HomeMy WebLinkAbout032211 - Agenda Packet 032211
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
City Hall
Council Chambers
6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, California
Community Redevelopment Agency
Meeting: 6:00 P.M.
City Council
Regular Session: Immediately following the
conclusion of the Community
Redevelopment Agency
meeting
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:00 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION – CALL TO ORDER: Immediately following the conclusion
of the Community Redevelopment
Agency meeting
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Kelley
ROLL CALL: Mayor O’Malley
Mayor Pro Tem Kelley
Council Member Clay
Council Member Fonzi
Council Member Sturtevant
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Recognition to Outgoing Planning Commissioner Heather Moreno
2. Commendation to Police Department Dispatcher Rebecca Romero
for her role in the capture of a homicide suspect
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: (All items on the consent calendar are considered to
be routine and non-controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion
if no member of the Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If
comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the
consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an
opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the
item before action is taken. DRAFT MINUTES: Council meeting draft minutes
are listed on the Consent Calendar for approval of the minutes. Should anyone
wish to request an amendment to draft minutes, the item will be removed from
the Consent Calendar and their suggestion will be considered by the City
Council. If anyone desires to express their opinion concerning issues included in
draft minutes, they should share their opinion during the Community Forum
portion of the meeting.)
1. City Council Draft Action Minutes – February 8, 2011
Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action
Minutes of February 8, 2011. [City Clerk]
2. City Council Draft Action Minutes – February 22, 2011
Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action
Minutes of February 22, 2011. [City Clerk]
UPDATES FROM THE CITY MANAGER: (The City Manager will give an oral report on
any current issues of concern to the City Council.)
COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to
address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has
jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please state your name for the
record before making your presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff
to place a matter of business on a future agenda. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum, unless changed by the Council.)
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan Septic
System Amendments
Fiscal Impact: Total costs are unknown at this time. Total and ongoing
costs will depend on the level of detail required in our Onsite Wastewater
Management Plan. Potential financial impacts could be in excess of
$500,000 over three to five years initially, with ongoing staffing cost
indefinitely.
Recommendation: Council direct staff to submit comments on the
Central Coast Water Quality Control Board’s Draft Resolution R3 -2011-
0004; Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast
Basin, regarding onsite wastewater system implementation program.
[Public Works]
2. Historic City Hall Project Additional Alternates
Fiscal Impact: None at this time.
Recommendation: Council give Staff direction by providing a priority
ranking of the attached List of Alternates for the Historic City Hall
Project. [Administrative Services]
3. Housing Element Annual Progress Report 2010 (PLN 2006-1133)
Fiscal Impact: None.
Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends the City Council:
Direct staff to submit the attached 2010 Housing Element Annual
Progress Report to the State of California Department of Housing and
Community Development. [Community Development]
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, Council
Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities.
Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take
action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may
take action on items listed on the Agenda.)
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees.
Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary):
Mayor O’Malley
1. City / Schools Committee
2. County Mayors Round Table
3. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
4. League of California Cities – CITIPAC Board Member
5. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
6. SLO Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA)
Mayor Pro Tem Kelley
1. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Committee
2. Atascadero Youth Task Force
3. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee
4. City of Atascadero Finance Committee
5. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
6. Homeless Services Oversight Council
Council Member Fonzi
1. Air Pollution Control District
2. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee
3. City of Atascadero Finance Committee
4. SLO Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) - alternate
Council Member Sturtevant
1. City / Schools Committee
2. Community Action Partnership of SLO County
3. League of California Cities – Council Liaison
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND / OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Clerk
3. City Treasurer
4. City Attorney
5. City Manager
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, that
person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public hearing. Correspondence submitted at this
public hearing will be distributed to the Council and available for review in the City Clerk's office.
I, Victoria Randall, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury that
the foregoing agenda for the March 22, 2011 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was
posted on March 15, 2011, at the Atascadero City Hall, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
and was available for public review in the Customer Service Center at that location.
Signed this 15th day of March, 2011, at Atascadero, California.
___________________________________
Victoria Randall, Deputy City Clerk
City of Atascadero
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. unless there is a
Community Redevelopment Agency meeting commencing at 6:00 p.m. in which event the Council meeting will commence
immediately following the conclusion of the Community Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council meetings will be held at
the City Hall Council Chambers, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of
the printed Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file
in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours at the Front Counter of
City Hall, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, and on our website, www.atascadero.org. An agenda packet is also
available for public review at the Atascadero Library, 6850 Morro Road. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be
allocated a number once they are approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers.
All documents submitted by the public during Council meetings that are either read into the record or referred to in their
statement will be noted in the minutes and available for review in the City Clerk's office. Council meetings are videotaped
and audio recorded, and may be reviewed by the public. Copies of meeting recordings are available for a fee. Contact
the City Clerk for more information (470-3400).
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting
or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager’s Office or the City Clerk’s Office, both at (805)
470-3400. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in
assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, “COMMUNITY FORUM”, the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the
Council to approach the lectern and be recognized.
1. Give your name for the record (not required)
2. State the nature of your business.
3. All comments are limited to 3 minutes.
4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council.
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council’s attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council).
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS (from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code)
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their
report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is open and
will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the lectern. If
you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way:
1. You must approach the lectern and be recognized by the Mayor
2. Give your name (not required)
3. Make your statement
4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
6. All comments limited to 3 minutes
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24
hours prior to the meeting. Digital presentations must be brought to the meeting on a USB drive or CD. You are required
to submit to the City Clerk a printed copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before
the meeting begins to announce your presence and turn in the printed copy.
The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereaft er, no further public comments will be
heard by the Council.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 03/22/11
r;
1918 1878
\ATA'�ran 0%
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — Public Works Department
Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
Basin Plan Septic System Amendments
RECOMMENDATION:
Council direct staff to submit comments on the Central Coast Water Quality Control
Board's Draft Resolution R3-2011-0004; Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan,
Central Coast Basin, regarding onsite wastewater system implementation program.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
The City of Atascadero regulates the installation of septic systems based on the
requirements set forth in the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
(Water Board) Basin Plan Resolution 83-12 approved by the State in 1983. Additionally
the Water Board adopted a "General Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements" that
empowers the City to independently review and approve septic system installations
(based on compliance with Resolution 83-12) without individual State waste discharge
permits being issued on every project utilizing septic systems. This arrangement has
been successfully functioning for the past 28 years.
The Water Board is now in the process of making changes to those septic system rules
and regulations with a series of amendments to the Basin Plan, the first in May 2008,
and then again in March 2009. The City has steadfastly opposed certain portions of the
proposed amendments, and submitted comments and attended each hearing.
Unfortunately, none of the City's concerns and previous comments were incorporated
by the local Water Board into the approved amendments.
The local Water Board submitted the 2008 and 2009 amendments to the Basin Plan to
the State Water Resources Control Board for review and final approval as required prior
to the changes going into effect. The State Water Resources Control Board staff
subsequently had concerns with the Water Board's modifications, and the Water Board
withdrew the changes for further refinement of the document. The Water Board has
subsequently revised its septic system rules and regulations, and has now prepared
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 03/22/11
Resolution R3-2011-0004. This resolution will be considered by the Water Board at its
May 9, 2011 meeting.
The Water Board staff report characterizes the latest changes as "minor," intended to
primarily help clarify and reorganize the 2009 Implementation Plan amendments. It
further states that "Staff does not propose that the Water Board revisit the Basin Plan
criteria for onsite systems in its entirety as the public has had several opportunities to
comment the 2008 and 2009 amendments."
City staff previously provided Regional Board staff with comments objecting to a
number of new and changed requirements that were unfunded mandates and may
result in potential costs to property owners. Staff's prior comments are included in
Attachment C. The comments in Attachment C remain in the record and will be
provided to the State Water Board should the Water Board adopt this current amended
resolution.
City staff will submit new comments included in Attachment B, including other City
Council comments or concerns as directed.
DISCUSSION:
The following is an overall timeline of some of the Basin Plan update process:
Event Date
Water Board staff release draft Basin Plan February 22, 2008
language.
City staff provides comments to the Water April 14, 2008
Board on the proposed changes.
Mayor requests additional time for input into April 25, 2008
septic system requirements.
Water Board adopts an amendment to the
Basin Plan changing the criteria for onsite May 9, 2008
septic systems. City provides comments at
the public meeting.
Water Board sends draft language to the
State Water Board for review and approval. June 2008
State Water Board starts its review process of
the Basin Plan language. June 2008
City staff is directed by Council to review and
comment on any State Water Board action.
The State Water Board was anticipating a October 14, 2008
State Water Board hearing on November 18,
2008.
The Water Board Executive Officer requests
that State Water Board withdraw the November 7, 2008
consideration of the Basin Plan amendments
until a later date.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 03/22/11
The City Council and Planning Commission
hold a joint informational session regarding the November 12, 2008
Water Board's proposed Basin Plan
Amendments.
Water Board adopts an implementation
program for the Basin Plan criteria adopted in March 20, 2009
May 2008. City provides comments at the
public meeting
Water Board staff re-issue Basin Plan
amendments addressing State Water Board February 1, 2011
concerns. The Water Board hearing will only
focus on the new amendments.
Comment Period Closes March 25, 2011
Proposed amended Basin Plan adoption date May 5, 2011
Background: The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board is a State
Government Agency that is responsible for protecting surface and groundwater quality
in the six counties stretching from Santa Barbara to southern Santa Clara County. The
Water Board is part of the State Water Resources Control Board' and California
Environmental Protection Agency.
The Regional Board was formed in 1949 to regulate wastewater discharges from
industrial and municipal treatment plants. The idea was to create a local version of a
State agency that would make better decisions than a body located in Sacramento. The
Regional Board consists of nine individuals from the six county areas. Regional Board
members are appointed by the Governor to staggered four-year terms.
The appointees are all volunteers and are required to have knowledge regarding water
quality issues. Individual members represent constituents such as water quality, water
supply, local government, recreation, fish or wildlife and others. Information on the
current local Regional Board members may be viewed at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/about us/board members.shtml
In 1969 the Porter Cologne Water Quality Acte expanded the Regional Board's authority
to protect all ground and surface waters. This authority includes the ability to levee
significant fines on polluters and establish water quality objectives as part of a Regional
Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan.) The Basin Plan is developed by the Regional
Board to describe the requirements3 that are needed in order to protect ground and
The State Water Resources Control Board provides administrative support and appellate oversight for
the State's nine Regional Water Boards.
2 The Porter Cologne Water Quality Act is the governing State law for water quality protection in California
and can be found at: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/1aws_reguIations/docs/portercologne.pdf
3 Water quality objectives are established to protect the beneficial uses of State waters. This means that
when an entity discharges treated wastewater to an aquifer or stream there will be specific pollutant levels
that cannot be exceeded. For example, the City is allowed to discharge wastewater to percolation ponds
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 03/22/11
surface water quality in the Regional Board's jurisdiction. The Basin Plan includes
requirements and goals for septic systems, wastewater discharges, landfills and storm
water systems. The Regional Board recently amended the Basin Plan's onsite
wastewater (septic system) treatment requirements on May 9, 2008, and adopted an
implementation program on March 25, 2009.
The Water Board subsequently sent the amended Basin Plan language to the State
Water Board for review and approval. However, the State Water Board did not approve
the changes and instead remanded the Basin Plan changes back to the Water Board
for revision. Water Board staff recently released the amended language for public
comment (see Attachment A.) The public comment period ends on March 25, 2011,
and City staff has prepared draft comments for submittal (see Attachment B.)
The amended Basin Plan language is not significantly changed from previous versions.
Issues such as requiring two acres for second units, development of septic system
management plans and unfunded requirements remain in the draft resolution. The
amended State septic system rules and regulations still require the City to:
1) Sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Regional Board in order to allow
the City to regulate septic systems in Atascadero,
2) Develop and implement a Septic System Management Plan, and
3) Update the Municipal Code to align our regulations with the Water Board's
recent changes.
The Septic System Management Plan would include provisions that would be financially
infeasible for the City to achieve (without developing new revenue sources to offset
increased costs), including-
1)
ncluding:1) Agency "identify' and "address" areas of potential groundwater and or surface
water that may be degraded by septic systems (i.e. groundwater and surface
water testing, monitoring and potential treatment program. The language is
vague and open to wide interpretation.)
2) Verification that existing and proposed systems are constructed and maintained
in accordance with State standards
3) Develop and implement an on-going public information program on proper
maintenance and operation of septic systems
4) Obtain, store and maintain availability of as-built construction plans for septic
systems installed within the City
5) Record notices of septic system related enforcement actions against properties
The proposed regulations still include 2008 / 2009 provisions that would significantly
increase development costs for housing within the City, including:
close to the Salinas River. The City is allowed to only release a set concentration of salts in order to
protect the use of the aquifer. The current beneficial uses of the Atascadero groundwater subbasin are
municipal, industrial and agricultural uses.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 03/22/11
1) Prohibition of secondary residences on parcels under 2-acres
2) Installation of 100% expansion area, and reserve room for an additional 100%
expansion
3) Prohibition of self-regenerating water softeners
Lastly, the Water Board will only be considering the current amendments to the
previously adopted resolution. Therefore, the City will still need to comment on and
attend any future State Water Board action should this amended resolution be adopted
by the local Water Board.
Summary: City staff previously provided Regional Board staff with comments objecting
to a number of new and changed requirements that were unfunded mandates and may
result in potential costs to property owners. Staff's prior comments are included in
Attachment C. The comments in Attachment C remain in the record and will be
provided to the State Water Board should the Water Board adopt this current amended
resolution.
City staff will submit the comments included in Attachment B, including other City
Council comments or concerns as directed.
Analysis: The amended Basin Plan changes will likely have a significant impact on City
finances, staff resources and will require changes in the Municipal Code. The main
issues include:
• The requirement that the City sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the Regional Board for septic system oversight
• The requirements to develop, gain approval for and implementation of, a Septic
System Management Plan
• Changing the Municipal Code to comply with the new second unit and other
Basin Plan changes.
Conclusion: City staff will closely monitor this issue and will be prepared to comment
on the final Water Board Resolution proposed for the May 9, 2011 Water Board
meeting in San Luis Obispo. In addition, staff will continue to monitor this issue at the
State Water Board level if the revisions are adopted in May and sent on to the State
Water Board. The Council has previously directed staff to comment to the State Water
Board when this issue arises. City staff will continue to keep the City Council informed
of future events.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 03/22/11
FISCAL IMPACT:
Total costs are unknown at this time. Total and ongoing costs will depend on the level
of detail required in our Onsite Wastewater Management Plan. Potential financial
impacts could be in excess of $500,000 over three to five years initially, with ongoing
staffing cost indefinitely. The City does have the option to forego regulation of septic
systems in Atascadero by not signing an MOU with the Regional Board. Regulation of
septic systems would revert back to the Regional Board. This means that this option
would have to be carefully weighed vs. the benefit of being able to regulate septic
systems locally.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council can direct staff to not submit comments to the Water Board.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Water Board May 5, 2011 Staff Report with Exhibits
B. Basin Plan Amendment Draft Response February 17, 2011
C. Staff's April 7, 2008 Comments
Attachment A
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
CENTRAL COAST REGION
STAFF REPORT FOR REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 5, 2011
Prepared on January 27, 2011
ITEM NUMBER:
SUBJECT: Resolution No. R3-2011-0004; Amendment to the Water
Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, regarding onsite
wastewater system implementation program
KEY INFORMATION
Location: Throughout the Central Coast Region
Type of Waste: Domestic wastewater discharged from individual and community
onsite wastewater systems
This Action: Adoption of Resolution No. R3-2011-0004(revising Basin Plan
and amendments adopted in 2008 and 2009)
SUMMARY
Historically, discharges from conventional onsite wastewater disposal systems (onsite
systems) have been regulated by local governing jurisdictions (cities and counties) that
implemented local requirements and the criteria for onsite systems set forth in the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region's (Central Coast Water
Board or Water Board) Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin (Basin Plan).
The Central Coast Water Board had also adopted a general waiver of waste discharge
requirements (General Waiver) for onsite systems, where such systems were regulated
by local agencies. The Water Board entered into multi-agency memoranda of
understanding (MOUs) governing regulation of onsite systems, and local permitting
agencies implemented criteria for onsite systems through their own permits. Pursuant
to Water Code §13269(b)(2), the Central Coast Water Board's General Waiver expired
on June 30, 2004. Since expiration of the General Waiver, discharges from onsite
systems have not been formally authorized by the Central Coast Water Board as
required by the California Water Code. Due in part to this lack of regulatory oversight,
consistent compliance with Basin Plan criteria is sporadic and there is little (if any)
monitoring of onsite system performance or water quality impacts from onsite disposal.
To address requirements of the California Water Code, the Central Coast Water Board,
on May 9, 2008, adopted an amendment to the Basin Plan that updated and clarified
criteria for onsite systems (Resolution No. R3-2008-0005). To ensure compliance with
the California Water Code, the Central Coast Water Board, on March 20, 2009, adopted
an additional Basin Plan amendment establishing an Implementation Program as a
conditional waiver of waste discharge requirements for onsite systems that meet Basin
Plan criteria for siting, design, construction, and management. The Implementation
Program establishes regulatory oversight, management, and monitoring of onsite
systems in a manner that is clear, streamlined and protective of water quality.
Attachment A
Item No. -2- draft for May 5,2011
Basin Plan amendments adopted by the Central Coast Water Board do not become final
until they have been reviewed and approved by the State Water Board and the Office of
Administrative Law(OAL). During their review of the 2008 and 2009 amendments, State
Water Board staff noted that revisions were necessary to further clarify the amendments.
This proposed Basin Plan amendment (Resolution No. R3-2011-0004) addresses each
of the issues identified by State Water Board staff.
This agenda item proposes revisions to the amendments adopted by the Central Coast
Water Board on May 9, 2008, and March 20, 2009, and is not intended to include
reconsideration of the entire section. Proposed revisions are identified by underlining
(additions) and strike-out (deletions). Updating the Basin Plan requirements for onsite
systems will complete a Triennial Review list priority task which has been backlogged for
many years.
DISCUSSION
Background — Persons who discharge waste that could affect the quality of the state,
including discharges from onsite wastewater systems, are required to submit a report of
waste discharge (application) under California Water Code section 13260 and obtain
waste discharge requirements or a waiver of waste discharge requirements. California
Water Code section 13263 authorizes the Water Boards to issue waste discharge
requirements. Section 13269 of the California Water Code authorizes the Central Coast
Water Board to waive the issuance of waste discharge requirements and the
requirement to submit a report of waste discharge, provided such waivers are
conditional, do not exceed five years, are consistent with applicable state or regional
water quality control plans, and are in the public interest.
The Central Coast Water Board encourages direct regulation of onsite systems by an
authorized and qualified local agency, where such a policy is mutually beneficial. To
facilitate direct regulation, the Water Board enters into MOUs with local agencies that
appropriately regulate onsite system siting, design, construction, monitoring and
performance, in accordance with criteria specified in the Basin Plan. The MOUs provide
for local regulation of the Central Coast Water Board's implementation program with
respect to onsite systems.
On June 30, 2004, the waiver for onsite system discharges expired (in accordance with
California Water Code §13269), leaving no Water Board regulation of most onsite
system discharges within the Region. Expiration of the waiver left onsite systems
subject to individual waste discharge requirements, a cumbersome and redundant
manner of regulatory oversight. Accordingly, the Central Coast Water Board's onsite
system General Waiver and implementing MOUs needed to be revised and updated.
On May 9, 2008, the Central Coast Water Board adopted an amendment to the Basin
Plan that updated, clarified and strengthened criteria for onsite systems (Resolution No.
R3-2008-0005). On March 20, 2009, the Water Board adopted an additional Basin Plan
amendment establishing an Implementation Program as a conditional waiver of waste
discharge requirements for onsite systems that meet Basin Plan criteria for siting,
design, construction, and management (Resolution No. R3-2009-0012). Further
information regarding the 2008 and 2009 amendments is available for reference at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoasVwater issues/programs/septics/index.shtml
Attachment A
Item No. -3- draft for May 5,2011
During their review of these amendments, State Water Board staff identified revisions
and clarifications needed prior to State Water Board approval. The Central Coast Water
Board staff have revised the 2008 and 2009 amendments to address the State Board
staff recommendations and the corresponding revisions are incorporated into the
proposed amendment, Resolution No. R3-2011-0004.
Proposed Resolution - Resolution No. R3-2011-0004 (Attachment 1 to this staff report)
adopts a revised Implementation Program into the Basin Plan under Water Code section
13242 that conditionally waives waste discharge requirements for discharges from onsite
systems and authorizes the Water Board's Executive Officer to enroll and terminate
enrollment in the Conditional Waiver. The proposed Implementation Program also
would waive the requirement to submit reports of waste discharge for existing and
certain new onsite wastewater systems. Proposed revisions are identified by underlining
(additions) and strike-out (deletions). The Implementation Program has been
reorganized in the Basin Plan with few substantive revisions. The reorganization and
revisions are intended to clarify the criteria and conditions for dischargers to qualify for a
waiver of waste discharge requirements and to ensure consistency in terminology,
applicable dates, and Implementation Program components. Staff does not propose that
the Water Board revisit the Basin Plan criteria for onsite systems in its entirety as the
public has had several opportunities to comment on the 2008 and 2009 amendments.
The record for this action to amend the Basin Plan will be consolidated with the records
for the May 2008 and March 2009 amendments for State Water Board review and
approval. Interested persons will not need to resubmit comments on the parts of the
amendment that are unchanged from the May 2008 and March 2009 amendments.
Proposed Resolution No. R3-2011-0004 amends the Basin Plan onsite wastewater
system criteria and implementation program in two ways. First, sections are reorganized
so that the implementation program (formerly Section VIII.D.3) is brought forward to the
beginning of the onsite section (VIII.D.1). Second, increased detail is incorporated into
the text to clarify terms, implementation practices, and requirements. Specific revisions
are described below and highlighted (with underline and strikeout) on Attachment A of
the proposed Resolution No. R3-2011-0004.
Section VIII.D. (beginning on Page 1 of Attachment A) — Definitions are added and/or
expanded to clarifying text in the following sections.
Section VIII.D.1. (beginning on Page 2) — The Implementation Program is relocated
from VIII.D.3 to Section VIII.D.1 and background information regarding the Water
Board's expired onsite wastewater system waiver policy is added. Much of the added
background information previously appeared in the Staff Report for Resolution 83-2009-
0012.The section is relocated and renumbered.
Section VIII.D.1.a. (Page 5) — To increase clarity of the Implementation Program, the
eligibility criteria and conditions for enrollment of existing onsite systems under the
conditional waiver of waste discharge requirements and reports of waste discharge are
more clearly identified. The proposed amendment continues the conditional waiver of
waste discharge requirements and reports of waste discharge for existing onsite
systems that are regulated by the local governing jurisdiction, and clarifies each
condition to ensure that local regulation of existing onsite systems (and replacements of
such systems) is consistent with Basin Plan requirements. Recommendations are
carried over from the 2009 amendment, with editorial revisions to be sure optional
Attachment A
Item No. -4- draft for May 5,2011
(rather than mandatory) language is used for such recommendations. Specific section
numbers are listed to clarify referenced Basin Plan criteria.
Section VIII.D.i.b. (beginning on Page 6)—Similarly (to the revisions described above),
the eligibility criteria and conditions for enrollment in the waiver for new onsite systems
regulated directly by the Water Board is clarified.Much of the added language previously
appeared in the Staff Report for Resolution R3-2009-0012. The section is relocated and
renumbered.
Section VIII.D.1.c. (beginning on Page 7) — Clarifying language is added regarding
eligibility criteria, conditions and prohibitions for waiver of waste discharge requirements
for onsite systems regulated by local governing jurisdictions. Revised language of these
criteria, conditions and prohibitions is carried over from the Staff Report for Resolution
No. R3-2009-0012, carried over from existing Water Code regulations, or added to
clarify Basin Plan sections referenced.The section is relocated and renumbered.
Section VIII.D.2. (Page 8)—Section relocated and renumbered accordingly.
Section VIII.D.2.a.(beginning on Page 8)—Clarifying language is added and the section
is relocated and renumbered.
Section VIII.D.2.b. (beginning on Page 9)—This section is relocated, renumbered and
expanded with additional detail regarding onsite wastewater management plan content.
Onsite wastewater management plans implemented by local governing jurisdictions are
key to effective implementation of this conditional waiver for onsite systems, and
ultimately water quality protection. This section describes the purpose and goals of
comprehensive onsite management plans, consolidates plan components from other
sections of the Basin Plan criteria, and adds detail regarding existing onsite
management plan requirements.
Section VIII.D.2.c.(Page 11)—Section relocated and renumbered only.
Section VIII.D.3. (Page 11)—Section relocated and renumbered with minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.a. (beginning on Page 11) — Section relocated and renumbered with
minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.b. (beginning on Page 13) — Section relocated and renumbered with
minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.c.(Page 15)—Section relocated and renumbered with minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.d.(beginning on Page 15)—Section relocated and renumbered only.
Section VIII.D.3.e.(Page 16)—Section relocated and renumbered with minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.f. (beginning on Page 16)— Section is relocated and renumbered with
minor edits. The term "salts minimization plan" is replaced with "onsite wastewater
management plan" as salts is likely to be a component issue of the broader
management plan. It should be noted that in many areas, local governing jurisdictions
will be taking a lead role in developing basin-wide salts and nutrient management plans
Attachment A
Item No. -4 draft for May 5,2011
(rather than mandatory) language is used for such recommendations. Specific section
numbers are listed to clarify referenced Basin Plan criteria.
Section VIII.D.1.b. (beginning on Page 6)—Similarly (to the revisions described above),
the eligibility criteria and conditions for enrollment in the waiver for new onsite systems
regulated directly by the Water Board is clarified. Much of the added language previously
appeared in the Staff Report for Resolution R3-2009-0012. The section is relocated and
renumbered.
Section VIII.D.1.c. (beginning on Page 7) — Clarifying language is added regarding
eligibility criteria, conditions and prohibitions for waiver of waste discharge requirements
for onsite systems regulated by local governing jurisdictions. Revised language of these
criteria, conditions and prohibitions is carried over from the Staff Report for Resolution
No. R3-2009-0012, carried over from existing Water Code regulations, or added to
clarify Basin Plan sections referenced.The section is relocated and renumbered.
Section VIII.D.2. (Page 8)—Section relocated and renumbered accordingly.
Section VIII.D.2.a. (beginning on Page 8)—Clarifying language is added and the section
is relocated and renumbered.
Section VIII.D.2.b. (beginning on Page 9) —This section is relocated, renumbered and
expanded with additional detail regarding onsite wastewater management plan content.
Onsite wastewater management plans implemented by local governing jurisdictions are
key to effective implementation of this conditional waiver for onsite systems, and
ultimately water quality protection. This section describes the purpose and goals of
comprehensive onsite management plans, consolidates plan components from other
sections of the Basin Plan criteria, and adds detail regarding existing onsite
management plan requirements.
Section VIII.D.2.c. (Page 11)—Section relocated and renumbered only.
Section VIII.D.3. (Page 11)—Section relocated and renumbered with minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.a. (beginning on Page 11) — Section relocated and renumbered with
minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.b. (beginning on Page 13) — Section relocated and renumbered with
minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.c. (Page 15)—Section relocated and renumbered with minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.d. (beginning on Page 15)—Section relocated and renumbered only.
Section VIII.D.3.e. (Page 16)—Section relocated and renumbered with minor edits.
Section VIII.D.3.f. (beginning on Page 16)— Section is relocated and renumbered with
minor edits. The term "salts minimization plan" is replaced with "onsite wastewater
management plan" as salts is likely to be a component issue of the broader
management plan. It should be noted that in many areas, local governing jurisdictions
will be taking a lead role in developing basin-wide salts and nutrient management plans
Attachment A
Item No. -5- draft for May 5,2011
required by the State Water Board's 2009 Recycled Water Policy. If onsite wastewater
systems are identified as a potential source of excess salts discharges, specific
measures to reduce such discharges will be incorporated into those basin-wide plans.
Section VIII.D.3.g. (Page 17)—Renumbered only.
Section VIII.D.3.h. (beginning on Page 17)—Renumbered with minor edits.
In addition to the revisions described above, several sections refer to approval of an
onsite wastewater management plan or granting exemptions by the Central Coast Water
Board or its Executive Officer. In each instance, "or its Executive Officer"is deleted.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY
The proposed action is the adoption of a Basin Plan amendment to add an Onsite
Wastewater System Implementation Program. The amendment consists of revisions to
the Implementation Program adopted in Resolution No. R3-2009-0012. Summary of
public participation; project scoping pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) (California Public Resources Code §21083.9(a)(2); and evaluation of project
alternatives is included in the Staff Report for Resolution No. R3-2009-0012. The Staff
Report for Resolution No. R3-2009-0012 is available at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/board info/agendas/2009/mar/item 18/inde
x.shtml
The Central Coast Water Board is the lead agency with respect to CEQA.The Secretary
of Resources has certified the basin planning process as exempt from the CEQA
requirement to prepare an environmental impact report or negative declaration. (PRC
21080.5; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15251(g)). The State Water Board has adopted
regulations to implement certified regulatory programs that require the regional boards to
prepare substitute environmental documents, including a written report and an
accompanying CEQA Environmental Checklist. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, §3775 et seq.)
The staff of the Central Coast Water Board prepared substitute environmental
documents for Resolution No. R3-2008-0005 and Resolution No. R3-2009-0012.
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15162, the Central Coast Water Board is not
required to prepare a subsequent or supplemental CEQA document because the
revisions proposed in this action do not constitute substantial changes from the
previously approved projects, do not involve new information, and would not result in any
new or more significant environmental effects than those reviewed in the previous CEQA
substitute environmental documents. (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15162, subd. (a).) This
action today revises previously adopted Basin Plan amendments by reorganizing and
clarifying, without significant substantive changes. The Substitute Environmental
Documents for this action consist of:
• CEQA Reports for Basin Plan Amendments Regarding Onsite Wastewater Systems
(Resolution No. R3-2008-0005 and No. R3-2009-0012), including associated CEQA
Environmental Checklists
• Staff Reports for Resolution No. R3-2008-0005 and No. R3-2009-0012; including
Supplemental Staff Reports, Comments and Response to Comments
Attachment A
Item No. -6- draft for May 5,2011
• Resolution No. R3-2008-0005 and No. R3-2009-0012, including Basin Plan
amendments adopted therein
• Staff Report for Resolution No. R3-2011-0004(this staff report), including Comments
and Response to Comments
• Resolution No. R3-2011-0004, including Basin Plan amendments adopted therein
A Notice of Public Hearing, draft staff report, resolution, and text of proposed revisions to
the Basin Plan were circulated to known interested parties throughout the Central Coast
Region and posted on the Central Coast Water Board's website. Public comments
regarding the proposed revisions the onsite Implementation Program, and associated
Water Board staff responses, are addressed below.
COMMENTS and RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
(pending)
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. R3-2011-0004 as proposed and direct the Executive Officer to
forward the resolution and corresponding administrative record to the State Water
Board for review and approval.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Proposed Resolution No. R3-2011-0004 with Attachment
A. Revised Basin Plan Chapter 4(onsite sections only)
2. Notice of Public Hearing
3. Comment letters(pending)
SAWO Control Planning\Onsite\2011 Revisions\2011 amendment staff report.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
CENTRAL COAST REGION
895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
DRAFT RESOLUTION No. 133-2011-0004
AMENDING THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN REGARDING THE ONSITE
WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region
(hereafter Central Coast Water Board) finds:
1. The Central Coast Water Board adopted the second edition of the Water Quality
Control Plan, Central Coastal Basin (Basin Plan) on September 8, 1994. The Basin
Plan designates beneficial uses and water quality objectives, implementation
programs for achieving water quality objectives addressing point source and
nonpoint source discharges, adopts prohibitions, and incorporates statewide plans
and policies.
2. The Basin Plan contains an implementation program setting forth criteria regarding
siting and design of onsite wastewater systems. The Central Coast Water Board
updated its policy regarding siting and design of onsite wastewater systems on
September 16, 1983, by adopting Resolution No. 83-12. The text and requirements
specified in Resolution No. 83-12 are included in the Basin Plan as provisions of
Chapters 4 and 5.
3. On May 9, 2008, the Central Coast Water Board adopted Resolution No. 83-2008-
0005, revising the Basin Plan onsite wastewater system criteria. On March 20, 2009,
the Central Coast Water Board adopted Resolution No. R3-2009-0012, revising the
Basin Plan onsite implementation program and adopting minor revisions to the onsite
wastewater criteria set forth in Resolution No. R3-2008-0005. This Resolution, No.
R3-2011-0004, revises the Basin Plan amendments (Resolution No. R3-2008-0005
and Resolution No. R3-2009-0012) with clarifying language and reorganized and
renumbered sections. The text and requirements specified in Resolution No. R3-
2008-0005, Resolution No. R3-2009-0012 and Resolution No. R3-2011-0004, as
amended with these revisions, will be incorporated into the Basin Plan after review
and approval by the State Water Resources Control Board and the Office of
Administrative Law.
4. Section VIII.D.1. of the Basin Plan, as amended by this Resolution, specifies the
criteria, conditions, recommendations, and prohibitions of discharges that onsite
wastewater systems must meet to be eligible for waivers described in the
implementation program. These discharges will not have a significant effect on the
quality of waters of the State provided the conditions of the Basin Plan criteria and
implementation program are met.
5. Area of Applicability - The effect of this amendment will be throughout the Central
Coast Region, where onsite systems are used to treat and dispose of wastewater.
Resolution No. R3-2011-0004 2 draft for May 5, 2011
6. Anti-Degradation — State Water Board Resolution No. 68-16 Statement of Policy with
Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Waters in California (Resolution No. 68-16)
requires Regional Water Boards, in regulating the discharge of waste, to maintain
high quality waters of the State until it is demonstrated that any change in quality will
be consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State, will not unreasonably
affect beneficial uses, and will not result in water quality less than that described in a
Regional Water Board's policies (e.g., quality that exceeds applicable water quality
standards). Resolution No. 68-16 also states, in part:
Any activity which produces or may produce a waste or increased volume or
concentration of waste and which discharges or proposes to discharge to existing
high quality waters will be required to meet waste discharge requirements which will
result in best practicable treatment and control of the discharge necessary to assure
that (a) a pollution or nuisance will not occur and (b) the highest water quality
consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State will be maintained.
The Basin Plan implementation program revised by this Resolution is consistent with
the provisions of the State Water Board Resolution No. 68-16. Dischargers that could
be subject to the conditional waiver established in the implementation program will
be required to comply with the Basin Plan criteria that are expected to prevent
degradation of waters of the state, prevent pollution or nuisance, and implement best
practicable treatment or control. The Basin Plan implementation program prohibits
systems that do not meet the criteria.
7. CEQA — The Central Coast Water Board is the lead agency with respect to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Secretary of Resources has
certified the basin planning process as exempt from the CEQA requirement to
prepare an environmental impact report or negative declaration. [PRC 21080.5; Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, §15251(g)]. The State Water Resources Control Board (State
Water Board) has adopted regulations to implement certified regulatory programs
that require the regional boards to prepare substitute environmental documents,
including a written report and an accompanying CEQA Environmental Checklist.
(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, §3775 et seq.) The staff of the Central Coast Water Board
prepared substitute environmental documents for Resolution No. R3-2008-0005 and
Resolution No. R3-2009-0012. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15162, the
Central Coast Water Board is not required to prepare a subsequent or supplemental
CEQA document because the revisions proposed in this action do not constitute
substantial changes from the previously approved projects, do not involve new
information, and would not result in any new or more significant environmental
effects than those reviewed in the previous CEQA substitute environmental
documents. [Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15162, subd. (a).] This action today revises
previously adopted Basin Plan amendments by reorganizing and clarifying, without
making significant substantive changes. The substitute environmental documents
for this Basin Plan amendment have been made available to the public. The Central
Coast Water Board finds that the proposed amendments to the Basin Plan will not
have a significant effect on the environment.
8. Public Notice - Interested persons and the public have been informed of the Central
Coast Water Board's intent to revise the Basin Plan Implementation Program for
onsite wastewater systems. Efforts to inform the public and solicit public comment
include a public notice of the amendments providing the public with a comment
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. 133-2011-0004 3 draft for May 5, 2011
period in excess of 45 days in advance of the Central Coast Water Board hearing.
Notice of public hearing was given by posting on the Water Board website, by
mailing a copy of the notice to all persons requesting such notice and applicable
government agencies. The Central Coast Water Board has provided responses to
written comments received from interested persons.
9. On May 5, 2011, the Central Coast Water Board held a public hearing and
considered all the evidence and comments concerning this matter. Notice of this
hearing was given to all interested persons in accordance with CCR, Title 14,
§15072.
10. The Basin Plan amendment must be submitted for review and approval by the State
Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and the State Office of Administrative
Law (OAL). The Basin Plan amendment will become effective upon approval by
OAL. The subject Resolution will become effective immediately.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. Pursuant to California Water Code §13240, the Water Board, after considering the
record, including oral testimony at the hearing, hereby adopts the Basin Plan
amendment set forth in Attachment A to this Resolution adopting an implementation
program that conditionally waives waste discharge requirements and submittal of
reports of waste discharge for onsite wastewater systems.
2. The Central Coast Water Board's Executive Officer is directed to forward copies of
the Basin Plan amendment to the State Water Board in accordance with the
requirements of California Water Code §13245.
3. The Central Coast Water Board requests the State Water Board approve the Basin
Plan amendments in accordance with requirements of California Water Code §13245
and §13246, and forward it to OAL for approval. The State Water Board, on behalf of
the Central Coast Water Board, shall file a Notice of Decision with the Secretary of
Resources and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (State
Clearinghouse) after approval by OAL.
4. If, during its approval process, the State Water Board or OAL determines that minor,
non-substantive corrections to the language of the amendment are needed for clarity
or consistency, the Central Coast Water Board Executive Officer may make such
changes, and shall inform the Central Coast Water Board of any such changes.
I, Roger W. Briggs, Executive Officer of the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board, Central Coast Region, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board, Central Coast Region, on May 5, 2011.
Executive Officer
Attachment: A. Revised Basin Plan Chapter 4 (onsite sections only)
SAWQ Control Planning\Onsite\2011 Revisions\2011-0004 draft resolution.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT A
CHAPTER4. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Alternative onsite system consists of additional
VIII.D. INDIVIDUAL,
(beyond conventional) treatment and/or disposal
ALTERNATIVE AND features engineered to overcome site constraints.
COMMUNITY ONSITE A conventional onsite system that requires a pump
to reach the leach area is not considered
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS "alternative".
Application area shall be calculated no greater
Onsite wastewater systems may be used to treat than the trench bottom and side walls below the
and dispose of wastewater from: (1) individual bottom of the leach pipe, minus the first foot on
residences; (2) multi-unit residences; (3) institutions each side. In seepage pits the application area
or places of commerce; (4) industrial sanitary refers to the total gravel depth in a seepage pit,
sources; and (5) small communities. All individual minus any impervious, bedrock or clay lenses
and multi-unit residential, commercial, institutional encountered in the sidewalls.
and industrial developments with a discharge flow
rate less than 2,500 gallons per day and community At-grade disposal systems consist of distribution
systems not regulated by waste discharge pipe and bed at the native ground surface level and
requirements must comply with these criteria. cover provided by filled material. At-grade disposal
Community systems are defined for the purposes of systems are similar to mound systems without the
this Basin Plan as: (1) residential wastewater sand layer.
treatment systems serving more than 5 units or
more than 5 parcels; or (2) commercial, institutional Certified professional is a person who
or industrial systems treating sanitary wastewater demonstrates special qualifications (through
equal to or greater than 2,500 gallons per day education, experience, exam, etc.) needed to
(average daily flow). successfully perform the task at hand.
Conventional onsite wastewater systems consist of Conventional onsite system consists of a septic
septic tanks and leachfield or seepage pits and are tank and leachfield or seepage pit.
typically designed to treat and dispose of domestic
wastewater. Alternatives to conventional onsite Detrimental Water Quality Impact is any
system designs are used when site constraints significant increase in waste concentrations or
prevent the use of conventional systems. impairment of beneficial uses of a water body.
Examples of alternative systems include (but are
not limited to) enhanced treatment systems, mound Discharger is the owner and/or operator of an
or evapotranspiration disposal systems, or at-grade onsite wastewater system.
disposal systems.
Drainfield is used interchangeably with leachfield,
Conventional, alternative and community systems leach area or disposal area.
can pose serious water quality problems if
improperly designed, installed, and/or managed. Effective trench depth means depth below the
Failures have occurred in the past and are usually bottom of the leach trench distribution piping minus
attributed to the following: the first foot.
• Systems are inadequately or improperly sited, Engineered systems are treatment and disposal
designed, or constructed. systems that require special design features to
Lon term use is not considered. overcome site limitations (topography, soil
• Long conditions, shallow groundwater or setback
• Inadequate operation and maintenance. variances).
Existing onsite system is any onsite system
The following definitions are used throughout this approved and/or installed prior to adoption of these
section of the Water Quality Control Plan. criteria on MarGh 20, 20^9(OAL approval dateL
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
2
Failed or failing onsite system is any system that Reservoir - A pond, lake, basin, or other space
displays symptoms of inadequate dispersion, either natural or created in whole or in part by the
treatment or assimilation of wastewater. These building of engineering structures, which is used for
may include, but are not limited to, surfacing storage, regulation, and control of drinking supply
effluent, lush growth above the leach area, sluggish water.
house drains, impacts to surface or groundwater
from the onsite discharge, odors, frequent pumping, Septage is material removed from a septic tank;
or backflow into tank when pumped. Standard usually the accumulated scum, sludge and liquid
pumping frequency is recommended every five within the tank.
years unless system-specific characteristics support
an alternative frequency. Sidewall is the side portion of the leach area below
the bottom of the distribution piping, or total gravel
Fill is material deposited to raise the existing or depth beneath the first hole in the central pipe of a
excavated ground level. seepage pit.
Inflow and infiltration refers to non-wastewater Threatened condition is one that if left
(stormwater, groundwater, streams, seawater) uncorrected may cause or contribute to water
entering the wastewater system through cracks, quality or public health impacts.
roof drains or other openings.
Watercourse - A natural or man-made channel for
Low permeability material is defined as having a passage of water. There must be a stream, usually
percolation rate slower than 120 minutes per inch or flowing in a particular direction (though it need not
having a clay content (% passing 200 sieve) of 60 flow continuously) usually discharging into some
percent or greater. stream or body of water.
Local governing jurisdiction shall refer to the VIII.D.31. ONSITE SYSTEM
local governing jurisdiction, typically city or county, _
vested with legislative authority for onsite IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
wastewater system permitting.
Monitoring shall refer to any sort of quality or California Water Code §13260(a) requires that any
performance assessment, including visual person discharging waste or proposing to discharge
inspections. waste that could affect the quality of the waters of
the State, shall file with the appropriate Regional
New onsite system is an onsite wastewater Board a report of waste discharge, unless the
system placed on property that has not previously Regional Board waives such requirement.
been developed, or expansion of an existing onsite
system to accommodate an increase in wastewater California Water Code §13263 requires the
generation, after adoption of these criteria (MarEh Regional Board to prescribe waste discharge
20, 2809 OAL approval date). Repair or requirements, or waive waste discharge
replacement of an existing onsite system does not requirements, for the discharge. The waste
constitute a new onsite system. discharge requirements must implement relevant
water quality control plans and the Water Code.
Onsite disposal area shall include the direct
application area (trench, pit, bed) and surrounding California Water Code §13269 authorizes the
100' radius from any point in the application area Central Coast Water Board to waive the submittal
that may be influenced by discharge from the of reports of waste discharge and waste discharge
disposal system. requirements for specific types of discharges where
such a waiver is consistent with applicable state
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. 133-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. R3-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
3
and regional water quality control plans and is in the wastewater systems covered by these renewed
public interest. conditional waivers are: individual residences,
multi-unit residences, institutions or places of
California Water Code §13269 requires that waivers commerce, industrial sanitary sources, and small
shall be conditional and may be terminated at any community systems not regulated by waste
time by the Central Coast Water Board. Waivers discharge requirements.
may be granted for discharges of waste to land, but
may not be granted for discharges of waste subject The Central Coast Water Board finds that the this
to the NPDES requirements of the federal Clean Conditional Waivers set forth in this Implementation
Water Act. The waiver must also include Program comply with Water Code $13269, are +s in
monitoring unless the Regional Board determines the public interest, and are This Conditional Waiver
that the discharges do not pose a significant threat ^^^+-ai^S ^A—nditi^^S -And- is consistent with the Basin
to water quality. Plan because:
On April 15, 1983, the Central Coast Water Board 1. Waivers granted for discharges that do not pose
adopted a waiver of waste discharge requirements a significant threat to water quality enable staff
for onsite systems thatwas incorporated into the resources to be used effectively and avoid
Basin Plan. (1983 Waiver). That 1983 Waiver unnecessary expenditures of limited resources.
waived the requirements to submit a report of waste
discharge and obtain waste discharge requirements 2. It was adopted in compliance with Water Code
for individual sewage disposal systems and for ReAtieps §13242 and §13269 and other
sanitary waste disposal from certain small applicable law.
community, institutional, commercial, and industrial
facilities if the systems met certain specified 3. It requires compliance with the Basin Plan.
conditions. In summary, the systems were required
to meet standard criteria of the governing local 4. It includes conditions that are intended to
jurisdiction that is implementing the Basin Plan reduce and prevent pollution and nuisance and
requirements pursuant to a memorandum of protect the beneficial uses of the waters of the
understanding with the Water Board or was an State.
individual prosect that complies with the Basin Plan.
On January 1, 2003, the 1983 Waivers terminated 5. Dischargers may not discharge any waste not
by operation of law due to an amendment to Water specifically regulated by this Conditional Waiver
Code §13269. Since termination of the 1983 except in compliance with the Water Code.
Waiver, the Central Coast Water Board has been
developing revised Basin Plan criteria and a 6. Dischargers who violate the conditions of this
renewed conditional waiver of waste discharge Conditional Waiver are subject to enforcement
requirements. Onsite wastewater systems have pursuant to Water Code seetien §13350 and
continued to be permitted by local governing other applicable law.
jurisdictions consistent with the 1983 Waiver and
the Basin Plan criteria and some have been subject 7. The discharges from onsite wastewater systems
to individual waste discharge requirements or all discharge the same type of waste.
waivers issued by the Central Coast Water Board.
n+ 8. It provides a method for coordinating regulation
nm�,,�m�
This section of the Basin Plan ,� sets with local governing jurisdictions that routinely
forth an revised Implementation Program for onsite permit and oversee onsite wastewater systems,
wastewater systems to ensure protection of waters thereby reducing overlapping regulation.
of the state, including criteria and as a conditional
waivers of waste discharge requirements and It is appropriate to regulate onsite wastewater
reports of waste discharge requirements for existing systems by way of a Conditional Waiver rather than
and new onsite wastewater systems. Onsite with individual waste discharge requirements
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 113-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
4
because there are over 100,000 discharges of the order to be substantially equivalent to the Basin
listed categories. Issuing individual waste Plan. If and when statewide criteria are adopted
discharge requirements to each of those would use pursuant to California Water Code §13291, this
significant staff resources and is not necessary in Basin Plan section and the memoranda of
most circumstances because such systems are understanding will be reviewed to determine if they
regulated by local governing jurisdictions. The need to be modified. Individual memoranda of
conditions imposed in this Conditional Waiver will understanding shall incorporate additional
be protective of waters of the state. This measures to be taken by the local governing
Conditional Waiver will simplify and streamline the jurisdiction to identify and address areas of
regulatory process without compromising the degraded groundwater or surface water quality,
protection of water quality. where onsite wastewater systems are a potential
source of pollution.
Although a discharge may qualify for waiver
enrollment, the Central Coast Water Board retains This Implementation Program sets forth twe-types
the right to regulate that discharge through other Of ondnt'onal waiversinr the regulation of onsite
programs or Central Coast Water Board actions wastewater systems. (1) a conditional waiver of the
(such as enforcement orders, individual waste requirement to submit reports of waste discharge
discharge requirements, general orders). The and to obtain waste discharge requirements for
Central Coast Water Board may terminate a existing onsite systems regulated under the 1983
discharger's enrollment in a waiver at any time and Waivers, (2) a conditional waiver of the
require the discharge to obtain waste discharge requirement to obtain waste discharge
requirements or terminate the discharge. requirements, but not the requirement to submit
Dischargers not eligible for the Conditional Waiver reports of waste discharges, for those systems
must apply for waste discharge requirements or regulated directly by the Central Coast Water
waiver of waste discharge requirements in Board, and (3) a conditional waiver of the
accordance with Water Code §13260. requirements to submit reports of waste discharge
and obtain waste discharge requirements for those
Local governing jurisdictions also regulate onsite systems that are regulated by local governing
systems. The Central Coast Water Board and local jurisdictions that comply with the conditions of this
governing jurisdictions typically coordinate the section. SestlenWl' n, D.3-aeendi+, ,ona;iywaiv
regulation of onsite systems. Appropriately wOaste d+SGhargeT 1eq�,rem s, "�E)t FepEs�f
developed and implemented memoranda of waste—diSGhages, fere systern6 regulated
understanding between the Central Coast Water d+reEtly byh-�CGtral GA-ast I^la+or Sep-
Board
esBoard and local governing jurisdiction (e.g., VIII.D.3.b Gonditionally waives waste i6GhaW
counties and cities) provide practical and requiFeme.nts and- Feperts of waste d'SGha
enforceable tools to compel compliance with the those systems that aro regulated by IGGal governing
Basin Plan criteria for onsite systems and ensure „Yrisdin+inno that ..,,F„ni„ ,^,i+h the nnnrli+inns of +hio
water Quality protection. seGtio .
The Central Coast Water Board's FEw^^ii+ive Offs^^r In compliance with Water Code §13269, the
is authorized to may approve and execute, on conditional waivers set forth in this Basin Plan shall
behalf of the Central Coast Water Board, individual expire five years after (OAL approval date) and may
memoranda of understanding with local governing be renewed.
jurisdiction in the Region based substantially on the
requirements specified in Chapter 4, Section VIII.D VIII.D.1.a. CONDITIONAL WAIVER FOR
of the Basin Plan (sections pertaining to onsite EXISTING ONSITE WASTEWATER
wastewater systems). Individual memoranda of
understanding shall commit the local governing SYSTEMS
jurisdiction to amending its municipal code and
onsite wastewater system program, if necessary, in
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
5
The Central Coast Water Board waives the tests are performed in accordance with
requirement to submit reports of waste discharge standard procedures.
asSOGmated fee and obtain waste discharge
requirements to +"-�eG-e-ntr-al-Cosi Bard a d b. Ensures proper system siting (VIII.D.3.a.),
tO resenv^ enrollment nGtWGa inn for those onsite design (VIII.D.3.b.), construction
wastewater systems that existed as of (OAL (VIII.D.3.d.), and installation for repairs and
approval date) that meet all the eligibility criteria and replacements.=and
comply with the conditions set forth below regulated
by a- Iaeal governing Ghon,-provided the c. Adequately informs property owners
fEAG ORg GA—A iti.,no are Met regarding proper installation (of repairs and
replacement), operation and ongoing
As set forth in this Implementation Program, the maintenance of their onsite wastewater
Water Board expects that local governing systems.
jurisdictions will continue to directly regulate most
existing onsite wastewater systems. The Water CONDITIONS
Board will continue to take direct action as
appropriate to protect water quality, including Dischargers to existing systems shall comply with
enforcement actions and requiring submittal of the following conditions.
reports of waste discharge requirements, and/or
issuance of individual waste discharge 1. Properly operate and maintain the onsite
requirements or conditional waivers. system to prevent failure.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA 2. Notify the local governing jurisdiction of system
failures.
1. The onsite wastewater system existed as of
[OAL approval datel. 3. Seek appropriate permits regarding repairs and
replacements of failing systems.
2. The onsite wastewater system is installed at an
individual residence, multi-unit residence, 4. Ensure that repairs and replacements comply
institution or place of commerce, industrial with the Criteria for New Systems (Section
sanitary source, or small community not VIII.D.>>) to the greatest extent practicable.
regulated by waste discharge requirements.
5. Manage and maintain the onsite wastewater
3. The onsite wastewater system was required to system in a manner consistent with the Water
meet the standard criteria of the local governing Board or Water Beard—€xeGUtive—OffTcer-
jurisdiction that was implementing the Basin approved onsite management plan
Plan criteria or the onsite wastewater system implemented by the local governing jurisdiction.
complied with the Basin Plan consistent with
the 1983 Waiver. The rangy wastewater RECOMMENDATIONS
:system is managed and maintained iR a
manger Eens4sten+ with the Water Board or The Water Board expects that:
management nlplemented by the i^^ai 1. Local governing jurisdictions may oaa use staff
GT1T�fl inspectors or individuals under contract with the
local government. A standard detailed checklist
4. The local governing jurisdiction takes the should s4a4 be completed by the inspector to
following actions: verify the onsite wastewater system was
constructed in conformance with the Basin Plan
a. Ensures site suitability tests are performed and local governing jurisdiction requirements.
prior to repairs and replacements, and that
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
6
2. Property owners should be made aware of the conditions provided the following Genditions are
nature and requirements of their onsite Met.
wastewater system. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
3. Prospective property buyers should be informed For an onsite wastewater system to be eligible for a
of any enforcement action affecting parcels or conditional waiver of waste discharge requirements:
houses they wish to buy. Local governing
jurisdictions should ensure the terms of the 1. The onsite wastewater system is installed at an
enforcement action are entered into the county individual residence, multi-unit residence,
record for each affected parcel. When a institution or place of commerce, industrial
prospective buyer conducts a title search, terms sanitary source, or small community not
of the enforcement action would appear in the regulated by waste discharge requirements.
preliminary title report.
2. The discharger receives enrollment notification
4. All onsite wastewater system owners should from the Executive Officer.
Reed to be aware of proper operation and
maintenance procedures. Local governing CONDITIONS
jurisdictions should shall mount a continuing
public education program to provide home 1. The onsite wastewater system is sited
owners with onsite wastewater system (VIII.D.3.a.), designed (VIII.D.3.b.), constructed
operation and maintenance guidelines. Basin (VIII.D.3.d.) managed and maintained
Plan information should be available at local (VIII.D.3.e.) in a manner consistent with criteria
governing jurisdiction health and building specified in the Basin Plan, Chapter 4, Section
departments. VIII.D.
VIII.D.1.b3.a. CONDITIONSAL FOR 2. The applicant submits a report of waste
WAIVER OF WASTE DISCHARGE that
to the Central Coast Water Board
that provides documentation of consistency with
REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW ONSITE each Basin Plan criterion.
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS REGULATED
DIRECTLY BY THE CENTRAL COAST 3. The applicant submits with the report of waste
WATER BOARD discharge a fee corresponding to the lowest
applicable fee for waste discharge
requirements (threat and complexity rating of
The Central Coast Water Board waives the III-C) identified in the State Water Board's fee
requirement to obtain waste discharge schedule set forth in Title 23 California Code of
requirements, but not the requirement to submit Regulations.
reports of waste discharge, for new onsite
wastewater systems (installed after [OAL approval 4. The applicant enrolled in the Conditional Waiver
datel) directly regulated by the Water Board that complies with conditions specified in an
meet the eligibility criteria and comply with the approved onsite management plan
conditions set forth below. `^ice-s+o disp.haFge implemented by the local governing jurisdiction,
ts [California Water Gode§13263(a)] are if available,
waived as fellews;
The Central Coast Water Board or its Executive
The Central Coast Water Board's Executive Officer Officer may terminate the discharger's enrollment in
is authorized to enroll applicants in the onsite the Conditional Waiver at any time. Dischargers
wastewater system conditional waiver that meet the not eligible for the Conditional Waiver must apply
eligibility criteria and comply with the following for waste discharge requirements or waiver of
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
7
waste discharge requirements in accordance with Coast Water Board regarding onsite
Water Code requirements. wastewater system management.
VIII.D.1.0.b. CONDITIONSAL FOR CONDITIONS
WAIVER OF Wnc-rE nicrunQGc
REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW ONSITE 1. The onsite wastewater system is permitted by a
local governing jurisdiction that implements the
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS REGULATED criteria for new systems (Section VIII.D.3.)
BY LOCAL GOVERNING
JURISDICTIONS 2. The onsite wastewater system is permitted by a
local governing jurisdiction that implements an
The Central Coast Water Board waives the onsite wastewater management plan approved
requirements to submit a report of waste discharge by the Central Coast Water Board or its
q p g G.,8,.��+i„o 040,.
and associated Water Board fee, and to obtain W.
waste discharge requirements or receive enrollment 3. The local governing jurisdiction has entered into
notification for new systems (installed after [OAL a memorandum of understanding with the
approval date]) that meet the eligibility criteria and Central Coast Water Board regarding onsite
comms with the conditions set forth below are wastewater system management.
1.4-AI AW-A fnr GRG48 wastewater systems regulated by
a IGGal governing jurisdiGtion, provided the following 4. The onsite wastewater system meets the
criteria in Basin Plan Chapter 4, Section VIII.D.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA for site suitability (VIII.D.3.a.), design
(VIII.D.3.b.), alternatives (VIII.D.3.0,
For an onsite wastewater system to be eligible fora construction (VIII.D.3.d.), maintenance(VIII.D.3.e.), and use considerations (VIII.D.3.f.)
conditional waiver of the requirements to submit a
report of waste discharge and obtain waste 5. The onsite wastewater system is sited,
g q DiSGharges
discharge requirements: ��� designed, managed and maintained in a
r,�+�iio,� ++or nn ,r,h �n 200 9)-! manner consistent with the Water Board—er
G
Waterr Board .,o,.,,+,,,o Of f,,,or-approved onsite
1. The onsite wastewater system is installed at an management plan implemented by the local
individual residence, multi-unit residence, governing jurisdiction.
institution or place of commerce, industrial
sanitary source, or small community not 6. The applicant submits any required application
regulated by waste discharge requirements. and fee to the local governing iurisdiction.
2. The local governing iurisdiction has adopted or PROHIBITIONS
updated local ordinances that incorporate the
Criteria for New Systems set forth in Section 1. Local governing iurisdiction approval and
VIII.D.3. of the Basin Plan. Lo�anGes discharger installation of new alternative
systems are prohibited subsequent to final
3. The local governing jurisdiction implements an approval of these criteria on (OAL approval
onsite wastewater management plan approved date) unless consistent with either a locally
by the Water Board eritszxese#+ve Of; implemented onsite wastewater management
(VIII.D.2.b.) to ensure conformance with the plan approved by the Central Coast Water
Basin Plan criteria set forth in Section VIII.D.3. Board, or the Water Board has adopted waste
and local regulations, and has entered into a discharge requirements or issued a conditional
memorandum of understanding with the Central waiver of waste discharge requirements for the
system.
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
8
Local governing jurisdictions should require onsite
VIII.D.24-. LOCAL GOVERNING wastewater system as-built plans as a condition of
new construction final inspection.
JURISDICTION ACTIONS
Prospective property buyers should be informed of
any enforcement action affecting parcels or houses
VIII.D.24-.a. DISCLOSURE AND they wish to buy. Local governing jurisdictions
COMPLIANCE OF EXISTING ONSITE should ensure the terms of the enforcement action
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS are entered into the county record for each affected
parcel. When a prospective buyer conducts a title
search, terms of the prohibition enforcement action
The Water Board, on March 20, 2009, adopted a would appear in the preliminary title report.
Basin Plan Implementation Program establishing a
conditional waiver for onsite wastewater systems All onsite wastewater system owners need to be
that meet specified eligibility criteria and #lie aware of proper operation and maintenance
conditions (Basin Plan Section VIII.D.13.a, b and c). procedures. Local governing jurisdictions shall
For an onsite wastewater system to be eligible for a should mount a continuing public education
conditional waiver of Report of Waste Discharge, program to provide homeowners with onsite
local governing jurisdictions must develop and wastewater system operation and maintenance
implement programs to ensure conformance with guidelines. Basin Plan information should be
this Basin Plan (as found in the following sections) available at local governing jurisdiction health and
and local regulations and enter into memorandum building departments.
of understanding with the Central Coast Water
Board. Such programs shall include (but are not Dual leaching capabilities provide an immediate
limited to) procedures to: remedy in the event of system failure. For that
reason, dual leachfields are considered appropriate
• Ensure site suitability tests are performed as for all systems. Furthermore, should wastewater
necessary, and that tests are performed in flows increase, this area can be used until the
accordance with standard procedures; system is expanded. Dedicated system expansion
areas are also appropriate. To protect this
• Ensure proper system siting, design, set-aside area from encroachment, the local
construction and installation; and governing jurisdiction shall require restrictions on
future use of the area as a condition of land division
• Adequately inform property owners regarding or building permit approval. For new subdivisions,
proper installation, operation and ongoing Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's)
maintenance of their onsite wastewater or additional map sheets recorded with the Parcel
systems. or Tract Final Map might provide an appropriate
mechanism for protecting a set aside area. Future
Local governing jurisdictions may Gae use staff buyers of affected property would be notified of
inspectors or individuals under contract with the property use restrictions by reading the CC&R's or
local government. A standard detailed checklist Final Map.
should shall be completed by the inspector to verify
the onsite wastewater system was constructed in Many existing systems do not comply with current
conformance with the Basin Plan and local or proposed standards. Repairs to failing systems
governing jurisdiction requirements. shall be done under permit from the local governing
jurisdiction. The local governing jurisdiction shall
Property owners should be aware of the nature and require failing systems to be brought into
requirements of their onsite wastewater system. compliance with the Basin Plan or repair criteria
Plans should be available in city or county offices consistent with locally implemented onsite
showing placement of soil absorption systems. management plan (approved by the Central Coast
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. R3-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
9
Water Board or its Exec;uti„e OffiAer), 7. Local governing jurisdictions shall ensure that
alternative onsite system owners are provided
Land use changes should not be approved by the an informational maintenance or replacement
local governing jurisdiction until the existing onsite document by the system designer or installer.
system meets criteria of this Basin Plan and local This document shall cite homeowner
ordinances. procedures to ensure maintenance, repair, or
replacement of critical items within 48 hours
Within the following sections, criteria are specified following failure.
for RECOMMENDATIONS, REQUIREMENTS and
PROHIBITIONS. 8. Local ordinances shall be updated to reflect
Basin Plan criteria for management plans
RECOMMENDATIONS (VIII.D.2.b.), site suitability (VIII.D.3.a.), design
(VIII.D.3.b.), alternatives (VIII.D.3.c.),
1. Inform property buyers of the existence, construction (VIII.D.3.d.), maintenance
location, operation, and maintenance of onsite (VIII.D.3.e.), and use considerations (VIII.D.3.f.)
disposal systems. Prospective home or
property buyers should also be informed of any PROHIBITIONS
enforcement action (e.g., Basin Plan
prohibitions) through the County Record. 9. New alternative systems are prohibited unless
consistent with a locally implemented onsite
2. Conduct public education programs to provide wastewater management plan approved by the
property owners with operation and Central Coast Water Board Ar its ExeA„+;„e
maintenance guidelines. Offer or waste discharge requirements issued
or waived by the Water Board.
3. It may be appropriate for onsite systems to be
maintained by local onsite maintenance VIII.D.24-.b. ONSITE WASTEWATER
districts. MANAGEMENT PLANS
4. Standard soil testing procedures should be
adopted. As set forth in Section VIII.D.1, the Water Board, ee
Marcel 29, 2509 adopted a Pasin PlaR
REQUIREMENTS mplerre"+ �Pr gram that sets forth —
conditional waiver of the requirements to submit a
5. Onsite Wastewater Management Plans shall be report of waste discharge and obtain waste
prepared and implemented for urbanizing and discharge requirements for certain onsite
high density areas served by onsite wastewater wastewater systems TBesin—P'�oes ' n `t+c3„ - "lI-D.3�-.
systems. F=A-.r AA Ansite ;niaAsfe;eiater system to be eligible fAr
Gend'tnonal waiver, where the local governing
6. Local governing jurisdictions shall require jurisdiction must adept develops and implements an
replacements or repairs to failing systems to be onsite wastewater management plan that esnapl+es
in substantial conformance (to the greatest with this seAfieA is approved by the Water Board.
extent practicable) with the Basin Plan criteria This section sets forth the purpose and content of
for site suitability (VI II.D.3.a.), design the onsite wastewater management plan that must
(VI II.D.3.b.), alternatives (VI II.D.3.c.), be included prior to Water Board approval. Approval
construction (VIII.D.3.d.), maintenance of onsite system wastewater management plans
(VI II.D.3.e.), and use considerations (VIII.D.3.f.) shall be based upon (but not limited to) the inclusion
rese endat'ons, requirements and of the elements set forth below g,,i4aPGe A4:e�
prehibitie—ps or the local onsite wastewater +fthe . A guidance document, titled "Central Coast
management plan. Water Board Checklist for Developing & Reviewing
Onsite Wastewater Management Plans” is provided
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
10
to assist local governing jurisdictions in developing Recommendations and requirements for new
the plan ('n^i dee as AttaGhmonf 2 of MaFGh 20 onsite wastewater systems reflecting Basin
2009 Staff er#). Plan conditions and criteria (VIII.D.3).
1. For a conditional waiver to apply to onsite • Alternative means of disposing of sewage in the
wastewater systems, onsite wastewater event of disposal system failure and/or
management plans shall be implemented in irreversible degradation from onsite disposal.
urbanizing areas to investigate and mitigate
reduce or prevent long-term cumulative impacts • Procedures to assure that land use changes
resulting from continued use of individual, are not approved by the local governing
alternative, and community onsite wastewater jurisdiction until existing onsite wastewater
systems. Onsite wastewater management systems meet criteria of this Basin Plan and
plans should be a comprehensive planning tool local ordinances.
to specify onsite disposal system limitations to
prevent ground or surface water degradation. Education and outreach program including
procedures to inform property buyers of the
2. Onsite wastewater management plans shall be existence, location, operation, and maintenance
prepared and implemented for urbanizing and of onsite disposal systems. Prospective home
high density areas served by onsite wastewater or property buyers should also be informed of
systems. any enforcement action (e.g., Basin Plan
prohibitions) through the County Record. The
3. Onsite wastewater management plans shall education and outreach program shall also
include (but not be limited to) the following include procedures to ensure that alternative
elements: onsite system owners are provided an
informational maintenance or replacement
• Survey and evaluation of existing onsite document by the system designer or installer.
systems. This document shall cite homeowner
procedures to ensure maintenance, repair, or
• Water quality (groundwater and surface water) replacement of critical items within 48 hours
monitoring program. following failure.
• Projections of onsite disposal system demand 0 Enforcement options.
and determination of methods to best meet
demand. • Septage management.
• Recommendations and requirements for 0 Program administration, staffing, records
existing onsite wastewater system inspection, keeping, installation and repairs tracking, and
monitoring, maintenance and repairs including financing.
procedures to ensure that replacements or
repairs to failing systems are done under permit • Consideration of the appropriateness of onsite
from the local governing jurisdiction and in maintenance districts.
substantial conformance (to the greatest extent
practicable) with Basin Plan criteria for site • Adoption of standard soil testing procedures.
suitability (VIII.D.3.a.), design (VI II.D.3.b.),
alternatives (VIII.D.3.c.), construction . Adoption or update of local ordinances to reflect
(VIII.D.3.d.), maintenance (VIII.D.3.e.), and use Basin Plan criteria for management plans
considerations (VIII.D.3.f.) or the local onsite (VIII.D.2.b.), site suitability (VIII.D.3.a.), design
wastewater management plan. (VIII.D.3.b.), alternatives (VIII.D.3.c.),
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. R3-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
11
construction (VIII.D.3.d.), maintenance criteria and guidelines into their local ordinances,
(VIII.D.3.e.), and use considerations (VIII.D.3.f.) systems will not be eligible for waivers set forth in
VIII.D.1.c. These criteria will be used by the Central
• Procedures to assure that onsite wastewater Coast Water Board for Water Board regulated
system as-built plans are required as a systems and exemptions.
condition of new construction final inspection,
and procedures to assure that plans are Local governing jurisdictions may authorize
available in city or county offices showing alternative onsite systems if the agency acts
placement of soil absorption systems. consistent with locally implemented onsite
wastewater management plans approved by the
Consideration of use of onsite wastewater disposal Central Coast Water Board or its ExeGUt'Ve OffiGer
zones, as discussed in Rep#+ee §6950-6981 of the and with the Basin Plan criteria specified in
Health and Safety Code, may be an appropriate VIII.D.3.c.
means of implementing onsite wastewater
management plans. For any onsite system, limited disposal options are
available for septage (solids periodically removed
VIII.D.24-.c. ONSITE WASTEWATER from septic tanks). As a component of a
SYSTEM MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS wastewater management plan, long-term septage
disposal plans shall be considered and developed
by local onsite governing jurisdictions.
It may be appropriate for community onsite systems
to be maintained by local onsite wastewater system Onsite wastewater system criteria are arranged in
maintenance districts. These special districts could sequence under the following categories: site
be administered through existing local governments suitability, onsite system design, design for
such as County Water Districts, Community alternative and engineered systems, construction,
Services Districts, or County Service Areas onsite system maintenance, use considerations,
onsite wastewater system prohibition areas, and
Onsite wastewater system maintenance districts subsurface disposal exemptions
are responsible for onsite system operation and design, and leGal geve1n,�,9 7uisdfet+ees. Within
maintenance in conformance with this Water each category, criteria are specified for
Quality Control Plan. Such districts should ensure RECOMMENDATIONS, REQUIREMENTS and
proper construction, installation, operation, and PROHIBITIONS.
maintenance of onsite wastewater systems.
Maintenance districts should establish onsite VIII.D.32.a. SITE SUITABILITY
system surveillance, maintenance and pumping —
programs, provide repairs to plumbing or
Ieachfields, and encourage water conservation RECOMMENDATIONS
measures.
1. For new land divisions, onsite disposal systems
and expansion areas should be protected from
VIII.D.32. CRITERIA FOR NEW encroachment by provisions in covenants,
SYSTEMS conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs), recorded
in Final Maps or similar mechanisms.
Onsite wastewater system problems can be 2. Percolation test holes (at least three per
minimized with proper site location, design, system) should be drilled with a hand auger. A
installation, operation and maintenance. The hole could be hand augered or dug with hand
following section includes criteria for all new onsite tools at the bottom of a larger excavation made
wastewater disposal systems. Unless l=local by a backhoe.
governing jurisdictions -should incorporate these
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. 133-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
12
3. Natural ground slope of the disposal area with recommendations, requirements and
should not exceed 20 percent. prohibitions specified in this section). Seepage
pits should be utilized only after careful
4. An excavation should be made to detect consideration of site suitability.
mottling or presence of underground channels,
fissures, or cracks. Soils should be excavated 11. Distances between trench bottom and highest
to a depth of 4-5 feet below drain field bottom. seasonal usable groundwater, including
perched groundwater, shall not be less than the
REQUIREMENTS separation specified by appropriate percolation
rate:
5. At least one soil boring or excavation per onsite
system shall be performed to determine soil Percolation Rate
suitability, depth to groundwater, and depth to (minutes/inch)* Distance (feet)
bedrock or impervious layer. Soil borings are 1-4 20
particularly important for seepage pits. The soil 5-29 8
boring or excavation should extend at least 10 >30 5
feet below the drain field bottom at each
proposed location and be performed during or Onsite disposal in soils with percolation rates faster than
one minute per inch are prohibited without additional
shortly after the wet season to characterize the (alternative)treatment.
most limiting conditions.
12. Onsite disposal systems on slopes greater than
6. For leachfields, at least three percolation test 20 percent shall be designed by a certified
locations shall be used to determine system professional.
acceptability.
PROHIBITIONS
7. Percolation tests shall be continued until a
stabilized rate is obtained. 13. For new land divisions (including lot splits)
served by onsite systems, lot sizes less than
8. Percolation tests shall be performed at a depth one acre are prohibited unless authorized under
corresponding to the bottom of the subsurface an onsite management plan approved by the
disposal area. Central Coast Water Board or its ExeG,,+;„o
9ftiEer. For the purpose of this prohibition,
9. If no restrictive layers intersect, and geologic secondary units are considered "de-facto” lot
conditions permit surfacing, the setback splits and shall not be constructed on lots less
distance from a cut, embankment or steep than two acres in size unless consistent with
slope (greater than 30 percent) should be onsite management plans.
determined by projecting a line 20 percent
down gradient from the sidewall at the highest 14. Onsite wastewater disposal shall not be located
perforation of the discharge pipe. The in areas subject to inundation from a 25-year
leachfields shall be set back far enough to flood.
prevent this projected line from intersecting the
cut within 100 feet, measured horizontally, from 15. Onsite disposal systems shall not be installed
the sidewall. If restrictive layers intersect cuts, where natural ground slope of the disposal area
embankments or steep slopes, and geologic exceeds 30 percent.
conditions permit surfacing, the setback shall
be at least 100 feet measured from the top of 16. Leachfields are prohibited in soils where
the cut. percolation rates are slower than 120 min/in
unless parcel size is at least two acres.
10. Prior to permit approval, site investigation shall Disposal systems designed to accommodate
determine onsite system suitability (consistency slow percolation rates (such as
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
13
evapotranspiration systems) shall be evaluated 24. Onsite discharge in soils with percolation rates
as alternative systems. faster than one minute per inch is prohibited
without additional treatment consistent with an
17. Onsite discharge is prohibited on any site onsite management plan implemented by the
unable to maintain subsurface disposal. local governing jurisdiction and approved by the
Central Coast Water Board nr its Exep ,+ive
18. Onsite discharge is prohibited where lot sizes, Offer.
dwelling densities or site conditions cause
detrimental impacts to water quality. 25. Onsite discharge is prohibited in fill unless
specifically engineered as a disposal area.
19. Onsite discharge is prohibited within a water
supply reservoir watershed where parcel size is VIII.D.32.b. ONSITE SYSTEM DESIGN
less than one acre, unless consistent with an —
onsite wastewater management plan approved
by the Central Coast Water Board or its RECOMMENDATIONS
Gvoni i+iio /lffinor
1. Dual disposal fields (200 percent of original
20. Onsite discharge is prohibited in any area calculated disposal area) should be installed.
where continued use of onsite systems
constitutes a public health hazard, an existing 2. For commercial and institutional systems,
or threatened condition of water pollution, or pretreatment may be necessary if wastewater is
nuisance. significantly different from domestic
wastewater.
21. Onsite discharge is prohibited where soils or
formations with channels, cracks, fractures, or 3. Distance between drainfield trenches should be
percolation rates allow inadequately treated at least two times the effective trench depth.
waste to surface or degrade water quality.* Distance between seepage pits (nearest
sidewall to sidewall) should be at least 20 feet.
Unless a setback distance of at least 250 feet to any
domestic water supply well or surface water is ensured. 4. Application area used in design calculations
should be no greater than defined in section
22. Seepage pits are prohibited in soils or VIII.D. +hn ern n,�n„��+nrl „�ir,n trnnnh bettnm
formations containing 60 percent or greater clay and—sidewallsR.A.i.A.l--s +ho firs+ feet. hoer,,., the
(a soil particle less than two microns in size) � s
unless parcel size is at least two acres.
23. For seepage pits, distances between pit bottom 5. Seepage pit application rate should not exceed
and usable groundwater, including perched 0.3 gallons per day (gpd) per square foot.
groundwater, shall not be less than separation REQUIREMENTS
specified by appropriate soil type:
Soil Type Distance (feet) 6. Onsite wastewater treatment tanks shall be
Gravels additional (alternative) water-tight, and designed to remove settleable
treatment required solids and should provide a high degree of
Gravels with few fines* 20 anaerobic decomposition of colloidal and
Other 10 soluble organic solids.
Gravels with few fines - Soils with 90 percent to 94 7. The minimum design flow rate shall be 375
percent coarse fraction larger than a No.4 sieve. gallons per day for a 3-bedroom house, and 75
gpd should be added for each additional
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. R3-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
14
bedroom. 17. Where site conditions permit migration of
wastewater to water, setback distances from
8. Drainfield design shall be based only upon disposal trench/pit shall be at least:
usable permeable soil layers.
Minimum Setback
9. Leachfield loading application rate shall not Distance (feet)
exceed the following:
Domestic water supply wells 100
Percolation Rate Loading Rate
(minutes/inch) (gpd/sq.ft.) Watercourse 100
1 - 20 0.8
21 - 30 0.6 Drinking water supply reservoir
31 - 60 0.25 spillway elevation 200
61 - 120 0.10
Springs, natural or any part
10. If curtain drains divert groundwater to of a man-made spring 100
subsurface soils, the upslope separation from a
Ieachfield or pit shall be at least 20 feet and the 18. Community systems shall be designed with
down slope separation shall be at least 50 feet. adequate capacity to accommodate the
build-out population.
11. Onsite system design shall allow access for
inspection and cleaning. Septic tanks must be 19. Community wastewater treatment and disposal
accessible for pumping. facilities shall be operated by a public agency.
If a demonstration is made to the Central Coast
12. For commercial, institutional, industrial and Water Board that an existing public agency is
community systems, design shall be based on unavailable and formation of a new public
daily peak flow. agency is unreasonable, a private entity with
adequate financial, legal, and institutional
13. Dual disposal systems shall be installed (200 resources to assume responsibility for waste
percent of original calculated disposal area) for discharges may be acceptable.
community systems.
PROHIBITIONS
14. All onsite disposal systems shall reserve an
expansion area (additional 100% disposal 20. Onsite discharge to leachfields is prohibited
capacity) to be set aside and protected from all where soil percolation rates are slower than 60
uses except future drainfield repair and minutes per inch unless the system is designed
replacement.up" Community systems shall for an effluent application rate of 0.1 gpd per
install dual drainfields (200% disposal capacity) square foot of application area, or less.
and reserve replacement area (3rd 100%
disposal capacity). 21. Discharge shall not exceed 40 grams per day of
total nitrogen, on the average, per acre served
15. Community systems shall provide duplicate by onsite system overlying groundwater
individual equipment components for recharge areas, except where a local governing
components subject to failure (such as pumps). jurisdiction has adopted a Wastewater
Management Plan approved by the Central
16. Distances between trench/pit bottom and Coast Water Board or its ExeGUt'Ve OffiGer
bedrock or other low permeability material shall
be at least ten feet. 22. Community system seepage pits are prohibited
unless additional (alternative) treatment is
provided consistent with an onsite management
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. R3-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
15
plan implemented by the local governing 4. Alternative and engineered onsite wastewater
jurisdiction and approved by the Central Coast systems are prohibited, except where
Water Board EXeG t'Ve Off . Such seepage consistent with a locally implemented onsite
pits shall have at least 15 vertical feet between management plan approved by the Central
pit bottom and highest usable groundwater, Coast Water Board or its ExeGUt'Ve Off;
including perched groundwater.
23. Inflow and infiltration shall be precluded from VIII.D.32.d. CONSTRUCTION
the system unless design specifically
accommodates such excess flows. RECOMMENDATIONS
24. Onsite wastewater systems are prohibited in 1. Construction activities should follow
any subdivision unless the subdivider clearly recommendations and precautions described in
demonstrates the installation, operation and the Environmental Protection Agency's Design
maintenance of the onsite system will be Manual: Onsite Wastewater Treatment and
properly functional and in compliance with all Disposal Systems.
Basin Plan criteria for new onsite systems
VII( I.D.3.) 2. Onsite wastewater systems should have a
slightly sloped finished grade to promote
25. Curtain drains that discharge to ground surface surface runoff.
or surface water are prohibited within 50 feet
down slope of onsite system disposal areas. 3. Surface runoff should be diverted around open
trenches/pits to limit siltation of trench bottom
VIII.D.32.c. DESIGN FOR ALTERNATIVE area.
AND ENGINEERED SYSTEMS 4. Work should be scheduled only when infiltrative
surfaces can be covered in one day to minimize
RECOMMENDATIONS windblown silt or rain clogging the soil.
1. Mound systems, evapotranspiration systems, 5. In clayey soils, work should be done only when
and other alternative onsite systems should be soil moisture content is low enough to avoid
designed and installed in accordance with smearing of infiltrative surfaces.
guidelines available from the State Water
Resources Control Board. 6. Bottom and sidewall areas should be left with a
rough surface. Any smeared or compacted
REQUIREMENTS surfaces should be removed.
2. Alternative onsite wastewater systems shall be 7. Bottom of trench or bed distribution piping
designed by a certified professional competent should be level throughout to prevent localized
in alternative onsite wastewater system design. overloading.
3. Alternative and engineered onsite wastewater 8. Properly constructed distribution boxes or
systems shall be located, designed, installed, junction fittings should be installed to maintain
operated, maintained, and monitored in equal flow to each trench. Distribution boxes
accordance with a locally implemented onsite should be placed with extreme care outside the
management plan approved by the Central leaching area to ensure settling does not occur.
Coast Water Board or its EXeGut,,,o OffiGer.
9. Risers to the ground surface and manholes
PROHIBITIONS should be installed over the septic tank
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. 133-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
16
inspection ports, access ports and distribution
boxes. 4. Onsite wastewater systems shall be maintained
in accordance with approved onsite
10. Drainfields should include inspection pipes to management plans. Where onsite
check water level. management plans have not been approved by
the Central Coast Water Board ^.r ,+s G„e,mitiye
11. Nutrient and heavy metal removal should be Off+EeK, onsite systems shall be maintained as
facilitated by planting ground cover vegetation described in bullets 5 and 6 below iR the
over shallow subsurface drainfields. The plants following speGifiGations.
must have the following characteristics: (1)
evergreen, (2) shallow root systems, (3) 5. Disposal of septage (solid residue pumped from
numerous leaves, (4) salt resistant, (5) ability to septic tanks) shall be accomplished in a
grow in soggy soils, and (6) low or no manner acceptable to the Central Coast Water
maintenance. Plants downstream of leaching Board Executive Officer.
area may also be effective in nutrient removal.
6. Records of maintenance, pumping, septage
REQUIREMENTS disposal, etc. shall be maintained by the onsite
system owner and available upon request.
13. Prior to backfilling, the distribution system shall
be tested to check the hydraulic loading pattern. VIII.D.32.f. USE CONSIDERATIONS
14. Disposal systems shall be inspected by the
permitting agency prior to covering to ensure RECOMMENDATIONS
proper construction. Designers and/or
installers of engineered onsite wastewater 1. Water conservation and solids reduction
systems shall provide a letter to the permitting practices should be implemented by all onsite
authority stating that the onsite system was system users. Garbage grinders should not be
installed in conformance with the approved used in homes with septic tanks. Where
plans. grinders are used, septic tank capacity and
inspection/pumping frequency should be
VIII.D.32.e. ONSITE SYSTEM increased.
MAINTENANCE 2. Metering and water use costs should be used to
encourage water conservation in areas served
RECOMMENDATIONS by onsite systems.
1. Septic tanks should be inspected every two to 3. Bleach, solvents, fungicides and any other toxic
five years to determine the need for pumping. material, grease and oil should not be
discharged into onsite wastewater systems.
2. Septic tanks should be pumped whenever: (1)
the scum layer is within three inches of the 4. Self-regenerating water softeners should not be
outlet device, (2) the sludge level is within eight used where discharge is to onsite systems. If
inches of the bottom of the outlet device, or (3) water softening is necessary, use of canister-
every five years;whichever is sooner. type softeners will protect the treatment and
disposal systems and underlying groundwater
3. Drainfields should be alternated when drainfield from unnecessary accumulation of salts.
inspection pipes reveal a high water level or
every six months, whichever is sooner. PROHIBITIONS
REQUIREMENTS
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. 133-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. R3-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
17
5. Self-regenerating water softener brine Prohibition Boundary Map included as
discharge to onsite wastewater systems is Attachment A of Resolution No. 83-13, which
prohibited unless consistent with an onsite can be found in Basin Plan Appendix A-30.
wastewater management sans Mi„mmizat on
plan approved by the Central Coast Water VIII.D.32.h. SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL
Board Exep-mf,
- „o nff;^o� and implemented by the local governing jurisdiction. EXEMPTIONS
VIII.D.32.g. ONSITE WASTEWATER The Central Coast Water Board ^tet;
SYSTEM PROHIBITION AREAS Of� may grant exemption to prohibitions for: (1)
engineered new onsite wastewater systems for
In order to achieve water quality objectives, protect sites unsuitable for standard systems; and (2) new
present and future beneficial water uses, protect or existing onsite systems within the specific
public health, and prevent nuisance, discharges are prohibition areas cited above in section VIII.D.3.g.
prohibited in the following areas: To obtain an exemptions, the discharger must
submit a report of waste discharge to the Water
PROHIBITIONS Board and the local governinq jurisdiction that
provides
after PF86 Rtati^n of sufficient justification, including
1. Discharges from individual sewage disposal geologic and hydrologic evidence that the continued
systems are prohibited in portions of the operation of such system(s) in a particular area will
community of Nipomo, San Luis Obispo not individually or collectively, directly or indirectly,
County, which are particularly described in result in pollution or nuisance, or affect water quality
Basin Plan Appendix A-27. adversely.
2. Discharges from individual sewage disposal Individual, alternative, and community systems shall
systems within the San Lorenzo River not be approved for any area where it appears that
Watershed shall be managed as follows: the total discharge of leachate to the geological
Discharges shall be allowed providing the system, under fully developed conditions, will
County of Santa Cruz, as lead agency, cause: (1) damage to public or private property; (2)
implements the "Wastewater Management Plan ground or surface water degradation; (3) nuisance
for the San Lorenzo River Watershed, County condition; or, (4) a public health hazard. Interim use
of Santa Cruz, Health Services Agency, of septic tank systems may be permitted where
Environmental Health Service:, February 1995 alternate parcels are held in reserve until sewer
and "San Lorenzo Nitrate Management Plan, systems are available.
Phase II Final Report", February 1995, County
of Santa Cruz, Health Services Agency, Requests for exemptions will not be considered
Environmental Health Service (Wastewater until the local erkity governing jurisdiction has
Management Plan) and assures the Central reviewed the system and submitted the proposal for
Coast Water Board that areas of the San Central Coast Water Board review. Dischargers
Lorenzo River Watershed are serviced by requesting exemptions must submit a Report of
wastewater disposal systems to protect and Waste Discharge, supplementing the local
enhance water quality, to protect and restore governing jurisdiction's submittal. Exemptions will
beneficial uses of water, and to abate and be subject to filing fees as established by the State
prevent nuisance, pollution, and contamination. Water Code.
3. Discharges from individual and community Discharges from onsite wastewater systems
sewage disposal systems are prohibited, regulated by waste discharge requirements or a
effective November 1, 1988, in the Los conditional waiver of such requirements may be
Osos/Baywood Park area depicted in the exempt from the requirements of this chapter. The
ATTACHMENT A
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Res. No. R3-2008-0005 & No. R3-2009-0012
Revisions to Chapter 4 incorporated, Res. No. 133-2011-0004
(onsite wastewater sections only) amendment(additions/deletions) shown
18
waste discharge requirements or conditional waiver
will act in lieu of exemption, and separate
exemption is not required.
Further information concerning individual,
alternative, or community onsite wastewater
sewage disposal systems can be found in Chapter
5 in the Management Principals and Control Actions
sections. State Water Resources Control Board
Plans and Policies, Discharge Prohibitions, and
Central Coast Water Board Policies may also apply
depending on individual circumstances.
SAWQ Control Plan ni ng\Onsite\201 1 Revisions\Chap 4 2011 edits-public draft.DOC
ATTACHMENT A
I CITY OF ATASCADERO
I .
° r
r .� r r r gip,°o, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
c r-r
1978' ' 6907 El CAMINO REAL, ATASCADERO, CA 93422
Telephone (805)461-5000 * Fax(805)461-7612
February 17, 2011
Ms. Sorrel Marks
Central Coast Regional
Water Quality Control Board
895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Comments on Amendments to the Central Coast Water Quality Control Plan
(Basin Plan) Onsite Wastewater Requirements
Dear Ms. Marks,
This letter expresses the City's comments on Resolution No. R3-2011-0004;
Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, regarding onsite
wastewater system implementation program (Amendments.) The City of Atascadero
(City) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Central Coast Regional Water
Quality Control Board's (Water Board) revised 2008 and 2009 Onsite Wastewater Basin
Plan Amendments.
As you are aware the City has been permitting septic systems in the City of Atascadero
since before 1983. The City has a robust set of municipal code requirements that are
protective of water quality, while maintaining flexibility in design and construction.
Hence, the local Water Company is on record saying that the City's drinking water
aquifer is not impacted by the approximately 5,000 septic systems located in the City's
23 square mile jurisdiction. We believe our current requirements protect health, safety
and state waters, are consistently applied and have the least amount of economic
impact on our residents. None-the-less, the City recognizes that periodic review of
regulations is beneficial as long as additional bureaucracy is not unnecessarily created.
It appears, based on the City's review, that the proposed Amendments are slightly
improved from the 2009 version. We appreciate the language changes that the Water
Board has made to the Recommendation sections in the implementation program. The
City believes it is very important to aim high while remaining flexible to reach goals. In
that light, the City has the following comments:
Draft Staff Report
1 . Page 2, Paragraph 3. The word "waters" should be added after "state" to clarify
the intent of the sentence.
"...Background — Persons who discharge waste that could affect the quality of
the state waters, including discharges from onsite wastewater systems, are
required to submit a report of waste discharge (application) under California
Water Code section 13260 and obtain waste discharge requirements or a waiver
of waste discharge requirements..."
Draft Staff Report Attachment A
2. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 4, Paragraph 3. We recommend that the word
"discharger" be inserted prior to "compliance" to clarify who is being compelled to
comply with the subject requirements.
"...Local governing jurisdictions also regulate onsite systems. The Central Coast
Water Board and local governing jurisdictions typically coordinate the regulation
of onsite systems. Appropriately developed and implemented memoranda of
understanding between the Central Coast Water Board and local governing
jurisdiction (e.g., counties and cities) provide practical and enforceable tools to
compel discharger compliance with the Basin Plan criteria for onsite systems
and ensure water quality protection..."
3. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 4, Paragraph 4. The paragraph contains a
redundant reference to the Central Coast Water Board. We recommend that
you strike the excess language.
"...The Central Coast Water Board' E—xecUtOV-e OffiGer authorized to may
approve and execute, on behalf of the Central Coast Water BGar4-, individual
memoranda of understanding with local governing jurisdiction in the Region
based substantially on the requirements specified in Chapter 4, Section VIII.D of
the Basin Plan (sections pertaining to onsite wastewater systems)..."
4. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 4, Paragraph 4, next column. We recommend
that you clarify what item the word "they" in this sentence is referring. We
recommend that you strike the term "they need to be modified" and insert
"modification is needed" as shown below.
"...order to be substantially equivalent to the Basin Plan. If and when statewide
criteria are adopted pursuant to California Water Code §13291 , this Basin Plan
section and the memoranda of understanding will be reviewed to determine if
they need to be modifioi! modification is needed.
5. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 4, Paragraph 5. We recommend that Water
Board staff re-evaluate the language in the last sentence of paragraph five,
shown below.
"...Individual memoranda of understanding shall incorporate additional measures
to be taken by the local governing Ourisdiction to identify and address areas of
degraded groundwater or surface water quality, where onsite wastewater
systems are a potential source of pollution..."
The City believes that the above noted sentence should be modified so that
flexibility can be maintained during MOU development, and requirements are not
2
located outside of appropriate sections. The City recommends the following
changes:
"...Individual memoranda of understanding shall be developed in cooperation
with local governing jurisdictions in order to protect surface and
groundwater from onsite wastewater system discharges. shall inoorperote
additional measures to be taken by the IOGal ur'sd'Gt'on to identify apd
address areas of degraded greund ater eir surflarce �..fatter quality, where ORsite
wastewater systems are o potential so,,roe of pollution..."
The California Water Code is very specific regarding who can be compelled to
identify and address areas of degraded groundwater or surface water quality.
The Water Board cannot compel an agency (Cities or Counties) or an individual,
which does not own the land where the discharge occurs or generates the
wastewater discharge, to investigate and or remedy groundwater or surface
impacts thereupon. In addition, this requirement appears to be an unfunded
mandate on agencies since it is the Water Board's responsibility to order
discharger's to identify and abate conditions of pollution and nuisance. Lastly,
this sentence is a requirement and does not belong in the section discussing the
implementation program.
The City recognizes that it is under no obligation to sign a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with the Water Board to regulate onsite wastewater
systems. The City further understands that the review and approval service now
provided by the City will revert back to the Water Board. This is likely to have a
negative impact on the Water Board's staff budget and the timely permitting of
our citizen's onsite wastewater systems. However, Water Board staff has made
it clear that Water Board staff expects that local governing jurisdictions will
continue to directly regulate most onsite wastewater systems (page 5, paragraph
2.) We believe that the Basin Plan language is conflicting and is akin to the old
saying "the beatings will continue until the moral improves" and does nothing to
improve interagency cooperation. Lastly, the last portion of this sentence
"potential source of pollution" is vague and it is unclear why this is included.
Every onsite system currently installed could be considered a "potential source of
pollution." The City does not believe that it is the Water Board staff's intent to
have local jurisdictions investigate every installed onsite wastewater system.
However, this requirement leaves the door open for that circumstance to happen.
If it is the Water Board's intent to require the City to investigate every system,
then we can state that they City will not cooperate in this endeavor. This would
be an unfunded mandate that the City would not comply with. Re-iterating our
earlier comment, the City is not responsible for investigating and or monitoring
onsite wastewater discharges. The City has been working with owners of failed
systems, however to ensure health, safety and the environment are protected
and will continue to do so as a service to our citizens and the Water Board.
3
6. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 5, Eligibility Criteria Item 4(a). The City is
concerned that the proposed language indicates that the City would be required
to perform tests or perform other functions for individual onsite wastewater
system owners. We do not believe that is the intent of the Water Board staff.
The City recommends that the following changes for clarity:
4. The local governing jurisdiction includes the following requirements
in its local onsite wastewater system codes: pri�oottiake?she
following antinnc•
a. Ensures Ssite suitability test-sing a-re is performed prior to repairs
and replacements, and that test-sing are is performed in
accordance with standard procedures.
b. Ensures Proper system siting (VIII.D.3.a.), design (VIII.D.3.b.),
construction (VIII.D.3.d.), and installation for repairs and
replacements of onsite wastewater systems:; and
c Adequately informs property owners regarding proper installation
(ef repairs and replagement) operation and opening malntenanoe
of their onsite wastewater systems
The last item is struck since the term adequately is vague and is open to infinite
interpretation. In addition, this eligibility requirement conflicts with
Recommendations 2 and 4. Item 2 states that "property owners should be made
aware if the nature and requirements of their onsite wastewater system." Item 4
states "...Local governing jurisdictions should shall mount a continuing public
education program to provide homeowners with onsite wastewater system
operation and maintenance guidelines." We recommend that Water Board staff
include repairs and replacement in the Recommendations section to remove the
conflict between the eligibility criteria and Recommendations.
7. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 8, VIII.D.24-.a. Third bullet. This section has
the same consistency problem that is described in item 6, above. Bullet three
states that property owners shall be adequately informed which appears to be
direction to inform homeowners. However the narrative in later paragraphs
states that landowners should be informed. City staff recommends that the
requirement in bullet three be eliminated or changed to be consistent with the
paragraphs of the Disclosure and Compliance section.
8. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 9, Paragraph 2. The City of Atascadero
recommends the following change to Paragraph 2.
"...Land use changes should not be approved by the local governing jurisdiction
until the existing onsite system meets the criteria of this basin plan and local
ordinances..."
9. Staff Report Attachment A, Page 9, Recommendation 2. Recommendation 2 is
vague and does not specify who should conduct a public education program.
City staff recommend the following revision:
4
2. "..The Water Board should conduct public education programs to provide
property owners with operation and maintenance guidelines..."
10.Staff Report Attachment A, Page 9, Recommendation 3. Recommendation 3 is
a statement and not a recommendation. We recommend that Water Board staff
revise Item 3 to make it a recommendation.
11 .Staff Report Attachment A, Page 10, Items 1 and 2. Items 1 and 2 appear to be
requirements and not elements. In addition, items 1 and 2 are essentially the
same and item 2 appears to be redundant.
12.Staff Report Attachment A, Page 11 , Column 2, Paragraph 3. The City is
unclear of what is meant by "local onsite governing jurisdictions." It appears that
onsite wastewater system maintenance districts may be the term that was
intended. The City requests that the Water Board define this term if the left in
the paragraph. In addition, this paragraph deals with septage disposal and it is
unclear why it is included in Section VIII.D.3. CRITERIA FOR NEW SYSTEMS.
13.Staff Report Attachment A, Page 12, Column 2, Prohibition 13. The City re-
iterates its objections to the Water Board's prohibition on second residential units
on lots less than two acres. This prohibition is in conflict with sound science and
state mandated housing requirements for second units. Please refer to our
previous correspondence related to this requirement.
14.Staff Report Attachment A, Page 16 & 17, Recommendation 4 and Prohibition 1 .
These two items appear to conflict. We recommend that you evaluate these two
items to make the Water Board's intent clear.
City staff appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the re-proposed Onsite
Wastewater Basin Plan Amendments. Please call me at (805) 470-3424 should you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
Russell S. Thompson, PE
Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Atascadero
Cc:
5
Attachment C
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
6907 El CAMINO PEAL,ATASCADERO,CA 93422
Telephone(805)461-5000*Fax(805)461-7612
April 7, 2008
Ms. Sorrel Marks
Central Coast Regional
Water Quality Control Board
895 Aerovista Place,Suite 101
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Comments on Amendments to the Central Coast Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)
Onsite Wastewater Requirements
Dear Ms. Marks,
The City of Atascadero(City)appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Central Coast
Regional Water Quality Control Board's(Water Board)proposed Onsite Wastewater Basin Plan
Amendments. The City agrees with the Water Board staff that amendments to the Onsite
Wastewater Basin Plan requirements are long overdue. The City appreciates Water Board
staffs eye towards making the requirements straightforward and implementable. However,the
City believes that a number of the amendments should be modified or clarified prior to adoption.
The City has the following comments:
Resolution No. R3-2208-0005
1. Page 3. Definition of `Watercourse"-
Regional Board staff has changed the definition of a watercourse, mainly by deleting some
language and adding"man-made"to the definition. City staff is concerned that the new
definition is too flexible and is still open to broad interpretation. Past experience has shown
that not all Water Board staffers interpret the Basin Plan equally. In addition,the old
definition was much clearer and provided language that assisted City staff in identifying
watercourses. However, City staff understands that the original definition was problematic
for Water Board staff and we are therefore recommending the following definition':
Watercourse—A running stream of water; a natural stream fed from permanent or
natural sources, including rivers, creeks, runs, and rivulets. There must be a stream,
usually flowing in a particular direction,though it need not flow continuously. It may
sometimes be dry. It must flow in a definite channel, having a bed or banks,and
usually discharges itself into some other stream or body of water. It must be something
more than a mere surface drainage over the entire face of the tract of land, occasioned
by freshets or other extraordinary causes.
It is important to define watercourse in a straight forward, easy to interpret manner. The
above definition provides the minimum guidelines that agency staff, homeowners, and the
public can use to determine appropriate setback distances.
2. Page 5, RECOMMENDATIONS, Number 1 -
City staff recommends that the first sentence be amended as follows:
' Definition from Black's Law Dictionary,Fifth Edition, 1989
Attachment C
"...Provide property buyers, upon request,with legally available records regarding the
existence, location,operation,and maintenance of onsite disposal systems..."
It is not the City's responsibility to track or be involved with property transfers within our
boundary. We will provide any documents that we physically posses, in conformance with
the Freedom of Information Act.
3. Page 5, Item 7-
City staff recommends that additional language be added to the following sentence:
"...Local jurisdictions shall ensure that alternate onsite system owners are provided an
informational maintenance or replacement document by the system designer engineer or
representa :e installer..."
This language better clarifies who is responsible for providing operational documents to
homeowners since non-engineers are allowed to design septic systems.
4. Page 5, PROHIBITIONS, Page 9-
We recommend that Water Board staff take a collaborative approach to achieving its goal of
getting Cities and Counties to develop and implement Onsite Wastewater Management
Plans,as described further below. We recommend that Water Board staff add the following
language to the end of this prohibition:"...Central Coast Water Board Executive Officer or
individual Waste Discharge Requirements issued by the Water Board..."
5. Page 5, VIII.D.2.l.b. ONSITE WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS-
The City,with Water Board staff's knowledge and approval, has been implementing the
Water Board's Basin Plan requirements at the City's own expense. We have consented to
this situation in order to provide a service to the City's homeowners.This has worked for the
most part and has freed up valuable Water Board staff time, allowed for speedy permitting
and eliminated duplicative governmental oversight. However,we are now perplexed on why
the development of Onsite Wastewater Management Plans have become such an important
and immediate issue. It appears that the Water Board staff desires that the City spend a
potentially significant amount of funds on an issue that,to City staff's knowledge,is not
currently needed in Atascadero.
Overall, it is unclear to City staff how the Water Board can require Cities and Counties to
prepare Onsite Wastewater Management Plans. Staff has looked at the Basin Plan's
governing document,the Porter Cologne Water Quality Act. City staff has found no
instance where the Water Board is given the authority to require the City to address a waste
discharge that is not the City's responsibility(The City is not the owner of the individual
septic systems.) Therefore,we strongly recommend that the Basin Plan language be
reverted back to the current language. Additionally,this requirement,as written, is an
unfunded mandate. If the current language is not changed,then the City requests that the
Water Board provide the funding for plan development.
City staff agrees with Water Board Staff that Onsite Wastewater Management Plans may
be a good tool to prevent ground or surface water contamination in areas where limiting site
conditions could lead to problems. Indeed,Water Board staff has already identified the
urbanizing areas with septic systems that may be impacting water quality. These areas
were noted in Basin Plan Section VIII.D2.b. Curiously enough,Atascadero was not listed in
2
Attachment C
that section even though septic systems have been in use for over 75 plus years,a majority
of the land has been previously subdivided, and it incorporates approximately 25 square
miles of land. It is also important to note that the City does not allow new divisions of land
less than one acre if sewer is not available. Therefore, even if further"urbanization"were to
occur,the current Basin Plan requirements would be adequate to protect water quality in
Atascadero. Lastly,all new subdivisions that are less than one acre are connected to our
wastewater collection system.
The City sees itself as a partner in the effort to protect water quality. We believe that
forcing Cities and Counties to produce Onsite Wastewater Management Plans(if it is
somehow legal,we believe it is an undue requirement)is a step in the wrong direction.
Water Board staff should use a collaborative approach, much like the approach that was
used to develop the Ag Waiver program,for each individual jurisdiction. City staff also
believes that this new water quality objective should be focused on the areas where septic
systems are known problems(those listed in the current Basin Plan.) This would ensure
that funds and resources are spent on real problem areas.
City staff pledges to work with Water Board staff to implement changes that may be needed
in our upcoming Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)discussions. We believe that a
collaborative approach and minor changes may be all that is needed.
6. Page 8. PROHIBITIONS, Number 13-
Water Board staff have added new language to prohibit second units on lots less than 2-
acres. This new language is based on a Water Board legal opinion and does not appear to
be supported by technically sound science. City staff sees no difference between building a
second unit or a single home with additional bedrooms. Each situation would have to show
that the property is capable of handling the entire wastewater flow and include open land for
the reserve leachfield. City staff also recommends removal of the term"defacto"since the
words use implies that the construction of a second unit on lots of less than 2 acres
constitutes an illegitimate or illega12 lot split. City staff recommends the following
amendments be made:
` ...For the purpose of this prohibition, secondary units construction on a lot of less than 2
acres is are considered"defaeto" a lot splits and shall not be allowed,
less than t "'a8Fes in size unless it is shown that the lot can accept the wastewater flow
from the primary and second unit.
It also appears that Water Board staff has removed language that was previously contained
in the Basin Plan that allowed lot splits of less than one acre, if favorable site conditions
were present. No justification was provided in the amended requirements.
Lastly, it appears short sighted to require that lots be 2-acres or larger for second units.
California, especially the Central Coast, is dealing with a large population of aging
individuals. These individuals are being cared for by their adult children, hence,there is a
demand for second units. The Water Code requires Water Board staff to consider housing
needs when establishing new requirements. It does not appear that the housing needs
requirement was considered. City staff believes that the threshold for second units vs. lot
size should be based on whether or not the land can accept the onsite wastewater load.
2 The use of De facto:As defined in Black's Law Dictionary,Fifth Edition, 1989
3
Attachment C
Failure to do so would potentially cause undue hardships on families when the potential for
water quality improvement or protection is insignificant.
7. Page 9. REQUIREMENTS. Number 9-
City staff is unclear why the requirement for a 0.1 gallon per day per square foot application
rate is required for percolation rates between 61 and 120 minutes per inch. It is not
reasonable to require a landowner with a percolation rate of 61 minutes per inch to
construct an onsite wastewater system that would be the same size as the system on a lot
with an 120 minute per inch percolation rate. The 61 minute per inch percolation rate is
almost twice as fast as the 120 minutes per inch rate. Therefore,the system would be twice
the needed size,twice the cost and provide no greater water quality protection. Agencies
have to be responsive and only require what is necessary to protect human health and the
environment. City staff proposes the following application rates for percolation rates
between 61 and 120 minutes per inch:
minutes/inch d/s .ft
61-80 0.2
81-100 0.15
101- 120 0.1
8. Page 9& 10, REQUIREMENTS. Number 17-
City staff recommends that a note be included with each setback clarifying that a 100-foot
setback applies to the areas upslope from a Water Course, Drinking Water Supply
Reservoir Spillway Elevation or Spring. Onsite wastewater systems that are downslope
from the aforementioned features do not pose a risk to the upslope features(water doesn't
flow uphill.)
9. Page 10. REQUIREMENTS, Number 25-
City staff recommends that the word "downgradient"in this paragraph be changed to
"downslope"since this more accurately describes the surface location.
City staff appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed Onsite
Wastewater Basin Plan Amendments. Please call me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Original Signed by David Athey
David M.Athey
Deputy Public Works Director
City of Atascadero
Cc: Wade McKinney, City of Atascadero
Steve Kahn, City of Atascadero
Warren Frace,City of Atascadero
4
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 03/22/11
�rlr 11
�1918 �� .., �. l`1979�
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — Administrative Services Department
Historic City Hall Project Additional Alternates
RECOMMENDATION:
Council give Staff direction by providing a priority ranking of the attached List of
Alternates for the Historic City Hall Project.
DISCUSSION:
As Council is aware, there are a number of elements of the Historic City Hall Project
that are not funded by FEMA, and are to be done entirely at the City's expense. Several
of these items would be a significant part of the restoration of the historical fabric of the
building, but are not part of the repairs that are mandatory to reoccupy the building.
Although it may be desirable to include all of these additional alternates in the project
contracts that will be awarded during the next few months, the reality is that the amount
of City funds that will be available to complete these alternates is still unknown.
There are fourteen City-funded additional alternates, all of which are optional. Before
receiving bids for the scopes of work that could contain these alternates, Staff is asking
Council for a `wish list' on the preferred priority of these fourteen elements. In
accordance with the City's Purchasing Policy, bidders will be submitting sealed bids in
the coming weeks, which are to include a base bid for the basic scope of work along
with bids for appropriate additional alternates. Staff will then bring forward for Council
approval a contract for each bid package with the responsive bidder that has a
combination of the lowest base bid plus alternates (if appropriate), based on a
combination of Council's suggested priority of alternates and the availability of funds.
For this reason, it is important that Council give a rank number for each alternate.
Following is a list of the various alternates, in no particular order, along with the
estimated cost for each and a brief description.
1) ADA Ramp #2 at North Entry - $59,000 estimate
Provide additional ramp at north (Lewis Avenue) entry that will match ramp at south
(Palma Avenue) entry across from the Sunken Gardens. The north entry ramp will
provide ADA access when the north doors, which typically will be closed, are open
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 03/22/11
to allow access during Council meetings or booked events and meetings in the two
north conference rooms on the first floor of historic City Hall.
2) Re-opening Lower Rotunda Overlooks from Second Floor - $37,400 estimate
The building originally had overlooks from the second floor circular corridor into the
lower rotunda. In addition to providing a visual connection between floors, these
overlooks also allowed additional natural daylight into the lower rotunda. This
alternate would reopen the overlooks, and will include installation of one-hour rated
glazing, to maintain the required fire rating in the building for exiting purposes.
3) Lightboxes at Lower Rotunda Third Floor Luminaires - $11,600 estimate
The existing luminaires (high windows) in the lower rotunda were originally created
to allow natural daylight to fill the volume of the lower rotunda, due to an intricate
natural daylight concept related to skylights in the building. Over time, the skylights
were removed and the building was reconfigured so natural daylight no longer
filtered through to the luminaires. In lieu of reconfiguring the building, this alternate
would allow light boxes to be created behind the luminaires that can provide
artificial light in the lower rotunda to mimic the original natural daylighting scheme.
4) Decorative Painting of Lower Rotunda Dome - $168,000 estimate
The ornate plaster ceiling in the lower rotunda is an original feature of the building
that most people rarely notice. The ceiling is very elaborate with ornate coffers and
detailing that is hard to discern from floor level. A decorative paint scheme for the
lower rotunda would highlight the intricate features of the ceiling and enhance the
overall character of the space.
5) Acoustic Treatment of Lower Rotunda Walls
Option A — Stretch Fabric - $67,200 estimate
Option B —Acoustic Plaster- $78,400 estimate
In order to improve the acoustics of the lower rotunda, an acoustical treatment
would be applied to the lower curved walls between the pilasters. The treatment
could either be an acoustical fabric with absorbent backing on panels or an applied
finish of acoustical plaster.
6) Pendant Light Fixtures at North and South Entries - $30,000 estimate
Install new custom light fixtures in the south and north entry vestibules of the
building to enhance the light levels at the primary entries. This would enhance the
character of the vestibule spaces by replacing the existing surface mounted
fluorescent fixtures.
7) Change Out Interior Door Types - $2,700 estimate
Replace the few flat panel hollow core wood doors that had been installed in the
building over the years with new wood panel doors (rail and stile) to match the
remaining historic interior doors.
8) Acoustic Plaster at North and South Entry Ceilings - $13,500 estimate
Replace existing direct glue acoustical tile in the north and south entry vestibules
with acoustic plaster to enhance the historic character of the vestibules.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 2
DATE: 03/22/11
9) Upper Rotunda Skylight Light Box - $6,700 estimate
Provide lighting inside the currently abandoned skylight in the upper rotunda to
mimic the natural daylighting effect of the original skylight.
10) Additional Cove Lighting at Upper Rotunda - $11,500 estimate
Enhance existing florescent lighting around the topmost perimeter of the upper
rotunda. This alternate would provide a continuous light source and eliminate the
"scalloping" effect that has resulted from unsuitable spacing of existing light fixtures.
11) Stain Grade Wood and Stain in Lieu of Paint - $36,800 estimate
Upgrade wood for upper mezzanine floor, upper mezzanine railing, and sidelights
for doors that are currently stained. This would be in lieu of low grade paint finish
wood for replacement elements funded by FEMA, to upgrade the wood to a higher
quality stain finish that would match the historic appearance of the interior wood
elements.
12) Misc. Exterior Deferred Maintenance - $194,500 estimate
Provide all exterior deferred maintenance elements related to the exterior envelope
of the existing building. These elements (terra cotta spalls and cracking; removing
mortar droppings from previous repointing efforts; rebuilding sills that weren't
properly done when additional windows were added to the building in the late
1920's; etc.) have all evolved over time and are not covered by FEMA under repair
and hazard mitigation funding.
13) Landscape Restoration and Enhancements - $256,600 estimate
Provide additional landscape restoration and enhancements. FEMA only pays for
new grass seed. Landscape enhancements would include additional low bushes
and flowering plants, plus restoration of the fountains.
14) Enhanced Lighting Plan for Entire Building - $54,500 estimate
Provide appropriate interior light fixtures, given that FEMA only pays to reinstall the
surface mounted florescent fixtures that were in place on the day of the event.
Existing fixtures would be replaced with new fixtures that compliment the historic
character of the building while providing energy efficient light sources. All fixtures
would use compact fluorescent bulbs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time.
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A — List of Additional Alternates
Exhibit A
List of Additional Alternates
Ranked
Preference Alternate Description
ADA Ramp#2 at North Entry
Re-opening Lower Rotunda Overlooks from Second Floor
Li htboxes at Lower Rotunda Third Floor Luminaires
Decorative Painting of Lower Rotunda Dome
Acoustic Treatment of Lower Rotunda Walls
Pendant Light Fixtures at North and South Entries
Change Out Interior Door Types
Acoustic Plaster at North and South Entry Ceilings
Upper Rotunda Skylight Light Box
Additional Cove Lighting at Upper Rotunda
Stain Grade Wood and Stain in Lieu of Paint
Misc. Exterior Deferred Maintenance
Landscape Restoration and Enhancements
Enhanced Lighting Plan for Entire Building
Please rank the 14 alternates above, giving the highest priority alternate a rank of 1, and the lowest
priority alternate a rank of 14.
Please be sure to give each of the above alternates a ranking number.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 3
DATE: 03/22/11
,,�SCADE$p
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — Community Development Department
Housing Element Annual
Progress Report 2010
(PLN 2006-1133)
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission recommends the City Council:
Direct staff to submit the attached 2010 Housing Element Annual Progress Report to
the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development.
DISCUSSION:
Background: The State of California requires all cities to file an Annual Housing
Element Progress Report to the Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD). The purpose of the Housing Report is to monitor the implementation of the City's
General Plan Housing Element and progress toward meeting the City's Regional
Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The allocations are targets for the production of
affordable housing for various income groups throughout the City.
Table 1
State of California Income Level Definitions
Very Low Income Lower Income Moderate Income Above Moderate
50% of County 80% of County 120% of County Greater than 120% of
Median Median Median County Median
San Luis Obispo County Median Income for a Family of Four(4): $72,500 for 2010
These regional housing allocations are required to be used by the City when updating
the housing element. They are the basis for assuring that adequate sites and zoning are
available to accommodate at least the number of units allocated. These housing
allocation numbers are not housing unit quotas that the City must achieve within the
time frame of their next housing element update, but housing targets for which the City
must provide zoning and reduced obstacles to development.
City Staff and City consultants have updated Atascadero's Housing Element. This
updated housing element has been approved by the City Council in early 2011 and is
awaiting submittal to HCD for approval.
Analysis: The current allocation sets housing needs for a seven-year period ending in
2014. As of December 31, 2010, Atascadero had met approximately 38% of its total
housing allocation. Of these new units, the City issued building permits on 13 new
residential units in 2010. Of these units, two (2) units for very low income residents were
a direct result of the Council's Downtown Redevelopment Housing initiative, and one (1)
unit was considered moderate income because of the formula established for 2nd unit
calculation. The remaining ten units were considered above moderate or market rate
units.
To date, the City has met approximately 11% of the requirement for moderate housing
(10 units) and 12% for low housing (9 units). The City has met approximately 7% (8
units) for very low housing needs for the 2007-2014 reporting period. These
percentages only reflect units that have been issued a building permit and do not reflect
entitled units or the units from the various projects that have been approved.
Table 2
2007-2014 Atascadero Share of Regional Housing Need (RHNA)
Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
2007-2014 Reporting Period Totals 106 74 88 194 462
n Permitted Units Issued 2 0 0 121 123
NSecondary Units Issued 0 9 2 0 11
Subtotal 2 9 2 121 134
00 Permitted Units Issued 4 0 0 14 18
NSecondary Units Issued 0 0 4 0 4
Subtotal 4 0 4 14 22
Permitted Units Issued 0 0 0 4 4
N Secondary Units Issued 0 0 3 1 4
Subtotal 01 0 3 5 8
c Permitted Units Issued 2 0 0 10 12
NSecondary Units Issued 0 0 1 0 1
Subtotal 2 0 1 101 13
Total Units Issued 2007-2010 8 91 10 1501 177
Remaining RHNA 1 981 651 781 441 285
Larger approved projects such as Dove Creek, and West Front Village are restarting
construction activities to finish off un-built units. Many of these large scale projects
halted construction activities in 2008 due to the significant tightening of credit and
capital, and the downturn of the housing market. These larger projects include
affordable housing production requirements as a part of their conditions of approval.
In addition to some of the larger developments, other smaller developments have been
picked up out of foreclosure such as Regio Place, The Villas at Montecito, and Oak
Grove Phase II. These also contain additional affordable housing units however these
project have building permits that have been issued previously in years prior to 2007 will
not be counted for the purposes of this reporting cycle.
2010 Affordable Housing Production
Calendar year 2010 saw an increase in building production by 30% versus 2009. While
the increase in the number of building permits is welcomed news, these numbers pale
in comparison to pre-economic downturn building permit numbers. Similar to many
national trends, the City saw little development in new units due to a lack of demand.
The City issued 13 residential building permits for new housing unit construction. Of the
total building permits issued, one (1) second unit is considered affordable for the
moderate income level group. This group is defined as "affordable" if the cost per
square foot for a typical rent in Atascadero ($1.09/sf based on the San Luis Obispo
Multi-Family Housing Rental Survey) multiplied by the square footage of the second
unit. If the rent falls within an income category, that unit is deemed affordable for that
income type.
The median home price in Atascadero for a new or existing home in 2010 according the
California Realtors Association was $308,657. This median home price still gives the
ability for moderate income wage earners to become homeowners for the first time in
many years. With the median home price expected to increase slightly or remain flat for
2011, the affordability for new or existing homes remains high for the City.
Conclusion: The City expects a slight increase in construction activity for 2011. This
includes limited new development from individual lot owners and an increase in
affordable housing for very low, low, and moderate income units as existing projects
that were approved with the inclusionary policies restart construction.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 2010 Housing Element Annual Progress Report Submittal to HCD
2 2010 RHNA Income Limits
Attachment 1: 2010 Housing Element Annum Progress Report Submittal to HCD
k�
!
}
OC
f } ({ )
/
x
® I /{
] % _ # !
x _ !2 ■I
�~
} \ \ \ §
/
e E . a
LU r
z @ E |
Uj �7 I
2 f
} }
<
Z k> � � | ■
o - - oo0000
_ & 7 f
- f a i ■ ®
k 15
` , .
! / { \ } \ �
I$ ! § | � lpp � f ; 2l ; !
{ �
$
X22 ,
| § s
06 �
;i
- !k
u ^ |\ -
|{
w
Cif -
�
LLI f : \ ) 3
Of 0 22 ■§ ){ ) (
_ � ; ' §s mea
j |
\ j \ !f E
j / ) 9 ° {j
_jIm
k
) � a UE | � -
} ! {
ƒ | !
is ! L
} }
&
�i
I !.
�
En { ! A
ƒ tQ k
2 2 2 r
LU
\ { /
LU % k & !.
LU 7 2 { (
u q _ k
/ o }
2 = 2
I =
!.
.2 IL
C-
e
L
u
Q
c
C � E
o
1rp a
� R >
a c 'o £ o
c i E
w o O v g £
8 Q 7 Op M $ A O C
o
� n3o a c 'S om o.
QEm
a v5 c A "- a n A Y 2S
CL LU O $ d m ;, c � o c 5 .; 3 � w
lq p m € v t .c cw 2'•- _c o o E ca 'c O.m E
�` .3.. So'6 og'g. o- Ocg' ' t. S' w o 4 C9 o
�IL
9v� 0uj
4wO Ud d � drarc $ d
0 o
T, c c
` o2 $c E C
w c c 21 c '
v
U C E o CX to
O O 0 Ot t0 Ot
CL �,,, N m d a O O O O O
C v a E rn E d _
y m m o $
Q d o u
LU V E c a r c c
2v E 3 0 _ 8 fi m
W W L ;a eoa g g 8 !'
S F �y' �'z c E
49 49
o t o
Z = o Z01 E E
L n
R py m
z J, O. a r a m v
w o v
co
O hw n U1 u A w 'cc O m
o rn Z a c - c 2 c
c a E v o E o iY t a a w L' �° o � ;4y{
.4 m m G O y o. 0 Q � d 4 O w Q 2 �
C Q= N N V �fI o 1� m r N N Il r N N
r U N N - r N fJ r
W o 2 r r r r W N N N N N ow U Mf
'J
U
a
w w
o � 2
u m
prpppS oc q QcQ m ami c rn � ` a
m
1�0 V V S O
Yg E og g �ov m o a °c° ms U
cw
Y " n
~ m w E E ^° m
�1 `gg o Yv 10 `� Ac Sm S 0g1i �
Em N E ca N o� m gE c ; E R 3 r5 aEi aV uo ` awe
Eo 0 0 = E oy�
W E
P £
� 40 m
ver t C C t Imp � C L �
p Q U Y Q V C C EL 2 L U T O
W c -
C& $ 8d U 2v V � O O K y U8 rOE 8 °
C C C C C 2 ` E
y z E qQ Qq Qqo
Q L <fn Dt t t E E s
C =
y —` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o o
CL e o '-� F
C y a E a E m
WLLI
g W
J 01 O�
W
cL
CC
Z Q L O C
w pr
S a a wIr $ c x! 3 E
o
U m c 0 6 o Q A w o o E p
n E QF c O b 2 V K O t �+ o ¢ v � o
a Irli
� E oocQEc ` EEEX c C O 0 8u'S > 2 5 � a: a Owm
�� UE ri rh �
rCp
C
t
V
Q
� Y c °� o L 12w
E g " o
E
L C 8 o d W m d £ g U
r c '� a
C
c E
c cv Eo �iw na �+ a 0E is E Yd m �
w g o o § m a
as a�4 o t a �w7 P S �t g& A t e �A
Q $ E
a� L g
a u u c c E
� a� E
4 SW
tI " 1 S E
p ° ,n-
g a g n 4 m Q, c U U g 2 V U tS
je. «�r z $ `7S UZSWU. U£ Z !- ZV � 3 � s < �U'S �� U0 � $
LU H tlQm
Le 0
m
a : c �= o Q a U o o O O U o O
y a E o�E
H d F m Q
LU
w W E 3
w 0 o a
J
a a < a < < < < < < g < a g m a
J '� d a 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 z z 3 z z
z
Q o �
0
A m CC
Q S C A A O V N C E V
W v g ' a1.IL qQ az E d
F N C rl
� O d w N C C
yo e y c w �' E o n
o TW e o U m Na o 4x u0
a m 2 Si E 13 Y! c .n 1i c o c 4
c a O � m = m y o F OCL
rn avi� c m �
.4 rn mb z 071 Z W 5 w CJ � U Kc £ � a: P
O Cf Y lJ � N a 17 0 C N
oQ a`� v e ori ai Bei ed 'd
rc
C`
L ,
V
m
Q
n v o g agg r
wo
£ ` m A g 8c n z & 3
es �0c, EE
� y7R5 E b o om mg' n m
U c E 4 a c
�f m $
m n cq o '1 m $ I m 3 c m
gc4� o C7 �m t ny gco $Vp U
22-2c ob o& E 'SaQ9c c 9 S
s" gN
pEm £ 38 � �g2.
$ w as c c c� 3 °' E•tl cy a
CL C $ ym v Em nma L4-.a �°0 0
W O 2g " � �W 4 t a'2 °c_°p nL' n �m : F o
L 8
n n
9 $ �, o,3 c CC .m N m �'
N m dg m � ' U m� U �.5 U gy iUa go��£I£U 4i U
�E�caFii� $
W y d y
0
N p1 p p�
C O W C C C C
I^ �
c m rn a a
N C C C
avEg ��
H N F c ° m
w � � m ~
o
W U E I m
w
w .= o d a < < g < g a a < < < < < c
J y a d S 3 3 Y Y Y Y 3 Y 2
O R g O
Z T
Z o
Q
a E n c
o P O c m g 7AE �� 'p a- It $
m LL u m LL � m
gF »
c'm a 18 A m q4� pg t o � o m 3 a1 � n
o `�w E m< n U d at ", 'g- v °u 'c a$ < y _
m om < caE � 6
� b w5
x h E N fh 1(d N �j,,
a o 0D rjoj
m $ m�i aD ao G m Oa m a u
n a` SOU ria` n nLL �x m
_ y
k�
2
2 \) 3 /k
� - ° -
! ! �!
}
c In E
Tj
! 2!
!
3|{ \\$ k 2
e � kI }kk \ \�"6
§ §k ) _ \ ;2 •a;
b .% �\ �) �
/}k
LU / - §f // a k) 390g
o � § ) �{a E@ ƒ
|o
LU
j /LLJ | Sa §
u m cp £jr !
LU .E _ � A
o J !
u m
2 = §
z !
«
| [ + 2
\ e 2
Ek -
#{ § 2k z!
lu ■ k\
� ! E
k
# § ■ §
L
V
a
O
CL IZo
w
w
� N
O
O
CL CIND
z d
z
d U
w W
J a1
J �
Q
Z
Z
z
Q
0 0
H
W
Q
C
U
4 �
o E
c a E
.2 m U
p C
y
Attachment 2: 2010 Housing Element Annual Progress Report Submittal to HCD
3-.ATE s.SL1=CRNLA-6USI���$$,Jp,E,N�PO�-A-�f.AIJC-OUSIPIG AG6NC
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Division of Housing Policy Development
t B;i-h n_Styr,S Wte-.30 �.
,9'6'.22321i- FAX FZ16 32--2612
wwn.r c0.rayr;
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 17,2010
TO: InterestedParti
FROM: ?Divi
VnoCfHousing
reswell, Deputy Director
Policy Development
SUBJECT: Official State Income Limits for 2010
Attached are the official State Income Limits for 2010 for all counties reflecting extremely
low-,very low-, low-,median-,and moderate-income levels for households of various sizes.
The income limits are posted at the Department of Housing and Community Development's
(Department)website<htto://www.hcd.ca.aov/hnd/hmJreo/state/incNote.htmh and replace
those in effect until this posting.
Official State Income Limits apply to designated programs and are to be used to determine
applicant eligibility(based on level of household income)or to calculate housing cost
amounts for housing assistance programs. Note that use of official State Income Limits
is subject to a particular program's definition of income,family,family size,effective
dates,and other factors. Also,definitions applicable to income categories, criteria,and
geographic areas sometimes differ depending on funding source and program resulting
in some programs using other income limits.
California Health and Safety Code(H&SC) provides that income limits for extremely
low-(H&SC 50106),very low-(H&SC 50105),and low-(H&SC 50079.5)income
categories not exceed equivalent levels established by the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development(HUD)for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher(HCV) Program.
Pursuant to State law,the Department is required to publish these State income limits
after HUD's release of its new income limits which occurred on May 14,2010. California
H&SC 50093(c) requires the Department to file any changes that revise Section 6932 of
Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations with the Office of Administrative Law. The
changes contain:(1)HUD updates to area median incomes and income limits applicable
to extremely low-,very low-,and low-income households and, (2) Department adjustments
to some area median incomes and income limits for moderate-income households.
If you have any questions concerning these income limits,please contact Department
staff at(916)445-4728.
Attachment
Income Limits Pursuant to Title 25,§6932
California Code of Regulations(CCR)
Methodology
The extremely low-,very low-,and low-income limits contained in California Code of
Regulations Section 6932 equal the extremely low-,very low-,and low-income limits
established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)for
use in its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. For moderate-income limits,
the Department sets the limits at 120 percent of the median income figure for household
size. For some counties,the Department increased the median figure to equal the
State non-metropolitan median (S56,300),as HUD specifies that income limits for
non-metropolitan areas not be less than the State non-metropolitan median family
income level.
HUD's FY 2010 methodology used to produce FY 2010 Median Family Incomes(MFI)
is unchanged from FY 2009;however, beginning FY 2010, HUD did make a policy
change to eliminate its"hold harmless"policy(that is separately described in the next
section). Data from the Bureau of Census American Community Survey(ACS)has
been updated from 2007 three-year data to 2008 three-year data.The factor used to
trend the 2008 estimates to the midpoint of FY 2010 MFIs is unchanged at 3 percent
per year.This trend, produced last year using the annualized change in the ACS
national median family income estimate between 2000 and 2007,does not change
using the 2008 national estimate in place of the 2007 estimate,so the trend factor is
also unchanged from last year.
As outlined last year in determining median family incomes, HUD shifted from use of
one-year ACS data to three-year ACS data. HUD uses three-year estimates to smooth
out year-to-year fluctuations in MFIs that impact programs relying on these parameters.
This smoothing effect is particularly important in times of economic turbulence.
Income limits are determined for metropolitan statistical areas(MSAs) and non-
metropolitan counties. Where an area or county has a condition that warrants special
consideration,called an exception, HUD adjusts the limit for an income category.
Upward adjustments are made either to the level of the statewide median for non-
metropolitan areas for high housing costs or because of a historical exception.
Adjustments to the low-income limit are capped by the U.S. median.
Policy Change
Beginning with FY 2010 Income Limits, HUD eliminated its long standing"hold harmless"
policy of maintaining and not adjusting income limits when decreases in median family
income occur. Therefore, HUD no longer sets the 4-person median amount at the
higher of normal income limit calculations or the previous year's income limits. HUD's
new policy is to control both decreases and increases to the 4-person very-low and
low income limits by holding decreases to 5 percent and increases to the greater of
5 percent or twice the change in the national median family income. Notice of this
change can be found in the Federal Register notices of September 14,2009,and
October 7, 2009,that solicited public comments on HUD's proposal to discontinue
its"hold harmless"policy and the Federal Register notice of May 17,2010.
Income Limits Pursuant to Title 25, §6932
California Code of Regulations(CCR)
Page 2
Generally, but not always,the area median income (AMI) is the greater of either the:
1) median family income for a county's metropolitan statistical area or for the non-
metropolitan county;2)statewide median family income for non-metropolitan counties
(S56,300 for 2010);or 3)AMI of the prior year. Once HUD establishes the very low-
income limits,they are then used to determine the limits for extremely low-and low-
income categories. HUD's 4-person very low-income limit usually equals 50 percent
of MFI. Also, in most cases,the 4-person median income limit equals two times HUD's
4-person very low-income limit, except when an adjustment has been made. In some
counties, adjustments and rounding conventions cause the 4-person median income
limit to be less than two times the 4-person very low-income limit.
Although many 4-person low-income limits equal 80 percent of area median income,
HUD's briefing materials specify that the low-income limits actually are based on very
low-income limits by calculating 160 percent of the relevant 4-person very low-income
limit,with some HUD exceptions. An exception for some high income areas means
that the 4-person low-income limit is different from what the 160 percent calculation
would yield because a maximum, or cap,was applied by HUD. An exception for high
housing costs relative to incomes means that, although HUD may have raised the
low-income limit for an area, HUD may not have raised the limit for the very low-income
category. In sum,what is called,for example,an "80%'limit cannot be assumed in all
cases to equal 80 percent of the AMI or 4-person median income limit nor 160 percent
of the very low-income limit due to HUD's adjustments.
California's extremely low-income limits are HUD's limits for"30%of Median". HUD
calculates its"30%of Median"limits using 60 percent of the relevant very low-income
limits, but with a floor set at the minimum Supplemental Security Income(SSI).
Income limits for all income categories are adjusted for household size so that larger
households have higher income limits than smaller households. For all income
categories,the income limits for household sizes other than 4-persons are calculated
using the 4-person income limit as the base. HUD's adjustments use the following
percentages,with results rounded to the nearest$50 increment:
Number of persons in Household: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Adjustments: 70% 800% 900% Base 108% 116% 124% 132%
For households of more than eight persons, refer to the formula at the end of the table
of the 2010 Income Limits. Due to the adjustments HUD can make between income
limits in a given county,these tables should be the only method of determining eligibility.
Arithmetic calculations are applicable only when a household has more than eight
members.
References: FY 2010 HUD Income Limits Transmittal Notice PDR-2009-02 issued
May 14, 2010 and FY 2010HUD Income Limits Briefing Material dated May 13,2010
available at<http ':'www.huduser.orWportal:'datasets!'iL`i110;'index.html>.
Income Limits Pursuant to Title 25, § 6932
California Code of Regulations (CCR)
Page 3
Applicability of Income L mits
Applicability of official State Income Limits is subject to particular programs as program
definitions of such factors as income, family, and household size, etc., vary. Some
programs, such as M.,Itifamily Tax Subsidy Projects, use different income limits.
For Multifamily Tax Suosidy Projects (MTSPs), separate income limits apply oer
provisions of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) of 2008 (Publ c Law
110-289). Income limi's for MTSPs are used to determine qualification levels as well
as set maximum rental rates `or projects funced with tax credits authorized under
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code). Also, MTSP income limits apply to
projects financed with tax exempt housing ponds issued:o provide qualified res dentia)
rental development under Section 142 of the Code. These income limits are available
at this weblink<http:i.,www.huduser.orgydatasets,'mtsp.htmh.
State Income Limits for 2010 5 of 7
Number of Persons in Household
County Income Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
San Diego County Extremely Low 16,500 18,850 21,200 23.550 25.450 27,350 29.250 31.100
Area Median Income: Very Low Income 27.500 31,400 35,350 39.250 42.400 45,550 48,700 51.850
75,500 Lower Income 44,000 50,250 56,550 62.800 67.850 72,850 77,900 82.900
Median Income 52.850 60,400 67,950 75.500 81.550 87,600 93,600 99.650
Moderate Income 63,400 72,500 81,550 90.600 97.850 105,100 112.350 119.600
San Francisco County Extremely Low 22,600 25,800 29,050 32.250 34,850 37,450 40.000 42.600
Area Median Income: Very Low Income 37.650 43,000 48.400 53,750 58.050 62,350 66,650 7a-95o
9.400 Lawer Income 60,200 68,800 77,400 86,000 92.900 99,800 106,650 113.550
Median Income 69,600 79,500 89,450 99.400 107,350 115,300 123,250 131,200
Moderate ncome 837500 95,450 107,350 1191300 128,850 138,400 147,950 157,500
San Joaquin County Extremely Low 13,300 15,200 17,100 18.950 20.500 22,000 23,500 25.050
Area Median Income: eery Low Income 22,100 25,250 28,400 31,550 34,100 36,600 39,150 41.650
63,100 Lower Income 35,350 40,400 45,450 50,500 54,550 58,600 62,650 66.700
Median Income 44,150 50,500 56,800 63.100 68,150 73,200 78,250 83.300
Moderate Income 53.000 60.550 68,150 75,700 81.750 87,800 93,850 99.900
San Luis Obispo County Extremely Low 15,250 17,400 19,600 21.750 23,500 25,250 27,000 28.750
Area Median Income: Very Low Income 25,400 29,DDD 32,650 36.250 39.150 42,050 44,950 47.850
72.500 Lower Income 40.600 46,400 52,200 58,000 62,650 67,300 71,950 76.600
Median Income 50,750 58.DDD 65,250 72,500 78.300 84,100 89,900 95-700
Moderate Income 60,9017 69,60D 78,300 87,000 93,950 100,900 107,900 114.850
San Mateo County Extremely Low 22.600 25.800 29,050 32.250 34,850 37,450 40,000 42600
Area Median Income: Very Low Income 37.650 43.DDD 48,400 53.750 58,050 62,350 66,650 70.950
:9,400 Lower Income 60,200 68,800 77,400 86,000 921900 99,800 106,650 113.550
Median Income 69,600 79,500 89,450 99.400 107,350 115,300 123.250 131,200
Moderate Income 83.500 95,450 107,350 119.300 128,850 138,400 147.950 157.501)
Santa Barbara CoLn:y Extremely Low 15,550 17.800 20,000 22.200 24.OD0 25,800 27,550 2935D
Area Median ncome: Very Low Income 25,900 29.600 33,300 37.000 40,000 42,950 45.900 48.850
71.400 Laver Income 41,450 47.400 53,300 59.200 63,950 66,700 73,450 78.150
Median Income 50.000 57,100 64,250 71.400 77,100 82,800 88,550 94.250
Moderate income 60.000 68,550 77,150 85.700 92,550 99,400 106,250 113.100
Santa Gara County Extremely Low 21.750 24.850 27,950 31.050 33,550 36,450 38,550 41.000
Area Median Income: Very Low Income 36,250 41740D 46,600 51.750 55.900 60,050 64,200 68.350
103.500 Lower Income 56,5017 64,600 72,650 80.700 87.200 93,650 100,100 106.550
Median ncome 72.450 82,800 93,150 103.500 111,800 120,050 128.350 136.600
Moderate ncome 86,950 99,350 111,800 124.200 134,150 144,050 154.000 163.950
Santa Cruz County Extremely Low 20300 23,2DD 26,100 28.950 31.300 33,600 35,900 38.250
Area Median Income: '•:Ery Low Income 33,800 38.60D 43,450 48.250 52,150 56,000 59,850 63.700
64.200 Laver Income 54,050 61,800 69,500 77.200 83.400 89,600 95,750 101,950
Median Income 58;950 67,350 75,800 84.200 90.950 97,650 104.400 111.150
Moderate Income 70.750 80.650 90,950 101.050 109.150 117,200 125.300 133.401)
Shasta County Extremely Low 11,850 13.550 15,250 16.900 18,300 19,650 21,000 22.350
Area Median Income: Very Low Income 19,750 22.550 25,350 2x.150 30.450 32,700 34,950 37.200
55.300 Laver Income 31,550 36,050 40,550 45,050 48.700 52,300 55.900 59.500
Median Income 39.400 45.050 50,650 56.300 60.800 65,300 69,800 74.300
Moderate Income 47.300 54.050 60,800 67.550 72.950 78,350 83.750 89.150
Mote:See instructixmslexample on last page to determine income limit for households larger than 6 persons
t:\-06 pins\pin 2006-1133 annual housing report\annual housing report 2010\cc-sr-2010housingreport-ac.doc