MONTEREYPENINSULA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

Ordinance 98

CEQA GUIDELINES APPENDIX G
MPWMD ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM - ORDINANCE NO. 98


 
PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Project Title:  Adoption of Ordinance No. 98: Residential Bathroom Fixture Ordinance
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, PO Box 85, Monterey, CA 93942-0085 [Street address: 5 Harris Court, Bldg. G, Monterey, CA 93940]
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Henrietta Stern, 831/658-5621 
4. Project Location: District-wide, see Attachment 1, map
5. Project Sponsor's Name/Address: MPWMD, see #2 above
6. General Plan Designation: Varies throughout District
7. Zoning: Varies throughout District
8. Description of Project: Ordinance No. 98 would revise, amend and republish existing residential water use fixture criteria set forth in District Rule 24. In general, the ordinance would allow the addition of a second bathroom to an existing residential dwelling with only one bathroom without debiting the jurisdiction's allocation of water. The ordinance responds to modern quality-of-life standards that recognize that a second bathroom in a home is primary for convenience, and would not add significant water use.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Land uses within the District range from urban and suburban residential and commercial areas to open space/wilderness. The District encompasses the cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Seaside, portions of Monterey County (primarily Carmel Valley, Pebble Beach and the Highway 68 corridor), and the Monterey Peninsula Airport District (Attachment 1). Each of these jurisdictions regulates land uses within its individual boundaries. The District does not regulate land uses. 

The Monterey Peninsula is dependent on local sources of water supply, which (directly or indirectly) are dependent on local rainfall and runoff. The primary sources of supply include surface and groundwater in the Carmel River basin, and groundwater in the Seaside Basin (Attachment 2).

Vegetation communities on the Monterey Peninsula include marine, estuarine, and riverine habitats; fresh emergent and saline emergent (coastal salt marsh) wetland communities; riparian communities, particularly along the Carmel River; a wetland community at the Carmel River lagoon; and upland vegetation communities such as coastal scrub, mixed chaparral, mixed hardwood forest, valley oak woodland, and annual grassland. These communities provide habitat for a diverse group of wildlife. The Carmel River supports various fish resources, including federally threatened steelhead fish and California red-legged frog. 
10: Other public agencies whose approval is required: None 
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Hazards and Hazardous Materials Public Services
Agricultural Resources Hydrology and Water Quality  Recreation
Air Quality Land Use and Planning Transportation/Traffic 
Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities & Service Systems
Cultural Resources Noise
Geology/Soils  Population and Housing Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
  • I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a negative declaration will be prepared.

  • I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A mitigated negative declaration will be prepared.

  • I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an environmental impact report is required.

  • I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or is "potentially significant unless mitigated." An environmental impact report is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

  • I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 

    1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards; and 

    2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. 

    The earlier EIR adequately analyzes the proposed project, so no additional environmental impact report or negative declaration will be prepared.
_____________________                                                      __(signed 21/11/2000)__
Signature                                                                                    Date
Printed Name: Darby W. Fuerst
Title: MPWMD General Manager
 


 
 


 


 
 
 
 


 
 
 

 
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the entire action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, Earlier Analyses, may be cross-referenced).
5. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. The significance threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant
6. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration [Section 15063(c)(3)(D)]. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a. Earlier Analysis used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analyses.

c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 
7. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used, or individuals contacted, should be cited in the discussion.
8. This checklist has been adapted from the form in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended effective October 26, 1998 (from website).
9. Information sources cited in the checklist and the references used in support of this evaluation are listed in attachments to this document. 

ord98cklstintro.wpd
Back to Ordinance 98 Page

Home Page   What is MPWMD ? District Programs  What's New ?   Board Meetings        Related Links
Contact MPWMD