EXHIBIT 3
DRAFTMONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
FINDINGS
CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION TO CREATE
MONTEREY BAY SHORES WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMOCTOBER 18, 1999
It is hereby found and determined as follows:1. FINDING: In action on December 1, 1998, the City of Sand City approved the proposed development project known as the Monterey Bay Shores Resort, a 495-unit mixed use (visitor-serving/residential) project. The City certified the project Final EIR on November 17, 1998 in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
EVIDENCE: City of Sand City Resolution RA 98-07, SC 98-85, SC 98-86, SC 98-87, SC 98-88, and SC 98-93; Resolution SC 98-83 for EIR certification.
2. FINDING: An appeal of the City's determination regarding consistency with the Local Coastal Plan was filed before the California Coastal Commission. The Commission has chosen not to act on the appeal, nor allow the project to go forward, until various steps are completed. A permit for a Water Distribution System from MPWMD is one requirement.
EVIDENCE: Letter from California Coastal Commission (Charles Lester) to Edward Ghandour (applicant) dated May 20, 1999, on file at District office.3. FINDING: Mr. Edward Ghandour of SNG Development Company (applicant) has applied for a permit to create the Monterey Bay Shores Water Distribution System (WDS) to serve the area included in the following Assessor's Parcel Numbers:
(1) 011-501-014 to be divided into multiple APNs in the future.EVIDENCE: Application dated April 22, 1999 on file at MPWMD office.4. FINDING: Application to create Monterey Bay Shores WDS, along with supporting materials, is in accordance with District Rules 21 and 22.
EVIDENCE: Permit application and supplemental materials on file at the MPWMD office.
5. FINDING: The application adequately identifies the responsible party as Mr. Edward Ghandour and SNG Development Company. Mr. Ghandour's local agent is identified as Mr. Larry Seeman (District Rule 22 B).
EVIDENCE: Permit application on file at the MPWMD office.
6. FINDING: The source of supply will be used to provide potable and subpotable water for the parcel identified in Finding No. 3. The Monterey Bay Shores WDS will be independent of any other system. A professional firm will be retained to operate the system.
EVIDENCE: Permit application and supplementary information provided by applicant, on file at the MPWMD office.
7. FINDING: The applicant, as a condition of holding a permit pursuant to Rule 22 (B) shall meet annual reporting requirements for the Monterey Bay Shores WDS.
EVIDENCE: MPWMD Conditions of Approval dated _____ (pending approval).
8. FINDING: The approval of the permit would not cause unnecessary duplication of the same type of services by any existing system (Rule 22 C).
EVIDENCE: Parcels to be served by proposed WDS are located outside of boundaries of the Cal-Am service area, as shown on current Cal-Am Monterey Division Service Area maps.
9. FINDING: The approval of the permit would not import or export water into or outside the District (Rule 22 C).
EVIDENCE: The referenced parcels are located wholly within the MPWMD as shown on District boundary location maps on file at the District office.
10. FINDING: The approval of the permit could potentially result in significant environmental effects. Mitigation measures proposed as conditions attached to the MPWMD permit have not been reasonably demonstrated as feasible means to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, to date (Rule 22 C).
Potential effects include potential seawater intrusion associated with chronic water levels below sea level (drawdown) in the coastal area of the Seaside Basin anticipated to occur with the proposed water system operations under current regional basin management.
Mitigation measures within the control of the applicant that would partially reduce adverse effects were identified. They include: (1) use of irrigation water from the shallow dune sand aquifer underlying the site, and construction of a larger (1 million gallon) water storage tank to reduce summer peak demand and dampen the seasonality of extractions; (2) locate production well as far away from coast as possible on the property; (3) install ultra-low flow fixtures and drought tolerant landscaping; and (4) construct and maintain monitor wells for quarterly reporting of water quality and water level data.
Mitigation measures that would be most effective in reducing impacts are beyond the control of the applicant, who is willing to contribute funding on a pro-rata basis. They include: (1) move Cal-Am and other large production wells inland to new sites; (2) artificially recharge the basin via MPWMD injection/recovery project or similar means; (3) construct regional desalination project if approved within five years of MBSR water system approval (contingency measure); and (4) reduced pumping by Cal-Am and other appropriative users within the basin. These measures have conceptual merit but cannot be reasonably demonstrated as viable mitigation measures at this time.
EVIDENCE: Report entitled Ground Water Operations and Monitoring Plan -- Monterey Bay Shores Resort, prepared by Martin B. Feeney, August 1999 (pages 9-12 and Figures 6 and 7). Letter to applicant from Darby Fuerst, MPWMD General Manager, dated August 26, 1999 (page 2). Addendum to Groundwater Plan dated September 3, 1999 (pages 2 and 3). MPWMD staff analysis contained in October 18, 1999 Board packet, Item VI-A, Question 2, "Unmitigated Environmental Effects." All citations are on available for review at the MPWMD office.
11. FINDING: The approval of the permit could potentially create an overdraft or increase an existing overdraft in the Seaside Basin coastal subareas, unless binding legal agreements ensure that regional production stays within the sustainable yield (Rule 22 D).
EVIDENCE: All citations in Finding No. 10 above. MPWMD staff analysis contained in October 18, 1999 Board packet, Item VI-A, Question 3, "Groundwater Overdraft," including Exhibits K, L , M and N (MPWMD recommendations for Cal-Am operation changes, Seaside Basin groundwater production data, figures showing water level trends, and letter from applicant attorney, respectively). All citations are available for review at the MPWMD office.
12. FINDING: The approval of the permit could potentially adversely affect the ability of existing systems to provide water to users in dry water year types, due to the possible combined effect of State Water Resources Control Board Order WR 95-10 and possible restrictions on Cal-Am production from the Seaside Basin coastal area (Rule 22 D). Project impacts cannot be fully ascertained until claimed water rights are verified.
EVIDENCE: All citations in Finding No. 11 above. State Water Resources Control Board Order WR 95-10 dated July 1995. MPWMD staff analysis contained in October 18, 1999 Board packet, Item VI-A, Question 4, "Impact to Other Water Systems," as well as Exhibits I, N and O (letter from Cal-Am to MPWMD opposing the application, and two letters from applicant attorney, respectively). All citations are available for review at the MPWMD office.
13. FINDING: In the review of this application, MPWMD has followed those guidelines adopted by the State of California and published in the California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. Specifically, the MPWMD as a responsible agency under CEQA for this action, has relied on the certified EIR adopted by the City of Sand City in November-December 1998 as well as additional supplemental environmental documentation requested by MPWMD in 1999.
EVIDENCE: CEQA and CEQA Guidelines (Section 15096). MPWMD Rules and Regulations. Certification of EIR by City of Sand City per Resolution SC 98-83. Report entitled Ground Water Operations and Monitoring Plan -- Monterey Bay Shores Resort, prepared by Martin B. Feeney, August 1999; Addendum to report dated September 3, 1999. MPWMD public hearing on project environmental review held on October 18, 1999. All citations are available for review at the MPWMD office.
14. FINDING: To date, it has not been demonstrated that the ability of the source of supply to provide water for potable consumption complies with the standards set forth in Title 22 of the California Administrative Code (Rule 22 B).
EVIDENCE: Water quality analytical results in application, also submitted by applicant to California Department of Health Services (State Health). Letter from State Health to applicant dated August 20, 1999, and verbal confirmation of State Health position by Eric P. Lacy, State Health District Engineer on September 8, 1999. All cited documents are available for review at the MPWMD office.
U:\henri\wp\ceqa\1999\mbsfind.o01
Previous Page
Back to Oct 16, 2000: Agenda (Item VI B) | MPWMD Home Page | Contact MPWMD