Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan

Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, the Lucia Mar Unified School District, and the South County Page 1 Sanitation District.

MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL

LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN

City of Arroyo Grande, CA.

City of Grover Beach, CA.

Lucia Mar Unified School District, Arroyo Grande, CA.

South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District, Oceano, CA.

Original Document August 12, 2013 Revised Document December 23, 2014 Modified Document December 10, 2015 Approved Document December 10, 2015 Prepared by: David L. Mathe Emergency Preparedness Coordinator Five Cities Fire Authority



Table of Content ADOPTED RESOLUTONS A. City of Arroyo Grande 6 B. City of Grover Beach 9 C. Lucia Mar Unified School District 10 D. South County Sanitation District 12 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. General Plan Description 13 B. Plan Purpose and Authority 13 II. PLANNING PROCESS A. DMA 2000 Requirements 14 B. Revised Plan Development 15 C. Public and Jurisdictional Input Process §201.6(b) 15 D. Public Comment §201.6(b) (1) 16 E. Neighboring Communities §201.6(b) (2) 17 F. Incorporation of Existing Plans and Other Information §201.6(b) (3) 17 G. Planning Process Development §201.6(c) (1) 17 H. Hazard Identification §201.6(c)(2)(i)(ii) 18 I. Existing Authorities, Plans, Policies, Programs and Resources §201.6 (c) (3) 19 J. Plan Maintenance Monitoring §201.6 (c) (4) (i) 20 K. Implementation Through Existing Plans and Programs §201.6(c)(4)(ii) 21 L. Plan Maintenance Community Participation §201.6 (c) (4) (iii) 21 M. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) 21 N. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) continued participation and compliance 21 O. Hazard Profiles 22

a. Earthquake b. Flood/Dam Inundation c. Tsunami d. Wildfire

P. Cost Benefit Analysis §201.6(c) (3) (iii) 26 Q. Plan revisions 2008 vs. 2013 §201.6(d) (3) 26 III. Community Descriptions City of Arroyo Grande A. Development History 27 B. Geography 27 C. Demographics 27 D. Population and Growth 28



E. Economy 29 F. Climate 30 G. Government 30 H. Land Use 30 I. Zoning Map 31 J. Future Development 32 K. City of Arroyo Grande Specific Hazard Locations, Impacts vulnerabilities and Maps, 33 §206.6(c) (2) (i) and §206.6(c) (2) (ii)

a. Earthquake b. Flood c. Dam Failure d. Tsunami e. Wildland Fire

L. Capability Assessment Table and Summary 42 M. Mitigation Strategies and Actions § 201.6 (c)(3)(iv) 47

a. Flooding b. Earthquake c. Wildland and Structure Fires d. Dam Inundation

N. Property Schedule 52 O. Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure § 201.6 (c)(3)(i) 54 P. Loss Estimate to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure 56 Q. City of Arroyo Grande 2008 Mitigation Project Status 58

City of Grover Beach A. Development History 61 B. Geography 61 C. Demographics 62 D. Population and Growth 62 E. Economy 63 F. Climate 64 G. Government 64 H. Land Uses 64 I. Zoning Map 65 J. Future Development 65 K. City of Grover Beach Specific Hazard Locations, Impacts vulnerabilities and Maps, §206.6(c) (2) (i) and §206.6(c) (2) (ii) 66 L. Capability Assessment 78 M. 2013 Mitigation Strategies and Actions §201.6(c)(3)(iv) 87

a. Earthquake b. Flooding c. Tsunami d. Wildland Fires and Structure Fires

N. City of Grover Beach 2008 Mitigation Project Status 92 O. Property Schedule 95 P. Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures § 201.6 (c)(3)(i) 96



Q. Loss Estimation to Vulnerable Structures 97

South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District A. District Description 98 B. District Members 98

a. City of Arroyo Grande 99 b. City of Grover Beach 99 c. Oceano Community Services District 99

C. Form of Government 99 D. What is a Special District 100 E. Geographic Service Area 100 F. Wastewater Treatment 100

a. Preliminary treatment b. Primary treatment c. Secondary treatment d. Fixed Film e. Final treatment focuses f. Sludge

G. Collection System 101 H. Treatment Plant 102 I. Outfall 103 J. Biosolids 103 K. Plant Process 104 L. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Specific Hazard Locations, 105

Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Maps, §206.6(c) (2) (i) and §206.6(c) (2) (ii) M. Mitigation Strategies §201.6(c)(3)(iv) 113

a. Earthquake b. Flooding c. Fire d. Tsunami

N. Property Schedule 119 O. Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Critical Infrastructure§ 201.6 (c)(3)(i) 120 P. Loss Estimation to Vulnerable Structures 122

Lucia Mar Unified School District A. Description of School District 123 B. Classification Information 124 C. Future Development 125 D. Lucia Mar Unified School District Specific Hazard Locations, 125 Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Maps, §206.6(c) (2) (i) and §206.6(c) (2) (ii) E. Mitigation Strategies §201.6(c)(3)(iv) 134 \ \

a. Earthquake b. Flood



c. Fire d. Tsunami

F. Lucia Mar Unified School District 2008 Mitigation Project Status 138 G. Property Schedule 141 H. Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure § 201.6 (c)(3)(i) 142 I. Loss Estimate to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure 143

Appendixes A. Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Calendar 144 B. City of Arroyo Grande Ordinance 646, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) 145 C. Letter requesting comment from the City of Pismo Beach 150 D. Letter requesting comment from the Oceano Community Services District 151 E. Press Release 152 F. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Revision Task Responsibilities 154 G. A Resolution of the Council of the City of Grover City requesting permission 155

to participate in the Federal Flood Insurance Program H. Ordinance No. 12-06, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grover Beach 158

Amending Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX Planning and Zoning Regulations and Article VII Public Works Associated with Development Permit Application No. 11-12



Arroyo Grande Resolution DMA 2000 Requirement §201.6(c) (5)





Grover Beach Resolution DMA 2000 Requirement §201.6(c) (5)



Lucia Mar Unified School District Resolution DMA 2000 Requirement §201.6(c) (5)





South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Resolution DMA 2000 Requirement §201.6(c) (5)



I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. General Plan Description The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach, the South County Sanitation District, and the Lucia Mar Unified School District, have united to develop a jurisdiction specific hazard mitigation plan. The goal of this multi-jurisdictional plan is to arrive at practical, meaningful, attainable and cost-effective mitigation solutions to minimize each jurisdiction’s vulnerability to the identified hazards and ultimately reduce both human and financial losses subsequent to a disaster. Development of this mitigation plan entailed assessing the planning capabilities, securing political support and soliciting input and approval from each of the involved communities. Risk assessments were then performed which identified and evaluated each natural and man-made hazard that could impact these areas. Historical hazard events are described. The future probability of these identified hazards and their impact on each of these communities is described. Vulnerability assessments were performed which summarized the identified hazards’ impact to each community’s critical structures and infrastructure and future development. An estimate of the potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures was determined. The risk and vulnerability assessments were used to determine mitigation goals and objectives to minimize long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. These goals and objectives were the foundation behind the development of a comprehensive range of specific attainable mitigation actions created for each jurisdiction. An action plan has been developed which entails adopting, implementing, assigning responsibility, monitoring, and reviewing this hazard mitigation plan over time, to ensure the goals and objectives are being achieved and the plan remains a relevant document. B. Plan Purpose and Authority The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000, also commonly known as “The 2000 Stafford Act Amendments” (the Act), constitutes an effort by the Federal government to reduce the rising cost of disasters. The Act stresses the importance of mitigation planning and disaster preparedness prior to an event. Mitigation Planning Section 322 of the Act requires local governments to develop and submit mitigation plans in order to qualify for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) project funds. It also increases the amount of HMGP funds available to states meeting the enhanced planning criteria, and enables these funds to be used for planning activities. To facilitate implementation of the DMA 2000, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) created an Interim Final Rule (the Rule), published in the Federal Register in February of 2002 at section 201 of 44 CFR. The Rule spells out the mitigation planning criteria for States and local communities. Specific requirements for local mitigation planning efforts are outlined in section §201.6 of the Rule. Local jurisdictions must demonstrate that proposed mitigation actions are based upon a sound planning process that accounts for the inherent risk and capabilities of the individual communities as stated in section §201.5 of the Rule. In developing this comprehensive Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, FEMA’s Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance (July 2008) was strictly adhered to for the purpose of ensuring thoroughness, diligence, and compliance with the new DMA 2000 planning requirements.



II. PLANNING PROCESS A. DMA 2000 Requirements

§201.6(b) An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include:

§ 201.6(b) (1) (1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting

stage and prior to plan approval;

§201.6(b) (2) (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private

and non-profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and

§ 201.6(b) (3) (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information.

§ 201.6(c) (1) [The plan shall document] the planning process used to develop the plan including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved.

§201.6(c) (2) (i) [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the local and extent of all

natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events.

§201.6(c) (2) (ii) [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the type of all natural

hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. §201.6(c)(3) [The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan must include a] mitigation strategy that

provides the jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools.”

§201.6(c) (3) (i) [The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] description of mitigation goals

to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.

§201.6(c)(3)(ii) [The mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure.



A. DMA 2000 Requirements (continued)

§201.6(c) (3) (iii) [The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan describing how the actins identified in section (c) (3) (ii) will be prioritized. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs.

§ 201.6(c) (4) (i) [The plan maintenance process shall include a] section describing the

method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle.

§201.6(c)(4)(ii) [The plan shall include a] process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate.

§ 201.6(c) (4) (iii) [The plan maintenance process shall include a] discussion on how the Community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process.

B. Revised Plan Development In March 2008 FEMA approved the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach and the Lucia Mar Unified School District. It is required that Local Hazard Mitigation Plans are to be revised to reflect any Hazard changes within the Plans partners. The 2008 Plan is scheduled to be revised on or before March 2013. Planning work was started in late 2011 and continued into the third quarter of 2012. The City of Arroyo Grande acted as Project Manager for the 2008 Plan. It was agreed by all partners that the Five Cities Fire Authority would continue in that role for the 2013 revised plan. The City of Arroyo Grande was approached by the South County Sanitation District to become partners in the 2013 Plan. They have been welcomed to participate in the Plan Development process. C. Public and Jurisdiction Input Process §201.6(b) Each of the participating jurisdictions have provided input consisting of Hazard Analysis, Hazard Mitigation actions, Hazard Identification, Vulnerability Assessment and Risk Assessment. Planning meetings with partner staff was conducted through the entire revision process. The Project Manager/ City of Arroyo Grande Emergency Planning Coordinator met with the City Managers of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, the Safety Director of the Lucia Mar Unified School District, and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Superintendent. The partners were requested to provide representatives from the public and private sector to provide input in the development and completion of the plan. This task was accomplished by the city managers, director and superintendent via telephone, email and personal visits to invite the representatives to participate in the process.

§201.6(c) (3) (iii) [The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan describing how the actions identified in section (c) (3) (ii) will be prioritized. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs.

§ 201.6(c) (4) (i) [The plan maintenance process shall include a] section describing the

method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle.

§201.6(c)(4)(ii) [The plan shall include a] process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate.

§ 201.6(c) (4) (iii) [The plan maintenance process shall include a] discussion on how the

Community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process.



D. Public Comment § 201.6(b) (1) The opportunity for public input was advertised in the San Luis Obispo County newspaper, the Tribune, the Five Cities newspaper, the Times-Press-Recorder, KSBY-TV local NBC affiliate, KCOY-TV local CBS affiliate, KVEC radio, and Coast News. See Appendix E, page 110 The Draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plan was posted on the Five Cities Fire Authority web page for public comment and review for 30 days, ending October 31, 2012. On December 11, 2012, the Arroyo Grande City Council public testimony on the plan and adopted it by resolution 4502. On November 19, 2012 the Grover Beach City Council reviewed the plan and received additional Public testimony and adopted the plan by resolution 12-74. On February 5, 2013, the Lucia Mar Unified School District board, in a public hearing adopted the plan as its official document by resolution A-1213-11. On December 19, 2012 he South County Sanitation District Board of Directors, in a public hearing, adopted the plan as its official document by resolution 2012-302. Arroyo Grande Hazard Mitigation Plan Revision Planning Group Name Representing Caren Ray City Council Member Dan Langstaff Arroyo Grande Police Department Detective Sergeant Randy Russom Citizen Matt Downing California Polytechnic State University Intern to the City of Arroyo Grande David Mathe Five Cities Fire Authority, Project Manager Grover Beach Hazard Mitigation Revision Planning Group Name Representing Bob Perrault Grover Beach City Manager Jim Copsey Grover Beach Police Chief Breven Baima Citizen David Mathe Five Cities Fire Authority, Project Manager South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation Hazard Mitigation Revision Planning Group Name Representing Tony Ferrara SCSD Board Member Bob Barlogio SCSD Superintendent Joe Costello Citizen David Mathe Five Cities Fire Authority, Project Manager Lucia Mar Unified School District Name Representing Jeff Dixon Lucia Mar Unified School District Denise Bailey Lucia Mar Unified School District David Mathe Five Cities Fire Authority, Project Manager Matthew Downing, a City and Regional Planning Master’s Candidate at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo and Planning Intern with the City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department, was assigned to this project. He provided GIS mapping services, acted as a liaison from the Community Development Department to provide information concerning current and future development projects within Arroyo Grande, and provided an educational viewpoint on the update of Local Hazard Mitigation Plans. Mr. Downing was critical to the revision of this Plan.



E. Neighboring Communities §201.6(b) (2) Each of the Partners participated throughout the planning process. Additionally, the governing bodies of each jurisdiction reviewed the plan and jurisdiction representatives provided input throughout the plan’s development. Further participation occurred through interviewing multiple public officials and staff members in their areas of specific expertise (i.e.-public works directors, city engineering staff, the Five Cities Fire Authority Chief, Community Development Director, City Finance Officers, City Clerks, School District Facilities Manager). Letters requesting comment from the communities of Pismo Beach, City Manager James Lewis and Oceano, Marie McGrath were hand delivered to their offices on May 28, 2013. There was no response. See supporting documents appendix, See Appendix C and D pages 108 and 109. F. Incorporation of Existing Plans and Other Information § 201.6(b) (3) At the onset of and throughout the hazard mitigation planning process, all applicable local emergency operations plans and geotechnical reports were reviewed and incorporated into this mitigation plan. The following sources were used:

• City of Arroyo Grande General Plan

• City of Grover Beach General Plan

• State Hazard Mitigation Plan

• Local and State land use regulations

• Flood ordinances

• Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach Drainage Master Plan

• Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach Water Master Plan

• City of Arroyo Grande Emergency Operations Plan.

• City of Grover Beach Emergency Operations Plan.

• Lucia Mar Unified School District Emergency Operations Plan.

• Past disaster declarations

• Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM’s)

• Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan for the Lucia Mar Unified School District

• City of Arroyo Grande, General Plan, Safety element

• City of Grover Beach, General Plan, Safety element

• South County Sanitation District Emergency Operations Plan

G. Planning Process Development §201.6(c) (1) Throughout the planning process, the Project Manager made a concerted effort to gather information from Plan Partners departments, as well as state and federal agencies, the local business community, area residents and other stakeholders. The solicited information was from departments, agencies and people with specific knowledge of natural hazards, and past historical events, as well as planning and zoning codes, ordinances and recent planning



decisions. The hazard mitigation strategies contained in this plan were developed through an extensive planning process involving the partner Local Hazard Mitigation Revision Planning Groups. Arroyo Grande Council Person and Planning Chair Ray, Detective Sergeant Dan Langstaff, Mr. Randy Russom Arroyo Grande Citizen, City of Arroyo Grande Planning Intern Matt Downing and the Project Manager met to discuss Arroyo Grande Hazard Analysis, Hazard Mitigation actions, Hazard Identification, Vulnerability Assessment and Risk Assessment. During the process the group reviewed and continued to provide input to the Project Manager in the development and completion stages of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Grover Beach City Manager Bob Perrault, Police Chief and Planning Chair Jim Copsey, Citizen Breven Baima and the Project Manager met to discuss the Grover Beach Hazard Analysis, Hazard Mitigation actions, Hazard Identification, Vulnerability Assessment and Risk Assessment. During the process the group reviewed and continued to provide input to the Project Manager in the development and completion stages of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Hazard Board Member and Chair Tony Ferrara, Superintendent Bob Barlogio, Citizen Joe Costello and the Project Manager met to discuss the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Hazard Identification, Vulnerability Assessment and Risk Assessment. During the process the group reviewed and continued to provide input to the Project Manager in the development and completion stages of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Lucia Mar Unified School District member and Chair Jeff Dixon and Denise Bailey met to discuss the Lucia Mar Unified School District Hazard Identification, Vulnerability Assessment and Risk Assessment. During the process the group reviewed and continued to provide input to the Project Manager in the development and completion stages of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Project Manager met with each group, quarterly, to brief them on the status of the Plan. Attendance at the meetings was 100%. In that the meetings were of an informal nature attendance sign-in was not required, there was no pre-determined agenda, and minutes were not recorded. With all four groups the goals and tasks were successfully accomplished. H. Hazard Identification §201.6(c) (2) (i)(ii) Central California is susceptible to a number of natural hazards. The State of California identifies the following types of natural hazards that California has encountered since 1950: Agricultural, earthquake, fire, flood, landslides, volcanoes and extreme weather. The following natural occurring hazards may impact the plan partners: earthquake, flood (dam failure), fire, and tsunami. It is unlikely the following natural hazards would impact any of the partners: agricultural, volcanoes, extreme weather. Natural hazards that have impacted the partners are: earthquake, flood, fire, and tsunami. Historical data, catastrophic potential relevance to the partners and the probability and potential magnitude of future occurrences were all used to reduce and prioritize the natural hazards most relevant to the plan partners. The specific impacts to each partner will be discussed in detail in their descriptions.



I. Existing Authorities, Plans, Policies, Programs and Resources §201.6 (c) (3) Cities of Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande At the onset of and in conjunction with the hazard mitigation planning process, all applicable local emergency operations plans and geotechnical reports were reviewed and incorporated into this mitigation plan. The following sources were used: City of Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande General Plan including the Land Use Element and the Safety Element City of Grover Beach Municipal Code Article V. Sanitation and Health Chapter 3 City of Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Title 8 Health and Safety Chapter 8.12 CAL FIRE/San Luis Obispo County Fire Management Plan California State Hazard Mitigation Plan Local and State land use regulations Flood ordinances Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM’s) Legal and Regulatory The cities applicable Building Codes, Zoning Ordinances, Subdivision Regulations, Capital Improvement Plan, and other regulatory development guides provide specific support to hazard mitigation activities within the Cities. Additionally, the cities General Plans, Comprehensive Emergency Management Plans, and Disaster Recovery Plans provide additional authority. Financial In order to achieve the goals and objectives of the Mitigation Strategies, one or more of the following funding sources could be utilized: federal and state entitlements and grants, general fund, sales and property taxes, infrastructure user fees, impact fees, and new development impact fees. The Cities have the necessary budgetary tools and practices in place to facilitate handling mitigation funds; however funding sources are very limited. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District as defined by state law is an agency of the state for the local performance of governmental or propriety functions within limited boundaries. Special Districts deliver a limited number of public services to a geographically limited area. The Sanitation District provides solid waste treatment to the cities of Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District. Legal and Regulatory California Health and Safety Code §4700 Assessments, California Constitution Article XIII D Benefit Assessment Act of 1982, Government Code §54703, et. seq. Bond Oversight, Government Code §53410, et. seq. Financial The Sanitation District has procedures in place to assist with the financial recommendation of the Mitigation Plan. By state statute the Sanitation District may consider the implementation of special taxes or levies to achieve the goals and objectives of the Mitigation Plan as it related to the Sanitation District.



Lucia Mar Unified School District Financial The Lucia Mar Unified School District may sell bonds to reconstruct, remodel or replace existing school buildings, to fulfill the Mitigation Strategies if the costs exceed the normal budgeting process. Legal and Regulatory California Education Code Section 33308.5, State Board of Education Regulations and Criteria Regarding School District Organization California School Finance Authority The Plans Team members will review regulatory tools to assess the integration of the Mitigation Strategies. The Plans Team will Work with pertinent divisions and departments to increase awareness of the LHMP and provide assistance in integrating the mitigation strategy (including the action plan) into relevant planning mechanisms. Implementation of these requirements

J. Plan Maintenance Monitoring § 201.6(c) (4) (i) The Fire Chief will appoint the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator as Project Manager. The LHMP partner representatives are the Five Cities Fire Authority Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, (representing the City of Arroyo Grande), City of Grover Beach, Grover Beach Police Chief, South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District General Manager, and the Lucia Mar Unified School District, Executive Director, Facilities, Planning Maintenance and Operations. The Five Cities Fire Authority will take lead as Project Manager and responsibility for plan maintenance and implementation. Plan implementation and evaluation will be a shared responsibility among all Plan

Financial Resources for Hazard Mitigation

Financial Resources Effect on Hazard Mitigation Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Can be used for any hazard mitigation activity;

however, it is only eligible for use with voter approval. Development Impact Fee Can be used for both on-site and off-site capital

improvements, including seismic hazard repair and maintenance, drainage, and critical facilities.

Incur debt through general obligation bonds Can be used for any hazard mitigation activity; however, it is only eligible for use with voter approval.

Incur debt through special tax and revenue bonds Can be used for any hazard mitigation activity; however, it is only eligible for use with voter approval.

Incur debt through private activity bonds Can be used for any hazard mitigation activity; however, it is only eligible for use with voter approval.

FEMA HMPG and PDM grants HMGP grant funding is available to local communities after a Presidentially declared disaster. It can be used to fund both pre- and post-disaster mitigation plans and projects. PDM funding is available on an annual basis. This grant can only be used to fund pre-disaster mitigation plans and projects only.



Partners. The review committee will meet on an annual basis for the purpose of the review to evaluate issues, and status of goals and objectives.

These meeting will provide an opportunity to discuss the progress of the Plan Mitigation Measures, and maintain the partnerships that are essential for the sustainability of the Plan. K. Implementation Through Existing Plans and Programs §201.6(c) (4) (ii) The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach have established land use planning, development standards, capital improvement plans, building and fire codes along with additional regulatory processes that enable them to guide and control development in their communities. The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District and the Lucia Mar Unified School District have established capital improvement plans that allows them, as funding is available, to address Plan Mitigation Measures. The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach will include the Plan into their respective Safety Element of the Municipal Codes. The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach have used the Hazard Mitigation Plan as a basis for their individual Comprehensive Emergency Management Plans. The City of Arroyo Grande amended Sections 16.04.070 and 16.44.050 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code regarding Floodplain Management on September 25 2012. The amendment is known as Ordinance Number 646 and is located on page 90 of this plan. In that there are no new school construction projects planned for or approved since the previously-approved plan it has not been used as a tool in the planning process. However, the Lucia Mar Unified School District fully intends to incorporate the Plan into the existing planning process for any new schools or construction projects. As a point of information, the previous Plan has been used as a basis for school fire drills, earthquake exercises and flood preparation. L. Plan Maintenance Community Participation § 201.6(c) (4) (iii) The Five Cities Fire Authority Fire Chief will appoint the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator as Project Manager. The LHMP partner representatives are the Five Cities Fire Authority Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, (representing the City of Arroyo Grande), City of Grover Beach, Grover Beach Police Chief, South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District General Manager, and the Lucia Mar Unified School District, Executive Director, Facilities, Planning Maintenance and Operations. The Five Cities Fire Authority Emergency Preparedness Coordinator will take the lead as Project Manager and will be responsibility for the monitoring of plan maintenance and implementation by the Plan Partners. Plan implementation will be the responsibility of all Plan Partners. The Plan Partners will meet annually in the first quarter of each calendar year. The Plan Partners will present the status of their Plan, e.g. monitoring for progress and recommendations for updating to their Plan, and evaluation of the Plan as a result of their annual Emergency Preparedness annual table top exercise. This meeting will provide an opportunity to discuss the progress of the Plan Mitigation Measures, and maintain the partnerships that are essential for the sustainability of the Plan. As required by FEMA, mitigation plans are required to be updated within 5 years of the official FEMA approval date. The fourth year of the annual review meeting will kick-off the plan update process. The review will include an evaluation of the following:



• Notable changes in the Plan Partners risk of natural hazards.

• Impacts of land development activities and related programs on hazard mitigation.

• Goals and objectives address current and expected conditions.

• Progress made with the LHMP action plan (identify problems and suggest improvements as necessary).

• The use of adequate resources for implementation of the LHMP.

• Participation of Planning Team Members and others in the LHMP implementation.

• Document the annual review and revisions of the mitigation strategies.

The Plan Partners are committed to the mitigation of hazards and creating disaster resilient communities. M. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) The cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach are participants in the National Flood Insurance Program. The Arroyo Grande CID # is 060305. The City of Grover Beach CIS # is 060306. There are no repetitively flood damaged structures in Arroyo Grande or Grover Beach. The Lucia Mar Unified School District and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District participate in the National Flood Insurance Program as special districts within the County of San Luis Obispo County Government. The CID # is 060304. There have been no repetitively flood damages structures in the Lucia Mar Unified School District or the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District. N. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) continued participation and compliance All Plan participants will continue to participate and remain in compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program. (NFIP) O. Plan Partner Hazard Summary All Plan partners are susceptible to the following natural occurring hazards:

a. Earthquake b. Flood Dam Failure c. Wildfire d. Tsunami

The impacts of each hazard to the Plan partners vary. The impacts are discussed in detail within the individual partner’s community description.

a. Earthquake History 1934, 1966 and 2004 Parkfield Earthquakes. These earthquakes had magnitudes of 6.0 and 5.5, respectively, and occurred on the San Andreas Fault in or near the northeast corner of San Luis Obispo County, approximately 75 miles north east of the Plan area. Earthquake intensities generally conformed to anticipated characteristics for events of this size, with intense shaking being limited to a relatively small area



near the epicenters of the quakes. Moderate shaking was experienced in most of the central and western parts of San Luis Obispo County. 2003 San Simeon Earthquake. The San Simeon Earthquake struck at 11:15 a.m. on December 22, 2003. The magnitude 6.5 earthquake is attributed to having occurred near the San Simeon/Oceanic/Hosgri Fault system. The epicenter was approximately six miles from the community of San Simeon. Future Probability There are a number of active or potentially active fault systems throughout the county and given the past history of earthquakes in the area, experts agree that the probability of a damaging earthquake occurring is high. Active Earthquake Faults There are a number of active or potentially active fault systems throughout the county and given the past history of earthquakes in the area, experts agree that the probability of a damaging earthquake occurring is high. Mapped faults within the area are the potentially active Wilmar Avenue fault and the inactive Pismo fault. The Wilmar Avenue fault is exposed in the sea cliff near Pismo Beach and the buried trace of the fault is inferred to strike northwest - southeast parallel and adjacent to U.S. Highway 101 beneath portions of Arroyo Grande. The potentially active fault presents a moderate potential fault rupture hazard to the City. The inactive Pismo fault presents a very low potential fault rupture hazard. Further studies to evaluate the activity of the faults are warranted, prior to placing structures near the mapped fault traces. Risk Assessment The greatest threat to these cities, the school district and the sanitation district from a natural hazard is that of a significant earthquake. Based on the past history of damaging earthquakes and the fact that the Plan area is located within a seismically active region, the probability is rated MEDIUM. Given the properties at risk and the cascading effects the severity is rated as HIGH.

It is important to note that it is possible an earthquake could occur on an unknown fault in areas other than those currently known.

Moment Magnitude Scale

The Moment Magnitude scale is a way to measure the power of earthquakes. The higher the number, the bigger the earthquake. It is the energy of the earthquake at the moment it happens. It is similar to the Richter scale

The scale is a logarithmic, with a base of ten, like the Richter scale.

Scale Number Earthquake Effect

less than 3.5 This would be a very weak earthquake. People would not feel it, but it would be recorded by Geologists

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquakes

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_scale

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithm


http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologists



3.5-5.4 Generally felt by people, but it rarely causes damage.

5.4-6.0 Will not cause damage to well-designed buildings, but can cause damage or destroy small or poorly-designed ones.

6.1-6.9 Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 kilometers across where people live. 7.0-7.9 Considered a "major earthquake" that causes a lot of damage. 8 or greater Large and destructive earthquake that can destroy large cities.

b. Flood/Dam Inundation Flood History Over the years, the study area has experienced severe flooding events that have resulted in extensive property damage. Historical floods include: March, 2001. Central and Southern California was significantly impacted by a powerful storm that delivered up to 6 inches of rain in some of the coastal areas of San Luis Obispo County. The mountain area of the county received even more, with reports of up to 13 inches. The heavy rain produced numerous flooding incidents throughout the County. Flooding occurred along Corbett Creek in Arroyo Grande damaging 4 homes. Additionally, Arroyo Grande High School had 5 classrooms flooded when Arroyo Grande Creek overflowed. Further downstream a levee broke on the south side of the channel, flooding hundreds of acres of farmland and several residences. If the northern levee had broken more homes and a wastewater treatment plant would have been flooded. December, 2004. A quick moving and powerful storm brought flash flooding and heavy rain to the Central Coast of California. Rainfall amounts ranged from 1 to 3 inches on the coastal plains to 3 to 6 inches in the more mountainous regions of the county. Flooding problems were reported in the Plan area. December 2010. The Plan Area experienced substantial rains over a short period of time causing local residential flooding and the topping of area water retention basins. The governor declared a local state of emergency. Dam Failure Although the probability of this type of hazard occurring is highly unlikely, it warrants consideration because a considerable portion of the study area is located in the inundation area of Lopez Dam. In the event of complete failure of Lopez Dam, water would flow in a westerly direction following Arroyo Grande Creek, approximately 3,000 feet in each direction of the centerline of the creek channel. Water flows would pass through the rural areas directly below the dam and then into the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, some schools within the Lucia Mar Unified School District and the Sanitation District before reaching the ocean. Substantial impacts to life and property are a significant possibility in the City of Arroyo Grande. The threat diminishes as the distance from the dam increases and as the flood plain widens as it approaches Grover Beach. In Grover Beach, the general area of inundation, if the dam were at full capacity and experienced a total failure, the low lying areas south of Grand Avenue and west of Highway 1 would be impacted. The State of California Division of Safety of Dams conducts periodic reviews to evaluate dam safety and a considerable amount of work was completed in 2004 in order to bring the dam into compliance with current seismic standards.



Future Probability Areas with a past history of flooding have a high probability of future flooding during a potential Lopez Dam failure. Risk Assessment The study area has a significant history of flooding and therefore has received a HIGH probability rating. Areas that have flooded in the past are likely to flood in the future. Because a considerable amount of resources have already been expended toward resolving flood issues in these areas and because of the minimal threat to loss of life, flooding has been deemed a MODERATE risk. Areas of greatest concern for Arroyo Grande are the convergence of Tally Ho and Corbett Canyon Creeks, the downtown area, and the agricultural areas near Hwy. 101. In Grover Beach, the Arroyo Grande creek stream bed widens diminishing the threat of flooding from this creek. A separate Grover Beach flood concern is the Meadow Creek area near Fourth Street where the creek terminates into the ocean. The only flood concern for the School District is the location of the Arroyo Grande High School in the low lying areas of Arroyo Grande Creek. One significant and persistent challenge facing the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach is their inability to manage flood control issues upstream on properties where they have no authority. In an effort to resolve this problem, a special Resource Conservation District-Zone 1/1A was established. In 2003, a series of storms demonstrated the need for this Flood Control District to initiate additional flood control measures. Tsunami History In Crescent City, California, in 1964, tsunami waves of up to 20 feet, a result of an Alaskan earthquake, caused over 11 million dollars in property damage and resulted in 11 deaths. The impact of this tsunami was also felt in Morro Bay with damage to docks and fueling stations, yet not in Grover Beach PG&E (1973) suggested that faults in the offshore area could generate tsunami wave heights as great as six feet. The historic record shows local tsunamis have resulted from distant sources. Houston and Garcia in a 1978 study estimated the Cayucos/Morro Bay coastline 100- and 500-year tsunami run-ups, based on distant source generation (such as the Aleutian or Chile-Peru Trenches), and are approximately 9.5 feet to 24.2 feet, respectively. Those run-ups were calculated using astronomical high tides, and are consistent with recorded tsunamis that have occurred in Crescent City and other locations along the California coast. However, according to Kilbourne and Mualchin (1980), the worst case scenario would occur if a tsunami occurred during a meteorological tide (storm surge), which would add an estimated 14.5 feet to the run-up calculated by Houston and Garcia. Thus, with a worst case scenario, the estimated tsunami run-up for the 100-year and 500-year event would be no greater than 50 feet above mean sea level. Fukushima 2011 The Plan area was impacted by the Fukushima Earthquake and subsequent Tsunami. The Tsunami warning for the Plan was issued. Low lying areas were evacuated in anticipation of the Tsunami making land. The Tsunami arrived at low tide and as such no inundation was experience by the Plan area. Cascading effects Just outside the study area, two neighboring coastal low lying areas could be struck by a tsunami. They are:

• Pismo Creek in Pismo Beach



• Arroyo Grande Creek in Oceano.

Future Probability Large tsunamis have not been common on the Central Coast of California. Few incidences have been recorded and the historical record is not extensive enough to develop accurate reoccurrence predictions. The potential tsunami hazard for the Plan area coastal areas is greatest for those communities or portions of communities located below the estimated elevation 50 feet above mean sea level. In general, much of the Plan area is protected from tsunami hazards by wide beaches, or coastal dunes, which provide protection for coastal developments. Coastal developments most vulnerable to the tsunami hazards are those located near mouths of streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean. The potential for damage to coastal structures would likely increase if the tsunami event were to coincide with a high tide, storm related waves, or large winter storm runoff. Risk Assessment The Plan area has had minimal threat from tsunami activity. The probability of this hazard event is deemed low. The combination of the following factors also gives this natural hazard a low severity rating: 1) The accurate tsunami warning system in place, 2) The limited territory exposed, and 3) The wide beaches backed by tall sand dunes which resultantly reduces the areas vulnerability from this hazard and provides time for evacuation.

c. Wildfire

History Wildland fires in San Luis Obispo County have burned thousands of acres and caused considerable property loss with an occasional life loss. The majority of these large fires have occurred in the northern and central portions of the county. Large fires on the coastal side of the county occur less frequently. Future Probability The Plan area is located on the western coastal fringe of the Santa Lucia Mountain Range and is in a fairly favorable position with respect to Wildland fire threat. The mild coastal summers characterized by cool temperatures and foggy days and nights help to maintain the fuel moisture levels to a point that limits the potential for rapid fire spread. In addition, the majority of the topography is level and well developed in both residential and agricultural land uses. Risk Assessment The majority of the Plan area is not threatened by wildfire. Certain locations in the City of Arroyo Grande do have the correct combination of fuels and topography to allow an unchecked wildfire to become quite a threat. However, the strong coastal weather influence diminishes this hazard much of the time. P. Cost Benefit Analysis §201.6(c)(3)(iii) Economic analysis of Hazard Mitigation strategies provides an understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis upon which to compare alternative projects. This approach allowed Plan Partners to develop a Cost to benefit analysis of the hazards most likely to impact their jurisdiction. The Cost to benefit process was used to show if the benefits to life and property protected through mitigations efforts exceeded the cost of the mitigation activity. The analysis is based on calculating the frequency and severity of a hazard, and avoiding future damages.



All costs and benefits were evaluated in terms of dollars. If the net benefit exceeded the net costs, the project will be approved. Q. Plan Revisions §201.6(d) (3) The 2008 goals and objectives for the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and the Lucia Mar School district are located in the Supporting Documents of the plan. After careful analysis of the 2008 goals and objectives the following have been eliminated from the 2013 plan because all goals and objective have been achieved. Hazardous Materials incident, Biological Agent incident, Promote Disaster resistant future development, public support for hazard mitigation, building local capacity to minimize vulnerabilities of the partners. The goals and objectives that have been eliminated are now addressed on an ongoing basis by all the Plan partners. It should be noted the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District was not a participant in the 2008 plans and therefore has no 2008 goals and objectives. The 2013 plan goals and objective focus on hazards that would be catastrophic in nature when they occur without mitigation actions. Mitigation actions will not eliminate the hazard but rather minimize the impact of the event. The goals and objectives are a major basis of all the partners Emergency Management Plans and included in their Emergency Management Training.



III. COMMUNITY DESCRIPTIONS CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE: A. Development History The earliest inhabitants of Arroyo Grande Valley were the northern or Obispena Chumash Indians. The Arroyo Grande area was still occupied by Chumash Indians at the time of contact with the first Spanish explorer, Juan Cabrillo. During the colonial settlement of California, the Arroyo Grande Valley became separated into two major ranchos granted by the Mexican government around 1840. Francisco Zeba Branch first visited the Arroyo Grande area in 1832. He bought nearly 17,000 acres and launched a successful cattle business. In the mid 1860's, a severe drought decimated the cattle population, forcing the large ranchos to sell smaller parcels to new settlers for agriculture uses. Branch began to sell parcels of his vast holdings to settlers. The Village of Arroyo Grande developed to serve them. In 1862, the San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors established the township of Arroyo Grande. By 1876, there were 35 families and the farm-based community began to flourish. A railway depot was established in 1882. On July 10, 1911 residents voted to incorporate the City of Arroyo Grande. From the beginning businesses were established along a road appropriately named Branch Street. Source: The City of Arroyo Grande Local History 2005 B. Geography Arroyo Grande is a small coastal town with historic, suburban and rural element located mid-way between Los Angeles and San Francisco on US Highway 101. Arroyo Grande is located at 35°7'15" North, 120°35'12" West (35.120878, -120.586799) GR1. According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 15 km² (5.8 mi²), all of it land. C. Demographics The 2010 United States Census reported that Arroyo Grande had a population of 17,252. The population density was 2,956.5 people per square mile (1,141.5/km²). The racial makeup of Arroyo Grande was 14,710 (85.3%) White, 156 (0.9%) African American, 125 (0.7%) Native American, 595 (3.4%) Asian, 14 (0.1%) Pacific Islander, 856 (5.0%) from other races, and 796 (4.6%) from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race was 2,707 persons (15.7%).

The Census reported that 17,078 people (99.0% of the population) lived in households, 62 (0.4%) lived in non-institutionalized group quarters, and 112 (0.6%) were institutionalized.

There were 7,628 households, out of which 2,027 (28.6%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 3,741 (52.8%) were opposite-sex married couples living together, 653 (9.2%) had a female householder with no husband present, 275 (3.9%) had a male householder with no wife present. There were 346 (4.9%) unmarried opposite-sex partnerships, and 42 (0.6%) same-sex married couples or partnerships. 1,968 households (27.8%) were made up of individuals and 1,017 (14.4%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.41. There were 4,669 families (65.9% of all households); the average family size was 2.93.

The population was spread out with 3,633 people (21.1%) under the age of 18, 1,193 people (6.9%) aged 18 to 24, 3,704 people (21.5%) aged 25 to 44, 5,229 people (30.3%) aged 45 to 64, and 3,493 people (20.2%) who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 45.4 years. For every 100 females there were 92.6 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 88.4 males.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_references#1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Census_Bureau

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_kilometer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_mile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_Census

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Islander_(U.S._Census)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(United_States_Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latino_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSSLQ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_partnerships

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_(U.S._Census)



There were 7,628 housing units at an average density of 1,307.2 per square mile (504.7/km²), of which 4,686 (66.1%) were owner-occupied, and 2,401 (33.9%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 1.9%; the rental vacancy rate was 4.0%. 11,345 people (65.8% of the population) lived in owner-occupied housing units and 5,733 people (33.2%) lived in rental housing units.

D. Population and Growth

Arroyo Grande 2010 Data PEOPLE Arroyo Grande United States

Population 17,252 308,745,538

Pop. Density 17,252/5.45 sq.mi.= 3166 80

Pop. Change .039% 5.88%

Median Age 45.4 37.6

Household Size 2.41 2.58

RACE Arroyo Grande United States

White 76.9 77.53%

Black .07 12.35%

Asian 3.2 3.58%

American Indian .04 0.89%

Other 3.1 5.65%

Hispanic 15.7% 12.73%

FAMILY Arroyo Grande United States Married, w/children 22.97% 27.90%

Married, no children 33% 31.04%

Single, w/children 5.99% 9.43%

Single, no children 35.33% 30.05%

Divorced 11.5% 7.64%

Separated 1% 2.82%

Widowed 7.41% 7.42%

Now Married 59.25% 57.73%

Never Married 19.59% 24.39% Sources: U.S. Census

Source: U.S. Census 2010

U. S. Census Year Population

1980 11,290

1990 14,622

2000 15,851

2003 16,414

2005 16,500

2010 17,252

javascript:alert(%22Most%20Recent%20City%20Population%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20number%20of%20residents%20per%20square%20mile%20of%20area.%20Updated:06/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20change%20in%20the%20citys%20population%20since%201990.%20%20Negative%20percentages%20represent%20a%20decrease%20in%20population.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20median%20age%20of%20all%20residents%20of%20the%20city.%20%20Median%20is%20the%20middle%20value,%20when%20all%20possible%20values%20are%20listed%20in%20order.%20%20Median%20is%20not%20the%20same%20as%20Average%20(or%20Mean).%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20(mean)%20number%20of%20residents%20of%20a%20household.%20%20A%20household%20includes%20all%20persons%20who%20occupy%20a%20housing%20unit,%20which%20may%20be%20a%20house,%20apartment,%20mobile%20home,%20or%20set%20of%20rooms.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20of%20the%20population%20who%20have%20indicated%20their%20race%20as%20White,%20or%20reported%20entries%20such%20as%20Canadian,%20German,%20Italian,%20European,%20Lebanese,%20Near%20Eastern,%20or%20Arab.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20of%20the%20population%20who%20have%20indicated%20their%20race%20as%20Black,%20or%20reported%20entries%20such%20as%20African%20American,%20Afro-American,%20Black%20Puerto%20Rican,%20Jamaican,%20West%20Indian,%20or%20Haitian.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20of%20the%20population%20who%20have%20indicated%20their%20race%20as%20Asian%20or%20Pacific%20Islander,%20including%20Asian%20Indian,%20Filipino,%20Cambodian,%20Thai,%20Bangladeshi,%20Burmese,%20Pakistani,%20Samoan,%20Hawaiian.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20of%20the%20population%20who%20have%20indicated%20their%20race%20as%20American%20Indian,%20or%20Native%20American,%20Eskimo,%20or%20Aleut.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20of%20the%20population%20who%20have%20indicated%20their%20race%20as%20other%20than%20White,%20Black,%20Asian,%20or%20American%20Indian.%20%20Due%20the%20confusion%20of%20classifying%20Hispanic%20as%20an%20ethnicity%20and%20not%20a%20race,%20most%20Census%20respondents%20choosing%20this%20'other'%20category%20were%20Hispanic.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percent%20of%20the%20population%20who%20have%20indicated%20their%20ethnicity%20as%20Hispanic.%20%20A%20person%20can%20be%20Hispanic%20and%20of%20any%20race,%20which%20is%20why%20the%20total%20of%20the%20race%20categories%20is%20greater%20than%20100%25.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20married,%20living%20with%20one%20or%20more%20children.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20married,%20and%20without%20children.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20single,%20and%20living%20with%20one%20or%20more%20children.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20single,%20and%20without%20children.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20currently%20single%20and%20divorced.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20currently%20single%20and%20separated.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20currently%20single%20and%20widowed.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20who%20are%20currently%20married.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22Percentage%20of%20population%20(over%2015%20years%20old)%20who%20are%20currently%20single,%20and%20have%20never%20been%20married.%20Updated:11/05%22);



E. Economy The California Employment Development Department lists Arroyo Grande Hospital, Arroyo Grande High School, Rabo Bank, and various agricultural farming and marketing organizations are the major employers in Arroyo Grande.

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, 47.2% of the potential labor force was employed and

there was a 9.0% unemployment rate. Of the population over the age of 16, a total of 40.7% were not in the labor force. Of the employed civilian population, 20.4% worked in “Educational, health and social services,” 14.5% worked in “Retail trade” and 8.6% worked in “Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services,” the majority of those falling under “Accommodation and food services.” A total of 17.4% of the employed civilian population was employed by the local, state, or federal government in 2010. However only 0.1% was reported as working for the government in the industries of agriculture, forestry, fishing, or mining. A total of 2.2% of the employed civilian population over the age of 16 was involved in “Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting” according to the 2000 U.S. Census.

ECONOMY Arroyo Grande United States

Unemployment Rate 9.0% 8.1%

Recent Job Growth 2.44% 1.30%

Future Job Growth 15.32% 1.30%

Sales Taxes 8.75% 6.00%

Income Taxes 6.00% 5.02%

Household Income $56,389 $44,684

Income per Cap. $30,422 $24,020

HOUSING Arroyo Grande United States Apartment Rent $923 $653 Property Tax Rate $7.78 N/A Median Home Age 26.1 years 27.2 years Median Home Cost $400,000 $208,500

Home Appreciation -6.53% -15.3% Homes Owned 66.1% 64.07% Homes Rented 33.9% 21.45% Housing Vacant 1.9% 14.48% Sources: U.S. Census 2010 HOUSING UNIT TRENDS IN ARROYO GRANDE

UNITS IN STRUCTURE

2000 2010 Percent Change Number Percent Number Percent

1-unit, detached 4,516 66.4 5,296 68.2 +17% 1-unit, attached 590 8.7 639 8.2 +8% 2 to 4 units 493 7.2 367 4.7 -26% 5 to 9 units 181 2.7 286 3.7 +58% 10 to more units 473 7.0 575 7.4 +22% Mobile home, Boat, RV, van, etc.

553 8.1 606 7.8 +9.5%

Total 6,806 100 7,769 100 +14% Sources: 2010 information based on U.S. Census, American Community Survey-5 Year Estimates of Selected Housing Characteristics in DP04, accessed June 14, 2012

javascript:alert(%22The%20most%20recent%20unemployment%20data%20for%20an%20area.%20%20The%20unemployment%20rate%20is%20expressed%20as%20a%20percentage%20of%20the%20available%20work%20force%20that%20is%20not%20employed.%20Updated:10/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20increase%20or%20decrease%20in%20available%20jobs%20over%20the%20most%20recent%2012-month%20period.%20%20A%20decrease%20in%20available%20jobs%20is%20represented%20as%20a%20negative%20number.%20Updated:10/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20increase%20or%20decrease%20in%20available%20jobs%20over%20the%20most%20recent%2012-month%20period.%20%20A%20decrease%20in%20available%20jobs%20is%20represented%20as%20a%20negative%20number.%20Updated:10/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20total%20of%20all%20sales%20taxes%20for%20an%20area,%20including%20state,%20county%20and%20local%20taxes.%20Updated:08/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20total%20of%20all%20income%20taxes%20for%20an%20area,%20including%20state,%20county%20and%20local%20taxes.%20%20Federal%20income%20taxes%20are%20not%20included.%20Updated:02/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20median%20income%20of%20all%20households%20in%20a%20given%20geographic%20area.%20%20The%20median%20is%20the%20middle%20value%20when%20all%20are%20arranged%20from%20highest%20to%20lowest.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20income%20of%20every%20resident%20of%20a%20geographic%20area,%20including%20all%20adults%20and%20children.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20rent%20for%20a%202%20Bedroom%20Apartment%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20property%20tax%20rate%20shown%20here%20is%20the%20rate%20per%20$1,000%20of%20home%20value.%20If%20the%20tax%20rate%20is%20$14.00%20and%20the%20home%20value%20is%20$250,000,%20the%20property%20tax%20would%20be%20$14.00%20x%20($250,000/1000),%20or%20$3500.%20This%20is%20the%20'effective'%20tax%20rate.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20age%20of%20homes%20%20in%20years.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22This%20is%20the%20value%20of%20the%20years%20most%20recent%20home%20sales%20data%20(January%20to%20December,%202005).%20%20Its%20important%20to%20note%20that%20this%20is%20not%20the%20average%20(or%20arithmetic%20mean).%20The%20median%20home%20price%20is%20the%20middle%20value%20when%20you%20arrange%20all%20the%20sales%20prices%20of%20homes%20from%20lowest%20to%20highest.%20%20This%20is%20a%20better%20indicator%20than%20the%20average,%20because%20the%20median%20is%20not%20changed%20as%20much%20by%20a%20few%20unusually%20high%20or%20low%20values.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20percentage%20change%20in%20the%20value%20of%20the%20area's%20homes,%20in%202005.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20housing%20units%20which%20are%20owned%20by%20the%20occupant.%20%20A%20housing%20unit%20is%20a%20house,%20apartment,%20mobile%20home,%20or%20room%20occupied%20as%20separate%20living%20quarters.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20housing%20units%20which%20are%20rented%20by%20the%20occupant.%20%20A%20housing%20unit%20is%20a%20house,%20apartment,%20mobile%20home,%20or%20room%20occupied%20as%20separate%20living%20quarters.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20housing%20units%20which%20are%20vacant%20(unoccupied).%20%20A%20housing%20unit%20is%20a%20house,%20apartment,%20mobile%20home,%20or%20room%20occupied%20as%20separate%20living%20quarters.%20Updated:11/05%22);



TRANSPORT Arroyo Grande United States

Commute Time (minutes) 23.0 27.4

Method of Transportation Auto (alone) 80.3% 71.32%

Carpool 10.5% 15.6%

Mass Transit 0.2% 2.5%

Work at Home 5.1% 4.4%

Sources: U.S. Census 2010

COST OF LIVING Arroyo Grande United States

Overall 98 100

Food 105 100

Housing 94 100

Utilities 104 100

Health 103 100

Transportation 102 100

Goods and Services 94 100 Sources: U.S. Census 2010

F. Climate

CLIMATE Arroyo Grande United States

Rainfall (in.) 16.0 36

Snowfall (in.) 0 25

Precipitation Days 44 100

Sunny Days 286 205

Avg. July High 72 86.5

Avg. Jan. Low 42 20.5

Comfort Index (higher=better) 62 44

UV Index 5.3 4.3

Elevation ft. 80 1,060

G. Government Form of Government: General Law/Council-Manager H. Land Uses A land use element is in effect with well established parameters.

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20number%20of%20minutes%20that%20residents%20of%20an%20area%20require%20for%20a%20one-way%20commute%20to%20work.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20the%20working%20population%20which%20commute%20to%20work%20alone%20in%20their%20car.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20the%20working%20population%20which%20commutes%20to%20work%20in%20a%20carpool.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20the%20population%20that%20commutes%20using%20mass%20transit,%20including%20bus,%20light%20rail,%20subway,%20and%20ferry.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20percentage%20of%20the%20population%20that%20has%20their%20home%20as%20their%20principal%20place%20of%20work.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20total%20of%20all%20the%20cost%20of%20living%20categories%20weighted%20subjectively%20as%20follows:%20housing%20(30%25),%20food%20and%20groceries%20(15%25),%20transportation%20(10%25),%20utilities%20(6%25),%20health%20care%20(7%25),%20and%20miscellaneous%20expenses%20such%20as%20clothing,%20services,%20and%20entertainment%20(32%25).%20%20State%20and%20local%20taxes%20are%20not%20included%20in%20any%20category.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20cost%20of%20food%20and%20groceries%20(not%20including%20restaurants).%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20cost%20of%20an%20area's%20housing,%20which%20includes%20mortgage%20payments,%20apartment%20rents,%20and%20property%20tax.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20cost%20of%20heating%20or%20cooling%20a%20typical%20residence%20for%20the%20area,%20including%20electricity%20and%20natural%20gas.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20cost%20of%20health%20care%20calculated%20using%20the%20standard%20daily%20rate%20for%20a%20hospital%20room,%20and%20the%20costs%20of%20a%20doctor's%20office%20visit%20and%20a%20dental%20checkup.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20cost%20of%20gasoline,%20car%20insurance%20and%20maintenance%20expenses,%20and%20mass%20transit%20fare%20for%20the%20area.%20%20The%20cost%20of%20the%20vehicle%20and%20any%20vehicle%20registration%20and%20license%20taxes%20are%20not%20included.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20cost%20index%20of%20those%20goods%20and%20services%20not%20included%20in%20the%20other%20cost%20of%20living%20categories,%20including%20clothing,%20restaurants,%20repairs,%20entertainment,%20and%20other%20services.%20Updated:11/05%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20annual%20rainfall%20in%20inches.%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20annual%20snowfall%20in%20inches.%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20annual%20number%20of%20days%20with%20measurable%20precipitation%20(over%20.01%20inch).%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20number%20of%20days%20per%20year%20that%20are%20predominantly%20sunny.%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20daily%20high%20temperature%20for%20the%20month%20of%20July,%20in%20degrees%20Fahrenheit.%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20average%20daily%20low%20temperature%20for%20the%20month%20of%20January,%20in%20degrees%20Fahrenheit.%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22...Higher%20values%20indicate%20a%20more%20confortable%20climate.%20%20The%20Comfort%20Index%20measure%20recognizes%20that%20humidity%20by%20itself%20isn't%20the%20problem.%20%20(Have%20you%20noticed%20nobody%20ever%20complains%20about%20the%20weather%20being%20'cold%20and%20humid?)%20%20It's%20in%20the%20summertime%20that%20we%20notice%20the%20humidity%20the%20most,%20when%20it's%20hot%20and%20muggy.%20%20Our%20Comfort%20Index%20uses%20a%20combination%20of%20afternoon%20summer%20temperature%20and%20humidity%20to%20closely%20predict%20the%20effect%20that%20the%20humidity%20will%20have%20on%20people.%20Updated:08/04%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20UV%20Index%20is%20a%20measure%20of%20an%20area's%20exposure%20to%20the%20sun's%20ultraviolet%20rays.%20This%20is%20most%20often%20a%20combination%20of%20sunny%20weather,%20altitude,%20and%20latitude.%20Updated:10/03%22);

javascript:alert(%22The%20elevation%20or%20altitude,%20in%20feet.%20Updated:07/02%22);



I. Zoning Map



J. Future Development Plans There is a considerable amount of open and undeveloped land within the City limits of Arroyo Grande. A sizable portion (349 acres) of this land is currently used for agricultural purposes, as it has high quality soils and is valued by the community as part of its cultural heritage and profitability. The remainder exists on gently sloping open areas, more difficult to develop and highly valued for its green belt effects. In the developed areas there are very few vacant lots or parcels available for new construction. The 2003 Housing Element lists 22 parcels ranging in size that could be developed. The Arroyo Grande Community Development Department reports several projects are in varying stages of planning or permit processing.

Approved Projects: 1. A school expansion of 7,300 sq. ft. total has been approved on the Valley View Adventist Academy at

230 Vernon Street, near the Village area. 2. A 36-unit apartment complex on 1.63 acres has been approved on a portion of the vacant property

at the intersection of E. Grand Avenue and South Courtland Street. 3. A new 9,400 sq. ft. retail building has been approved on Pad I-2 of the Five Cities Center Phase II

property fronting West Branch Street and Rancho Parkway.

Projects under Construction:

1. A 30-unit townhouse and ~120,000 sq. ft. medical office project is currently under construction at the intersection of Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland Drive. The residential portion of the project has already been completed and construction of the medical offices is beginning.

2. A 15 single-family home and 4-unit apartment project is currently under construction on 30 acres off of Grace Lane

Redevelopment and Enhancement Plans On December 28, 2011, the California Supreme Court upheld Assembly Bill XI 26 (Dissolution Act), terminating municipal redevelopment agencies and requiring the dissolution of such agencies. The City of Arroyo Grande created a Successor Agency charged with winding down the affairs of the dissolved Redevelopment Agency. At this time, planned redevelopment projects are indefinitely on hold. The East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan generally includes those properties fronting onto the arterial street, with the inclusion of some side street property frontages as well. The overall goal of this plan is to improve the image of the City and spur investment by individual property owners. Economic and Historic Resource Considerations: The City has a rich history, productive farmland, and active tourism. Although loss of life may result from any of the various hazards discussed in the Plan, economic impacts would more commonly occur. These impacts would result from potential destruction of historic resources that would reduce the City’s attraction for heritage tourism and general tourism. Additionally, damage to buildings would cause further economic disruptions due to rebuilding necessities. Also, some hazards could severely impact the production of the City’s agricultural lands, resulting in missed harvest seasons, reduced harvest yields, and high crop prices at



farmer’s markets and grocery stores. Communications and public transportation would only be temporarily impacted following a hazard event and would return to operation quickly. The City of Arroyo Grande contains several important economic features that could be impacted by potential hazards in the area. Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, one of San Luis Obispo County’s largest employers, is located at the corner of Fair Oaks Avenue and S. Halcyon Road and is located in a dam inundation zone, as indicated in the Dam Inundation Zone map. The Five Cities Center is a regional commercial center with tenants such as Wal-Mart, Office Max, Marshalls, Trader Joe’s, and Petco and is located along West Branch Street near Rancho Parkway. This area is at risk of fire from the nearby Wildland urban interface (WUI) and seismic shaking, as can be seen in the Fire Risk and Earthquake Fault maps, respectively. The Village of Arroyo Grande is a major economic and cultural resource for the City located in areas around East Grand Avenue. Several historic structures in this area of the City, including the Independent Order of Odd Fellows Hall (128 Bridge Street), Santa Manuela School House (Short Street), and Old Briscoe Hotel (129 East Branch Street) serve as area attractions for residents and visitors. These attractions add to the City’s economic base as a result of tourist spending in the area. Parts of this area are at risk of fire, flood, earthquake shaking, and dam inundation, which can be seen in the respective hazard maps. K. City of Arroyo Grande Hazard Locations, Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Maps

§ 201.6(c) (2)(i), § 201.6(c) (2)(ii) The type and locations of natural hazards extent of the Plan participants are located in the individual Plan participants Hazard Maps. a. Earthquake: Severity HIGH (Moment Magnitude Scale 3.5 to 5.4 or higher), Probability MEDIUM There are a number of active or potentially active fault systems throughout the county and given the past history of earthquakes in the area, experts agree that the probability of a damaging earthquake occurring is high. Mapped faults within the City of Arroyo Grande are the potentially active Wilmar Avenue fault and the inactive Pismo fault. The Wilmar Avenue fault is exposed in the sea cliff near Pismo Beach and the buried trace of the fault is inferred to strike northwest - southeast parallel and adjacent to U.S. Highway 101 beneath portions of Arroyo Grande .The potentially active fault presents a moderate potential fault rupture hazard to the City. The inactive Pismo fault presents a very low potential fault rupture hazard. Further studies to evaluate the activity of the faults are warranted, prior to placing structures near the mapped fault traces.



The Moment Magnitude scale is a way to measure the power of earthquakes. The higher the number, the larger the earthquake. It is the energy of the earthquake at the moment it happens. It is similar to the Richter scale













Impact and Vulnerability The City has a history of damaging earthquakes, but there have also been a number of magnitude 5.0 to 6.2 earthquakes which have affected portions of the City.




A 6.5 Richter scale magnitude earthquake would cause heavy damage to the downtown business district. The majority of the buildings are Unreinforced Masonry. Damage to the building would be collapse and unstable causing the commercial area to be unable to conduct their business. The loss of commerce to the businesses in the district would cause a significant lost of tax revenue to the City. In addition to the downtown business district the City of Arroyo Grande City Hall is located in the business district and is also an Unreinforced Masonry. The 6.5 earthquake would cause the City of Arroyo Grande City Hall to be relocated to its alternate location, a structure in the city that may withstand a 6.5 earthquake. Businesses located outside the downtown business district are of newer construction with collapse improbable. These businesses would be able to resume their operations after minor repairs and clean-up of their structures. Revenue loss from the impacted businesses would range from $1.5 to $3.0 million annually. Property loss to the City of Arroyo Grande infrastructure and key city facilities could range from $28.0 to $ 56.0 million. Single family residential and multi-family residential would experience similar damage with losses ranging in the $ 30.0 to $75.0 million. Real Estate tax revenue loss would range from $3.0 to $7.5 million annually. b. Flood: Severity MEDIUM, Probability: HIGH

Areas of potential 100-year flooding in Arroyo Grande include portions of the creek channels that traverse the City: Canyon/Meadow Creek on the west side of the City, Corbett Canyon, Tally Ho and Arroyo Grande Creeks on the east side of the City, and Los Berros Creek in the southeastern portion of the City. Although inundation areas are generally located along creek channels, adjacent properties could be adversely affected in isolated areas. Near the convergence of Corbett Canyon and Arroyo Grande Creeks, the 100-year floodplain widens and impacts properties between Crown Terrace and Mason Streets. The floodplain along Arroyo Grande Creek also widens slightly on the north and south sides of Highway 101. Impact and Vulnerability During a flood event, the depth of flooding will vary based on location, elevation, and tributary. In general, flooding events may occur along the portions of the Arroyo Grande Creek, Tally Ho Creek, and Meadow Creek tributaries. In the upper tributaries, it is anticipated that flooding will be approximately 3”-6”. Flooding in the lower tributaries will be approximately 3”-12”. Duration of flooding will obviously depend on amount of rainfall, but will also be impacted by tide levels outside of City limits. The duration for potential flood events is approximately 2 to 8 hours. Flood events of these magnitudes will have impacts on City economics by limiting business activity and due to property damages. Property damages will vary depending upon factors such as use (residential/commercial), material (wood, stone), and historic value. Area that could be flooded is primarily residential. As such the fiscal impact to the city would range from In lose real estate tax revenue of approximately $1.8 million annually. Commercial impacts would be minimal as the 100 and 500 year flood zones are outside the downtown business district. Fiscal impacts from a flood to the city would have no significant impact.




Flood Probability

Flood Recurrence Intervals

Percent Chance of Occurrence Annually

10 years 10.0% 50 years 2.0% 100 years 1.0% 500 years 0.2%



c. Dam Failure: Severity High: Probability: Low Although the probability of this type of hazard occurring is highly unlikely, it warrants consideration because a considerable portion of the study area is located in the inundation area of Lopez Dam. In the event of complete failure of Lopez Dam, water would flow in a westerly direction following Arroyo Grande Creek, approximately 3,000 feet in each direction of the centerline of the creek channel. Substantial impacts to life and property are a significant possibility in the City of Arroyo Grande. Impact and Vulnerability If the dam were at full capacity, and experienced a total failure, the low lying areas south of Grand Avenue and would be severely impacted. Key city infrastructure impacted would be City Hall, City Council Chambers, Fire Station 1, and the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. The losses to these structures could exceed $ 30 million. The residential area impacted by a Lopez Dam failure is over 50% of the residential properties in the City. The losses from a dam inundation to 100% of the structures may exceed $160 million. Insurance Risk Managers predict the losses should be in the $80 to $100 million range as all structures will not be a 100% loss. The State of California Division of Safety of Dams conducts periodic reviews to evaluate dam safety and a considerable amount of work was completed in 2004 in order to bring the dam into compliance with current seismic standards.





d. Tsunami: SEVERITY Medium, Probability LOW Large tsunamis have not been common on the Central Coast of California. Thus, few incidences have been recorded and the historical record is not extensive enough to develop accurate reoccurrence predictions. The potential tsunami hazard for the San Luis Obispo County coastal areas is greatest for those communities or portions of communities located below the estimated elevations for the 100-to 500-year events, that is, below elevation 50 feet above mean sea level. In general, much of the Coast of San Luis Obispo County is protected from tsunami hazards by wide beaches, coastal dunes, or sea cliffs that provide protection for coastal developments. Coastal developments most vulnerable to the tsunami hazards are those located near mouths of streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean. The potential for damage to coastal structures would likely increase if the tsunami event were to coincide with a high tide, storm related waves, or large winter storm runoff. Vulnerability Due to the distance and elevation from the ocean, there is no threat to the community of Arroyo Grande. Impact probability In that the City of Arroyo Grande is well outside of the Tsunami Inundation Zone there is a Low probability of a Tsunami impacting the city. The only impact from a Tsunami affecting the Plan Area would be a population surge as a result to evacuations from neighboring impacted communities. The probability scale for determining the impact of a Tsunami impacting the City of Arroyo Grande is: High probability 90-100% Medium probability 49-89% Low probability 0-49%



e. Fire: SEVERITY Medium, PROBABILITY Low Located in the generally flat valley area and surrounded by agricultural uses, the majority of the community is not threatened by wildfire; however a limited amount of wild land urban interface does exist in the City. The steeper hillside area such those found in the Miller Way, Methodist Camp and the Wildwood Ranch neighborhoods are much more susceptible. Fire fighting activities in these areas may be impacted by a lack of water, limited access, and heavy fuel beds adjacent to homes. The plan area is located on the western coastal fringe of the Santa Lucia Mountain Range and is in a fairly favorable position with respect to wild land fire threat. The mild coastal summers characterized by cool temperatures and foggy days and nights help to maintain the fuel moisture levels to a point that limits the potential for rapid fire spread. In addition, the majority of the topography is level and well developed in both residential and agricultural land uses. However, in 1985 the Los Pilitas Fire burned in the mountains to the north of the City Arroyo Grande with amazing speed. While this threat was short lived, given the right series of circumstances, the correct combination of weather, topography and fuel, the potential does exist for a wild land fire to burn into or start within some areas under study. In 1985 the Los Pilitas Fire burned in the mountains to the north of the City Arroyo Grande with amazing speed. While this threat was short lived, given the right series of circumstances, the correct combination of weather, topography and fuel, the potential does exist for a wild land fire to burn into or start within the Plan area. Impact and Vulnerability The vulnerability to the city would be primarily residential in nature. Critical infra structure had been determined to be Non Wildland and Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zones by CDF. The opportunity for a Wildland fire to start in the plan area would be minor. The areas that have been determined to be susceptible to a wild fire have been mitigated through working relationship with the local Fire Safe Council. With funding from the Fire Safe Council, defensible spaces of a minimum of 100’ have been accomplished in the Miller Way, Methodist Camp and the Wildwood Ranch neighborhoods. Impact from a wildfire would be of a residential nature. The majority of the residential property in the city is located in the High Fire Hazard Severity Hazard Zone. A catastrophic wildfire starting in the county area and traveling into the city could have a major fiscal impact to the city revenue stream. Estimates of the real estate revenue annual loss could exceed $5.0 million.





L. City of Arroyo Grande Capability Assessment Table and Survey

Capability Assessment Table

Regulatory Tool (Ordinances, codes, plans, etc.)

Y/N Comments

General Plan Y Zoning Ordinance Y Subdivision Ordinance Y Site Plan Review Requirements Y Growth Management Ordinance N Limited to Sphere of Influence Floodplain Ordinance Y Other Special Purpose Ordinances (e.g., storm water, steep slope, wildfire, etc.)

Y Storm water Ordinance

Building Code Y BCEGS Rating Y 3, 2 Fire Department ISO Rating Y Erosion or Sediment Control Program Y Storm water Management Program Y Capital Improvements Plan Y Economic Development Plan Y Local Emergency Operations Plan Y Currently under revision Other Special Plans Y Mills Act Ordinance Flood Insurance Study or Other Engineering Study for Streams Y

Elevation Certificates Y

Personnel Resources Y/N Department/Position

Planner/Engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Y

Community Development Department: Assistant Planner, Associate Planner, Community Development Director

Engineer/Professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure

Y Community Development Department: Assistant City Engineer, Building Official

Planner/Engineer/Scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Y Community Development

Department: Assistant Planner

Personnel skilled in GIS Y Community Development Department: Assistant Planner

Full-time Building Official Y Community Development Department: Building Official

Floodplain Manager N Emergency Manager Y City Manager GIS data – Hazard Areas Y GIS data – Critical Facilities Y GIS data – Land Use Y GIS data – Assessor’s Data Y Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-1-1, Cable Override, Outdoor Warning Signals) Y



Financial Resources Y/N Comments Capital Improvement Programming Y Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Y Special Purpose Taxes (or taxing districts) Y TBD Gas/Electric Utility Fees N

Water/Sewer Fees Y

Storm water Utility Fees Y Development Impact Fees Y General Obligation, Revenue, and/or Special Tax Bonds Y

Partnering Arrangements or Intergovernmental Agreements N

Other Agency Potential Programs/Grants Department of Homeland Security – Federal

Emergency Management Agency Homeland Security Grant Program, Emergency Management Performance Grants Program, Transit Security Grant Program, Assistance to Fire Fighter Grants, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program, Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, Severe Repetitive Loss Program

US Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grants

US Department of the Interior Coast Impact Assistance Program, US Geological Survey Research and Data Collection

US Department of Defense – US Air Force Training Requirements Funding US Department of Health and Human

Services/California Department of Health Services

Grants for Public Health Emergency Preparedness

US Department of Commerce Coastal Resilience Networks California Emergency Management Agency Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program,

Interoperable Emergency Communications Center Grant Program, Proposition 1B Grant, Citizens Corps Program, Metropolitan Medical Response System Program, Earthquake and Tsunami Grants Program

California Department of Housing and Community Development Disaster Recovering Initiative

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Western States WUI Fire Assistance Grant



Local Capability Assessment Survey Jurisdiction/Agency: City of Arroyo Grande Phone: (805) 473-5420

Point of Contact: Matt Downing E-mail: [email protected]

Planning / Regulatory Tool

In Place

Under Development

Department

Responsible

Effect on Loss Reduction Comments Strongly

Supports Helps

Facilitate Hinders

Hazard Mitigation Plan X Five Cities Fire

Authority X Update to LHMP

currently in progress

Comprehensive Land Use Plan (or General, Master or

Growth Mgt. Plan) X Community

Development X

Floodplain Management

Plan X Community

Development X Flood plain

management ordinance

Open Space Management Plan (or Parks & Rec./

Greenways Plan) X Community

Development X

Storm water Management Plan / Ordinance

X Comm. Dev./Public Works X

Natural Resource Protection Plan

X Community Development X

General Plan Conservation

Open Space Element

Flood Response Plan X City Manager X

Combined with EOP

Emergency Operations Plan X City Manager X

Currently being updated and refined

Continuity of Operations

Pl

X City Manager X Combined with EOP

Evacuation Plan

None

Other Plans (please explain under

Comments)

1. PLANNING AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY - Please indicate whether the following planning or regulatory tools (plans, ordinances, codes or programs) are currently in place or under development for your jurisdiction by placing an "X" in the appropriate box. Then, for each particular item in place, identify the department or agency responsible for its implementation and indicate its estimated or anticipated effect on hazard loss reduction (Strongly Supports, Helps Facilitate or Hinders) with another "X". Finally, please provide additional comments or explanations in the space provided or with attachments.




In Place

Under Development

Department / Agency Responsible


Supports Facilitates Hinders

Disaster Recovery Plan X City Manager X

Work in progress

Capital Improvements Plan X Community

Development X

Economic Development

Pl


Historic Preservation Plan X Community

Development X Work in progress

Floodplain Ordinance (or Flood Damage Prevention

Ordinance) X Community

Development X

Zoning Ordinance X Community

Development X

Subdivision Ordinance X Community

Development X

Unified Development

Ordinance X Community

Development X Development Code

Post-disaster Redevelopment /

Reconstruction Ordinance X

Work in progress

Building Code X Community

Development X

Fire Code X Five Cities Fire

Authority X State Fire Code

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)


NFIP Community Rating System (CRS Program)




Staff / Personnel

Resources

Yes

No

Department / Agency

Comments

Planners with knowledge of land development and land

management practices X Community

Development

Engineers or professionals trained in construction

practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure

X Community Development

Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural and/or human- caused

hazards


Emergency manager X City Manager

Floodplain manager X

City of 17,000 – does not have a floodplain manager

Land surveyors X Community

Development

Scientist familiar with the hazards of the community

X Coordinated effort between Community Development, Emergency Services, and

County

Staff with education or expertise to assess the

community’s vulnerability to

X Five Cities Fire Authority

Personnel skilled in Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

and/or FEMA's HAZUS


Resource development staff or grant writers

X No single individual responsible for this; it is approached on an as needed basis

2. ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITY - Please indicate whether your jurisdiction maintains the following staff members within its current personnel resources by placing an "X" in the appropriate box. Then, if YES, please identify the department or agency they work under and provide



Financial

Resources

Yes

No

Department / Agency

Comments

Capital Improvement

Programming X Community Development

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)


Special Purpose Taxes (or taxing districts) X Administrative Services

Gas / Electric Utility Fees X

Water / Sewer Fees X Administrative Services

Storm water Utility Fees X Community Development

Associated with development impact fees

Development Impact Fees X Community Development

General Obligation, Revenue and/or Special Tax Bonds

X Administrative Services None associated with

hazard mitigation

Partnering arrangements or intergovernmental

X

Other:

3. FISCAL CAPABILITY - Please indicate whether your jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use the following local financial resources for hazard mitigation purposes (including as match funds for State of Federal mitigation grant funds). Then, identify the primary department or agency responsible for its administration or allocation and provide any other comments you may have in the space provided or with attachments.



Floodplain Management and Creek Protection Ordinance: http://library.municode.com/HTML/16194/level2/TIT16DECO_CH16.44SPDI.html#TIT16DECO_CH16.44SPDI_16.44.050FLMACRPRFMDIUN

Additionally, the City’s General Plan and other planning documents can be located on the City’s website: http://www.arroyogrande.org/142/Planning-Division

4. POLITICAL CAPABILITY - Political capability can be generally measured by the degree to which local political leadership is willing to enact policies and programs that reduce hazard vulnerabilities in your community, even if met with some opposition. Examples may include guiding development away from identified hazard areas, restricting public investments or capital improvements within hazard areas, or enforcing local development standards that go beyond minimum State or Federal requirements (e.g., building codes, floodplain management, etc.). Please identify some general examples of these efforts if available and/or reference where more documentation can be found.

http://library.municode.com/HTML/16194/level2/TIT16DECO_CH16.44SPDI.html#TIT16DECO_CH16.44SPDI_16.44.050FLMACRPRFMDIUN

http://library.municode.com/HTML/16194/level2/TIT16DECO_CH16.44SPDI.html#TIT16DECO_CH16.44SPDI_16.44.050FLMACRPRFMDIUN

http://www.arroyogrande.org/142/Planning-Division



DEGREE OF CAPABILITY

LIMITED MODERATE HIGH

Planning and Regulatory Capability X

Administrative and Technical Capability

X

Fiscal Capability X

Political Capability X

OVERALL CAPABILITY X

5. SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY - Please provide an approximate measure of your jurisdiction's capability to effectively implement hazard mitigation strategies to reduce hazard vulnerabilities. Using the following table, please place an "X" in the box marking the most appropriate degree of capability (Limited, Moderate or High) based upon best available information and the responses provided in Sections 1-4 of this survey.



M. Mitigation Strategies § 201.6 (c) (3) (iv) The Mitigation Strategies for the City of Arroyo Grande were developed after an analysis of the potential frequency of occurrence of the hazard and the potential fiscal impact. After careful analysis the listed hazards were selected with the highest probability of occurrence with the maximum fiscal impact. Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries, and the potential for loss of life, and are reducing emergency response costs, which would otherwise be incurred. The implementation and administration of the Mitigation Strategies are the responsibility of the listed partner located in the Mitigation Action Goals.



City of Arroyo Grande Mitigation Action (a) Goal 1. Minimize the level of damage and losses due to flooding. Objective: Research and identify flooding vulnerability of residential, commercial and local government within the City of Arroyo Grande. Mitigation Project: Residential-Commercial-Government Floodsmart projects. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Residential: relocate, revise building codes, and provide mitigation assistance. • Commercial: relocate, revise codes, and provide mitigation assistance.

Conduct a Cost to benefit analysis to consider expanding the capacity of the retention basins at various locations in the City of Arroyo Grande.

• Creation of Bio-Swales for water conservation. Determine cost effective mitigation strategies for Newsom Springs area.

• Conduct a Cost to Benefit analysis of a flood water diversion system for the City of Arroyo Grande’s Critical Infra-structure and the flood vulnerable Commercial District.

• Conduct a Cost Benefit Analysis for the design and construction of creek restoration and enhancement improvements to Tally Ho Creek to reduce flooding potential.

Implementation Responsibility: Recreation and Maintenance Services

Community Development Emergency Preparedness Time Line: 5 years Funding Source: PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff

time Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L

2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant 2014: Commence Mitigation projects 2015: Conclude Mitigation projects 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions



City of Arroyo Grande Mitigation Action (b) Goal 2. Minimize the level of damage and losses due to earthquakes Objective: 1. Research and confirm Earthquake faults impacting the City of Arroyo

2. Use United States Geologic Survey and Cal OES resources for determining Earthquake Faults in Arroyo Grande.

3. Conduct a Seismic Retrofit Cost/Benefit Analysis of vulnerable structures In Arroyo Grande. Mitigation Project: Earthquake fault identification and Seismic Retrofit projects. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Identify and catalog seismically vulnerable structures. • Notify public of location of earthquake faults. • Notify public of location of Seismic vulnerable structures.

Identify and catalog buildings registered with the National Historic Register.

Implementation Responsibility: Emergency Preparedness Time Line: 5 years Funding Source: PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff Time Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant 2014: Commence Mitigation projects 2015: Conclude Mitigation projects 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions



City of Arroyo Grande Mitigation Action (c) Goal 3. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people due to Wildland and Structure Fires. Objective: 1. Educate the public to maximize compliance with Fire Safe Community guidelines.

Mitigation Project: Create a Fire-Smart Community by developing a comprehensive approach to reducing damage and loss due to fires.

Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Encourage the 100’ Defensible Space around structures in the Wildland Urban Interface. • Continue weed abatement program. • Enforce building codes and ordinances that eliminate the use of wood shake roofs. • Enforce codes and ordinances that require fire sprinkler systems in all new structures

constructed. Environmental Riparian Habitats Implementation Responsibility: Fire Department, Community Development Time Line: 5 Years Funding Source: California Fire Safe Council, General Fund, Fire Prevention Grant,

PDM Grant, Staff time Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Develop comprehensive Fire Prevention program. 2014: Apply for grant funding. 2015: Commence education and action programs. 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions. 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions.



City of Arroyo Grande Mitigation Action (d) Goal 4. Minimize impacts to community from Dam Inundation events. Objective: Prepare Community for a Lopez Dam Inundation event. Mitigation Project: 1. Create an Evacuation Plan using the cities dam inundation map. 2. Locate gathering locations outside the dam inundation zone. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Create a community specific Evacuation Plan. • Exercise Evacuation Plan for effectiveness. • Revise Evacuation Plan as appropriate.

Special Environmental None Implementation Responsibility: Emergency Preparedness/Arroyo Grande Police Department Time Line: 5 Years Funding Source: PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff

time Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant 2014: Commence Mitigation projects 2015: Conclude Mitigation projects 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions



N. Property Schedule City of Arroyo Grande Category Property Location Sq.ft. Value

Government City Hall 300 E. Branch St. 6051 $2,046,291 City Hall Annex 214 E. Branch St. 3878 871,830 Council Chambers 215 E. Branch St. 3158 415,484

Public Safety Fire Station 140 Traffic Way 13,000 5,397,441 Police Headquarters 200 N. Halcyon 7036 2,626,253 Police Storage 200 N. Halcyon 600 65,329

Community Facilities

Community Center 211 Vernon 4773 621,321 Corp. Yard Maintenance Bldg. 1375 Ash St. 4800 638,206 Corp. Yard Equipment Bldg. 1375 Ash St. 7000 494,586 Storage and Chemical Garage 1375 Ash St. 5672 471,039 Public Restroom 200 E. Branch St. 390 65,953 Heritage Square Park 205 Nelson St. - 2,492 Heritage Park Bandstand 205 Nelson St. - 16,394

Swinging Bridge 200 E. Branch - 95,332

Potable Water and

Wastewater Facilities

Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. - 20,603

Elm St. Park Control House # 2 1221 Elm St. 224 21,636 Elm St Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. 160 50,891 Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. 180 73,346 Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. 168 108,225 Lift Station Tiger Tail - 45,133 Lift Station 612 Taylor Place - 45,133 Lift Station Oak Park Blvd. - 188,288 Lift Station Leanna Dr. - 110,080 Lift Station Huasna Rd. - 99,513 Huasna Rd. Yard & Outside Huasna Rd. - 3,133 Booster Pump Station Bldg. Lower Miller Way - 6,025 Booster Pump Station Bldg. Upper Miller Way # 1 - 14,556 Booster Pump Station Bldg. Upper Miller Way # 2 - 14,088 Booster Pump Station Bldg. 311 Oro Drive - 37,580 Reservoir # 1 300 Reservoir Rd. - 555,376 Reservoir # 1 Inlet Bldg. 300 Reservoir Rd. - 10,687 Reservoir # 1 Radio Bldg. 300 Reservoir Rd. - 13,076 Reservoir # 1 Yard and Outside Fence 300 Reservoir Rd. - 18,880 Reservoir # 2 200 Hillcrest Dr. - 438,808 Reservoir # 2 Emergency Light Bldg 200 Hillcrest Dr - 38,745, Reservoir # 2 Booster Pump Station 200 Hillcrest Dr - 61,774 Reservoir # 2 Valve Pit 200 Hillcrest Dr. - 5,368 Reservoir # 2 Yard and Outside Fence 200 Hillcrest Dr. - 21,974 Reservoir # 3 Stagecoach Rd - 100,353 Reservoir # 3 Yard and Outside Fence Stagecoach Rd - 5,740 Reservoir # 4 Huebner Lane 614,577 Reservoir # 4 Valve Pit Huebner Lane - 3,968 Reservoir # 4 Yard and Outside Fence Huebner Lane - 23,757



City of Arroyo Grande Property Schedule (continued) Category Property Location Sq. Ft. Value

Recreation

Pre-School 126 Mason St 1,444 213,085 Recreation Building 1221 Ash St. 534 369,437 Soto Sports Complex Office 1275 Ash St. 2,304 369,434 Soto Sports Complex Rest Rooms 1275 Ash St. 398 77,788 Elm Street Park Gazebo 1221 Ash St. - 20,603 Strother Park Rest Room 1150 Huasna Rd. - 86,167

Critical Infrastructure Water Systems Various - 16,000,000 Primary Roadways Various - 80,000,000

Total $111,761,682



O. City of Arroyo Grande Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure Critical Structures and Infrastructure Potentially Impacting Hazards

Category Property Location Earthquake

Flood

Wild

Fire

Dam/

Flood

Government City Hall 300 E. Branch H H H H City Hall Annex 214 E. Branch H H H H Council Chambers 215 E. Branch H H H H

Public Safety Fire Station 140 Traffic Way H H H H Police HQ 200 N. Halcyon H L L L Police Storage 200 N. Halcyon H L L L


Community Center 211 Vernon H L H H Corporate Yard & Maintenance 1375 Ash St. H L L H Corporate Yard Equipment Bldg 1375 Ash St H L L H Public Restroom 200 E. Branch H H H H Heritage Square Park 205 Nelson St. H H H H Heritage Park Bandstand 205 Nelson St. H H H H Swing Bridge 200 E. Branch H H H H

Potable Water and


Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. H L L H Elm St. Park Control House #2 1221 Elm St. H L L H Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. H L L H Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. H L L H Elm St. Park Well House # 1 1221 Elm St. H L L H Lift Station Tiger Tail H H H L Lift Station # 5 612 Taylor Pl. H L L H Lift Station Poplar St. H L L L Lift Station Oak Park Blvd. H L L L Lift Station Leanna Dr. H H L L Lift Station # 3 Husana Rd. H H H L Husana Road and Yard & Outside Husana Rd. H L H L Booster Pump Station Bldg. Lower Miller Way H L H L Booster Pump Station Bldg. Upper Miller Way # 1 H L H L Booster Pump Station Bldg. Upper Miller Way # 2 H L H L Booster Pump Station Bldg. 311 Oro Drive H L H H Reservoir # 1 300 Reservoir Rd. H L L L Reservoir # 1 Inlet Bldg. 300 Reservoir Rd. H L L L Reservoir # 1 Radio Bldg. 300 Reservoir Rd. H L L L Reservoir # 1 Yard & Outside Fence 300 Reservoir Rd. H L L L Reservoir # 2 200 Hillcrest Dr. H L L L Reservoir # 2 Yard & Outside Fence 200 Hillcrest Dr. H L L L Reservoir # 2 Valve Pit 200 Hillcrest Dr. H L L L Reservoir # 2 Booster Pump Bldg. 200 Hillcrest Dr. H L L L Reservoir # 2 Emergency Light Bldg. 200 Hillcrest Dr. H L L L Reservoir # 3 Stagecoach Rd. H L L H Reservoir # 3 Yard & Outside Fence Stagecoach Rd. H L L H Reservoir # 4 Huebner Lane H L L H Reservoir # 4 Valve Pit Huebner Lane H L L H Reservoir # 4 Yard & Outside Fence Huebner Lane H L L H



City of Arroyo Grande Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure (continued) Critical Structures and Infrastructure Potentially Impacting

Hazards Category Property Location Earthquake F

lood

Wild Fire

Dam / Failure

Recreation

Pre-School 126 Mason St H H H H Recreation Building 1221 Ash St. H L L H Soto Sports Complex Office 1275 Ash St. H L L H Soto Complex Rest Rooms 1275 Ash St. H L L H Elm St. Park Gazebo 1221 Ash St. H L L H Strother Park Rest Room 1150 Husana Rd. H H H H

Critical Infrastructure

Water System Various H H H H Roadways Various H H H H Arroyo Grande Community Hospital H H H H

Earthquake: High (H) Ground Shaking, outside Landslide, Liquefaction and Earthquake Fault Zone Flood: In or near area of low (L) hazard of flooding or high hazard of flooding Wildfire: Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Tsunami: In/or near or outside (O) the Tsunami Hazard Zone Resources: California OES My Hazard and CDF/San Luis Obispo Unit Fire Hazard Severity Zone and FRAP Map



P. City of Arroyo Grande Loss Estimate to Vulnerable Properties and Infrastructure Category Property Location 100% 50% 25%

Government City Hall 300 E. Branch St. $2,046,291 $1,023,146 $511,573 City Hall Annex 214 E. Branch St. 871,830 435,915 217,958 Council Chambers 215 E. Branch St. 415,484 207,742 103,871

Public Safety Fire Station 140 Traffic Way 5,397,441 2,698,721 1,349,360 Police HQ 200 N. Halcyon 2,626,253 1,313,127 656,563 Police Storage 200 N Halcyon 65,329 32,665 16,332


Community Center 211 Vernon 621,321 310,661 155,330 Corporate Yard Maintenance Bldg. 1375 Ash St. 638,206 319,103 159,952 Corporate Yard Equipment Bldg 1375 Ash St. 494,586 247,293 123,647 Storage and Chemical Garage 1375 Ash St. 471,039 235,520 117,760 Public Restroom 200 E. Branch St 65,953 32,977 15,488 Heritage Square Park 205 Nelson St. 2,492 1,246 632 Heritage Park Bandstand 205 Nelson St. 16,394 8,197 4,099 Swinging Bridge 200 E. Branch 95,332 47,666 23,833

Potable Water And


Elm St. Park Well House #1 1221 Elm St. 20,603 10,302 5,151 Elm St. Park Control House #2 1221 Elm St. 21,636 10,818 5,409 Elm St. Park Well House #1 1221 Elm St. 50,891 25,446 12,723 Elm St. Park Well House #1 1221 Elm St. 73,346 36,673 18,337 Elm St. Park Well House #1 1221 Elm St. 108,225 54,113 27,056 Lift Station Tiger Tail 45,133 22,567 11,283 Lift Station 612 Taylor Pl. 45,133 22,567 11,283 Lift Station Poplar St. 31,236 15,618 7,809 Lift Station Oak Park Blvd. 188,288 94,144 47,072 Lift Station Leanna Dr. 110,080 55,040 27,520 Lift Station Huasna Rd. 99,513 49,757 24,878 Huasna Road Yard & Outside Husana Rd. 3,133 1,567 783 Booster Pump Station Bldg Lower Miller Way 6,025 3,013 1,506 Booster Pump Station Bldg # 1 Upper Miller Way 14,556 7,278 3,639

Booster Pump Station Bldg # 2 Upper Miller Way 14,088 7,044 3,522 Booster Pump Station Bldg 311 Oro Drive 37,580 18,790 9,395 Reservoir#1 300 Reservoir Rd. 555,376 277,688 138,844 Reservoir #1 Inlet Bldg. 300 Reservoir Rd. 10,687 5,344 2,672

Reservoir #1 Radio Bldg. 300 Reservoir Rd. 13,076 6,538 3,269

Reservoir #1 Yard & Outside Fence 300 Reservoir Rd. 18,880 9,440 4,720 Reservoir #2 200 Hillcrest Dr. 430,808 215,404 107,702 Reservoir#2 Emergency Light Bldg. 200 Hillcrest Dr. 38,745 19,373 9,686 Reservoir #2 Booster Pump Station 200 Hillcrest Dr. 61,774 30,887 15,444 Reservoir #2 Valve Pit 200 Hillcrest Dr. 5,368 2,684 1,342 Reservoir #2 Yard & Outside 200 Hillcrest Dr. 21,974 10,987 5,494 Reservoir #3 Stagecoach Rd. 100,353 50,177 25,088 Reservoir #3 Yard & Outside Fence Stagecoach Rd. 5,740 2,870 1,435 Reservoir #4 Huebner Lane 614,577 307,289 153,644 Reservoir #4 Valve Pit Huebner Lane 3,968 1,984 992 Reservoir # 4 Yard & Outside Fence Huebner Lane 23,757 11,879 5,939



City of Arroyo Grande Loss Estimate to Vulnerable Properties and Infrastructure (continued)

Category Property Location 100% 50% 25%

Recreation

Pre-School 126 Mason 213,085 106,543 53,271 Recreation Building 1221 Ash St. 369,437 184,719 92,359 Soto Sports Complex Office 1275 Ash St. 369,434 184,717 92,359 Soto Sports Complex Rest Rooms 1275 Ash St. 77,788 38,894 9724 Elm Street Park Gazebo 1221 Ash St. 20,603 10,302 5,151 Strother Park Rest Room 1150 Huasna Rd. 86,167 43,084 21,542

Critical Infrastructure Water Systems Various 16,000,000 8,000,000 4,000,000 Roadways Various 80,000,000 40,000,000 20,000,000

Total - $111,761,682 $55,880,850 $27,930,108



Q. City of Arroyo Grande 2008 Mitigation Status

Promote disaster-resistant future development. Objective 1.1 Continue to adopt, update, develop, and support the jurisdiction’s general plans, master plans, ordinances, and codes to limit development in hazard areas or build to standards that will prevent or reduce damage. Objective 1.2 Adopt and support codes that protect existing infrastructure and assets in hazard areas. Mitigation Action The City of Arroyo Grande planning staff was a key member of the 2008 Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan planning team.

The City of Arroyo Grande Municipal Code was revised to include the most contemporary standards in development as it related to the prevention and reduction of damage from a disaster.

Promote understanding and support for hazard mitigation by key stakeholders and the public

within the city of Arroyo Grande. Objective 2.1 Provide education to key stakeholders and the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigating hazards. Objective 2.2 Promote partnerships between the state, counties and local governments to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation actions. Objective 2.3 Promote hazard mitigation in the business, residential, academic, and agricultural communities. Objective 2.4 Monitor and publicize the outcome of effective mitigation actions employed to gain public acceptance. Mitigation Action Members of the Five Cities fire Authority have presented to various civic groups Disaster Preparedness presentations with information from Ready.gov made available to the attendees.

The Emergency Preparedness Coordinator created a Business Continuity Template that was presented to the

Chamber of Commerce. The template is available at the Chamber of Commerce Office and the Five Cities Fire Authority web page.

The Five Cities Fire Authority coordinated an Integrated Community Specific Course for 73 government and private sector employees in Emmitsburg, MD.

The City of Arroyo Grande web page provides links to various disaster preparedness resources.

Build and support local capacity and commitment to minimize the City of Arroyo Grande’s vulnerability to potential hazards. Objective 3.1 Improve existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations. Objective 3.2 Develop programs to enhance the safety of residents, students and staff within the community. Objective 3.3 Continue to support the applicable City departments in their ability to respond effectively to major emergencies. Mitigation Actions All police and fire department supervisors have been trained in the procedure to activate the County EAS system. The procedure is a component of the City of Arroyo Grande Emergency Center Operations Center Handbook.



City of Arroyo Grande 2008 Mitigation Status (continued) The Emergency Preparedness Coordinator participates as an instructor for the regional CERT Classes. The 2008Multi Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan was completed on time and submitted to CalOES

for review. The plan was returned for clarifications. The City of Arroyo Grande Continuity of Operations Plan is included in the Emergency Operating Plan.

Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and

infrastructure due to flooding. Objective 4.1 Implement policies, procedures and regulations which reduce the exposure to flood hazards. Objective 4.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to flood hazards. Objective 4.3 Reduce the vulnerability of community assets, particularly critical facilities, located in the 100-year floodplain Objective 4.4 Support the San Luis Obispo Resource Conservation District (RCD) Goals: Long term goals are to provide technical assistance and cost-sharing funds for landowners to install Best Management Practices (BMP’s) on their land in order to reduce sedimentation problems in Arroyo Grande Creek and Pismo Lake. Short term goals include the following: 1) Reaching out to landowners via press releases, local media, and organizational newsletters. Coordinating and participating in watershed tours, and giving presentations to public groups including schools, agricultural organizations, citizens and stakeholder groups. 2) Holding workshops on: Rangelands Water Quality Planning, Farm Water Quality Planning, and Positive Point System. 3) Developing a minimum of 5 conservation plans with a minimum of 5 to 7 detailed, ready-to-build BMP designs. Mitigation Actions The City of Arroyo Grande is an active participant in San Luis Obispo Resource Conservation District (RCD) County Flood Control Zone 1/1A.

The City has and continues to maintain compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) requirements.

Construction in the 100 year flood plain is scrutinized prior, if at all, The issuing of building permits.

Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to Wildland fires. Objective 5.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses due to Wildland fires. Objective 5.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to the effects of Wildland fires. Objective 5.3 Educate the public about Wildland fire dangers and mitigation measures.



City of Arroyo Grande 2008 Mitigation Status (continued)

Mitigation Actions The City of Arroyo Grande received grant funding from the San Luis Obispo County Community Fire Safe Council for fuel thinning in the Miller Heights, James Way and Methodist Camp area of the city.

The City also received another grant from the San Luis Obispo County Community Fire Safe Council for a fire resistant demonstration garden. The garden in located at the Five Cities Fire Authority Headquarters Fire Station. There are leaflets that detail the native plants that reduce fuel hazards.

The weed abatement program continues along with the continued enforcement of codes and ordinances that eliminate the use of wood shake roofing materials.

Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to earthquakes. Objective 6.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses due to earthquakes. Objective 6.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to the effects of earthquakes. Mitigation Actions City department Evacuation Plans have been developed with department personnel trained on an annual basis. A Continuity of Operations Plan is included in the Emergency Operations Plan.

All City critical infrastructures have been earthquake proofed. Training has provided actions necessary for other natural or manmade disasters.

Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and

infrastructure due to the accidental spills and releases of Hazardous Materials. Mitigation Actions The Five Cities Fire Authority has located all petroleum, natural gas, and combustible fuel pipelines that transverse the community. This information is now included in the City of Arroyo Grande Emergency Operations Plan. The Five Cities Fire Authority has 4 Hazardous Materials Specialists on staff. In addition 2 Fire Captains are members of the County of San Luis Obispo Hazardous Materials Response cadre. All Fire Personnel are training to a minimum Hazardous First Responder Operational.

Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to biological agent threats. Objective 8.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to minimizing the loss of human life, livestock and agricultural products due to biological agent threats. Mitigation Actions The City of Arroyo Grande supported County of San Luis Obispo in its efforts to develop and adopt a Vector program. The City of Arroyo Grande has been involved with the annual Point of Distribution Flu Shot program.



CITY OF GROVER BEACH: A. Development History On August 1, 1887, Dwight William Grover filed plans at the San Luis Obispo County Court House and founded what would become the City of Grover City. For this land, he paid $22,982.20 in gold to John Michael Price, the founder of Pismo Beach. Mr. Grover thus founded the Town of Grover. He had a vision of a community which included a hotel and railroad station near the beach and promoted his town as "the place where the tide lands and the rails meet". In the 1890's, Mr. Grover attempted to have a train station built in the Town of Grover, in order to attract tourists and investors. Unfortunately, the Southern Pacific constructed the sought after station in nearby Oceano, an unincorporated town in San Luis Obispo County.

D.W. Grover laid out streets in a grid pattern, naming them for popular beaches of the time and set aside land for a train depot, a hotel and a city park, hoping to foster commercial growth. A land auction was held on August 1, 1887. Grover and his partner, George Gates, promoted Grover City as the "grandest summer and winter seaside resort on the Pacific Coast". Over the ensuing years, D.W. Grover made numerous attempts at making his city a reality and the cause of the city bearing his name would be picked up by other men.

The seeds of development didn't flourish as planned until many years later when Horace V. Bagwell came north in 1935 and bought about 1,100 acres. He advertised Grover City as the "home of the average man", with land prices in the working man's range. Word began to spread and so did development. In the mid-1940's, the first store opened followed by the first post office. In 1949, the Fair Oaks Fire District and the Grover City Water District were formed followed by a building boom in the early 1950's.

The little town grew in numbers and progressed in development until in 1959 the majority of residents wanted to make the "city" a reality. An incorporation election was held on December 21, 1959.

As the city boundaries were laid out shortly after incorporation, the groundwork was also laid for more growth and development. The city grew steadily in the decades to follow, and in the mid-1970's, development took off as vacant lots were replaced with restaurants, markets and residences.

In 1992, Grover City was renamed "Grover Beach". The City now has a population of 13,156 residents (2010 Census) and Mr. Grover's dream of a train station became a reality in November 1996 when Amtrak began rail service with two daily stops at a newly constructed train station at 150 Grand Avenue on the Pacific Coast Highway.

Source: City of Grover Beach website: www.grover.org B. Geography Grover Beach is located on the beautiful Central Coast of California midway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. It is one of the major entryways to Pismo State Beach and the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreational Area. Grover Beach is located at 35°7'15" North, 120°37'10" West (35.120934, 120.619529). According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 6.0 km² (2.3 mi²). 6.0 km² (2.3 mi²) of it is land and none of it is covered by water.

http://www.grover.org/



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_mile



C. Demographics The 2010 United States Census reported that Grover Beach had a population of 13,156. The population density was 5,684.2 people per square mile (2,194.7/km²). The racial makeup of Grover Beach was 9,964 (75.7%) White, 146 (1.1%) African American, 186 (1.4%) Native American, 542 (4.1%) Asian, 35 (0.3%) Pacific Islander, 1,582 (12.0%) from other races, and 701 (5.3%) from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race was 3,840 persons (29.2%). There were 5,111 households, out of which 1,656 (32.4%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 2,178 (42.6%) were opposite-sex married couples living together, 735 (14.4%) had a female householder with no husband present, 335 (6.6%) had a male householder with no wife present. There were 428 (8.4%) unmarried opposite-sex partnerships, and 54 (1.1%) same-sex married couples or partnerships. 1,330 households (26.0%) were made up of individuals and 439 (8.6%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.54. There were 3,248 families (63.5% of all households); the average family size was 3.04.

In the city the population is spread out with 22.3% under the age of 18, 9.6% from 18 to 24, 29.0% from 25 to 44, 27.4% from 45 to 64, and 11.8% who are 65 years of age or older. The median age is 36.9 years. For every 100 females there are 95.7 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there are 93.6 males.

There were 5,748 housing units at an average density of 2,483.5 per square mile (958.9/km²), of which 2,390 (46.8%) were owner-occupied, and 2,721 (53.2%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 2.0%; the rental vacancy rate was 3.7%. 5,719 people (43.5% of the population) lived in owner-occupied housing units and 7,248 people (55.1%) lived in rental housing unit. D. Population and Growth Grover Beach 2010 Data

People Grover Beach United States Population 13,156 308,745,538 Population Density 5,684 87 Population Change .7% 9.34% Medial Age 36.6 37.2 Household Size 2.54 2.63 Ethnicity Grover Beach United States White 62.3% 63.4% Black 1.1 13.1 Asian 4.1 5.0 American Indian 1.4 1.2 Hispanic 29.2 16.7 Other 1.9 .06 Family Grover Beach United States Married, with children 19.5% 20.2% Married, without children 26.8% 33.6% Single, with children 11.4% 7.4% Single, without children 34.8% 33.5% Divorced 16.7% 10.6% Separated 3.4% 4.9% Widowed 5.6% 6.3% Now Married 41.22% 47.2% Never Married 33.11% 33.0%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_Census



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_(U.S._Census)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(United_States_Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latino_(U.S._Census)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSSLQ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_partnerships

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_(U.S._Census)



Population

Year Population 1980 8,827 1990 11,656 2003 12,991 2005 12,887 2010 13,156

E. Economy Within the City of Grover Beach, the following industries provide the bulk of employment:

• Educational, health, and social services provide 18.5% of the city’s employment • Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services provide 14.7% of the city’s

employment • Retail trade provides 12.9% of the city’s employment 22.5% of Grover Beach residents both live and

work in the city. The majority of the residents commute to work. Economy Grover Beach United States Unemployment Rate 9.9% 9.1% Recent Job Growth -.21% -.12% Future Job Growth 29.68% 31.25% Sales Tax 7.75% 6.8% Income Tax 9.30% 6.25% Household Income 50,123 52,954 Income per Capita 25,533 27,067 Housing Grover Beach United States Apartment Rent $1,196 $950 Property Tax Rate 7.63% 11.2% Median Home Age 32.8% 35.1% Median Home Cost $374,900 $175,00 Home Appreciation -6.77% -3.15% Homes Owned 45.7% 59.9% Homes Rented 46.2% 29.73% Vacant Housing 8.09% 10.37% Housing Unit trends in Grover Beach Units in Structure

2000 Number Percent

2009 Number Percent

Percent Change

1 Unit attached 3,060 57.0 3,051 56.4 (03) 1 Unit detached 784 14.6 811 15.0 3.4 2-4 Units 701 13.1 711 13.1 0.0 5-9 Units 351 6.5 351 6.5 0.0 10 Units or more 226 4.2 236 4.5 .03 Mobile home, boat, RV, van, etc

246 4.5 246 4.5 0.0

Total 5,368 100 5,406 100 3.4



Transportation Grover Beach United States Commute Time (minutes) 20.1 27.7 Method of Transportation Auto 76.42% 75.83% Carpool 17.22% 14.52% Mass Transportation .48% 4.19% Work at Home 5.88% 5.46% Cost of Living Grover Beach United States Overall 126.5% 100% Food 115.6% 100% Housing 150% 100% Utilities 115.6% 100% Health 134.4% 100% Transportation 113.9% 100% Miscellaneous 104.9% 100% Education Grover Beach United States School Expenditure $4,972 $5,678 Pupil to Teacher Ration 18.8% 14.9% Students per Counselor 779 513

F. Climate

G. Government Form of Government: General Law/Council-Manager

H. Land Uses A land use element is in effect with well established parameters

Climate Grover Beach United States Rainfall (in.) 17.1 36.5 Snow (in.) 0 25 Precipitation Days 44 100 Sunny Days 291 205 Avg. July high temperature 70 86.5 Avg. January high temperature 62.3 UV index 5.3 4.3 Elevation 42 1,060



I. Zoning Map

J. Future Development The City of Grover Beach updated its General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) in 2010. The LUE recognizes that the majority of the City is developed and that future development will occur on the few remaining vacant properties and the redevelopment of underutilized properties. Commercial redevelopment will be focused on West Grand Avenue, the City’s main commercial corridor, with the potential for two and three story mixed use projects. Residential in-fill projects will continue to occur throughout the City and consist primarily of planned unit developments and multi-family residential projects.



K. City of Grover Beach Hazard Locations, Impacts and Vulnerabilities

§ 201.6(c) (2) (i), § 201.6(c) (2) (ii) a. Earthquake: Severity HIGH (Moment Magnitude Scale 3.5 to 5.4 or higher), Probability MEDIUM The only mapped fault near Grover Beach is the potentially active Wilmar Avenue fault. The Wilmar Avenue fault is exposed in the sea cliff near Pismo Beach and the buried trace of the fault is inferred to strike northwest-southeast generally along the alignment of U.S. Highway 101 past Grover Beach. The mapped location of the fault runs along a portion of the northern city limits for Grover Beach. The Wilmar Avenue fault is considered potentially active and presents a moderate hazard to the City. However, there are several known active and potentially active earthquake faults, including the San Andreas, San Simeon and Los Osos faults located in San Luis Obispo County. Potential Impacts of Hazard - Cascading Effects Earthquakes can cause many cascading effects such as fires, flooding, hazardous materials spills, utility disruptions, landslides, and transportation emergencies. Ground shaking may cause seiche, the rhythmic sloshing of water in lakes or bays.

• Effects on people and housing. In any earthquake, the primary consideration is saving lives. Time and effort must also be dedicated to providing for mental health by reuniting families, providing shelter to displaced persons, and restoring basic needs and services. Major efforts will be required to remove debris and clear roadways, demolish unsafe structures, assist in reestablishing public services and utilities, and provide continuing care and temporary housing for affected citizens.

A survey of local, State, and Federal government emergency plans indicate that although there is a general capacity to respond to small and intermediate-sized earthquakes, it is unlikely that any of these governmental units will be able to cope with the immediate impact of a great quake, such as an M 8.3 event on the south-central San Andreas fault. The general public must realize that the assistance that they have been used to expecting simply will not be immediately available. In fact, in the event of an earthquake of such magnitude, citizens must be prepared to wait for up to 72 hours or more for any type of organized response.

• Effects on commercial and industrial structures: After any earthquake, individuals are likely to lose wages due to the inability of businesses to function because of damaged goods and/or facilities. With business losses, the City of Grover Beach will lose revenue. Economic recovery from even a minor earthquake will be critical to the communities involved.

• Effects on infrastructure: The damage caused can lead to the paralysis of the local infrastructure: police, fire, medical and governmental services.

• Effects on agriculture: Earthquakes can cause loss of human life, loss of animal life, and property damage to structures and land dedicated to agricultural uses. The most significant long-term impacts on agriculture from earthquakes are those that arise from the cascading effects of fire and flood.

Risk Assessment Conclusion The City of Grover Beach is located in a geologically complex and seismically active region. There are numerous active and potentially active faults in the County in which the City exists. The City has a history of damaging earthquakes, but there have also been a number of magnitude 5.0 to 6.2 earthquakes which have



affected portions of the City. While it is impossible to accurately predict the next earthquake event, the probability for future damaging earthquakes in Grover Beach is rated as Medium to High.



















b. Flood: Severity MEDIUM, Probability: HIGH Isolated areas of potential flooding in response to a 100-year storm are located in the northern and western portions of the City that are adjacent to Meadow Creek. Flood hazard areas in the northern portion of the City are restricted to an area south of U.S. 101 and north of Nacimiento Avenue. A mobile home subdivision is located in this area. Arroyo Grande Creek, which is the only major drainage that can threaten the City, can present varying hazards during a flood and can block access to and egress from portions of the City. South Grover Beach and West Grover Beach neighborhoods can experience flooding issues. Most other areas of the City will present only minor flooding problems. In the western part of the City, flooding could affect areas located west of the Union The Pacific Railroad tracks, running north and south through the City, are subject to inundation from a 100-year storm, and may be affected by local drainage problems. Local flooding conditions currently exist in two isolated areas within the City where properties are located below street level. One parcel is subject to flooding from a 50-year storm event if sandbags are not used or if cars are parked on the street. For the second parcel a 75-100 year storm event will flood this property, however, an asphalt berm has been constructed which alleviates flooding under storms of lesser magnitude. The City of Grover Breach entered the National Fire Insurance Program (NFIP) in 1981 by passing Resolution 81. It was the Intent of the City Council to comply with land use and management criteria regulations as required by the NFIP. It was also the intent of the Council to recognize and duly evaluate flood hazards in all official actions relating to land use in the flood plain areas having special flood hazards. The City has continually reviewed its General Plans and Zoning Ordinances in order to comply with NFIP. In fact, in 2012, the City updated its Planning and Zoning Regulations, Ordinance 12-06, which included updated flood hazard regulations to be consistent with the new FEMA model ordinance. Section 5.10 of Chapter 5 of the Development Standards further outlines the City’s floodplain management regulations. Sections 7300-7361, Chapter 3 - Flood Damage Prevention Regulations, of the Grover Beach Municipal Code addresses flood hazards relative to public health, safety and general welfare. The purpose of these regulations is to minimize public and private loses due to flood conditions. Potential Impacts of Hazard – Cascading Effects While there are some benefits associated with flooding, such as the replenishment of beach sand, and nutrients to agricultural lands, it is generally considered a hazard to development in floodplains. Floods can cause many cascading effects. Fire can break out as a result of dysfunctional electrical equipment. Hazardous materials can also get into floodways, causing health concerns and polluted water supplies. In many instances during a flood, the drinking water supply will be contaminated.

• Effects on people and housing. Direct impacts of flooding can include injuries and loss of life, damage to property and health hazards from ruptured sewage lines and damaged septic systems. Secondary impacts include the cost and commitment of resources for flood fighting services, clean-up operations, and the repair or replacement of damaged structures.

• Effects on commercial and industrial structures. Flooding can cause damage to commercial and industrial structures, damage to vegetation, crops and livestock. Beach erosion results in the loss of sand from coastal areas. This hazard can accelerate the rate of erosion of coastal bluffs, and can also contribute to increased wave-related damage to coastal structures.

• Effects on infrastructure. Flooding can cause damage to roads, communication facilities and other infrastructure.

• Agriculture. Effects on agriculture can be devastating. Flooding can damage crops, livestock and dairy stock. In addition to the obvious impacts on crops and animals, flooding can have deleterious effects on soil and the ability to reinvigorate the agricultural activities impacted



once the flood waters recede. Damage to water resources such as underground irrigation systems, water storage reservoirs, springs and other natural water bodies could have a serious effect upon agriculture operations.

Flood Probability Flood Recurrence Intervals







c. Dam Inundation Although the probability of this type of hazard occurring is highly unlikely, it warrants consideration because a considerable portion of the study area is located in the inundation area of Lopez Dam. In the event of complete failure of Lopez Dam, water would flow in a westerly direction following Arroyo Grande Creek, approximately 3,000 feet in each direction of the centerline of the creek channel. Water flows would pass through the rural areas directly below the dam and then into the Cities of Arroyo Grande, around Grover Beach following the Arroyo Grande Creek prior to dissipating into the Pacific Ocean as indicated in the San Luis Obispo County of Emergency Services Inundation Map of Lopez Dam. The State of California Division of Safety of Dams conducts periodic reviews to evaluate dam safety and a considerable amount of work was completed in 2004 in order to bring the dam into compliance with current seismic standards. Impacts and Vulnerabilities The threat diminishes as the distance from the dam increases. The dam inundation zone widens as it approaches Grover Beach. In Grover Beach, the possible area of inundation, if the dam were at full capacity and experienced a total failure, impacted areas could be the low lying areas south of Grand Avenue and west of Highway 1. The economic and social impacts would be minimal. Water would rise to no more than 3 to 6 inches. These areas are not populated nor are any businesses located in the possible inundation area. d. Tsunami: SEVERITY Medium, Probability LOW Large tsunamis have not been common on the Central Coast of California. Thus, few incidences have been recorded and the historical record is not extensive enough to develop accurate reoccurrence predictions. The potential tsunami hazard for the San Luis Obispo County coastal areas is greatest for those communities or portions of communities located below the estimated elevations for the 100-to 500-year events, that is, below elevation 50 feet above mean sea level. In general, much of the Coast of San Luis Obispo County is protected from tsunami hazards by wide beaches, coastal dunes, or sea cliffs that provide protection for coastal developments. Coastal developments most vulnerable to the tsunami hazards are those located near mouths of streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean. The potential for damage to coastal structures would likely increase if the tsunami event were to coincide with a high tide, storm related waves, or large winter storm runoff. In general, portions of coastal Grover Beach are protected from tsunami hazards by wide beaches and coastal dunes. The only exception to this is the low lying areas where Meadow Creek meets the Pacific Ocean. Tsunami Hazard Potential The historic record indicates that significant tsunamis typically have been generated from distant earthquake sources. It has been estimated that the 100- and 500-year tsunami runups in the study area are based on far-field source generation locations (such as the Aleutian or Chile-Peru Trenches). Estimated tsunami runup along the San Luis Obispo County coastline which includes the coastline of the City of Grover Beach is approximately 9.5 feet to 24.2 feet for the 100-year and 500-year events, respectively. Those runups were calculated using astronomical high tides, and compare well with recorded tsunamis that have occurred in other locations along the California Coast. However, the worst case scenario would occur if a tsunami occurred during a meteorological high tide (storm surge), which would add an estimated 14.5 feet



(4.5 meters) to the runup values calculated. Thus, with a worst case scenario along the coast line for Grover Beach area, the estimated tsunami runup for the 100-year and 500-year would be approximately elevation 24 and 39 feet above mean sea level, respectively. Tsunamis are a series of ocean waves generated by vertical movement of the sea floor. The movement is typically caused by earthquake related faulting, but can also result from submarine landslides or volcanic eruptions. San Luis Obispo County could be affected by a tsunami caused by fault related ground displacement on a local, near or offshore fault, or on a more distant fault. Common sources of tsunamis affecting California in the past have been earthquakes on faults off the coast of Chile and the North American coast (up to Alaska). In the open ocean, tsunami waves have a long wavelength (distance from the crest of one wave to the crest of the succeeding wave) normally over 100 miles, and a very low amplitude (height from crest to trough). As these waves approach shallow water, their speed is decreased from a deep-water speed of over 600 miles per hour to less than 30 miles per hour. The wave energy is transferred from wave speed to wave height. Thus, waves as high as 100 feet have been formed. Tsunamis are a unique hazard because the arrival time of a wave generated far out to sea can be predicted fairly accurately. Unfortunately, the intensity of the wave when it reaches shore cannot be accurately predicted. Tsunamis are sometimes preceded by a trough or recession of ocean water that can attract people to the shore to examine what appears to be a very low tide. These recessions can also cause problems, when the water returns, for moored boats that are grounded. The primary effects of a tsunami can be widespread destruction and damage to coastal communities. In Crescent City, California, in 1964, tsunami waves up to 20-feet high caused over 11 million dollars in property damage and resulted in 11 deaths. Historically, large tsunamis have not been common on the Central Coast of California. As such, few incidents have been recorded and the historical record is not extensive enough to develop accurate recurrence predictions. The largest recorded tsunami to affect California was caused by an earthquake in the Santa Barbara Channel in 1812. Resulting tsunami run-up was reported to have been up to 50 feet above sea level at Gaviota, and 35 feet at Santa Barbara. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) (1973) reported that the historical record for San Luis Obispo County includes no tsunamis that have exceeded the normal tidal range. PG&E (1973) suggests that faults in the offshore area could generate tsunami wave height as great as six feet. In San Luis Obispo County, coastal areas near Port San Luis, Cayucos, Morro Bay and San Simeon were designated as having a “potential danger” from tsunami. This potential hazard level was the lowest designation included in the study. The potential for damage to coastal structures could be increased if the tsunami event were to coincide with a high tide, storm related waves, or large winter storm runoff. The historic record shows local tsunamis have resulted from distant sources. Houston and Garcia in a 1978 study estimated the Northern San Luis Obispo County coastline 100- and 500-year tsunami run-ups, based on distant source generation (such as the Aleutian or Chile-Peru Trenches), and are approximately 9.5 feet to 24.2 feet, respectively. Those run-ups were calculated using astronomical high tides, and are consistent with recorded tsunamis that have occurred in Crescent City and other locations along the California coast. However, according to Kilbourne and Mualchin (1980), the worst case scenario would occur if a tsunami occurred during a meteorological tide (storm surge), which would add an estimated 14.5 feet to the run-up calculated by Houston and Garcia. Thus, with a worst-case scenario, the estimated tsunami run-up for the 100-year and 500-year event would be no greater than 50 feet above mean sea level. The Houston and Garcia (1978) study did not evaluate the tsunami run-up potential generated from local seismic events or local submarine landslides. It is difficult to model tsunami run-up magnitudes based on local events; however, it is thought that local events could generate a tsunami of equal magnitudes as those from distant tsunami sources (Kilbourne and Mualchin, 1980).



Recent run-up and inundation modeling and mapping, done by the University of Southern California (USC) under contract to Cal EMA, indicate a general potential maximum inundation elevation of 40 feet above mean sea level. However, undersea geology or bathymetry and local natural or manmade structures may alter this estimate and the City has decided to utilize an inundation of 50 feet above mean sea level for emergency planning purposes. The Tsunami Response Plan for the City of Grover Beach uses as its planning basis all those coastal locations, recreation and developed areas with an elevation of 50 feet above mean sea level. Impacts and Vulnerabilities Much of the coast of Grover Beach is protected by wide beaches, or coastal dunes that provide protection for coastal developments. Areas most vulnerable to the tsunami hazard are developments or infra-structure near the mouths of streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean. Tsunami impacts in the following locations:

• Five Cities Drive/El Camino Real • Margarita Avenue from 4th Street to Oak Park. • 2nd Street to the Ocean • 6th Street to the Ocean from Brighton to Manhattan • 14th Street to the Ocean from Manhattan to The Pike. • West Grand Avenue from 2nd Street to Oceano, including Pismo State Beach Golf Course.

Tsunami Vulnerabilities The Tsunami Impact area along Highway 1 is in the expected inundation zone, which may prove problematic with regards to evacuation, however the damage expected should not cause structural damage. Located in the inundation zone are approximately 107 residences with 22 commercial structures. Inundation is predicted not to exceed 12” due to the beach area absorbing much of the tsunami. Disruption to residences and commercial properties are anticipated to be minimal. U pon recession of the water, the highway should be usable.

Tsunami Impact Probability The probability of a Tsunami impacting the City of Grover Beach is low. The run-up of recent Tsunami’s that have impacted the city has been less than one (1) foot in the beach areas only. There was no impact to the residential area or the business core. As such based on recent and past history of Tsunami’s impacting the city the probability of an impact is low. The probability scale for determining the impact of a Tsunami impacting the City of Grover Beach is: High probability 90-100% Medium probability 49-89% Low probability 0-49%





e. Fire: SEVERITY Medium, PROBABILITY Low The plan area is located on the western coastal fringe of the Santa Lucia Mountain Range and is in a fairly favorable position with respect to Wildland fire threat. The mild coastal summers characterized by cool temperatures and foggy days and nights help to maintain the fuel moisture levels to a point that limits the potential for rapid fire spread. In addition, the majority of the topography is level and well developed in both residential and agricultural land uses. However, in 1985 the Los Pilitas Fire burned in the mountains to the north of the City Arroyo Grande with amazing speed. While this threat was short lived, given the right series of circumstances, the correct combination of weather, topography and fuel, the potential does exist for a Wildland fire to burn into or start within some areas under study. Impacts and Vulnerabilities The City of Grover Beach is not confronted with a significant wildfire hazard because of its location on the coast away from vegetated hillsides. The high humidity levels and cool ocean temperatures minimize the potential for wildfire activity. A limited number of open areas containing annual grasses exist throughout the City. These light fuels do not represent a major wildfire risk.





L. City of Grover Beach Capability Assessment Table and Survey Capability Assessment Table

Regulatory Tool (Ordinances, codes, plans, etc.)

Y/N Comments

General Plan Y Zoning Ordinance Y Subdivision Ordinance Y Site Plan Review Requirements Y Growth Management Ordinance Y Floodplain Ordinance Y Other Special Purpose Ordinances (e.g., storm water, steep slope, wildfire, etc.) Y Storm Water only

Building Code Y BCEGS Rating Y 3 Fire Department ISO Rating Y Erosion or Sediment Control Program Y Storm water Management Program Y Capital Improvements Plan Y Economic Development Plan Y Local Emergency Operations Plan Y Other Special Plans Y Flood Insurance Study or Other Engineering Study for Streams Y

Elevation Certificates Y Other

Personnel Resources Y/N Department/Position Planner/Engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Y

Engineer/Professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure

Y

Planner/Engineer/Scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Y

Personnel skilled in GIS Y

Full-time Building Official N Contract

Floodplain Manager N Emergency Manager Y GIS data – Hazard Areas Y GIS data – Critical Facilities Y GIS data – Land Use Y GIS data – Assessor’s Data Y Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-1-1, Cable Override, Outdoor Warning Signals)

Y



Financial Resources Y/N Comments Capital Improvement Programming Y Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Y Special Purpose Taxes (or taxing districts) Y As needed Gas/Electric Utility Fees N

Water/Sewer Fees Y

Storm water Utility Fees Y Development Impact Fees Y General Obligation, Revenue, and/or Special Tax Bonds Y

Partnering Arrangements or Intergovernmental Agreements N

Other Agency Potential Programs/Grants

Department of Homeland Security – Federal Emergency Management Agency

Homeland Security Grant Program, Emergency Management Performance Grants Program, Transit Security Grant Program, Assistance to Fire Fighter Grants, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program, Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, Severe Repetitive Loss Program

US Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grants

US Department of the Interior Coast Impact Assistance Program, US Geological Survey Research and Data Collection

US Department of Defense – US Air Force Training Requirements Funding US Department of Health and Human Services/California Department of Health Services Grants for Public Health Emergency Preparedness

US Department of Commerce Coastal Resilience Networks

California Emergency Management Agency

Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program, Interoperable Emergency Communications Center Grant Program, Proposition 1B Grant, Citizens Corps Program, Metropolitan Medical Response System Program, Earthquake and Tsunami Grants Program

California Department of Housing and Community Development Disaster Recovering Initiative

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Western States WUI Fire Assistance Grant



Assessment Survey Jurisdiction/Agency: City of Grover Beach Phone: 805-473-4511

Point of Contact: Chief Jim Copsey E-mail: [email protected]


In Place

Under

Development



Supports Helps

Facilitate Hinders

Hazard Mitigation

Plan X X Police X

Plan adopted in 2005 and updated in 2013

Comprehensive Land Use Plan (or

General, Master or Growth Mgt. Plan)


All included in a Comprehensive updated plan, Article IX, adopted

in 2012

Floodplain

Management Plan X Public Works X

Included in Development Code Chapter 5, adopted

in 2012

Open Space Management Plan (or Parks & Rec./ Greenways Plan)


All included in a comprehensive updated plan, Article IX, adopted

in 2012

Storm water Management Plan /

Ordinance X Public Works X

Plan updated adopted in 2010

Natural Resource Protection Plan

X

Flood Response

Plan X Police X

Included in Development Code Chapter 5, adopted

in 2012

Emergency

Operations Plan X Police X

Emergency operations plan completed revised in 2005

adopted.

Continuity of

Operations Plan X Police X

Adopted as part of the emergency plans

1. PLANNING AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY - Please indicate whether the following planning or regulatory tools (plans, ordinances, codes or programs) are currently in place or under development for your jurisdiction by placing an "X" in the appropriate box. Then, for each particular item in place, identify the department or agency responsible for its implementation and indicate its estimated or anticipated effect on hazard loss reduction (Strongly Supports, Helps Facilitate or Hinders) with another "X". Finally, please provide additional comments or explanations in the space provided or with attachments.




In Place

Under

Development


Effect on Loss Reduction

Co

Regulatory Tool

In Place

Evacuation Plan X Police X Adopted as part of the

emergency plans

Other Plans (please




In Place

Under Development


Effect on Loss Reduction Comments Strongly Supports Facilitates Hinders

Disaster Recovery

Plan X Police X

Adopted as part of the emergency plans

Capital

I t

X Public Works X

Economic

Development Plan X Community

Development X

Historic

Preservation Plan X X

Floodplain Ordinance (or

Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance)

X Public Works X

Zoning Ordinance


All included in a comprehensive

updated plan, Article IX, adopted

in 2012

Subdivision Ordinance X Community

Development X



in 2012

Unified

Development Ordinance

X Public Works X

Included in Development

Code Chapter 5, adopted in 2012

Post-disaster Redevelopment /

Reconstruction

X

Building Code




Fire Code X Community

Development X

National Flood Insurance

X Public Works X

NFIP Community Rating System (CRS Program)

X Public Works Participation in NFIP

began in 1981



Staff / Personnel Resources

Yes

No

Department Agency

Comments

Planners with knowledge of land

development and land


In addition, the Public Works Director/Engineer

Engineers or professionals trained

in construction

X Public Works The Public Works Director/Engineer as well as part-time building officials

Planners or engineers with an

understanding of /

X Public Works The Public Works Director/Engineer as well as part-time building officials

Emergency Manager

X City Management

Typically the City Manager will fill this role, however in his absence the

Assistant City Manager/ Police Chief Will act in the capacity of Emergency

Manager

Floodplain Manager X Public Works

The Public Works Director/Engineer as well as part-time building officials

Land surveyors X Public Works


Scientist familiar with the hazards of the

X

Staff with education or expertise to assess

the community’s l bili

X Public Works


Personnel skilled in Geographic

Information Systems ( ) /

X City Management Staff in City Management only familiar with GIS operations and use. If GIS is

obtained staff is familiar enough to use.

Resource developme

X City Management City Management facilitates both

Community Development as well as Public Works for grant writing

2. ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITY - Please indicate whether your jurisdiction maintains the following staff members within its current personnel resources by placing an "X" in the appropriate box. Then, if YES, please identify the department or agency they work under and provide any other comments you may have in the space provided or with attachments.



Financial Resources

Yes

No

Department / Agency

Comments

Capital Improvement

Programming X Public Works


Community Development Block

X Planning

Special Purpose Taxes (or taxing districts)

X

Gas / Electric Utility

Fees X

Water / Sewer Fees X Public Works

The Public Works Director/Engineer as well as part-time building officials. Also, Administrative staff is

utilized.

Storm water Utility

Fees X Public Works


Development Impact

Fees X

We do obtain fees but can only be used for improvements for special projects

and not for rebuilding.

General Obligation, Revenue and/or

X City Management

Partnering arrangements or

X City Management

Other:

3. FISCAL CAPABILITY - Please indicate whether your jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use the following local financial resources for hazard mitigation purposes (including as match funds for State of Federal mitigation grant funds). Then, identify the primary department or agency responsible for its administration or allocation and provide any other comments you may have in the space provided or with attachments.



4. POLITICAL CAPABILITY - Political capability can be generally measured by the degree to which local political leadership is willing to enact policies and programs that reduce hazard vulnerabilities in your community, even if met with some opposition. Examples may include guiding development away from identified hazard areas, restricting public investments or capital improvements within hazard areas, or enforcing local development standards that go beyond minimum State or Federal requirements (e.g., building codes, floodplain management, etc.). Please identify some general examples of these efforts if available and/or reference where more documentation can be found. The City of Grover Beach political leadership has been willing and continues to be willing to develop and maintain applicable Building Codes, Zoning Ordinances, Subdivision Regulations, Capital Improvement Plan, and other regulatory development guides that provide specific support to hazard mitigation activities within the community. Additionally, the City General Plans, Multi-hazard Emergency Response Plans, and Post-Disaster Recovery Plans provide additional authority that is used to develop and adjust as necessary any emergency or mitigation plans. City leadership has attended special training and has always shown an interest in improving any policy or plans that would otherwise improve the cities response to and recovery to any such action that directly impacts the cities community and infrastructures. Most of the City’s plans and codes are regularly reviewed and updated as necessary. In fact most municipal codes have recently been all updated as of 2012 and include any such mitigated actions necessary.



DEGREE OF CAPABILITY

LIMITED MODERATE HIGH Planning and Regulatory Capability X

Administrative and Technical Capability X

Fiscal Capability X

Political Capability X

OVERALL CAPABILITY X

M. Mitigation Strategies §201.6(c)(3)(iv) The Mitigation Strategies for the City of Grover Beach were developed after an analysis of the potential frequency of occurrence of the hazard and the potential fiscal impact. The criteria used for analysis was City of Grover Beach staff and community personnel knowledge of incidents that have occurred in the past. The team reviewed past hazard incidents that have occurred as well as the propensity of any additional hazards. Based upon the City’s location within the County of San Luis Obispo, the location to existing and known fault lines, and the location to the Pacific Ocean the team came up with the included hazards. After careful analysis the listed hazards were selected with the highest probability of occurrence with the maximum fiscal impact. Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries, and the potential for loss of life, and are reducing emergency response costs, which would otherwise be incurred. Mitigation strategies are politically, economically and social feasible. They help, not only the general population, but help the underserved population by providing additional plans, actions, and potential resources otherwise no available The implementation and administration of the Mitigation Strategies are the responsibility of the listed department located in the Mitigation Action Goals.

5. SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY - Please provide an approximate measure of your jurisdiction's capability to effectively implement hazard mitigation strategies to reduce hazard vulnerabilities. Using the following table, please place an "X" in the box marking the most appropriate degree of capability (Limited, Moderate or High) based upon best available information and the responses provided in Sections 1-4 of this survey.



Goal 1. Minimize the level of damages and loses due to earthquake (a) City of Grover Beach Mitigation Action Objective: • Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses due to earthquakes. • Perform a safety review of all current city structures and facilities paying close attention to disaster proofing all facilities. Convene a group of department heads to prioritize the needs and research funding strategies. • Develop disaster preparedness caches of supplies, tools, and equipment for use by city employees, so that they may continue to perform their duties during a major emergency. Mitigation Project: Earthquake fault identification and Seismic Retrofit projects Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Identify and catalog seismically vulnerable structures. • Implement policies, procedures and regulations which reduce the exposure to earthquake

hazards. • Protect the improved property and infrastructures vulnerable to earthquake hazards.

Special Environmental Impacts to community structures Concerns: Implementation Responsibility: Emergency Preparedness Time Line: 5 Years Funding Source: PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff time

Resources Required: To be Determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Identify the safety needs of the City and vulnerable structures due to earthquakes 2014: Develop a comprehensive approach and identify funding sources to address specific needs 2015: Obtain funding and commence mitigation projects 2016: Conclude mitigation projects and development of caches of supplies 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of mitigation



Goal 2. Minimize the level of damage and losses due to flooding. (b) City of Grover Beach Mitigation Action Objective: Research and identify flooding vulnerably within the City of Grover Beach. Residential, commercial and local government.

Mitigation Project: Residential-Commercial-Government Floodsmart projects. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Implement policies, procedures and regulations which reduce the exposure to flood hazards. • Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to flood hazards. • Reduce the vulnerability of community assets, particularly critical facilities, located in the 100-

year floodplain. Special Environmental Endangered habitats and impacts to surrounding area Implementation Responsibility: Recreation and Maintenance Services, Public Works, and Emergency Preparedness Time Line: 5 years Funding Source: PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff time Priority: H-M-L

2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Research and identify flooding vulnerably within the City of Grover Beach. 2014: Identify Funding needs and funding source. 2015: Apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant and Commence Mitigation projects. 2016: Conclude Mitigation projects. 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions.



Goal 3. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people due to Wildland and Structure Fires. (c) City of Grover Beach Mitigation Action Objective: 1. Educate the public about Wildland and Structure fire dangers.

Create a Fire-Smart Community by developing a comprehensive approach to reducing damage and loss due to fires. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Encourage the 100’ Defensible Space around structures in the Wildland Urban Interface.

• Continue weed abatement program • Enforce building codes and ordinances that eliminate the use of wood shake

roofs. • Enforce codes and ordinances that require fire sprinkler systems in all new

structures constructed.

Environmental Riparian Habitats Concerns: Implementation Responsibility: Fire Department Time Line: 5 Years

California Fire Safe Council, Fire Prevention Grant funding, PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff time

Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Develop comprehensive Fire Prevention program. 2014: Apply for grant funding. 2015: Commence education and action programs. 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions. 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions.



Goal 4. Minimize the level of damage and loses to people and surrounding areas due to Tsunami events, and increase understanding and response to Tsunamis. (c) City of Grover Beach Mitigation Action Objective: To increase the understanding and response to tsunamis within the community by Working with Federal and State agencies to better understand and prepare for the hazards of tsunamis and to improve the ability to respond to tsunami warnings provided by NOAA’s West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center. Mitigation Project: Develop a comprehensive action plan to reduce damage from a Tsunami. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Review Tsunami inundation areas and educational needs. • Review emergency policies and training needs • Review Tsunami plans, maps, and evacuation plans • Special Environmental • Concerns: • Endangered coastline • Impacts to people and surrounding area

Implementation Responsibility: Police Department Time Line: 5 Years Funding Sources: PDM Grant, General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff time

Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Review inundation area pre-response plans 2014: Review community education needs and programs 2015: Study feasibility of Tsunami warning signs 2016: Implement community education along with installation of signage 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of education and signage



N. City of Grover Beach 2008 Mitigation Status Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant future development. Objective 1.1 Continue to adopt, update, develop, and support the jurisdiction’s general plans, master plans, ordinances, and codes to limit development in hazard areas or build to standards that will prevent or reduce damage. Objective 1.2 Adopt and support codes that protect existing assets in hazard areas. Mitigation Action 1.A The City of Grover Beach in cooperation with administrative and planning staff completed a review and update of the City’s General Plan, Land Use Element, and Zoning Ordinance. During the review and subsequent implementation, the City took into consideration building codes and possible hazardous areas regarding where to build or what standards would and might be used that would prevent or reduce damage due to potential disasters. The City also has worked with emergency preparedness and disaster planning with all staff and elected officials, completing a wide variety of NIMS training and disaster drills. Goal 2. Promote understanding and support for hazard mitigation by key stakeholders and the public within the city of Grover Beach.

Objective 2.1 Provide education to key stakeholders and the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigating hazards. Objective 2.2 Promote partnerships between the state, counties and local governments to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation actions. Objective 2.3 Promote hazard mitigation in the business, residential, academic, and agricultural communities. Objective 2.4 Monitor and publicize the outcome of effective mitigation actions employed to gain public acceptance. Mitigation Action 2.A The City has provided some training to service clubs as well as provided education through the City’s new web pages as well as education during the update of our General Plan and Land Use Element through public workshops. The City involved some public during several emergency disaster exercises. In addition, the City has worked with the local school district regarding education with the elementary students. There has been no funding for an extensive education program within the community and businesses; however, staff has utilized media and disasters around the country to make people aware of potential risks and the need for preparedness.

Goal 3. Build and support local capacity and commitment to minimize the City of Grover Beach’s vulnerability to potential hazards.

Objective 3.1 Improve existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations. Objective 3.2 Develop programs to enhance the safety of residents, students and staff within the community. Objective 3.3 Continue to support the applicable City departments in their ability to respond effectively to major emergencies. Mitigation Actions: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 The City has extensively worked with the County Emergency Operations staff regarding preparedness in warning the public about emergency situations. The police department has worked with other city staff regarding their response and preparedness to emergencies and the operations of the City’s EOC. Staff has been trained and



City of Grover Beach 2008 Mitigation Status (continued) updated in NIMS. Although funding has been short, the City has been planning for and has implemented plans for an increase in CERT programs utilizing DHS funds and in cooperation with County and Fire personnel. Due to staffing shortages, turnover in key staff members, and budget issues, the City has not developed a Continuity of Operations Plan or been able to maintain a Disaster Preparedness committee. The police department has taken on the general role for disaster preparedness. Goal 4. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to flooding. Objective 4.1 Implement policies, procedures and regulations which reduce the exposure to flood hazards. Objective 4.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to flood hazards. Objective 4.3 Reduce the vulnerability of community assets, particularly critical facilities, located in the 100-year floodplain. Objective 4.4 Support the San Luis Obispo Resource Conservation District (RCD) Goals: Long term goals are to provide technical assistance and cost-sharing funds for landowners to install Best Management Practices (BMP’s) on their land in order to reduce sedimentation problems in Arroyo Grande Creek and Pismo Lake. Short term goals include the following: 1) Reaching out to landowners via press releases, local media, and organizational newsletters. Coordinating and participating in watershed tours, and giving presentations to public groups including schools, agricultural organizations, citizens and stakeholder groups. 2) Holding workshops on: Rangelands Water Quality Planning, Farm Water Quality Planning, and Positive Point System. 3) Developing a minimum of 5 conservation plans with a minimum of 5 to 7 detailed, ready-to-build BMP designs. Mitigation Actions: 4.A, 4.B, 4.C, 4.C The City has implemented procedures and regulations which reduce exposure to flood hazards. The City has implemented several infrastructure projects which included several storm drain replacements and street designs that have reduced or eliminated flooding to neighborhoods and businesses. The City has updated the City Flood Plane Management Ordinance to meet current FEMA standards. Staff has continued to participate in the County Resource Conservation District (RCD) along with the local Zone 3 area group. The City actively participated in the development of the Integrated Water Regional Management (IWRM) Plan. Goal 5. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to earthquakes. Objective 5.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses due to earthquakes. Objective 5.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to the effects of earthquakes. Mitigation Actions: 5.1, 5.2

The City has evaluated all city and commercial facilities within the community for earthquake readiness. Strategies have been implemented and the community buildings retrofitting have been completed. The City continues to implement California Building Code regulations for earthquake design. The City Maintains a small cache of supplies for use by City employees and will continue to maintain and increase those supplies.



City of Grover Beach 2008 Mitigation Status (continued) Goal 6. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to the accidental spills and releases of Hazardous Materials. Objective 6.1 Support the existing comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses due to the accidental spills and releases of Hazardous Materials. Objective 6.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to the accidental spills and releases of Hazardous Materials Mitigation Actions 6.1, 6.2

The Police Department and the Five City’s Fire Department continue to work together to reduce any hazardous spills within the City. The emergency plans have been reviewed and staff has trained in prevention and release of hazardous materials. The Fire Department has been to specialized hazardous material training and continues to be part of and have staff on the County’s Hazardous Material Response Team. Staff has petroleum pipeline maps, keeps them readily available in the EOC, and has worked with the local petroleum company providing training and updated materials. Goal 7. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to tsunamis. Objective 7.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses resulting from Objective 7.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to a tsunami event tsunamis. Mitigation Actions: 7.1 and 7.2 The City has worked extensively with the County and State regarding Tsunami preparedness and plans for the City. We have developed a County wide Tsunami plan and have reviewed those plans in comparison to the City’s. We have obtained State guidance and maps regarding the inundation zones and have completed disaster exercises regarding these plans. Staff has completed, in conjunction with the County, education for the public and Staff is continuing to work with the County regarding signage along the coast and roadways for the public. We have included Tsunami information on the City’s web page. The City has not restricted construction, however, has worked with developers and the Coastal Commission regarding education and impacts of potential Tsunami issues. Goal 8. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to biological agent threats. Objective 8.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to minimizing the loss of human life, livestock and agricultural products due to biological agent threats. Mitigation Action: 8.1

The City has worked with the County Public Health department regarding any potential risk to life regarding biological or health related issues. The City has participated in several pandemic drills involving both city staff as well as the public and emergency responders. During these drills, media was involved and we were successful in educating the public. Police Department staff continues to participate and be part of the Public Health Emergency Preparedness Advisory Committee. The City supported the County and a Vector program for the County of San Luis Obispo has been adopted.



O. City of Grover Beach Property Schedule

Category Building Location Sq. Ft. Value

Government City Hall 154 S. 8th St. 6,512 $1,828,467 Fire Station 701 Rockaway 6,745 2,287,010 Police Station 711 Rockaway 4,928 1,151,282


Community Center 1230 Trouville 6,384 1,499,040 Ramona Community Center 933 Ramona Ave. 2,856 780,730

Potable Water and


Booster Station 551 N 16th 0 641,899 Water Treatment Control Bldg S. 16th St. and Mentone 224 205,614 Water Treatment Plant 16 S. 16th St. and Mentone 224 1,918,934 Water Storage Tank (1) HI 1541 Hillcrest 0 1,441,945 Water Tank (2) 1541 Hillcrest 0 1,014,475 Four City Wells 16th Street 2,000 349,4000

Other City owned

Facilities

Corporation Yard 1150 Farroll Ave. 5,408 1,562,984 Multi-Modal Transportation 180 W. Grand Ave. 1,000 823,835 Multi-Modal Transportation 933 Ramona Ave. 0 383,845 Bridges Various 2,600,000 Primary Roadways 4.2 miles 30,800,000

Total $49,289,460



P. City of Grover Beach Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure


Critical Structures and Infrastructure Potentially Impacting Hazards

Category Building Location E A R T H Q U A K E

F L O O D

F I R E

T S U N A M I

Government City Hall 154 S. 8th St. H L H L Fire Station 701 Rockaway H L H L Police Station 711 Rockaway H L H L

Community Facilities Community Center 1230 Troutville H L H L Ramona Community Center 933Ramona Ave. H L H L

Potable Water and Wastewater Facilities

Booster Station 551 N 16th H L L L Water Treatment Control Bldg S. 16th St. & Mentone H L L L Water Treatment Plant 16 S. 16th St. & Mentone H L L L Water Storage Tank (1) HI 1541 Hillcrest H L L L Water Tank (2) 1541 Hillcrest H L L L Four City Wells 16th Street H L L L

Other City owned Facilities

Corporation Yard 1150 Farroll Ave. H L H L Multi-Modal Transportation 180 W. Grand Ave H H H H Multi-Modal Transportation 933Ramona Ave. H L H L Bridges Various H H L H Primary Roadways 4.2 miles H H L H



Q. City of Grover Beach Property Loss Estimation to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure

Category Building Location 100% 50% 25%

Government

City Hall 154 S. 8th St. $1,828,467 $914,234 $457,117 Fire Station 701 Rockaway 2,287,010 1,143,505 571,753 Police Station 711 Rockaway 1,151,282 575,641 287,821


Community Center 1230 Troutville 1,499,040 749,520 374,760 Ramona Community Center 933 Ramona Ave. 780,730 390,365 195,183

Potable Water And Wastewater Facilities

Booster Station 551 N. 16th St 641,899 320,950 160,475 Water Treatment Control Bldg S. 16th St. & Mentone 205,614 102,807 51,404 Water Treatment Plan 16 S. 16th St. & Mentone 1,918,934 959,467 479,734 Water Storage Tank (1) HI 1541 Hillcrest 1,441,945 720,973 360,487 Water Storage Tank (2) 1541 Hillcrest 1,014,475 507,238 253,619 Four City Wells S. 16th St. 349,400 174,700 87,350

Other City owned Facilities

Corporation Yard 1150 Farroll Ave. 1,562,984 781,492 390,746 Multi-Modal Transportation 180 W. Grand Ave. 823,835 411,918 205,959 Multi-Modal Transportation 933 Ramona Ave. 383,845 191,923 95,962 Bridges Various 2,600,000 1,300,000 650,000 Primary Roadways 4.2 miles 30,800,000 15,400,000 7,700,000

Totals $49,289,460 $24,644,733 $12,322,370



South County Sanitation District A. District Description The history of the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District dates back to 1958 when the Grover City County Water Board commissioned engineering studies to investigate the rising nitrate levels observed in the local ground water resource. At the time, Grover City and nearby Oceano were entirely unsewered and dependent on the use of individual septic tanks. Much of nearby Arroyo Grande was sewered with a system which led to a wastewater treatment plant located at the “sewer farm”. This plant offered “primary” treatment by means of an Imhoff tank, disposing of the partially treated wastewater onto adjacent land. The results of those studies conducted by the Grover City County Water District confirmed the need to adequately address the septic tank and “sewer farm” impact on the local ground water. As a result, The County Board of Supervisors formed the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District on September 3, 1963. Application was made for federal grant funding and by 1966 construction was completed, allowing for nearly 9 miles of incoming trunk sewer lines, a new wastewater treatment plant, and an ocean outfall line for discharge of the treated wastewater.

Several modifications, improvements and expansions to the wastewater treatment plant have occurred since the original date of construction.

In 1978 an entirely new and longer outfall line was constructed to replace the initial outfall that underwent serious damage during successive major storm events.

In 1979 the plant was upgraded to include new sludge drying beds, a sludge thickener, a new maintenance building and the installation of standby power to provide for continued treatment in the event of a local power failure.

In 1986 a major plant enlargement was constructed which led to the addition of a new fixed film reactor and the conversion of the original aeration tank and final clarifier structure into a single, enlarged final clarifier unit. Additionally, a new power generation building was constructed. These projects resulted in increasing the plant capacity from the initial 2.5 mgd to 3.3 mgd.

In 1990 the plant was expanded once again to include the addition of a new secondary digester along with a new primary clarifier unit. This expansion increased the overall treatment flow capacity from 3.3 mgd to 5.0 mgd.

In 2005 the most recent wastewater treatment plant improvement occurred with the addition of a new chlorine contact chamber. This chamber was constructed to meet new effluent requirements stipulated in the District’s NPDES Permit R3-2004-0050, providing for adequate disinfection prior to release from the plant.

B. District Members The District provides wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to the three Member Agencies, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach, and Oceano Community Services District. The combined average annual raw wastewater flow to the District from these agencies is in the order of 2.9 million gallons per day.



a. City of Arroyo Grande http://www.arroyogrande.com The City of Arroyo Grande is a community encompassing 5.45 square miles of diverse landscapes ranging from gentle rolling suburbs to scenic canyon lands. The current population of Arroyo Grande is reported to be 17,252 which represent approximately 44% of the total District’s population. Arroyo Grande currently contributes approximately 1.26 million gallons per day of average annual raw wastewater flow to the District. Arroyo Grande's General Plan emphasizes the community’s desire to maintain a rural, small town character. The majority of Arroyo Grande is residential in use. Approximately 82% of the land area is occupied by housing. Southwest of Hwy 101 the land is relatively flat and suburban in character. Arroyo Grande has recently experienced a considerable increase in commercial/retail development along the Hwy 101 corridor. There are approximately 18 acres of city land devoted to light industrial and Business Park to be developed. The projected build out population is 20,000 residents.

b. City of Grover Beach http://www.grover.org Grover Beach is an incorporated ocean front city encompassing approximately 2.25 square miles of gently rolling hills, urban and suburban neighborhoods. The current population of Grover Beach is 13, 156 which represents approximately 36% of the total District population. Grover Beach currently contributes approximately 1.03 million gallons per day of average annual raw wastewater flow to the District. Grover Beach’s General Plan seeks to “…preserve and promote an economically diverse town influenced by the natural benefits of its location on the hills and valleys, reaching out to the coastal dunes, the beach, and the Pacific Ocean.” Most of the city appears commercial, suburban and recreational in character. There is little light industry and no heavy industry. Commercial/Retail uses are located primarily on the Grand Avenue corridor. The projected future build out population is 16,268 residents.

c. Oceano Community Services District http://www.oceanocsd.org Oceano is an unincorporated area of San Luis Obispo County governed by the Oceano Community Services District (OCSD). The OCSD boundary encompasses an area approximately 1.7 square miles and includes both the town of Oceano and community of Halcyon. The current population of Oceano is 7,903 which represent approximately 20% of the total District population. Oceano currently contributes approximately 0.59 million gallons per day of average annual raw wastewater flow to the District. The County’s San Luis Bay Area Plan governs land use and development in Oceano which is comprised of large open space areas in the form of beach land, the Oceano Airport, and several agricultural fields totaling about 126 acres. The community is approximately 42% residential. Commercial areas are located along the railroad/Highway 1 corridor and along Pier Avenue. These areas account for about 20% of the total land area. A limited amount of light industrial uses are also located along the railroad corridor. These uses occupy about 20 acres of land. The projected build out population of 9,601 is anticipated to be reached around 2020. C. Form of Government The District is governed by a three-member body, known as the District Board, who is appointed by the respective member agencies on a yearly basis. The District Board includes one representative from each of its Member Agencies, specifically, the City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District. The District Board makes bi-partisan decisions in the best interest of the District. The Board makes policy and operational decisions with advice from the District administrator/engineer and District staff. The District Board also establishes district policy, setting goals and objectives, approves the annual budget, approves expenditures and performs other related functions.

http://www.arroyogrande.org/

http://www.arroyogrande.org/

http://sslocsd.org/

http://www.grover.org/

http://www.nvo.com/oceanocsd



D. What is a Special District State law defines a special district as “any agency of the state for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions within limited boundaries.” In plain language, a special district is a separate local government that delivers a limited number of public services to a geographicallylimited area. Special districts have four distinguishing characteristics. Special districts:

• Are forms of government. • Have governing boards. • Provide services and facilities. • Have defined boundaries.

Special districts have most of the same basic powers as counties and cities. They can sign contracts, employ workers, and acquire real property through purchase or eminent domain. Following constitutional limits, they can also issue bonds, impose special taxes, levy benefit assessments, and charge service fees. Like other governments, special districts can sue and be sued. Special districts are local agencies which deliver specific services to specific communities. Operating under state laws, special districts are autonomous government entities that are accountable to the voters or landowners they serve. State officials, however, oversee special districts For example; special districts must send their annual financial reports to the State Controller’s Office. Districts must also follow the state laws for special taxes, bonded debt, public hearings, public records and elections. E. Geographic Service Area The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District encompasses a geographic area of 165 square miles. It is located within an area known as the Five Cities area in the southwestern portion of San Luis Obispo County and is located 15 miles south of the City of San Luis Obispo. The District provides its services for the residents of the City of Arroyo Grande, the City of Grover Beach and the Oceano Community Services District. In addition, there is a small County population of approximately 50 residences that are not incorporated within the communities listed above who also receive those services offered by the District. F. Wastewater Treatment Clean water is one of our most precious natural resources. Before wastewater can be safely released back into our waterways, it must first be adequately treated. That treatment consists of subjecting the wastewater to a series of physical, chemical, and biological processes. Typically those processes occur at an industrial-scale wastewater treatment plant.

The treatment of sewage is a multi-stage process to renovate the wastewater before it either; reenters a body of water, is applied to the land or is reused. The goal is to reduce or remove organic matter, metals, solids, nutrients, disease-causing organisms and other various forms of pollutants.

The typical processes involved in wastewater treatment are preliminary treatment, primary treatment, secondary treatment and final treatment. During each of the first three processes settled solids, or sludge, is removed from the liquid waste stream and further treated within a sludge digester.

a. Preliminary treatment is the first form of treatment that the wastewater undergoes upon arrival at a treatment plant. Sticks, rags, large food particles, sand, gravel, toys, etc. are



removed at this stage to protect the pumps and other various facilities used within the treatment plant.

b. Primary treatment is the second step in the treatment process and is intended to separate the suspended solids and greases from the wastewater. In this process, wastewater is passed into large circular tanks called primary clarifiers and held for several hours before being released for further treatment. The long detention times within these low velocity tanks allows for the heavier solids to settle to the bottom as sludge, while the lighter solids float to the surface as scum. Mechanically rotating arms collect the sludge and solids, allowing for distribution to the sludge digester for further treatment. The clarified wastewater remaining is now ready for the secondary treatment process.

c. Secondary treatment is a biological treatment process to remove dissolved organic matter from wastewater. Sewage microorganisms are cultivated and added to the wastewater. The microorganisms absorb organic matter from sewage as their food supply. Three separate approaches can be used to accomplish secondary treatment; fixed film, suspended film and lagoon systems.

d. Fixed film systems grow microorganisms on substrates such as rocks, sand or plastic. The wastewater is spread over the substrate, allowing the wastewater to flow past the film of microorganisms fixed to the substrate. As organic matter and nutrients are absorbed from the wastewater, the film of microorganisms grows and thickens. Trickling filters, rotating biological contactors, and sand filters are examples of fixed film systems.

e. Final treatment focuses on the removal of disease-causing organisms from the wastewater. Treated wastewater can be disinfected by adding chlorine or by using ultraviolet light. High levels of chlorine may be harmful to aquatic life in receiving streams. Treatment systems often add a chlorine-neutralizing chemical to the treated wastewater before stream discharge.

f. Sludge is generated throughout the sewage treatment process. Primary sludge, material that settles out during primary treatment, often has a strong odor and requires treatment prior to disposal. Secondary sludge is the extra microorganisms from the biological treatment processes. The goals of sludge treatment are to stabilize the sludge and reduce odors, remove some of the water thereby reducing volume, decompose some of the organic matter, thereby reducing volume, kill disease causing organisms and disinfect the sludge.

Untreated sludge is about 97 percent water. Settling the sludge and decanting off the separated liquid removes some of the water and reduces the sludge volume. Settling can result in sludge with about 92 to 96 percent water. More water can be removed from sludge by using sand drying beds, vacuum filters, filter presses, and centrifuges resulting in sludge with between 50 to 80 percent water. This dried sludge is called a sludge cake. Aerobic and anaerobic digestion is used to decompose organic matter to reduce volume. Digestion also stabilizes the sludge to reduce odors. Caustic chemicals can be added to sludge or it may be heat treated to kill disease-causing organisms. Following treatment, liquid and cake sludge are usually spread on fields, returning organic matter and nutrients to the soil.

Wastewater treatment processes require careful management to ensure the protection of the body of water that receives the discharge. Trained and certified treatment plant operator’s measure and monitor the incoming sewage, the treatment process and the final effluent to ensure regulatory compliance.

G. Collection System The District owns and operates nearly 9 miles of collection sewer referred to as the District Trunk Line. The purpose of this line is to allow for the collective transport of wastewater from the smaller municipal lines of



the three member agencies to the final destination of the District's Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Trunk Line was initially constructed as part of the original District design of 1963. It is comprised of sewer pipe ranging in size from 15-30 inches in diameter.

The pipe segments are primarily composed of either Vitrified Clay Pipe or Asbestos Cement Pipe. Due to the naturally sloping coastal topography and owing to careful consideration and planning during the design phase of the collection system, the District's collection system operates entirely as gravity fed sewer. As a result, the District is not dependent upon the use of pumps at any point in the collection system to convey the wastewater. The result is reduced annual operating expenses which in turn are passed directly on to the District's customers.

Annual average daily flow passing through the collection system is in the order of 2.9 million gallons per day with peak daily flows of approximately 3.16 million gallons per day. Routine video inspection of the entire system is performed every 4 years by means of Closed Circuit Television cameras (CCTV). The videos resulting from those inspections are reviewed by system engineers and accurate assessments are made of the system. System abnormalities and/or deficiencies noted within the collection system are ranked and prioritized, assisting in the development of short term and long term rehabilitation plans. In addition, the collection system is also cleaned on average every 4th year as part of the District's preventative maintenance plan.

H. Treatment Plant The wastewater collected within the District’s Trunk Sewer Line begins the treatment process in the influent pumping plant. There it is passed through a Parshall metering flume to measure the quantity of influent wastewater to the plant. Currently, average annual daily flow at the plant is on the order of 2.57 million gallons per day (mgd), with peak day dry weather flow of approximately 3.37 mgd and peak hour wet weather flows of 8.03 mgd.

Once measured, the wastewater passes through an in-channel screen to mechanically separate and remove the larger debris. Typically this debris consists of sticks, rags, large food particles, paper products, etc. The removed debris is collected, ground, and hauled offsite to a landfill for disposal. The screened wastewater is then distributed to the primary clarifiers by means of the four raw sewage pumping units located within the pumping station.

Prior to arrival at the clarifiers the wastewater enters the clarifier control box. Under normal operations, the control box is designed to separate the waste stream into equal parts for distribution into one of the two primary clarifiers. The control box has the added function of isolating flow to either of the independent clarifiers during periods of maintenance and repairs.

Clarification is achieved at the plant by means of two identical primary clarifiers; one constructed as part of the original 1965 project and the other as part of the 1990 expansion. Each primary clarifier is 55 feet in diameter with a side wall depth of 9 feet. These dimensions allow for a combined volume of 320,625 gallons. Under average annual daily flow, the combined overflow rate of the clarifiers is 610gpd/sf and the combined detention time between the clarifiers is 2.65 hours.

The clarifiers serve to separate a large portion of the suspended solids from the waste stream. This is achieved by maintaining quiescent flow throughout detention, allowing for the heavier solids (sludge) to sink to the bottom of the tank and the lighter solids (scum) to rise to the surface.



The sludge which accumulates on the bottom of the tank is raked continuously towards the center column by a steel raking mechanism. This raking mechanism forces the sludge out of the clarifier through a sludge pocket near the center of the tank. The scum is removed from the clarifier by means of a skimmer assembly attached to one of the arms of the raking mechanism. As the skimmer arm revolves around the tank, scum is guided into a trough attached to the inside of the launder wall. The scum trough removes the scum from the tank and combines it with the sludge removed by the rakes. The removed sludge and scum are pumped to the plant digesters for treatment. The clarified wastewater eventually discharges over the effluent weirs and flows to the fixed film reactor to receive secondary treatment.

Secondary treatment is achieved at the plant by means of a single, fixed film reactor (FFR), constructed as part of the 1986 improvement project. The FFR utilizes a bio-filtration process which removes the dissolved organic matter from the wastewater. The FFR is 117 feet in diameter with a plastic media depth of 12 feet. Wastewater is distributed over microorganisms which grow on the plastic media substrate. The microorganisms absorb the organic matter from the wastewater as their food supply, utilizing much of the suspended colloidal and dissolved organic substrate matter for bioassimilation. As organic matter and nutrients are absorbed from the wastewater, the film of microorganisms grows and thickens, periodically sloughing off the plastic media surface. Partially decomposed organic matter, excess sloughed film, and dead film is carried off with the FFR effluent for further clarification in the secondary clarifier unit.

The secondary clarifier unit, constructed as part of the 1986 improvement project, performs much the same operation as the primary clarifier. The unit is 97 feet in diameter and has a side wall depth of 12 feet. These dimensions allow for a total volume of 665,000 gallons. Under average daily flow, the overflow rate of the clarifier is approximately 393gpd/sf and the detention time is 5.5 hours.

The final step in the treatment process at South San Luis Obispo Sanitation County District’s Wastewater Treatment Plant is the disinfection of the treated effluent prior to release through the ocean outfall. This process occurs within the chlorine contact chamber and is achieved by the injection of sodium hypochlorite into the waste stream to kill the majority of all remaining bacteria. Once the wastewaters disinfected, it is discharged from the plant through the ocean outfall line.

I. Outfall Treated municipal wastewater is discharged to the Pacific Ocean through a 4,400 foot outfall/diffuser system as regulated by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - NPDES Permit No. CA 0048003. The outfall terminates in approximately 55 feet of water. The design of the outfall is intended to diffuse the treated municipal waste prior to discharge, creating a minimum initial dilution of 165 parts seawater to 1 part treated municipal waste at the point of release. This line also serves to convey treated wastewater from the City of Pismo Beach which shares this line by means of a connection at the District’s treatment plant site. Discharge of treated municipal waste from Pismo Beach is regulated under California Regional Water Quality Control Board - NPDES Permit No. CA0048151.

The outfall pipe/diffuser system is inspected tri-annually to ensure proper operation and structural integrity of the system. The inspection is conducted from the shoreline to its ocean terminus and includes general observations and photographic records of the outfall/diffuser as well as that of the ocean bottom in the vicinity of the system.

J. Biosolids Biosolids is a term used by the water treatment industry that refers to treated sludge. Sludge, or "Biosolids," is the byproduct of the treatment of domestic and commercial wastewater or sewage in a wastewater

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_treatment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sludge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wastewater

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewage



treatment plant. During waste water treatment, bacteria and other microorganisms break down components in wastewater into simpler and more stable forms of organic matter. Non-organic matter also settles into sludge. Biosolids in their liquid form look like muddy water and contain 1-10% solids. Biosolids may be dewatered in a second step of the treatment process, which turns it into a "cake" with the texture of a wet sponge. In this stage it contains 11-40% solids.

According to US EPA, Biosolids that meet treatment and pollutant content criteria "can be safely recycled and applied as fertilizer to sustainably improve and maintain productive soils and stimulate plant growth." The US EPA’s promulgated regulation is 40 CFR Part 503.

K. Plant Process At the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District the solids are collected at the Primary Clarifier and are either pumped to the Gravity Sludge Thickener, or directly to the Primary Digester. In the Primary Digester, the solids are heated to approximately 96 degrees and mixed using the pumped vortex method. Detention time in the Primary Digester is approximately 26 days.

The solids are then transferred to the Secondary Digester which is unheated and unmixed. This allows the sludge to cool and stratify. The supernatant is recycled through the plant for further treatment and the digested solids are drawn off for further processing.

Sludge drying takes place in one of two ways depending on the weather. During the winter months the District uses the centrifuge for the purpose of dewatering the sludge. The material is then stored in the sludge lagoon. Once the weather warms up, operations Staff begins the use of the drying beds with supplemental processing by the centrifuge. Polymer addition is required for proper operation of the centrifuge, however Staff has made several modifications to the feed system allowing for a

dryer cake then usually obtained from similar machines (approx. 25%). The solids generated by the centrifuge and drying beds are then stockpiled onsite until transportation to a composting facility is scheduled.

Over the years, the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District has maintained an excellent record with the local Regional Board with respect to Biosolids. In light of recent and pending regulations, for the last few years the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District has processed all Biosolids through commercial composting facilities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacterium

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPA



L. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Specific Hazard Locations, Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Maps § 201.6(c) (2)(i), § 201.6(c) (2)(ii)

a. Earthquake: Severity HIGH (Moment Magnitude Scale 3.5 to 5.4 or higher), Probability MEDIUM

There are a number of active or potentially active fault systems throughout the county and given the past history of earthquakes in the area, experts agree that the probability of a damaging earthquake occurring is high. The Sanitation District is located within the impact Zone of the active Willmar fault and the inactive Pismo fault. California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services has rated the severity of an earthquake as High. In the event of a localized earthquake with a Richter Scale effect of 6.5 or above will cause moderate to major damage to the Treatment Facility. Major damage may cause the Treatment Facility to temporarily cease operations creating a health and safety emergency. As an illustration, when the San Simeon Earthquake (epicenter located approximately 50 miles north of the Plant) occurred it caused moderate damage with no interruption in service to the Sanitation Plant





b. Flood: Severity MEDIUM, Probability: HIGH South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District: The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District is located is a Special Flood Hazard Area (AE) subject to inundation by the 1% Annual chance of flooding. Inundation dept may exceed 10 feet. Deflood time is projected to exceed 12 hours. The 1% annual chance of flooding (100 year Flood), also known as Base Flood, is the flood that has a chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Flood Probability

Flood Recurrence Intervals Percent Chance of Occurrence Annually 10 years 10.0% 50 years 2.0% 100 years 1.0% 500 years 0.2%

Resources: California Office of Emergency Services, My Hazard FEMA Flood Map Service Center Flood Insurance Rate Map County of San Luis Obispo County Public Works Inundation Map In December of 2010 the area experience localized flooding due to heavy rains. The rains caused mechanical failure at the Sanitation District which flooded nearby residences with 384,000 gallons of raw sewage. As a result of the flooding the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board has fined the District $1.1 million. While an occurrence of this magnitude is rare the Sanitation District will continue to be vulnerable to like events due to its low lying location.





c. Tsunami: SEVERITY Medium, Probability LOW

The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District is located in a Tsunami Inundation Area. The maximum on shore run-up may be up to 38’ with the highest incoming wave elevation of 37’. Large tsunamis have not been common on the Central Coast of California. Thus, few incidences have been recorded and the historical record is not extensive enough to develop accurate reoccurrence predictions. The potential tsunami hazard for the San Luis Obispo County coastal areas is greatest for those communities or portions of communities located below the estimated elevations for the 100-to 500-year events, that is, below elevation 50 feet above mean sea level. In general, much of the Coast of San Luis Obispo County is protected from tsunami hazards by wide beaches, coastal dunes, or sea cliffs that provide protection for coastal developments. Coastal developments most vulnerable to the tsunami hazards are those located near mouths of streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean. The potential for damage to coastal structures would likely increase if the tsunami event were to coincide with a high tide, storm related waves, or large winter storm runoff. Due to the proximity of the Sanitation District plant to the Pacific Ocean the district is very vulnerable to the effects of a Tsunami. An inundation and the subsequent damage as a result of a Tsunami the Plant could be damaged beyond repair. The Plan would be unable to treat any solid waste and therefore create a health hazard to the community. Resources:

California Office of Emergency Services, My Hazard California Geological Survey University of Southern California, Tsunami Research Center [email protected] CDF San Luis Unit, Oceano Tsunami Inundation Map

http://[email protected]/





d. Fire: SEVERITY Medium, PROBABILITY Low Wildfire The Sanitation District is located in a Moderate Wildland fire zone. The District is at a minor risk from wildfires. The plan area is located on the western coastal fringe of the Santa Lucia Mountain Range and is in a fairly favorable position with respect to Wildland fire threat. The mild coastal summers characterized by cool temperatures and foggy days and nights help to maintain the fuel moisture levels to a point that limits the potential for rapid fire spread. In addition, the majority of the topography is level and well developed in both residential and agricultural land uses. However, in 1985 the Los Pilitas Fire burned in the mountains to the north of the City Arroyo Grande with amazing speed. While this threat was short lived, given the right series of circumstances, the correct combination of weather, topography and fuel, the potential does exist for a Wildland fire to burn into or start within some areas under study. Impacts and Vulnerabilities The District plant has a very minimum risk from wildfire as a result of their location adjacent to the Ocean, agriculture land, and marshland. However the risk of a plant fire is minimal due to the fire prevention measures in effect at the plant and the surrounding agriculture land and marshland which create a natural defensible space buffer zone.





M. Mitigation Strategies §201.6(c)(3)(iv) The Mitigation Strategies for the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District were developed after an analysis of the potential frequency of occurrence of the hazard and the potential fiscal impact. After careful analysis the listed hazards were selected with the highest probability of occurrence with the maximum fiscal impact. Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries, and the potential for loss of life, and are reducing emergency response costs, which would otherwise be incurred. The implementation and administration of the Mitigation Strategies are the responsibility of the Management of the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District



South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Mitigation Action (a) Goal 1. Minimize Earthquake damage and losses due to earthquakes.

Objective: 1. Research and confirm Earthquake faults impacting the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District.

2. Use United States Geologic Survey and Cal OES resources for determining Earthquake Faults at the South County Sanitation District facility.

3. Conduct a Seismic Retrofit Cost/Benefit Analysis of vulnerable structures at the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District facility. Mitigation Project : Earthquake fault impact identification and Seismic Retrofit projects Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Seismic Retrofit of identified structures. • Identify, replace, repair clay pipe feeder system.

Special Environmental Concerns:

• Endangered habitats • Impacts to surrounding areas

Implementation Responsibility : South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Time Line: 5 years

PDM Grant, District General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff time Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Complete Risk Analysis and apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant funding 2014: Commence Mitigation projects 2015: Conclude Mitigation Projects 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions



South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Mitigation Action (b) Goal 2. Minimize Flooding damage and losses due to flooding. Objective 2: 1. Research and identify flooding vulnerabilities within the South San Luis Obispo

County Sanitation District facility. 2. Request and encourage San Luis Obispo County Public Works to implement

adequate flood protection measures in the county areas adjacent to the Sanitation District Plant.

Mitigation Projects: a. Initiate Floodsmart projects within the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Facility.

b. Drainage channeling and maintenance projects for the Oceano Lagoon and Creek Levees.

Proposed Mitigation Actions: Objective 1:

• Upgrade facility flood protection measures. • Install flood gates for each building where appropriate • Install and upgrade Storm Drainage Systems

Objective 2: • Provide technical information as to cause and effect of upstream watershed projects on

downstream watershed hydrology that may adversely affect the District Plant. • Take action to mitigate area flooding from Carpenter Creek to include it’s outlet to the Ocean. • Correct deficiencies in directing storm flows through the Oceano Lagoon Area to viable discharge

points. • Implement a regularly scheduled vegetation removal program in the Arroyo Grande Creek,

Meadow Creek and Lagoon areas. Special Environmental Concerns:

• Endangered habitats • Extreme, adverse impacts to surrounding areas

Implementation Responsibility: Objective 1. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Objective 2. San Luis Obispo County in consultation with SSLOCSD Time Line: 5 years

Objective 1. PDM Grant, District General Funds, Capital Improvement funds, Staff Time. Objective 2. To be determined by San Luis Obispo County in consultation with SSLOCSD

Resources Required: Objective 2(a) To be determined. Objective 2(b) To be determined by San Luis Obispo County in consultation

with SSLOCSD.

Priority: H-M-L



South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Mitigation Action (continued) (b) Goal 2. Minimize Flooding damage and losses due to flooding.

2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: Objective 2(a) 2013 Complete Risk Analysis and apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant funding 2014 Commence Mitigation projects 2015 Conclude Mitigation projects

2016 Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions 2017 Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions

Objective 2(b) Request San Luis Obispo County to: 2013 Complete Risk Analysis and apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant funding 2014 Commence Mitigation projects 2015 Conclude Mitigation projects

2016 Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Action 2017 Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions



South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Mitigation Action (c) Goal 3. Minimize the level of losses and damage due to Fires.

Objective: Create a fire safe facility environment

Mitigation Project: Develop a comprehensive action plan to reduce damage from fires. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Install built-in fire protection systems in administrative building. • Install appropriate built-in fire protection system in Motor Control Center. • Develop and create a fuels mitigation storage system.

Special Environmental Concerns: Monitor impacts to surrounding areas Implementation Responsibility : South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Time Line: 5 years




South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Mitigation Action (d) Goal 4. Minimize Tsunami impacts to South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District facility.

Objective: Prepare South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District facility for a Tsunami.

Mitigation Project: Develop a comprehensive action plan to reduce damage from a Tsunami. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Determine the feasibility of constructing a Levee system. • Construct a Levee Tsunami protection system. • Consider relocating the facility out of the Tsunami inundation zone.

Special Environmental Concerns:

• Monitor impacts to surrounding areas • Endangered habitats

Implementation Responsibility : South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Time Line: 5 years




N. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Property Schedule

Category Building Location

Sq. Ft. Value

Administration Main office 1600 Aloha 2,700 $450,000

Sewage Treatment Facilities

Headworks/pumping station 1600 Aloha 1,500 1,000,000 Splitter box 1600 Aloha 150 500,000 Primary #1 and pumps 1600 Aloha 3,000 1,000,000 Primary #2 and pumps 1600 Aloha 3,000 1,000,000 Fixed film reactor and pumps 1600 Aloha 12,000 2,000,000 Final clarifier and pumps 1600 Aloha 8,000 2,000,000 Chlorine contact tank and pumps 1600 Aloha 10,000 2,000,000 Chemical tank farm and pumps 1600 Aloha 800 100,000 Digester #1 1600 Aloha 4,500 1,750,000 Digester #2 1600 Aloha 4,500 1,750,000 Heating and mixing room 1600 Aloha 1,200 750,000 Centrifuge and bldg 1600 Aloha 1,620 2,100,000 Motor control center 1600 Aloha 900 750,000 Co-gen and equipment 1600 Aloha 750 2,000,000 Emergency generator, bldg, and accessories 1600 Aloha 625 400,000 Shop 1600 Aloha 2,100 250,000 Storage facility 1600 Aloha 2,200 350,000 Sludge drying beds 1600 Aloha 32,000 250,000 Storm drain system 1600 Aloha 1,500 LF 250,000

Total $20,650,000

Mobile Equipment

Diesel powered pumps 1600 Aloha $300,000 2 pick ups 1600 Aloha 18,000 1 SUV 1600 Aloha 15,000 1 forklift 1600 Aloha 15,000 1 case front end loader 1600 Aloha 71,000

Total $ 419,000

Sewage collection facilities

Sewer trunk line Various 9 linear miles

$3,346,224

Total $3,346,224

Sewage disposal facilities

Outfall 4,400 feet off shore Total $1,768,105

South County Sanitation District Total Assets*

Total Assets $26,183,329 *Independent Auditors Report, Crosby Co. San Luis Obispo CA.



O. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Critical Infrastructure

Potentially Impacting Hazards

E AR THQUAKE

F L O O D

F I R

T S U N A M I

Category

Administration

Building Main Office

Location 1600 Aloha

E


Headworks/pumping station 1600 Aloha H H M H Splitter Box 1600 Aloha H H M H Primary # 1 and pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H Primary # 2 and pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H Fixed film reactor and pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H Final clarifier and pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H Chlorine contact tank and pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H Chemical tank farm and pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H Digester # 1 1600 Aloha H H M H Digester # 2 1600 Aloha H H M H Heating and mixing room 1600 Aloha H H M H Centrifuge and building 1600 Aloha H H M H Motor control center 1600 Aloha H H M H Co-Gen and equipment 1600 Aloha H H M H Emergency generator, bldg. and accessories

1600 Aloha H H M H

Shop 1600 Aloha H H M H Storage facility 1600 Aloha H H M H Sludge drying beds 1600 Aloha H H M H Storm drain system 1600 Aloha H H M H

Mobile Equipment

Diesel powered pumps 1600 Aloha H H M H 2 pick-up trucks 1600 Aloha H H M H 1 SUV 1600 Aloha H H M H 1 Forklift 1600 Aloha H H M H 1 Case front end loader 1600 Aloha H H M H

Sewage Collection Facilities

Sewer Trunk lines 1600 Aloha H H M H

Sewage Disposal Facilities

Outfall 1600 Aloha






P. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Loss Estimation to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure

Administration Main Office 1600 Aloha $450,000 $225,000 $112,500


Headworks/pumping station 1600 Aloha 1,000,000 500,000 250,000 Splitter Box 1600 Aloha 500,000 250,000 125,000 Primary # 1 and pumps 1600 Aloha 1,000,000 500,000 250,000 Primary # 2 and pumps 1600 Aloha 1,000,000 500,000 250,000 Fixed film reactor and pumps

1600 Aloha 2,000,000 1,000,000 500,000

Final clarifier and pumps 1600 Aloha 2,000,000 1,000,000 500,000 Chlorine contact tank and pumps

1600 Aloha 2,000,000 1,000,000 500,000

Chemical tank farm and pumps

1600 Aloha 100,000 50,000 25,000

Digester # 1 1600 Aloha 1,750,000 875,000 437,500 Digester # 2 1600 Aloha 1,750,000 875,000 437,500 Heating and mixing room 1600 Aloha 750,000 375,000 187,500 Centrifuge and building 1600 Aloha 2,100,000 1,050,000 525,000 Motor control center 1600 Aloha 750,000 375,000 187,500 Co-Gen and equipment 1600 Aloha 2,000,000 1,000,000 500,000 Emergency generator, bldg. and accessories

1600 Aloha 400,000 200,000 100,000

Shop 1600 Aloha 250,000 125,000 62,500 Storage facility 1600 Aloha 350,000 175,000 87,500 Sludge drying beds 1600 Aloha 250,000 125,000 62,500 Storm drain system 1600 Aloha 250,000 125,000 62,500

Mobile Equipment

Diesel powered pumps 1600 Aloha 300,000 150,000 75,000 2 pick-up trucks 1600 Aloha 18,000 9,000 4,500 1 SUV 1600 Aloha 15,000 7,500 3,750 1 Forklift 1600 Aloha 15,000 7,500 3,750 1 Case front end loader 1600 Aloha 71,000 35,500 17,750

Sewage Collection Facilities

Sewer truck line Various 1,673,112 836,556 418,278

Sewage Disposal Facilities

Outfall 4,400 feet off shore

1,768,105 884,053 442,027

Total $24,510,217 $12,255,109 $6,127,555




LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT A. Description of School District The Lucia Mar Unified School District is San Luis Obispo County’s largest school district. The district is located along the Central Coast of California, between Santa Maria and San Luis Obispo. More than 10,588 students attend Lucia Mar’s eleven elementary schools, three middle schools, two comprehensive high schools, one continuation high school and adult education program. The Lucia Mar Unified School District covers 550 square miles, and serves the adjoining communities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, Shell Beach, Nipomo and Oceano. The Lucia Mar Unified School District contains the following schools:

SCHOOL NAME GRADES STUDENTS P/T RATIO ZIP CODE

Arroyo Grande High School 09-12 2225 22.2 93420

Branch Elementary KG-06 301 30.1 93420

Harloe Elementary KG-06 628 27.3 93420

Lopez Continuation High 09-12 143 13 93420

Mesa Middle 07-08 527 18.8 93420

Ocean View Elementary KG-06 560 26.7 93420

Paulding (Ruth) Middle 07-08 656 24.3 93420

Grover Heights Elementary KG-06 434 25.5 93433

Grover Beach Elementary KG-06 508 26.7 93433

Fairgrove Elementary KG-06 461 27.1 93433

Dana Elementary KG-06 607 25.2 93444

Nipomo Elementary KG-06 434 24.1 93444

Nipomo High School 9-12 1117 20.3 93444

Dorothea Lange Elementary KG-06 581 27.7 93444

Oceano Elementary KG-06 460 24.2 93445

Judkins (Frances) Middle 07-08 535 21.4 93449

Shell Beach Elementary KG-06 411 27.4 93449

http://www.bestplaces.net/school/SchoolStats.aspx?schoolid=062308003516&leaid=0623080














B. Classification Information: Type: Lucia Mar Unified is a local school district that is not a component of a supervisory union. Charter: All schools associated with Lucia Mar Unified are “non-charter schools”. Combined Statistical Area: Lucia Mar Unified is not associated with “a recognized combined statistical area”. Statistical Area: Lucia Mar Unified is associated with “a recognized population nucleus and adjacent communities that have a high degree of integration with that nucleus, and designated by the U.S. Government as a metropolitan or micropolitan statistical area. County: San Luis Obispo Metro Status: Lucia Mar Unified’s statistical area is a metropolitan area. Service Area: Lucia Mar Unified serves a Core Based Statistical Area but not primarily its principal city. Locale: Lucia Mar Unified is located in the “Urban Fringe of a Mid-size City”. Enrollment:

Enrollment by Grade Lucia Mar Unified School

District 2011-2012

Enrollment

Kindergarten 784

Grade 1 751

Grade 2 763

Grade 3 775

Grade 4 734

Grade 5 776

Grade 6 802

Grade 7 870

Grade 8 848

Grade 9 868

Grade 10 860

Grade 11 874

Grade 12 883

Total 10,588



C. Future Development The Lucia Mar Unified School District currently has construction in progress at Arroyo Grande High School for three Career Technical Education Academies. These Academies include AG Science New Construction Building, Idea Facility Modernization and AutoTech Modernization with a total construction cost of $10.6 million. Anticipated completion of these CTE Academies is scheduled for August of 2012. The Central Coast New Tech High School, which is housed on the Nipomo High School campus, is scheduled to open in August 2012. The addition of the Central Coast New Tech High School will involve the renovation of one building currently located on the campus and the addition of one modular building increasing the square footage by 6,000 Sq.ft. D. Lucia Mar Unified School District Specific Hazard Profiles Locations, Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Maps § 201.6(c) (2)(i), § 201.6(c) (2)(ii) a. Earthquake: Severity HIGH (Moment Magnitude Scale 3.5 to 5.4 or higher), Probability MEDIUM

There are a number of active or potentially active fault systems throughout the county and given the past history of earthquakes in the area, experts agree that the probability of a damaging earthquake occurring is high. All LMUSD properties are located in a High Ground Shaking Zone, bur are outside the Landslide, Liquefaction and Earthquake Fault Zone. During the 2003 6.5 San Simeon Earthquake there was minor damage to properties in the School District.

















All Schools within the LMUSD are vulnerable to Earthquakes. All structures are single story with new schools constructed in conformance to the latest standards for earthquake construction. Many of the other schools have been hardened to minimize the impact to life and property from an earthquake. The San Simeon Earthquake of 2003 caused minimal damage to the LMUSD school district. However, in that the San Simeon Earthquake epicenter was located approximately 50 miles from the district is the primary reason for the moderate damage. An epicenter located closed to the district could cause the collapse in some of the older school buildings. If an earthquake occurred during school hours casualties would be quite high as compared to an earthquake occurring on weekends of after school is dismissed. The LMUSD is actively preparing staff and students for the eventuality of an earthquake.



b. Flood: Severity MEDIUM, Probability: HIGH Lucia Mar Unified School District: The probability of localized flooding is highly likely. Flooding would not impact the schools as they have been placed so as not to be impacted by flooding. Past flooding in the areas have not inundated the properties. However, low lying areas, parking lots, athletic fields, and agricultural areas have been impacted to a minor extent. The water has receded from low lying areas, parking lots, athletic fields, etc., within 4 hours of the localized flooding event. There are no other schools located within the flood inundation zone. Flood Probability Terms

Flood Recurrence Intervals



Vulnerabilities The following facilities and schools could be impacted by localized flooding: Schools Nipomo High School Central Coast New Tech High School (located on the campus of Nipomo High School0 Dorothea Lange Elementary School Facility Transportation Maintenance Facility Impacts The Nipomo High School and the New Tech High School The structures have not been impacted by flooding. The parking lots, agricultural areas, and the athletic fields have been impacted by inundation of less than 4 inches. The water receded within 4 hours of the flood event. As a precaution school was dismissed the day of the event and resumed normal schedule the next day.



Dorothea Lange Elementary School The school will not be impacted by localized flooding as the structure is located on property well above the vulnerable area of campus. The only impacts have been to the parking lot and athletic field. The parking lot and athletic field receded within 3 hours of the event. School was dismissed the day of the event and resumed normal school schedule the following day. Transportation Maintenance Facility The lower bus parking lot has been impacted, less than 4 inches, in localized flooding events. The remaining parking lots were not impacted as the parking area is on an incline. The lower area drained well as a result of storm drains and culverts positioned to drain flood waters.



c. Tsunami: SEVERITY Medium, Probability LOW Large tsunamis have not been common on the Central Coast of California. Thus, few incidences have been recorded and the historical record is not extensive enough to develop accurate reoccurrence predictions. The potential tsunami hazard for the San Luis Obispo County coastal areas is greatest for those communities or portions of communities located below the estimated elevations for the 100-to 500-year events, that is, below elevation 50 feet above mean sea level. In general, much of the Coast of San Luis Obispo County is protected from tsunami hazards by wide beaches, coastal dunes, or sea cliffs that provide protection for coastal developments. Coastal developments most vulnerable to the tsunami hazards are those located near mouths of streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean. The potential for damage to coastal structures would likely increase if the tsunami event were to coincide with a high tide, storm related waves, or large winter storm runoff. Impacts and Vulnerabilities Vulnerabilities The only property in the Lucia Mar Unified School District is the Oceano Elementary School; 1551 17th Street, Oceano is located near a Tsunami Zone. Impacts Due to the 2011 Fukushima Tsunami, as a precaution the Oceano Elementary School was evacuated. There was not run-up as a result of the Tsunami. It should be noted the School District student Evacuation Plan was orderly and without any issues or problems. If a Tsunami impacted Oceano Elementary the result may be a closing of the school which can disrupt normal school operations. Should a Tsunami impact Oceano Elementary inundation would be less than 6”. School disruption would be less than 5 days for clean-up and any repair. As such the fiscal impact to Paulding would be minor and require special funding. The School District has a plan in place to have students attend other Elementary Schools in the District to continue their education All other School District Properties are located outside the Tsunami Inundation Zone.





d. Fire: SEVERITY Medium, PROBABILITY Low Impacts and Vulnerabilities The following properties, Nipomo High School, New Tech High School, Mesa Middle School, and Dorothea Lange Elementary School lie within the High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as defined by, a CDF/San Luis Obispo County Unit and California OES My Hazard maps. It should be noted these properties are located in the rural Nipomo Area of the School District and as such are automatically classified by CDF as High Fire Hazard Severity Zone These properties have not suffered any property loss due to wildfires. The School District is very proactive in its Wild Fire Prevention, 100 foot defensible space, the lambing of trees near the properties in the Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and when necessary using Fire Safe construction on these structures. All other School District Properties are within a low fire hazard area, Non-Wildland/Non-Urban or Urban Zone. Vulnerabilities The following schools may be impacted by Wildfires: Schools: Nipomo High School New Tech High School (located on the campus of Nipomo High School) Dorothea Lange Elementary School Mesa Middle School Impacts Nipomo High School and New Tech High School Both schools are of new fire safe construction and are located are surrounded by agricultural fields. There are no trees, brush or the like located on the campus. The probability of these schools being impacted by a Wildfire is very low. However, should a Wildfire occur in the area the School District has an evacuation plan in place to transport students of a safe refuge in the School District Dorothea Lange Elementary School The school is located in a residential area of Nipomo. It is surrounded by open space on the north and west, without any highly combustible wildfire materials. The east is a parking lot with the south a two lane paved road. The probability of Dorothea Lange School being impacted by a wild fire is low. However, should a Wildfire occur in the area the School District has an evacuation plan in place to transport students of a safe refuge in the School District. Mesa Middle School As with Dorothea Lange, Mesa Middle School is located in an urbanized residential area of Nipomo. The school has athletic fields on the south and west of the structure, parking lots on the north and a two lane pave road with a parking lot on the east exposure. The probability of a Wildfire impacting Mesa Middle



School is low. However, should a Wildfire occur in the area the School District has an evacuation plan in place to transport students of a safe refuge in the School District. Total impacts In the event of a Wildfire impacting any of these facilities may result in a closing of the facilities which will disrupt normal day to day school operations. The disruption could be could be relatively minor, less than 10 school days, in the event of an impact from a Wildfire. If the facilities did not use Fire Safe Construction and maintain the 100’ recommended WUI clearance around the facilities the impact would be much more severe. As such the fiscal impacts minor and may require special funding. The School District has a plan in place to have students attend other Elementary Schools in the District to continue their education.



e. Dam Failure: Severity Medium, Probability Low Although the probability of this type of hazard occurring is highly unlikely, it warrants consideration because a considerable portion of the study area is located in the inundation area of Lopez Dam. In the unlikely event of complete failure of Lopez Dam, water would flow in a westerly direction following Arroyo Grande Creek, approximately 3,000 feet in each direction of the centerline of the creek channel. Water flows would pass through the rural areas directly below the dam. It should be noted in the event of a complete failure or Lopez Dam the warning time would be an hour or more. This will allow the orderly evacuation of the Paulding Junior High School, Arroyo Grande High School and Transportation Maintenance Facility. Impacts and Vulnerabilities Vulnerabilities The following facilities and schools would be impacted by a complete failure of Lopez Dam: Schools: Paulding Junior High School Arroyo Grande High School Facilities: Transportation Maintenance Facility Impacts: Paulding Junior High School Paulding Junior High School is located approximately 250 feet above the centerline of the creek channel and 2000 feet north of the centerline of the creek channel. It is unlikely the waters would reach the campus Should the waters reach campus inundation would be less than 6”. School disruption would be less than 5 days for clean-up and any repair. As such the fiscal impact to Paulding would be minor and require special funding. The School District has a plan in place to have students attend other Junior High Schools in the District to continue their education. Arroyo Grande High School The Arroyo Grande High School is over 3,000 feet from the centerline of the creek channel. However, it should be noted that in a rare situation the lower portions of the campus may be inundated. Inundation to lower campus (parking lot) would be 3 inches or less. Drainage to the waters from the inundation area would be approximately 4 hours. The school would be impacted for less than a day of studies. The District would dismiss school for the day of the event and have



students and staffs remove their automobiles from campus. Fiscal impact would be very minor, just the possible clean-up of the parking lot. Funding for this would be from the maintenance budget. No special funds would be required. Transportation Maintenance Facility The Maintenance Facility is well within the inundation zone. As such in the event of a total failure of Lopez Dam there is the possibility of complete destruction of the facility. Due to the pre- warning time of total Lopez Dam Failure District officials have plans in place to remove the busses and maintenance equipment to higher ground. There would be no disruption of transportation service for the District. In the event of total destruction of the Maintenance Facility recovery funding would be necessary to relocate the facility. E. Mitigation Strategies §201.6(c)(3)(iv) The Mitigation Strategies for Lucia Mar Unified School District were developed after an analysis of the potential frequency of occurrence of the hazard and the potential fiscal impact. After careful analysis the listed hazards were selected with the highest probability of occurrence with the maximum fiscal impact. Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries, and the potential for loss of life, and are reducing emergency response costs, which would otherwise be incurred. Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries, and the potential for loss of life, and are reducing emergency response costs, which would otherwise be incurred. The implementation and administration of the Mitigation Strategies are the responsibility of the Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation department of the Lucia Mar Unified School District.



Lucia Mar Unified School District Mitigation Action (a) Goal 1. Minimize Earthquake damage and losses to School District facilities due to Earthquake. Objective: 1. Research and confirm Earthquake faults impacting the Lucia Mar Unified

School District. 2. Utilize USGS and CalOES resources to determine Earthquake faults

impacting the Lucia Mar Unified School District facilities. 3. Conduct a Seismic Retrofit Cost/Benefit Analysis of vulnerable structures within the Lucia Mar Unified School District.

Mitigation Project: Earthquake fault impact identification. Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Seismic retrofit of appropriate facilities. Environmental Concerns:


Lead Organization: Lucia Mar Unified School District, Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Time Line: 5 years Funding Source: State of California, School District General Funds, PDM Grant Funding Resources Required: To be determined Priority: H-M-L 2013 – 2017 Mitigation Action Schedule: 2013: Complete Risk Analysis and apply for Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Funding. 2014: Commence Mitigation Projects 2015: Conclude Mitigation Projects 2016: Monitor and record effectiveness of Mitigation Actions 2017: Evaluate effectiveness of Mitigation Actions



Lucia Mar Unified School District Mitigation Action (b) Goal 2. Minimize damage and due to flooding. Objective: Research and confirm the flooding vulnerability of Arroyo Grande High School and Harloe Elementary School.

Project: Determine if Floodsmart projects for Arroyo Grande High School and Harloe Elementary School are appropriate.

Proposed Mitigation Actions:

• Create Flood Protection measures for identified facilities. Environmental Concerns:





Lucia Mar Unified School District Mitigation Action (c) Goal 3. Minimize damage and due to fires. Objective: Create a fire safe environment for all Lucia Mar Unified School District facilities. Mitigation Project: Develop a comprehensive action plan to reduce damage from fires

especially wildfires.

Proposed Mitigation Actions: Maintain and update, where appropriate, water storage systems for the facilities that may be impacted by wildfires. Environmental Concerns:





Lucia Mar Unified School District Mitigation Action (d) Goal 4. Minimize potential Tsunami impacts to Lucia Mar Unified School District facilities. Objective: Determine Lucia Mar Unified School District facilities that may be located in the Tsunami inundation zone. Mitigation Project: Develop a comprehensive action plan to reduce damage from Tsunami’s if appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Actions: If facilities are located in the Tsunami inundation zone, determine the feasibility of constructing a levee system around the impacted facilities.

Environmental Concerns:





E. LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 2008 MITIGATION STATUS Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant future development Objective 1.1 Continue to adopt, update, develop, and support the jurisdiction’s general plans, master plans, and policies to limit development in hazard areas or build to standards that will prevent or reduce damage. Objective 1.2 Adopt and support policies that protect existing assets in hazard areas. Mitigation Action 1.A Lucia Mar USD considers a safe learning environment one of our top priorities. Disaster preparedness is one of aspects of keeping of students and staff safe in a variety of situations. The district trains staff and practices with staff and students through the school year. Drill policy: Elementary: Fire (1/month), Duck & Cover (1/quarter), Lockdown (1/quarter) Middle: Fire (4/year), Duck & Cover (1/semester), Lockdown (1/quarter) High School: Fire (4/year), Duck & Cover (1/semester), Lockdown (1/quarter) Goal 2. Promote understanding and support for hazard mitigation by key stakeholders and the public within Lucia Mar Unified School District Objective 2.1 Provide education to key stakeholders and the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigating hazards. Objective 2.2 Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local governments to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation actions. Objective 2.3 Monitor and publicize the outcome of effective mitigation actions employed to gain public acceptance. Mitigation Action 2.A Lucia Mar USD communicates extensively regarding our emergency procedures, drills, and other related issues. 1. Our web site has a section devoted to emergency preparedness

http://www.lmusd.org/education/dept/dept.php?sectionid=4237& 2. Our superintendent and the principals communicate with staff and parent through district newsletters, emails, and school news letters sent home with the students

In January of 2013, the district further hosted a public meeting regarding emergency response and preparedness. The meeting was attending by all the police chiefs in our area and the sheriff’s office. A variety of emergency situations such as “shooter on campus” and “Diablo emergency response” was discussed. Goal 3. Build and support local capacity and commitment to minimize the School District’s vulnerability to potential hazards. Objective 3.1 Improve existing capabilities to warn the students and staff of emergency situations. Objective 3.2 Develop programs to enhance the safety of students and staff within the School District. Objective 3.3 Continue to support the applicable School District departments in their ability to respond effectively to major emergencies. Objective 3.4 Eliminate tree hazards at vulnerable sites.

http://www.lmusd.org/education/dept/dept.php?sectionid=4237&



LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 2008 MITIGATION STATUS (continued) Mitigation Action 3.A The safety and emergency response of each school is captures in the “School Safety Plan”. Each plan is reviewed and approved annually. In 2013 the district undertook a detailed review of each plan, including a review of the emergency response procedures: the district’s Exec. Director of Information Technology Services met with each principal during the month of January to review and update the plans. Mitigation Action 3.B Lucia Mar USD performs annual site inspections to coordinate with Principals and department heads regarding any safety or disaster preparedness needs. Once a scope of work is identified to support each site they are prioritized based on the available funding a risk levels associated with the project completion. In addition, sites are able to input work orders at any time that may be related to safety and disaster preparedness facilities repairs/improvements. Similar to the annual site inspections, the work orders are prioritized based on funding and risk. In addition to current practices, the district will be updating its Facilities Master Plan to identify all potential facilities improvements over the next 5 to 10 years. This document will include detailed look at site infrastructure, layout, and improvements that will mitigate potential disasters and ensure buildings are brought up to current building code requirements. Mitigation Action 3.C The Lucia Mar Unified School District works closely with all agencies having jurisdiction within our school district boundary. In addition to coordination meetings related to disaster preparedness and safety planning, the district participates with local law enforcement and fire authorities at varying school sites to ensure comprehensive training is provided for differing disaster scenarios on an annual basis. Mitigation Action 3.D All district grounds are carefully maintained to ensure safety in all foreseeable weather conditions. Hazardous trees at Paulding Middle School have been removed. Goal 4. Minimize the level of damage to losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to flooding. Objective 4.1 Implement policies, procedures and regulations which reduce the exposure to flood hazards. Objective 4.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to flood hazards. Mitigation Action 4.A Lucia Mar Unified School District continues to work closely with all agencies having jurisdiction over flood zones in our district. Specific mitigation measures and actions are required as part of any building construction or renovation if such improvements are in or near known flood inundation zones. Mitigation Action 4.B The district continuously monitors and supports the activity of the Zone 1-A Flood Control District to minimize the flooding hazard at Arroyo Grande High School. Site improvements have occurred in 2005 and 2013 to further help alleviate drainage issues, which include the addition of drainage lines and a new culvert.



Goal 5. Minimize the level of damage and losses to people, existing and future critical facilities and infrastructure due to earthquakes. Objective 5.1 Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the level of damage and losses due to earthquakes. Objective 5.2 Protect the improved property, natural resources and life vulnerable to the effects of earthquakes. Mitigation Action 5.A Safety inspections occur annually for each site. In addition, the district’s facilities master plan is being updated to address all potential deficiencies or opportunities to mitigate safety/disaster issues. The plan will also include a comprehensive look at current and available funding opportunities the district could utilize in the completion of all identified scope of work.



F. Lucia Mar Unified School District Property Schedule

Category Property Location Sq. Ft. Value

High Schools

Arroyo Grande High School 495 Valley Rd. Arroyo Grande 280,362 $62,950,623 Central Coast New Tech High School 525 N. Thompson Rd. Nipomo 8,375 1,246,748 Nipomo High School 525 N. Thompson Rd Nipomo 164,820 32,896,027 Lopez Continuation High School 1055 Mesa View Dr. Arroyo Grande 20,000 6,420,000

Middle Schools

Judkins Middle School 680 Wadsworth St. Pismo Beach 57,959 11,323,449 Mesa Middle School 2555 Halcyon Rd. Arroyo Grande 64,160 14,421,504 Paulding Middle School 600 Crown Hill St. Arroyo Grande 57,657 14,094,680

Elementary Schools

Branch Elementary School 970 School Rd. Arroyo Grande 26,923 3,306,940 Dana Elementary School 920 W. Teft Nipomo 45,068 7,286,549 Fairgrove Elementary 2101 The Pike Grover Beach 41,233 7,092,683 Grover Beach Elementary 365 S. Tenth St. Grover Beach 43,095 7,183,752 Grover Heights Elementary 770 N. 8th St. Grover Beach 38,306 5,622,529 Harloe Elementary 901 Fair Oaks Arroyo Grande 42,208 7,238,228 Dorothea Lange Elementary 1661 Via Alta Mesa Nipomo 44,977 2,010,216 Nipomo Elementary 190 E. Price St. Nipomo 46,006 7,884,734 Oceano Elementary 1551 17th St. Oceano 37,994 6,911,331 Ocean View Elementary 1208 Linda Dr. Arroyo Grande 40,662 7,686,930 Shell Beach Elementary 2100 Shell Beach Rd Pismo Beach 30,510 4,450,319

District Admin/ Support Spaces

Bridge Street Student Services 227 Bridge St., Arroyo Grande 14,182 3,052,370 Community School 229 Stanley Ave, Arroyo Grande 2,322 499,230 District Office 602 Orchard St., Arroyo Grande 20,115 2,779,443 Maintenance & Operations Yard 222 Stanley Ave., Arroyo Grande 13,290 1,592,400 Oceano Community Center 19th and Wilmar St., Oceano 15,380 4,121,840 Transportation Yard 710 Huasna Rd., Arroyo Grande 8,216 2,039,764

Total $233,991,289



H. Lucia Mar Unified School District Hazard Impact to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure

High Schools

Arroyo Grande High School 495 Valley Rd. Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Nipomo High School 525 N. Thompson Rd Nipomo H H L Outside Central Coast New Tech High School

525 N. Thompson Rd. Nipomo H H L Outside

Lopez Continuation High School 1055 Mesa View Dr. Arroyo Grande

H L H Outside

Middle Schools

Judkins Middle School 680 Wadsworth St. Pismo Beach H L L Outside Mesa Middle School 2555 Halcyon Rd. Arroyo Grande H L H Outside Paulding Middle School 600 Crown Hill St. Arroyo Grande H H L Outside

District Admn/Support

Spaces

Branch Elementary School 970 School Rd. Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Dana Elementary School 920 W. Teft Nipomo H L L Outside Fairgrove Elementary 2101 The Pike Grover Beach H L L Outside Grover Beach Elementary 365 S. Tenth St. Grover Beach H L L Outside Grover Heights Elementary 770 N. 8th St. Grover Beach H L L Outside Harloe Elementary 901 Fair Oaks Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Dorothea Lange Elementary 1661 Via Alta Mesa Nipomo H H H Outside Nipomo Elementary 190 E. Price St. Nipomo H L L Outside Oceano Elementary 1551 17th St. Oceano H L L In/or near Ocean View Elementary 1208 Linda Dr. Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Shell Beach Elementary 2100 Shell Beach Rd Pismo Beach H L L Outside

Bridge Street Student Services 227 Bridge St., Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Community School 229 Stanley, Arroyo Grande H L L Outside District Office 602 Orchard St., Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Maintenance & Operations Yard 222 Stanley, Arroyo Grande H L L Outside Oceano Community Center 19th and Wilmar St., Oceano H L L Outside Transportation Yard 710 Huasna Rd., Arroyo Grande H H H Outside


Critical Structures and Infrastructure Potentially Impacting Hazards

Category Property Location E A R T H Q U A K E

Flood

Wildfire

Tsunami



I. Lucia Mar Unified School District Loss to Vulnerable Structures and Infrastructure

High Schools

Arroyo Grande High School 495 Valley Rd. Arroyo Grande $62,950,623 31,325,312 15,662,656 Central Coast New Tech High School

525 N. Thompson Rd., Nipomo 1,216,748 608,374 304,187

Nipomo High School 525 N. Thompson Rd Nipomo 32,896,027 16,440,014 8,224,007 Lopez Continuation School 1055 Mesa View Dr. Arroyo Grande 6,420,000 3,210,000 1,605,000

Middle Schools

Judkins Middle School 680 Wadsworth St. Pismo Beach 11,232,449 5,661,725 2,830,863 Mesa Middle School 2555 Halcyon Rd. Arroyo Grande 14,421,504 7,210,752 3,605,376 Paulding Middle School 600 Crown Hill St. Arroyo Grande 14,094,680 7,047,340 3,523,670

Elementary Schools

Branch Elementary School 970 School Rd. Arroyo Grande 3,306,940 1,653,470 826,735 Dana Elementary School 920 W. Teft Nipomo 7,286,549 3,643,275 1,821,638 Fairgrove Elementary 2101 The Pike Grover Beach 7,092,683 3,546,342 1,773,171 Grover Beach Elementary 365 S. Tenth St. Grover Beach 7,183,752 3,591,876 1,795,938 Grover Heights Elementary 770 N. 8th St. Grover Beach 5,622,529 2,811,265 1,405,633 Harloe Elementary 901 Fair Oaks Arroyo Grande 7,238,228 3,619,114 1,809,557 Dorothea Lange Elementary 1661 Via Alta Mesa Nipomo 12,010,216 6,005,108 3,002,554 Nipomo Elementary 190 E. Price St. Nipomo 7,884,734 3,942,367 1,971,184 Oceano Elementary 1551 17th St. Oceano 6,911,331 3,455,666 1,727,833 Ocean View Elementary 1208 Linda Dr. Arroyo Grande 7,686,930 3,843,465 1,921,733 Shell Beach Elementary 2100 Shell Beach Rd Pismo Beach 4,450,319 2,225,160 1,112,580

District Admn/ Support Spaces

Bridge Street Student Services

227 Bridge St., Arroyo Grande

3,052,370

1,526,185 763,093

Community School 229 Stanley Ave., Arroyo Grande 499,230 249,615 124,808 District Office 602 Orchard, St., Arroyo Grande 2,779,443 1,389,722 694,861 Maintenance & Operations Yard

222 Stanley Ave., Arroyo Grande

1,592,400 796,200 398,100

Oceano Community Center 19th & Wilmar, Oceano 4,121,840 2,060,920 1,030,460 Transportation Yard 710 Husana Road 2,039,764 1,019,882 509,541

Total $233,991,289 $116,883,149 $58,445,178




Appendix A

Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Revision Calendar

Task 2012

2013

1/12 2/09 3/08 4/12 5/10 6/14 7/12 8/09 9/13 10/11 11/08 12/13 1/02 Initial Meeting X

Plans Team Meeting # 1 # 2 # 3 # 4 # 5

Hazard Identification & Vulnerability Assessment

X X X X X

Capability Assessment

X X X X X

Mitigation Measures X X X Implementation Strategy

X X X X

Public Meetings #1 #2 #3 #4 Draft Mitigation Plan X X X Public Hearing X Plan adoption by governing bodies

X

Submit to CalOES X Submit to FEMA Region 9

X



Appendix B City of Arroyo Grande Ordinance No. 646 ORDINANCE NO. 646 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING SECTIONS 16.04.070 AND 16.44.050 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande (" City") participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (" NFIP") pursuant to the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (the Act"); and WHEREAS, the Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA") has prepared a Flood Insurance Study (" FIS") and has issued a Flood Insurance Rate Map (" FIRM") identifying the Special Flood Hazard Areas (" SFHAs") which are located within the City; WHEREAS, as a condition of continued eligibility in the NFIP, the City is required to have floodplain management regulations which meet or exceed the standards of Code of Federal Regulations, Title 44, and Section 60 3(d); WHEREAS, this ordinance amends the City's floodplain management regulations in order to comply with the current NFIP standards. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: SECTION 1. Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16. 04.070 is hereby amended to add the following definitions: Basement" means, for floodplain management purposes, any area of the building having its floor sub grade — i. e. below ground level — on all sides. Development" means, for floodplain management purposes, any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including, but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage or equipment or materials. Expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision" means, for floodplain management purposes, the preparation of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed ( including the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads). Lowest Floor" means, for floodplain management purposes, the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area, including basement (see floodplain management definition of “basement"). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure below the lowest floor that is usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building’s lowest floor provided it conforms to applicable non-elevation design requirements, including, but not limited to, flood opening standards, anchoring standards, construction materials and methods standards and standards for utilities as set forth in Section 16.44.050 of this code. For residential structures, all sub grade enclosed areas are prohibited as they



are considered to be basements (see floodplain management definition of "basement"). This prohibition includes below grade ORDINANCE NO. 646 PAGE 2 garages and storage areas. New manufactured home park or subdivision" means, for floodplain management purposes, a manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed including at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed on or after June 26, 2007

Recreational vehicle" means, for floodplain management purposes, a vehicle which is built on a single chassis, four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection, designed to be self propelled or permanently towable by a light-duty truck, and designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational camping, travel, or seasonal use.

Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)" means an area in the floodplain subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. It is shown on an FHBM or FIRM as Zone A, AO, A1- A30, AE, A99 or AH.

SECTION 2. The following definitions in Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16. 04.070 are hereby amended as follows: Existing manufactured home park or subdivision" means, for floodplain management purposes, a manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is was completed before June 26, 2007. Manufactured home" means structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities. For floodplain management purposes, the term “manufactured home” does not include a “recreational vehicle" as defined under the city's floodplain management regulations. New construction" means, for floodplain management purposes, structures for which the starts of construction commence on or after the effective date of June 26. 2007, and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures. SECTION 3. Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.44.050 is hereby amended to add a new subsection H as follows:

H. Findings of Fact. 1. The flood hazard areas of the City of Arroyo Grande are subject to periodic inundation which results in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare.



2. These flood losses are caused by uses that are inadequately elevated, flood proofed, or protected from flood damage. The cumulative effect of obstructions in areas of special flood hazards which increase flood heights and velocities also contributes to flood losses. ORDINANCE NO. 646 PAGE 3

SECTION 4. Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 16.44.050. E. 1 is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 1. Establishment of Development Permit. A development permit shall be obtained before any construction or other development, including manufactured homes, within any area of special flood hazard established in subsection D (2) of this section. Application for a development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the floodplain administrator. The applicant shall provide the following minimum information:

a. Plans in duplicate, drawn to scale, showing:

i. Location, dimensions, and elevation of the area in question, existing or proposed structures, storage of materials and equipment and their location;

ii. Proposed locations of water supply, sanitary sewer and other utilities; iii. Grading information showing existing and proposed contours, any proposed fill, and drainage facilities;

iv. Location of the regulatory floodway when applicable; v. Base flood elevation information as specified in subsections D (2) or E (3) (b) of this section;

vi. Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures; and vii. Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any nonresidential structure will be flood proofed, as required in subsection F( 2)( c)(ii) of this section and detailed in FEMA Technical Bulletin TB 3- 93. b. Certification from a registered civil engineer or architect that the nonresidential flood proofed building meets the flood proofing criteria in subsection F( 2)( c)( ii) of this section. c. For a crawl-space foundation, location and total net area of foundation openings as required in subsection F (2) (c) (iii) of this section and detailed in FEMA Technical Bulletins 1- 93 and 7- 93. d. Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development.

e. All appropriate certifications listed in subsection E (3) (d) of this section.

SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause be declared unconstitutional. SECTION 6. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the



names of those City Council Members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 646 PAGE 4 SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. On motion of Council Member Costello, seconded by Council Member Brown, and on the following roll call vote to wit: AYES: Council Members Costello, Brown, Guthrie, Ray, and Mayor Ferrara NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing Ordinance was adopted this 25k" day of September 2012. TONY FERRA, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLYWETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the attached is a true, full, and correct copy of Ordinance No. 646 which was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on September 11, 2012; was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of September 2012; and was duly published in accordance with State law (G. C. 40806). WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 25th day of September 2012. KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK





Appendix C May 28, 2013 City of Pismo Beach Mr. James Lewis, City Manager 761 Mattie Road Pismo Beach, CA. 93449 SUBJECT: Comment on the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Lucia Mar Unified School District and South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Dear Jim: The Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation is in DRAFT Stage. As prescribed by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 section §206.6 (b) (1) neighboring communities are invited to provide their comments to the Plan. As such, we are respectfully requesting your comments on the Plan. I would be grateful if you would comment to me (electronically is acceptable) by June 14, 2013. I will be out of the area from June 3rd through June 14th. If you have any questions please contact me via e-mail, [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, David Mathe Five Cities Fire Authority Emergency Planning Coordinator



Appendix D May 28, 2013 Oceano Community Services District Ms. Marie McGrath 1655 Front Street Oceano, CA. 93475 SUBJECT: Comment on the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Lucia Mar Unified School District and South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District Dear Ms. McGrath: The Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation is in DRAFT Stage. As prescribed by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 section §206.6 (b) (1) neighboring communities are invited to provide their comments to the Plan. As such, we are respectfully requesting your comments on the Plan. I would be grateful if you would comment to me (electronically is acceptable) by June 14, 2013. I will be out of the area from June 3rd through June 14th. If you have any questions please contact me via e-mail, [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, David Mathe Five Cities Fire Authority Emergency Planning Coordinator



Appendix E

PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: OCTOBER 3, 2012 INVITATIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN The FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY invites your comments on the 2012 DRAFT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Plan will be posted on the Five Cities Fire Authority web page until October 31, 2012 for your comments (www.fivecitiesfireauthority.org). The Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, the Lucia Mar Unified School District and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District partnered to create the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. WHY DEVELOP A MITIGATION PLAN? As the costs of damage from disasters continue to increase, the Plan Partners realize the importance of identifying effective ways to reduce vulnerability to disasters. Mitigation plans assist communities in reducing risk from hazards by identifying resources, information, and strategies for risk reduction, while helping to guide and coordinate mitigation activities for the Plan Partners. The Plan provides a set of action items to reduce risks from hazards through actions, education and outreach programs to foster the development of partnerships, and implementation of preventative activities. The resources and information within the Mitigation Plan:

Establishes a basis for coordination and collaboration among the Plan Partners; Identifies and prioritizes future mitigation projects; Assists in meeting the requirements of the following federal assistance programs:

o Hazard Mitigation Grant Program o Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program o Flood Mitigation Assistance Program

The Mitigation Plan works in concert with other Plans, including Plan Partner Emergency Operations Plans.

http://www.fivecitiesfireauthority.org/



(Continue to Page 2 The Plan area is vulnerable to earthquakes, floods, dam failure and wildfire. It is impossible to predict exactly when these disasters will occur, or the extent to which they will impact the Plan Area. However, with careful planning and collaboration among the Plan Partners, it is possible to minimize the losses that can result from these natural disasters. Please review the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and e-mail your comments to David Mathe, [email protected]. Thank You. City of Arroyo Grande City of Grover Beach Lucia Mar Unified School District South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District /s/: Joel Aranaz Joel Aranaz Fire Chief FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, CONTACT: DAVID MATHE, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COORDINATOR FIVE CITIES FIRE AUTHORITY (805) 473-5495 Dated: October 3, 2012

mailto:[email protected]



Appendix F Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Revision Task Responsibilities

Task Responsibility Chair Project Manager Team Plans Meetings X Public Meetings X Public Hearing X Plan Adoption by governing bodies X Hazard Identification X Hazard Events Profile X Capability Assessment X Mitigation Measures

X

Vulnerability Assessment

X

Initial Meeting X Risk Assessment/Loss Estimation X Strategy Implementation X Draft Mitigation Plan X Submit to CalOES X Submit to FEMA Region 9 X



Appendix G Resolution 81 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER CITY REQUESTING PERMISSION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FEDERAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM

WHEREAS, certain areas of the City of Grover City are subject to periodic flooding from stream overflow causing serious damages to residential and to other properties within the city; and

WHEREAS, relief is available in the form of flood insurance as authorized by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 as amended; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Council to comply with land use and management criteria regulations as required in said act; and

WHEREAS it is also the intent of this Council to recognize and duly evaluate flood hazards in all official actions relating to land use in the flood plain areas having special flood hazards: and

WHEREAS, the Municipal Code of the City of Grover City grants the City “the power to make and enforce all laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs;” and

WHEREAS, California State zoning, subdivision, and health and safety laws additionally authorize the City to regulate and control and use in a manner which will adequately protect the public health, safety and welfare;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Grover City as follows: The City of Grover City hereby assures the Federal Insurance Administration that it takes the following legislative action: 1) Vests the City Administrator with the responsibility, authority and means to:

(a) Delineate or assist the HUD Administrator, at his request, in delineating the limits of the areas having special flood hazards on available local maps of sufficient scale to identify the location of building sites.

(b) Provides such information as the HUD Administrator may request concerning present use and occupancy of the flood plain area.

(c) Maintain for public inspection and furnish upon request, with respect to each area having special flood hazards, information on elevations in relation to mean seal level of the lowest floors of all new or substantially improved structures.

(d) Cooperate with Federal, State and local agencies and private firms which undertake to study, survey, map and identify flood plain areas, and cooperate with neighboring communities with respect to management of adjoining flood plain areas in order to prevent aggravation of existing hazards.



(e) Submit on the anniversary date of the communities’ initial eligibility, an annual report to the HUD Administrator on the progress made during the past year within the community in the development and implementation of flood plain management measures.

2) Take such other official action as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the objectives of the program,

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Community Development shall review all applications for grading permits, building permits, subdivision and other developmental permits, and all other construction entitlement of any sort form the City, and shall require that all of such proposed construction or development.

(1) Be designed and anchored to prevent the flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure portions of the structure due to flooding.

(2) Use construction and development materials and utility equipment that are resistant to flood damage.

(3) Use construction and development methods and practices that will minimize flood damage. (4) Provide adequate drainage to reduce the risk of flooding.

(5) Locate public utilities and facilities on the site in such a manner as to be elevated and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damage, such utilities and facilities including sewer, gas, electrical and water systems. On motion of Barnes, second by Newdoll, and on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Barnes, Heath, Lynn Newdoll, Dutra NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted this 7th day of October, 1974

s/s Alfred C. Dutra MAYOR ATTEST: s/s Kenneth O. Berry City Clerk



C E R T I F I C A T I O N

I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed by the Council of the City of Grover City at a Regular Meeting thereof held on the 7th day of October 1974.

s/s Kenneth O. Berry

City Clerk

NOTE: THE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WILL BE CONTAINED IN THE LHMP THAT IS TO BE RETAINED BY THE LEAD AGENT. THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT IS NOT COMPATABLE WITH SCANNING AND COPYING TO THIS DOCUMENT. David Mathe



Appendix H. ORDINANCE NO. 12-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH AMENDING GROVER BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE ARTICLE IX PLANNING AND ZONING REGULATIONS AND ARTICLE VII PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 11-12

WHEREAS, in November 2009 the City updated the Housing Element of the General Plan, which included many new policies regarding housing; and

WHEREAS, in February 2010, the City Council adopted a comprehensive update to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, which included many new policies regarding future development of the City; and

WHEREAS, in January 2011 the City adopted the West Grand Avenue Master Plan, which included new guidelines for development along West Grand Avenue; and

WHEREAS, Section 65860 of the California Government Code directs that a city's zoning ordinance must be consistent with its General Plan; and

WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Zoning Code to be updated to bring it into conformance with the updated Land Use and Housing Elements; and

WHEREAS, Article IX Chapters 1 Zoning Regulations, Chapter 2 Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 4 Signs and Chapter 5 Tree Regulations are being reorganized and reformatted to create a new Article IX to be known as the "Development Code"; and

WHEREAS, Article IX Chapters 1 Zoning Regulations, Chapter 2 Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 4 Signs and Chapter 5 Tree Regulations shall serve as the "Interim Zoning Code" for the area of the City within the Coastal Zone until such time the new Article IX known as the "Development Code" is approved by the Coastal Commission; and

WHEREAS, Article IX Chapter 3 Underground Utility Districts is being deleted and added in its entirety to Article VII Public Works as Chapter 7; and

WHEREAS, Article VII Public Works, Chapter 3 Flood Damage Prevention Regulations is being deleted and replaced with new flood hazard regulations in Article IX Chapter 5 consistent with the new FEMA model ordinance; and

WHEREAS, public notice has been given in the time and manner required by State law and City code; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Grover Beach has reviewed and considered the proposed Zoning Code Amendment associated with Development Permit Application No. 11-12 at Public Hearings on July 9 and July 24, 2012; and



WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 6, 2012, the City Council duly considered all evidence,

including public testimony from interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the Planning Commission, presented at said hearings and conducted a first reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 12-05; and Ordinance No. 12-06, Zoning Code Amendment

WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 20, 2012, the City Council did not conduct a second reading of the Ordinance and directed staff to amend the legal non-conforming use section; and

WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 1, 2012, the City Council duly considered all evidence, including public testimony from interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the Planning Commission, presented at said hearings and conducted a first reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 12-06 which included a revision to the legal non-conforming use section for the Coastal Commercial zone; and

WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 15, 2012, the City Council conducted a second reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 12-06; and WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings:

1. Changes to the Development Code were made to maintain consistency with the General Plan Land Use and Housing Elements. 2. Changes to the Zoning Map were made to maintain consistency with the General Plan Land Use Element. 3. The City has prepared an Initial Study and Negative Declaration in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act and determined in its independent judgment that the Amendment would not have a significant impact on the environment.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH does hereby ordain as follows: PART 1. For the areas of the City that are not within the Coastal Zone, Article IX Planning and Zoning Regulations, Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with Exhibit "A" referenced as the 2012 Grover Beach Development Code, except that all regulations effecting the CPR1, CR1, CR2, CR3, CVS, CC, CI, CIC, COS, CGC, CVB, and CPB zones shall not take effect until Part 4 becomes effective. PART 2. Article IX Planning and Zoning Regulations, Chapter 3 Underground Utility Districts is hereby deleted in its entirety and added in its entirety to Article VII Public Works, Chapter 7 Utility Undergrounding Districts. PART 3. Article VII Public Works Chapter 3 Flood Damage Prevention Regulations is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with new flood hazard regulations in Article IX Chapter 5. PART 4. For the areas of the City that are within the Coastal Zone, Article IX Planning and Zoning Regulations, Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with Exhibit "A" referenced as the 2012 Grover Beach Development Code. Until such time that Part 4 becomes effective, Article IX Planning and Zoning Regulations, Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 shall serve as the interim Planning and Zoning Regulations for the CPR1, CR1, CR2, CR3, CVS, CC, CI, CIC, COS, CGC, CVB, and CPB zones and shall be referenced as



"Article IX-An Interim Planning and Zoning Regulations for the Coastal Zone". Ordinance No. 12-06 Zoning Code Amendment PART 5. For the areas of the City that are within the Coastal Zone, the following Zoning Map amendments to Article IX Section 2.10.020.8 Official Zoning Map are amended as follows: General Location/Area Current Zone Proposed Zone 950 El Camino Real CPC CVS Becket Industrial Area CIC CC 150 South Highway 1 (Train Station PF CVS 202 South 3rd Street CI CC South side of Ramona Ave. between 2nd and 4th Streets CR2 CVS PART 6. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be in violation of the law, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared in violation of the law. PART 7. Parts 1, 2, and 3 of this Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption, except that all regulations effecting the CPR1, CR1, CR2, CR3, CVS, CC, CI, CIC, COS, CGC, CVB and CPB zones shall not take effect until Part 4 becomes effective. Within fifteen (15) days after it’s adoption by the City Council, it shall be published once, together with the names of the Council Members voting thereon, in a newspaper of general circulation within the City. PART 8. Parts 4 and 5 of this Ordinance shall not become effective until final certification by the California Coastal Commission. However, within fifteen (15) days after adoption by the City Council, the Ordinance shall be published once, together with the names of the Council Members voting thereon, in a newspaper of general circulation within the City. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held October 1, 2012, and PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council on October 15, 2012, on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Bright, Molnar, Peterson, Mayor Pro Tem Nicolls, and Mayor Shoals. NOES: Council Members - None. ABSENT: Council Members - None. ABSTAIN: Council Members - None. John P. Shoals, Mayor s/s Donna l. McMahon, City Clerk s/s Approved as to Form: Martin D. Koczanowicz, City Attorney s/s