HomeMy WebLinkAbout058-650-016m
93
SECTION U. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW INFORMATION
1. Describe hazardous materials to be used (inflammable, explosives, strong chemicals, etc.):
Fuel for grading equipment
2. Daily hours of earthwork: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
3. Number of employees on site: 2
4. List any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those
required by city, regional, State and Federal agencies; none
5. Provide the angle of the repose for the given earth material proposed for grading: Unknown
6. Identify potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the grading permit:
Significant environmental impacts associated with site grading are unknown.
Grading Permit Application.doc 4
SECTION 111. EXEMPTION INFORMATION
1. An exemption to the grading permit may be requested if an environmental review is performed under
the control of another regulatory agency. (Check box that applies and provide additional information
to support exemption request)
Ll Excavation and grading authorized by a valid building permit as provided for under appendix I - Grading of the 2007
California Building Code, as adopted by section 26-1 of chapter 26 of the Butte County Code.
L3 Construction of roads for forestry or fire protection purposes, as required by a governmental fire protection agency.
El Excavations for: cemetery graves, tunnels, wells, mining, quarrying, under grounding of utilities, public works projects,
archaeological sites, or dams and public refuse disposal sites, controlled by other regulatory agencies.
13 Emergency projects due to landslides, road and bridge washouts, flooding or other natural disasters.
13 Routine maintenance of roads or manmade or engineered flood control channels and levees.
13 Grading, specifically authorized by the terms of. any discretionary permit or approval granted by the County of Butte.
0 Routine Agricultural Grading maintenance to support, keep, replace, refurbish, replant, cultivate and continue in an
existing state ' or condition without decline, including existing agricultural improvements, such as, but not limited to,
fields, pastures, crops, vineyards, orchards, facilities, buildings, structures, walls, fences, poles, ponds, reservoirs, dams,
pipes, irrigation systems, bridges, and roads. All other agdcultural grading for the conversion of existing Non-agdcultural
vegetation to an agricultural operation will require an Agricultural Process Grading Review by submission of an
Agricultural Grading Application to the Butte County Agricultural Commissioner for review and approval.
L3 Maintenance of existing firebreaks and roads to keep the firebreak or road substantially in its original condition.
L3 Timber harvest and management activities when approved and carried out consistent with the California Forest
Practices Act.
L3 Clearing of vegetation for fire protection purposes within 100 feet of a dwelling unit. Any additional clearing for fire
prevention, control or suppression purposes is exempt when authorized or required in writing by a fire prevention or
suppression agency.
Q Construction pursuant to subdivision plans or site improvement plans, which have been approved by the Department of
Public Works. The storage of excess soil from approved projects to be used as fill for other approved projects is exempt
as long as proper erosion and sediment controls are maintained at the stockpiled storage site.
maintenance of irrigation and drainage facilities.
13 An excavation for a sewage disposal system or a well that is constructed in accordance with a valid permit issued by the
Butte County Public Health Department, Environmental Health Division.
L3 An excavation for installation, closure, or remediation of an underground storage tank, performed in accordance with a
valid permit issued by the Butte County Public Health Department, Environmental Health Division.
E3 An excavation for removal or remediation of site contamination, performed under the oversight of the Butte County Public
Health Department, Environmental Health Division, or the California Environmental Protection Agency, or the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
U Other — explain on additional sheet of paper.
Grading Perrnit Application.doc
6
DEER PEAK LAKE ESTATES, UMT NO. 2
58-65
PORTION OF SECTIONS 9 8 16, T21N., R 4 E., m. D a. a m.
36
9?.37,., 16 zi 1 6
33
28
C)
118.
14
MAB AC
3217
34
1"- 400'
10.63AA
sas.
468.37
8?2 10.09 AC.
t co 27
1 taoi4c.
143.09
29
12.85 AC
(2.70
4 50q Be 910
13
23 .62 1131
76
4
rl?
16115
15. 89 AC.
12.80AC. as (30)
It ftc:
26 rl
c�
X
N
5.44 1 %a "-,0 w
k" 113,4 AC
13.6 Ar. 1 (33)
w
6
12
24
(D 719 %
@
I - I @
M47 AC. 0,0 I
MOW. 19
@
\
0
PZZS 25 m
'd 0 14.54 Ac.
�pu
ro (D
I
10.77AC.
1, 6-26
RS 10
it A
120-99
634.22 9
.40
32
45 I go 31
MEW PEAK LAKE ESTATFS 1.69
F6 9
1.6
UNi T
NO. I
Assessor's Map No. 58-65
County of Butte, Callf
DEER PEAKLAKE EvATES, umrNO.2, M.O.R. &K.91, F63.79 THRU 93. FEBRUARY f3,1984
REVISED, 9-91
GRADING COMPLAINT
`*0T
=D. ent..f.P.bJ,,Wft' INSPECTION FORM Date -7 2- (D I -S
M . T (9 T F S S Circle Day
Wo�k order No.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Ownees Name . 4-017 Owner onsIte during Inspection 0 YeS Q No
Address of possible grading violation 12-1 LoL.:) C-V--
Assesors Parcel Number d 1)
e,
Complaint made by Address
Additional Information
717 ---to
GRADING
Description of Grading 97 --PS
Estimated Quantity of Excavation and/or Fill Cuts or Fills ?: 10 Feet in Height Yes No
STORM WATER
Has gradin� been Performed adjacent to a natural stream that conveys water?
YeS No
If yes, name of stream, creek or river
Has more than I acre been disturbed? R_Yes ONO
If yes, does the site have a current Notice of Intent Issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board? 0 YeS No
If Yes, Is a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program onsite
0 YeS 91 No
Are there any BMPs deployed on the project site? Yes kNO
If yes, describe the BMPs deployed and photo document
Are any Illicit discharges observed? Yes No
If yes, describe discharge observed
ADDITIONA L NOTES OR INFORMATION
Signature
Title 9192184
�Pj�o. I 1�1 CL
Gf-a�,(\,Aq v (Top slq�
Iv -
w x
31D 4AS
X
2
C-1
72
= I—N-2- d�s 7 --'
x 10
x 2-(Oq -7 Ll qA s
Y2,5' KLO 3'
x.4.-.3 yCkc )A -5 oll g
L \J
L J)ks
3 -3.33 1- 1A j
9-70
BUTTE COUNTY
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR
GRADING PERMIT
APPLICANT: HARVEST DATE: 4/23/14
AGENT: APN: 058-650-016
FILE#: GRD13-0010 PLANNER: HICKLE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Those items checked are conditions of approval.
PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS:
I. Submit grading and drainage improvement plans to the Land Development Division for review and
approval. Comply with approved plans and terms of the grading permit.
2. Submit erosion and sediment control plans to the Land Development Division for review and
approval. Comply with approved plans and terms of the grading permit.
3. Provide a performance bond and labor and material bond for the construction of the required
improvements in an amount approved by the Director of Public Works.
B. DRAINAGE
El I A plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Public Works. The drainage plans shall detail existing drainage conditions and shall specify how
drainage waters shall be detained or retained onsite and/ or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly
maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak
flow runoff to said channel or facility.
E:1 2. Demonstrate that the grading does not adversely affect the carrying capacity of areas where base flood
elevations have been determined.
El 3. Pay drainage impact fees per Article XI, Chapter 3 of Butte County Code.
4. Prior to grading, a construction storm water permit will be required by the State Water Resources
Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing, excavation, filling, and
grading) of one or more acres. The permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control
Board prior to construction. If a construction storm water permit is required, place a note on an
additional map sheet that states: "The development of thi's parcel/fin,al map required a construction
storm water permit. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but
which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. Development of
individual lots may require an additional permit(s)."
C. LEGAL LOT STATUS
Prove to the satisfaction of the public works director that the parcel of the subject application is a
legal parcel.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
BUTTECOUNTY
INITIAL STUDY AND PROPOSED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE
AEON HARVEST GRADING PERMIT
HARVEST GRD13-0010
(APN # 058-650-016)
December 2014
2. The maximum height of cut is approximately 6 feet and fill is 4.5 feet.
The maximum and minimum slope of the work site is Cuts (H:V) 2:1 maximum, 4:1
minimum; Fills 2:1 maximum, 4:1 minimum.
A site-specific Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ECP) is a part of the proposed grading plan, and
Best Management Practices (BMPs) meeting the requirements of the State Department of
Transportation (CalTrans) standard specifications, May 2006 were installed on-site and are
incorporated into the project description. The Grading Plan identifies BMP's of silt fencing, straw
wattles, and hydroseeding. Alternative BMP's ' for leveled areas are the addition of clean 2" rock.
BMPs stabilize the site for water quality protection and erosion control, if needed. The purpose of
the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is to avoid water quality impacts off-site as the result of a
storm event.
Conservation Measure CM#1 (Stormwater BMBI
Conservation Measure #1 is a list of BMPs that have been incorporated into the proposed Grading
Plan, by the applicant:
1. If one or more acres of ground is to be disturbed, a permit must be obtained from
the state water resources control board prior to construction.
2. All erosion control measures shall conform to the Caltrans standard specifications
May 2006 and the erosion control plans shown on the construction drawings.
Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during
construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
4. All slopes with disturbed soils greater than 10% that are free of vegetation shall
have earth guard applied or mulch spread and tacked down prior to a 30% chance
of rain.
5. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces
to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the
form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least
twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All
clearing, grading," earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
6. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress
by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a
minimum depth of 12" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil
material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed
on a daily basis. (broom clean- do not use water to wash the street) If equipment
traffic is minimal, stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off
the property and onto paved roadways shall be swept immediately after each
vehicle leaves the site.
7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall
be stabilized by applying "earth guard" or seeded and watered until grass cover is
grown.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2
9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper
order. Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing collected
sediment and repairing deficiencies.
10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall bmp's may become clogged.
Extreme care should be taken to clean BMP's to reduce fugitive discharge and
potential flooding.
11. Applicant may remove temporary BMP's (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent
BMP's have been established.
12. Native seed and erosion control matting shall be applied to all disturbed areas that
are not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles.
Irrigation will be performed by hand watering. Seed and mulch shall be kept moist
at all times until germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the
California State Seed Law and applied at the following rate:
Seed - Melica Californica: 15 lbs/acre
Fiber - 100% wood fiber- 2,000 lbs/acre
Tack - Scilium based "M" binder 120 lbs/acre
The project includes an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Figure 2), which is part of the Grading
Plan. The following is a list of measures that will be implemented, as part of the Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan:
1. If BMP's are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care
should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs.
2. If BMP's have failed, or are ineffective, notify the owner/contractor to modify the
BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed
within 72 hours of approval
3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re -seeded,
fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original
application rate should be applied.
4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be
repla ced annually if required beyond 1 year.
Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer, temporary BMPs may
be removed if no longer needed.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 3
RMT-TV.-ITOUTT.777 M-#31116 M_
The project also includes dust suppression measures to reduce dust and particulate matter
associated with grading activities. These include:
1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust carried
onto street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing grading, earth -moving,
excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler
systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust
after each day's activities cease.
2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except when
loading or unloading materials.
3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a minimum in
the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency of watering shall
increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control District.
4. All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation
operations shall be minimized at all times.
6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14 days
shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
7. The applicant shall minimize construction -related exhaust emissions by maintaining
construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune according to
manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May through October) by not
allowing construction equipment to be left idling for long periods.
8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
9. Re -vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to reduce
dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the County of Butte
for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with
.soil binders to prevent dust generation.
11. Burning of vegetative material may be undertaken only after obtaining a valid burn
permit issued by the BCAQMD (Rule 300 Open Burning Requirements) and in
compliance with the conditions specified on the permit. _
12. Other measures as determined appropriate by the Butte County Air Quality
Management District and Department of Public Works to reduce dust.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 4
The use, storage, and disposal of chemicals associated with uses occurring within the project
boundaries shall be applied pursuant to manufacturer's instructions, subject to all applicable laws,
regulations, and permits.
9. Environmental Setting:
The property is situated approximately 11 miles north of the City of Oroville, east of State Route 70
(SR 70) in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada's on a ridgeline between Rich Gulch and an unnamed
intermittent tributary to Lake Oroville, in the southeast portion of Butte County, California. The
property can be accessed from SR 70 via Rich Gulch Road and Lower Gulch Road. The property is
located on the east side of Lower Gulch Road approximately 0.25 miles south of the Rich Gulch Road
intersection on the east side of a ridgeline that runs north/south. From this ridgeline, the property
slopes about 5-35 percent to the east. The property ranges in elevation from approximately 1,150
to 1,275 feet. The property drains to the east into Rich Gulch, which flows into Lake Oroville near
the confluence of the West Branch and the North Fork of the Feather River. Currently, there is a
residential mobile home and domestic water well located on the property. Grading and clearing
activities are described in more detail in the Project Description.
The project area is comprised of blue oak -foothill pine woodlands that includes both conifer and
hardwood tree species. Common associates in blue oak -foothill pine woodlands are foothill pines and
blue oaks, occuring at slightly higher elevations than blue oak woodland. Other representative tree
species include interior live oak, black oak, and California buckeye. The understory of blue oak -
foothill pine woodlands in Butte County contains several shrub species clumped together and
interspersed with patches of annual grassland. Dominant shrub species include manzanita,
ceanothus, redberry, California coffeeberry, poison oak, blue elderberry, gooseberry, silver lupine,
and western redbud (GP EIR, pg 4.4-12). Vegetation in- the area where the leveling activities
occurred primarily consisted of woody shrubs, canyon live oak, and conifer tree species. While
grading activities avoided the thickest stands of vegetation located on the property, an unknown
quantity of various plant species (including trees and shrubs) were removed during grading
activities. The area in which grading took place encompasses 0.44 acres of a 10±acre parcel.
10. Surrounding Land Uses:
Surrounding parcels vary in size from approximately 10 to 40 acres. Properties within the project
vicinity are zoned Foothill Residential with approximately10, 20 and 40 -acre minimum parcel size,
and Agriculture 160 -acre minimum parcel size. Surrounding land uses include Lake Croville
Recreation Area, Public Lands, and single-family residences. The nearest residence from grading
activities is located approximately 300 feet to the north, off Lower Gulch Road. Lake Oroville is
located approximately 0.75 miles to the south of the site.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014,
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 5
Page Intentionally Left Blank
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit August2014
Initial StudylNegative Declaration Page 8
T
.......................
ABBREVIATIONS PLANS PREPARED BY:
APPROvED FOR CONSTRUMN,
lu
12-16-14
w wm— Im
T=
11 u= ME
z wz= -
M GENERAL N6TES
V.
Z.M"
DUST SUPPRESSION PLAN
GRADING QUANTITIES
zw=— --
%X=71 M,
Mt
N:
EROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE PLA
"I lov,
.... ......
- - --- --- --- --- --- ---
ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE (ESTIMATE) rtFrAL GLT FENCE HNAUATEN TYPrAL BMW WATn.E 06TAILLATION
NorthStar AECN FLARVEW GRAMG AND ERMION CONML PLAN
I TEFIACWG PRCUECT
121 LOWER MLCH RD
ENGINEERING
-------- YAMEE FLL, CALIFORNIA AM MrtM 1. Ab Mbw
Page Intentionally Left Blank
APN 058-6SO-01 6 Grading Permit
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
December 2014
Page M
2.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project; however'
with the incorporation of mitigation measures, "potentially significant impacts are reduced to less
than significant level by the project" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15382).
n Aesthetics El Agricultural/Forestry Resources El
Air Quality
0 Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources El
Geology/Soils
n Greenhouse Gas Emissions 0 Hazards/Hazardous Materials n
Hydrology/Water Quality
El Land Use/Planning El Mineral Resources El
Noise
[:1 Population & Housing El Public Services 0
Recreation
EJ Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Ej
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
3.0 Determination
Determination:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
El 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 revisions in the project have been made by
or agreed to by the project proponent.,A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
El I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
L3 I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact 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. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to
be addressed.
0 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
I Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner Date
Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager
Date
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 11
4.0 Environmental Checklist
1. Aesthetics
Setting
General Plan Figures COS -7, COS -8, and COS -9 depict identified scenic resources in Butte County.
Significant scenic resources identified by the General plan are displayed in General Plan Figure COS -7
and are comprised of land-based resources (Butte Creek Canyon, Sacramento River National Wildlife
Refuge, Table Mountain, and Feather Falls Scenic Area) and water-based resources (Philbrook
Reservoir, Lake Oroville, Thermalito Afterbay, and Lake Wyandotte).
Although there are no officially -designated State Scenic Highways in the County, State Route 70 (SR70)
north of the inter -section with State Route 149 (SR149) is included in the California Scenic Highway
Program and is considered an eligible State Scenic Highway. SR70 through the Feather River Canyon
and a portion of State Route 32 (SR32) north of Forest Ranch are recognized as County Scenic
Highways.
A Scenic Highway Overlay Zone is applied to an area extended 350 linear feet from the centerline of
scenic routes identified in COS -9, including portions of SR 32 north of Chico, Portions of SR70 north of
the SR149 intersection, the Skyway, southern portions of SR191 and Pentz Road, portions of SR162
along Lake Oroville, and portions of Forbestown Road and Lumpkin Road.
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant A scenic vista is defined as viewpoint that provides expansive'views
of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. The property is located on
the foothill slopes of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and consists of a blue oak -foothill pine
woodland habitat community, which is dominated by an understory of mixed chaparral
composed of common manzanita, whiteleaf Manzanita, and scrub oak, with associated
species such as toyon, California buckeye, and poison oak. The total parcel encompasses
10.1 acres, however, for the purpose of the Grading Permit, the total area affected,by.
grading, leveling and terracing activities is approximately 0.44 acres. The initial grading,
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 12
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
with
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
X
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources
X
within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the
X
site/surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
,glare which would adversely affect day or
X
nighttime views in the area?
Setting
General Plan Figures COS -7, COS -8, and COS -9 depict identified scenic resources in Butte County.
Significant scenic resources identified by the General plan are displayed in General Plan Figure COS -7
and are comprised of land-based resources (Butte Creek Canyon, Sacramento River National Wildlife
Refuge, Table Mountain, and Feather Falls Scenic Area) and water-based resources (Philbrook
Reservoir, Lake Oroville, Thermalito Afterbay, and Lake Wyandotte).
Although there are no officially -designated State Scenic Highways in the County, State Route 70 (SR70)
north of the inter -section with State Route 149 (SR149) is included in the California Scenic Highway
Program and is considered an eligible State Scenic Highway. SR70 through the Feather River Canyon
and a portion of State Route 32 (SR32) north of Forest Ranch are recognized as County Scenic
Highways.
A Scenic Highway Overlay Zone is applied to an area extended 350 linear feet from the centerline of
scenic routes identified in COS -9, including portions of SR 32 north of Chico, Portions of SR70 north of
the SR149 intersection, the Skyway, southern portions of SR191 and Pentz Road, portions of SR162
along Lake Oroville, and portions of Forbestown Road and Lumpkin Road.
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant A scenic vista is defined as viewpoint that provides expansive'views
of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. The property is located on
the foothill slopes of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and consists of a blue oak -foothill pine
woodland habitat community, which is dominated by an understory of mixed chaparral
composed of common manzanita, whiteleaf Manzanita, and scrub oak, with associated
species such as toyon, California buckeye, and poison oak. The total parcel encompasses
10.1 acres, however, for the purpose of the Grading Permit, the total area affected,by.
grading, leveling and terracing activities is approximately 0.44 acres. The initial grading,
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 12
leveling, and terracing operation involved minimal removal of trees and brush and
disturbance to the soil (refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). The remaining 9.6 -acre
portion of the property has not been affected by grading and terracing (with the exception
of a permitted trailer residence and associated access road) activities and no additional
grading activity is proposed. The perimeter of the site screens adjacent parcels with native
vegetation.
There are no water features, unique geologic features, which are considered local scenic
,resources. the graded area cannot be viewed from adjacent roadways or parcels; therefore,
grading activities will have a less than significant impact on a scenic vista and would not
substantially degrade the visual character of the site and surroundings. ,
b) No Impact The project site is located approximately 0.65 miles east of SR 70. Although
there are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in Butte County, SR 70 north of the
intersection with Highway 149 is a county designated scenic highway and is considered an
eligible State scenic highway. A Scenic Highway Overlay Zone extends 350 linear feet from
the centerline of scenic routes (GP EIR, pg 4.1-7). Although the property is accessed from SR
70 via Rich Gulch Road, it is 0.65 miles from SR 70 and is outside this Zone and is not visible
from SR 70. Therefore, grading activities would have no impact to scenic resources within a
designated County scenic highway.
C) Less Than Significant Refer to the discussion under Item a) above.
d) No Impact The proposed project would not result in the establishment of a new light
source (i.e. residential lighting, streetlights and so forth). Grading activities would not result
in a new significant source of lighting, nor would it affect nighttime views in the area.
2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 13
Less Than
Would the project-
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
with
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of
Statewide Importance) pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
X
the CA Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
X
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 1220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
X
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
X
forest land to non -forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
X
environment which, due to their location or
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 13
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use? I I I I
Setting
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California Resources Agency issued
an Important Farmlands MaI2 for Butte Coun-ty identifying Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance, Unique Farmland, and Grazing land. The map is maintained by the State of CA
Department of Conservation and designates the subject property as Other Land. Other Land denotes
"land not included in any other mapping category, common examples include low density rural
developments, brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing, confined
livestock, poultry, or aquaculture facilities, strip mines, borrow pits, and water bodies smaller than 40
acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development, and greater
than 40, acres is mapped as other land.
Soils on the site are identified by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as Oroshore-
Mounthrope-Dunstone gravelly clay loam, 1.5 to 30 percent slope. The site does not contain prime
agricultural soils.
Discussion
a,b) No Impact The proposed project is the grading and leveling of land to accommodate the
installation of an organic garden or similar use. It is anticipated that horticultural activities
will occur on site in the future.
The Important Farmlands Map for Butte County does not identify important farmlands on
the project site; rather, it identifies the site as 'Other Land! Additionally, the soils on site
are not prime soils, and the site is designated for residential development. A review of the
Butte County General Plan 2030 Land Use Map identifies the property as being located
within an area designated as Foothill Residential (FR -20), 20 -acre minimum parcel size.
Foothill residential zoning designation allows single-family dwellings at rural densities of 1
to 40 acres per dwelling unit, depending on the zoning.
The site is not important farmland and does not occur on prime agricultural soils; therefore,
grading activities would not convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance)
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency to a non-agricultural use.
c,d) Less Than Significant. As stated under Item a) above, the site is designated as Foothill
Residential and a zoning designation as FR -20. The project would not result in the rezoning
of forest land or timberland zoned for Timberland production. The project involves the
grading and terracing of a 0.44 -acre are of a 10 -acre site within montane hardwood -conifer
and mixed chaparral habitat. Grading would not result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non -forest use or non-agricultural use. Refer to Section 4,
Biological Resources, Item b) further below for a description of vegetation communities in
the project area and on the project site.
e) No Impact As stated under Item a) above, grading activities would not convert Farmland
(Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Grading activities will not affect
agriculturally -designated property to the south.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 14
11. Burning of vegetative material may be undertaken only after obtaining a valid burn
permit issued by the BCAQMD (Rule 300 Open Burning Requirements) and in
compliance with the conditions specified on the permit. I -
12. Other measures as determined appropriate by the Butte County Air Quality
Management District and Department of Public Works to reduce dust.
Although grading on the site likely resulted in some level of grading -related dust and
particulate matter emissions, no further construction or construction vehicle related
emissions is anticipated. Should additional grading activities be necessary as part of needed
erosion control, per the grading permit, Conservation Measure CM#3 would apply. Grading
activities do not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;
therefore, there is a less than significant impact.
b, c) Less Than Significant The BCAQMD uses general screening criteria to determine the type
and scope of projects requiring an air quality assessment and/or mitigation. These criteria
are based on project size and are focused primarily on the indirect emissions (i.e., motor
vehicles) associated with residential, commercial and industrial development. Due to the
relatively limited scale of grading required, 0.44 acres, equipment related emissions would
not exceed District emission thresholds. Therefore, grading will not violate State or Federal
air'quality standards or contribute to an existing air quality violation in the basin as only
minor amounts of material has been, or will be moved. Therefore, grading would not result
in locally elevated levels of regulated air emissions in close proximity to sensitive receptors.
d) No Impact Sensitive populations (i.e., children, senior citizens and acutely or chronically ill
people) are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than are the general population.
Land uses considered sensitive receptors typically include residences, schools, playgrounds,
childcare centers, hospitals, convalescent homes, and retirement homes. The surrounding
area is designed as FR -20, which means that adjacent parcel sizes are twenty acres or
greater in size. The nearest resident or structure is approximately 500 -feet north of grading
activities. In addition, grading activities are temporary, and a Dust Suppression
Conservation Measures (CM#3) would be implemented as part of future grading work,
thereby minimizing dust emissions. There are no other sensitive receptors in proximity to
the project site.
e) No Impact Grading activities would not result in the creation of objectionable odors
affecting a substantial number of people.
4. Biological Resources
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 17
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or regional
X
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 17
Setting
Oak woodlands are scattered throughout the County but are concentrated in the transition area
between the lower valley and higher elevations. Based on site photos and aerial imagery, the
APN OSB -650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 18
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
X
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
X
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
X
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
X
preservation policy or ordinance?
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
X
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
g) A reduction in the numbers, a restriction in the
range, or an impact to the critical habitat of any
X
unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species
of animals?
h) A reduction in the diversity or numbers of
a nimals onsite (including mammals, birds,
X
reptiles, amphibians, fish or invertebrates)?
i) A deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat
X
(for foraging, breeding, roosting, nesting, etc.)?
j) Introduction of barriers to movement of any
X
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species?
k) Introduction of any factors (light, fencing, noise,
human presence and/or domestic animals)
X
which could hinder the normal activities of
wildlife?
Setting
Oak woodlands are scattered throughout the County but are concentrated in the transition area
between the lower valley and higher elevations. Based on site photos and aerial imagery, the
APN OSB -650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 18
I F V
7
14
x
J
V
k
6
R1 JT1rP :ni inty
tillar (%
I ION
V1111011
Pit
22
�--A�'N— Ch
Wit
onar e a
A
If
14 �Is
Legend, Feet 1 inch 2,000 ft Figure 3: CNDDB Occurences
Project Area (0.768 ac) 0 500 1,000 2,000 (printed at 8.5 x 11) Aeon Harvest Grading Permit
F=—= --,Project Parcel - Butte County, CA -
I Mile Buffer Imagery Source: CNDDB Data Source:
CNDDB USGS Topo CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife ..northstareng.00m NorthStar
Map Date: Drawn By: ENGINEERING
I NSE Project# 0 NorthSlar Engineering Cwd - Surveymq - Afchock�a & Demp
Dec 15, 2014 CJW 13-243 Watv ftswws E—m..enud - GLS
Page Intentionally Left Blank.
I
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 22
approximately S percent of the total parcel acreage. Any fencing of the graded portion of the
site would not pose a significant impediment to migrating deer populations within the area.
Therefore, there is a less than significant impact on the movement of native wildlife species.
e) No Impact The project site is located in the transitional ecotone from the valley foothill
hardwood -conifer, mixed chaparral and montane hardwood -conifer communities, is
common locally and regionally throughout California, . Grading and terracing activities
affected a 0.44 -acre portion of the property. The project would not conflict with any Butte
County tree policy or ordinance adopted for the long-term preservation of oak woodlands,
including the Butte County Oak Woodlands Management Plan.
No Impact. The project site is not located in an area identified as having an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plans. The Butte Regional Conservation Plan (BRCP)
is scheduled for final approval in late 2014. Based on available information, the project site
is not located in an area of Butte County that will be regulated by the BRCP. Therefore, the
project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan.
g) No Impact Refer to discussion under Item a) above. The project is not located in an. area
identified as critical habitat, nor is the project in the recovery area for unique, rare,
threatened, or endangered species of animals.
h) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item a) and Item b) above. The
graded area comprises 0.44 acres within a 10.1 -acre site, the remainder of the site is
undisturbed and provides habitat for a variety of species. The site. consists of blue oak -
foothill pine woodland habitat, which occurs throughout California and is not considered a
sensitive natural community, nor is the area a designated critical habitat or recovery area
for any listed rare, threatened and endangered species. Animals typically associated with
this habitat type are common species, the diversity of which would not be significantly
impacted by the removal of a small portion of their associated habitat.
i) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item h) above. Rich Gulch, a
jurisdictional intermittent stream, occurs 600 -feet east of grading activities. However,
project grading activities were not conducted within the vicinity of the drainage. Fish and
wildlife that may use the site and drainage are still able to forage, breed, roost and nest
within the surrounding area.
j) Less Than Significant Impact Refer to the discussion under Item d) above.
k) Less Than Significant Impact Refer to the discussion under Item d) above. No temporary
lighting is proposed. In addition, although site activities may include temporary noise
associated with human activity, the proposed project would not result in the establishment
of new permanent noise or light sources. Temporary noise is not anticipated to be at a level
that would substantially alter the normal activities of wildlife, such as with a residential
subdivision, commercial land use development, or major roadway. Furthermore, the
proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations.
Project activities would not increase human presence more than what would be permitted
from other allowed uses within this zone.
APN OSB -650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 24
Mitigation:
Mitigation Measure MMI (Oak Woodlands)
Prior to final acceptance of the grading permit, an Oak Tree Mitigation Plan prepared by a
certified arborist, registered professional forester, botanist or landscape architect shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Director of Development Services or his/her
designee that includes:
1)A survey showing the location of oak trees 5 inches or more in diameter at breast height,
as defined by PRC §21083.4(a);
2)The removal of all oak trees 5 inches or more in diameter at breast height shall be
mitigated. It shall be mitigated by one or more of the following: replanting and maintaining
oak trees, establishing conservation easements, contributing funds for off-site oak
woodlands conservation, and/or other mitigation measures developed by Butte County.
Replanting oak trees cannot account for more than one-half of the mitigation. Replanted
oak trees shall be maintained for a period of seven years after they are planted. If any of the
replanted oak trees die or become diseased, they shall be replaced and maintained for seven
years after the new oak trees are planted;
3)A replanting schedule and diagram for trees removed or encroached upon by permit
activities consistent with PRC §21083.4(b)(2), applicable mitigation measures, and Butte
County Ordinance, if any, shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of
Development Services or his/her designee. Replanted trees shall be planted in areas
deemed appropriate by the Plan, considering future lot development, interference with
foundations, fencing, roadways, driveways, and utilities. Trees planted shall be protected
from livestock and other animals;
4)Oak Tree protection measures for trees to be retained within the project site shall be
included in construction specifications. Each oak tree to be preserved shall be surrounded
by a tree zone identified by the drip line of the tree. An orange plastic fence or other
suitable type of fence shall be used to identify the tree zone during construction activities.
No vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or other development activities shall occur within
the tree zone in order to protect root systems and minimize compaction of the soil, unless
authorized by Oak Tree Mitigation Plan; and
S)Conservation easements or funds for off-site oak woodlands conservation shall be
proposed to and approved by the Director of Development Services or his/her designee."
Plan Requirements: No vegetation removal, grading, road construction, or other
earthwork shall be permitted until the Oak Tree Mitigation Plan is submitted and
approved.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be satisfied prior final acceptance of the
grading permit, and prior to any development activity or the issuance of any grading,
building, septic, or well permit, or the approval of any improvement plans on the parcels.
Monitoring: The Butte County Department of Development Services and Department of
Public Works shall ensure thatthis mitigation is complied with prior to final acceptance of
the grading permit.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration Page 25
a
S. Cultural Resources
Discussion
a, b) No Impact. The site and the immediate surrounding vicinity are not designated as
archaeological or historically sensitive areas. In addition, there are no known cultural
resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory. The existing 0.44 -acre of a 10.1 -acre project site has been disturbed
by grading activities and unknown historic resources have not been discovered. Further
activities on the site would consist of stabilizing the site for water quality protection and
erosion control. Additional grading activities are not anticipated. Site stabilization measures
would consist of the BMPs, as described in Section 9, Item a) Hydrology and Water Quality.
C) No Impact. Due to the project site's location, lack of outcroppings, or unique geologic
features on the property and that existing disturbance has not revealed any sub -surface
resources, continued site stabilization activities are not likely to directly or indirectly
destroy sub -surface resources as additional grading is not anticipated.
d) No Impact There are no known grave sites within the project limits. Therefore, the
disturbance of human remains is not anticipated. However, in the unlikely event that human
remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and
disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must
be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are determined to be
prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC),
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of
the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC.
The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the
disposition of the remains.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 26
0
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined
X
in California Code of Regulations, Section
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
X
pursuant to CA Code of Regulations, §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
X
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
X
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a, b) No Impact. The site and the immediate surrounding vicinity are not designated as
archaeological or historically sensitive areas. In addition, there are no known cultural
resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory. The existing 0.44 -acre of a 10.1 -acre project site has been disturbed
by grading activities and unknown historic resources have not been discovered. Further
activities on the site would consist of stabilizing the site for water quality protection and
erosion control. Additional grading activities are not anticipated. Site stabilization measures
would consist of the BMPs, as described in Section 9, Item a) Hydrology and Water Quality.
C) No Impact. Due to the project site's location, lack of outcroppings, or unique geologic
features on the property and that existing disturbance has not revealed any sub -surface
resources, continued site stabilization activities are not likely to directly or indirectly
destroy sub -surface resources as additional grading is not anticipated.
d) No Impact There are no known grave sites within the project limits. Therefore, the
disturbance of human remains is not anticipated. However, in the unlikely event that human
remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and
disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must
be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are determined to be
prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC),
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of
the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC.
The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the
disposition of the remains.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 26
0
(broom clean- do not use water to wash the street) If equipment traffic is minimal,
stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off the property and onto
paved roadways shall be swept immediately after each vehicle leaves the site.
7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall be
stabilized by applying "earth guard" or seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper order.
Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing collected sediment and
repairing deficiencies.
10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall, BMPs may become clogged.
Extreme care should be taken. to clean BMPs to reduce fugitive discharge and potential
flooding.
11. Applicant may remove temporary BMPs (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent BMPs
have been established.
12. Native seed and erosion control matting shall be applied to all disturbed areas that are
not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles. Irrigation will
be performed by hand watering. Seed and mulch shall. be kept moist at all times until
germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the California State Seed
Law and applied at the following rate:
Seed - Melica californica: 10 lbs/acre
Fiber - 100% wood fiber: 2,000 lbs/acre
Tack - Scilium based "M" binder 120 lbs/acre
The project includes an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Figure 3), which is part of the Grading
Plan. The following is a -list of measures that will be implemented, as part of the Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan:
1. If BMP's are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care
should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs.
2. If BMP's have failed, or are ineffective, notify the owner/contractor to modify the
BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed
within 72 hours of approval
3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re -seeded,
fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original
application rate should be applied.
4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be
replaced annually if required beyond 1 year.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 29
5. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer, temporary BMPs may
be removed if no longer needed.
b) Less Than Significant Impact The project lies within an area that has a high erosion
hazard potential. (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-4) As stated earlier, stabilization of exposed soil
within the graded area will be accomplished through the use of hydroseed (containing
mulch, seed, and tacifier) as well as aggregate base. Additionally, the ECP requires notifying
the engineer/QSD should any of the BMP's fail or become ineffective. Any areas that are not
effectively stabilized will be addressed accordingly by replacing BMPs. The implementation
of effective stabilization techniques will yield no substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.
C) Less Than Significant Impact While the project is located in an area identified as having a
'high' landslide potential, it is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is considered
unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project. Therefore, the potential
for on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, or collapse is less than significant.
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the soil type within the project
area is entirely within Map Unit 671 Oroshore-mounthrope-Dunstone soils (NRCS 2014).
This Unit is composed of gravelly coarse and clay loams, similar soils, and paralithic
bedrock at approximately 40-60 inches, which are not prone to liquefaction. Additionally,
there have been no documented incidents of subsidence in Butte County and the only areas
at risk for subsidence are in the valley region (GP EIR, pg 4.6-12), not the foothills where the
project is located.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. . The project is located in an area with low expansive soil
potential (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-3). Expansive soils are generally found in basin deposits in the
low-lying portions of the county near the Sacramento and Feather Rivers as well as
localized areas elsewhere in the county (GP EIR, pg 4.6-12). The project site is not located in
expansive soil areas.
e) No Impact. The project will not use or install septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems.
7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Setting
The earth's atmosphere naturally contains a number of gases, including (but not limited to) carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20), which are collectively referred to as greenhouse
gases (GHGs). GHG emissions are generally numerically depicted (when applicable) as carbon dioxide
APN OSB-6SO-01 6 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration � Page 30
Less Than
Evaluated
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
in Previous
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Document
Mitigation
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, directly or
X
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or
X
regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Setting
The earth's atmosphere naturally contains a number of gases, including (but not limited to) carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20), which are collectively referred to as greenhouse
gases (GHGs). GHG emissions are generally numerically depicted (when applicable) as carbon dioxide
APN OSB-6SO-01 6 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration � Page 30
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
X
response plan. or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands
X
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Setting
The property is located in an area designated by CAL FIRE as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). The project involves the grading and leveling of land and the removal of
vegetation from the graded portion of the site to a 'slash pile' near the entrance to the site.
The applicant has agreed to use any chemicals according to the manufacturer's specifications, as
reflected in CM#4 below.
Conservation Measures CM #4 (Use of ChemicaW
The use, storage, and disposal of chemicals used within the project boundaries shall be applied
pursuant to manufactureijs instructions, subject to all applicable laws, regulations, and permits.
Discussion
a) No Impact The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials, and would not result in such impact.
b) No Impact. The proposed grading activities and site stabilization measures are not
anticipated to result in a release of hazardous materials into the environment.
C) No Impact Grading and clearing activities do not involve any emission or handling of any
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing school. No
existing or proposed school facilities are located within a one-quarter mile radius of the
project site.
d) No Impact. The property is not included on a list of sites containing hazardous materials,
and would not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. The project
site is not included on the Cortese -Knox list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5.
e) No Impact, The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan or
within two miles of a public airport and the project would not result in permanent
structures that expose people to a safety hazard.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 33
No Impact The proposed project site is not located within the ' vicinity of a private airstrip
and the project would not result in permanent structures that expose people to a safety
hazard.
g) No Impact The proposed project does not include any actions within the roadway that
would physically interfere with any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans.
The project would not result in an increase in traffic, and thus would not reduce the current
level of service of the area road network.
h) Less than Significant with Mitigation.. The property is located in an area designated by
CAL FIRE as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). The project
involves the grading and leveling of land and the removal of vegetation from the graded
portion of the site to a 'slash pile' near the entrance to the site.
Comprised of dead and dry vegetation, the slash pile provides fuel for wildIfires that may
occur near the project site. Decomposition and ignition of the slash pile can also occur over
time. For these reasons, the removed vegetation associated with grading activities could
expose people or structures to a signiflcant risk of wildland fires. Mitigation Measure MM2
requires that vegetation cleared during grading activities be handled appropriately by one
of three methods: removing to a permitted green waste facility, chipping and distributing
the materials on site, or burning the materials consistent with a valid burn permit from the
BCAQMD. With the removal of cleared vegetation, any fire hazard associated with grading
permit activities will be less than significant.
Mitigation:
A note on the final grading plan states: "All vegetation cleared during grading activities shall be
removed from the project site by one of three methods: removing vegetation to a permitted
green waste facility, chipping and distributing the materials on site, or burning cleared
vegetation consistent with a valid burn permit from the Butte County Air Quality Management
district (BCAQMD)."
Plan Requirements: Remove fire danger from cleared (downed, dead) vegetation.
Timing: Prior to the Public Works Director singing off the final Grading Permit.
Monitoring: Public Works Land Development will ensure cleared vegetation is
removed prior to final grading approval.
9. Hydrology and Water Quality
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 34
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
I
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Violate any water quality standards or
X
waste discharge requirements?
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 34
net change in the flow of water on or off the site that would lead to an increase in flooding
on- or off-site.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not yield an increase in storm water runoff
that would require the use or construction of storm water drainage facilities. As addressed
in Item a) above, the Grading Plan and ECP will meet water quality standards and not result
in polluted runoff.
Less Than Significant Impact Refer to Item a) above. The ultimate goal of an Erosion
Control Maintenance plan is to prevent degradation of water quality through the prevention
of sediment and pollutant runoff. The ECP is project specific and designed to minimize
erosion, thereby protecting water quality.
g -i) No Impact The proposed project, which is grading and clearing activities, is not located
within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Project activities would not result in placing housing in
a 100 -year flood hazard area, nor would activities impede or redirect flood flows. The
project would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding as a result of levee or dam failure.
D No Impact There are no anticipated impacts to the proposed project from seiche, tsunami,
or mudflow, as no topographical features of water bodies capable of producing such events
occur within the project site vicinity.
10. Land Use and Planning
Discussion
a) No Impact Grading activities have been conducted on a 0.44 -acre site within a 10.1 -acre
property. The site is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and is rural in
nature, with no surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the project will not have an impact
on the physical arrangement of an established community.
b) No Impact The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation
of Foothill Residential and the FR -20 (Foothill Residential, 20 -acre minimum parcel size)
zoning designation. The project would neither propose a change in zoning, nor conflict with
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration Page 38
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
LessThan
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Physically divide an established community?
X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
X
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
X
conservation plan?
Discussion
a) No Impact Grading activities have been conducted on a 0.44 -acre site within a 10.1 -acre
property. The site is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and is rural in
nature, with no surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the project will not have an impact
on the physical arrangement of an established community.
b) No Impact The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation
of Foothill Residential and the FR -20 (Foothill Residential, 20 -acre minimum parcel size)
zoning designation. The project would neither propose a change in zoning, nor conflict with
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration Page 38
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant The Butte County Board of Supervisors passed Ordinance #4053,
Noise Control on March 26, 2013. The Ordinance became effective on April 25, 2013. The
Ordinance states:
Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, demolition, paving or
grading of any real property or public works project located within 1,000 feet of
residential uses, provided said activities do not take place between thefollowing hours:
• Sunset to sunrise on weekdays and non -holidays;
• Friday commencing at 6:00 p.m. through and including 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, as
well as not before 8:00 a.m. on holidays;
• Saturday commencing at 6:00 p.m. through and including 10:00 a.m. on Sunday;
and,
• Sunday after the hour of 6:00 p.m.
Provided, however, when an unforeseen or unavoidable condition occurs during a
construction project and the nature of the project necessitates that work in process be
continued until a specific phase is completed, the contractor or owner shall be allowed
to continue work into the hours delineated above and to operate machinery and
equipment necessary to complete the specific work in progress until that specific work
can be brought to conclusion under conditions which will not jeopardize inspection
acceptance or create unduefinancial hardshipsfor the contractor or owner.
Additional grading activities are not anticipated. However, if grading were necessary, the
implementation of the provisions of the Noise Ordinance would reduce any temporary and
periodic increase in noise levels to less than significant levels.
b) Less Than Significant The project encompasses grading and clearing on 0.44 acres, most of
which has been conducted. Although additional grading activities are not anticipated, any
activities suchas site stabilization would be temporary, occur during less sensitive daytime
hours, and short in duration. As a result, any potential impacts from grading -related
groundborne vibrations or noises would be less than significant.
C) No Impact The proposed project does not involve uses or activities that would result in a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Although
additional grading activities are not anticipated, noise associated with any additional
activities would be temporary.
d) Less Than Significant The property is located in a rural, area with generally low noise
levels and is not subject to any significant continuous noise. The nearest residence is
approximately 500 ft of project activities. Any additional grading activities on the site would
temporarily generate an increase in noise levels on and adjacent to the site. However, noise
levels would be temporary and would not be in excess of local standards.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 41
e, No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within
two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip. As such, the project
would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive n6ise levels.
13. Population and Housing
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant No significant population growth associated with the proposed
project is expected. Any employment generated by grading activities would be temporary
and drawn from the local work force, and would not create a permanent population growth
to the area.
b, c) No Impact. As stated under Item a) above, grading activities will not generate a permanent
increase to the local population that would displace existing housing or add a substantial
number of people, necessitating the constructiori of replacement housing elsewhere.
14. Public Services
Would,the project: result in substantial adverse
Less Than
physical impacts associated with the provision of
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant Less Than
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
Mitigation
Mitigation
or other performance objectives for any of the
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
public services:
a) Fire protection?
either directly (for example, by proposing new
X
b) Police protection?
X
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
X
X
example, through extension of roads or other
e) Other public facilities?
X
infrastructurep
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
X
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
X
housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant No significant population growth associated with the proposed
project is expected. Any employment generated by grading activities would be temporary
and drawn from the local work force, and would not create a permanent population growth
to the area.
b, c) No Impact. As stated under Item a) above, grading activities will not generate a permanent
increase to the local population that would displace existing housing or add a substantial
number of people, necessitating the constructiori of replacement housing elsewhere.
14. Public Services
Would,the project: result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
Less Than
need, the construction of which could cause Potentially
Significant Less Than
No
significant environmental impacts, in order to Significant
With Significant
Impact
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
Mitigation
or other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
a) Fire protection?
X
b) Police protection?
X
c) Schools?
X
d) Parks?
X
e) Other public facilities?
X
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration Page 42
5.0 Mandatory Findings.of Significance
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant. Potential impacts to biological resources were found to be less than
significant, (refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). In addition, there are no known
cultural resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory (refer to Section 5, Cultural Resources).
b) Less Than Significant. The project is the issuance of a Grading Permit on 0.44 acres of a
10.1 -acre parcel. Impacts identified in this Initial Study were found to be less than
significant or would have no impact on environmental resources. Adherence to applicable
regulatory requirements, i.e., Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, Dust Suppression Plan, and
other permits or approvals of responsible agencies would ensure less than significant
cumulative impacts.
C) Less Than Significant Based on the preceding environmental analysis and adherence to
applicable local, state and federal regulations, as noted in this document, the proposed
project would not result in potentially significant cumulative, direct or indirect adverse
effects on the environment or human beings.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 47
Less Than
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Significant
With
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
Mitigation
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
X
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
consid6rable ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
X
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
X
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant. Potential impacts to biological resources were found to be less than
significant, (refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). In addition, there are no known
cultural resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory (refer to Section 5, Cultural Resources).
b) Less Than Significant. The project is the issuance of a Grading Permit on 0.44 acres of a
10.1 -acre parcel. Impacts identified in this Initial Study were found to be less than
significant or would have no impact on environmental resources. Adherence to applicable
regulatory requirements, i.e., Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, Dust Suppression Plan, and
other permits or approvals of responsible agencies would ensure less than significant
cumulative impacts.
C) Less Than Significant Based on the preceding environmental analysis and adherence to
applicable local, state and federal regulations, as noted in this document, the proposed
project would not result in potentially significant cumulative, direct or indirect adverse
effects on the environment or human beings.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 47
systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust
after each day's activities cease.
2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except when
loading or unloading materials.
3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a minimum in
the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency of watering shall
increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control District.
4. All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation
operations shall be minimized at all times.
6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14 days
shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
7. The applicant shall minimize construction -related exhaust emissions by maintaining
construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune according to
manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May through October) by not
allowing construction equipment to be left idling for long periods.
8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
9. Re -vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to reduce
dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the County of Butte
for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with
soil binders to prevent dust generation.
11. Burning of vegetative material may be undertaken only after obtaining a valid burn
permit issued by the BCAQMD (Rule 300 Open Burning Requirements) and in
compliance with the conditions specified on the permit.
12. Other measures as determined appropriate by the Butte County Air Quality
Management District and Department of Public Works to reduce dust.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 51
7.0 Preparers and References
Report Preparation and Review
Kamie Loeser, Senior Planner, NorthStar Engineering, Preparer
Keith Landrum, Assistant Environmental Planner/ Biologist, NorthStar Engineering, Preparer
Crystal Keesey, Botanist/Planner, NorthStar Engineering, Preparer
Carol Wallen, QSP, Biologist, NorthStar Engineering, GIS/Graphics
Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner, Butte County Development Services, Reviewer
Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager, Butte County Development Services
References
Butte County. 20 10. Butte County General Plan. October 26, 2010
Butte County. 2010. Butte County General Plan, Draft EIR. April 8, 2010.
Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD). 2008. CEQA Air Quality Handbook,
Guidelinesfor Assessing Air Quality Impactsfor Project Subject to CEQA Review. January 2008.
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California.
State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game.
Mayer, K.E. and W.F. Laudenslayer. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, CA..
Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals. 2013. Northern
Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2012 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan. Spring 2013.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2006. Soil Survey of Butte Area, California Parts of Butte
and Plumas Counties. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 53
' `
` ' ^ '� .
� � � .
` `
�� , , `
` ^ ^
� `� ` �
. . ` .
. . .
` �
`'
` , '� �
`
. .
'
���� ��� '
.
.
`
. , . � '
' i
' . BC&���-----.-----------------'.-----'Bu�eCouu�,���uuU�,04aou�omoutD�tdc, ' ~
DPVV Dopurmoeotof�nbuodVVUdU�' ' ' .
P8�A-----'_..---�------------'---------Pedera B000rgeocyx4unu�oo�ut��ency ` �
� NS\Q\8'—_----�---------_--------_�-----'Noc�mrnSucrumaoto\�Uey��Bourd i
SVvDC8---.---------------------'.-------'--'3tu�e»xu�erBenourcomCou�o Bourd �
nSyVVS--_------.----------'---'--'---------UodedSta���xbundVVUd|d�Secvce
^
' ` ` \
.
. .
`
C8�&----------------- —'—_.---���di�ro�Bnv�000ueo�A�uo&�,�:
Cp�--------------------------------------------------'Codeo[yedera Be�uubnun
C�P---------------------------��------------.-[CuU�ro�lCounumcbou�eoe,a Pecna� `
CV0�-------------------------------------------�--.----�---'--C�uoVyu�or&c
8lR---------------------..�-------'---'--'----_----'�u,�oo�eo�a [�pao Repm�
�
� �
� .
&�OS---�------.--..---- �---'---J�mbientAjr�uuUryS�moda,ds
CmDDB.-------'----------------__-------'--Cubho,u�Na�uruD�eroh�Dutuhaoe .
CN98 Nut�ePbo�Soc�ty �
CSC----------- ---'-----------------Cdd�cu�Spec�sof8pec�\Coocero . '
dB------------�------' --'------'---------Dec�e�� ^
�8� �reeo8ouoe�aseo . .
. .
' N Nnt�eo�b�eot . .
. �
��m/,s �u�e,�nu�buo10/�Sx0�roum � �
Sm/pPy----------------------------------------'�onnVYa�ecPoUut�pProvendnoP�o i
'
' ' |
.
. ^ � .
. ' |
|
�
'
. . � '� .
^ ' `
�
� .
^ ^ ^ �
. `
'
� ^
' ~
�
� ' `
` .�
�
� . . , � ' .�
. ' ^ � '
. � �^ .
^ `
' `
�. � � � �
' ~ ` )
.
. . . .
� � �
' . . ` ^^ ,
^ ` �
� �
' �pwn�8��V�z6Jnu�n��xn�� � ooa,n�r�o�4' . .
� /muuS��y�m�u�dxu�u�,000c�,uuon� � � .pu��S«
� . � .
' ' -. � � . . . . �
� � ,�
` '
` � �
�
' �
9.0 Consulted Agencies
Consulted Agencies
Environmental Health Public Works Building Manager
BCAG ALUC LAFCo
Air Quality Management City of Chico City of Biggs
City of Gridley City of Oroville Town of Paradise
CA Department of Forestry CalTrans (Traffic) Central Reg. Water Quality
Department of Conservation Dept. of Fish and Game Highway Patrol
Army Corps of Engineers National Marine Fisheries Service US Fish & Wldlife Service
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial StudylMitigoted Negative Declaration
December 2014
Page 55
10.0 Incorporation of Mitigation into Proposed Project
Project Sponsor(S) Incorporation of Mitigation into Proposed Project:
IlWe have reviewed the Initial Studyfor the Harvest GRD13-0010 CAPN # 058-650-0162 application
and particularly the mitigation measures identified herein, Ilwe hereb� modi)J1 the application onfile
with the Butte County Planning Department to include and incorporate all mitigations setforth in this
Initial Study.
Project Sponsor/Project Agent Date
Project Sponsor/Project Agent Date
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
ylMitigated Negative Declaration
Initial Stud Page 56
1.0 Project Information
1.
Project Title:
Aeon Harvest Grading Permit Application GRD13-0010
2.
Lead Agency:
Butte County Department of Public Works
7 County Center Drive
Croville, CA 95965
(530) 538-7266
3.
Contact Person:
Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner
(530) 538-6573
4.
Project Applicant:
Aeon Harvest
989 Wisconsin Street
Chico, CA 95928
(530) 720-7170
S.
Project Location:
Figure 1 Location Map
APN 058-650-016 located at 121Lower Gulch Road in Yankee Hill,
Butte County, California. Affected area is approximately 0.44 acres
on a 10+/ --acre parcel.
Latitude: 39.6854N, Longitude: -121.5265W
6.
General Plan Designation: Foothill Residential
7.
Zoning: FR -20 (Foothill Residential, 20 -acre minimum parcel size)
8.
Project Description:
The applicant requests approval of a Grading Permit pursuant to Butte County Code Chapter 13,
Article I for a grading operation that disturbed 0.44 acres of a 10+ -acre property for the purposes of
leveling land for the installation of an organic garden or similar use. Grading activities were
conducted over a one-week period. in April 2013 using a small tractor. Disturbance to the site
included the leveling and terracing of approximately 0.44 acres of land within an unimproved
portion of the residential property. There are no additional grading, clearing, or vegetation removal
activities proposed as part of the project. However, the owner is required to maintain BMP's which
may involve additional minor soil disturbance over time.
Vegetation in the area where the leveling activities occurred consisted primarily of woody shrubs,
canyon live oak, and conifer tree species. While grading activities avoided the thickest stands of
vegetation located on the property, approximately 13 oak trees and 1 pine tree were removed; see
Figure 2, Grading and Erosion Control Plan. The Grading Permit request includes the following
estimates of grading, cut, and fill.
1. Grading of the land; the extent of grading, clearing, and terracing activities comprise
approximately 0.44 acres. The applicant has leveled the existing land cutting approximately
250 cubic yards and filling approximately 250 cubic yards.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial �Studyllditigated Negative Declaration Page 1
SECTION A -A
LEGEND
- - - - - - - - - -
.......................
4 --
4. -
ABBREVIATIONS PLANS PREPARED BY:
I om-,
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION:
B, GLI
N, Uetodl" App�
T' 12 -1114 -
ps----- ----------------------------- - ------- - -----
M4
In
I.A'
. .......... - ------ --------
VICKN MAP
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMFIS)
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY NOTES
"-. Ml%'WlTFVZ-
T- -=:.IA:= I
V 9 zuw
11 T =T I
GENERAL NOTES
.7 K =r =Z
GRADING QUANTITIES
DUST SUPPRESSION PLAN
11 A- I
EROSION CONTROL MAINTE�ANCi PLAN:
.5m
ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE (ESTIMATE)
TWIM& -T FENW IWALLATEN TyprAL umw wATnj= @wALLAmm
NordiStar
AE<)N HAFMESr
ClRADING AND EROSON CONTROL PLAN
I
1M LOWER CKLCH RD.
TlERACING PRCJECT
ENGINEERING
-pq mpq�
. . ....
YAWEE HLl- CALIFORNA
AM *A tw Job Mmigm
Page Intentionally Left Blank
t
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
De6ember2014
Page 10
a
A
2.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project; however,
with the incorporation of mitigation measures, "potentially significant impacts are reduced to less
than significant level by the project" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15382).
El Aesthetics El Agricultural/ Forestry Resources El Air Quality
* Biological Resources* El Cultural Resources El Geology/Soils
* Greenhouse Gas Emissions M Hazards/Hazardous Materials El Hydrology/Water Quality
EJ Land Use/Planning El Mineral Resources Noise'
Ej Population & Housing 0 Public Services El Recreation
Ej Transportation/Traffic EJ Utilities/Service Systems El Mandatory Findings of
Significance
3.0 Determination
Determination:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
El I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Z 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 revisions in the project have been made by
or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
El I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Q I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact 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. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to
be addressed.
El I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measuresdiat are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Sta* Jolliffe, Principal Planner D'afe
Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
A
Date
December2014
Page 11
4
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use? I I I
Setting
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California Resources Agency issued
an Important Farmlands MaI2 for Butte County identifying Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance, Unique Farmland, and Grazing land. The map is maintained by the State of CA
Department of Conservation and designates the subject property as Other Land. Other Land denotes
"land not included in any other mapping category, common examples include low density rural
developments, brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing, confined
livestock poultry, or aquaculture facilities, strip mines, borrow pits, and water bodies smaller than 40
acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development, and greater
than 40 acres is mapped as other land.
Soils on the site are identified by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as Oroshore-
Mounthrope-Dunstone gravelly clay loam,,15 to 30 percent slope. The site does not contain prime
agricultural soils.
Discussion
a,b) No Impact The proposed project is the grading and leveling of land to accommodate the
installation of an organic garden or similar use. It is anticipated that horticultural activities
will occur on site in the future.
The Important Farmlands Map for Butte County does not identify important farmlands on
the project site; rather, it identifies the site as 'Other Land.' Additionally, the soils on site
are not prime soils, and the site is designated for residential development. A review of the
Butte County General Plan 2030 Land Use Map identifies the property as being located
within an area designated as Foothill Residential (1711-20), 20 -acre minimum parcel size.
Foothill residential zoning designation allows single-family dwellings at rural densities of 1
to 40 acres per dwelling unit, depending on the zoning.
The site is not important farmland and does not occur on prime agricultural soils; therefore,
grading activities would not convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance)
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency to a non-agricultural use.
c,d) Less Than Significant. As stated under Item a) above, the site is designated as Foothill
Residential and a zoning designation as FR -20. The project would not result in the rezoning
of forest land or timberland zoned for Timberland production. The project involves the
grading and terracing of a 0.44 -acre are of a 10 -acre site within montane hardwood -conifer
and mixed chaparral habitat. Grading would not result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of,forest land to non -forest use or non-agricultural use. Refer to Section 4,
Biological Resources, Item b) further below for a description of vegetation communities in,
the project area and on the project site.
e) No Impact As stated ' under Item a) above, grading activities would not convert Farmland
(Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Grading activities will not affect
agriculturally -designated property to the south.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 14
t
3. Air Quality
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant The property is located in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB),
which is divided into two planning sections. Butte County belongs to the Northern
Sacramento Valley Air Basin (NSVAB). The NSVAB has been categorized as "moderately"
non -attainment for ozone and particulate matter.
The County is under the jurisdiction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District
(BCAQMD), a regional agency responsible for regulating sources of air pollution in Butte
County. The BCAQMD is responsible for the preparation of plans for the attainment and
maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), adoption and enforcement of rules
and regulations for sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources
of air pollution.
The Air Pollution Control Districts and Air Quality Management Districts (Districts) for the'.
counties located in the northern portion of the Sacramento Valley together compromise the
Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area (NSVPA). The NSVPA Districts have committed
to jointly prepare and adopt a uniform air quality attainment plan for the purpose of
achieving and maintaining healthful air quality throughout the air basin. This triennial
update of the NSVPA Air Quality Attainment Plan (Plan) addresses the progress made in
implementing the 2009 Plan and proposes modifications to the strategies necessary to
attain the California ambient air quality standard for the 8 -hour ozone at the earliest
practicable date. The 2012 Plan identifies those portions of the NSVPA designated as "non -
attainment" for the State ambient air quality standards and discusses the health effects
related to the various air pollutants. The Plan identifies the air pollution problems which
are to be cooperatively addressed on as many fronts as possible in order to make the region
.7
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 15
Less Than
would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
with
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
X
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
X
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
X
standard (including emissions that exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substanti al
X
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
X
substantial number of people?
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant The property is located in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB),
which is divided into two planning sections. Butte County belongs to the Northern
Sacramento Valley Air Basin (NSVAB). The NSVAB has been categorized as "moderately"
non -attainment for ozone and particulate matter.
The County is under the jurisdiction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District
(BCAQMD), a regional agency responsible for regulating sources of air pollution in Butte
County. The BCAQMD is responsible for the preparation of plans for the attainment and
maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), adoption and enforcement of rules
and regulations for sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources
of air pollution.
The Air Pollution Control Districts and Air Quality Management Districts (Districts) for the'.
counties located in the northern portion of the Sacramento Valley together compromise the
Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area (NSVPA). The NSVPA Districts have committed
to jointly prepare and adopt a uniform air quality attainment plan for the purpose of
achieving and maintaining healthful air quality throughout the air basin. This triennial
update of the NSVPA Air Quality Attainment Plan (Plan) addresses the progress made in
implementing the 2009 Plan and proposes modifications to the strategies necessary to
attain the California ambient air quality standard for the 8 -hour ozone at the earliest
practicable date. The 2012 Plan identifies those portions of the NSVPA designated as "non -
attainment" for the State ambient air quality standards and discusses the health effects
related to the various air pollutants. The Plan identifies the air pollution problems which
are to be cooperatively addressed on as many fronts as possible in order to make the region
.7
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 15
a healthier place to live now and in the future. Like the 2006 and 2009 Plans, the 2012 Plan
focuses on the adoption and implementation of control measures for stationary sources,
area wide sources, and indirect sources, and addresses public education and information
programs (NSVPA Air Quality Attainment Plan, pg. 3).
The project consists of grading and terracing of 0.44 acres of land. Conservation Measure
CM#3 incorporates dust suppression measures to reduce dust and particulate matter
associated with future grading activities. These measures are consistent with the BCAQMD
Standard Mitigation Measures for the reduction of dust and particulate matter as per
Section 6.3 of the BCAQMD Handbook. These measures include:
Conservation Measure CM#3 (Dust Suppressimil
The project also includes dust suppression measures to reduce dust and particulate matter
associated with grading activities. These include:
1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust carried onto
street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing grading, earth -moving,
excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems
are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's
activities cease.
2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except when
loading or unloading materials.
3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a minimum in the
late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency of watering shall increase
if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control District.
4. All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation
operations shall be minimized at all times.
6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14 days shall
be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
7. The applicant shall minimize construction -related exhaust emissions by maintaining
construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune according to
manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May through October) by not
allowing construction equipment to be left idling for long periods.
8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
9. Re -vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to reduce dust
emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the County of Butte for
review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil
binders to prevent dust generation.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration Page 16
~-' | `~^~~-~~`~~~~�`~~~~^~^~~~~~~^`
O
. `
. .� '' `
� �
.. �
'
` � '. �
` `
. 's
.� ` .
'
. '-. 4
. . i�
,'. .
' '` t
^�
. [
`.` i
`
- ^, . . ^�. �` �
` � '� - �
~ �` ^ .
�' � ' , , _` � _, {
� . `~ .� � `
` ` . ~ � .' ~ �~ ^`. .'� .
. ^ ' °' . ' .
. .- '�~ * ^ �
.- - ' ` � ` ~ �` " ' ' .
� ^ ' ' . �.
^ . . . �� ��` �
' .~ �
� Docomh�,3014 ° ,^� , ^, � /
� rqg«29 '.�. ^ .
!� ` ' . ' . `
. . '` ., ~ ` '��,° ` ^ �
» �, ^. , ,~ ~ . " '
. . . � ^� ��' - �^ ^ `�
^ , -. / ` - "
. �- . ' . � �
, .' .
�'
,
^
.. �
.
.
�
.`
.
~
^
. '.
�
�
/
. `
. .� '' `
� �
.. �
'
` � '. �
` `
. 's
.� ` .
'
. '-. 4
. . i�
,'. .
' '` t
^�
. [
`.` i
`
- ^, . . ^�. �` �
` � '� - �
~ �` ^ .
�' � ' , , _` � _, {
� . `~ .� � `
` ` . ~ � .' ~ �~ ^`. .'� .
. ^ ' °' . ' .
. .- '�~ * ^ �
.- - ' ` � ` ~ �` " ' ' .
� ^ ' ' . �.
^ . . . �� ��` �
' .~ �
� Docomh�,3014 ° ,^� , ^, � /
� rqg«29 '.�. ^ .
!� ` ' . ' . `
. . '` ., ~ ` '��,° ` ^ �
» �, ^. , ,~ ~ . " '
. . . � ^� ��' - �^ ^ `�
^ , -. / ` - "
. �- . ' . � �
, .' .
b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation . The California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) identifies sensitive natural communities (SNC) based on classifications created by
Holland, R.F. (1986), which includes those communities that, if eliminated or substantially
degraded, would sustain a significant adverse impact as defined under CEQA. According to
the General Plan EIR, Figure 4.4-1, Vegetative Communities and Wildlife Areas, the project
area is designated as conifer and oak woodland, which are regionally abundant common
natural communities occurring throughout the eastern portion of the County. The site is
located in the transitional ecotone from the valley foothill hardwood -conifer, mixed
chaparral and montane hardwood -conifer communities. A majority of the site is covered in
blue oak -foothill pine habitat, including interior live oak, black oak, and several shrub
species such as manzanita, ceanothus, redberry and California coffeeberry etc. Other
portions of the site consist of natural open areas, the 0.44 -acre graded area, and the mobile
home site. It is estimated that during grading and clearing activities approximately 14 trees
were removed, including a pine and 13 oaks of unknown oak subspecies..
Public Resources Code section 21083.4 specifies that "a county shall determine whether a
project within its jurisdiction may result in the conversion of oak woodlands that will have a
significant effect on the environment." If a county determines there may be a significant
effect to oak woodlands, the county must require one or more mitigation alternatives to
mitigate the significant effect of the conversion. Butte County has not adopted a criteria for
assessing oak woodland loss.
An Oak Woodland Impact Decision Matrix was published in 2008 by the UC Integrated
Hardwood Range Management Program as an analytical approach to oak woodland impact
analysis. An impact decision matrix (page 12) can be used to describe the significance of
oak woodland loss. Since the project site was disturbed prior to permit, the quality of the
oaks cut down during grading activities must be inferred based on the surrounding oak
woodland. a "moderately degraded woodland" (given the location of adjacent roadways,
the grading activities, and the surrounding parcels and land uses). Page 8 of the Matrix
identifies criteria that could be considered to determine significance, including the net loss
of approximately 0.44 acres of a 10 -acre site and road building activities that facilitate
future home -site construction. To offset this impact, Mitigation Measure (MM1) is
provided below to replace oak woodland loss consistent with the Public Resources Code.
C) No Impact A review of aerial imagery and site photos indicates no jurisdictional waters
are present within the property boundary. The closest jurisdictional drainage, Rich Gulch, is
located approximately 0.75 miles north of Lake Oroville. Rich Gulch is approximately 600 -
feet east of the project site. Although no additional grading activities are anticipated, the
applicant will be required to implement an Erosion Control Maintenance Plan (ECP) to
minimize erosion and sedimentation as a result of grading and thereby minimize water
quality impacts off-site. By implementing an ECP, there will be no impacts to waters of the
U.S. and wetlands located offsite.
d) Less Than Significant Impact The project area is located within an area designated by the
General Plan as Critical Deer Herd Range (GP EIR, Figure 4.4-4, Migratory Deer Herd Areas).
With the exception of a small section of fencing along the western property line at the road,
there are no other barriers to interfere with the movement of wildlife through the project
site. The fencing along the western property line at the road does not pose a significant
impediment to migrating deer populations within the area. If the graded area is fenced as
part of future uses, it will account for a 0.44 -acre portion of a 10.1 -acre parcel,
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 23
Mitigation:
Mitigation Measure MMI (Oak Woodlands)
Prior to final acceptance of the grading permit, an Oak Tree Mitigation Plan prepared by a
certified arborist, registered professional forester, botanist or landscape architect shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Director of Development Services or his/her
designee that includes:
1)A survey showing the location of oak trees 5 inches or more in diameter at breast height,
as defined by PRC §21083.4(a);
2)The removal of all oak trees 5 inches or more in diameter at breast height shall be
mitigated. It shall be mitigated by one or more of the following: replanting and maintaining
oak trees, establishing conservation easements, contributing funds for off-site oak
woodlands conservation, and/or other mitigation measures developed by Butte County.
Replanting oak trees cannot account for more than one-half of the mitigation. Replanted
oak trees shall be maintained for a period of seven years after they are planted. If any of the
replanted oak trees die or become diseased, they shall be replaced and maintained for seven
years after the new oak trees are planted;
3)A replanting schedule and diagram for trees removed or encroached upon by permit
activities consistent with PRC §21083.4(b)(2), applicable mitigation measures, and Butte
County Ordinance, if any, shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of
Development Services or his/her designee. Replanted trees shall be planted in areas
deemed appropriate by the Plan, considering future lot development, interference with
foundations, fencing, roadways, driveways, and utilities. Trees planted shall be protected
from livestock and other animals;
4)Oak Tree protection measures for trees to be retained within the project site shall be
included in construction specifications. Each oak tree to be preserved shall be surrounded
by a tree zone identified by the drip line of the tree. An orange plastic fence or other
suitable type of fence shall be used to identify the tree zone during construction activities.
No vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or other development activities shall occur within
the tree zone in order to protect root systems and minimize compaction of the soil, unless
authorized by Oak Tree Mitigation Plan; and
5)Conservation easements or funds for off-site oak woodlands conservation shall be
proposed to and approved by the Director of Development Services or his/her designee."
Plan Requirements: No vegetation removal, grading, road construction, or other
earthwork shall be permitted until the Oak Tree Mitigation Plan is submitted, and
approved.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be satisfied prior final acceptance of the
grading permit, and prior to any development activity or the issuance of any grading,
building, septic, or well permit, or the approval of any improvement plans on the parcels.
Monitoring: The Butte County Department of Development Services and Department of
Public Works shall ensure thatthis mitigation is complied with prior to final acceptance of
the grading permit.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 25
11
S. Cultural Resources
Discussion
a, b) No Impact The site and the immediate surrounding vicinity are not designated as
archaeological or historically sensitive areas. In addition, there are no known cultural
resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory. The existing 0.44 -acre of a 10.1 -acre project site has been disturbed
by grading activities and unknown historic resources have not been discovered. Further
activities on the site would consist of stabilizing the site for water quality protection and
erosion control. Additional grading activities are not anticipated. Site stabilization measures
would consist of the BMPs, as described in Section 9, Item a) Hydrology and Water Quality.
c) No Impact Due to the project site's location, lack of outcroppings, or unique geologic
features on the property and that existing disturbance has not revealed any sub -surface
resources, continued site stabilization activities are not likely to directly or indirectly
destroy sub -surface resources as additional grading is not anticipated.
d) No Impact There are no known grave sites within the project limits. Therefore, the
disturbance of human remains is not anticipated. However, in the unlikely event that human
remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and
disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must
be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are determined to be
prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC),
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of
the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC.
The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on'the
disposition of the remains.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Stu dylMitigoted Negative Declaration Page 26
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined
X
in California Code of Regulations, Section
1S064.S?
b)'Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
X
pursuant to CA Code of Regulations, §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
X
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
X
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a, b) No Impact The site and the immediate surrounding vicinity are not designated as
archaeological or historically sensitive areas. In addition, there are no known cultural
resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory. The existing 0.44 -acre of a 10.1 -acre project site has been disturbed
by grading activities and unknown historic resources have not been discovered. Further
activities on the site would consist of stabilizing the site for water quality protection and
erosion control. Additional grading activities are not anticipated. Site stabilization measures
would consist of the BMPs, as described in Section 9, Item a) Hydrology and Water Quality.
c) No Impact Due to the project site's location, lack of outcroppings, or unique geologic
features on the property and that existing disturbance has not revealed any sub -surface
resources, continued site stabilization activities are not likely to directly or indirectly
destroy sub -surface resources as additional grading is not anticipated.
d) No Impact There are no known grave sites within the project limits. Therefore, the
disturbance of human remains is not anticipated. However, in the unlikely event that human
remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and
disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must
be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are determined to be
prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC),
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of
the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC.
The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on'the
disposition of the remains.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Stu dylMitigoted Negative Declaration Page 26
(broom clean- do not use water to wash the street) If equipment. traffic is minimal,
stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off the property and onto
paved roadways shall be swept immediately after each vehicle leaves the site.
7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall be
- stabilized by applying "earth guard" or seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper order.
Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing collected sediment and
repairing deficiencies.
10. Du ring long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall, BMPs may become clogged.
Extreme care should be taken to clean BMPs to reduce fugitive discharge and potential
flooding.
11. Applicant may remove temporary BMPs (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent BMPs
have been established.
12. Native seed and erosion control matting shall be applied to all disturbed areas that are
not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles. Irrigation will
be performed by hand watering. Seed and mulch shall be kept moist at all times until
germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the California State Seed
Law and applied at the following rate:
Seed - Melica californica: 10 lbs/acre
Fiber - 100% wood fiber- 2,000 lbs/acre
Tack - Scilium based "M" binder 120 lbs/acre
The project includes an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Figure 3), which is part of the Grading
Plan. The following is a list of measures that will be implemented, as part of the Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan:
1. If BMP's are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care
should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs.
2. If BMP's have failed, or are ineffective, notify the owner/contractor to modify the
BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed
within 72 hours of approval
3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re -seeded,
fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original
application rate should be applied.
4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be
replaced annually if required beyond 1 year.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 29
S. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer, temporary BMPs may
be removed if no longer needed.
b) Less Than Significant Impact The project lies within an area that has a high erosion
hazard potential. (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-4) As stated earlier, stabilization of exposed soil
within the graded area will be accomplished through the use of hydroseed (containing
mulch, seed, and tacifier) as well as aggregate base. Additionally, the ECP requires notifying
the engineer/QSD should any of the BMP's fail or become ineffective. Any areas that are not
effectively stabilized will be addressed accordingly by replacing BMPs. The implementation
of effective stabilization techniques will yield no substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.
C) Less Than Significant Impact While the project is located in an area identified as having a
'high' landslide potential, it is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is considered
unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project. Therefore, the potential
for on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, or collapse is less than significant.
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the soil type within the project
area is entirely within Map Unit 671 Oroshore-mounthrope-Dunstone soils (NRCS 2014).
This Unit is composed of gravelly coarse and clay loams, similar soils, and paralithic
bedrock at approximately 40-60 inches, which are not prone to liquefaction. Additionally,
there have been no documented incidents of subsidence in Butte County and the only areas
at risk for subsidence are in the valley region (GP EIR, pg 4.6-12), not the foothills where the
project is located.
d) Less Than Significant Impact . The project is located in an area with low expansive soil
potential (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-3). Expansive soils are generally found in basin deposits in the
low-lying portions of the county near the Sacramento and Feather Rivers as well as
localized areas elsewhere in the county (GP EIR, pg 4.6-12). The project site is not located in
expansive soil areas.
e) No Impact The project will not use or install septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems.
7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Setting
The earth's atmosphere naturally contains a number of gases, including (but not limited to) carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20), which are collectively referred to as greenhouse
gases (GHGs). GHG emissions are generally numerically depicted (when applicable) as carbon dioxide
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 30
Less Than
Evaluated
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
in Previous
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Document
Mitigation
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, directly or
X
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or
X
regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Setting
The earth's atmosphere naturally contains a number of gases, including (but not limited to) carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20), which are collectively referred to as greenhouse
gases (GHGs). GHG emissions are generally numerically depicted (when applicable) as carbon dioxide
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 30
Projects that wish to demonstrate consistency with the CAP must demonstrate consistency with all
applicable measures and action items from the CAP. For the subject project, consistency with the CAP
would not require special provisions because it is not anticipated to result in housing units, non-
residential development, or other greenhouse gas producing activities.
Discussion
a, b) Less Than Significant. The proposed project is the clearing, grading, and terracing of 0.44
acres of land. Generally, GHG emissions that are normally associated with land use projects
include: water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Grading and clearing
activities will not result in a long term net increase in GHG emissions. The project created
nominal short-term air emissions, particularly with regard to dust; an ECP has been
prepared as part of Grading Plan (refer to Section 3, Air Quality). The project will not
interfere with the State's goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the
year 2020, per AB 32, nor would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2014
page 32
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
..,the enviro ' nment through the routine
X
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
X
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
X
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
X
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
,use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
X
project result in a safety hazard for people
.residing or working in the project area?
0' For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
X
the project area?
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2014
page 32
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
X
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands
X
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Setting
The property is located in an area designated by CAL FIRE as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). The project involves the grading and leveling of land and the removal of
vegetation from the graded portion of the site to a 'slash pile' near the entrance to the site.
The applicant has agreed to use any chemicals according to the manufacturer's specifications, as
reflected in CM#4 below.
The use, storage, and disposal of chemicals used within the project boundaries shall be applied
pursuant to manufacturer's instructions, subject to all applicable laws, regulations, and permits.
Discussion
a) No Impact The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials, and, would not result in such impact.
b) No Impact The proposed grading activities and site stabilization measures are not
anticipated to result in a release of hazardous materials into the environment.
C) No Impact Grading and clearing activities do not involve any emission or handling of any
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing school. No
existing or proposed school facilities are located within a one-quarter mile radius of the
project site.
d) No Impact The property is not included on a list of sites containing hazardous materials,
and would not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. The project
site is not included on the Cortese -Knox list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5.
e) No Impact The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan or
within two miles of a public airport and the project would not result in permanent
structures that expose people to a safety hazard.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 33
No Impact The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip
and the project would not result in permanent structures that expose people to a safety
hazard.
g) No Impact The proposed project does not include any actions within the roadway that
would physically interfere with any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans.
The project would not result in an increase in traffic, and thus would not reduce the current
level of service of the area road network.
h) Less than Significant with Mitigation.. The property is located in an area designated by
CAL FIRE as a Very'High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). The project
involves the grading and leveling of land and the removal of vegetation from the graded
portion of the site to a 'slash pile' near the entrance to the site.
Comprised of dead and dry vegetation, the slash pile provides fuel for wild1fires that may
occur near the project site. Decomposition and ignition of the slash pile can also occur over
time. For these reasons, the removed vegetation associated with grading activities could
expose people or structures to a significant risk of wildland fires. Mitigation Measure MM2
requires that vegetation cleared during grading activities be handled appropriately by one
of three methods: removing to a permitted green waste facility, chipping and distributing
the materials on site, or burning the materials consistent with a valid burn permit from the
BCAQMD. With the removal of cleared vegetation, any fire hazard associated with grading
permit activities will be less than significant.
Mitigation:
Mitigation Measure MM2 (Removal of Cleared Vegetation)
A note on the final grading plan states: "All vegetation cleared during grading,activities shall be
removed from the project site by one of three methods: removing vegetation to a permitted
green waste facility, chipping and distributing the materials on site, or burning cleared
vegetation consistent with a valid burn permit from the Butte County Air Quality Management
district (BCAQMD)."
Plan Requirements: Remove fire danger from cleared (downed, dead) vegetation.
Timing: Prior to the Public Works Director singing off the final Grading Permit.
Monitoring: Public Works Land Development will ensure cleared vegetation is
removed prior to final grading approval.
9. Hydrology and Water Quality
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 34
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
LessThan
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Violate any water quality standards or
X
waste discharge requirements?
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 34
I -
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact The project is the grading of 0.44 -acre site, and ' thus is
required to prepare an ECP, which will be submitted to the Butte County Public Works
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 35
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
LessThan
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
X
production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
X
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on -
or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
X
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on -
or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
X
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Otherwise degrade water quality?
X
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
X
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
X
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
X
flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
X
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact The project is the grading of 0.44 -acre site, and ' thus is
required to prepare an ECP, which will be submitted to the Butte County Public Works
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 35
Department for review and approval as part of the Grading Permit process. Compliance
with these measures would ensure the project would not violate any water quality
standards.
Conservation Measure# CMI (Stormwater BMW
The following is a list of BMPs, have been incorporated into the proposed Grading Plan, by the
applicant:
1. If one or more acres of ground is to be disturbed, a permit shall be obtained from
the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction.
2. All erosion control measures shall conform to the Caltrans standard specifications
May 2006 (See Appendix A and B to this study) and the erosion control plans shown
on the construction drawings.
3. Interim erosion control measures shall be installed as needed during construction to
assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
4. All slopes with disturbed soils greater than 10% that are free of vegetation shall
have earth guard applied or mulch spread and tacked down prior to a 30% chance
of rain.
5. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces
to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the
form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least
twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All
clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
6. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress
by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a
minimum depth of 12" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil
material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed
on a daily basis. (broom clean- do not use water to wash the street) If equipment
traffic is minimal, stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off
the property and onto paved roadways shall be swept immediately after each
vehicle leaves the site.
7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall
be stabilized by applying "earth guard" or seeded and watered until grass cover is
grown.
9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper
order. Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing collected
sediment and repairing deficiencies.
10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall, BMPs may become clogged.
Extreme care should be taken to clean BMPs to reduce fugitive discharge and
potential flooding.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 36
11. Applicant may remove temporary BMPs (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent
BMPs have been established.
12. Native seed and erosion control matting shall be applied to all disturbed areas that
are not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles.
Irrigation will be performed by hand watering. Seed and mulch shall be kept moist
at all times until germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the
California State Seed Law and applied at the following rate: ,
Seed - Melica californica: 10 lbs/acre
Fiber - 100% wood fiber: 2,000 lbs/acre
Tack - Scilium based "M" binder 120 lbs/acre
The project includes an ECP (Figure 3), which is part of the Grading Plan. The following is a list of
measures that will be implemented, as part of the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan:
1. If BMP's are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care
should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs.
2. If BMP's have failed, or are ineffective, notify the owner/contractor to modify the
BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed
within 72 hours of approval
3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re -seeded,
fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original
application rate should be applied.
4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be
replaced annually if required beyond 1 year.
5. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer, temporary BMPs may.
be removed if no longer needed.
b) No Impact No activities associated with the project are anticipated to have any impact on
ground water. Project activities are limited to surface grading for the leveling and terracing
of land.
C) Less Than Significant Impact. The project activities include grading and leveling of land on
a 0.44 -acre portion of a 10.1 -acre site. The overall direction of drainage on the site will not
change. The terracing, along with erosion BMP's will serve to slow the rate of runoff from
the site, not accelerate it. No streams or rivers will have their course altered as a result of
project activities.
d) No Impact The project does not lie in an area designated as a FEMA flood zone nor is it
immediately adjacent to any areas that are designated as flood zones (GP EIR, Figure 4.8-3).
Furthermore, the project activities involve the leveling'of already sloped land. There is no
APIV058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 37
net change in the flow of water on or off the site that would lead to an increase in flooding -
on- or off-site.
e) Less Than Significant Impact The project will not yield an increase in storm water runoff
that would require the use or construction of storm water drainage facilities. As addressed
in Item a) above, the Grading Plan and ECP will meet water quality standards and not result
in polluted runoff.
f) Less Than Significant Impact Refer to Item a) above. The ultimate goal of an Erosion
Control Maintenance plan is to prevent degradation of water quality through the prevention
of sediment and pollutant runoff. The ECP is project specific and designed to minimize
erosion, thereby protecting water quality.
g -i) No Impact The proposed project, which is grading and clearing activities, is not located
within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Project activities would not result in placing housing in
a 100 -year flood hazard area, nor would activities impede or redirect flood flows. The
project would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding as a result of levee or dam failure.
No Impact There are no anticipated impacts to the proposed project from seiche, tsunami,
or mudflow, as no topographical features of water bodies capable of producing such events
occur within the project site vicinity.
10, Land Use and Planning
Discussion
a) No Impact Grading activities have been conducted on a 0.44 -acre site within a 10.1 -acre
property. The site is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and is rural in
nature, with no surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the project will not have an impact
on the physical arrangement of an established community.
b) No Impact The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation
of Foothill Residential and the FR -20 (Foothill Residential, 20 -acre minimum parcel size)
zoning designation. The project would neither propose a change in zoning, nor conflict with
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration
December2014
Page 38
LessThan
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Physically divide an established community?
X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
X
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
X
conservation plan?
Discussion
a) No Impact Grading activities have been conducted on a 0.44 -acre site within a 10.1 -acre
property. The site is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and is rural in
nature, with no surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the project will not have an impact
on the physical arrangement of an established community.
b) No Impact The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation
of Foothill Residential and the FR -20 (Foothill Residential, 20 -acre minimum parcel size)
zoning designation. The project would neither propose a change in zoning, nor conflict with
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit
Initial Studyllditigated Negative Declaration
December2014
Page 38
any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the
site.
C) No Impact The project site is not currently located in an area identified as having an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan. In addition,
available information indicates that once approved, the Butte Regional Conservation Plan's
jurisdictional area will not encompass the project site.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 39
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant The Butte County Board of Supervisors passed Ordinance #4053,
Noise Control on March 26, 2013. The Ordinance became effective on April 25, 2013. The
Ordinance states:
Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, demolition, paving or
grading of any real property or public works project located within 1,000 feet of
residential uses, provided said activities do not take place between thefollowing hours:
• Sunset to sunrise on weekdays and non -holidays;
• Friday commencing at 6:00 p.m. through and including 8.00 a.m. on Saturday, as
well as not before 8:00 a.m. on holidays;
• Saturday commencing at 6:00 p.m. through and including 10:00 a.m. on Sunday;
and,
0 Sunday after the hour of 6:00 p.m.
Provided, however, when an unforeseen or unavoidable condition occurs during a
construction project and the nature of the project necessitates that work in process be
continued until a specific phase is completed, the contractor or owner shall be allowed
to continue work into the hours delineated above and to operate machinery and
equipment necessary to complete the specific work in progress until that specific work
can be brought to conclusion under conditions which will not jeopardize inspection
acceptance or create unduefinancial hardshipsfor the contractor or owner.
Additional grading activities are not anticipated. However, if grading were necessary, the
implementation of the provisions of the Noise Ordinance would reduce any temporary and
periodic increase in noise levels to less than significant levels.
b) Less Than Significant The project encompasses grading and clearing on 0.44 acres, most of
which has been conducted. Although additional grading activities are not anticipated, any
activities such as site stabilization would be temporary, occur during less sensitive daytime
hours, and short in duration. As a result, any potential impacts from grading -related
groundborne vibrations or noises would be less than significant.
c) No Impact The proposed project does not involve uses or activities that would result in a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Although
additional grading activities are not anticipated, noise associated with any additional
activities would be temporary.
d) Less Than Significant The property is located in a rural area with generally low noise
levels and is not subject to any significant continuous noise. The nearest residence is
approximately 500 ft of project activities. Any additional grading activities on the site would
temporarily generate an increase in noise levels on and adjacent to the site. However, noise
levels would be temporary and would not be in excess of local standards.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit. December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 41
e, No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within
two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip. As such, the project
would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
13. Population and Housing
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant No significant population growth associated with the proposed
project is expected. Any employment generated by grading activities would be temporary
and drawn from the local work force, and would not create a permanent population growth
to the area.
b, c) No Impact; As stated under Item a) above, grading activities will not generate a permanent
increase to the local population that would displace existing housing or add a substantial
number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
14. Public Services
Would the project: result in substantial adverse
Less Than
physical impacts associated with the provision of
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant Less Than
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
Mitigation
Mitigation
or other performance objectives for any of the
aj Induce substantial population growth in an area,
public services:
a) Fire protection?
either directly (for example, by proposing new
X
b), Police protection?
X
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
X
X
example, through extension of roads or other
e) Other public facilities?
X
infrastructurep
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
X
replacement housing elsewhere?
c). Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
X
housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant No significant population growth associated with the proposed
project is expected. Any employment generated by grading activities would be temporary
and drawn from the local work force, and would not create a permanent population growth
to the area.
b, c) No Impact; As stated under Item a) above, grading activities will not generate a permanent
increase to the local population that would displace existing housing or add a substantial
number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
14. Public Services
Would the project: result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
LessThan
need, the construction of which could cause Potentially
Significant Less Than
No
significant environmental impacts, in order to Significant
With Significant
Impact
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
Mitigation
or other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
a) Fire protection?
X
b), Police protection?
X
c) Schools?
X
1d) Parks?
X I
e) Other public facilities?
X
APN OSB-6SO-01 6 Grading Permit
Initial Studylkitigated Negative Declaration
December 2014
'Page 42
Discussion
a -e) No Impact The project includes grading and clearing activities and site stabilization
measures on 0.44 acres of land. These activities would not result in substantial physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities
including fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public and quasi -public
services.
15. Recreation
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
X
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities, which
X
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Discussion
a) No Impact No significant population growth is anticipated with the proposed project that
would generate an increase in d * emand for existing public or private parks or other
recreational facilities that would either result in or increase the physical deterioration of
the facility.
b) No Impact Project activities does not include recreational facilities.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Studyloitigated Negative Declaration Page 43
4
16. Traffic and Transportation
Discussion
a,b) No Impact The proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or
policy with regard to the effectiveness of the performance of the circulation system. Grading
activities have already occurred onsite using a small tractor without offsite hauling. The
proposed project would not generate additional traffic, as it would not construct facilities,
which would generate additional vehicular traffic construction traffic, or increase vehicular
trips. Therefore, the project would have no impacts associated with transportation or
traffic. I
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 44
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance
or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass
transit and non -motorized travel and
x
relevant components of the circulation
system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other
x
standards established by the county
congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
x
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
x
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
x
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
x
decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?
Discussion
a,b) No Impact The proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or
policy with regard to the effectiveness of the performance of the circulation system. Grading
activities have already occurred onsite using a small tractor without offsite hauling. The
proposed project would not generate additional traffic, as it would not construct facilities,
which would generate additional vehicular traffic construction traffic, or increase vehicular
trips. Therefore, the project would have no impacts associated with transportation or
traffic. I
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 44
t
t
C) No Impact No public use airports have been identified as being located within the vicinity
of the project site. The project site is located outside the compatibility zones for the area
airports,,and therefore, would not result in a change to air traffic patterns, including
increases in air traffic levels or safety hazards.
k
d) No Impact The property is accessed from Lower Gulch Road via a dirt driveway. The
issuance of a Grading Permit, and any site stabilization would not substantially increase
hazards due to a transportation design feature. New roadways are not proposed as part of
this project.
e),, No Impact No existing residential uses are located on the project site, and the proposed
project would not generate a permanent increase in traffic volumes to cause the existing,
road network to have inadequate emergency access.
No Impact. The proposed project would not generate a permanent increase in population
growth to the project area that would cause an increase in demand for alternative
transportation facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
17. Utilities and Service Systems
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 45
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements
of the applicable Water Quality Control
X
Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
X
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of
X
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing entitlements
X
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves/may serve the project that it has
X
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
X
project's solid waste disposal needs?
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 45
Discussion
a,b,e) No Impact. The project does not include construction or expansion of wastewater
treatment facilities.
C) No Impact No existing stormwater drainage facilities are located on the project site and
none would be required with approval of the proposed project due to project site having
adequate area within the project site to allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground
before leaving the site.
d) No Impact The site is located in a rural area of Butte County where water services are
provided by individual groundwater wells. The well located on the property provides
domestic water to the residence onsite. The availability of groundwater in the area depends
largely upon the geologic, hydrologic and climatic conditions of the project area. Though the'
availability of existing water supplies is uncertain due to the variability of site conditions,
water demand for other activities would not be greater than what would be permitted from
,other allowed uses within the Foothill Residential (FR -20) zoning. Therefore, the project
will not require new or expanded water entitlements.
f, g) No Impact Grading and clearing activities resulted in green waste that was burned on-site.
Issuance of a Grading Permit would not result in an increase of solid waste to the Butte
County Neal Road Landfill. The project would not impact federal, state, and local statutes
related to solid waste.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 46
Less Than
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
X
waste?
I
Discussion
a,b,e) No Impact. The project does not include construction or expansion of wastewater
treatment facilities.
C) No Impact No existing stormwater drainage facilities are located on the project site and
none would be required with approval of the proposed project due to project site having
adequate area within the project site to allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground
before leaving the site.
d) No Impact The site is located in a rural area of Butte County where water services are
provided by individual groundwater wells. The well located on the property provides
domestic water to the residence onsite. The availability of groundwater in the area depends
largely upon the geologic, hydrologic and climatic conditions of the project area. Though the'
availability of existing water supplies is uncertain due to the variability of site conditions,
water demand for other activities would not be greater than what would be permitted from
,other allowed uses within the Foothill Residential (FR -20) zoning. Therefore, the project
will not require new or expanded water entitlements.
f, g) No Impact Grading and clearing activities resulted in green waste that was burned on-site.
Issuance of a Grading Permit would not result in an increase of solid waste to the Butte
County Neal Road Landfill. The project would not impact federal, state, and local statutes
related to solid waste.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 46
5.0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Discussion
a) Less Than'Significant. Potential impacts to biological resources were found to be less than
significant, (refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). In addition, there are no known
cultural resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory (refer to Section 5, Cultural Resources).
b) Less Than Significant. The project is the issuance of a Grading Permit on'0.44 acres of a
10.1 -acre parcel. Impacts identified in this Initial Study were found to, be less than
significant or would have no impact on environmental resources. Adherence to applicable
regulatory requirements, i.e., Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, Dust Suppression Plan, and
other permits or approvals of responsible agencies would ensure less' than significant
cumulative impacts.
c) Less Than Significant. Based on the preceding environmental analysis and adherence to
applicable local, state and federal regulations, as noted in this document, the proposed
project would not result in potentially significant cumulative, direct or indirect adverse
effects on the environment or human beings.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 47
Less Than
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
X
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
X
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
'the effects of other current projects, and
,the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
X
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Discussion
a) Less Than'Significant. Potential impacts to biological resources were found to be less than
significant, (refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). In addition, there are no known
cultural resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory (refer to Section 5, Cultural Resources).
b) Less Than Significant. The project is the issuance of a Grading Permit on'0.44 acres of a
10.1 -acre parcel. Impacts identified in this Initial Study were found to, be less than
significant or would have no impact on environmental resources. Adherence to applicable
regulatory requirements, i.e., Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, Dust Suppression Plan, and
other permits or approvals of responsible agencies would ensure less' than significant
cumulative impacts.
c) Less Than Significant. Based on the preceding environmental analysis and adherence to
applicable local, state and federal regulations, as noted in this document, the proposed
project would not result in potentially significant cumulative, direct or indirect adverse
effects on the environment or human beings.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 47
6.0 Conservation Measures, Mitigation Measures and Monitoring
Requirements
Prior to final acceptance of the grading permit, an Oak Tree Mitigation Plan prepared by a
certified arborist,, registered professional forester, botanist or landscape architect shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Director of Development Services or his/her
designee that includes:
1)A survey showing the location of oak trees 5 inches or more in diameter at breast height,
as defined by PRC §21083.4(a);
2)The removal of all oak trees 5 inches or more in diameter at breast height shall be
mitigated. It shall be mitigated by one or more of the following: replanting and maintaining
oak trees, establishing conservation easements, contributing funds for off-site oak
woodlands conservation, and/or other mitigation measures developed by Butte County.
Replanting oak trees cannot account for more than one-half ofthe mitigation. Replanted
oak trees shall be maintained for a period of seven years after they are planted. If any of the
replanted oak trees die or become diseased, they shall be replaced and maintained for seven
years after the new oak trees are planted;
3)A replanting schedule and diagram for trees removed or encroached upon by permit
activities consistent with PRC §21083.4(b)(2), applicable mitigation measures, and Butte
County Ordinance, if any, shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of
Development Services or his/her designee. Replanted trees shall be planted in areas
deemed appropriate by the Plan, considering future lot development, interference with
foundations, fencing, roadways, driveways, and utilities. Trees planted shall be protected
from livestock and other animals;
4)Oak Tree protection measures for trees to be retained within the project site shall be
included in construction specifications. Each oak tree to be preserved shall be surrounded
by a tree zone identified by the drip line of the tree. An orange plastic fence or other
suitable type of fence shall beiised to identify the tree zone during construction activities.
No vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or other development activities shall occur within
the tree zone in order to protect root systems and minimize compaction of the soil, unless
authorized by Oak Tree Mitigation Plan; and
5)Conservation easements or funds for off-site oak woodlands conservation shall be
proposed to and approved by the Director of Development Services or his/her designee."
Plan Requirements: No vegetation removal, grading, road construction, or other
earthwork shall be permitted until the Oak Tree Mitigation Plan is submitted and
approved.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be satisfied prior final acceptance of the
grading permit, and prior to any development activity or the issuance of any grading,
building, septic, or well permit, or the approval of any improvement plans on the parcels.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 48
Monitoring: The Butte County Department of Development Services and Department of
Public Works shall ensure thatthis mitigation is complied with prior to final acceptance of
the grading permit. I
Conservation Measure CM#1 (Stormwater BM"s
Conservation Measure #1, the following is a list of BMPs, have been incorporated into the proposed
Grading Plan, by the applicant:
1. If one or more acres of ground is to be disturbed, a permit must be obtained from
the state water resources control board prior to construction.
2. All erosion control measures shall conform to the Caltrans standard specifications
May 2006 (See Appendix A and B to this stud) and the erosion control plans shown
on the construction drawings.
3. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during
construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
4. All slopes with disturbed soils greater than 10% that are free of vegetation shall
have earth guard applied or mulch spread and tacked down prior to a 30% chance
of rain.
Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces
to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the
form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least
twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All
clearing grading, earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
6. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress
by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a
minimum depth of 12" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil
material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed
on a daily basis. (broom clean- do not use water to wash the street) If equipment
traffic is minimal, stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off
the property and onto paved roadways shall be swept immediately after each
vehicle leaves the site.
7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins orother effective covers at all times. ,
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall
be stabilized by applying "earth guard" or seeded and watered until grass cover is
grown.
9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper
order. Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing collected
sediment and repairing deficiencies.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 49
10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall, BMPs may become clogged.
Extreme care should be taken to clean BMPs to reduce fugitive discharge and
potential flooding.
11. Applicant may remove temporary BMPs (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent
BMPs have been established.
12. Native seed and erosion control matting shall be applied to all disturbed areas that
are not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles.
Irrigation will be performed by hand watering. Seed and mulch shall be kept moist
at all times until germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the
California State Seed Law and applied at the following rate:
Seed - Melica californica: 10 lbs/acre
Fiber - 100% wood fiber: 2,000 lbs/acre
Tack - Scilium based "M" binder 120 lbs/acre
Consenm-tion Measure CM#2 (Erosion Control Plan)
The project includes an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Figure 3), which is part of the Grading
Plan. The following is a list of measures that will be implemented, as part of the Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan:
1. If BMP's are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care
should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs.
2. If BMP's have failed, or are ineffective, notify the owner/contractor to modify the
BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed
within 72 hours of approval
3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re -seeded,
fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original
application rate should be applied.
4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be
replaced annually if required beyond 1 year.
5. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer, temporary BMPs may
be removed if no longer needed.
The project also includes dust suppression measures to reduce dust and particulate matter
associated with grading activities. These include -
1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust carried
onto street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing grading, earth -moving,
excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 50
systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust
after each day's activities cease.
2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except when
loading or unloading materials.
3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a minimum in
the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency of watering shall
increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control District.
4. All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds
exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation
operations shall be minimized at all times.
6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14 days
shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
7. The applicant shall minimize construction -related exhaust emissions by maintaining
construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune according to
manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May through October) by not
allowing construction equipment to be left idling for long periods.
8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
9. Re -vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to reduce
dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the County of Butte
for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with
soil binders to prevent dust generation.
11. Burning of vegetative material may be undertaken only after obtaining a valid burn
permit issued by the BCAQMD (Rule 300 Open Burning Requirements) and in
compliance with the conditions specified on the permit.
12. Other measures as determined appropriate by the Butte. County Air Quality
Management District and Department of Public Works to reduce dust.
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 51
� .
. .
`
.
.
`
. . .`
`
8.0 Acronyms �
. `
`
Agencies. Boards, Commissions, Districts:
^.
BC&0MD.........................................................................................................
Butte County Air Quality Management District
DPVV..................................................................................................................... (Cudoroia)Department of Fish and Wildlife ^
FEMA ..........................................................................................................................
Federal Emergency Management Agency '
.
NS\AB............................................................................................................................
Northern Sacramento Valley Air Board
SnyKCB.................................. ..........................................................................................
State Water Resources Control Board
USFVVS...........................................................................................................................
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
�
..
Guidelines. Policies. Programs, Regulations:
~ .
�
C8g&................................................................................................................................... California Environmental Quality Act
CFR—..---------- ..............................
----........ ---'Code ofFederal Baguudoos. !
CGP '----_--'-------'----------�—�------(Cub/orn�
)Couo�ucbouCeuera Permit
CnVA '
Clean Water Act . . '
8%D
Environmental Impact Report �
. . �.
' AAQS '
Air Quality Standards
CNDDB..............................................................................................................................
California Natural Diversity Database
' CNPS
Native Plant Society �
' CSC ........................................................................................................................................
California Species ofSpecial Concern ~
d8
Decibel(s).
G8G
Green House Gases �
NCx
Notice oIntent ^ , !
' PMm/zs
Matter less than 1O/l5Microns '
SVVPPP..........................................................................................................................
' .
^
. .
^
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
.
^ ' �
. .
. . .
.
'^
..
'.
~ .
. . .'
. .
^
`
.
..
..
'. . '
. .
.
� ^
' . .
` ^
�
Arwoan-6so*z6Grading Permit
oomxnbe,2014 ^ .
^ /muu Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
.
Page 54
.` . .
.. .
.
. . ^
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 55,
9.0 Consulted Agencies
Consulted Agencies
Environmental Health
Public Works
Building Manager
BCAG
ALLIC
LAFCo
Air Quality Management
City of Chico
City of Biggs
City of Gridley
City of Oroville
Town of Paradise
CA Department of Forestry
CalTrans (Traffic)
Central Reg. Water Quality
Department of Conservation
Dept. of Fish and Game
Highway Patrol
Army Corps of Engineers
National Marine Fisheries Service
US Fish & Wldlife Service
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December 2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 55,
Appendices
A ............... CalTrans Construction Site BMP manual SS -7 Geotextiles, etc.
B ........................ CalTrans Construction Site BMP Manual SC -S Fiber Rolls
C ........................................................ Oak Woodland Impact Decision Matrix
APN 058-650-016 Grading Permit December2014
Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Page 57
Butte County Department of Development Serviees
TIM SNELLINGS, DIRECTOR PETE CALARCO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR 0
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
(530) 538-7601 Office
(530) 538-7785 Fax
www.buttecounty.net
www.butte-generalplan.ne
February 5, 2014
SUbject: Recommended Continuation of February 11, 2015 Zoning Administrator Hearing.—
Grading Permit GRID1 3-0010 (Harvest, Aeon); 121 Lower Gulch Road, Yankee Hill.
This letter. is to' notify you that'Planning Staff isrecommending continuation of the public hearing for
the above-described Grading Permit application from the February 11, 2015 meetingi to an
unspecified date (off calendar). You. will be notified when the item. is re -scheduled for hearing.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, or.wouldlike additional* information regarding the
proposed project, please do not hesitate to contact, me at (530) 538-6573 or by errfail at
sjolliffe@buftecounty.net.
Sincerely;
Stacey Jolliffe
Principal Planner
Ntam
'i" -rckach
er Peak R
Wilderne, -wr.;
sswi
Ilk? Pn s n Canyon mu
Din
0) Al
0
U)
�.4
PCX.
vJ.
3
imp Hill Rd
4— '
410
LA
a U
CD
(P
0
LI
ec Rd
rAr
oce"r, Uy
V-11
OQ
zt
Cherokee Rd
Ab
J:bp
kk
i>
0:
Call
0
ridot PI
umpyback Rd
YOUNG SHELA ETAL..
1666.9 RED EYE RD'.
YANKEE HILL CA:'95966.'
JOHNSON MERLYN_L & PHYLLIS M.-.:,
5i4 RICH GULCH RD
YANKEE HIthCA 959'65*
HOWARD FAMILY TRUST
PO tOX 1�3a
PARADISECA95967
YOUNG SftELA ETAL..''
10294'RtbEYERD*.:- -
.
YANK EE HILL CA: 95965 -
YOUNG SHEILA ETAL
1094 REJ) EYE RD,
YANKEE HILL'C�,- §596�
SMITH FAMILY TRUST-:%
3945 DAWN DR
LOOMIS CA 956'50
SHIELDS WILLIAM W'.'
583 -LOWER -GULCH RD-�
DROVILL.E CA 95965
LATTIN STEVEN M-
318 RICH GULCH ROAD
DROVIL.LE CA �5965
SATO TATSUO ETAL
240 RICH GULCH RD"..,
DROVILLE CA 95965
DLIVER FAMILY TRUST
PO'BOX 412325"
LOS.ANGEI.:tS.CA 9004'1.' .
A
'�*U_CCA _BRIAN� 77
ruCAIPA CA'9239�-
J1556 DEERFIELD DR
ORUM FAMILYLIVING' TWST�.
4�7 WOODCOCK CT
MILPITAS CA 95035
COOK NICHOLAS,
24425 WOOLSEY'CANYONRI) SPC 35
iWESTHILLS:CA91304
.BAR�RIS RANDY & GL . OR . IA ETAL,-:
,�5 LOWER -GULCH RD
OROVILLE CA 959 65
; S ARNOFF H ARRY A'
83 LOWER GULCH RD
OR6VILLE CA 95965
MINNICK RONALD- STEVEN
�56 LOWER: GULCH -RD.
0
40.VILLE.CA,95965
,SATO TATSUO & LISA-ANDINA
I** - 1. . . 1. � -
240RICHGULCHRD:
OROVILLE CA 96965
,HARVEST AEON J
989 WISCONSIN ST
�CHICO CA -95928