STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-1 OWNER Williamstown Friendly Village Partners 422 Burlingame Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90049 APPLICANT/AGENT: Daniel Dickson PO Box 135 Caspar, CA 95420 REQUEST: Construct a new 3,167± sq. foot two-story single-family

residence/attached garage with a maximum height of 25± feet above average natural grade. Associated development includes driveway, connect to utilities, convert test well to production well, water storage tank, propane tank, on-site septic disposal system, and improvements to walking path.

The applicant requests a variance to reduce the side yard setback on the

north side from 20 feet to six feet. LOCATION: In the Coastal Zone, approximately one mile south of the town of

Mendocino on the west side of Highway One at 9290 North Highway One (APN 119-340-04).

TOTAL ACREAGE: 3.12± Acres GENERAL PLAN: RR-5 ZONING: RR: L-5 EXISTING USES: Undeveloped ADJACENT ZONING: East: RR: L-5 [RR: L-2] West: Ocean North: RR: L-5 South: RR: L-5 PD SURROUNDING LAND USES: East: Highway One; Residential West: Ocean North: Residential South: Residential SUPERVISORY DISTRICT: 5 CA COASTAL RECORDS: Image 200503472 OTHER RELATED APPLICATIONS: CDP 105-02 approved on March 27, 2003, an interior remodel and 465 sq. foot addition to an existing 2,340 sq. foot two-story single-family residence located on parcel 119-340-05, directly adjacent to the north. The residence appears to pre-date the Coastal Act. The earliest building permit on file for the residence is an electrical permit (10169) dated 12/7/79. This information is pertinent to the project because the subject proposed residence on APN

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-2 119-340-04), recently purchased by the owner of APN 119-340-05 (property directly adjacent to the north), would match in height, materials and colors, to the existing residence at APN 119-340-05. This is a Highly Scenic Area. CDP 17-1996 approved on November 11, 2001, a test well, to be drilled a minimum of 100 feet from the bluff edge on subject parcel. CDP 17-2007 was applied for on March 19, 2007. The applicants requested to construct a 7,216 sq. foot single family residence with approximately 2,827 sq. feet in walkways, balcony, covered entry, and patios, and approximately 3,200 sq. feet of paved driveway on the subject parcel. A site view with planning staff and Tracie Nelson of the Department of Fish and Game occurred on April 10, 2007. Staff and DFG observed potential Sonoma tree vole habitat, as shown in the picture, taken on April 10, 2007, in Figure 1. Subsequently, planning staff sent a letter to the applicants, requesting a biological survey be conducted. The survey was never submitted1, and the project was withdrawn by the applicant on October 29, 2007. The subject property was subsequently purchased by Williamstown Friendly Village, the owners of the adjacent lot to the north as stated earlier.

Figure 1. Site conditions in April of 2007. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicants propose to construct a new 3,167± sq. foot two-story single-family residence and attached garage, with a maximum average height of 25± feet above the natural grade. Associated development includes a driveway, connection to utilities, conversion of the test well to a production well, a water storage tank, propane tank, on-site septic disposal system, and after the fact approval for improvements to a walking path and major vegetation removal. 1 The draft biological report for the subject project indicates that a Sonoma tree vole survey occurred on July 26 and August 15, 2007. Redwood Coast Associates found multiple Sonoma tree vole nest structures, and multiple resin ducts in nearly every Bishop pine on the property.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-3 The project is located in an area with sensitive natural resources, including Northern Bishop Pine Forest occupied by Sonoma tree voles, Coastal Terrace Prairie, Northern Coastal Bluff Scrub, riparian habitat, Brewery Gulch, which is a stream occupied by wild rainbow trout and Pacific giant salamander, and potential rare Mendocino coast Indian paintbrush (Castilleja mendocinensis) plants. The project would impact portions of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest that have recently been disturbed by removal of the understory, substantial limbing, and improvements to an existing trail through the occupied Sonoma tree vole habitat/Northern Bishop Pine Forest, including grading, placement of gravel, and installation of stairs and railing. The project includes a request for a variance to reduce the side yard setback on the north side from 20 feet to six feet. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW and RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: In addition to protections afforded by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California’s coastal resources are protected by Coastal Act requirements. The County is responsible for assuring that developments are carried out in compliance with Coastal Act requirements through implementation of the policies found within the Local Coastal Plan (LCP). The following analysis addresses both CEQA and Coastal Act requirements. Staff recommends denial of the project for failure to comply with CEQA or Local Coastal Plan requirements for protection of natural resources as outlined in Section 20.496.020 of the Coastal Zoning Code. Specifically, the proposed conservation area, as shown on Exhibit H, does not provide for adequate buffer areas from rare and endangered plant communities, including the Northern Bishop Pine Forest, Northern Coastal Bluff Scrub, and Coastal Terrace Prairie. The proposed conservation area additionally does not adequately protect the Northern Bishop Pine Forest or provide an adequate habitat area within the Northern Bishop Pine Forest for Sonoma tree voles which have been found present throughout the forested portion of the parcel. As an alternative motion, staff recommends conditional approval with mitigation measures as outlined in the Recommended Conditions, including a revised site plan, subject to approval by the Coastal Permit Administrator, protecting the maximum amount of Northern Bishop Pine Forest feasible, and allowing for minimum 50 foot buffers from all ESHAs within the conservation area where possible. The alternative motion would utilize the Mitigated Negative Declaration analysis for approval. Earth (Item 1): Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil: The application indicates approximately 122 cubic yards of gravel fill will be needed for the foundation slab, and 48.8 cubic yards will be graded for the proposed retaining walls. The proposed driveway would be located on relatively flat land, and would be approximately 60 feet in length. The applicants have submitted a geotechnical engineering report by BACE Geotechnical, a division of Brunsing Associates, Inc., for the proposed project. In the Geotechnical Investigation, Planned Temple Residence, 9290 North Highway One, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California, project 11679.3 (hereafter referred to as the “geotechnical report”), dated December 5, 2008, BACE recommends that foundation excavations be reviewed by BACE while excavation operations are being performed. Staff includes Recommended Condition Number 1 to require BACE recommendations as a condition of approval. As conditioned, the project would not result in significant impacts from disruptions displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site: Specific details have not been provided regarding proposed erosion control, however the site plan shows a proposed French drain along the west side of the structure, which continues south to the property line, where a gravel pit is proposed. The development area is slopes at a maximum rate of approximately 30%. Due to steep slopes, the extent of area to be developed, and the

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-4 proximity of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas downslope, measures should be taken to assure that erosion impacts from exposed soils and stormwater runoff will be minimized.

Regarding erosion control, Section 20.492.015 of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code states in pertinent part:

(A) The erosion rate shall not exceed the natural or existing level before development.

(B) Existing vegetation shall be maintained on the construction site to the maximum extent feasible. Trees shall be protected from damage by proper grading techniques.

(C) Areas of disturbed soil shall be reseeded and covered with vegetation as soon as possible after disturbance, but no less than one hundred (100) percent coverage in ninety (90) days after seeding; mulches may be used to cover ground areas temporarily. (E) To control erosion, development shall not be allowed on slopes over thirty (30) percent unless adequate evidence from a registered civil engineer or recognized authority is given that no increase in erosion will occur.

(G) Erosion control devices shall be installed in coordination with clearing, grubbing, and grading of downstream construction; the plan shall describe the location and timing for the installation of such devices and shall describe the parties responsible for repair and maintenance of such devices.

The trail geotechnical report, an additional report by BACE entitled Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance of the Trail Construction/Improvement at 9290 North Highway One, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California, dated April 24, 2008, outlines the following recommendations for existing trail construction work:

1. Cut slopes observed along the inboard and upper trail section, and first part of the lower section should be laid back to approximately 2H:1V, and the excess soils removed to a planting area outside of the ESHA.

2. Prior to each rainy season, until the areas are re-vegetated, erosion control such as fiber wattles should be placed along the inboard (uphill) side of these portions of the trail. Alternatively the cut slopes could be retained by additional, supported railroad ties.

3. Soil accumulated along the outboard of the lower section of trail is bare and therefore susceptible to erosion directly into the ESHA. Runoff might breakthrough the accumulated soil and/or be confined by it and flow alongside the trail. The accumulated soils should be groomed such that they are not weighing on the adjacent vegetation, then planted with a native groundcover species that is acceptable within the ESHA (BACE 2008).

Additionally, mitigation measures are recommended in the Biological Report of Compliance for a Mendocino County Coastal Development Permit, 9290 North Highway 1, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California, dated December 2008, which are designed in part (in association with Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas) to address potential soil erosion issues resulting from the project. These mitigation measures, which are included in Recommended Conditions Numbered 2 and 3 of this report, include the use of silt fencing and seasonal ground disturbance restrictions. In addition to these measures, staff recommends that ground disturbances be limited to areas of active construction, and disturbed areas not currently part of active construction activities for a period of 7 or more days be covered with seed, mulch, or mats within 14 days of inactivity. An adequately sized refuse container should also be maintained on-site. Recommended Condition Number 3 is included to assure that areas of disturbed soil are reseeded or otherwise stabilized in a timely manner, and that a revised erosion control plan be provided by a qualified soils engineer, assuring that no increase in erosion will occur as a result of the proposed development or trail improvements. As conditioned, the project would not have significant impacts on earth resources.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-5

Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, ground failure, or other hazards: The proposed development would be located approximately 150 feet from the ocean bluff edge at the closest point. The ocean bluff is very steep and roughly 100 feet high at this location. Section 20.500.020(B)(1) of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code states as follows regarding coastal bluff erosion hazards:

New structures shall be setback a sufficient distance from the edges of bluffs to ensure their safety from bluff erosion and cliff retreat during their economic life spans (seventy-five (75) years). New development shall be setback from the edge of bluffs a distance determined from information derived from the required geologic investigation and the setback formula as follows:

Setback (meters) = structure life (75 years) x retreat rate (meters/year)

Note: The retreat rate shall be determined from historical observation (aerial photos) and/or from a complete geotechnical investigation.

The BACE geotechnical report indicates the sufficient 75 year lifespan distance to be 50 feet (page 6). It is the policy of the Coastal Commission and the County to require recordation of a deed restriction as a condition of development on blufftop parcels, prohibiting the construction of seawalls and requiring that permitted improvements be removed from the property if threatened by bluff retreat. The restriction also requires that the landowner be responsible for any clean up associated with portions of the development that might fall onto a beach. Recommended Condition Number 4 is included to require recordation of the deed restriction prior to issuance of the Coastal Development Permit. The BACE geotechnical report states the following regarding seismic (earthquake) hazards (page 8):

As is typical of the Mendocino County area, the site will be subject to strong ground shaking during future, nearby, large magnitude earthquakes originating on the active San Andreas Fault, Maacama fault, or possibly other, more distant fault systems. The intensity of ground shaking at the site will depend on the distance to the causative earthquake epicenter, the magnitude of the shock, and the response characteristics of the underlying earth materials. Generally, wood-frame structures founded in supporting soils/bedrock and designed in accordance with current building codes are well suited to resist the effects of ground shaking (BACE 2008).

Structural hazards associated with strong ground shaking are addressed by building codes as part of the building permit process. Recommended Condition Number 12 is included to assure that building permits are obtained. BACE indicates that soils in the location of the planned residence are weak and porous, and are susceptible to collapse and consolidation under light to moderate loads. These soils are therefore not suitable for support of foundations or slabs on grade in their current condition. Additionally, BACE determined that underlying soils could liquefy under ground shaking conditions, resulting in a projected settlement of approximately 1.2 inches. BACE outlines specific recommendations for preparing the soils and for the foundation to assure the residence is soundly founded. Staff includes Recommended Condition Number 1 to require BACE recommendations as a condition of approval. Water (Item 3):

Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff: The proposed structures would cover roughly 3,000 sq. feet of ground, including approximately 1,000 sq. feet of impervious paving. This

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-6 would result in impervious surfaces covering 2% of the 3.12 acre property. Drainage patterns and surface runoff would be altered in the vicinity of the structure since stormwater flows from roof and other impervious areas would be concentrated and directed. The proposed removal of vegetation (approx. four trees) to accommodate the development, as well as the removal of vegetation that has already occurred in the Northern Bishop Pine Forest and trail areas additionally result in a small but measurable decrease in local absorption and transpiration rates. Slopes within the footprint of the proposed development appear to be as steep as 32 to 33% on the west side, sloping into the Northern Bishop Pine Forest ESHA. The applicants submitted a geotechnical engineering report by BACE Geotechnical, a division of Brunsing Associates, Inc. The Geotechnical Investigation, Planned Temple Residence, 9290 North Highway One,, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California, dated December 5, 2008, briefly discusses recommendations for drainage on pages 13-14 as follows:

Because surface and/or subsurface water is often the cause of foundation or slope stability problems, care should be taken to intercept and divert concentrated surface flows and subsurface seepage away from the building foundations and ocean bluff. Drainage across the lot should be by sheet flow. Surface grades should maintain a recommended two percent gradient away from building foundations (BACE 2008).

The applicants also submitted a biological report by WRA Environmental Consultants. The report, Biological Report of Compliance for a Mendocino County Coastal Development Permit, dated December 2008, recommends mitigations to protect natural resource areas from erosion and stormwater runoff associated with increased impervious surfaces, resulting from development. These measures include seasonal restrictions, placement of silt fencing during construction, and replanting disturbed areas. According to the site plan, the applicant proposes to install a French drain along the south and west sides of the residence, with hard line draining southward from the residence to the south east property line. The hard line pipe would daylight to riprap on at the property boundary, approximately five to ten feet upslope from proposed leach lines. Regarding the proposed drainage, Carly Williams of the Division of Environmental Health commented that “water collected in the foundation drain shall be dispersed a minimum of 25 feet downslope of the primary and replacement leachfield areas.” Section 20.492.025 of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code outlines runoff standards, and includes:

(A) Water flows in excess of natural flows resulting from project development shall be mitigated.

(D) Retention facilities and drainage structures shall, where possible, use natural topography and natural vegetation. In other situations, planted trees and vegetation such as shrubs and permanent ground cover shall be maintained by the owner.

(E) Provisions shall be made to infiltrate and/or safely conduct surface water to storm drains or suitable watercourses and to prevent surface runoff from damaging faces of cut and fill slopes.

(G) Subsurface drainage devices shall be provided in areas having a high water table and to intercept seepage that would adversely affect slope stability, building foundations, or create undesirable wetness.

(K) All development that is within, or drains into, environmentally sensitive habitat, is a commercial or residential subdivision, is a service station or automotive repair facility or that includes commercial development or a parking lot, shall capture and infiltrate or treat, using relevant best management practices, including structural best management practices, all runoff from storms of a magnitude such that the runoff from eight-five (85) percent of storms is encaptured or treated.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-7 Staff recommends Condition Number 3 to require submission of a revised drainage/erosion control plan acceptable to Planning and Building Services and in compliance with the Coastal Zoning Code and recommendations by BACE, WRA, and the Division of Environmental Health as outlined above, prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. As conditioned, the project would not result in significant impacts from changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff. Change in the quantity of ground water, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations: Domestic water would be provided by an on-site well. A test well was approved by CDP 17-1996 in 2001. The test well would be converted to a production well as part of this project. Ground water will be impacted by withdrawals to serve the residence, however on-site wells are common in the unincorporated areas of the county and overall groundwater impacts are not expected to be significant. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tsunamis: The parcel is not located in a 100 year flood zone. Regarding potential tsunami/storm wave hazards, the geotechnical report states as follows on page 7:

As typical of the Mendocino coastal area, the site could be subject to large storm waves or tsunami waves. In February 1960, the Point Cabrillo Light House was damaged by an approximately 60 feet high storm wave. In 1964, a magnitude 9.2 earthquake in Alaska caused 21-foot waves in Crescent City and significant effects and damage as far south as San Francisco Bay. Local earthquakes, or those occurring within the Pacific Basin, may trigger tsunami waves that have the potential to reach (and potentially damage properties on) the California coast. The region from Cape Mendocino (Humboldt County) to north of Monterey is considered at moderate risk of tsunami events generated by local earthquakes.

Within nearly Mendocino County municipalities, the generally-recognized “safe elevation level” with regard to tsunami events is approximately 60 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). Since the property bluffs are approximately 45 to 110 feet in vertical height, the lower portions of the bluffs and of Brewery Gulch could potentially be inundated by tsunami/large storm wave action. However, the elevation of the planned improvements is approximately 125 feet above MSL, essentially precluding it from impact by such events. Therefore, tsunami/storm wave events are not considered a hazard for the project (BACE 2008).

Plant Life (Item 4): Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants: The trail reconstruction and major vegetation removal that have already occurred, and the proposed residential development would result in a reduction of the number of bishop pine (Pinus muricata), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), grand fir (Abies grandis), tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflorus var. densiflorus), and shore pine (Pinus contorta ssp. contorta) trees, and approximately 45,000 sq. feet of associated understory of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest, including but not limited to coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis), salal (Gaultheria shallon), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), coffeeberry (Rhamnus purshiana), wax myrtle (Myrica californica), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), and California blackberry (Rubus ursinus). As discussed in sections below in detail, the loss of these numbers of plants will be significant because sufficient areas have not been set aside within the proposed conservation area for these plants, and little to no buffer area has been included in the proposed conservation area.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-8 Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants: Resources - With the project application, the applicants submitted a biological report by WRA Associates; Biological Report of Compliance for a Mendocino County Coastal Development Permit, 9290 North Highway 1 (APN 119-340-04), Mendocino, Mendocino County, California (hereafter referred to as the “biological report”), dated December 2008. The biological report indicates that one potential rare plant species, Mendocino coast Indian paintbrush (Castilleja mendocinensis) was observed on the property. Additionally, Brewery Gulch, its associated riparian area, and three rare plant communities, Northern Coastal Bluff Scrub, Coastal Terrace Prairie and Northern Bishop Pine Forest, were identified on the property. Table One outlines these resource areas and shows significance designations. Table 1. Natural resource areas found on the parcel.

Resource Area Significance Extent of

Occurrence CNDDB/Rarity

Status

Northern Coastal Bluff Scrub

Rare plant community; habitat for Mendocino coast Indian paintbrush (Castilleja mendocinensis) approx. 1/3 acre

Community - G2, S2.2

Coastal Terrace Prairie Rare plant community approx. 1,200 sq. feet

Community - G3, S2-1

Northern Bishop Pine Forest Rare plant community; habitat for Sonoma tree vole approx. 1.75 acres

Community - G2, S2.2

Brewery Gulch and associated riparian area

Protected by the Local Coastal Plan; important habitat for wildlife, including wild rainbow trout, pacific giant salamander

approx 3,000 sq. feet of riparian area, and 50 linear feet of creek drainage

Protected by the Local Coastal Plan

The Mendocino County Coastal Element defines special plant habitat as follows:

Special Plant Habitat. The approximate location of rare, or endangered or threatened plant species identified by the California Department of Fish and Game, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service or as designated by the California Native Plant Society is found in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (1984). "Rare" is defined to mean a plant that is of limited distribution; or that occurs in such small numbers that it is seldom reported; or that occurs only in very few highly restricted populations. "Endangered" is defined to mean a plant threatened with extinction and not likely to survive unless some protective measures are taken.

The “S” and “G” ratings listed in Table One under CNDDB/Rarity Status pertain to designations assigned by the Department of Fish and Game as part of the inventory they use as a tool in their decision making processes relative to assignment of protections. Table Two shows classification meanings.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-9 Table 2. California Department of Fish and Game ranking system for rare plants and communities.

California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) ELEMENT RANKING

Global Ranking

The global rank (G-rank) is a reflection of the overall condition of an element throughout its global range.

Species or Community Level

G1 = Less than 6 viable element occurrences (EOs) OR less than 1,000 individuals OR less than 2,000 acres.

G2 = 6-20 EOs OR 1,000-3,000 individuals OR 2,000-10,000 acres.

G3 = 21-80 EOs OR 3,000-10,000 individuals OR 10,000-50,000 acres.

G4 = apparently secure; this rank is clearly lower than G3 but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e., there is some threat, or somewhat narrow habitat.

G5 = Population or stand demonstrably secure to ineradicable due to being commonly found in the world.

State Ranking

The state rank (S-rank) is assigned much the same way as the global rank, except state ranks in California often also contain a threat designation attached to the S-rank.

S1 = Less than 6 EOs OR less than 1,000 individuals OR less than 2,000 acres

S1.1 = very threatened

S1.2 = threatened

S1.3 = no current threats known

S2 = 6-20 EOs OR 1,000-3,000 individuals OR 2,000-10,000 acres

S2.1 = very threatened

S2.2 = threatened

S2.3 = no current threats known

S3 = 21-80 EOs or 3,000-10,000 individuals OR 10,000-50,000 acres

S3.1 = very threatened

S3.2 = threatened

S3.3 = no current threats known

S4 = apparently secure within California; this rank is clearly lower than S3 but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e. there is some threat, or somewhat narrow habitat. NO THREAT RANK.

S5 = demonstrably secure to ineradicable in California. NO THREAT RANK.

For Coastal Act compliance, the Local Coastal Plan (LCP) contains provisions to protect plant and animal resources of concern that could be significantly degraded or disturbed by development. Areas warranting protection are set aside as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs). The Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code defines ESHAs in Section 20.308.040(E)(F) as follows:

"Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area" means any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could easily be disturbed or degraded by human activities or developments. In Mendocino County, environmentally sensitive habitat areas include, but are not limited to: anadromous fish streams, sand dunes, rookeries and marine mammal haul-out areas, wetlands, riparian areas, areas of pygmy vegetation that contain species of rare or endangered plants, and habitats of rare and endangered plants and animals.

The Coastal Element defines special wildlife habitat as follows:

Special Wildlife Habitat. The approximate location of animal species considered to be threatened, rare, endangered, or protected by the California Department of Fish and Game, or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are shown on the land use maps. A rare and endangered species is an animal whose existence is threatened by one or more of the

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-10

following conditions: the mortality rate exceeds the birth rate; the species is not capable of adapting to environmental change; the species habitat is threatened by destruction or serious disturbance; survival is threatened by the introduction of other species through predation, competition, or disease; or environmental pollution threatens the species survival. A protected species is an animal which cannot be taken or possessed under any permit or license, except when authorized by the Department of Fish and Game for scientific research. Threatened species are defined as those species contained on the lists identified as such by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game, as is the case with rare species and endangered species.

Evidence of habitation by Sonoma tree voles was present throughout the Northern Bishop Pine Forest. Sonoma tree vole (Arborimus pomo) is listed by the Department of Fish and Game as a G3, S3 Species of Concern, and listed by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) as Near Threatened (NT). These listings do not constitute any rare, endangered, threatened or protected lists as outlined in the definition of Special Wildlife Habitat in the Coastal Element.

Figure 2. Sonoma tree vole. http://www.bioconsultant.net/tree_vole.htm Species which warrant protections under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are outlined in Title 14, Section 15380 of the California Code of Regulations as follows:

§ 15380. Endangered, Rare or Threatened Species. (a) "Species" as used in this section means a species or subspecies of animal or plant or a variety of plant. (b) A species of animal or plant is: (1) "Endangered" when its survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, disease, or other factors; or

(2) "Rare" when either: (A) Although not presently threatened with extinction, the species is existing in such small numbers throughout all or a significant portion of its range that it may become endangered if its environment worsens; or (B) The species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range and may be considered "threatened" as that term is used in the Federal Endangered Species Act. (c) A species of animal or plant shall be presumed to be endangered, rare or threatened, as it is listed in:

(1) Sections 670.2 or 670.5, Title 14, California Code of Regulations; or (2) Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations Sections 17.11 or 17.12 pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act as rare, threatened, or endangered. (d) A species not included in any listing identified in subdivision (c) shall nevertheless be considered to be endangered, rare or threatened, if the species can be shown to meet the criteria in subdivision (b). (e) This definition shall not include any species of the Class Insecta which is a pest whose protection under the provisions of CEQA would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man as determined by:

(1) The Director of Food and Agriculture with regard to economic pests; or (2) The Director of Health Services with regard to health risks. Sonoma tree vole is not listed in CCR Section 670.2 or 670.5, or under the Federal Endangered Species act.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-11 Despite a lack of specific listing, the Sonoma tree vole is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the Department of Fish and Game, and its presence within the Northern Bishop Pine Forest indicates wildlife value associated with these areas. Section 20.496.020 (A)(1) of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code requires buffers to ESHAs as follows:

(A) Buffer Areas. A buffer area shall be established adjacent to all environmentally sensitive habitat areas. The purpose of this buffer area shall be to provide for a sufficient area to protect the environmentally sensitive habitat from degradation resulting from future developments and shall be compatible with the continuance of such habitat areas.

(1) Width. The width of the buffer area shall be a minimum of one hundred (100) feet, unless an applicant can demonstrate, after consultation and agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game, and County Planning staff, that one hundred (100) feet is not necessary to protect the resources of that particular habitat area from possible significant disruption caused by the proposed development. The buffer area shall be measured from the outside edge of the Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas and shall not be less than fifty (50) feet in width. New land division shall not be allowed which will create new parcels entirely within a buffer area. Developments permitted within a buffer area shall generally be the same as those uses permitted in the adjacent Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area.

Section 20.496.020(A) (1-4) of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code outlines criteria for determining the appropriate width of a buffer area, and determining the extent of developments allowed within a specified ESHA buffer. In general, the buffer area must be sufficient to protect the resources, and developments within the buffer may only be allowed if there is no other feasible site, the development must be compatible with the functional capacity of the habitat area, and impacts need to be minimized. The general concept is that the development needs to be of a size and use appropriate for the property, needs to be placed in the “best site” possible, and impacts mitigated to a level of less than significant. Impacts - Some aspects of the project have already occurred without benefit of a permit and are being considered after the fact as part of this application, to assure natural resource protection through appropriate restoration and other mitigations. Specifically, recent Major Vegetation Removal has occurred in the Northern Bishop Pine Forest, and recent trail re-construction developments have occurred. These developments occurred sometime between April of 2007 when staff and DFG visited the site, and December 3, 2007, when staff documented trail improvements visible from public view areas. Major Vegetation Removal is defined in Section 20.308.080(C) of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code as follows (emphasis added):

(C) “Major Vegetation, Removal or Harvesting” shall be defined to include one or more of the following:

(1) The removal of more than fifteen (15) trees or ten (10) percent of the total number of trees on the parcel, whichever is less, with a diameter of twelve (12) inches or a circumference of thirty-eight (38) inches or more measured at four and one-half (4 ½) feet vertically above the ground; or

(2) The removal of trees within a total contiguous ground area of six thousand (6,000) square feet, or within a noncontiguous area or areas not exceeding a total of six thousand (6,000) square feet measured as the area located directly beneath the tree canopy; or

(3) The Planning and Building Services Director may determine that a proposal to remove vegetation constitutes major vegetation removal if the Planning and Building Services Director finds that it may result in a significant impact. In making a finding that the proposed major vegetation removal may result in a significant impact, the Planning and Building Services Director shall review the proposal and determine if any of the following conditions exist or are proposed:

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-12

(a) The vegetation removal involves the use of heavy equipment, or

(b) The vegetation removal is proposed on a steep slope (fifteen (15) percent or greater) and removal of vegetation may result in soil erosion or landslide, or

(c) The vegetation removal is located within or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat, or

(d) The vegetation removal may result in significant exposure of adjacent trees to wind damage, or

(e) The vegetation removal may result in significant degradation of the viewshed.

(f) The removal of one or more trees which measure twenty-four (24) inches or more in diameter at breast height and which are visually or historically significant, exemplary of their species, or ecologically significant.

(4) Exempt from this definition would be one or more of the following:

(a) Removal of trees and other vegetation that have been reviewed and approved in conjunction with an associated development permit; or

(b) Removal or harvesting of vegetation for agricultural purposes in areas presently used for agriculture; or

(c) Kelp harvesting; or

(d) Timber operations which are in accordance with a timber harvesting plan submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Z’berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commencing with Section 4511).

Extensive limbing and removal of understory vegetation and litter occurred within a known Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area, consisting of the rare Northern Bishop Pine Forest, heavily occupied by Sonoma tree voles. Additionally, the applicant improved an area historically shown2 to have a trail by adding the following materials:

• Railroad ties (steps and outboard support) • Benderboard (outboard shaping and support) • Compacted gravel • Handrails

The improvements occurred within 100 feet of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas on a bluff top lot, and there are no exclusions for this type of work, even if it were to be considered “improvements to an existing trail.” For this reason, impacts from the trail improvements are considered after the fact as part of the subject Coastal Development Permit application. In addition to impacts that have already occurred due to unpermitted development, there are also impacts to consider for the proposed development: The applicant proposes construction of a single-family residence with an attached garage, driveway development, on-site septic disposal and production well, water storage facilities, propane tank, and connection to offsite utilities.

2 At the request of staff, the applicant provided a report indicating pre-existence of the subject trail. The report by BACE Geotechnical is entitled Re: Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance of The Trail Construction/Improvement at 9290 North Highway One, Mendocino County, California (hereafter referred to as “the trail geotechnical report,” and is dated April 24, 2008. This report is located in the project file.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-13 To summarize impacts, the following impacts from developments considered after the fact as well as developments proposed are as follows:

1. Impacts from the removal of the understory and limbing of trees throughout the approx. 1.75 acre Northern Bishop Pine Forest, inhabited by Sonoma tree voles, a DFG Species of Special Concern.

2. Impacts from the proposed residential development, which would permanently impact .2 acres of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest.

3. Impacts from the proposed residential on-site septic disposal system, which would temporarily impact .3 acres of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest.

4. Impacts from improvements to the historically existing trail, which have resulted in ground disturbances including steep cut slopes, unstabilized soils, and removal of native vegetation.

The residential development is moderately sized in comparison with surrounding development, and adequate steps have been taken to assure the residential structure is located in the least impacting, or “best site,” including a variance request to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to six feet, a relatively moderate sized structure, and placement of the structure near the existing access. Siting of the residence aside, there are substantial issues with the development as proposed. It is not clear whether the septic system has been located in the only feasible “best site” to protect resources. Additionally, the applicant proposes conservation area boundaries (which should correspond to Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Boundaries plus adequate buffer areas as determined by the biologist) that staff finds are not sufficient to adequately protect the resources. With the applicant’s proposal, approximately half of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest would be within the conservation area, and all of this is either within 50 feet of the conservation area boundary or property boundaries for the adjacent parcel (also owned by the subject parcel owner), which means none of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest would be protected by even a minimum 50 foot buffer area. Additionally, the applicant proposes a large section inside of the conservation area to be omitted from the conservation area. This omission of area would result in no buffer to the westerly portion of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest, and no buffer to Coastal Terrace Prairie and Northern Coastal Bluff Scrub areas. Additionally, discontinuity of conservation area boundaries as proposed by the applicant, given the omission of the middle area, devalues the area in terms of wildlife use. The current wildlife value of the area is considered of great importance due to determined Sonoma tree vole presence. As outlined above, Section 20.496.020(A)(1) of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code requires a minimum buffer area of 50 feet to ESHAs from development. Proposed buffers as requested by the applicant do not meet the minimum requirement, even in areas where the property is not constrained by proposed development. Staff finds that the proposal is not in line with the intent or letter of the Coastal Act (as administered through the Local Coastal Plan) or the California Environmental Quality Act, and therefore recommends denial of the project as proposed. As an alternative motion, staff recommends Condition Number 2, which outlines mitigation measures recommended in the biological report and by DFG, and additionally requires that the boundaries of the conservation area be expanded to include both ESHA and minimum 50 foot ESHA buffer areas, allowing only for a “best site” of the proposed reasonably sized residence and associated structures in or near rare or endangered plant communities. The biological report outlines the following mitigation measures:

1a. RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES IN ESHAS. No activities should be allowed that would disturb vegetation, topography, or hydrology beyond the permanent construction impact area and septic fields, both during and following construction. Some examples of these activities are vehicle parking or storage of other heavy materials, regular foot traffic, and clearing of vegetation. However, certain vegetation removal activities may be permitted, including native plant restoration activities and pruning or removal of hazardous or

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-14

diseased trees or thinning of trees if deemed beneficial to the ESHA by a certified arborist or qualified biologist. Vegetation management activities are described further in Mitigation Measures 1g and 3c.

Solid material, including wood, masonry/rock, glass, paper, or other material should not be stored outside of the limit of permanent construction impacts shown in Figure 2. Solid waste materials should be properly disposed of offsite. Fluid materials, including concrete, wash water, fuels, lubricants, or other fluid materials used during construction should not be disposed of onsite and should be stored or confined as necessary to prevent spillage into natural habitats including the onsite ESHAs. If a spill of such material occurs, the area should be cleaned immediately and contaminated material disposed of properly. The affected area should be restored to its natural condition.

1b. WORK WINDOWS. All activities that require substantial ground disturbance should take place only

during the summer months (generally April 15 through October 31) to minimize potential erosion and sedimentation. Activities that do not require construction vehicles to access the site or ground other than planting may take place outside of this window as long as Mitigation Measure 1c is implemented prior to construction.

1c. LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS. Prior to any ground disturbance and vegetation clearing,

combination silt fence and construction fence should be installed around the limit of permanent construction impacts and septic fields as shown in Figure 2. Fence locations and any ESHA boundaries in the vicinity of construction must be determined and flagged by a qualified biologist. The fencing should not be placed within 100 feet of any ESHAs except the NBPF, and should be placed such that construction impacts to NBPF are minimized. No grading, placement of fill material, or other ground disturbance may occur beyond the designated construction impact area. This fencing may only be removed once all construction activities are completed. In addition, during construction, an effort should be made to install the septic fields as close as possible to the structures, away from the riparian corridor.

1d. STAFF EDUCATION. Prior to construction, the project contractors should be informed of the sensitive

resources within the Project Area. Furthermore, the significance of the limits of construction impacts and fencing and flagging of potential Sonoma tree vole nests should be clearly explained to all parties working within the Project Area both during and following construction.

1e. PERMANENT FENCING. Permanent exclusionary fencing should be installed between the development

and the NBPF prior to or upon completion of construction, along the boundary of the construction impacts or closer to the development where possible, to prevent disturbance of the ESHAs following construction. Post and cable or other similar fencing should be of a type adequate to prevent activities such as regular foot traffic or general landscape maintenance.

1f. EXTERIOR LIGHTING. Exterior lighting on the south and west facing sides of the development area

should be avoided or shaded such that lights do not shine upwards or sideways into the NBPF and potentially disturb Sonoma Tree Vole or other wildlife in the ESHA.

1g. RESTORATION OF TEMPORARILY IMPACTED VEGETATION. All disturbed ground remaining after

construction outside the permanent fencing, including septic fields, should be replanted under the guidance of a qualified biologist or landscaper with knowledge of native plants and restoration. Only native species may be used, and they should be installed at a density appropriate to the forested or forest-opening conditions present (see Appendix A and Mitigation Measure 1h for appropriate native plants). Target establishment is recommended to be at least 50% absolute cover of native species and less than 5% cover of exotic species. Planting should occur in the winter months to reduce the need for additional irrigation, and irrigation of these plants should not be continued once the native species are established (typically after one or two years). Revegetation of these areas should be monitored by a qualified biologist annually for at least three years and corrective measures taken as necessary to achieve the establishment targets (may be done in conjunction with Bishop pine restoration activities described in Measure 3c.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-15

1h. LANDSCAPING RESTRICTIONS. Since the entire impact area is located within 50 feet of the NBPF, no non-native plants should be planted on the property, with the exception of gardens used for food production. Landscaping and revegetation both during and following construction will ideally include species native to NBPF, as listed in Table 3 below. Otherwise they should be native coastal species present in the Project Area (Appendix A) or native plants typical of these communities in Mendocino County. When possible, planting should be of local stock to preserve local genetic diversity. The local CNPS chapter, a qualified biologist, or a landscaper with knowledge of native plant communities should be consulted to identify appropriate species for planting.

Table 3. Native species typical of Northern Bishop Pine Forest and preferred for landscaping in the ESHA buffer and restoration of ESHA areas.

Scientific name Common name Abies grandis grand fir (large tree)

Arctostaphylos columbiana redwood manzanita Calamagrostis nutkaensis Pacific reedgrass

Ceanothus thyrsiflorus blue blossom Garrya elliptica coast silk tassel

Iris douglasii Douglas’ iris

Maianthemum dilatatum false lily-of-the-valley (ground cover)

Pinus contorta ssp. contorta shore pine (medium sized tree)

Pinus muricata Bishop pine (large tree)

Polystichum munitum sword fern

Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern (can be aggressive)

Rhamnus californica California coffeeberry

Rubus ursinus California blackberry

Satureja douglasii yerba buena (ground cover)

Symphoricarpos mollis creeping snowberry

Lithocarpus densiflorus tan oak (medium sized tree) Vaccinium ovatum California huckleberry

2. The bird breeding season typically extends from February to August. Ideally, the clearing of vegetation and

the initiation of construction can be done in the non-breeding season between September and January. If these activities cannot be done in the non-breeding season, a qualified biologist shall perform pre-construction breeding bird surveys within 14 days of the onset of construction or clearing of vegetation. If active breeding bird nests are observed, no ground disturbance activities shall occur within a minimum 100-foot exclusion zone. These exclusion zones may vary depending on species, habitat and level of disturbance. The exclusion zone shall remain in place around the active nest until all young are no longer dependent upon the nest. A biologist should monitor the nest site weekly during the breeding season to ensure the buffer is sufficient to protect the nest site from potential disturbances. As with birds, bat roost sites can change from year to year, so pre-construction surveys are usually necessary to determine the presence or absence of bat roost sites in a given area. Pre-construction bat surveys do not need to be performed if work or vegetation removal is conducted between September 1 and October 31, after young have matured and prior to the bat hibernation period. However, if it is necessary to disturb potential bat roost sites between November 1 and August 31, pre-construction surveys should be conducted. Pre-construction bat surveys involve surveying trees, rock outcrops, and buildings subject to

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-16

removal or demolition for evidence of bat use (guano accumulation, or acoustic or visual detections). If evidence of bat use is found, then biologists shall conduct acoustic surveys under appropriate conditions using an acoustic detector, to determine whether a site is occupied. If bats are found, a minimum 50 foot buffer should be implemented around the roost tree. Removal of roost trees should occur in September and October, or after the bats have left the roost. In summary, no impacts would be expected and therefore no preconstruction surveys would be required for the species above if vegetation removal (including standing dead trees) is scheduled for the months of September or October. The months of November through August would require a bird and/or bat survey dependent on the time of year.

3a. Construction and silt fencing will serve as a limit of disturbance to guide tree felling and protect nearby potential Sonoma Tree Vole nests and habitat (see Mitigation Measure 1c). Permanent fencing and preservation of the majority of forested habitat present in the Project Area will help to prevent future disturbance of potential nests and habitat (see Mitigation Measure 1e).

3b. All practicable effort should be made to prevent the dropping of trees and limbs outside of the fenced

construction area, and to prevent damage to adjacent trees during felling. Slash and tree debris may not be stored or disposed of outside of this impact area.

3c. As mitigation for removal of Bishop pine trees, understory vegetation, and development within the 50 foot

buffer of Northern Bishop Pine Forest ESHAs, a five-year forest management and monitoring plan should be developed by a certified arborist or qualified biologist. This plan would aim to improve the structural and species diversity of the NBPF understory. It would also aim to establish and protect Bishop pine in existing canopy openings in the Project Area in order to encourage regeneration and improve the health and age structure of the stand in the absence of a natural fire regime. The plan should describe management actions required as mitigation during the first five years following completion of construction. The plan should also provide additional guidance for long-term stewardship of the Project Area ESHAs by the property owner and landscape personnel after the five-year mitigation and monitoring period. The management plan should include performance standards for understory establishment and Bishop pine regeneration, and should describe in more detail the following management actions: • Diseased and dying Bishop pine individuals will be identified on site by a qualified biologist or certified arborist, and selected for removal based upon the degree of disease and risk to structures or public safety. • Regeneration of Bishop pine seedlings within mitigation areas and other canopy gaps created by the removal of dying and diseased trees will be monitored by a qualified biologist for a period of five years, and the following two corrective management actions will be implemented if regeneration is not occurring. • Planting of native shrubs and herbaceous species (see Table 2) will be conducted where appropriate, including the disturbed clearing shown in Figure 2, NBPF edge areas lacking understory (particularly near the proposed development and permanent fencing), and septic fields. The plan must include targets for percent survival and canopy cover appropriate to the amount of shade and allowing for natural recruitment. • Understory brush removal and thinning of needle litter may be utilized as necessary to reduce fire risk and encourage growth of Bishop pine seedlings and native understory species. • If natural regeneration is not observed in clearings within two years of tree removal, seedlings from local seed stock should be planted on site. • Protective measures for wildlife must be included in the plan to ensure avoidance of direct impacts to breeding birds, special status bats, or Sonoma Tree Vole during tree and brush removal. • Invasive non-native plants should be controlled in all Project Area ESHAs to the maximum extent possible. Plant species listed as invasive (High, Moderate, Limited) on the California Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2006) should be removed as they would pose a risk to the rare natural communities. Some examples of invasive plants likely to be found in the Project Area that should be monitored and controlled are English ivy (Hedera helix), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius). • Annual monitoring of the NBPF ESHA, planted areas, and protective fencing should be conducted by a qualified biologist. The biologist should submit an annual report to the County assessing the health and regeneration of the NBPF, survival and cover of understory plantings, and presence of weeds and other

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-17

threats, and should suggest any corrective management actions needed to achieve targets and remove or control threats to the ESHAs (DeGraff 2008).

The biologist additionally notes:

The mitigation measures described above were developed based upon review of the applicant’s proposed project, and should minimize impacts both during and following construction. Temporary vegetation removal within a small segment of the riparian 100-foot ESHA buffer is not expected to have a significant impact on the ESHA if the area is promptly replanted and monitored as described above. Development within the northeastern corner of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest is the most feasible proposal for the property, and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures will help to minimize impacts and protect and improve the health and longevity of the remaining forest ESHA (DeGraff 2008).

The Department of Fish and Game recommends the following additional mitigation measures:

1. Identify active red tree vole nests. Trees supporting active tree vole nests shall not be cut, trimmed or otherwise modified.

2. To mitigate for past habitat modification including recent trail work and vegetation removal/trimming, a

habitat restoration program shall be developed and implemented for this parcel. This plan shall emphasize restoring understory vegetation within the northern Bishop pine forest, restore/improve the coastal prairie terrace area and remove the lower section of trail that was constructed within and near the riparian corridor of Brewery Gulch.

3. To mitigate for impacts to identified sensitive species and habitats, a conservation easement/deed

restriction shall be established for the property. This conservation easement shall set aside the riparian area, coastal prairie terrace and areas of northern Bishop pine that exist down-slope of the home site. Conservation easement areas shall be allowed to re-vegetate naturally. Habitat modifying activities including vegetation removal/cutting, land grading, herbicide use, fencing, trail construction and landscaping shall be prohibited within the conservation easement area.

4. Work involving trail construction near Brewery Gulch may require a lake or streambed alteration

agreement (LSAA) from the Department of Fish and Game (DFG). Fish and Game Code §1602 requires notification to DFG for an LSAA prior to any activity that substantially modifies the bed, bank, or channel or diverts or obstructs the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake. Information regarding LSAAs may be found at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/habcon/1600/index.html (Macedo 2009).

Recommended Condition Number 11 is included to assure the applicant acquires the necessary permits from the Department of Fish and Game prior to development activities. The biologist has provided a reduced buffer analysis (included as Appendix B). Staff recommends denial of the project as proposed, however DFG and planning staff are in agreement that with revised conservation area boundaries and the measures outlined above, the proposed 50 foot buffer will not result in significant impacts to the resource area. Recommended Condition Number 2 is included to require the measures outlined above as conditions of approval, should the Coastal Permit Administrator opt for the alternative motion. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species: As outlined above, the biological report recommends measures, including measures 1g, 1h and 3c, to assure only native plants are used for landscaping and disturbed ground planting. Staff recommends denial of the project due to inadequate conservation area boundaries. Should the Coastal Permit Administrator opt for the alternative motion of approval, Staff finds the mitigations by WRA appropriate to protect the resource areas from invasive plants, however, Staff additionally recommends that heavy equipment be

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-18 cleaned prior to entering the site, to prevent potential for contamination of soils by invasive plant species. Recommended Condition Number 2 includes language to this effect. Animal Life (Item 5): Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals, including birds, land animals, reptiles, fish, shellfish, insects, and benthic organisms: As outlined above in the “Plant Life: Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants” section, the project as proposed does not allow for an adequate conservation area to assure that the project is not likely to result in a change in diversity of species or number of any animals. Staff therefore recommends denial of the project. Should the conservation area be expanded to include the maximum amount of rare plant communities, and 50 foot buffers from rare plant communities where feasible, and assure that all of the proposed development is located in the “best site,” then adequate step will have been taken to assure continuance of existing wildlife populations and diversity. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat: As outlined above in the “Plant Life: Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants” section, with mitigations included as Recommended Conditions Number 2 and 3, Brewery Gulch, which provides habitat for wildlife, potentially including steelhead, would be protected from impacts. Recommended Condition Number 2 also contains provisions to assure Sonoma tree voles are protected during development, and adequate habitat is provided. Noise (Item 6): Increases in existing noise levels: The only noteworthy increase in noise generated by the project will be that of construction activity, which will be of limited duration. Noise impacts will not be significant. Light and Glare (Item 7): Production of new light and glare: The project proposes new exterior lighting.

Section 20.504.035 of the Coastal Zoning Code (Exterior Lighting Regulations) states (pertinent part):

(A) Essential criteria for the development of night lighting for any purpose shall take into consideration the impact of light intrusion upon the sparsely developed region of the highly scenic coastal zone.

(2) Where possible, all lights, whether installed for security, safety, or landscape design purposes, shall be shielded or shall be positioned in a manner that will not shine light or allow light glare to exceed the boundaries of the parcel on which it is placed.

(5) No lights shall be installed so that they distract motorists.

Specific details regarding proposed exterior lighting have not been provided. Recommended Condition Number 5 is included to assure proposed lighting will not allow glare to exceed the boundaries of the subject parcel or distract motorists. The biological report recommends that exterior lighting on the south and west facing sides of the development area be avoided or shaded such that lights do not shine upwards or sideways into Northern Bishop Pine Forest areas. The intent of this recommendation is to assure that exterior lighting does not disturb the Sonoma Tree Vole or other wildlife within the forest. Recommended Condition Number 2 addresses this recommendation. As conditioned, the project will not result in significant light and glare impacts.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-19 Land Use (Item 8): Substantial alteration of the present or planned use of a given area: The parcel is classified on the Coastal Plan Map and zoned as Rural Residential Five Acres Minimum (RR-5). The proposed single-family residence and associated development are permitted uses within the Rural Residential Zoning District, and are consistent with the Rural Residential land use classification. The required yard setbacks for a parcel less than five acres in size in an RR-5 zone are 20 feet from all property lines. Calfire requires a minimum 30 foot setback from all property lines. A corridor preservation setback of 40 feet applies along Highway One, resulting in a front yard setback of either 90 feet from the road corridor centerline or 50 feet from the property line, whichever is greater. The applicants request a variance to the side yard on the north side from 20 feet to six feet. With a variance from the County and Calfire for a six foot side yard setback, the proposed structure is in compliance with setbacks required by the County Zoning Code and Calfire. Findings for the variance are included at the end of this report, and Recommended Condition Number 11 is included to assure compliance with Calfire safety clearance requirements.

The site is within a designated highly scenic area, however the residence would be minimally visible to public view from the Highway, and the residence directly adjacent to the north is approximately 28 feet in height. The proposed 25± foot maximum height of the residence is in compliance with the height limit. Maximum lot coverage for a lot between two and five acres in size in a Rural Residential zone is 15%. Lot coverage is the percentage of the gross lot area covered by structures, including roads. The lot is approximately 3.12 acres, or 135,907 square feet. The Site Plan shows approximately 3,000 square feet of coverage, or 2%. The project complies with lot coverage limits. As conditioned, the project complies with the zoning requirements for the Rural Residential District set forth in Chapter 20.376, and with all other zoning requirements of Division II of Title 20 of the Mendocino County Code. Transportation/Circulation (Item 12):

Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? The project will contribute incrementally to traffic volumes on local and regional roadways, however such incremental increases were considered when the Local Coastal Plan land use designations were assigned to the site. Additional vehicular movement will not be substantial.

Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? Chapter 20.472 of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code sets requirements for off-street parking for residential use as follows (pertinent part):

Sec. 20.472.010 General.

(B) At the time of initial occupancy of a site or of construction of a structure or of a major alteration or enlargement of site or structure, there shall be provided off-street parking facilities for automobiles in accordance with the regulations prescribed in this Chapter. For the purposes of this Chapter the term "major alteration or enlargement" shall mean a change of use or an addition which would increase the number of parking spaces required by more than ten (10) percent of the total number required.

(I) Parking areas shall, at a minimum, be surfaced with gravel; however, the approving authority may require a hard surface such as road oil mix, or other surfacing of a more durable type such as a bituminous plant mix, asphaltic concrete or concrete as a condition of the Coastal Development Permit.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-20

(J) All required parking spaces shall be at least nine (9) by twenty (20) feet, unless otherwise provided for under this section.

Sec. 20.472.015 Residential. (A) Single-family detached dwelling or mobile home: two (2) parking spaces. As shown on the site plan, adequate off-street parking is proposed. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Section 20.504.015(C)(13) requires:

Access roads and driveways shall be sited such that they cause minimum visual disturbance and shall not directly access Highway 1 where an alternate configuration is feasible.

The residence would take access from an existing encroachment onto Highway One. Caltrans was sent a referral and did not submit a response. The project would not substantially impact existing transportation systems. Public Services (Item 13): Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas:

Fire protection, police protection, schools, parks and other recreational facilities, other governmental services: The property is in an area that has a “moderate” fire hazard severity rating as determined by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (Calfire). Calfire has submitted recommended conditions of approval (CDF# 228-08) for address standards, driveway standards, setbacks, and defensible space standards. Recommended Condition Number 11 is included to achieve compliance with Calfire fire safe standards.

Maintenance of public facilities, and roads? The project would have insubstantial impacts to public roads. Utilities (Item 15): Will the project result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following:

Potable water: The project would be served by an on-site well for domestic water.

Sewerage, Energy or information transformation lines: Sewerage - The proposed addition would be served by an on-site septic disposal system. The system has been designed to accommodate a two bedroom residence, and includes primary and replacement leachfield areas, and a 1200 gallon septic tank. The project was referred to the Division of Environmental Health. The Division of Environmental Health responded that they could give clearance to this permit application, noting that construction within eight foot of the leachfields is not permitted, and that water collected in the foundation drain is to be dispersed a minimum of 25 feet downslope of the primary and replacement leachfield areas.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-21 On-site septic disposal systems are common in the unincorporated portions of the County. The proposed development of a new on-site septic disposal system is not a significant impact to utilities. Energy/information transformation lines – The project would be served by electrical, gas, and telephone utilities. Policy 3.5-8 of the Coastal Element states:

Power transmission lines shall be located along established corridors. Elsewhere transmission lines shall be located to minimize visual prominence. Where overhead transmission lines cannot be located along established corridors, and are visually intrusive within a "highly scenic area", the lines shall be placed underground west of Highway One and below ridgelines east of Highway One if technically feasible. Certain lines shall, over time, be relocated or placed underground in accord with PUC regulations (see Big River Planning Area Policy 4.7-3 and Policy 3.11-9). Distribution lines shall be underground in new subdivisions.

As indicated on the application, utility lines will be placed underground. The project will be adequately served by utilities, and will not result in significant impacts to existing utilities. Aesthetics (Item 17): Obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? The parcel is located in a designated “Highly Scenic Area” west of Hwy 1 and the proposed project is subject to the following development criteria for Coastal Act compliance per the Local Coastal Plan: Coastal Element Policy 3.5-1 provides general guidelines for all development in the coastal zone, requiring that: The scenic and visual qualities of Mendocino County coastal areas shall be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas. New development in highly scenic areas designated by the County of Mendocino Coastal Element shall be subordinate to the character of its setting. Policy 3.5-3 of the Coastal Element states: Any development permitted in (highly scenic) areas shall provide for the protection of ocean and coastal views from public areas including highways, roads, coastal trails, vista points, beaches, parks, coastal streams, and waters used for recreational purposes. In addition to other visual policy requirements, new development west of Highway One in designated “highly scenic areas” is limited to one-story (above natural grade) unless an increase in height would not affect public views to the ocean or be out of character with surrounding structures. Section 20.504.015(C)(2) of the Coastal Zoning Code requires: In highly scenic areas west of Highway 1 as identified on the Coastal Element land use plan maps, new development shall be limited to eighteen (18) feet above natural grade unless an increase in height would not affect public views to the ocean or be out of character with surrounding structures. Section 20.504.015(C)(3) also requires:

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-22 New development shall be subordinate to the natural setting and minimize reflective surfaces. In highly scenic areas, building materials including siding and roof material shall be selected to blend in hue and brightness with their surroundings. The applicant proposes a two story house with a maximum height of 25 feet (averaged) above grade. The proposed colors and materials are outlined in Table 4. The residence height, materials and colors would match the existing structure on the parcel located directly to the north (APN 119-340-05). Table 4. Proposed exterior materials and colors.

Material Color

Siding Vertical Redwood / Cedar Shingles / Natural Stone Natural Wood /Stone

Trim Redwood Natural Wood Chimney Metal Black Paint with Copper Roofing Asphalt Shingles Charcoal

Window Frames Andersen Painted Aluminum Beige

Doors Natural Wood & Andersen Painted Aluminum Natural

Fencing Redwood Natural Retaining Walls "Keystone" Units Granite

Other Exterior Materials Copper Flashing Natural Walking Path Packed Gravel Grey

Handrails Redwood Natural The proposed colors and materials would match the existing residence to the north. For the most part, the proposed colors and materials would blend in well with the natural environment. The copper flashing and beige window panes might be of concern if they were in a more visible area, but given vegetative cover in this area, staff is not concerned with materials such as these that have a potential to “stand out.” Staff recommends that existing vegetation be maintained on the site as much as possible to provide a buffer between the proposed development and public view. Recommended Condition Number 2 is included to this effect. Section 20.504.015(C)(2) of the Coastal Zoning Code requires a maximum height of 18 feet for this portion of the Highly Scenic Area, unless an increase in height would not affect public views or be out of character with surrounding development. Although the residence will be visible briefly from Highway One, the structure will not block public views of the ocean because the project is located in a heavily wooded area, where the ocean is not visible from the highway. The structure would be similar in height, 25 feet, to the structure located on the parcel directly adjacent to the north, under the same ownership. Staff included Recommended Condition Number 6, requiring a landscaping plan be submitted to the satisfaction of the Coastal Permit Administrator, assuring the view from the highway of the proposed development will be appropriately buffered by vegetation. More visible than the residence would be the two 2,500 gallon, semi-submerged black plastic water storage tanks, to be located south of the residence. Staff recommends the landscaping plan include provisions to buffer the view of the proposed water storage tanks from the highway.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-23 The following Coastal Element policies apply to the subject parcel: 4.7-1 New development west of Highway 1 shall be subordinate to the view shed or scenic character of the area. New development east of Highway 1 where designated as a highly scenic area shall be subordinate to its setting. 4.7-2 Dedication of scenic easements on undeveloped portions of parcels along Highway 1 or on Brewery Gulch Road should be required. Recommended Condition Number 2 is included to require a deed restriction, designating undeveloped portions of the parcel included in the proposed conservation area to be restored and maintained as a scenic area and a buffer to development, and to protect natural resources of concern present. The project is in compliance with Local Coastal Plan requirements, and as conditioned, would not result in significant visual impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act. Public Access & Recreation (Item 18): Impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? The project site is a bluff top lot located west of Highway 1. The Land Use Map shows an existing lateral access along Brewery Gulch Road, which ends in a small parking area and connects back to Highway One approximately 600 feet north of the property. The Coastal Element states as follows regarding the North Brewery Gulch Road (McMillen Access): Location: South of Big River mouth, west of Comptche-Ukiah Road intersection with Highway 1. Ownership: McMillen has recorded an offer of dedication for shoreline access over the portion of his property west of Brewery Gulch Road. Existing Development: Wide bluff area with access to rocky intertidal area. Policy: 4.7-9 Offer of access dedication by McMillen shall be accepted. 4.7-10 Brewery Gulch Road south of Big River on the west side of Highway One shall be preserved as an existing bluff top access affording spectacular views of Mendocino Bay and the town of Mendocino. These views shall be protected and enhanced by possible future relocations of power lines as indicated in Policy 4.7-3. There is no known public access on the subject parcel, and the steepness of the coastal bluff makes access to the beach impossible from this property. The existing trail does not provide access to the beach. The project would not result in impacts to public access or recreation.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-24 Cultural Resources (Item 19): Alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? The project was referred to the Mendocino County Archaeological commission, and was considered at their July 8, 2009 hearing. The Arch Commission determined (5-0) that a survey would be required for the project. The property was surveyed by Thad Van Bueren, and his survey report (indicating there are no sites), dated September 15, 2006 was considered at the August 12, 2009 Arch Commission hearing. Nevertheless, the applicant is advised by Recommended Condition Number 15 of the County’s “discovery clause” which establishes procedures to follow should archaeological materials be unearthed during project construction.

Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building or structure? There are no known historic or prehistoric structures in the vicinity. The project would not impact any prehistoric or historic structures. ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATION: No significant environmental impacts are anticipated which cannot be adequately mitigated, therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY RECOMMENDATION: The proposed project is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends denial of the project as proposed as the project is not in compliance with Section 20.496.020 of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, and adequate measures have not been taken to assure that all impacts of the project would be reduced to a level of less than significant through mitigation measures as considered under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ALTERNATIVE MOTION: If the Coastal Permit Administrator deems the project compliant with the LCP and CEQA, staff recommends the following findings and conditions of approval:

General Plan Consistency Finding: As discussed under pertinent sections of this report, the proposed project is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan as subject to the conditions being recommended by staff.

Environmental Findings: The Planning Commission finds that no significant environmental impacts would result from the proposed project which can not be adequately mitigated through the conditions of approval, therefore, a Negative Declaration is adopted.

Variance Findings: A Variance is requested to the Zoning Code requirements to allow for a side yard setback reduction on the north side, from 20 feet to six feet. Section 20.540.020 of the Coastal Zoning Code requires that the approving authority make all of the following findings prior to granting variances within the Coastal Zone:

A. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property involved, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings.

DISCUSSION:

The property contains an abundance of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas, and the least impacting “best site” is that closest to the existing access and disturbed upper areas. Variance to set the development closer to the highway is not feasible because the embankment between the proposed development and

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-25

highway provides a visual buffer in this Highly Scenic Area. The site is further constrained due to the steep bluff and slopes.

B. That such special circumstances or conditions are not due to any action of the applicant subsequent to the application of the zoning regulations contained in the Division and applicable policies of the Coastal Element.

DISCUSSION:

The property constraints are not resulting from any actions taken by the applicant. This finding can be made.

C. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of privileges possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone and denied to the property in question because of special circumstances identified in Subsection (A).

DISCUSSION:

This variance would allow for a relatively moderate sized residence and associated developments similar in size to that enjoyed by other coastal residents. This finding can be made.

D. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property in the same vicinity and zone in which the property is located.

DISCUSSION:

The proposed setback variance would not result in detriment to public welfare, nor would it be injurious to property in the vicinity. Calfire has been consulted regarding the variance and has responded that rock work siding will be utilized. This finding can be made.

E. That the variance does not authorize a use or activity that is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning provisions governing the parcel.

DISCUSSION:

The variance allows for a reduction to the side yard setback for a residence. The property is zoned for residential use. This finding can be made.

F. That the granting of such variance is in conformity with all other provisions of this Division and the Mendocino Coastal Element and applicable plans and policies of the Coastal Act.

DISCUSSION:

Staff did not identify any other provisions of the County Coastal Zoning Code, Coastal Element or the Coastal Act which conflict with the requested variance. Therefore, this finding can be made.

Coastal Development Permit Findings: The Coastal Permit Administrator finds that the application and supporting documents and exhibits contain information and conditions sufficient to establish, as required by Section 20.532.095 of the Coastal Zoning Code, that:

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-26

1. The proposed development is in conformity with the certified local coastal program; and 2. The proposed development will be provided with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and

other necessary facilities; and 3. The proposed development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the zoning district

applicable to the property, as well as the provisions of the Coastal Zoning Code, and preserves the integrity of the zoning district; and

4. The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment

within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. 5. The proposed development will not have any adverse impacts on any known archaeological or

paleontological resource. 6. Other public services, including but not limited to, solid waste and public roadway capacity have

been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development. 7. The proposed development is in conformity with the public access and public recreation policies

of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act and the Coastal Element of the General Plan. 8. Resource protection findings:

(a) The resource identified will not be significantly degraded by the proposed development. (b) There is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative. (c) All feasible mitigation measures capable of reducing or eliminating project related

impacts have been adopted. ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR CDP 4-2009 and CDV 1-2009: Staff recommends as an alternative motion that the Coastal Permit Administrator approve Coastal Development Permit CDP 4-2009 and Coastal Development Variance CDV 1-2009, subject to the conditions of approval recommended by staff. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS: ** 1. The recommendations in the geotechnical report prepared by BACE Geotechnical, Geotechnical

Investigation, Planned Temple Residence, 9290 North Highway One, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California, dated December 5, 2008, shall be incorporated into the design and construction of the proposed project. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit evidence that a qualified geotechnical or civil engineer has reviewed the final grading and building plans. No development shall be permitted within 50 feet of the blufftop edge.

** 2. The Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas as shown on the site plan (Exhibit H) shall be

protected in perpetuity from development and disturbance. The following measures are required to ensure protection of ESHAs during and after development activities:

(a) Prior to issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, the applicant shall submit to the

satisfaction of the Coastal Permit Administrator, a revised site plan showing the boundaries of the Conservation Area expanded to encompass the greatest extent feasible of all rare and endangered plant communities present on the parcel, including the Northern Bishop Pine Forest, Coastal Terrace Prairie, Northern Coastal Bluff Scrub,

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-27

riparian areas, Brewery Gulch, and Coastal Waters. The revised site plan shall show the septic leach fields and associated structures in the “best site,” allowing for maximum protection of the Northern Bishop Pine Forest from development. Prior to issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, the proposed septic location as shown shall be verified by the septic designer in writing as only site feasible, or all feasible locations shall be drawn out. The least impacting location for the septic system shall be determined and approved by the Coastal Permit Administrator. The proposed permanent fencing location shall correspond with the most easterly boundary of the Conservation Area. The applicant shall execute and record a non-revocable deed restriction to the satisfaction of the Coastal Permit Administrator, which shall provide that all portions of the conservation area revised and approved by the Coastal Permit Administrator, shall be maintained and protected from development and disturbance (with the exception of restoration and other preservation activities authorized by Mendocino County) in perpetuity. Staff additionally recommends the Conservation Area to be offered to a reputable land trust for continued management, financial details of the management agreement to be worked out between the land trust and property owner.

(b) No activities shall be allowed that would disturb vegetation, topography, or hydrology

beyond the permanent construction impact area and septic fields, both during and following construction. Some examples of these activities are vehicle parking or storage of other heavy materials, regular foot traffic, and clearing of vegetation. However, certain vegetation removal activities may be permitted, including native plant restoration activities and pruning or removal of hazardous or diseased trees or thinning of trees if deemed beneficial to the ESHA by a certified arborist or qualified biologist. Vegetation management activities are described further in Mitigation Measures 2(i) and 2(m).

(c) Solid material, including wood, masonry/rock, glass, paper, or other material shall not be

stored outside of the limit of permanent construction impacts shown in Exhibit H. Solid waste materials shall be properly disposed of offsite. Fluid materials, including concrete, wash water, fuels, lubricants, or other fluid materials used during construction shall not be disposed of onsite and shall be stored or confined as necessary to prevent spillage into natural habitats including the onsite ESHAs. If a spill of such material occurs, the area shall be cleaned immediately and contaminated material disposed of properly. The affected area shall be restored to its natural condition.

(d) Prior to issuance of the building permit, or any ground disturbance or vegetation clearing, combination silt fence and construction fence shall be installed around the limit of permanent construction impacts and septic fields as shown in Exhibit H. Fence locations and any ESHA boundaries in the vicinity of construction must be determined and flagged by a qualified biologist. The fencing shall not be placed within 100 feet of any ESHAs except the NBPF, and shall be placed such that construction impacts to NBPF are minimized. No grading, placement of fill material, or other ground disturbance shall occur beyond the designated construction impact area. This fencing shall only be removed once all construction activities are completed. In addition, during construction, all reasonable efforts shall be made to install the septic fields as close as possible to the structures, away from the riparian corridor.

(e) Prior to construction, all project contractors and subcontractors shall be informed of the

sensitive resources within the Project Area. Furthermore, the significance of the limits of

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-28

construction impacts and fencing and flagging of potential Sonoma tree vole nests shall be clearly explained to all parties working within the Project Area both during and following construction. A copy of this report must be in the possession of all contractors and subcontractors when on site during construction.

(f) Permanent exclusionary fencing shall be installed between the development and the

NBPF prior to final inspection of the building permit, along the boundary of the construction impacts or closer to the development where possible, to prevent disturbance of the ESHAs following construction. Post and cable or other similar fencing shall be of a type adequate to prevent activities such as regular foot traffic or general landscape maintenance. Prior to final building inspection, the Building Division shall verify the permanent fencing has been constructed.

(g) Exterior lighting on the south and west facing sides of the development area shall be

avoided or shaded such that lights do not shine upwards or sideways into the NBPF and potentially disturb Sonoma Tree Vole or other wildlife in the ESHA.

(h) All disturbed ground remaining after construction outside the permanent fencing,

including septic fields, shall be replanted under the guidance of a qualified biologist or landscaper with knowledge of native plants and restoration. Only native species shall be used, and they shall be installed at a density appropriate to the forested or forest-opening conditions present (see Appendix A (native plants indicated in bold) and Mitigation Measure 2(i) for appropriate native plants). Target establishment shall be at least 50% absolute cover of native species and less than 5% cover of exotic species. Planting shall occur in the winter months to reduce the need for additional irrigation, and irrigation of these plants shall not be continued once the native species are established (typically after one or two years). Revegetation of these areas shall be monitored by a qualified biologist annually for at least three years and corrective measures taken as necessary to achieve the establishment targets (may be done in conjunction with Bishop pine restoration activities described in Measure 2(m).

(i) No non-native plants shall be planted on the property, with the exception of gardens used

for food production. Landscaping and revegetation both during and following construction will ideally include species native to NBPF, as listed in Table 3 below. Otherwise they shall be native coastal species present in the Project Area (Appendix A, native plants indicated in bold..) or native plants typical of these communities in Mendocino County. When possible, planting shall be of local stock to preserve local genetic diversity. The local CNPS chapter, a qualified biologist, or a landscaper with knowledge of native plant communities should be consulted to identify appropriate species for planting.

Table 3. Native species preferred for landscaping in the ESHA buffer and ESHA restoration.

Scientific name Common name Abies grandis grand fir (large tree)

Arctostaphylos columbiana redwood manzanita Calamagrostis nutkaensis Pacific reedgrass

Ceanothus thyrsiflorus blue blossom Garrya elliptica coast silk tassel

Iris douglasii Douglas’ iris

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-29

Maianthemum dilatatum false lily-of-the-valley (ground cover)

Pinus contorta ssp. contorta

shore pine (medium sized tree)

Pinus muricata Bishop pine (large tree)

Polystichum munitum sword fern

Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern (can be aggressive)

Rhamnus californica California coffeeberry Rubus ursinus California blackberry

Satureja douglasii yerba buena (ground cover) Symphoricarpos mollis creeping snowberry Lithocarpus densiflorus tan oak (meduim sized tree)

Vaccinium ovatum California huckleberry

(j) If possible, the clearing of vegetation and the initiation of construction shall be done in

the bird non-breeding season between September and January. If these activities cannot be done in the non-breeding season, a qualified biologist shall perform pre-construction breeding bird surveys within 14 days of the onset of construction or clearing of vegetation. If active breeding bird nests are observed, no ground disturbance activities shall occur within a minimum 100-foot exclusion zone. These exclusion zones may vary depending on species, habitat and level of disturbance. The exclusion zone shall remain in place around the active nest until all young are no longer dependent upon the nest. A biologist shall monitor the nest site weekly during the breeding season to ensure the buffer is sufficient to protect the nest site from potential disturbances.

If clearing of vegetation and major ground disturbance occurs between November 1 and August 31, pre-construction bat surveys shall be conducted. Pre-construction bat surveys involve surveying trees, rock outcrops, and buildings subject to removal or demolition for evidence of bat use (guano accumulation, or acoustic or visual detections). If evidence of bat use is found, then biologists shall conduct acoustic surveys under appropriate conditions using an acoustic detector, to determine whether a site is occupied. If bats are found, a minimum 50 foot buffer shall be implemented around the roost tree. Removal of roost trees shall occur in September and October, or after the bats have left the roost. In summary, no impacts would be expected and therefore no preconstruction surveys would be required for the species above if vegetation removal (including standing dead trees) is scheduled for the months of September or October. The months of November through August would require a bird and/or bat survey dependent on the time of year.

(k) Construction and silt fencing shall serve as a limit of disturbance to guide tree felling and

protect nearby potential Sonoma Tree Vole nests and habitat (see Mitigation Measure 2(d)). Permanent fencing and preservation of the majority of forested habitat present in the Project Area will help to prevent future disturbance of potential nests and habitat (see Mitigation Measure 2(f)).

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-30

(l) Prior to issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, a survey shall occur to identify trees with active Sonoma tree vole nests, and the survey report submitted to the Coast Planning office. Trees supporting active tree vole nests shall not be cut, trimmed or otherwise modified. All practicable effort shall be made to prevent the dropping of trees and limbs outside of the fenced construction area, and to prevent damage to adjacent trees during felling. Slash and tree debris shall not be stored or disposed of outside of the construction impact area.

(m) Prior to issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, a five-year habitat restoration,

management, and monitoring plan shall be developed by a qualified biologist and accepted as adequate by the Coastal Permit Administrator. This plan shall aim to improve the structural and species diversity of the NBPF understory and restore/improve the Coastal Terrace Prairie. It shall also aim to establish and protect Bishop pine in existing canopy openings in the Project Area in order to encourage regeneration and improve the health and age structure of the stand in the absence of a natural fire regime. The plan shall describe management actions required as mitigation during the first five years following completion of construction. The plan shall also provide additional guidance for long-term stewardship of the Project Area ESHAs by the property owner and landscape personnel after the five-year mitigation and monitoring period. The management plan shall include performance standards for understory establishment and Bishop pine regeneration, and should describe in more detail the following management actions:

(i) Diseased and dying Bishop pine individuals shall be identified on site by a

qualified biologist or certified arborist, and selected for removal based upon the degree of disease and risk to structures or public safety.

(ii) Regeneration of Bishop pine seedlings within mitigation areas and other canopy gaps created by the removal of dying and diseased trees shall be monitored by a qualified biologist for a period of five years, and the following two corrective management actions shall be implemented if regeneration is not occurring: 1. Planting of native shrubs and herbaceous species (see Table 2) shall be

conducted where appropriate, including the disturbed clearing shown in Figure 2, NBPF edge areas lacking understory (particularly near the proposed development and permanent fencing), and septic fields. The plan must include targets for percent survival and canopy cover appropriate to the amount of shade and allowing for natural recruitment.

2. Understory brush removal and thinning of needle litter may be utilized as necessary to reduce fire risk and encourage growth of Bishop pine seedlings and native understory species.

(iii) If natural regeneration is not observed in clearings within two years of tree removal, seedlings from local seed stock should be planted on site.

(iv) Protective measures for wildlife shall be included in the plan to ensure avoidance of direct impacts to breeding birds, special status bats, or Sonoma Tree Vole during tree and brush removal.

(v) Invasive non-native plants shall be controlled in all Project Area ESHAs to the maximum extent possible. Plant species listed as invasive (High, Moderate, Limited) on the California Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2006) shall be removed as they pose a risk to the rare natural communities. Some examples of invasive plants likely to be found in the Project Area that should be monitored and controlled are English ivy (Hedera helix), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius).

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-31

(vi) Annual monitoring of the NBPF ESHA, Coastal Terrace Prairie, planted areas, and protective fencing shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The biologist shall submit an annual report to the County (Coast Planning) assessing the health and regeneration of the NBPF, survival and cover of understory plantings, and presence of weeds and other threats, and shall suggest any corrective management actions needed to achieve targets and remove or control threats to the ESHAs.

(vii) The lower section of trail shall be removed or allowed to naturally vegetate as recommended by the biologist, and natural, stable contours shall be achieved where contours have been altered and would otherwise result in erosion.

(n) Heavy equipment shall be washed to remove potential invasive plant seeds/debris prior to

entering the property.

** 3. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit for the approval of the Coastal Permit Administrator, a grading, erosion control, and drainage plan to address the revegetation and stabilization of disturbed earth associated with the project as well as storm water runoff resulting from the development. The plan shall comply with recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report (BACE 2008) and biological report (WRA 2008) submitted with the project application and located in the project file, and shall include, at minimum, specific measures as follows:

Grading - The grading plan shall include estimates of amounts and locations of total cut and fill materials, and indicate an approved location for offsite disposal of fills should excess materials result. Ground disturbances shall be limited to areas of active construction, and disturbed areas not currently part of active construction activities for a period of 7 or more days be covered with seed, mulch, or mats within 14 days of inactivity. Any seed used shall be sterile or of local native stock. An adequately sized refuse container shall be maintained on-site.

Erosion Control - The erosion control plan shall ensure the following:

(a) To comply with zoning code requirements:

(1) The erosion rate shall not exceed the natural or existing level before development.

(2) Existing vegetation shall be maintained on the construction site to the maximum extent feasible. Trees shall be protected from damage by proper grading techniques.

(3) Areas of disturbed soil shall be reseeded and covered with vegetation as soon as possible after disturbance, but no less than one hundred (100) percent coverage in ninety (90) days after seeding; weed-free mulches consisting of certified weed-free rice straw may be used to cover ground areas temporarily.

(4) To control erosion, development shall not be allowed on slopes over thirty (30) percent unless adequate evidence from a registered civil engineer or recognized authority is given that no increase in erosion will occur.

(5) Erosion control devices shall be installed in coordination with clearing, grubbing, and grading of downstream construction; the plan shall describe the location and timing for

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-32

the installation of such devices and shall describe the parties responsible for repair and maintenance of such devices.

(b) All activities that require substantial ground disturbance shall take place only during the dry season (generally April 15 through October 31) to minimize potential erosion and sedimentation. Activities that do not require construction vehicles to access the site or ground other than planting may take place outside of this window as long as Mitigation Measure 2(e) is implemented prior to construction.

(c) Cut slopes observed along the inboard and upper trail section, and first part of the lower

section shall be laid back to approximately 2H:1V, and the excess soils removed to a planting area outside of the ESHA.

(d) Prior to each rainy season, until the areas are re-vegetated, erosion control such as fiber

wattles shall be placed along the inboard (uphill) side of these portions of the trail. (e) Excess soil accumulated along the outboard of the lower section of trail shall be removed

by hand. The area shall then be planted with a native groundcover species that is acceptable within the ESHA as part of the Habitat Restoration Plan.

Stormwater Runoff – The drainage plan shall ensure the following: (a) To comply with zoning code requirements:

(1) Water flows in excess of natural flows resulting from project development shall be mitigated. (2) Retention facilities and drainage structures shall, where possible, use natural topography and natural vegetation. In other situations, planted trees and vegetation such as shrubs and permanent ground cover shall be maintained by the owner. (3) Provisions shall be made to infiltrate and/or safely conduct surface water to storm drains or suitable watercourses and to prevent surface runoff from damaging faces of cut and fill slopes. (4) Subsurface drainage devices shall be provided in areas having a high water table and to intercept seepage that would adversely affect slope stability, building foundations, or create undesirable wetness. (5) All development that is within, or drains into, environmentally sensitive habitat, is a commercial or residential subdivision, is a service station or automotive repair facility or that includes commercial development or a parking lot, shall capture and infiltrate or treat, using relevant best management practices, including structural best management practices, all runoff from storms of a magnitude such that the runoff from eight-five (85) percent of storms is encaptured or treated.

4. Prior to the issuance of the Coastal Development Permit, the applicant as landowner shall execute and record a deed restriction, in a form and content acceptable to the Coastal Permit Administrator which shall provide that:

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-33

(a) The landowner understands that the site may be subject to extraordinary geologic and erosion hazards and the landowner assumes the risk from such hazards;

(b) The landowner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the County of Mendocino, it

successors in interest, advisors, officers, agents and employees against any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, and expenses of liability (including without limitation attorneys’ fees and costs of the suit) arising out of the design, construction, operation, maintenance, existence or failure of the permitted project. Including, without limitation, all claims made by any individual or entity or arising out of any work performed in connection with the permitted project;

(c) The landowner agrees that any adverse impacts to the property caused by the permitted

project shall be fully the responsibility of the applicant;

(d) The landowner shall not construct any bluff or shoreline protective devices to protect the subject single-family residence, garage, septic system, or other improvements in the event that these structures are subject to damage, or other erosional hazards in the future;

(e) The landowner shall remove the house and its foundation when bluff retreat reaches the

point where the structure is threatened. In the event that portions of the house, garage, foundations, leach field, septic tank, or other improvements associated with the residence fall to the beach before they can be removed from the blufftop, the landowner shall remove all recoverable debris associated with these structures from the beach and ocean and lawfully dispose of the material in an approved disposal site. The landowners shall bear all costs associated with such removal;

(f) The document shall run with the land, bind all successors and assigns, and shall be

recorded free of all prior liens and encumbrances, except for tax liens.

** 5. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan and design details or manufacturer’s specifications for all the exterior lighting fixtures. Exterior lighting shall be kept to the minimum necessary for safety and security purposes and shall be downcast and shielded in compliance with Section 20.504.035 of the Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code.

** 6. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the

Coastal Permit Administrator, a landscaping plan, assuring that all development that would be within public view from the highway is buffered by existing and proposed vegetation for the life of the residence and associated structures. Emphasis shall be placed on retaining the existing vegetation between the highway and the building site.

7. This entitlement does not become effective or operative and no work shall be commenced under

this entitlement until the California Department of Fish and Game filing fees required or authorized by Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code are submitted to the Mendocino County Department of Planning and Building Services. Said fee of $2,043 shall be made payable to the Mendocino County Clerk and submitted to the Department of Planning and Building Services prior to September 11, 2009. If the project is appealed, the payment will be held by the Department of Planning and Building Services until the appeal is decided. Depending on the outcome of the appeal, the payment will either be filed with the County Clerk (if the project is approved) or returned to the payer (if the project is denied). Failure to pay this fee by the

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-34

specified deadline shall result in the entitlement becoming null and void. The applicant has the sole responsibility of timely compliance with this condition.

8. This permit shall become effective after all applicable appeal periods have expired, or appeal

processes have been exhausted, and after any fees required or authorized by Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code are submitted to the Department of Planning and Building Services. Failure of the applicant to make use of this permit within 2 years or failure to comply with payment of any fees within specified time periods shall result in the automatic expiration of this permit.

To remain valid, progress towards completion of the project must be continuous. The applicant has sole responsibility for renewing this application before the expiration date. The County will not provide a notice prior to the expiration date.

9. The use and occupancy of the premises shall be established and maintained in conformance with

the provisions of Division II of Title 20 of the Mendocino County Code. 10. The application, along with supplemental exhibits and related material, shall be considered

elements of this permit, and that compliance therewith is mandatory, unless an amendment has been approved by the Planning Commission.

11. This permit shall be subject to the securing of all necessary permits for the proposed development

from County, State and Federal agencies having jurisdiction.

12. The applicant shall secure all required building permits for the proposed project as required by the Building Inspection Division of the Department of Planning and Building Services.

13. This permit shall be subject to revocation or modification upon a finding of any one or more of

the following:

a. The permit was obtained or extended by fraud. b. One or more of the conditions upon which the permit was granted have been violated. c. The use for which the permit was granted is conducted so as to be detrimental to the

public health, welfare or safety, or to be a nuisance. d. A final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction has declared one or more conditions

to be void or ineffective, or has enjoined or otherwise prohibited the enforcement or operation of one or more such conditions.

Any revocation shall proceed as specified in Title 20 of the Mendocino County Code.

14. This permit is issued without a legal determination having been made upon the number, size or

shape of parcels encompassed within the permit described boundaries. Should, at any time, a legal determination be made that the number, size or shape of parcels within the permit described boundaries are different than that which is legally required by this permit, this permit shall become null and void.

15. If any archaeological sites or artifacts are discovered during site excavation or construction

activities, the applicant shall cease and desist from all further excavation and disturbances within

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-35

one hundred feet of the discovery, and make notification of the discovery to the Director of the Department of Planning and Building Services. The Director will coordinate further actions for the protection of the archaeological resources in accordance with Section 22.12.090 of the Mendocino County Code.

___________August 10, 2009______ ________________(Original Signed)____________

DATE TERESA SPADE PLANNER II

Negative Declaration Appeal Period: Ten calendar days for the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors, followed by ten working days for the California Coastal Commission following the Commission’s receipt of the Notice of Final Action from the County. Appeal Fee: $945 (For an appeal to the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors.) ** Indicates conditions relating to Environmental Considerations - deletion of these conditions may affect

the issuance of a Negative Declaration. ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit A: Location Map Exhibit B: Zoning Display Map Exhibit C: Orthophoto Exhibit D: Topographic Map Exhibit E: Photo Exhibit F: California Natural Diversity Database Map Exhibit G: 100 Year Flood and Coastal Wave Action Map Exhibit H: Site Plan Exhibit I: Lower Floor Plan Exhibit J: Upper Floor Plan Exhibit K: Elevations – Northeast and Southwest Exhibit L: Elevations – Northwest and Southeast Appendix A: Project Area Species List Appendix B: Reduced Buffer Analysis SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: Planning – Ukiah No comment. Department of Transportation No comment. Environmental Health – Fort Bragg DEH clearance as conditioned – no fence in leachfield area, foundation

drain water must be dispersed a minimum of 25 feet downslope of primary and replacement leachfields.

Building Inspection – Fort Bragg Calfire must review this request for a variance. The redwood/cedar shingles must conform to WUI 2007 CBC Chapter 7A requirements.

Assessor No response. Caltrans No response. Coastal Commission No response.

STAFF REPORT FOR CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT August 27, 2009 And VARIANCE Page CPA-36 Department of Fish and Game Comments as outlined in natural resources section. US Fish and Wildlife Service No response.

References

BACE Geotechnical, April 2008. Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance of The Trail Construction/Improvement at 9290 North Highway One, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California. 11679.2. A division of Brunsing Associates, Inc.

BACE Geotechnical, December 5, 2008. Geotechnical Investigation, Planned Temple Residence, 9290 North

Highway One, Mendocino, Mendocino County, California. 11679.3. A division of Brunsing Associates, Inc.

California Native Plant Society, 2009. Department of Fish and Game California Natural Diversity Database

Ranking System Guide. http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/inventory/ranking_system_mods.php July 2009.

County of Mendocino, 1991. Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code. http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/planning/CoastZO/ZOCoastIndex.htm July 2009. County of Mendocino, 1991. Mendocino County General Plan Coastal Element.

http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/planning/CoastPlan/ContentIndexFrame.htm July 2009.

DeGraff, Tim, December, 2008. Biological Report of Compliance for Mendocino County Coastal

Development Permit, 9290 North Highway One (APN 119-340-04), Mendocino, Mendocino County, California. WRA Environmental Consultants, San Rafael, CA.

Macedo, Rick, July 2009. Email correspondence dated 6-17-2009, Subject: Re: CDP 4-2009; Williamstown Friendly Village Partners.

Big River

Hare Creek

Little River

Noyo River

Caspar Creek

Jug Handle Creek

Digger Creek

Mitchell Creek

Albion River

Schoolhouse Creek

SH 20

LI TTL

E LA

KE ROAD

SH

1

COMPTCHE-UKIAH ROAD

SIMP

SON LAN

E

CASPAR ORCHARD ROA

D

CASPAR LITTLE LAKE ROAD

LITTLE RIVE R AIRPO RT ROA D

OC

EA

N D

RIV

E

POIN

T CA

BR

ILLO D

RIV

E

G ORDON LANE

CHESTNUT STREET

LA

NS

ING

STR

EE

T

TURNE R ROAD

FERN CREEK ROAD

GIB NEY LANE

FRA

NK

LIN

RO

AD

CA

SPA

R R

OA

D

HA

NS

ON

RO

AD

DO

RF

FI R

OA

D

FRO

NTA

GE

B

CASPAR LOGGING ROADP

RA

IRIE

WA

Y

GU

RLE

Y L

AN

E

BASIN S

TREET

NO

YO

AC

RE

S D

RIV

E

ELLISON WAY

PAC

IFIC

DR

IVE

BAYWOOD DRIVE

LAH

MO

N

RAMP

HOLQUIST LANE

WALNUT STREET

SOUTH STREET

HILLS R

OAD

FRO

NTAG

E A

KA

ST

EN

ST

RE

ET

SH 1

SH 1

South Fork Noyo River

South Fork Noyo River

Laguna Creek

FORT BRAGG

MENDOCINO

LITTLE RIVER

CASPAR

LOCATION MAP

5,000 0 5,0002,500Feet

Parcel lines are approximate. Parcel lines on this map are NOT SURVEY LINES, they are for viewing purposes only and shouldnot be used to determine legal boundary lines. Parcel line can be over 200 feet off. (Parcel lines are as of September 2007)

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

±

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

Subject Property

k

kk

k

kk

kk

kkk

kkkk

k k

k

k

k

k

k

k

k

k

k

Big River

HW

Y 1

GORDON LANE

FRO

NTA

GE

B

COMPTCHE-UKIAH ROAD

FRO

NTA

GE

A

CHAPKMAN ROAD

SO

UTH

BIG

RIV

ER

RO

AD

5C

1C

3C

ZONING DISPLAY MAP

500 0 500250Feet

Parcel lines are approximate. Parcel lines on this map are NOT SURVEY LINES, they are for viewing purposes only and shouldnot be used to determine legal boundary lines. Parcel line can be over 200 feet off. (Parcel lines are as of September 2007)

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

±

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

Subject Property

OS

OS

OS

TP

RR5

RR5RR5

[RR1]

RR5[RR2]

RR5[RR2]

RR5[RR2]

RR5PDRL

OSCR RR10CR RR10

RR5

ORTHOPHOTO - August 2005

100 0 10050FeetParcel lines are approximate. Parcel lines on this map are NOT SURVEY LINES, they are for viewing purposes only and should

not be used to determine legal boundary lines. Parcel line can be over 200 feet off. (Parcel lines are as of September 2007)

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

±

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

Subject Property

CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEETUSGS MAP

100 0 10050FeetParcel lines are approximate. Parcel lines on this map are NOT SURVEY LINES, they are for viewing purposes only and should

not be used to determine legal boundary lines. Parcel line can be over 200 feet off. (Parcel lines are as of September 2007)

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

±

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

Subject Property

8012040

Not To Scale

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

PHOTO OCTOBER 4, 2005COPYRIGHT resourcestrategies@usa.net

CALIFORNIA COASTAL RECORDS PROJECT

±

PACIFIC GILIASUPPLE DAISYDARK-EYED GILIADECEIVING SEDGE

PERENNIAL GOLDFIELDS

NORTHERN MICROSERIS

BLASDALE'S BENT GRASS

LIVID SEDGEGREAT BURNET

SEACOAST RAGWORTHAIR-LEAVED RUSH

MENDOCINO COAST PAINTBRUSHMENDOCINO LEPTONETID SPIDER

MENDOCINO COAST PAINTBRUSH

SWAMP HAREBELL

SUPPLE DAISY

COASTAL BLUFF MORNING-GLORY

OREGON GOLDTHREAD

SUPPLE DAISY

MENDOCINO COAST PAINTBRUSH

OREGON GOLDTHREAD

400 0 400200Feet

Parcel lines are approximate. Parcel lines on this map are NOT SURVEY LINES, they are for viewing purposes only and shouldnot be used to determine legal boundary lines. Parcel line can be over 200 feet off. (Parcel lines are as of September 2007)

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

±

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

Subject Property

CALIFORNIA NATURAL DIVERSITYDATABASE RAREFIND July 2009)

100 YEAR FLOOD ZONE andCOASTAL FLOOD VELOCITY (WAVE ACTION)

100 0 10050Feet

Parcel lines are approximate. Parcel lines on this map are NOT SURVEY LINES, they are for viewing purposes only and shouldnot be used to determine legal boundary lines. Parcel line can be over 200 feet off. (Parcel lines are as of September 2007)

WILLIAMSTOWN FRIENDLY VILLAGECDP 4-2009 / CDV 1-2009APN 119-340-04

±

OWNER:CASE #:APNs:

Subject Property

Case#: CDP 4-2009/CDV 1-2009 Williamstown Friendly Village Date: August 27, 2009 Prepared By: Teresa Spade

INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

Yes Will the project result in the following

environmental effects: No

Not Significant

Significant Unless

It is Mitigated

Significant - No

Apparent Mitigation

Cumulative

1. EARTH: A. Unstable earth conditions or changes in

geologic substructures.

B. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of the soil.

See Condition No. 1

C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features.

D. The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features.

E. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site.

See Conditions No. 2 and 3

F. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion that may modify the channel of a river, stream, inlet, or bay?

G. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, ground failure, or other hazards.

See Conditions No. 1and 12

2. AIR: A. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of

ambient air quality.

B. The creation of objectionable odors. C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or

temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally?

3. WATER: A. Changes in currents, or the course of water

movements, in either fresh or marine waters.

B. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff.

See Condition No. 3

C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters.

D. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body.

E. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity.

1

Yes

Will the project result in the following environmental effects:

No Not

Significant

Significant Unless

It is Mitigated

Significant - No

Apparent Mitigation

Cumulative

F. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water.

G. Change in the quantity of ground water, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations

H. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies.

I. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tsunamis.

4. PLANT LIFE: A. Change in the diversity of species, or

number of any species of plants including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants.

See Condition No. 2

B. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants

See Condition No. 2

C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species.

See Condition No. 2

D. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop.

5. ANIMAL LIFE: A. Change in the diversity of species, or

number of any species of animals including birds, land animals, reptiles, fish, shellfish, insects, and benthic organisms.

See Condition No. 2

B. Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals.

C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals.

D. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat.

See Conditions No. 2 & 3

6. NOISE: A. Increases in existing noise levels. B. Exposure of people to severe noise levels.

2

Yes Will the project result in the following

environmental effects: No

Not Significant

Significant Unless

It is Mitigated

Significant - No

Apparent Mitigation

Cumulative

7. LIGHT AND GLARE: A. Production of new light and glare.

See Conditions No. 2 and 5

8. LAND USE: A. Substantial alteration of the present or

planned land use of a given area.

9. NATURAL RESOURCES: A. Increase in the rate of use of any natural

resources.

10. POPULATION: A. Alterations in the location, distribution,

density, or growth rate of human populations.

11. HOUSING: A. Will the proposal affect existing housing or

create a demand for new housing?

12. TRANSPORTATION/ CIRCULATION:

A. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?

B. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking?

C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems?

D. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods?

E. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic?

F. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians.

13. PUBLIC SERVICES: A. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or

result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas:

Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks and other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, and roads?

Other governmental services?

3

Yes Will the project result in the following environmental effects:

No Not

Significant

Significant Unless

It is Mitigated

Significant - No

Apparent Mitigation

Cumulative

14. ENERGY: A. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or

energy?

B. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new energy sources?

15. UTILITIES: A. Will the project result in a need for new

systems or substantial alterations to the following:

Potable water? Sewerage? Energy or information transmission lines?

16. HUMAN HEALTH: A. Creation of any health hazard or

potential health hazard?

B. Exposure of people to any existing health hazards?

C. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions.

D. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or evacuation plan.

17. AESTHETICS: A. Obstruction of any scenic vista or view

open to the public, or create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view?

See Conditions No. 2 and 6

18. RECREATION: A. Impact upon the quality or quantity of

existing recreational opportunities?

19. CULTURAL RESOURCES: A. Alteration or destruction of a

prehistoric or historic archaeological site?

B. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building or structure?

4

Yes

Will the project result in the following environmental effects:

No Not

Significant

Significant Unless

It is Mitigated

Significant - No

Apparent Mitigation

Cumulative

C. Cause a physical change that would affect the unique ethnic cultural values?

D. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?

Section III Responses to Environmental Checklist. For a discussion of each of the environmental effects listed in the Environmental

Checklist along with related goals and policies of the General Plan, see the Environmental Review section of the attached staff report.

Section IV Mandatory Findings of Significance. A. As discussed in the preceding sections, the project does does not have the

potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment, including effects on animals or plants, or to eliminate historic or prehistoric sites.

B. As discussed in the preceding sections, both short-term and long-term

environmental effects associated with the project will be significant will be less than significant.

C. When impacts associated with the project are considered alone or in combination

with other impacts, the project-related impacts are significant insignificant. D. The above discussions do do not identify any substantial adverse impacts to

people as a result of the project.

Section V Determination. On the basis of this initial evaluation, it has been determined that:

The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and it is

recommended that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be adopted.

Although the project, as proposed, could have had a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures required for the project will reduce potentially significant effects to a less than significant level, therefore, it is recommended that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be adopted.

The proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

5