAINDER YPARCEL (PARCEL "A") OF 244 .1 2
ACRES; 2) A USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT ON 30" PERCENT SLOPES OR GREATER (ROAD); 3) AN
ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING SMALL WATER SYSTEM AT 376 CORRAL D E
TIERRA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 151-041-030-000) FROM FIVE EXISTING CONNECTIONS T O
NINE CONNECTIONS, A 60-FOOT WIDE ROAD AND UTILITIES EASEMENT ; A NEW 20-FOOT LON G
BRIDGE ACROSS WATSON CREEK ; AND GRADING FOR THE ROAD (APPROXIMATELY 21,240 CUBI C
YARDS CUTAND 14,690 CUBIC YARDS FILL) . SEWAGE DISPOSAL WOULD BE BY INDIVIDUAL SEPTI C
SYSTEMS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON CORRAL DE TIERRA ROAD, SOUTHEAST OF CALER A
CANYON ROAD (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 151-041-030-000 AND 151-041-031-000), TORO AREA .

Was the Owner/Applicant/Representative Present at Meeting? Yes X

PUBLIC COMMENT :

                                            Site Neighbor?                               Issues / Concerns
               Name
                                                                                     ' (suggested changes)
                                           YES                  NO

 None




                                                       5
 LUAC AREAS OF CONCER N

                                                                                    Suggested Changes -
          Concerns /Issue s
                                          Policy/Ordinance Referenc e               to address concern s
  (e.g . site layout, neighborhoo d                                             (e.g. relocate; reduce height ;
                                                   (If Known)
 compatibility ; visual impact, etc)                                               move road access, etc )
                                       26.1 .18.1
 Traffic




 ADDITIONAL LUAC COMMENT S

 LUAC met to discuss prior concerns about traffic safety policy 26 .1 .18 .1(T). See minutes from April 27, 2009 .
 Monterey Planner Bob Schubert addressed the traffic concerns of the LUAC members by sharing the attache d
 email from Raul Martinez, Monterey County Public Works Transportation Section .




 RECOMMENDATION :

           Motion to approve the minor subdivision as proposed .

           Motion by Varney                                                            (LUAC Member's Name )


           Second by Mueller                                                           (LUAC Member's Name )

     X Support Project as propose d

            Recommend Changes (as noted above )

            Continue the Ite m

           Reason for Continuance :

           Continued to what date :

 AYES : Marvin, Vanderqrift, Mueller, Varney

 NOES :

-ABSENT : Weaver, Baker, Kennedy

 ABSTAIN :
                                                         6
                                                         77/e--                                         flozAA-i




                                                                                                   o
2 6 . 1. 1 8 . 1 (I) *Development proposals on Corral de Tierra Road from Four Corners t e
                          Corral del Cielo shall be deferred until safety improvements are mad
                          by the developer, as provided for in policy 39 .1 .1 .1 (T), regardless o f
                          area plan land use designation .




                                                                                             n

 39 .1.1.1 (T) - The County :shall be encouraged to work with the state, local agencies ,
                  and; citizens groups to alleviate traffic congestion on, .and still maintain
                  the scenic beauty of, . Highway 68 . With the goal of eventually con-
                  structing a scenic four-lane divided highway, the County shall suppor t
                  the following interim. measures :

                                extension of Portola Drive through Serra Village in order t o
                                alleviate the traffic load on Highway 68 and traffic hazards'a t
                                the Toro Park intersection ;

                        2.      construction of a two-lane bypass in the area north of th e
                                present Corral de Tierra/ San Benancio/H .ighway 68 intersec-
                                tions within present plan lines ;

                         3.     methods of easing congestion at Toro Regional Park including ,
                                but not limited to, relocating entrance facilities, relocating th e
                                bus stop, and providing additional parking space ;
                        4.      construction of a divided four-lane segment between River Roa d
                                and Torero Drive and a low profile interchange (or other ac-
                                ceptable traffic solutions) at Toro Park ; and

                         5.     - construction of bus stops, pull-outs, and shelters where needed .
Schubert, Bob J . x5183
From :                 Martinez, Raul R. x462 8
Sent :                 Monday, May 11, 2009 3 :16 P M
To :                   Schubert, Bob J . x5183 ; Holm, Carl P. x510 3
Cc :                   Sauerwein, Rick P . 796-3071 ; Alinio, Chad S . x4937
Subject :              Corral de Tierra .


Bob :

Completed road improvements related to safety . These improvements are consistent with Policy
26.1 .18.1 (T) in the Toro plan . Encroachment permits are required for any work within the County
Right-of-way, such as work required or conditioned for development applications :
1.- From 2001 to present . more that a dozen Encroachments permits were issued to construct o r
reconstruct driveways to provide safe indre"ss and egress onto Corral de Tierra Road (see attachment
encroachments permits .pdf ) . Encroachment permits include conditions to clear sight visibility a s
needed as part of the permit requirements . .
Note : The Briggs project is also being required to construct a driveway for safety reasons .


Proposed near term road improvement projects for Hwy 68 are mentioned below . These projects
are mainly for operations, but also : provide safety benefits.

Under the State Hwy 68 Traffic Improvements the proposed near term projects are :
1 .-Double left-turn lanes on westbound State Hwy 68 at the intersection with Corral De Tierra Drive
(see attachment Corral de Tierra Construction Plans .pdf and Corral de Tierra Plani .pdf) .
Note : Cypress Church improvements in Blue and County Safety improvements projects in yellow .
2.- Double left-turn lane on westbound State Highway 68 at the intersection with San Benancio Roa d
O.
Under TAMC's Regional Development Impact Fee project list :
1 . Widening SR 68 from existing 4 lane section adjacent to Toro park West to Corral de Tierra .

There are several pending development projects which may include improvements to Hwy 68 bu t
currently nothing is yet approved .

As additional information, there were road improvement projects listed under 39 .1 .1 .1 (T) under th e
Toro Area plan . Some of these have been completed, as noted below (see attachment abstract Tor o
Area Plan.pdf) :
1.- Extension of Portola Drive through . Serra village .
2.- Partial construction of a divided four-lane segment between River Road and Torero Drive and a
Interchange at Toro Park .

Additional safety and operations projects along State Hwy 68 Traffic Improvements have also bee n
completed :
1.- Install Opticoms at signal controlled intersections on Hwy 68 .
2.- Double left-turn lanes on westbound Hwy 68 at the intersection with Laureles Grade . Exten d
eastbound right turn lane at Los Laureles Grade.
3 :- Widening of State Route 68; from State Route 218 to Ragsdale Road.


If you have any question please let me know .
                                           EXHIBIT F


MONTEREY COUNTY
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENC Y
PLANNING DEPARTMEN T
168 WEST ALISAL ST ., 2nd FLOOR, SALINAS, CA 9390 1
PHONE: (831) 755-5025     FAX: (831) 757-951 6

                     INITIAL STUD Y
            MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

I.       BACKGROUND INFORMATION

                    Project Title :   Briggs
                          File No.:   PLN02050 8
               Project Location :     376 Corral de Tierra Road, Salinas
     Name of Property Owner :         John and Marize Briggs

             Name of Applicant :      Marize Brigg s

 Assessor's Parcel Number(s) :        151-041-030-000 and 151-041-031-00 0
           Acreage of Property :      334.95 acre s
     General Plan Designation :       Resource Conservation, 10 to 160 acres per unit
                 Zoning District:     Resource Conservation, 10 acres per unit, Zoning District, with
                                      a Visual Sensitivity Overlay Zoning District ("RC/10-VS" )
                    Lead Agency :     Monterey County Resource Management Agency - Plannin g
                                      Department
                    Prepared By:      Mike Novo and Bob Schubert
                  Date Prepared :     March 20, 200 9
                 Contact Person:      Bob Schubert, Senior Planner
         Phone Number/Email:          (831) 755-5183, schubertbj@co .monterey .ca.us




 Briggs Initial Study (PLN020508 )
 March 20, 2009
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTIN G
A.     Project Description :

The Briggs Combined Development Permit consists of a Minor Subdivision to divide a 334 .95
acre parcel into four lots of 20 acres each (Parcels B-1, B-2 and B-3), one 29 .9 acre parcel (Parcel
B-4) and a 245 .05 acre remainder parcel ; a Use Permit for development on 30 percent slopes o r
greater (access road) and an Administrative Permit to expand an existing small water system .
Each of the four new parcels is expected to be built out with a single family dwelling and
accessory structures as desired by the future purchasers . Each parcel has the potential to have one
single family dwelling and, with discretionary permits, could be allowed additional habitabl e
dwellings . Due to the Visual Sensitivity zoning on the property, even the first single family
dwelling will be subject to discretionary permits .

Water is proposed to be served by an existing well on an adjacent parcel located at 376 Corral d e
Terra Road (APN151-041-030-000) . Sewage disposal for each residence is proposed throug h
individual septic tank and leach field systems designed in accordance with the specifications an d
recommendations of the soils percolation testing report, as required by the Environmental Health
Division .

A proposed 5,400 foot long, 18-foot wide, road will be constructed to serve the proposed parcel s
from Corral de Tierra Road to Parcel B-3 . The road will run along the boundary between Parcel
A and each B parcel . The road will cover a 6 inch water main that will serve a series of fir e
hydrants along the road . A new water line would extend from the well on the adjacent parce l
(APNO51-041-030-000) to water storage tank(s) on the remainder parcel adjacent to Parcel B-3 .
A new bridge will be constructed for the new road crossing of Watson Creek, located adjacent t o
Corral de Tierra Road . Construction of the road that will provide access to the four new lots wil l
entail 21,240 cubic yards of cut and 14,690 cubic yards of fill . An access easement is proposed
from the new road across Parcel B-4 to the site of the existing 14,000 gallon water tank .
(References 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 15 )

B.     Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses :

The proposed project site is located within the Toro Area Plan boundaries, 8 .5 miles from Salinas
and 10 .5 miles from Monterey (see Figure 1, Vicinity Map) . The project site is designated a s
Resource Conservation and contains a Visual Sensitivity designation . Zoning on the property
requires ten acres per unit. The property is visible from Laureles Grade Road for two seconds i n
one location (2-2 .5 miles from Highway 68) and five seconds at another location (2 .7 miles from
Highway 68) .

The project site is currently vacant. An adjacent parcel (APN151-041-030-000) at 376 Corral D e
Tierra Road is developed with a complex which consists of five houses and five barns, accesse d
from Corral de Tierra Road . Two wells serve the complex area . A 14,000 gallon water tank
exists on the upper portions of the adjacent property . The property was historically used for
grazing on the upper areas and cultivation on the alluvium adjacent to Watson Creek . The area
along Watson Creek is located within a floodplain. Surrounding land uses include large parcel s

                                                  2
zoned for grazing uses to the southwest, smaller parcels ranging in size from one to 40 acres to
the north that contain residential and public use (elementary school), and residential parcel s
ranging in size from two to 127 acres to the east and southeast .

The vegetation on the site contains primarily non-native annual grasslands, coast live oa k
woodland, and coastal scrub . Small areas of ephemeral water courses and Central arroyo willo w
riparian habitat is found along Watson Creek and a small manmade cattle pond (0 .05 acres) is
located in the central part of Parcel A . The pond area is heavily impacted by cattle and feral pigs .
Watson Creek has very infrequent and low volume flows during large storm events, and is dry
the rest of the year . The site has coast live oak woodland, mostly along the southwestern borde r
of the property, and on the north facing slopes in the eastern portion of the property . The Coastal
Scrub area is considered to be a dry phase of the coastal type and is not considered a chaparra l
community.

Topography is gentle to steep hills, with an elevation of about 575 at Watson Creek to abou t
1,100 feet above sea level along the ridges . The project site is located in the seismically activ e
San Francisco, Monterey Bay region, but outside of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zon e
established by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 . This region lies adjacent
to the San Andreas Fault System, which has created predominantly northwest-southeast trendin g
geologic structure and topographic features . The San Andreas Fault System constitutes th e
boundary between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates, and active faults are abundant
in the region. The project lies in an area identified by the Monterey County Geographi c
Information System as an area of moderate earthquake potential . A large (32 acres) ancient
landslide is found on the proposed Parcel A . No known active faults traverse the property or ar e
in the immediate vicinity of the property.

The project site has a Mediterranean climate where the summers are typically cool and dry an d
winters are mild and wet. Rainfall in the area averages approximately 16 inches per year . The
project site is in the upper reaches of the Watson Creek watershed, which eventually flows to the
Salinas River to the east .

The project site is located in the El Toro Groundwater Basin . The El Toro Groundwater Basin i s
a much smaller basin than the three major basins in Monterey County (Salinas Valley, Carme l
River, and North County). Groundwater flow generally follows the topography and exits the Toro
Area Plan planning area to the northeast . Groundwater basins are often broken up into severa l
subareas . Subareas often have aquifers that are interconnected and laterally continuous withi n
their respective geologic units . Therefore, water levels in subareas can influence nearby wel l
water levels in other subareas . In the vicinity of the project site, groundwater is pumped fro m
three water-bearing geologic units : the Aromas-Paso Robles Formation (also referred to as the
Paso Robles Formation), the Santa Margarita Formation, and alluvium in local drainages .
Decline of groundwater in some Toro Area Plan wells during the 1980s resulted in the Count y
imposing a B-8 zoning overlay to portions of the Plan area due to potential water suppl y
limitations . The B-8 zoning limits development to single family dwellings on existing lots of
record since 1991 . The proposed project is located outside the B-8 zoning overlay and is no t
subject to this restriction .



                                                  3
The project proposes four additional parcels on the project site, which can each be develope d
with single family residences and accessory structures . For these residential uses and
landscaping, the potential water usage (incorporates return flow from discharge to septic systems)
based on an average of 0 .3 AF/year (acre feet per year) per unit would be 1 .2 AF/year. Projected
water estimates for 4 residences and landscaping was derived from the El Toro Groundwate r
Study prepared by Geosyntec (July 2007) .

Surface drainage on the project site is either absorbed into the soil and slowly percolates into th e
groundwater or flows across the surface of the soil when the soil is saturated or precipitation rat e
is greater than the absorption rate . The existing onsite natural drainages are ephemeral and carr y
flows from winter storms to Watson Creek, which is located northeast of the project site . San
Benancio Creek and Watson Creek are two tributary creeks of the El Toro Creek . El Toro Creek
flows to the Salinas River to the northeast and eventually to the Pacific Ocean near Mos s
Landing . There are no streams or rivers on the project site .

Flood hazards from long-cycle storms can occur at most locations . They are most common
within areas designated as a 100-year flood zone by the Federal Emergency Management Agenc y
(FEMA) . The portion of the project site near Watson Creek is located within a 100-year floo d
zone . Since the project site is located approximately 13 miles inland from the coast at a n
elevation of approximately 575 feet or more above sea level, potential flooding due to
seismically induced waves (tsunami or seiche) is not expected .

According to the Monterey County Zoning Ordinance (Title 21), the project site is zone d
Resource Conservation with a Visual Sensitivity overlay district . The project site is located in an
area designated as visually sensitive by the Toro Area Plan and is within a Visual Sensitivit y
overlay zoning district . On June 2, 2003, the Toro Land Use Advisory Committee reviewed the
proposed project and unanimously recommended approval .

Fire protection service at the project site would be provided by the Salinas Rural Fire Protection
District (SRFPD) . The SRFPD provides firefighting, rescue and emergency medical service to
approximately 21,000 residents district wide . The SRFPD service area is comprised o f
approximately 250 square miles of predominantly rural and agricultural land uses, in addition to
the community of Spreckels . The closest station to the project site is the Laureles Statio n
(Station #3) located at Highway 68 and Laureles Grade Road, Salinas .

The Monterey County Sheriff's Office is the main provider of law enforcement services to th e
unincorporated areas of Monterey County . The closest patrol station to the project site is th e
Central Station (formerly the Salinas Station) located at 1414 Natividad Road, Salinas .

Washington Union School District provides primary education to the project site, whil e
secondary education is provided by Salinas Union High School District . Within Washingto n
Union School District there are three schools, Toro Park Elementary, Washington Elementary ,
and San Benancio Middle School . Salinas Union High School District contains eleven school s
but students would only attend Salinas High School within this District .




                                                  4
Traffic circulation in the area is provided primarily by traveling to/from Highway 68 via Corra l
de Tierra Road . Highway 68 is the main connector between Monterey County's two principal
urbanized areas, Salinas and the Monterey Peninsula . It serves as a commuter route betwee n
Salinas and the Monterey Peninsula while providing access to the low density residentia l
developments, schools and business parks adjacent to the corridor . The majority of traffi c
generated on Highway 68 is not created by residents living along the corridor, but by commut e
trips and tourism coming to and from the Salinas Valley and the Monterey Peninsula . Levels o f
Service in this area exceed county standards for the a .m. and p .m. peak hour along Highway 68 at
the following nearby signalized intersections : Laureles Grade, San Benancio Canyon, and Corra l
de Tierra . (References 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 17)




                                                5
  Figure 1
Vicinity Map




     6
HI.    PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LOCAL
       AND STATE PLANS AND MANDATED LAWS

Use the list below to indicate plans applicable to the project and verify their consistency or non-
consistency with project implementation.

General Plan/Area Plan               s               Air Quality Mgmt. Plan                s

Specific Plan                                        Airport Land Use Plans                u

Water Quality Control Plan           s               Local Coastal Program-LUP             u

Monterey County General Plan/Toro Area Plan : The project was reviewed for consistency wit h
the Monterey County General Plan and Toro Area Plan . Section VI.9 (Land Use and Planning )
discusses whether the project physically divides an established community, conflicts with an y
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project o r
conflicts with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan .
The project is consistent with the General Plan and Area Plan policies, as explained below i n
section IV.A . The Toro Area Plan designates the site with a "Resource Conservation" land use
designation. The proposed project is consistent with allowable uses under , this designation.
CONSISTENT (References 1, 2, 3, 4 )

Water Quality Control Plan
The Regional Water Quality Control Board incorporates the County's General Plan in it s
preparation of regional water quality plans . The project is consistent with the General Plan and
with AMBAG' S regional population and employment forecast and, therefore is consistent wit h
the Water Quality Control Plan . The proposal is to subdivide a 334 .95 acre parcel into four lots
of 20 acres each (Parcels B-1, B-2 and B-3), one 29 .9 acre parcel (Parcel B-4) and a 225 .05 acre
remainder parcel . Section VI (Environmental Checklist) below discusses how the propose d
project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements ,
substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge,
substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or create or contribute runof f
water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage .
CONSISTENT (References 1, 2, 3, 4, 10 )

Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP )
Consistency with the AQMP is an indication of a project's cumulative adverse impact o n
regional air quality (ozone levels) . It is not an indication of project-specific impacts, which are
evaluated according to the Air District's adopted thresholds of significance . Inconsistency with
the AQMP is considered a significant cumulative air quality impact .

Consistency of a residential project is determined by comparing the project population at the yea r
of project completion with the population forecast for the appropriate five year increment that i s
listed in the AQMP . If the population increase resulting from the project would not cause th e
estimated cumulative population to exceed the relevant forecast, the project would be consisten t
with the population forecasts in the AQMP . The project would involve a subdivision, whic h

                                                 7
would lead to residential construction. The projected residences would not significantly increas e
the population to a level that would exceed the relevant forecast . Therefore, the project would b e
consistent with the population and emission forecasts in the AQMP . CONSISTENT (Reference s
1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 18)




                                                 8
  .
IV ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AND
    DETERMINATION

A. FACTOR S

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, as
discussed within the checklist on the following pages .


s Aesthetics                        u Agriculture Resources           s Air Quality

s Biological Resources              u Cultural Resources              s Geology/Soils

s Hazards/Hazardous Materials       s   Hydrology/Water Quality       u Land Use/Plannin g

u Mineral Resources                 u Noise                           u Population/Housin g

u Public Services                   u Recreation                      s Transportation/Traffi c

s Utilities/Service System s

Some proposed applications that are not exempt from CEQA review may have little or n o
potential for adverse environmental impact related to most of the topics in the Environmental
Checklist; and/or potential impacts may involve only a few limited subject areas . These types o f
projects are generally minor in scope, located in a non-sensitive environment, and are easil y
identifiable and without public controversy . For the environmental issue areas where there is n o
potential for significant environmental impact (and not checked above), the following finding ca n
be made using the project description, environmental setting, or other information as supportin g
evidence .


u Check here if this finding is not applicable

FINDING :      For the above referenced topics that are not checked off, there is no potential fo r
               significant environmental impact to occur from either construction, operation o r
               maintenance of the proposed project and no further discussion in th e
               Environmental Checklist is necessary .

EVIDENCE : Less than significant impacts or potentially significant impacts are identified for
           aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology/soils, hazards/hazardou s
           materials, hydrology/water quality, transportation/traffic and utilities/servic e
           systems. The project will have no quantifiable adverse environmental effect o n
           the categories not checked above, as follows :

               Agricultural Resources : The project site is not located within proximity to the
               Salinas Valley, which contains most of the county's productive agricultural land .

                                                 9
According to county resources, the project site does not contain Prime, Unique, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance, is not zoned for agricultural use, and is no t
under a Williamson Act contract . Proposed development would not cause th e
conversion of prime agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, conflict wit h
existing agricultural zoning (on or off site), or conflict with a Williamson Act
contract. (References: 1-4, 7, 15)

Cultural Resources : The subject parcels are located within an area designated o n
county resource maps as _ archaeological sensitivity . The project area lies within
the currently recognized ethnographic area of the Costanoan (often called Ohlone )
linguistic group . The Costanoan group followed a general hunting and gatherin g
subsistence pattern with partial dependence on the natural acorn crop . Habitation
is considered to be semi-sedentary and occupation sites can be expected most
often at the confluence of streams, other areas of similar topography alon g
streams, or in the vicinity of springs . Prehistoric sites have been located in the
area, but none are known for this site. A standard condition of approval, require d
for all subdivisions in potentially sensitive areas, would require that lan d
disturbance be halted, and the county notified, in the event that cultural resource s
are found . The project is not expected to result in potentially significant effects t o
cultural resources . (References : 1-5, 15 )

Land Use/Planning : The project site is designated Resource Conservation and i s
designated as a visually sensitive area in the Toro Area Plan and General Plan .
The site is predominantly surrounded by rural residential and open space uses .
The project will not physically divide an established community, conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoidin g
or mitigating an environmental effect, or conflict with any applicant habitat o r
natural community conservation plan. The project, as designed, conditioned, an d
mitigated, would not conflict with the General Plan, Toro Area Plan, or th e
Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in land use
impacts . (References: 1-3)

Mineral Resources : According to Monterey County resources, no know n
mineral resources are found at or near the project site . Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource o r
a locally important mineral resource recovery site . (References: 1-3)

Noise: Noise-sensitive land uses generally include those uses where exposure t o
noise would result in adverse effects, as well as uses where quiet is an essentia l
element of their intended purpose . Residential dwellings are of primary concer n
because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals t o
both interior and exterior noise levels . Other noise-sensitive land uses includ e
hospitals, convalescent facilities, parks, hotels, churches, libraries, and other use s
where low interior noise levels are essential . Land uses located near the projec t
site consist primarily of rural residential uses, which are located approximately 4 0

                                   10
acres away. (Source: 1, 2, 3). The project would be located in a rural density are a
buffered by existing topography and vegetation . Therefore, the project is no t
expected to adversely affect current noise levels . The proposed project i s
consistent with acceptable uses in the area and would not violate any County nois e
standards and would not have a significant adverse affect on sensitive receptors .

Population/Housing: The project is a subdivision, which could allow up t o
new residences to be constructed. The project's potential for limited residentia l
use will not substantially induce growth or displace housing or people . Therefore,
the proposed project would have no impact on population/housing . (References :
1-3)

Public Services: Fire protection service at he project site would be provided by
the Salinas Rural Fire Protection District (SRFPD) . The SRFPD consist of three
fire stations : the Toro Station, located at 1900 Portola Drive, Salinas ; the Chualar
Station, located at 24281 Washington Street, Chualar ; and the Laureles Station ,
located at Highway 68 and Laureles Grade, Salinas . The Laureles Station woul d
serve the project site and includes the State Route 68 corridor from just west o f
Too Park to Olmstead Road and Laureles Grade to the Carmel Valley side of th e
Laureles Summit. According to the SRFPD, the average response time to the
project site would be approximately 6-8 minutes .

The Monterey County Sheriff's Office (SO) is the main provider of la w
enforcement services to the unincorporated areas of Monterey County . The S O
has three patrol stations : the Central Station located at 1414 Natividad Road ,
Salinas ; the Coastal Station, located at 1200 Aguajito Road, Monterey ; and the
South County Station located at 250 Franciscan Way, King City. The closest
patrol station to the project site is the Central Station . According to the SO, the
response time to the project site would range from five to seven minutes ,
depending on the location of the offer on the beat and the priority of the call .

Washington Union School District provides elementary education to the project
site, while secondary education is provided by Salinas Union High Schoo l
District . Washington Union School District has three schools : Toro Park
Elementary, Washington Elementary, and San Benancio Middle School .
According to Washington Union School District, the student generation rate is 0 . 4
students per residential unit and the District has a maximum capacity o f
approximately 980 students . Salinas Union High School District provides
secondary education to the project site and contains eleven schools . However,
students from this area would only attend Salinas High School within this district .
According to the Salinas Union High School District, the current generation rat e
is 0 .19 students per residential unit . The school board has recommended tha t
Salinas High School have a capacity of 2,000 students .




                                  1 1
The proposed project's limited residential use will not create the need for new o r
expanded public services of facilities, as adequate fire, police, and educationa l
services exist near the project site . Standard school impact fees would be assesse d
on any future residential construction during the building permit process . The
proposed project's residential use and compatibility with surrounding land use s
signify that any potential impact to public services will be insignificant, given tha t
adequate public services exist to properly serve the area, as evidenced by th e
County's Interdepartmental review of the project . Therefore, the project would not
result in impacts on fire protection, law enforcement protection, schools, parks ,
and other public facilities . (References : 1-4)

Recreation : The County of Monterey designates two kinds of parks : local and
regional parks . Local parks are located largely within larger subdivision
developments ; the County does not maintain information about these parks .
Larger subdivisions have been required to provide a minimum of 3 acres of par k
per 1,000 population. No public recreational uses exist on the project site . The
nearest regional park to the site, is Toro Park, which is located approximately 2 ¼
miles from the project site. Located south of Salinas on Highway 68, Toro Park
consists of 4,783 acres, 77 of which are developed for day uses . The park include s
20 miles of trails available to hikers, equestrian users and mountain bikers. the
subdivision does not propose the construction of any recreational uses, but will b e
required to pay a recreation in-lieu fee to the Monterey County Parks Departmen t
to support current and future recreational uses within the County . The project
would not cause the construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities ;
therefore, no significant effects are determined for this project . (References : 1-3,
15, 16)




                                  12
B. DETERMINATION

On the basis of this initial evaluation :

u       I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on th e
        environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .

s       I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on th e
        environment there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in th e
        project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent . A MITIGATED
        NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared .

u       I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and a n
        ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required .

u       I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" o r
        "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
        effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable lega l
        standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysi s
        as described on attached sheets . An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT i s
        required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed .

u       I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on th e
        environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequatel y
        in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, an d
        (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
        DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
        proposed project, nothing further is required .



                        Signature                                             Date


                  Bob Schubert, AICP                                     Senior Planner




                                                 13
V.     EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that ar e
      adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
      following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference d
      information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the on e
      involved (e .g ., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone) . A "No Impact" answer
      should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as genera l
      standards (e .g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based o n
      project-specific screening analysis).

2) All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well a s
        onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction a s
       well as operational impacts .

3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then th e
      checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
      significant with mitigation, or less than significant . "Potentially Significant Impact" i s
      appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant . If there are
      one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, a n
      EIR is required .

4) "Negative Declaration : Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applie s
      where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentiall y
      Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact ." The lead agency must describ e
      the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less tha n
      significant level mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may b e
      cross-referenced).

5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQ A
       process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration .
       Section 15063(c)(3)(D) . In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following :

       a)      Earlier Analysis Used . Identify and state where they are available for review .
       b)      Impacts Adequately Addressed . Identify which effects from the above checklis t
               were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
               to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
               mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis .
       c)      Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigatio n
               Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which wer e
               incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
               address site-specific conditions for the project.

6)     Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to informatio n
       sources for potential impacts (e .g., general plans, zoning ordinances) . Reference to a

                                                 14
     previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference
     to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated .

7)   Supporting Information Sources : A source list should be attached, and other sources use d
     or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion .

8)   The explanation of each issue should identify :
     a)     The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question ; and
     b)     The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less tha n
            significance.




                                              15
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIS T
1.      AESTHETICS                                                                 Less Than
                                                                                   Significant
                                                                    Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                    Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a)   Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?               u              u             s           u
     (Source : 1-5, 7 )

b)   Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but              u              u             u           s
     not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and histori c
     buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source : 1-5 ,
     7)

c)   Substantially degrade the existing visual character or             u              u             s           u
     quality of the site and its surroundings? (Source : 1-5, 7 )

d)   Create a new source of substantial light or glare which            u              u             s           u
     would adversely affect day or nighttime views in th e
     area? (Source : 1-5, 7)


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

1(a), (c), (d) . The project site is currently developed with five houses and several accessor y
structures on Parcel 1 . The remainder of the site is vacant . The property is located in an are a
designated as visually sensitive by the Toro Area Plan and is within a Visual Sensitivity Zonin g
District pursuant to Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance) . County staff conducted a visual reconnaissanc e
of the project site in order to determine potential impacts with regards to visual resources .
Construction on the subject property has the potential to affect a scenic vista, the existing visual
character of the site and surroundings, and could affect day or nighttime views due to the creation
of a new source of substantial light . However, each construction project will require obtaining a
discretionary permit under the Visual Sensitivity zoning district regulations . The purpose of that
district is to ensure protection of the public viewshed in certain areas of the County . According to
the project plans, building sites have been located within the least steep portions of the property .

Grading for the road will entail 21,240 cubic yards of cut and 14,690 cubic yards of fill . Water
tank(s) are proposed in order to provide storage capacity for fire suppression, as well as potabl e
water . The tank(s) would be located on the remainder parcel near Parcel B-3 .

The proposed building sites would not be seen from Highway 68 or Corral de Tierra Road .
However, the property is visible from two locations along Laureles Grade Road. Structures on
the future B parcels could be seen from Laureles Grade Road for a total of two seconds at on e
location. These are medium to long views that are partially screened by natural vegetation and
topography, and by several Monterey Pines that have been planted along Laurales Grade Road .
(Source: 4)




                                                            16
The other viewshed point is located approximately 2 .4 miles from the site in a sector of Laurale s
Grade Road is much more visible to the traveler (see Figure 2 .6 attached). The viewshed area
consists of approximately a five second span, partially blocked by the guard rail, natura l
vegetation and topography . (Source: 4)

The county has a policy that all lighting be shielded or directed to illuminate only the intende d
area . A lighting plan will be required as a condition of the discretionary permit required by th e
Visual Sensitivity zoning district. Because of the distance, the extremely low density of on e
primary residence on a 20-acre parcel, the Visual Sensitivity zoning district requirement s
(requiring a discretionary permit for each residence), and the short duration of views, this impac t
is considered to be Less than Significant .

In order to ensure that the project's visibility will be minimized, the following conditions o f
approval will be required pursuant to County policies .

Proposed Condition of Approval :       In order to minimize impacts to visual resources, a
conservation and scenic easement shall be conveyed to the County over those portions of th e
property, outside of the proposed building sites and road improvement areas, on slopes of 3 0
percent or greater .

(b) .   In 1968, approximately 13 miles of State Route 68, between State Route 1 and Rive r
Road, were designated as a State scenic highway under California's Scenic Highway Programs .
State Route 68 is major regional transportation route that connect the cities of Monterey and
Salinas and would provide regional access to the project site . Based on a visual reconnaissance o f
the project properties as well as their location two miles away from Highway 68, the project sit e
would not be visible to those traveling on State Route 68 . The proposed project will result in th e
potential for developing new structures on four new parcels . The project does not involve the
demolition of existing structures or the removal of trees . Construction of a 5500 foot two-lan e
road will run along most of the property, but will not involve damage to scenic resources . The
road will not be visible from Corral de Tierra or Highway 68, but will be visible from Laurele s
Grade Road, a County road, at a distance . The project would not damage scenic resources withi n
the scenic corridor, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building s
within a state scenic highway .




                                                 17
         AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
                                                                                     Less Than
                                                                                     Significant
                                                                     Potentially        With        Less Than
                                                                     Significant     Mitigation     Significant     No
Would the project :                                                    Impact       Incorporated      Impact      Impact
a)   Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or                           u                u           u           s
     Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
     shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
     Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Californi a
     Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (Source : 1 -
     3, 7)

b)    Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a             u                u           u           s
      Williamson Act contract? (Source : 1-5)

c)    Involve other changes in the existing environment                    u                u           u           s
      which, due to their location or nature, could result i n
      conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use ?
      (Source : 1-3, 7 )


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

             No Impact. See previous Sections II .A (Project Description) and B (Environmenta l
2(a), (b), (c) :
Setting) and Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the sources
referenced .

3.       AIR QUALITY
                                                                                    Less Than
                                                                                    Significant
                                                                   Potentially         With        Less Than
                                                                   Significant      Mitigation     Significant      No
Would the project :                                                  Impact        Incorporated      Impact       Impact
a)   Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the                   u                u              u            s
     applicable air quality plan? (Source : 1-3, 6, 8, 18)

b)   Violate any air quality standard or contribute                    u                u              u            s
     substantially to an existing or projected air quality
     violation? (Source : 1-3, 6, 8, 18)

c)   Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of             u                u              u            s
     any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
     non-attainment under an applicable federal or stat e
     ambient air quality standard (including releasin g
     emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds fo r
     ozone precursors)? (Source : 1-3, 6, 8, 18 )

d)   Result in significant construction-related air quality            u                u              s
     impacts? (Source : 1-3, 6, 18)




                                                              18
3.       AIR QUALITY
                                                                               Less Than
                                                                               Significant
                                                                Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                               Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact

e)   Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant            u              u             u           s
     concentrations? (Source : 1-3, 6, 7, 8 )

f)   Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial             u              u             u           s
     number of people? (Source : 1-3, 7)


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

The proposed project is located in the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB) and within th e
jurisdiction of the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) . Both the
federal government and the State of California have adopted air quality standards for criteria ai r
pollutants . For purposes of demonstrating regulatory compliance, areas are designated as either
 "attainment," "non-attainment," or "unclassified ." An attainment designation for an area signifie s
that pollutant concentrations did not violate the standard for a specific pollutant in that area . A
non-attainment designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the standard at leas t
 once, excluding those occasions when a violation(s) was caused by an exceptional event, a s
 defined in the criteria . Unclassified designations indicate insufficient data is available t o
 determine attainment status . Under the Federal Clean Air Act, the NCCAB is currentl y
 designated attainment for the recently established eight-hour ozone federal Ambient Air Qualit y
 Standards (AAQS) . The NCCAB is designated either attainment or unclassified for the remainin g
 federal AAQS . Under the California Clean Air Act, the basin is designated as a non-attainmen t
 transitional area for the state 1-hour ozone standard and non-attainment for the recently
 promulgated 8-hour ozone standard . The NCCAB is also designated a non-attainment area fo r
 the state PMI0 (Particulate Matterlo) AAQS . The nearest sensitive receptors to the project sit e
 are five existing homes located on an adjacent parcel at 376 Corral De Tierra Road . (Source : 1 ,
 6, 7)

3(a), (c), (e), (f) : No Impact. The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation o f
the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District's Air Quality Management Plan for th e
Monterey Bay Region, nor would it violate any air quality standards, result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, expose sensitive receptors to substantia l
pollutant concentrations, or create objectionable odors . (Source : 1, 6, 7)

(b).   No Impact. The project consists of four new residential parcels on 89 .9 acres and the
potential to create residences on the remainder parcel (245 .05 acres). The development of thes e
units would be consistent with population projections, and, therefore, with the Air Quality
Management Plan . The new uses would not create a violation and would certainly not provide a
substantial contribution to any air quality violation due to its small scale . (Source 1, 6, 7) .



                                                           19
(d) . Less Than Significant with Mitigation . The project, including the development of the
building sites and road improvements, has the potential to result in potentially significant
temporary construction-related air quality impacts . Temporary impacts are associated with th e
operation of heavy equipment, grading, and construction truck trips. Grading for the road will
entail 21,240 cubic yards of cut and 14,690 cubic yards of fill . Removal of the 6,550 cubic yard s
of cut material would require approximately 655 truck trips (10 cubic yards per truck) .

Construction-generated emissions are short-term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long a s
construction activities occur, but possess the potential to represent a significant air quality impact . The
construction and development of the proposed project would result in the temporary generation o f
emissions resulting from site grading and excavation, paving, the application of architectural coatings ,
motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker trips, and the movement o f
construction equipment, especially on unpaved surfaces . Emissions of airborne particulate matter ar e
largely dependent on the amount of ground disturbance associated with site preparation activities .

The MBUAPCD has determined that construction activities that involve minimal earth moving over a n
area of 8 .1 acres, or more, could result in a potentially significant temporary air quality impacts, if not
mitigated . Construction activities that require more extensive site preparation (e .g., grading and
excavation) may result in significant unmitigated impacts if the area of disturbance were to exceed 2 .2
acres per day.

According to the MBUAPCD, activities involving minimal ground-disturbance typically generate a n
 average of approximately 10 lbs/day/acre while excavation and earthmoving activities generate about 3 8
 lbs/day/acre . Based on the more conservative emission rate (38 lbs/day/acre), the largest area of site
 disturbance (i .e., approximately 2 .3 acres for road improvements), and subsequent phasing of other
 grading and construction operations for the proposed residences, construction activities would generate a
maximum of approximately 43 .7 lbs/day of PMlo (if half of the road were graded in one day), which
would not exceed the MBUAPCD's significance threshold of 82 lbs/day. Furthermore, the overall area of
'earthmoving would not exceed the MBUAPCD's construction screening criteria of either 8 .1 acres for
 minimal site preparation activities or 2.2 acres for construction-related activities involving extensive sit e
 preparation . As a result, short-term construction related emissions would not be anticipated to excee d
 applicable air quality standards . However, localized concentrations of dust could potentially occur that
 may be a nuisance and would require the following mitigation : (Source 1, 6, 16, 17)

Mitigation Measure #1 : In order to minimize short-term construction emissions, the projec t
shall implement the following MBUAPCD-recommended mitigation measures during gradin g
and construction activities . The County's designated construction contractor shall monitor grading an d
construction activities on a daily basis to ensure that these measures are implemented.

•   Water all active construction areas at least twice daily . Frequency should be based on th e
    type of operation, soil and wind exposure ;
•   Prohibit all grading activities during periods of high wind (over 15 mph) ;
•   Apply chemical soil stabilizers on inactive construction areas (disturbed lands withi n
    construction projects that are unused for at least four consecutive days) ;
•   Apply non-toxic binders (e .g., latex acrylic copolymer) to exposed areas after cut and fill
    operations and hydroseed areas ;
•   Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks t o
    maintain at least 2 feet offreeboard;
                                                            20
•   Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles, suc h
    as dirt, sand, etc ;
•   Cover inactive storage piles ;
•   Sweep streets daily, with water sweepers, if visible soil materials are carried onto adjacen t
    public streets ;
•   Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways ;
•   Install wheel washers at the entrance to construction sites for all exiting trucks ;
•   Pave all roads at construction sites;
•   Construction equipment shall not be left idling for periods longer than 5 minutes when not i n
    use; and
•   Post a publicly visible sign which specifies the telephone number and person to contac t
    regarding emissions-related complaints. This person shall respond to complaints and take
    corrective action within 48 hours . The phone number of the Monterey Bay Unified Ai r
    Pollution Control District shall be visible to ensure compliance with Rule 402 (Nuisance) .

Mitigation Monitoring Action #1 : Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shal l
incorporate a "Fugitive Dust Control" note on the grading plans that includes, but is not limite d
to, the measures set forth in Mitigation Measure #1 . During grading operations, the contracto r
shall obtain any required Air District permits and conduct all grading and construction activitie s
as required by the Air District.

Implementation of the above mitigation would reduce fugitive dust emissions associated wit h
individual construction activities by approximately 4 to 90 percent, with overall fugitive dus t
emission reductions of approximately 50 percent, depending on the activities conducted . Mitigate d
construction-generated emissions would not exceed the MBUAPCD's significance threshold of 8 2
lbs/day. With phasing of onsite areas of disturbance and implementation of recommended dust-
control measures, predicted concentrations would not be anticipated to exceed applicable standards .
As a result, mitigation of this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level . The nearest
sensitive receptors are five existing single family dwellings located on the remainder parcel . As
a result of the proposed mitigation, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant leve l
(Source : 1, 6, 7)




                                                 21
4.       BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES                                                   Less Than
                                                                                Significant
                                                                 Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                 Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Wouldthe project :                                                 Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or             u              s             u           u
   through habitat modifications, on any species identifie d
   as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
   local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or b y
   the California Department of Fish and Game or U .S .
   Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source : 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 19 )

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat         u              s             u           u
   or other sensitive natural community identified in loca l
   or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by th e
   California Department of Fish and Game or US Fis h
   and Wildlife Service? (Source : 1, 2, 3, 7, 19 )

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected          u              u             u           s
   wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
   Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool ,
   coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
   hydrological interruption, or other means? (Source : 1 ,
   2, 3, 7, 8, 11 )

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native           u              s             u           u
   resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or wit h
   established native resident or migratory wildlife
   corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
   sites? (Source: 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 11 )

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances                    u              u             u           s
   protecting biological resources, such as a tre e
   preservation policy or ordinance? (Source : 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 ,
   11)

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat                u              u             u           s
   Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservatio n
   Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
   conservation plan? (Source : 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 11 )


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation : Future building site locations for Parcels B-1 through B- 4
are proposed within non-native annual grassland areas . The proposed road also will affect a smal l
portion of each parcel . Dale Hameister of Rana Creek Habitat Restoration conducted biologica l
surveys of the property between June 20, 2003 and July 29, 2003 . The entire property wa s
surveyed .

Monterey Manzanita (Arctostaphylos montereyensis), a California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
list 1B species, is located in the steep wooded area in the northwest portion of Parcel A . This area
will not be impacted by any proposed development. The annual grasslands are typical for the area
and are dominated by a mixture of European annual grasses and forbs . All the building sites an d

                                                            22
the majority of road construction will occur in the grassland area. The new road crossing o f
Watson Creek will be crossing a seasonal ephemeral watercourse with an open sandy channe l
bottom and scattered Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian, a sensitive habitat type, on th e
south bank . The understory and other vegetation in the area contain non-native annual plants .

Sensitive amphibians have been identified in the area, at a distance of over 2 .86 miles, mostly t o
the southwest and northwest. One dead newt (Coast Range newt-taricha torosa torosa) larvae
was found in the small cattle pond . The pond has been heavily impacted by cattle and feral pigs
creating a denuded area around the pond. This newt is a California Species of Concern . The
biologist identified that the pond is very poor habitat due to a lack of emergent vegetation on th e
pond's banks and a great deal of algae, which create anaerobic conditions in the water . The cattl e
pond will not be impacted by the proposed development. California red-legged frog and
California tiger salamander were not found on the site .

Birds on the property, many of which are protected species, utilize shrubs and trees for habitat
and nesting sites . The majority of development for the road and building sites will occur in th e
non-native grasslands, not where trees and shrubs are located . Evidence of the following
mammals was found on the property : coyote, badger and European wild boar.

(a)    Less than significant with mitigation incorporated . The proposed project has th e
potential to adversely affect, either directly or through habitat modifications, species identified a s
a candidate, sensitive, special status species or other sensitive natural community . The project
could have an impact on bird species, in addition to concerns relating to the stream crossing ,
identified in (b) and (d), below . Construction and/or vegetation removal during nesting seaso n
could adversely affect nesting birds, most of which are protected pursuant to Fish and Gam e
Code sections 3503 and 3801 and the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act . Road construction near
the cattle pond could impact newts, if present .

Project grading and construction in the vicinity of oak woodland has the potential to result in th e
disturbance or abandonment of active raptor nests if such activities occur during the nestin g
season (typically February through August) . This would result in a potentially significant impact .
A pre-construction raptor survey would be required to determine the presence or absence o f
active raptor nests within the project area.

The following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to biological resources to a les s
than significant level :

Proposed Mitigation Measure #2: If tree removal or grading activities occur betwee n
February 15 and August 15, in order to adequately determine the presence of active raptor nest s
within the oak woodland habitat, the applicant shall arrange for a pre-construction raptor
survey to be prepared by a County-approved biological consultant within 30 days prior to th e
initiation of development activities. If active raptor nests are found and the biologist determine s
that construction or development activities would remove the nest or have the potential to caus e
abandonment, then those activities shall be avoided until the raptor young have fledged a s



                                                  23
determined through monitoring of the nest. Once the raptor young have fledged, development
activities may resume .

Proposed Monitoring Action #2: Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, a pre-
construction raptor survey shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review an d
approval . If nesting birds are found, the biologist shall monitor the nesting activities and provid e
clearance for construction activities after the young have fledged.

Mitigation Measure #3 : An erosion control plan shall be prepared prior to the issuance of a
grading or building permit. The erosion control plan shall include features, techniques an d
facilities that reduce erosion potential to protect riparian areas and watercourses . All areas
where water drains off new roads and culverts shall have energy dissipaters to help prevent an d
reduce potential erosion. Subdivision improvement plans shall include these facilities in th e
project design . A note shall be included on the recorded parcel map to ensure that futur e
development of each parcel is aware of these requirements and includes these facilities on al l
future development plans.

Proposed Monitoring Action #3 : Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, an
erosion control plan shall be submitted to the RMA-Building Department for review an d
approval. The approved erosion control plan shall be provided to all grading contractors on th e
site prior to any grading activities.

Mitigation Measure #4 : The intent ofthis mitigation measure is to avoid impacts to newt durin g
grading and construction activities near the cattle pond found south ofproposed parcels B-1 and
B-4. A biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey, within 30 days of construction of the
road, identifying the possibility of newt impacts related to road construction near the pond. The
biologist shall recommend measures to avoid any newt impacts, including the following :

     delaying construction in the pond area until newt breeding season (spring) has bee n
     completed; or
    relocating newt during construction activities, if allowed by the Department of Fish and
     Game; or
gik relocating the road alignment to any area sufficiently distant, as determined by the biologis t
     (in consultation with CA Department ofFish and Game), from any newt breeding areas . Any
     road relocation must be approved by the Monterey County Planning, Building Services, an d
    Public Works Departments, and must be in substantial conformance with the approved roa d
     location. Substantial road relocation would require an amendment to the permit .

Proposed Monitoring Action #4 : A pre-construction newt survey shall be submitted to the
RMA-Planning Department for review and approval within 30 days ofconstruction ofthe road.
If newts are found, the biologist shall take one of the actions listed in the mitigation measure .
Such action shall be authorized by the California Department ofFish and Game and shall b e
provided to the grading contractor, RMA - Planning Department, and project applicant i n
writing from the biologist prior to grading or construction activities .



                                                  24
(b) and (d). Less than significant with mitigation. The project will not have a substantia l
adverse effect on any riparian habitat and will not substantially interfere with movement of an y
fish or wildlife species or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites . The south bank of Watson
Creek contains Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian habitat . The only potential interference to
fish is the Watson Creek crossing. According to the biologist, no listed fish species were
identified in this stretch of the creek (due to its ephemeral nature) and installation of either a
bridge or culvert, if done during the dry season, would not impact riparian vegetation .

Mitigation Measure #5 : The intent of this mitigation measure is to protect riparian vegetation
and water quality of Watson Creek . Prior to construction of the road crossing of Watson Creek,
the applicant shall obtain a Streambed Alteration Permit (SAP) from California Department o f
Fish and Game . All work done in the streambed shall occur only after the creek has dried up fo r
the season and shall be completed prior to October 1 of that year, or as otherwise stated by th e
SAP. All work shall be completed in compliance with the terms and conditions of the SAP .

Proposed Monitoring Action #5 : Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit fo r
work near, in or across Watson Creek, a Streambed Alteration Permit shall be obtained from th e
California Department of Fish and Game, if they determine one is necessary . Requirements of
the Streambed Alteration Permit shall be included as notes on any grading and building plans
for the stream crossing of Watson Creek.

(c) No Impact . No identified federal wetlands are found on or near the project site that could b e
affected by the construction of subdivision improvements or by the activity generated b y
additional single family dwellings on each proposed 20-acre parcel .

(e) No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with local policies or ordinance s
protecting biological resources, such as the Monterey County Tree Preservation Ordinance or the
Oak Woodland Conservation Act . The forested areas of the parcels are primarily coast live oak .
These oaks are mostly growing in small stands mixed with open meadows . Other trees on the
parcels include California buckeye . The project involves the removal of three oak trees an d
replanting of oak trees is proposed as part of the project design.

The proposed project is subject to the requirements set forth by the Oak Woodland Conservatio n
Act (Section 21083 .4) . The Oak Woodland Conservation Act defines "oak" as a native tre e
species that is five inches or more in diameter at breast height . As identified in the Biological
Reports and Letter prepared by Jud Vandevere (June 2006, May 2007 and August 2007) and th e
Arborist Reports prepared by Forest City Consulting (August 2006 and April 2008), the projec t
has the potential to result in impacts to oak woodland habitat . Specifically, the project propose s
the removal of 3 protected coast live oaks (18 inches, 19 inches and 28 inches in diameter) and 1
non-protected California buckeye (18 inches in diameter) to allow for access road improvement s
and 1 protected coast live oak (14 inches in diameter) to allow for one of the Villalobos singl e
family dwellings . It is not anticipated that the removal of 3 oak trees would result in a significan t
environmental impact to oak woodland resources .




                                                  25
(f) No Impact . No Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan, no r
any other conservation plans have been adopted for this area .

See Proposed Condition of Approval contained in Section VI .1 - Aesthetics, regarding
recordation of conservation and scenic easement over those portions of the property, outside of th e
proposed building sites and road improvement areas, on slopes of 30 percent or greater.

5.       CULTURAL RESOURCES                                                   Less Than
                                                                              Significant
                                                               Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                               Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                              Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impac t
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of       u              u             u           s
   a historical resource as defined in 15064.5 ?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of       u              u             u           s
   an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064 .5?

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological         u              u             u           s
   resource or site or unique geologic feature?

d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred             u              u             u           s
   outside of formal cemeteries ?


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

5(a), (b), (c), (d): No Impact. See previous Sections lI .A (Project Description) and B
(Environmental Setting) and Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as wel l
as the sources referenced .




                                                         26
6.        GEOLOGY AND SOILS                                                        Less Than
                                                                                   Significant
                                                                    Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                    Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantia l
    adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, o r
    death involving :

     i)   Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated            u              u             s           u
          on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Faul t
          Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
          area or based on other substantial evidence of a
          known fault? (Source : 1, 4, 10 )

     ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (Source :1, 4, 10)              u              u             s

     iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including                     u              u                         0
          liquefaction? (Source : 1, 4, 10)

     iv) Landslides? (Source: 1, 4, 10 )                                u              0             s           0

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil ?          u              u             s           u
    (Source : 1, 4, 10 )

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or           u              u             s           u
    that would become unstable as a result of the project ,
    and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, latera l
    spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (Source :
    1, 4, 10)

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B            u              s             u
    of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creatin g
    substantial risks to life or property? (Source: 1, 4, 10 )

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use o f            u              u             s   .       u


    septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
    where sewers are not available for the disposal of
    wastewater? (Source : 1, 4, 10)


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

                         Less Than Significant Impact. Although there are no known activ e
6(a)(i), (a)(ii), (a)(iii) :
faults that traverse the project site, the project site is within approximately 1,000 feet of the
Chupines Fault, 3 .5 miles of the Monterey Bay Tularcitos Fault, 5 .9 miles from the Rinconada
Fault, 14 miles from the San Gregorio Fault, and 23 miles from the San Andreas Fault . Of these
faults, the San Andreas Fault is the only one that appears to be active and therefore poses th e
greatest earthquake hazard. An active fault is one that has experienced seismic activity sinc e
roughly 1800 or exhibits evidence of surface displacement during Holocene time . If a fault shows
evidence of displacement that is between Holocene and Pleistocene ages, it is considere d

                                                               27
"potentially active" . A "non-active" fault is one that has shown no signs of activity for over 1 . 7
million years .

The project site will likely experience at least one moderate to severe earthquake (Magnitude 5 .0
to 7+) and associated seismic ground shaking during the lifetime of the proposed project . More
frequent earthquakes of less magnitude are more likely . Some structural damage from stronge r
shaking would be expected . Modifications to the interior of the existing structure will be require d
to be constructed to the most recent California Uniform Building Code as adopted by the County .
This would ensure that the modifications are built to reduce the risk of damage by earthquak e
shaking. Therefore, the project would not increase the risk of loss, injury or death associated wit h
earthquake faults, strong seismic ground shaking, or seismic related ground failure, and no
mitigation measures would be necessar y

(a)(iv) Less Than Significant Impact. The site contains three landslide areas . A large (32 acre)
ancient slide is located on proposed Parcel A . Two smaller landslide areas are found on the site ,
one on parcel A and the other on Parcel B-4 . The landslide area on Parcel B-4 is not locate d
within the area expected to be developed as a building site and is not located in an area between
the building site and access road . (Source 4)

(b), (c) Less Than Significant Impact . The site is located in a zone designated as "mos t
susceptible" to landslides and erosion . Large landslide areas have been mapped to a maximu m
thickness of thirty feet in the upper Robles Formation in the Corral de Tierra Area. The Paso
Roble Formation has been severely gullied in the vicinity, but is so well cemented on the subjec t
site that it poses a negligible erosion hazard . On site, an ancient landslide is defined b y
undulating topography . The headscarp is faintly evident along the ridge, but the tow and much o f
the main body has been removed by erosion . This slide is of substantial size (approximately 3 2
acres) and is located in the southwestern portion of the project site . No development is planne d
in this area . This slide is considered to be stabilized, and no features of recent movement wer e
observed. No indications of recent major landslides were observed on the site,, nor have an y
historical ground failures been reported . Movement could occur along the steep slope s
paralleling the southwestern boundary of the property if the sols were well saturated and th e
movement triggered by a large earthquake . However, this slope area is highly vegetated and it i s
doubtful that any slides of the "skinslide" type would occur . None of the proposed building site s
are located on 30% slopes or greater . (Source : 4)

 (d) Less than Significant with Mitigation . A Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation
Investigation Report was prepared by Soil Surveys Inc. for the subdivision . All development on
the project site will be required to follow the recommendations of the geotechnical report . The
majority of the site requires standard recommendations commonly found in geotechnical reports .
However, Parcel B-2 was identified as having a moderately to highly expansive lens of stif f
sandy clay from 1 .5 to 2.5 feet deep.

Mitigation Measure #6: In order to minimize geotechnical impacts, the applicant shall adher e
to the special recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Investigation and Percolatio n



                                                 28
Investigation reports prepared by Soil Surveys, Inc. (April 2003), including but not limited to the
following recommendations for development on Parcel B-2 :

    1. Spread footings shall be constructed a minimum of 18 inches below finished building pa d
       subgrade, measured from the lower of the inside or outside soil grade adjacent to th e
       foundation, for both one and two story portions of the new buildings, and continuous
       footings shall be reinforced with four #4 reinforcing bars, two placed near the botto m
       and two near the top offooting.
    2. Foundation excavations shall be flooded with three to four inches of water at least 2 4
       hours prior to pouring concrete, and subgrade for building slabs and foundations shoul d
       be brought to the low plastic limit range of moisture (19% to 25%) for a depth of at least
       eight inches prior to pouring concrete .
    3. Concrete floor slabs-on-grade shall be at least 5 inches thick and shall be reinforced wit h
       a minimum of #3 steel rebars placed 16 inches on center, or #4 steel rebars placed 2 4
        inches on center, both ways.
    4. No tree or high water using shrub should be planted within 15 feet of any buildin g
       foundation .
    5. Any lawns and landscaped strips near the buildings should be well watered an d
       maintained after completion of the project.
    6. Roof and site water should be directed away from the building foundation ; positive
        drainage shall be established away from the building, and no water draining from up-
       slope of the building shall be allowed to flow against any part of the building foundation .
    7. The subgrade for the access roads, driveways and parking areas in all parcels shall b e
       prepared for aggregate base as specified in Section VIII, "Recommende d
       Specifications," of the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Soil Surveys, Inc . dated
       April 2003 .

Mitigation Monitoring Action #6 : Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, th e
applicant shall submit grading and building plans that have been reviewed and approved by a
registered geotechnical engineer, and verified as consistent with the recommendations of th e
Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation Investigation reports. Accompanying the grading
and building plans shall be a letter prepared by the consulting registered geotechnical enginee r
stating that the plans are consistent with the special recommendations described in th e
Mitigation Measure .

(e) : Less Than Significant Impact. The Geotechnical Investigation and Percolatio n
Investigation Reported prepared by Soil Surveys, Inc . found that the site has soil condition s
suitable for septic systems . For all of the septic system drainfields, the report recommends that a
100% addition to the required drainfield be constructed with the initial installation, and that al l
septic systems be installed as required by County regulations . The report also recommends tha t
the drainfield branches be separated by a manual diversion valve in or4deer to alternately appl y
the septic tank effluent to each branch of the drainfield . The drainfield valve should be turned a t
least once each year for the purpose of alternating the drainfield applicatio n




                                                 29
        HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL S                                        Less Than
                                                                                Significant
                                                                 Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                 Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the                  u              u             u           s
   environment through the routine transport, use, or
   disposal of hazardous materials? (Source : )

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the                  u              u             u           s
   environment through reasonably foreseeable upset an d
   accident conditions involving the release of hazardou s
   materials into the environment? (Source :)

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or                   u              u             u           s
   acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
   one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
   (Source : 1-3, 7)

d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of               u              u             u           s
   hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant t o
   Government Code Section 65962 .5 and, as a result ,
   would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
   environment? (Source : 1-3, 12 )

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,         u              u             u           s
   where such a plan has not been adopted, within tw o
   miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
   project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
   working in the project area? (Source : 1-3, 7, 15)

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,          u              u             u           s
   would the project result in a safety hazard for people
   residing or working in the project area? (Source : 1-3, 7 )

g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an          u              u             u           s
   adopted emergency response plan or emergenc y
   evacuation plan? (Source : 1-3 )

h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,        u              u             s           u
   injury or death involving wildland fires, including wher e
   wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
   residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source : 1-4 ,
   7, 13, and 14 )


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

7(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) : No Impact. The proposed project is for residential use and wil l
not involve the transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials . No known hazards o r
hazardous materials exist on or within the vicinity of the project site .



                                                           30
7(h) : Less Than Significant Impact . The project site is located within an area designated t o
have a moderate to high wildland fire risk . The proposed project has the potential to expos e
people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires .
However, the Salinas Rural Fire Protection District staff reviewed the project application an d
placed conditions of approval to ensure the creation of new parcels and subsequent constructio n
on those parcels would be consistent with all applicable fire regulations . The conditions of
approval are based on an adopted County Ordinance that regulated development within fire
hazard areas, implementing requirements of state law . Therefore, the project's potential to expose
people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires would b e
considered less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be necessary .

8.       HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY                                               Less Than
                                                                                   Significant
                                                                    Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                    Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a)   Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge             u             u              u           s
     requirements? (Source : 10, 18, 19 )

b)   Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere            u              u             s           u
     substantially with groundwater recharge such that ther e
     would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering
     of the local groundwater table level (e .g ., the
     production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would dro p
     to a level which would not support existing land uses o r
     planned uses for which permits have been granted) ?
     (Source : 18, 19)

c)   Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the           u              s             u           u
     site or area, including through the alteration of th e
     course of a stream or river, in a manner which woul d
     result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site ?
     (Source : 10, 18, 19)

d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the             u              u                         s
     site or area, including through the alteration of th e
     course of a stream or river, or substantially increase th e
     rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner whic h
     would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source : 10 ,
     18, 19 )

e)   Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed               u              s             u           u
     the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainag e
     systems or provide substantial additional sources o f
     polluted runoff? (Source : 10, 18, 19)

f)   Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Source :            u             s             u           u
     10, 18, 19 )




                                                               31
8.       HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY                                              Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                   Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                   Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                  Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
g)   Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as              u             u              u           s
     mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Floo d
     Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineatio n
     map? (Source : 1-4, 18, 19)

h)   Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures              u             u              u           s
     which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Source :
     1-4, 18, 19)

i)   Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,        u              u             u           s
     injury or death involving flooding, including flooding
     as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (Source : 1 -
     4, 18, 19)

j)   Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (Source : 1-           u              u             u           s
     4, 18, 19)


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

8.(b) Less Than Significant Impact . The project has the potential to affect groundwater
supplies since the project proposes to be served by an existing private well, and is located withi n
the Toro Planning Area, which is an area with potential water supply limitations . Specifically,
the site is within the southeastern portions of the Watson Creek Subarea of the El Tor o
Groundwater Basin . The Watson Creek Subarea encompasses approximately 4,708 acres . While
groundwater level declines have been noted in most subareas of the El Toro Groundwater Basin ,
groundwater levels monitored in wells located within the Watson Creek Subarea have generally
exhibited seasonal fluctuations and relative stability . (Source : 19)

 Water for the project would be provided from an existing well located on an adjacent parce l
 (Briggs) at 376 Corral De Tierra Road (APN 151-041-030-000) . The well is located at a n
 elevation of approximately 550 feet above mean sea level (msl) . Based on the results of a 24-
 hour test performed in October 2003, the well is estimated to yield approximately 25 gallons pe r
 minute (gpm) with a specific capacity of approximately 6 .25 gpm per foot. (Source : 19)

 The total net water demand for the proposed project (incorporating both existing and propose d
 water demand) is estimated to be 3 .8 afy which should be available from groundwater recharge a t
 the property (estimated to be approximately 28 afy) during years of average precipitation.
 Additionally, groundwater storage within the Monterey Shale Aquifer beneath the propert y
 (estimated to range from 430 to 3,000 acre-feet) could provide additional supply during drought
 years . The quantity of water currently available from the Briggs well appears adequate to mee t
 the projected requirements and demand for the proposed project and appears to represent a n
 assured long term water supply, as defined in Monterey County Code, Title 19 . (Source : 18, 19)


                                                             32
8.(c), (e), (f) - Less Than Significant With Mitigation . The project site has mild slopes along
the ridge tops and within some valley areas with moderately steep sidehill slopes ; however, the
proposed building sites are all located on gently rolling ridges or knolls with slopes less than
30%. The building sites are mostly covered with grass and have nearby brush and scattered oa k
trees on the ridge and side slopes .

The proposed project has the potential to affect the existing drainage pattern, contribute runof f
water, and will potentially provide an additional source of polluted runoff which may degrad e
water quality. The project proposes to construct new single family residences with associate d
structures along with improvements to the access road . This development will alter the existin g
landscape via grading improvements, increase the impervious surface area onsite and wil l
contribute runoff water. However, the project has been designed, where feasible, to minimiz e
runoff, site disturbance, erosion and sedimentation .

In general, groundwater quality in the Toro Basin is characterized as fair to poor with significan t
variability between and within separate aquifer units . Groundwater quality data for the Briggs
well (Corral de Tierra Water System #40) indicate overall groundwater quality is poor . Arseni c
was detected in the groundwater samples at concentrations ranging from 0 .006 to 0 .010 mg/1,
which approaches or equals the California Primary MCL of 5 NTUs . (Source: 19)

Septic systems would be located within relatively flat portions of the proposed building sites fo r
each residence . Septic waste water will be processed on site by standard septic methods with the .
effluent dispersed to the subsoils . The recommended sewage disposal system configuratio n
should be a septic tank, associated piping and leach field trenches sized as discussed in th e
Percolation and Groundwater Study prepared for the project . Construction and operation of the,
systems should conform to the recommendations given in the Percolation and Groundwate r
Study and the requirements set forth by Monterey County . (Source: 10)

The project was reviewed by the Monterey County Environmental Health Division to determin e
the water quality impacts . The Environmental Health Division assessment concluded that
standard conditions could be implemented to mitigate the water quality impacts, including a
requirement that the existing water system must install a treatment system to bring water qualit y
into compliance with standards found in Chapter 15.04 of the County Code, Titles 17 and 22 o f
the California Code of Regulations and in the Residential Subdivision Water Supply standards .
(Source : 18)

The project was reviewed by the Water Resources Agency in order to determine the project' s
effect on the existing drainage pattern of the site . The Water Resources Agency assessmen t
concluded that standard drainage improvements to the access road and building sites could b e
implemented in order to control stormwater runoff and maintain onsite drainage patterns . As a
condition of approval, the project would be required to provide drainage improvements pursuan t
to an approved drainage plan . Specifically, stormwatefrunoff from impervious surfaces would b e
required to be dispersed at multiple points, away from and below any septic leach fields, over th e
least steep available slopes, and with erosion control at outlets . In addition, the mitigatio n



                                                 33
referenced below would reduce drainage and stormwater runoff impacts to a less than significan t
level:

See Mitigation Measure and Monitoring Action #3, contained in Section VI .4 - Biological
Resources, regarding the requirement for an erosion control plan .

8. (a), (d), (g), (h), (i), (j) - No Impact . The proposed project will not violate water quality
standards . It will not expose people or structures to flood hazards and will not subject people to
inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow .

9.       LAND USE AND PLANNING                                                     Less Than
                                                                                   Significant
                                                                    Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                    Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Wouldthe project :                                                    Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? (Source : 1-              u             u             u           s
   4, 7)

b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or                u             u             u           s
   regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
   (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
   plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance )
   adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating a n
   environmental effect? (Source : 1-5, 7, 18)

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or             u             u             u           s
   natural community conservation plan? (Source : 1-5, 7 ,
   18)


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

9 : No Impact. See previous Sections II.A (Project Description) and B (Environmental Setting )
and Section IV.A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the source s
referenced .

10. MINERAL RESOURCES                                                              Less Than
                                                                                   Significant
                                                                    Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                    Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral                u              u             u           U
   resource that would be of value to the region and the
   residents of the state? (Source : 1-4, 7)

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important            u              u             u           s
   mineral resource recovery site delineated on a loca l
   general plan, specific plan or other land use plan ?
   (Source : 1-4, 7)



                                                               34
Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

10(a), (b) : No Impact. See previous Sections II.A (Project Description) and B (Environmental
Setting) and Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the source s
referenced .

11.      NOISE                                                                  Less Than
                                                                                Significant
                                                                 Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                 Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project result in :                                      Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in           u              u             u           s
   excess of standards established in the local general pla n
   or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
   agencies? (Source : 1-5, 7)

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive                 u              u             u           s
   groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels ?
   (Source : 1-5, 7 )

c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise                 u              u             u           s
   levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
   without the project? (Source : 1-5, 7)

d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient           u              u             u           s
   noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
   without the project? (Source : 1-5, 7)

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,         u              u             u           s
   where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
   miles of a public airport or public use airport, woul d
   the project expose people residing or working in th e
   project area to excessive noise levels? (Source : 1-5, 7 )

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,          u              u             u           s
   would the project expose people residing or working i n
   the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source : 1-5 ,
   7)


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

11(a-f): No Impact. See previous Sections lI .A (Project Description) and B (Environmenta l
Setting) and Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the source s
referenced.




                                                            35
12. POPULATION AND HOUSIN G                                                       Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                  Potentially        With       Less Than
                                                                  Significant     Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project:                                                  Impact       Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either            u              u              u           s
   directly (for example, by proposing new homes an d
   businesses) or indirectly (for example, throug h
   extension of roads or other infrastructure) ?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,                  u              u              u           s
   necessitating the construction of replacement housin g
   elsewhere ?

c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating              u              u              u           s
   the construction of replacement housing elsewhere ?


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

No Impact. See previous Sections ILA (Project Description) and B (Environmental Setting) an d
Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the sources referenced .

13.      PUBLIC SERVICE S                                                         Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                   Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                   Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project result in :                                        Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with th e
provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered governmenta l
facilities, the construction of which could cause significan t
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptabl e
service ratios, response times or other performanc e
objectives for any of the public services :

a)       Fire protection?

b)       Police protection?

c)       Schools?

d)       Parks?

e)       Other public facilities?


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

13 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) : No Impact. See previous Sections II .A (Project Description) and B
(Environmental Setting) and Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well
as the sources referenced .
                                                             36
14.      RECREATION                                                               Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                   Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                   Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                  Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional              u              u             u           s
   parks or other recreational facilities such that substantia l
   physical deterioration of the facility would occur or b e
   accelerated ?

b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require         u              u             u           s
   the construction or expansion of recreational facilitie s
   which might have an adverse physical effect on th e
   environment?


14(a), (b) : No Impact. See previous Sections ILA (Project Description) and B (Environmenta l
Setting) and Section IV .A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the source s
referenced.


15.      TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC                                                   Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                   Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                   Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project:                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in                u              s             u               u
   relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of th e
   street system (i.e ., result in a substantial increase in
   either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
   ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (Source :
   1-4, 7, 9, 16, 18)

b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of             u              u              s          u
   service standard established by the county congestion
   management agency for designated roads or highways ?
   (Source : 1-4, 7, 9, 18 )

c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either        u              u             u           s
   an increase in traffic levels or a change in location tha t
   result in substantial safety risks? (Source : 1-4, 7, 9 )

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature              u              u             u           s
   (e .g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) o r
   incompatible uses (e .g ., farm equipment)? (Source: 1-4,
   7, 9)

e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Source : 1-4, 7,            u              u             'u
   9)




                                                             37
15.        TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFI C                                                 Less Than
                                                                                   Significant
                                                                    Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                    Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Source : 1-4, 7,             u              u             u           s
    9)

g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs                   u              u             u           s
    supporting alternative transportation (e .g ., bus turnouts ,
    bicycle racks)? (Source : 1-4, 7, 9 )



Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

The project site is located on the southwest side of Corral de Tierra Road, approximately 1 .25
miles southeast of its intersection with Calera Canyon and Robley roads . The site has access to
Corral de Tierra Road via a proposed private road . (Source: 9) Regional access is provided by
Highway 68 which is the main connector between Monterey County's two principal urbanize d
areas, Salinas and the Monterey Peninsula . It serves as a commuter route between Salinas and th e
Monterey Peninsula while providing access to the low density residential developments, school s
and business parks adjacent to the corridor. The majority of traffic generated on Highway 68 i s
not created by residents living along the corridor, but by commute trips and tourism coming t o
and from the Salinas Valley and the Monterey Peninsula .

Traffic congestion along Highway 68 is currently at a level of service F conditions during the
morning and afternoon commute periods . The metered traffic conditions at critical intersection s
on Highway 68 result in exceptionally long queues during peak periods of traffic . The evidence
of diversion to Blanco Road and "peak spreading" are further indicators that traffic along th e
Highway 68 corridor currently exceeds capacity . Since increased traffic demand along Highway
68 cannot be served in the peak hour, congestion is likely to begin earlier each morning and en d
later each evening . However, most of these problems should be significantly reduced by takin g
less signal time to serve the side streets and allowing more green time for the mainline traffic
using Highway 68 .

As described in the Highway 68 Traffic Improvements Action Plan, the following improvement s
are proposed:

      1) Install Opticoms at signal controlled intersections on Highway 68;
      2) Double left-turn lanes on westbound Highway 68 at the intersection with Laureles Grade ;
      3) Provide improved Torero Drive access onto Highway 68 ;
      4) Double left-turn lanes on westbound Highway 68 at the intersection with Corral de Tierr a
         Drive;
      5) Continuously maintain the existing shoulder on Highway 68 to the maximum exten t
         feasible ;
      6) Extend eastbound right turn lane at Los Laureles Grade ;

                                                               38
   7) Widen Highway 68 from State Route 218 to Ragsdale Road ;
   8) Double left-turn lanes on westbound Highway 68 at the intersection with San Benanci o
      Road; and
   9) Implement the South Fort Ord Bypass from Torero Drive to State Route 218 .

In order to support implementation these improvements, Monterey County Public Works ha s
coordinated with the Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) to develop a Regiona l
Traffic Plan and the institution of regional traffic impact mitigation fees . These projects are
required to contribute to the regional traffic mitigation fee program . (Sources: 9, 16, 18, 20)

15(a), (b) : Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation . The project will generate
approximately 38 daily trips, of which, 3 trips (1 in & 2 out) would be generated during the A M
peak hour and 4 trips (3 in & 1 out) during the PM peak hour . It is assumed that 62% of the
project trips would travel to/from east of Corral de Tierra (Salinas destinations) and 38% of the
project trips would travel to/from west of Corral de Tierra (Monterey Peninsula destinations) .
(Source : 9, 20 )

Intersection levels of service under background plus project conditions are as follows :

Highway 68/Laureles Grade Road Intersection - would continue to operate at LOS E during both
weekday AM and PM hours .

Highway 68/Corral de Tierra Road Intersection - would continue to operate at deficient LOS fo r
the weekday AM and unacceptable LOS E for the PM peak hour .

Highway 68/San Benancio Road Intersection - would operate at LOS F during both weekday
AM and PM peak hours .

According to Monterey County Public Works, in order to mitigate for incremental regiona l
impacts (includes Highway 68 transportation corridor), the project would be required to pay th e
Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) Regional Development Impact Fee (RDIF )
adopted by the County of Monterey, per Monterey County Ordinance 5110, adopted June 2008 .
The TAMC RDIF condition of approval below would reduce these impacts to a less tha n
significant level.

The project would also contribute temporary vehicle trips in the form of contractor an d
construction vehicles, building material delivery trucks and soil and approximately 655 soil off-
haul trucks during grading for the road. It is anticipated that these temporary vehicle trips woul d
be accommodated by the local road system and would not result in a significant impact .
However, nearby Highway 68 operates at a deficient level of service during peak traffic hours .
Therefore, the project would be required to minimize impacts on Highway 68 during AM an d
PM peak traffic hours . The below mitigation would reduce traffic impacts to a less tha n
significant level by keeping truck traffic to off-peak hours .




                                                39
Proposed Condition of Approval : The following condition of approval will be require d
pursuant to County policies : The applicant shall pay the adopted Transportation Agency of
Monterey County (TAMC) Regional Development Impact Fee identified in the TAMC nexus
studying, in accordance with Monterey County ordinance 5110, to the County of Monterey fo r
future transportation improvements within Monterey County . (Source : 20)

Proposed Condition of Approval : The following condition of approval will be require d
pursuant to County policies : The applicant shall pay the Route 68 Improvement Fee identified i n
the State Highway 68 Traffic Improvements Action Plan for improvements along the Highway 6 8
corridor.

Mitigation Measure #7:       In order to mitigate construction and grading truck impacts o n
Highway 68, the applicant shall arrange for the hauling of grading and construction materials
pursuant to the recommendations prescribed by a construction and management plan . Hauling
operations shall not occur on weekends and holidays. The only exception shall be structural
concrete, which will be allowed to be hauled during the 7:00 am to 9 :00 am time period on non-
holiday weekdays only.

Mitigation Monitoring Action #7: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
submit a construction management plan for review and approval by the RMA-Public Work s
Department. During construction and grading operations, the applicant shall submit monthl y
reports that include the daily truck trip log showing travel times to the Planning Department fo r
review and approval . The contractor shall submit a signed certification to contain an "under
penalty ofperjury" clause. Failure to comply shall cause revocation ofpermit .

15(c), (e), (f), (d), (g) : No Impact. The proposed project is not located near any airports and wil l
not change air traffic patterns . The project will not substantially increase hazards to a design
feature . The project would not result in inadequate emergency access or parking capacity . The
project is located within access of alternative modes of transportation such as bus services.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with policies, plans or programs supporting alternative
transportation.

16.      UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS                                        Less Than
                                                                              Significant
                                                               Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                               Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project :                                              Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the                 u              u             u           s
   applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board ?
   (Source : 16, 18)

b) Require or result in the construction of new water or           u              u             u           s
   wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existin g
   facilities, the construction of which could caus e
   significant environmental effects? (Source : 16, 18)




                                                          40
16.      UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS                                            Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                   Potentially       With       Less Than
                                                                   Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
Would the project:                                                   Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water            u              u             s           u
   drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, th e
   construction of which could cause significan t
   environmental effects? (Source : 16, 18 )

d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the               u              u             s           u
   project from existing entitlements and resources, or ar e
   new or expanded entitlements needed? (Source : 16, 18 )

e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment               u              u             u           s
   provider which serves or may serve the project that it ha s
   adequate capacity to serve the project's projecte d
   demand in addition to the provider's existing
   commitments? (Source : 16, 18 )

f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity          u              u             u           s
   to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
   needs? (Source : 1-4, 16 )

g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and                  u              u             u           s
   regulations related to solid waste? (Source : 1-4, 16 )


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation:

16(c), (d). Less Than Significant Impact . The proposed project has the potential to impac t
stormwater drainage facilities and water supplies due to proposed residential uses located withi n
an area that is currently undeveloped . The project was reviewed by the Water Resources Agenc y
and Division of Environmental Health for stormwater drainage and water suitability. Propose d
structures would be served by an existing well on an adjacent parcel (APN 151-041-030-000) an d
new septic systems with leach fields . The project proposes 4 new residences on the project site .
For these residential uses and landscaping, the potential water usage (incorporates return flo w
from discharge to septic systems) for 4 new units based on an average of 0 .3 AF/year (acre feet a
year) per unit would be 1 .2 AF/year . Projected water estimates for 4 residences and landscapin g
was derived from the El Toro Groundwater Study prepared by Geosyntec (July 2007) . Based on
Water Resources Agency review of stormwater drainage, standard drainage improvements woul d
be feasible . Further, locating these improvements along the existing road would minimiz e
environmental impacts such as uncontrolled erosion and runoff, and disturbance to habitat .
Based on Division of Environmental Health review of water, the existing well has adequat e
capacity to provide water to the four new homes . Therefore, the project would result in less than
significant impacts for stormwater drainage facilities and water supplies . (16, 18 )

16(a), (b), (e) : No Impact. According to Environmental Health's review of the project, th e
project would be able to comply with wastewater treatment requirements . Septic systems ,
including septic tanks and leach fields, would be located within relatively flat portions of th e

                                                             41
proposed building sites for each residence . According to the Percolation and Groundwater Stud y
prepared by Grice Engineering and Geology, Inc . (August 2006), the project site soils hav e
acceptable percolation capacity for disposal of septic effluent by either trench or pit-style leac h
fields . In addition, there are extensive areas available for septic dispersal . As such, the project
properties are relatively free of any septic restrictions or setbacks . Similarly, the amount of soli d
waste generated by the proposed project would not significantly impact the area's solid wast e
facilities . Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to these utilities an d
service systems issues. (Source: 16, 18)

16(f), (g) : No Impact. Solid waste collection service at the project site would be provided by th e
John Roscelli Corp . delivered to the Monterey Regional Waste Management District (MRWMD )
landfill located outside of the City of Marina . The MRWMD landfill receives solid wast e
disposal and sewage sludge ; recovers recycling materials ; and safely recycles or disposes o f
household hazardous waste for the many cities on the Monterey Peninsula . The MRWMD
landfill currently has a permit capacity of 3,500 tons per day and receives an average of 750 ton s
per day. The facility was recently re-engineered to have a total capacity of 48 million tons, o f
which 40 million tons are remaining, which is expected to provide service through the year 2107.
(Source: 1 - 4, 16)


VII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
NOTE : If there are significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated and no feasible project alternative s
are available, then complete the mandatory findings of significance and attach to this initial study as an appendix .
This is the first step for starting the environmental impact report (EIR) process .

                                                                                  Less Than
                                                                                  Significant
                                                                   Potentially       With       Less Than
Does the project:                                                  Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
                                                                     Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impact
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the                    u              s             u           u
   environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fis h
   or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife populatio n
   to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
   eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
   number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
   plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
   major periods of California history or prehistory ?
   (Source : )

b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but                     u              u             s           u
   cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulativel y
   considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
   project are considerable when viewed in connection
   with the effects of past projects, the effects of othe r
   current projects, and the effects of probable futur e
   projects)? (Source : )




                                                              42
                                                                            Less Than
                                                                            Significant
                                                             Potentially       With       Less Than
Does the project :                                           Significant    Mitigation    Significant     No
                                                               Impact      Incorporated     Impact      Impac t
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial       u              u             u           s
    adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
    indirectly? (Source : )


Discussion/Conclusion/Mitigation :

(a) : Less than Significant With Mitigation. Based upon the analysis throughout this Initia l
Study, the proposed project, as designed, conditioned, and mitigated, would not have th e
potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish o r
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten
to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare o r
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory . See previous Sections II . A (Project Description) and B (Environmental
Setting) and Section IV . A (Environmental Factors Potentially Affected), as well as the source s
referenced .

(b), (c): Less than Significant Impact . The project would involve residential development on a
site that is planned for Resource Conservation uses in the Monterey County General Plan an d
Toro Area Plan . Implementation of the proposed project would result in minor incrementa l
reductions in air quality in the project vicinity, and minor increases in traffic congestion . The
incremental air quality, transportation/traffic, public services, and utilities impacts of the project ,
when considered in combination with the effects of past projects, current projects, and probabl e
future projects in the planning area, would result in less than significant impacts . Conditions of
approval would ensure consistency with relevant General Plan health and safety policies . All
potential impact areas are deemed less than significant with County imposed conditions o f
approval.

Global Warming : The enactment of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, was signed int o
legislation by Governor Schwarzenegger in September 2006 and requires that greenhouse gase s
emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020 . Increased emissions of greenhouse gase s
due to developmental pressures have resulted in multiple adverse environmental effects ,
including, sea level rise, increased incidence and intensity of severe weather events (e .g., heavy
rainfall, droughts), and extirpation or extinction of plant and wildlife species. Further, emissions
contributing to climate change are attributable in large part to human activities associated wit h
the industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors . Given
the significant adverse environmental effects associated with anthropogenic climate change ,
increased emissions have the potential to result in cumulatively considerable air quality impact s
and indirect biological and hydrological impacts .

When analyzing a project's potential to affect climate change, it is important to note that neithe r
CEQA nor current case law identifies thresholds or other direction in measuring or evaluating th e

                                                        43
effect of individual projects on global warming . As a result, in the absence of applicabl e
methodology and thresholds, the significance of the project's effect on global warming cannot b e
quantified. Furthermore, given the transboundary nature of greenhouse gases, the cumulativ e
global emissions contributing to climate change can be attributed to every nation, region, and
city, in addition to naturally occurring phenomenon .

The level of emissions resulting due to project-generated traffic would not be expected to exceed
air quality standards . Further, as identified in Section VI.3 - Air Quality, the development of the
proposed project would not exceed applicable air quality standards as established by the ai r
pollution district . Given the scale and nature of the proposed project, in addition to, the use of
energy efficient appliances and other modern amenities, the proposed project is unlikely to
substantially impact existing levels of greenhouses gases on a local, regional, or global scale .




                                                 44
VIII . FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FEE S

Assessment of Fee :

The State Legislature, through the enactment of Senate Bill (SB) 1535, revoked the authority o f
lead agencies to determine that a project subject to CEQA review had a "de minimis" (minimal )
effect on fish and wildlife resources under the jurisdiction of the Department of Fish and Game .
Projects that were determined to have a "de minimis" effect were exempt from payment of th e
filing fees .

SB 1535 has eliminated the provision for a determination of "de minimis" effect by the lea d
agency; consequently, all land development projects that are subject to environmental review ar e
now subject to the filing fees, unless the Department of Fish and Game determines that the projec t
will have no effect on fish and wildlife resources .

To be considered for determination of "no effect" on fish and wildlife resources, developmen t
applicants must submit a form requesting such determination to the Department of Fish and Game .
Forms may be obtained by contacting the Department by telephone at (916) 631-0606 or throug h
the Department's website at www.dfg.ca.gov.

Conclusion :   The project will be required to pay the fee .

Evidence :     Based on the record as a whole as embodied in the Planning Department file s
               pertaining to PLN020508 and the attached Initial Study / Proposed Mitigate d
               Negative Declaration.




                                                  45
IX. REFERENCES

1. Project Application, Plans and Materials in File No . PLN020508
2. Monterey County General Plan (1982 )
3. Toro Area Plan
4. Environmental Impact Report for Brigadoon Estates Subdivision, EMC, 1980 (certified b y
   Board of Supervisors on June 16, 1981)
5. Monterey County Code : Title 21 Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5 .40 Uniform Transient
   Occupancy Tax, and Chapter 10 .60 Noise Control
6. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, Revise d
   June 2004
7. Site Visit conducted by the County Project Planner on February 11, 200 9
8. Monterey County Geographic Information Syste m
9. Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Higgins Associates, dated October 16, 2003 .
10. Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation Investigation Report prepared by Soil Survey s
    Inc. dated April 6, 2003 .
11. Biological Assessment Update prepared by Dale Hameister of Rana Creek Habitat
    Restoration dated November 10, 2003 .
12. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) . FIRM Panel #060 195 0140, January 30 ,
    1984 .
13. LUAC minutes of meeting on June 2, 2003 .
14. Public Resources Code 4290 et seq . (State of California Fire Code)
15. Title 19, Subdivision Ordinance, of the Monterey County Cod e
16. Initial Study for Villalobos (PLN070482, PLN060101, and PLN060296), Monterey Count y
    Planning Department and PMC Consultants, November 26, 2008 .
17. Air Quality Management Plan, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, August ,
    2008.
18. Interdepartmental Review, Agency Comments and Conditions
19. Project Specific Hydrogeologic Report - Briggs Subdivision prepared by PE S
   Environmental, Inc ., December 21, 2007 .
20. E-mail message from Raul Martinez to Bob Schubert dated March 23, 2009 .


ATTACHMENTS : Brigadoon Estates E .I.R Viewshed Map

                                                46
Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Higgins Associates, dated October 16 ,
2003 .
Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation Investigation Report prepare d
by Soil Surveys Inc . dated April 6, 2003 .
Biological Assessment Update prepared by Dale Hameister of Rana Cree k
Habitat Restoration dated November 10, 2003.
Project Specific Hydrogeologic Report - Briggs Subdivision (PLN020508 )
prepared by PES Environmental Inc . dated October 1, 2007.




                        47
                                                                     EXHIBIT G

                   MONTEREY BA Y
                   Unified Air Pollution Control District                                                           Air Pollution Control Officer
                   serving Monterey, San Benito, and Santa Cruz counties                                                 Richard Stedman

                                   24580 Silver Cloud Court • Monterey, California 93940 . 831/647-9411 • FAX 831/647-850 1




DISTRICT
BOAR D
MEMBER S                 April 23, 200 9                                                     Sent Electronically To :
CHAIR :                                                                                      s chubertbj@co .monterey.ca .us
Simon Salinas
Monterey County          Mr. Bob Schubert, Senior Planner                                    Original Sent by First Class Mai l
VICE CHAIR :             Resource Management Agency-Planning Department
Sam Storey
Santa Cru z              168 W . Alisal Street, 2 nd Floor
County Cities
                         Salinas, CA 9390 1
Lou Calcagno
Monterey Count y         SUBJECT : MND FOR BRIGGS MINOR SUBDIVISION
Tony Campo s
Santa Cruz
County                   Dear Mr. Schubert:
Dennis Donohu e
City of Salina s
                         The Air District submits the following comments for your consideration :
Joseph Russel l
Monterey
Peninsula Cities
                         Attainment Status for State Ozone Standard . Page 19 .
Ellen Piri e
Santa Cruz               The North Central Coast Air Basin has been designated "non-attainment" for the State ozon e
County
                         standard because it violates the 8-hour component of the standard .
Jane Parker
Monterey Count y

Reb Monac o              Mitigation Measure #1 . Page 20 .
San Benito
County                   Haul trucks should be covered and should maintain two feet of freeboard .
Richard Ortiz
South Monterey
County Cities           Mitigation Monitoring Action #1 . Page 21 .
                        No permits will be required from the Air District for the grading operations .

                         Thank you for the opportunity to review the document .

                         Sincerely,
                                                                                                                       'O
                                                     STATE OF CALIFORNI A
                                                                                                                   0
                                GOVERNOR'S OFFICE of PLANNING AND RESEARC H
                                        STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEdGER                                                                                              CYNTHIA BRYANT
     GOVERNOR                                                                                                         DIRECTOR

              April 24, 200 9



              Bob Schubert
              Monterey County - RMA Plannin g
              168 W . Alisall St ., 2nd Floor
              Salinas, CA 9390 1

              Subject: Brigg s
              SCH#: 200903108 8

              Dear Bob Schubert :

              The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected stat e
              agencies for review . The xeview period closed on April 23, 2009, and no state agencies submitte d
              comments by that date . This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghous e
              review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Qualit y
              Act.

              Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding th e
              environmental review process . If you have a question about the above-named project, please refer to th e
              ten-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office.

              Sincerely," .




                                 1400 10th Street P .O . Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044
                                       (916) 445-0613 FAX (916) 323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov
                                                 Document Details Report
                                              State Clearinghouse Data Bas e

       SCH#       200903108 8
 Project Title    Brigg s
Lead Agency       Monterey Count y

         Type     MND Mitigated Negative Declaratio n
  Description     Minor subdivision to divide a 335 acre parcel into four lots of 20 acres each (Parcels B-1, B-2, an d
                  B-3), one 29 .9 acre parcel (B-4) and a 245 acre remainder parcel .

 Lead Agency Contact
       Name       Bob Schuber t
     Agency       Monterey County - RMA Plannin g
      Phone       (831) 755-5183                                               Fax
       email
     Address      168 W . Alisall St., 2nd Floo r
         City     Salina s                                             State CA       Zip 9390 1

 Project Locatio n
      County      Monterey
         City     Salinas
      Region
   Lat/Lon g
Cross Streets     Corral de Tierra Rd/Calera Canyon R d
   Parcel No .    151-041-031-00 0
   Township                         Range                         Section                        Bas e


 Proximity to :
    Highways
     Airports
    Railways
   Waterways
     Schools
    Land Use      Vacant/RC/10-VA/Resource Conservatio n


Project Issues    Aesthetic/Visual ; Air Quality ; Biological Resources ; Drainage/Absorption ; Geologic/Seismic ; Publi c
                  Services; Septic System ; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading ; Traffic/Circulation ; Vegetation ; Wate r
                  Quality ; Water Supply ; Wetland/Riparian ; Wildlife


    Reviewing Resources Agency ; Department of Conservation ; Department of Fish and Game, Region 4 ; Office of
     Agencies Historic Preservation ; Department of Parks and Recreation ; Department of Water Resources ; Office o f
               Emergency Services ; Caltrans, District 5 ; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 3 ; Nativ e
               American Heritage Commissio n


Date Received     03/25/2009          Start of Review   03/25/2009          End of Review 04/23/200 9




                   Note : Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency .

				
DOCUMENT INFO