HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Mitigated Negative Declaration TO: Responsible, Trustee and Interested Agencies
Subject: DRAFT Mitigated Negative Declaration -to adopt
a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
project described in the attached Initial Study.
A thirty (30) day public review period is being conducted on the proposed mitigated negative declaration
described in this notice. The review period begins May 30,2008,and it will end June 29,2008. Environmental
documents and supporting materials can be reviewed at the City of Oroville Planning Department, 1735
Montgomery Street, Oroville. Comments relating to environmental concerns and the proposed mitigated
negative declaration for the project described in this notice should be submitted in writing to the Secretary of
the Planning Commission prior to June 29, 2008.
Please review the enclosed mitigated negative declaration. This review should focus on your agency's area of
expertise and jurisdiction.
Los Olivos Planned Development TSM, File TSM 06-03; Prezone ZC 06-05; Lead Agency: City of
Oroville 1735 Montgomery Street, Oroville, CA 95965.
Project Location: 35.19 acres located at the northeast corner of Feather Avenue and 18t" Street, in the
Thermalito area. Section 14 T 19N R 3E MDB&M as shown on the Oroville, California USGS 7.5 minute
quadrangle map. APN#030-110-029, 042, 058, 059, 060, 067, 068, and 073
Project Applicant: Rich and Angie Ceraolo
General Plan Designation(s): Medium Density Residential
Zoning: RL— Residential Large Lot; Proposed R-1 Single Density Residential
Project Description: Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM 06-03)and rezone(RZ 06-05)to create
165 single family lots. The GPA Land Use Element designation on 7 parcels totaling 35.19 acres is Medium
Density Residential in the City of Oroville General Plan a corresponding Zoning designation on the site is R-1 -
Residential Single family. The Tentative Subdivision Map would create 165 single family lots ranging in size
from 4,800 square feet to approximately 7,000 square feet. Approximately 8.55 acres will be retained as open
space to be utilized for drainage detention and open space area for project residents. The rezone would
change the zoning from RL-1 (large lot single family residential) to R-1 (single family residential) with a
Planned Development overlay designation.
An Initial Study for environmental review has been prepared for the above project and is available for review in
the Oroville Planning Department. Based upon the information within the initial study, the Planning Division is
recommending that a mitigated negative declaration be adopted for the project pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). A"mitigated negative declaration"is a determination that a project will not
have a significant impact on the environment. Also pursuant to CEQA,a 30-day public review period is being
conducted on the proposed mitigated negative declaration,to begin on May 30, 2008 and end at 5:00 p.m.on
June 29, 2008.
Written comments should be submitted to the City of Oroville Planning Department. The City will review all
comments, and either uphold the mitigated negative declaration or determine that an Environmental Impact
Report is required. Further information, including maps and files, may be reviewed at the City of Oroville
Planning Department, at the above address, or by phone at (530) 538-2430.
gZJ'C'i'F.COUNTY
_ AD"NISTRNTION
Craig Sanders, Planning Manager Date: May 27, 2008 JUN d 2 2008
ORO,VU E,CALIFORNIA
CITY OFORDV|LLE
1735 Montgomery Street, OroviUe, CA 95965
INITIAL STUDY- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. BACKGROUND
l. Project Title: Los ()|ivnsSubdivision
2. Name and Address ofProject Los {)|ivco Development LLC
Applicant: 7|63Red Holly Court
San Jose ' CA95l2O
Contact Person and Phone Number: RiohqrdCenzo|o' (408) 515- 2888
3. Type ofProject: Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Mop (TSM 06-
O3) and rezone (RZ 06-05) to create 165 single
family lots. The GPA Lund Use Element
designation on 7 parcels totaling 35.19 acres is
Medium Density Residential in the City of
(}rnviUe General Plan o corresponding Zoning
designation nnthe site isR'\ Residential Single
family. The Tentative Subdivision Mop would
create 165 single family lots ranging in sine from
4.800 square feet to approximately 7.000
square feet. Approximately 8.55 acres will be
retained as open space to be utilized for
drainage detention and open space area for
project residents. The rezone would change the
zoning from RL-1 (large lot single family
residential) to R-1 (single tonni|y residential) with
oPlanned Development overlay designation.
4. General Plan Designation: Existing County: Low Density Residential (l'6
units/acre)
Existing City: Medium Density Residential (2'6
units/acre)
5. Zoning: Existing County: Agricultural Residential- AR
Existing City Pnezone� Residential Single Family-
Large Lot KL,|
6. Project Location: 35.l9acres located a1the northeast corner of
Feather Avenue and )8mStreet, inthe
Thenno|itooreo. Section l4Tl9NR3E MOB&M
(see Figure l)
I Assessor's Parcel Numbers: APN# 03D-} lO-O29' O42' O58' O59. O6O. O67. O68.
and 073
City ofOnov0le Los O0vosTSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Pagel initial Study
8. Project Description:
The property is currently under County jurisdiction but is within the sphere of influence of the City
of Oroville and in immediate proximity to the existing City limit boundary. The property has
frontage on both 18th Street, Grand Avenue and Feather Avenue.
The proposed project includes a rezone from Residential Large Lot RL-1 to Single Family
Residential R-1 with a Planned Development overlay zone. The RL-1 zone currently has a
minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet and minimum lot width of 80 feet. The R-1 zone has a
minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet (There is a current zoning code amendment to reduce if to
5,000 square feet) and minimum lot width of 60 feet. The Planned Development Overlay zone
allows for deviation in development standards including lot size, width, setbacks, road widths, n
annexation into the City of Oroville and a tentative subdivision map is which would create 165
lots for development with single family residential dwellings. Included in the design will be an
open space area of approximately 8.55 acres which will have an incorporated drainage
detention facility to attenuate peak flow runoff to pre-development levels. The detained water
will ultimately be released to Ruddy Creek, a seasonal drainage, which runs through the far
eastern portion of the property.
The roads, lots and improvements will cover approximately 26.5 acres of the site. Road access
to the project will come from five points: a new road intersection on 18th Street; two new road
intersections on Feather Avenue; a new road intersection on Grand Avenue and connection
and extension of 16th street to Grand Avenue. Existing TID sewer and wafer lines are located in
Feather Avenue, 16th Street, Grand Avenue and 18th Street.
Each lot will be developed with a single family residence with the homes all having a 2-car
garage as well as two driveway parking spaces.
An annexation will also be required for this project and an application will be made to Butte
County LAFCo. The annexation will encompass the 35.19 acres of the project as well as 22 other
parcels for a total annexation area of approximately 60 acres including road rights-of-way. Most
of the parcels within the project are undeveloped two parcels have existing structures on them
which would be removed to accommodate the new subdivision. Of the 22 properties within the
additional annexation area only two parcels are undeveloped representing approximately 0.92
acres.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 2 Initial Study
Figure 1 - Project Location Map and Annexation Area
rand Ave.
INS
cu
cu
L Bq WIN
_. ea er ve.
Lim Anne atlon
A
LIQ ITT
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 3 Initial Study
Figure 2- Proposed Tentative Map
Id
Z 0
I
t 5 >1 U1
M 0 LLJ
Z
F
08
L
U
-jZ
ei.
ry
U1
JL
i2 21
1 ,T rj
gq
X7
le
Lt
12
133211S is H18t
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 4 Initial Study
9. Other Interested Public Agencies and Public Agencies Who's Approval Is Required:
Responsible or commenting Agencies:
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers: A wetland delineation was performed for the site and approximately
0.298 acres of jurisdictional wetlands were identified on the site. One outfall structure is proposed
within the bank of Ruddy Creek, a seasonal drainage course which runs through the eastern
portion of the property which will be addressed through a permit from the ALOE.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Consultation from Army Corp for endangered species.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB): The applicant must obtain an NPDES
Construction Activities Sformwater General Permit. The permit requires that the project applicant
prepare a Sformwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to any construction activities.
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the applicant may be required to obtain a Wafer
Quality Certification for discharge of the detained storm wafer to Ruddy Creek.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG): CDFG has the opportunity to review the
application for matters pertaining to fish and wildlife resources and has determined that no
particular concerns exist with the proposal.
Butte County LAFCo: LAFCo is responsible for hearing and approving the annexation request.
Ca/Trans: Caffrans will review potential impacts to state roadways that could be affected by the
project.
Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD): The BCAQMD has reviewed the
tentative map and has requested that the project applicant incorporate all feasible Standard
Construction Mitigation Measures into the project in addition to applicable Supplemental
Mitigation Measures (BCAQMD, August, 2006).
Service Provider Approval.-
Thermalito Irrigation District (TID): The Thermalito Irrigation District serves the project area. The
District will serve the project provided adequate facilities either exist or will be installed for the
project. Both water and sewer facilities are adjacent to the site in 181h Street, Feather Avenue and
Grand Avenue to serve the proposed subdivision.
Feather River Recreation and Parks District (FRRPD) - The FRRPD provides and maintains recreation
facilities within the greater Oroville area.
10. Environmental Setting:
Oroville is located within the western reaches of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, at the juncture
where the Sacramento Valley meets the Sierra foothills. The project site is identified as the Oroville
California Quadrangle map by the USGS and is located in the north half of Section 14, Township 19
North, and Range 3 East, Mount Diablo Meridian.
This 35.19-acre site is located at the northeast corner of 1811, Street and Feather Avenue in the
Thermalito area of western Oroville. The site is, for the most part, gently sloping to the southeast,
though the eastern-most portion of the site consists of a lower bench area adjacent to Ruddy
Creek, a seasonal watercourse. This lower bench area is located within a FEMA-designated one-
hundred year floodplain which is associated with Ruddy Creek. Elevations range from
approximately 210 feet above sea level at the northwest corner to 166 feet above sea level along
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 5 Initial Study
the far eastern property line. The northern boundary of the site is on Grand Avenue where the
project has approximately 150 feet of frontage. The western boundary of the site is 18th Street with
a frontage of approximately 375 feet. Southern boundary is Feather Avenue with about 1,248 feet
of frontage. The site is mostly vacant, however there are two structures on the site, a mobile home
just off of Grand Avenue and a garage/shop structure that is setback approximately 150 feet from
18th Street, both of which will be removed with the development of the property. The property was
at one time planted with an olive orchard and a significant number of olive trees remain on the
site. The orchard is no longer cultivated and is in a state of advanced decline. Many oak trees
have grown up on the site interspersed with the olives however the project site does not appear to
meet the City's definition of an oak woodland.
The land to the south was recently approved for a 172 lot single family residential subdivision which
has yet to be developed. An annexation was recently denied on the property which means that
this project is not contiguous to existing City land and other properties will have to be annexed
along with this project in order to create a logical city boundary. Land to the west is within the
unincorporated County area where a 60-lot Tentative Map has been in process for the past 4
years. Land to the north is also unincorporated and is a mixture of single family lots of varying sizes
and land to the east is generally undeveloped or developed with single family dwellings on larger
lots and is unincorporated.
Most of the site has been disturbed at one time or another due to past agricultural practices and
little to no native vegetation remains on the site. No significant riparian vegetation exists along
Ruddy Creek though if is designated as a riparian corridor.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 6 Initial Study
II. DETERMINATION - on the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ 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 or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
F-1 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "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 if must analyze only
the effects that remain to be addressed.
F1 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 measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
15 /2 -7 Lo 0
Signafuri ) , Date
Craig SaSders, Contract Planner City of Oroville
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 7 Initial Study
III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the environmental
checklist in this document.
❑ Aesthetics 0 Hazards/Hazardous Materials ❑ Public Services
❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Recreation
0 Air Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning 0 Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Utilities/Service Systems
❑ Cultural Resources 0 Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance
❑ Geology and Soils ❑ Population and Housing
IV. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
I A brief explanation is given for all answers except "No Impact" answers as they are
adequately supported by the information sources cited in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No
Impact" answer is explained where if is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards.
2) All answers take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once it is determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or
less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial
evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant
Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of a mitigation measure has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact". The mitigation measures are
described, and a brief explanation follows on how the mitigation measures reduce the
effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses are cross-
referenced).
5) Earlier analyses are used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier FIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion will identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where analyses are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Effects from the environmental checklist are identified
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards. Effects are addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures: For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures
Incorporated", the response will describe the mitigation measures, which were
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 8 Initial Study
incorporated or refined from the earlier document, and the extent to which they
address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) The checklist responses will incorporate references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages
where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list is attached in Section VII, References. Sources
used, individuals contacted, and other outside supporting sources of information are cited
throughout the discussion.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 9 Initial Study
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare ❑ ❑
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
The project site is not considered to have any particular scenic value as there is nothing unique
about the property that makes it different from all of the other land in the Thermalito area.
Table Mountain can be seen from the site as it can be seen from almost all of the Oroville
area. The development of the site will not significantly impair the views of Table Mountain and
these views are not unique to this site. Table Mountain can still be seen from most locations in
the Thermalito area. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
There are currently no State-designated scenic highways in the Oroville Planning Area. There
are hundreds of trees on the site, mainly olives with blue oaks interspersed. The olive trees are
remnants of an orchard that once covered much of the site. Removal of the olive trees is not
seen as significant as they are a non-native species introduced for a commercial purpose. The
orchard has not been cultivated or maintained for years and actually represents a threat to
the olive industry due to the fact that pests such as fruit flies may flourish in the orchard and
spread to existing commercial operations. Though there are oak frees on the property,
including blue oaks, the site does not meet the city's definition as an "oak woodland" which
requires that there be a 20% canopy of trees. Though not required, the applicant has
prepared a plan to preserve and replant a significant number of oak trees on site. Most of the
replanting will take place in the open space area adjacent to Ruddy Creek (Lots C & D) and
in Lot E. The project will be conditioned to follow the oak tree plan submitted to for the project
as a condition of the map. There are no rock outcroppings, historic buildings or other scenic
resources on the site. Based on the above facts there will be a less than significant impact to
scenic resources.
c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and
its s urro un din gs?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 10 Initial Study
The project site is not unique as it relates to a scenic vista or visual character. The
development of a residential subdivision will change the character of the site from a declining
orchard that is not maintained to one of a developed residential site with landscaping and
street trees which will be properly maintained as per City requirements. The development will
be similar in visual character to the existing subdivisions in the area, a mixture of one and two
story single family residences. This is a less than significant impact.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?
The project consists of a residential development, which will result in construction of structures
that are mainly composed of wood and stucco have small, segregated reflective surfaces
primarily glass windows which will not create a significant amount of reflective surface. In
addition, the site is not highly visible from any public places or area where the public gathers.
Streetlights are proposed for the subdivision. Streetlight locations and fixture types must be
submitted to the City of Oroville as part of the improvement design process. Street lighting is
required by the City and once properly installed, streetlights will not constitute a significant
source of light or glare. Therefore, there is a less than significant Impact.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Z
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ Z ❑
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, ❑ ❑ Z ❑
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page I I Initial Study
The project site is not located in an area designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide importance. There are no existing agricultural uses or activities on the
site. According to the Butte County Interim Farmland Map of 2004, the land is designated as
"Other Lands" with a small portion (15 acres) of "Important Farmlands" surrounded by non-
farmlands. In the past, the property was cultivated with an olive orchard but the orchard has
been abandoned and left to deteriorate. Reinstating an agricultural crop to the site would
not be feasible or economically viable given the existing improvements and surrounding
residential uses in the area. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact.
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
There are no parcels within or adjacent to the project that are used or primarily zoned for
agricultural uses. The existing County zoning on the site is Agricultural Residential which does
allow agricultural uses as well as residential uses at a density of up to 6 dwelling units per acre.
The remnants of an olive orchard exist on-site but the orchard has not been maintained for
several years and is not zoned for continuing agriculture. Additionally, there are no lands
within the Thermalito area that are subject to a Williamson Act contract. The closest Williamson
Act lands are located approximately 1.6 miles northeast of the project site. Therefore, there is
the impact is Less than significant.
c) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
There are no parcels within or adjacent to the project that are actively used or primarily zoned
for agricultural uses. The remnants of an olive orchard on-site is not currently being harvested or
managed for agricultural purposes. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact on the
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ❑ Z ❑ ❑
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute Z ❑
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase Z ❑
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions that exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 12 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
number of people?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Temporary air pollutant emissions associated with the development of the project would
consist primarily of motor vehicle exhaust, dust and other emissions due to construction
activities. Long-term emissions associated with the project would include those generated by
Indirect Mobile Sources (such as automobiles) and Indirect Stationary Sources (such as lawn
mowers, barbeques, wafer heaters, fireplaces/wood stoves and the burning of vegetated and
woody material). Mobile sources and most indirect stationary sources, such as those listed
above, remain uncontrolled by the BCAQMD. Reductions in emissions from these sources over
time are primarily the product of advances in technologies and new regulations and
legislation. By example total emissions from automobiles nation-wide have been steadily
declining over the past 30 years despite more vehicles being on the road and more miles
being traveled (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/vmtems.htm).
The Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD) has adopted mitigation
measures which, when implemented, reduce impacts related to development to a level that
is less than significant. Action-level thresholds (thresholds) are consistent with the New Source
Review adopted by the NSVAB Districts for permitting stationary sources. The thresholds
illustrate the extent of indirect source impacts resulting from projects, and are a basis from
which to apply mitigation measures. The thresholds are not intended to discourage planning
agencies from implementing mitigation measures for smaller projects. The action-level
thresholds are intended for use as a guide rather than strict, absolute values. When preliminary
analysis of a project indicates projected emissions are near the thresholds, additional analysis is
warranted. Closer scrutiny should refine the emissions analysis, explore any mitigating
characteristics of the project or site, and identify feasible mitigation measures.
Level A: Indirect sources which have the potential to emit less than 25 pounds per day of ROG
or Nox, or less than 80 pounds per day of PM 10 (as calculated by the District), would be
subject to the recommended list of standard mitigation measure
Level B: Indirect sources which have the potential to emit 25 pounds per day of ROG or NOx,
or 80 pounds per day of PM 10, or any nonattainment criteria pollutant (as calculated by the
District) would select as many supplemental mitigation measures as are feasible, in addition to
the recommended list of standard mitigation measures.
Level C: Indirect sources which have the potential to emit 137 pounds per day or greater (25
tons per year) of ROG or NOX, PM 10, or any nonattainment criteria pollutant (as calculated by
the District) would select as many supplemental mitigation measures as are feasible, in
addition to the recommended list of standard mitigation measures. Depending on factors
specific to the project, an environmental impact report may also be necessary under the
California Environment Quality Act (CEQA).
Project level emissions were estimated using Urbemis 2002 version 8.7 software. Estimates were
done for both construction and post development emissions. As the project will be developed
in three or more phases, the construction level emissions were calculated for a worst case 55
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 13 Initial Study
lot subdivision. Area source emissions were then tripled to arrive at full build-out emission levels.
While unmitigated construction level emissions exceed level A, and for ROG, level B thresholds,
these impacts will be reduced by incorporating the standard mitigation measures of the
Indirect Source Review Guidelines. In addition, these impacts are temporary, being limited to
the construction phase of the project. It is anticipated that the 55 homes within each phase
will not be constructed all at once. Home construction will be spread out over 2-3 years for
each phase, further reducing peak air quality emissions which will be spread out over more
than one building season. The emissions presented in the Urbemis analysis, attached as
appendix A, are a worst case scenario
Construction Level Emission Estimates lb/day - Urbemis 2007 v.9.2
ROG PM10 Nox
2008-4.84 3.5 28.12
2008-31.37 1.39 19.43
Once the project is built out, area source and operational emissions are below the level A
thresholds as listed below.
Area Source and Opera ional Emission Estimates lb/day at build out - Urbemis 2002 v.8.7
ROG PM10 Nox
Area 11.94 0.03 2.23
Operational 22.47 17.28 15.9
Total 34.41 17.31 18.13
The project has been reviewed against the Butte County Air Qualify Management District
(BCAQMD) North Sacramento Valley Air Basin 2003 Air Quality Attainment Plan and the 1997
Indirect Source Review Guidelines and implementation of all the Standard Mitigation Measures
will be required for the project. The City of Oroville assists the District with monitoring
construction activities, and requires developers to adhere to construction and development
mitigation measure to reduce project emissions and conflicts with the Air Quality Attainment
Plan to a level that is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measure:
MM 3.1
The project applicant, in coordination with the City and BCAQMD, shall implement BCAQMD
standard mitigation measures and applicable supplemental mitigation measures set forth
below:
1. Use adequate fugitive dust control measures for all construction activities during all
phases of construction.
2. Use EPA Phase 11 certified wood burning devices or District approved fireplaces. Provide
energy-efficient lighting (includes controls) and process systems such as water heaters,
furnaces, and boiler units.
3. Use adequate fugitive dust control measures for all construction activities during all
phases of construction.
4. Use alternatives to open burning of vegetative material on the project site.
5. Use temporary traffic control as appropriate at all stages of construction.
6. Schedule construction activities that direct traffic flow to off-peak hours as much as
practicable.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 14 Initial Study
7. Paved streets adjacent to the development site should be swept at the end of each
day as necessary to remove excessive accumulations of silt and/or mud which may
have accumulated as a result of activities on the development site.
8. Land clearing, grading, earthmoving or excavation activities suspended when winds
exceed 20 miles per hour.
9. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding
dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 24 hours.
The telephone number of the District shall also be visible to ensure compliance with
District Rule 200 & 205 (Nuisance and Fugitive Dust Emissions)
Supplemental mitigation measures, which may include the following:
10. Provide on-site road and off-site bus turnouts, passenger benches, and shelters as
demand and service routes warrant subject to review and approval by the local
transportation planning agency.
11. Incorporate shade frees, adequate in number and proportional to the project size,
throughout the project site to reduce building heating and cooling requirements.
12. Street pattern that provides for an efficient circulation route for buses and
accommodates other public transportation vehicles on key road networks.
13. Pedestrian access between bus service and major transportation points within the
project where deemed feasible.
b) and c) Would the project conflict with any air quality plan, violate any air quality standards or
result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
The physical environment in the northern Sacramento Valley, which includes the Oroville area,
is a contributing factor to adverse air quality. Pollutants are trapped between the Coast Range
and the Sierra Nevada Mountains. This problem is exacerbated by a temperature inversion
layer that traps air at lower levels below an overlying layer of warmer air. Prevailing winds in the
area are from the south and southwest. Sea breezes flow over the San Francisco Bay Area and
into the Sacramento Valley, transporting pollutants from the large urban areas to the south
northward into the upper valley and affect local air quality. Growth and urbanization in Butte
County and surrounding counties also contributes to the pollutant load in the local air. The
California Air Resources Board maintains an air qualify monitoring station in Chico. Another
monitoring station was established in Paradise. No monitoring stations are located in Oroville.
Ozone emission measurements taken at the Chico monitoring station during the years 2002-
2005 4-year period indicate that the number of days that exceeded the state standards was
two with no days exceeding the federal standard. These figures indicate a better air qualify for
ozone than the 1998-2000 3-year period when fen days exceeded the state standard and one
day exceeded the federal. The number of days that the air quality exceeded state PM10
standards was 17, down from 20 days for the 1998-2000 period. There were no days in which
federal PMio standards were exceeded. The station also monitors the PM2_5 particles and for the
2002-2005 time period the state standard was exceeded twice, while the federal standard was
not exceeded on any day. The Federal standard for PM2.5 has recently been revised, effective
December 17, 2006 and it is expected that Butte County may now become a non-attainment
area for the stricter Federal standard. No exceeclance of other air qualify standards was
recorded at the Chico monitoring station. (BCAQMD Air Qualify Report 2001- 2005). Butte
County has been designated as a non-attainment area for state and federal standards for
ozone and as non-attainment for state standards for particulate matter (PMio). Butte County is
designated as an attainment or unclassified area for all other state and federal ambient air
quality standards. http://www.bcaqmd.or.q/forms/
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 15 Initial Study
Direct emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 have increased in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin
between 1975 and 2000 and are projected to continue increasing through 2020. Emissions are
dominated by contributions from area-wide sources, primarily fugitive dust from paved and
unpaved roads, fugitive dust from construction and demolition, and particulates from
residential fuel combustion. Emissions of directly emitted PM10 and PM2.5 from mobile sources
and stationary sources have remained relatively steady. The PMio and PM2.5 emissions are
generally highest in the fall and winter months reflecting agricultural burning and the use of
wood burning stoves for heat. Another contributor to PMio emissions is dust generated during
site clearing and grading in anticipation of development and other construction activities.
Construction impacts are temporary in nature and cease once the site is developed and soils
stabilized.
Cumulatively, this project is but a small portion of the new dwelling units now under construction
or in the planning stages not only in the Oroville area but within the northern Sacramento Valley
Air basin. As the Sacramento Valley Air basin covers such a large area, development from
Sacrament northward need to be included when looking at cumulative impacts. This would
include development proposed for Roseville, Rocklin, Lincoln, Wheatland Marysville, Yuba City,
and numerous other cities. There are literally tens of thousands of new dwelling units proposed
in these areas that will affect cumulative air quality impacts. When this project of 165 dwelling
units is considered alongside the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 other proposed dwellings in the
northern Sacramento Valley, the air quality emissions are not cumulatively significant. In
addition, mitigation measures have been proposed that would reduce the direct net increase
impacts of criteria pollutant to a level that is less than significant.
d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
A significant impact would occur if the proposed project were to introduce a substantial
pollutant concentration or toxic air contaminants to populations of sensitive receptors. These
impacts most commonly occur along heavily used roadways and as the products of direct
sources such as refineries and manufacturing facilities (City of Oroville 1999). According to the
City of Oroville Environmental Review Guidelines, sensitive receptors include facilities,
developments, or uses that attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses, and others
who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. These types of uses include, but are
not limited to: schools, day care facilities, hospitals, senior/retirement centers, and other
residential uses. Based on information on the maps of Oroville, there are no schools,
commercial day care facilities, hospitals, or retirement centers located within one quarter mile
of the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to sensitive receptors from pollutant
concentrations will be less than significant level.
e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Objectionable odors are characterized as either "nuisance" or "hazardous" in the City's
Environmental Review Guidelines (1999). For an objectionable odor to be considered
significant, the odor must cause a serious adverse physical reaction or illness. The proposed
project site would consist entirely of residential development which is a use not typically
associated with generation of objectionable odors. Any unusual objectionable odors
affecting the project area would fall under the control of local nuisance ordinances. There is
no impact associated with objectionable odors as a result of the project.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than No
Significant Mitigation Significant Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 16 Initial Study
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ❑ El
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.), through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or
other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any El ❑
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or 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
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional or state habitat conservation plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
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 plans,
policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
The project site has already been significantly modified from past agricultural activities. Most
of the site was previously planted in olives and a large area of olive trees remain on-site. A
biological resource assessment of the site was performed by Gallaway Consulting in the spring
of 2005 during the flowering season. The analysis identified Ruddy Creek as jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. as well as the presence of other wetland features. Several common wildlife
species including the American crow, mockingbird, white-tailed kite, ringed-neck pheasant,
song sparrow, scrub jay, turkey vulture, Anna's hummingbird, and jackrabbit were observed on
or near the site.
The California Natural Diversify Database (CNDDB Rarefied 3, Commercial version Government
Version, Feb. 03-2006) was reviewed to determine if any special status species or habitats
City of Oroville Los Olives TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 17 Initial Study
occur on the project site or in the project area. The CNDDB showed no occurrences of any
special status species or habitats on the project site. However, a number of species occur
within a 5-mile radius. These include: Ahart's Dwarf Rush; Butte County Golden Clover; Butte
County Meaclowfoam; Greene's tuctoria; pink creamsacs, slender Orcuft grass; northern
harrier; Swainson's hawk; western burrowing owl; white-tailed kite; valley elderberry longhorn
beetle; vernal pool fairy shrimp; and western spadefoof toad. Of these species the site only
has potentially suitable habitat for western spadefoof toad, Butte County Golden Clover, pink
creamsacs, northern harrier, Swainson's hawk, white-tailed kite, and western burrowing owl.
No federal or state endangered, threatened, or sensitive wildlife or plants were observed on
the site. A red-shouldered hawk was observed within the survey area and the site contains
suitable nesting and foraging habitat for several bird species. Suitable habitat also occurs for
the yuma myotis bat, white-tailed kite, nutall's woodpecker, and rufous hummingbird. No
Sensitive Natural Communities are identified in the report.
Western Burrowing Owl
Habitat for nesting and foraging burrowing owls is located in the project area in the form of
grasslands and small mammal burrows. Development activities (site grading and clearing) and
other similar disturbances to annual grassland would result in indirect impacts via nest and
foraging habitat disturbance and direct impacts through the removal of potential nesting
habitat of the western burrowing owl.
The western burrowing owl is identified as a state species of concern, a status that carries no
procedural or substantive protections under the Endangered Species Act or the California
Endangered Species Act (CESA); however the Open Space, Natural Resources and
Conservation Element of the City's General Plan (objective 6.11 c) identifies the need for
protection of CDFG's "species of special concern" to the extent reasonable. Additionally, due
to a high level of public and regulatory controversy surrounding this species, DFG has
developed management guidelines to promote the continued existence and reduce the
likelihood for listing under CESA. Consequently, by implementing MM 4.1 through MM 4.4 these
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.1
The Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, published by CDFG (1995), recommends pre-
construction surveys shall be conducted to locate active burrowing owl burrows.
I Prior to issuance of grading permits, this preconsfruction survey shall be conducted
by a qualified biologist or ornithologist during both the wintering and nesting season,
unless the species is detected on the first survey. If possible, the winter survey shall be
conducted between December I and January 31 (when wintering owls are most
likely to be present) and the nesting season survey should be conducted between
April 15 and July 15 (the peak of breeding season). Surveys conducted from two
hours before sunset to one hour after, or from one hour before to two hours after
sunrise, are preferable. The survey techniques shall be consistent with the Staff
Report survey protocol and include a 260-foot-wide buffer zone surrounding the
project area. Repeat surveys should also be conducted not more than 30 days prior
to initial ground disturbance to inspect for re-occupation and the need for
additional protection measures. The survey(s) shall be paid by the applicant and
approved by the City.
2) If no burrowing owls are detected during preconstrucfion surveys, then no further
mitigation is required. If active burrowing owl burrows are identified, project activities
shall not disturb the burrow during the nesting season (February 1-August 31) or until
a qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the burrow has
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 18 Initial Study
been abandoned. A no disturbance buffer zone of 160-feet is required to be
established around each burrow with an active nest until the young have fledged
the burrow as determined by a qualified biologist.
3) If destruction of the occupied burrow is unavoidable during the non-breeding
season, September I- January 31, passive relocation of the burrowing owls shall be
conducted. Passive relocation involves installing a one-way door at the burrow
entrance, encouraging owls to move from the occupied burrow. No permit is
required to conduct passive relocation; however, this process shall be conducted
by a qualified biologist and in accordance with CDFG mitigation measures. In
addition, to offset the loss of foraging and burrow habitat on the project site, a
minimum of 6.5 acres of foraging habitat (calculated on a 300-ft foraging radius
around the burrow) per pair or unpaired resident bird, shall be acquired and
permanently protected at a location acceptable to the CDFG.
4) If burrowing owls are identified on the project site, the City of Oroville must receive
copies of the Mitigation Agreement by and between the applicant and CDFG, prior
to the issuance of grading permits for the proposed project.
Timinglimpiementation: Prior to issuance of a grading permit or any ground-
disturbance.
EnforcementlMonitoring: CDFG, City of Omvil/e Development Services Department.
Swainson's hawk
The annual grassland within the project covering approximately 5.4 acres provides suitable
foraging habitat for Swainson's hawk. The determination of suitable foraging habitat occurs
when there is a documented nest that has been active within the previous five years, within a
distance of ten miles from the project site. There is an active Swainson's hawk nest located near
the Feather River approximately 4.5 miles southeast of the Specific Plan Area (Pers. Com. Marr
September 2005). Due to the occurrence of a nearby Swainson's hawk nest the annual
grassland on-site is considered Swainson's hawk foraging habitat, pursuant to CDFG's Staff
Report. Due to the existence of mature trees in the project area, there is the potential for
nesting habitat for Swainson's hawk to be impacted. Therefore, a potentially significant impact
would occur to Swainson's hawk foraging and nesting habitat with the proposed development.
This potentially significant impact will be reduced to a level that is less than significant with
mitigation incorporated, with the implementation of MM 4.2a and MM4.2b
Mitigation Measures
Foraging Habitat
MM 4.2a
The applicant shall be responsible for mitigating the loss of any Swainson's hawk foraging
habitat. The extent of any necessary mitigation shall be determined CDFG;
Based on CDFG's Staff Report regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson's Hawks in the
Central Valley of California the following shall be implemented:
Prior to obtaining grading permits for the proposed project, the project proponent shall place
and record one or more Conservation Easements that meet the acreage requirements of
CDFG's Swainson's Hawk foraging habitat mitigation guidelines. The conservation easement(s)
shall be executed by the project proponent and a Conservation operator. The City may, at its
discretion, also be a party to the conservation easement(s). The conservation easements) shall
be reviewed and approved in writing by CDFG prior to the recordation for the purpose of
confirming consistency. The purpose of the conservation easement(s) shall be to preserve the
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 19 Initial Study
value of the land as foraging habitat for the Swainson's hawk. Past recommended mitigation
for loss of foraging habitat has been at a ratio of one acre of suitable foraging habitat for every
one acre utilized by the proposed project.
Nesting Habitat
MM 4.2b
If construction occurs during the breeding season (March "l-September 15), the project
proponent shall conduct CDFG-recommended protocol-level surveys prior to construction per
the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's hawk Nesting Surveys in
California's Central Valley (CDFG 2000b). The area to be surveyed shall include a 0.5-mile
radius area including and surrounding the project site and a qualified biologist should conduct
the surveys. If active nests are found, mitigation measures consistent with the Staff Report
Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson's Hawks in the Central Valley of California (CDFG
1994) shall be incorporated in the following manner:
I No intensive new disturbances (e.g., heavy equipment operation associated with
construction, use of cranes or draglines, new rock crushing activities) or other
project-related activities that may cause nest abandonment or forced fledging,
shall be initiated with in 0.25 miles (buffer zone) of an active nest between March I
and September 15.
2) Nest trees shall not be removed unless there is no feasible way of avoiding it. If a
nest tree must be removed, a Management Authorization (including conditions to
offset the loss of the nest tree) must be obtained from CDFG with the tree removal
period specified in the management Authorization, generally between October I
and February 1.
3) If construction or other project-related activities that may cause nest abandonment
or forced fledging are necessary within the buffer zone, monitoring of the nest site
(funded by the Project proponent) by a qualified biologist (to determine if the nest is
abandoned) will be required. If the nest is abandoned and if the nestlings are still
alive, the Project proponent shall fund the recovery and hacking (controlled release
of captive reared young) of the nesfling(s).
4) Routine disturbances such as agricultural activities, commuter traffic, and routine
maintenance activities within 0.25 mile of an active nest should not be prohibited.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of grading permit
Enforcement/Monitoring: CDFG, City of Oroville Development Services Department.
Because the site does have potential habitat for a number of species pre-construction surveys
should be conducted for plants (Butte County Golden Clover, pink creamsacs) during April or
May. A preconsfruction raptor survey should also be performed to assess the presence of
ground-nesting raptors (northern harrier and California burrowing owl) and for free nesting
species that may be in the vicinity. Surveys should be performed not more than 30 day prior to
site construction. With the following mitigation measures, impacts to candidate, sensitive, or
special status species will be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure:
MM 4.3
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 20 Initial Study
A pre-construction raptor survey must be conducted, preferably in April or May, prior to
construction activities, in order to determine whether nesting raptors, including ground nesting
species, are present within the proposed project area. If construction occurs between I March
and 15 September, a qualified biologist will survey the project site and all areas within 250 ft of
the project site for nesting raptors and migratory birds. The survey shall be conducted no more
than 30 days prior to the initiation of construction. If grading and tree removal is proposed
between 16 September and 28 February, no survey is required.
• If an active nest is located within 250 ft of the project site, a biologist will monitor the nest
weekly during construction to evaluate potential nesting disturbance caused by
construction activities. The biological monitor will have the authority to stop construction if
construction appears to be resulting in nest abandonment or forced fledging.
• If an active nest occurs in a tree scheduled for removal, the species of bird using the nest
will be determined. The nest tree of any bird protected under the META will be preserved
until it is outside of the breeding season for that species or until the young have fledged. If
construction cannot be delayed until the end of the breeding season, guidance from
CDFG will be requested.
Timing and Implementation: To be implemented before commencement of site clearing
and/or construction activities.
Monitoring: USFWS, CDFG, City of Oroville
Mitigation Measure:
MM 4.4
Retain a qualified botanist/biologist to conduct a pre-construction botanical survey, within the
months of April or May, to determine if there are any special status plants on site, particularly
pink creamsacs and Butte County Golden Clover, occurring onsite. If any special-status plant
species occurrences are found onsite, the applicant shall 1) comply with the California Native
Plant Protection Act, Sections 2062 and 2067, and confer with the California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG). Furthermore, construction activities shall be restricted based on DFG
guidance. Restrictions may include establishment of avoidance buffer zones, installation of silt
fences, or alteration of the construction schedule to allow time for rescuing and replanting the
sensitive species, if appropriate.
TiminglImplementation: Prior to the onset of construction activities or any site disturbance.
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Oroville Planning Department.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in loco/ or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Ruddy Creek, a seasonal watercourse runs along the eastern property line of the property.
While identified in the City's General Plan as being a riparian corridor, there is limited riparian
vegetation associated with this water feature through the project site. This seasonal drainage
is presumed to be subject to Army Corp of Engineers and California Department of Fish and
Game jurisdiction for any work performed within the channel. The project will be required to
comply with the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and section 1600 of the
California Fish and Game Code.
City of Oroville Los Clivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 21 Initial Study
The majority of the site does not support significant wildlife, having been under cultivation as
an olive orchard for decades. The current vegetation is dominated by olive free, interspersed
with oak trees, non-native vegetation including star thistle and annual grasses. The applicant is
proposing to construct a drainage detention facility in the southeast corner of the property on
the lower bench of land adjacent to Ruddy Creek and partially within fhe100-year floodplain.
No changes are proposed to the creek itself, with the exception of one drainage outfall
structure. By obtaining the required permit for the outfall and complying with state and
federal regulations the impact of development of the site on riparian vegetation, natural
communities and wildlife movement/corridors along the river will be less than significant
impact.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal wetlands, etc.), through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other
means?
A wetland delineation was performed on the site by Gallaway Consulting in March 2006. The
reconnaissance revealed the presence of approximately 0.298 acres of jurisdictional wetlands
other than Ruddy Creek which was identified as 0.286 acres of seasonal wetlands and 0.012
acres of Other Waters of the U.S. The much of the seasonal wetlands will be avoided and are
within lot "E" as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map. The installation of an outfall structure for
site drainage is proposed to Ruddy Creek which will result in some fill being placed within the
banks and therefore subject to an Army Corp permit. If is anticipated that the outfall will
come under a Nationwide Permit 7 and will require approval from the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers, CA Department of Fish and Game, and CA Regional Wafer Qualify Control Board.
Obtaining the Corp permits and complying with State and Federal regulations including the
Endangered Species Act, Clean Wafer Act, and CA Department of Fish and Game regulations
is a statutory requirement and not a change or mitigation to the project. Adherence to any
conditions imposed by the Corp for the permit will result in the impacts to be less than
significant.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory
fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The project site bounded by Feather Avenue to the north, 18th Street to the west and is
generally located within a developing urban area with residential uses surrounding the project
site at varying distances. There are no known migratory fish or wildlife species that currently
utilize the site as a migratory corridor or wildlife nursery. However, as discussed in section a)
above migratory raptors could be present on the site at some point in the future before
construction starts. To mitigate against that possibility a pre-construction survey for raptors shall
be conducted as required in mitigation measure 4.3. Therefore, the impact of development of
the site on wildlife movement/corridors along the river will be less than significant with
mitigation.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The project site does contain a number of oak trees including blue oaks. The City of Oroville
General Plan contains policies for preserving oak woodland habitat and the adopted City
Environmental review guidelines state in Policy 6.11 z3, a tree management and preservation
report shall be prepared for development sites with significant oak woodlands. A significant
oak woodland is considered to be a site of I acre or larger with an oak tree canopy cover
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 22 Initial Study
greater than 20%, or any portion of a site greater than one acre with 20% oak canopy cover
that is a contiguous part of a larger woodland area. Areas smaller than I acre may be
considered to have significant oak woodlands if tree canopy cover exceeds 50%, is part of
larger woodland complex, or contains "specimen" trees. A site visit was performed and aerial
maps reviewed and it was determined that this property does not meet the definition of a
significant oak woodland habitat in that the oak tree canopy is significantly less than 10%.
Therefore, a tree management and preservation report would not be required and removal of
the oak trees onsite is a less than significant impact.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
There are no Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or similar
plans that apply to the proposed project area. Therefore, there is no impact related to existing
habitat conservation plans.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ❑ ❑ Z ❑
outside of formal cemeteries?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) b) and c) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource or archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5, or directly or
indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature ?
Cultural resources include prehistoric and historic period archaeological sites; historical features,
such as rock walls, water ditches and flumes, and cemeteries; and architectural features.
Cultural resources consist of any human-made site, object (i.e., artifact), or feature that defines
and illuminates our past. Often such sites are found in foothill areas, areas with high bluffs, rock
outcroppings, areas overlooking deer migratory corridors, or near bodies of water. The project
site is located in the lower foothills and the east side of the Remainder Parcel does overlook
Ruddy Creek, which may have been utilized by Native American Indians. According to Butte
County constraints mapping, the project site is located in an area considered to have a low to
moderate archeological sensitivity. The Thermalifo area was one of the first land colony real
estate developments in Butte County and commercial orange groves were planted in the late
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 23 Initial Study
1800s. TheThonno|it0 area at one time contained numerous homesteads and funnfe|mh+d
features. Anearly l9OO'shome was located onthe adjacent parcel to the south, which was
completely destroyed bvfire inthe 1980s.
In accordance with Oroville General Plan Policy 6.15d, the City of Oroville requires that if historic
or prehistoric archaeological resources are uncovered during the course of project
development and construction, the uncovered site mud be examined by u qualified
archaeologist for appropriate protection and preservation. The inclusion of the following
condition as a note on the map will ensure that unanticipated discoveries are handled
appropriately and the impacts on historic and prehistoric resources are less than significant.
Map Condition:
If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural in origin are discovered during
construction, then all work must halt within o 100-fonf radius of the discovery. /\
qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the 3*on*tory of the Inferior's
Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall
be retained to evaluate the significance of the find. Work cannot continue at the
discovery site until the archaeologist conducts sufficient research and data
collection to make o determination that the resource is either l) not cultural in origin;
or 2) not potentially significant or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Mmcns/3|nto Register. If o potentially eligible resource is encountered, then the
archaeologist, City of (]roviUe' and project proponent shall arrange for either l) fed
excavations ortotal data recovery; or 2) total avoidance Vfthe resource' if possible.
dU Would the project disturb any honnon remains, including those interred outside of fonno/
cemeteries?
There are no known burial sites within the project area. Should human remains be unearthed
during the course of project development and construction, the provisions ofCalifornia Health
and Safety Code shall apply. Therefnre, no further disturbance would occur until the Butte
County Coroner makes the necessary findings as to origin and disposition of the remains,
pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the County Coroner
determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner is required to contact the Native
American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. Adherence to California Health and Safety
Code would ensure that the project's impacts to human remains are at o level that is
considered less than significant.
Less Than
Significant
ro|enMonv with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
o> Expose people orstructures topotential substantial
adverse effec1s, including the risk ofloss, injury pr
death, involving:
City of OrVv0le Los DKvosT3M & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 24 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ ❑
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on- or
offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ❑ Z ❑
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death, involving:
I), ii) and iii) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, or seismic-
related ground failure, including liquefaction?
All of Butte County is in Moderate Earthquake Intensity Zone VIII. The site is not within an Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake fault zone and is not within an after shock epicenter region (Butte County CIS
Epicenter Regions theme). The only known active fault in Butte County is the Cleveland Hill fault
zone, located approximately 8 miles to the east of the project site, where activity on August 1,
1975, resulted in the Oroville earthquake. This earthquake had a Richter magnitude of 5.7 and
resulted in approximately 2.2 miles of ground rupture along the western flank of Cleveland Hill.
In the northwest corner of Butte County near Chico there are a series of short, north-northwest
trending faults similar to the Cleveland Hill fault. These faults appear to be an extension of the
Bear Mountain Fault or Foothills Shear Zone. Minor seismic activity has occurred in the area of
these short faults; however, other geologic evidence indicates these faults are not active.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 25 Initial Study
The 80-mile-long Midland-Sweitzer fault is located approximately 40 miles south-southwest of
Butte County. This fault is considered active and has caused historic earthquakes of Richter
magnitudes between 6 to 6.9 in the area in 1892. There is some speculation as to the exact
location of the historic earthquake epicenters and some question if they actually occurred on
the Midland-Sweitzer fault.
Approximately five miles west of Butte County there is a north trending fault system known as
the Willows fault. This fault is approximately 40 miles long and displaces Cretaceous sediment in
the Sacramento Valley. If does not appear to displace surface sediment and has been
mapped principally by geophysical methods. However, there have been enough historical
seismic events in the vicinity of this fault to conclude that it should be considered potentially
active.
A moderate earthquake occurred on the afternoon of Friday, August 10, 2001, centered about
nine miles west of Portola, California, and about 55 miles northeast of the project site. Very little
damage occurred as a result of this earthquake, which had a magnitude of 5.5, but brief
ground shaking was felt in Chico during the earthquake and the aftershocks. This earthquake
occurred in the Mohawk Valley Fault Zone, and this area of California experiences a
magnitude five or higher earthquake approximately every 20 years, according to the University
of California, Berkeley Seismological Laboratory. Historical events in the area include the
following:
Historical Seismic Events Within 70 Miles of Oroville, CA
Year Magnitud Location
e
01/25/1855 6.0 65km to the E near Mohawk Valley
01/07/1881 5.0 42 km NW near Los Molinos
04/29/1888 6.2 45 km to the NE near Blairsden
06/23/1909 5.6 40 km to the ESE near Verdi
04/15/1928 5.9 28 km E near Yuba River
02/08/1940 5.7 34 km N East of Chico
0710711946 5.0 69 km N Lassen Peak
03/20/1950 5.5 65 km N Lassen Peak
08/01/1975 5.7 5 km SE Oroville
08/10/2001 5.5 70 km NE Portola Valley
Source: Seismic Shaking Hazard Maps of California, Map Sheet 48, prepared by CDMG in 2000
Like most of central California, the site can be expected to be subjected to seismic ground
shaking at some future time. Accordingly, all buildings and other improvements would be
designed and installed in accordance with Uniform Building Code requirements. Because the
project appears to be located such that the probability of significant ground shaking is low,
because the project does not propose the addition of significant structures that would be at risk
to seismic activity, and because any structures that are built during the course of the project
would be designed and installed in accordance with Uniform Building Code standards for the
appropriate Seismic Hazard Zone, potential geologic impacts would be less than significant.
According to the City's Environmental Review Guidelines, sites prone to ground
failure/liquefaction possess all of the following characteristics:
1) unconsolidated sandy alluvium/poorly compacted fill
2) Shallow ground water
3) Seismic zone 3 or 4.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 26 Initial Study
Areas outside the floodplain of the Feather River are not considered exposed to liquefaction, as
they do not meet criterion "I" listed above. The project site is not within the floodplain of the
Feather River (General Plan Figure 8-A).
According to the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared for the project site (Holdridge &
Kull, 2005) liquefaction within the general area is unlikely. In addition, the potential for seismic
settlement or differential compaction is generally considered low due to the relatively dense
nature of the subsurface soils encountered. A copy of the report was submitted with the
project and is on file in the Planning Division at Oroville City Hall. The City requires a soil report to
be done prior to Final Map and will incorporate those conditions into construction requirements.
Based on the information collected for the project area, impacts from seismic-related ground
failure, including liquefaction, are considered to be less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
The project site has no dramatic or excessively steep topography. There is one transition area in
the eastern portion of the site where the topography of the property drops approximately 20
feet over a 100 foot distance, with a resulting slope of approximately 20%. There is no evidence
of any landslide activity along this transitional area. Grading and soil disturbance activities are
proposed for this portion of the property including cut, fills and the installation of a drainage
collection feature. To insure the continued stability of this sloped area, all earthwork must be
designed by a licensed civil engineer and the City of Oroville requires the submittal of a
detailed grading plan prior to any soil disrupting activities. With the submittal and approval of a
grading plan and the utilization of accepted civil engineering practices in the earthwork done
on-site, the potential for landslides or soil/slope failure will be less than significant.
b) c) and d) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, located on a
geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, or
would the project be located on expansive soil,?
Erosion potential on the project site is currently low, due mainly to the existence of vegetation
and lack of watercourses on the project site, with the exception of Ruddy Creek at the easterly
boundary of the site. Grading and construction associated with the project would remove
vegetation and disturb the soils over a majority of the property; this will include some cuts and
fills to create building pods for homes and roads. Once disturbed the potential for erosion by
wind or water will increase. Due to the fact that the majority of the property is relatively level
and the annual rainfall in the area is moderate at an average of 24 to 26 inches per year is not
excessive, erosion potential is not expected to be significant. However, as part of the City's
grading permit application process, projects are required to submit plans for the disposition of
surface runoff and erosion control. Also, the BCAQMID has Standard Mitigation Measures that
are incorporated into Oroville's grading permit to mitigate erosion caused by wind.
Construction activities are also subject to implementation of the requirements identified in the
Regional Water Qualify Control Board NPDES construction permit, which typically requires
measures to control erosion (see Hydrology and Wafer Quality section). Some of the soils on
the site have a higher clay content which contributes to a shrink/swell condition that can affect
housing construction if foundations are not properly designed. The geotechnical report
prepared for the property recommends a number of measures to address the types of soils on
the site. Adherence to the recommendations in the report will be conditions of the issuance of
site grading activities and building construction as required by the California Building Code.
With these required conditions, potential erosion impacts will be addressed and will be less than
significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 27 Initial Study
The project would not require the use of septic tanks nor alternative wastewater disposal
systems as the subdivision is proposed to connect to a regional sewer system. Therefore, there
will be no impact related to expansive soils.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
environment through the routine 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 involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
acutely hazardous materials, 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 ❑ ❑ Z ❑
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code § 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 area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ Z
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
with, an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ❑ ❑ Z ❑
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 28 Initial Study
The transportation of significant amounts of hazardous waste is not associated with the
proposed residential use of the site. Normal amounts of household hazardous wastes will be
generated by the future residents but the amount generated is not seen as significant.
Household hazardous waste can be disposed of in Oroville at the Oroville Hazardous Waste
Facility located at 2720 South Fifth Avenue, Oroville, CA. If is open on the I sf and 3rd Friday of
every month from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
The proposed project is not likely to exceed the thresholds for regulated substances as
identified in the CCR, Section 2770.5 because the resulting residential land use will not use
significant amounts of hazardous material. However, it is conceivable that spills and leaks of
hazardous materials could occur during project construction. These hazardous materials
would mainly be petroleum products - motor vehicle and equipment fluids. These spills and
leaks would most likely be minor. However, spills and leaks located near Ruddy Creek along
the site's eastern boundary could have an adverse impact on wafer qualify, depending on
the time of year as the wafer course does not convey water year-round. Implementation of
MM 7.1 will reduce these impacts to a level that is less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
Mitigation Measure:
MM 7.1 Prior to approval of a grading and construction permit, the permit applicant shall
designate staging areas where fueling and oil-changing activities are permitted. No
fueling and oil-changing activities shall be allowed outside of the designated
staging areas. As much as practicable, the staging areas shall be located on level
terrain. Staging areas shall not be located within 100 feet of any water course or
residence that exists or may be constructed while the staging area is in use.
Timing/Implementation: To be implemented upon commencement of construction
activities.
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Oroville.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
The nearest school, an elementary school is located over 1/2 mile from the project site. No
other schools are proposed for development within one-quarter mile of the project site at this
time. The proposed land use (residential) is not associated with handling or generating
emissions of hazards, therefore impacts regarding hazardous materials near schools remain at
a level that is considered less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The project site has not been identified as a hazardous material site pursuant to Government
Code § 65962.5. The site was planted with an olive orchard, however all trees were removed
within the last year. The land has not been put to any other kind of land use that would
generate hazardous wastes during that time. Therefore the potential for significant hazards
identified on lists compiled by government agencies are considered less than significant.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 29 Initial Study
e\ and # For oproject located within on airportlandoseplanoreoocwheresuchoplanhcmnnf
been adopted, within two miles ofopublic airport or a public use airport or within the vicinity
o/oprivate airstrip, would the projectresult/nosafety hazard for people residing o/working /n
the project oeeo?
The project site is located approximately one mile from the nearest runway of the [)rovi||e
Municipal Airport. Exhibit 51 (Compatibility Factors Map) of the Butte County Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (December 20' 2000) shows that the project site is within Airport
Compatibility Zone C and is within the general traffic pattern envelope.
The City ofOrnvi||e has previously amended its General Plan tobein compliance with the
Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and has adopted Airport Overlay zoning to
implement compatibility requirements. This project is located in on AIA zone C which oo||s for
residential development of 4 or more units per acre or one dwelling unit per 5 acres. The
current RL zoning would not permit the 4 unit per acre density that the proposed R-I/PD zoning
will. The resulting average density for the project is4.68dvveUingunitsperacroondthedensify
of the project minus the 7.48acres ofroads as co||od for in the City's PD zone (net density) is
595 dwelling units per acre. In addition, the AIA C zone requires that lO% of the site be
retained as open space in o minimum unit of75' by 300'. The project meets this requirement
by retaining approximately 24.3% of open space. The project is therefore compatible with the
AIA zoning and the Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan subject tnconditions
including a. However, since this project involves a zoning change additional review by ALUC is
required. In 2006 the Butte County ALUC reviewed the proposed project' including the rezone
and subdivision layout and found it to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan, Zone [ which calls for residential densities of either l dwelling unit per 5 acres or 4 or
more dwelling units per acre. A deed notice to be included in the transfer of the parcels
which puts the buyer on notice that the house is within the airport area of influence and that
the property is subject to routine overflights which may subject residents to inconvenience'
annoyance, or discomfort arising from the noise generated by the operations of the public use
airport. The granting VfonoviQotioneasement will also boocondition ofhtproject. Since
the project isconsistent with by the Butte CnuntyALUC and densities proposed by the project
fo|| within the accepted range called for in the Airport Land use Compatibility Plan, the
impacts are considered |obeless than significant.
B) N/oo/d the project impair implementation of, or physically interfere w'/fh' on adopted
emergency response plan oremergency evacuation plan?
There will be fou/ access points to the proposed deve|opmnn1, one off of 181h Street, two off of
Feather Avenue, and one off of Grand Avenue to the north. This will provide adequate access
for emergency sen/ices. As o residential subdivision, the physical characteristics of the
development will not block urrestrict the evacuation routes designated in Drnvi||e's General
Plan; iherefore, impacts to emergency evacuation are considered less than significant.
h) Would the project expose people or structures to o significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wild/and fires. including where wild/ands are ooUocenf to urbanized o/coo or where
/es/c/encesore /nfenn/xedvv/fhvv//d/onds?
The project site is not located within the State Response Area (SRA) fnrwi|d|ond fires. Thera are
exiting fire hydrants in the area and additional hydrants will be required within the project
boundary oton=rninirnurnnf3OUfeet spacing. During the engineering phase ofthe project
fire flows to meet City and T|O requirement will have to be shown to be available. New
infrastructure to meet minimum fire flow requirements may have to be installed as part ofthe
subdivision improvements. Fire flow improvements will be located within the road rights-of-way
and will not pose significant impact tm the environment. Surrounding properties are either
City ofOrnv/0e Los [)livos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 30 Initial Study
developed with residential uses or are partially developed. No significant areas of wild lands
exist in the vicinity of the project and the project would not place residents in a significant
wildland fire hazard area. This impact is considered less than significant.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any wafer qualify standards or waste N ❑
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or N ❑
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 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 stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
offsite?
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 the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in flooding on- or offsite?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? El
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ Z ❑
structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 31 Initial Study
a) b) c) d) e) and f) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements, substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge, after the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, create or
contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or otherwise
substantially degrade water quality?
Though the site has been previously disturbed as a result of agricultural activities and grading,
substantial additional site disruption and grading will be required to in order to develop the site
as proposed. Construction of home pads, roads, driveways, and the installation of subsurface
improvements like sewer, water and storm drainage facilities will result in a significant majority
(approximately 850) of the property having surface disturbance. Prior to commencing any soil
disturbing activities, the project applicant is required to develop and implement a Sformwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and obtain Water Quality Certification from the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB). This permit will ensure that the grading and soil disruption
activities will include Best Management Practices (BMP) to mitigate soil erosion. In addition the
City of Oroville requires the submittal and approval of a grading plan prior to site disruption
and grading activities. The grading plan is required to include appropriate erosion control
measures.
Residential development of these parcels may introduce surface wafers that contain
contaminants that would enter surface waters and possibly groundwaters. Residential
development of these parcels would also contribute to a cumulative increase in downstream
flows from increased surface runoff. The City anticipates an increase in urban development
within the City limits and its Sphere of Influence, in accordance with its General Plan and
recently amended Sphere of Influence (1999). Increased urban development, particularly in
areas that are currently open space, would generate more urban runoff due to the increase in
impervious surfaces. However, the effects of this runoff would be reduces by the design of
required storm drainage detention system.
a. Contaminants in runoff from residential development are likely to consist of motor vehicle fluids
such as oil and radiator coolant, as well as fertilizers and herbicides applied for yard
maintenance. These and other contaminants can directly affect aquatic life. The project
includes one structural element that is an effective Best Management Practices (BMP), for
reducing the amount of pollutant constituents in urban runoff. This element is the detention
basin along the southeastern boundary of the project. The basin would provide storm wafer
qualify treatment water for bacteria, nutrients, fine sediment, some pesticides and herbicides,
and residual oil and grease then discharge the treated storm wafer into Ruddy Creek, a
natural seasonal water course. The detention basin will utilize a combination of physical and
natural processes to remove pollutants from storm water. Suspended material settles from the
water column due to gravity or from interaction with stems and leaves. Pollutants associated
with sediments are removed by chemical and biological process such as microbial
decomposition in the water or soil. In addition, bacteria concentration in storm water that has
been slowed or temporarily retained is reduced due to a combination of microbial action
and solar radiation. This would reduce pollutant concentrations to a level that is not
considered significant. Since the project would result in the disturbance of more than one
acre, it would be subject to the NPIDES permit process, which would require the
implementation of measures controlling sediments and other discharges during construction.
As part of the permit process, the project applicant would be required to develop and
implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that is approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB would require the submittal of
grading/drainage and erosion control plans as part of the SWPPP. Cities with populations
under 100,000 people are not required to have an adopted Storm Water Management Plan.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 32 Initial Study
The population of the {]iy of OrovUe b ± 12'656 (U.S. Census 2000). The project would have
no impact on storm water quality standards because there are no standards for communities
that are the size of (]noviUe.
The project proposes to connect to the wastewater collection system of the Thermo|ito
Irrigation District inadjacent road hgh|s-of-woys, The SewerogeCommission - DroviUeRegion
(SC-OR), o wastewater treatment facility owned and operated by Joint Powers Agreement
between the City, the Thenno|ifo Irrigation District, and the Lake DrnviUe Area Public Utilities
District, would provide sewer treatment service. VVudewm|er is treated at the SC-{)R facility
and discharged info the Feather River under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
permit granted by the California Regional Water Qualify Control Board in accordance with
the federal Clean Water Act and State Porter-Cologne YVote/ Quality Act. The permit issued
by the CRVV[B is called o Waste Discharge Requirement. Residential projects that receive
sewer service from SC-OR have a less than significant impact on impact on compliance with
vvosfe discharge requirements as SC-OR must remain in compliance with their VYode
Discharge Requirements. Incremental increases to the volume if waste wafer entering the SC-
0R treatment facility ultimately requires evaluation by the California Regional YVotcr Quality
Control Board and issuance nfnew Waste Discharge Requirements. The current VVode
Discharge permit hos been issued based on m designed average dry weather flow of 6.5
mgd. The plant currently receives approximately 3.1 mgd average dry weather flow.
However' the plant does receive significantly higher wet weather flows that one o result of
system-wide inflow and infiltration. These wet weather flows must be treated before being
discharged. In 2005/2006 there was a storm event where the peak wet weather flow was 11.4
nngd which exceeded the wet weather treatment plant capacity of 10.6 MGD. When high
wet weather flows exceed the treatment capacity of the plant the discharge of untreated
water is avoided by the fact the plant facilities include holding ponds which can temporarily
store excess flows for later treatment. The excess storage capacity isapproximately 22 million
gallons. Under heavy and continued rainfall events, there may be o potential for release of
untreated water from the facility due to excessive inflows, An inflow and infiltration study
conducted by the City and SC-OR in 1982 concluded that, due to |&|' in any given year there
is o 50% chance that CS-OR's hydraulic capacity will be exceeded and o 20Y& chance that
3C-DR's treatment capacity will be exceeded. The project will odd incremental Mows into the
plant that can be handled during the dry weather but have the potential to exacerbate wet
weather flows. Cumulatively, as the number nfdwelling units in the {)roviUe area increase, o
solution to the wet weather flows will have to be found' either by decreasing |&| or expanding
plant capacity. Decreasing |&| is the responsibility of the three member agencies that are
served by SC-[)R. This is o regional issue that is beyond the scope of this project to address.
This project alone does not trigger the need for the expansion of the 3C-OR facility and could
not pay for such on expansion. Noris this project responsible for solving existing |&| problems.
Once o solution has been agreed upon' o fair share cost to implement the solution can be
charged to new development and existing customers.
The SC-OR Board of Directors recently adopted o $53 million capital improvement plan which
includes expansion to their treatment plant and replacement of 3C-(}R's wed interceptor.
Along with the plan, 3C'(}R also adopted new sewer hook up fees to cover the cost of the
improvements. Sewer hook up fees for new dwelling will increase from o current figure of
approximately $|.70Oto $4'l63effective November 7' 20O7. The planned plant improvements
will serve 30'000 equivalent dwelling units within the DroviUe urban area, on increase of
approximately 12.516 EDU's over what the plant currently serves. Without expansion the 3C-
UR facility currently hos capacity for on additional 2.800 equivalent dwelling units. This figure
represents on approximate 7-10 year remaining life of the existing treatment facility at
conservative growth rates. The 7'10 year time period will give SC-OR the opportunity to plan
plant expansion and collect fees to help fond future improvements. Based in the above facts,
the impacts associated with wafer quality standards and waste discharge requirements Aemu
than significant.
City o/Onov0le Los L)0vox TJ/W & Rezone
b. All projects proposing wells with casings greater than 8 inches in diameter must adhere to the
provisions of the Butte County ground water ordinance and all project approvals will be
contingent on adherence to the ordinance. As this project does not propose the
development of any new wells, the impacts to groundwater from withdrawal will not be
significant. TID obtains the majority of its water supply for surface water sources but maintains
a number of well for back-up purposes A TID well is located within 200' of the project at the
corner of 18th Street and Feather Avenue. Water will be supplied from the Thermalito Irrigation
District which receives its water from surface sources.
As stated, the project would introduce impervious surfaces into a parcel that currently has
none. Along with increasing surface runoff, the project would reduce the amount of
precipitation that percolates into the ground, depending on the permeability of the soil,
percolation recharges local groundwater aquifers. The project site does not lie within an area
that has been identified as being significant to groundwater recharge. The most important
local recharge features are Lake Oroville and the Feather River. Surface water from the site
will be collected and detained in an on-site basin which will allow for continued percolation
on the site. In addition, considerable rural space remains outside the developed Oroville
area which will continue to allow for percolation into local aquifers. Therefore, impacts
associated with groundwater recharge are considered less than significant.
c) d) e) f) The City of Oroville does not meet the Federal criteria that would mandate a Municipal
Storm Water Permit or implementation of a Storm Wafer Management Plan; however, if is
recognized that development could create new sources of polluted runoff. Until such a time it
is mandated, the City encourages the use of Best Engineering Practices (BEP) to address
pollution in storm wafer runoff from new development. In specific instances, such as where a
proposed project may discharge polluted stormwater into a sensitive riparian or wetland area,
the City may require BEP. All projects that propose earth moving activities which would
significantly alter drainage patterns are required to obtain a grading permit and/or submit a
grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. Both require submission of
plans to control erosion which is considered adequate mitigation to reduce impacts to a less
than significant level.
As the project area develops, new impervious surfaces placed on the ground will increase
rates of runoff. Storm water flows currently run unchecked into Ruddy Creek which runs along
the eastern property boundary. Ruddy Creek is the main drainage course for a significant
portion of the Thermalito area, The City and County have prepared a master drainage plan
for the entire drainage basin in anticipation of urbanized development. The plan is currently
being recommended for adoption by both entities. The improvements called for in the
Thermalito Master Drainage Plan the City requires that projects upstream of Highway 162
provide individual on-site drainage detention be developed to mitigate storm wafer runoff to
pre-development levels. The project design includes a drainage detention basin located on
the easterly portion of the sites. The basin is approximately 2.5 acres in size and will
accommodate 1 in 2, 1 in 10, and I in 100 year storm flows.
Pursuant to the Clean Wafer Act, the applicant is required to obtain a National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit from the RWQCB. All
projects that disturb more than I acre of land are also required to obtain a Construction
Activity Storm Water Permit (CASWP) from the RWQCB, which, among other things, describes
erosion control measures. The City of Oroville and the project proponent, via consultation with
the Department of Fish and Game, the Corps of Engineers, may determine that additional
measures are necessary to avoid adverse impacts on drainage patterns. Approval of a
grading permit or a grading and drainage plan (with SMMs incorporated) by the Public Works
Department, securing NPIDES and CASWP permits from the Regional Water Quality Control
City of Oroville Los Olives TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 34 Initial Study
Board, and obtaining necessary approval from any other required agencies deemed
necessary will address the water qualify impacts of construction activity. These construction-
related measures, combined with a permanent detention system that will not contribute to
onsite/offsite siltation or erosion would reduce the impacts of alterations to drainage patterns to
a level that is Less Than Significant.
g) and h) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map or would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would
impede or redirect flood flows?
The far easterly portion of the site along Ruddy Creek is located within a 100-year Flood Zone
as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate
Map (FIRM), #06007C0790C dated June 8, 1998. No homes or significant structures are
proposed to be located within the mapped flood plain. However, the project does propose
the development of a drainage detention facility within this 100-year flood plain area. The
drainage detention facility does have the potential to displace flood waters and raise the
level of flood waters an insignificant amount immediately adjacent the detention basin. The
structures associated with the detention facility will have a less than significant impact on the
displacement of flood waters as it will displace an insignificant volume of water and the
constriction of he drainage course as it passes under Feather Avenue is far greater than that
proposed by the detention basin. Proper design of the detention basin can address this issue.
As a condition of development the park and detention basin will have to meet the
requirements of Oroville Municipal Code Chapter 8B Flood Damage Prevention. In addition
there are no homes close enough to Ruddy Creek to be affected by a minor change in wafer
elevation at this point on the stream. The project will not subject any of the homes within it to
any flooding hazards. The detention basin will be designed, as required by City Code, to
minimize changes to flood water elevations on Ruddy Creek. Therefore, the impacts to
structures from flooding are less than significant.
i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam?
The project site is not protected by any levee. It is located down stream from Oroville Dam,
one of the largest earth fill dams in the world. The Oroville Dam, completed in the 1960s to
capture and store water from the Feather River, is situated at the northeast corner of the
Oroville Planning Area. Lake Oroville is a large body of wafer that could be susceptible to
seiches. However, according to the Oroville General Plan Figure 8-A, Environmental Hazards,
Oroville Dam's likelihood of dam failure, is reduced as engineering studies conducted by the
Department of Wafer Resources have indicated that the Dam could withstand an earthquake
of an estimated magnitude of 6.5 on the Richter scale without significant damage. The study
also determined that a 6.5 magnitude earthquake exceeds the maximum credible event for
the region.
In addition, the California Office of Emergency Services has developed and approved a dam
failure inundation map for the area below the Oroville Dam. Based on the approved
inundation map, the City of Oroville has adopted emergency procedures for the evacuation
and control of populated areas below the dam. The development of this project will not
affect or change the inundation area or the stability of the dam. Impacts related to flooding
due to failure of the Oroville Dam or a seiche from Lake Oroville is therefore considered less
than significant.
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 35 Initial Study
A Mudflows (or debris flows) are rivers of rock, earth, and other debris saturated with water.
They develop when wafer rapidly accumulates in the ground, such as during heavy rainfall or
rapid snowmelf, changing the earth into a flowing river of mud or "slurry." A slurry can flow
rapidly down slopes or through channels, and can strike with little or no warning at avalanche
speeds. A slurry can travel several miles from its source, growing in size as if picks up frees, cars,
and other materials along the way. Mudflows fend to flow in channels, but will often spread
out over a floodplain.They generally occur in places where they have occurred before.
Development of the project is not likely to cause a mudflow as the topographic features of the
site do not have the elevation changes or water sources to develop a mud flow.
The proposed project is not located near any active volcanoes or large wafer bodies, so the
potential of volcanic mudflow or tsunami is non-existent. No Impact.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy ❑ ❑ Z D
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
plan or natural community conservation plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
This parcel and surrounding parcels are designated for residential uses, and this project
proposes to establish residential lots on this parcel. Because the project is a moderate size
residential subdivision it doesn't have any of the characteristics to divide a community like a
freeway, railroad, or canal project would. As the project would not divide an established
residential community, there is no impact.
b) Would the project 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 coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The project site is currently designated Residential Medium Density on the City General Plan
Land use Diagram. This designation calls for residential densities ranging from 2-6 dwelling units
per acre. This project is proposing an amendment to the City Zoning designation from RL-1
(Residential large Lot) to R-1 (Single Family Residential) with a PID combing zone. The PID
overlay will restrict the total number of dwelling units on the site to a maximum of 165 dwellings,
The resulting average density for the site will be approximately 4.6 dwelling units per acre. The
net density (minus roads) will be 5.95 dwelling units per acre which is within the range of the
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 36 Initial Study
existing land use designation. There are no adopted policies or regulations specific to this
property that was put in place to address environmental constraints. The project site is suitable
for the proposed density and planned residential land use subject to adopted development
regulations and required site improvements. Therefore, there is less than a significant impact
associated with conflicts to applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
There are no known habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans
within the Oroville Planning Area. Therefore, there is no impact associated with conflicts to
conservation plans for the area.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally ❑ Z
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) and b)Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the state or result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
There are no known significant deposits of mineral resources within the project site. Additionally,
there are no mineral resource recovery sites delineated by the Oroville General Plan or any
other City planning document within the Oroville Planning Area. Therefore, there is no impact
relative to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
11. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels ❑ ❑ Z ❑
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance or of applicable
standards of other agencies?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 37 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b} Exposure ofpersons tonrgeneration ofexcessive Fl [l 0 Fl
groundborn*vibration orgroundbo/nenoise
levels?
c> Asubstantial permanent increase inambient noise El D
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) Asubstantial temporary orperiodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
o) For oproject located within onairport land use
plan area or, where such oplan has not been
adopted, within two miles ofopublic airport oro
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) Fora project within the vicinity of o private airstrip,
would the project mxposopoop|eresidingor
working inthe project area to excessive noise
levels?
DISCUSSION (]FIMPACTS
o> VYoo/d the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels /n excess of
standards established in the loco/ genera/ plan or noise ordinance or of applicable standards
n/other agencies?
The Noise Bement of the City of Drovi||e General Plan establishes the following standards for
the maximum exposure ofpersons in residential areas |otransportation and non-tronsportohon
noise levels: the exterior noise level standard is 60 decibels (dB)' while inferior spaces cannot
exceed 45dB. An exterior noise level of 65 decibels is permitted if all f*udb|m mitigation
measures are implemented.
The entire project site is not located near any significant noise generating features or land uses
such asofreeway, railroad, orindustrial development. Though the project iswithin the area of
influence for the OrVvi||e Municipal Airport, if is not within the 55clB noise cVntoorfnr the airport
and airport noise isnot osignificant issue.
The project itself will not generate noise of significant level. Residential land uses are not high
noise generators and will not create average or sustained noise levels above the City's
standard of6Od8. This isoless than significant impact.
b} VVno/d the project result /n exposure of persons to or generation o/ excessive g000ndbVrne
vibration orgroundburnenoise levels?
Excessive groundbornevibration and Qroundbornenoise io not expected from the end land
use which will be single family residential homes. Minor grmundbornevibration may occur
during site development, particularly grading or excavation. However, this will be generally
City of(}rov///e Los {J0vos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 38 Initial Study
contained within the site and will be limited in duration. The impacts from groundborne
vibration and groundborne noise are considered less than significant.
c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
As the project is residential in nature, excessive noise will not be generated by the
development. The most noticeable new noise will be local vehicle traffic which will be at a
low speed internally and thus will not generate an unusual amount of noise. Of the three
streets the project fronts, 18th and Grand Carry the most traffic. The frontage along both of
these streets is short and a total of only 4 homes will front on these streets. Traffic noise from
these streets will be heard from the homes closest to the street. This is however, an existing
condition and not an impact generated by the project. To the extent that project traffic will
be increased on these streets and the associated noise will increase is the impact of the
project. According to Table 9-J in the Oroville General Plan, an increase of 3 decibels or more
to the current area noise level would constitute a significant change. Peak hour a.m. trips
generated by the project will be approximately 140 trips while the p.m. peak hour will
generate approximately 167 trips. Using a basic road noise calculator available at
www.xs4all.nl/-rigoleff/ENGEL/vlqcaic.hfm, increased traffic is estimated to produce an
increase noise level of less than I db which is not considered significant under CEQA as if is
normally accepted that a 3clB increase is needed for people to perceive the change.
According to the City's General Plan, new residential uses constructed within an exterior noise
environment of 60 dB Ldn or less shall be considered acceptable. The annexation of the
additional parcels within the project annexation area is not expected to generate any
additional noise because all parcels are currently developed with residential uses and can
already be developed to higher densities under the County jurisdiction without annexation. As
the project is will not add over 3 decibels to the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), the
project's impacts to ambient noise levels are considered less than significant.
d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
A temporary increase in noise levels associated with project construction would occur during
project development and home construction. This increase in noise would subside once
construction is completed. There are some residential uses adjacent to the property that will
temporarily be affected by construction noise. Oroville's City Code includes regulations that
address temporary construction noise impacts. Adherence to City Code (Chapter 13A) would
reduce impacts associated with an increase in ambient noise to a level that is considered less
than significant.
e) For a project located within an airport/and use plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport, or within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
This project is located within the airport area of influence for the Oroville municipal Airport.
However, the site is located outside of the 55c1b CNEL noise contour; therefore this is a less than
significant impact. (Butte County Airport Land use Compatibility Plan)
f) The project is not located near any private air strip and there would be no impact from noise
from a private air strip.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 39 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, ❑ ❑ H ❑
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ El ❑
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ El ❑
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The project site is located in an area that has been planned for residential development for
over 30 years. The current County General Plan land use designation allows for development
up to a maximum of 6 dwelling units per acre. At maximum build out this translates to the
potential for 211 dwelling units on the 35.19 acre site. The proposed project is for 165 dwelling
units for a gross density of 4.7 dwelling units per acre. The project is consistent with the existing
General Plan for the site
Backbone infrastructure including roads, sewer and wafer facilities are located immediately
adjacent to the site and can easily serve the proposed development. Annexation of the
project has no significant effect on the provision of infrastructure as both sewer and wafer are
available without annexation. As such, there will be no extension of services that would
induce other growth. The surrounding area is a mixture of developed, partially developed
and undeveloped parcels, which will develop with similar residential uses based on local
demand. Impacts to inducing growth are considered less than significant.
b) and c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
A project that displaces or removes 5 or more affordable housing units is considered to have a
significant impact. The displacement of 5 or more housing units will not be considered
significant if the project replaces the housing with like kind or the housing is displaced because
of unsafe, unsanitary, or uninhabitable conditions. The proposed project site is currently
vacant and no housing currently exists on the property. Therefore, there is no impact related
to existing housing.
City of Orovi/le Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 40 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the following public services:
a) Fire protection? El Z F-1 El
b) Police protection? El Z n n
c) Schools? ❑ 1:1 Z 1:1
d) Parks? ❑ 1:1 Z El
e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ Z ❑
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Fire Protection?
The City of Oroville Fire Department, the FI Medio Fire District, and the joint efforts of the Butte
County Fire Department and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDFFP)
provide fire protection services within the Oroville Planning Area. The City of Oroville Fire
Department (OFD) serves the approximate 12 square miles (7,680 acres) of the incorporated
City of Oroville. CDF Station 63 (at Nelson Avenue) currently serves emergency requests for the
area north of the Feather River within the Thermalito area. This fire-reporting district has
historically had the third highest call responses for structure fires in the Oroville Planning area.
The nearest staffed fire station is Station # 63 (Oroville, full time, CDF staffed), which is located
approximately 3.2 miles to the northeast of the site (on Nelson Avenue at County Center
Drive). The nearest City fire station is located approximately 3.9 miles away at 2055 Lincoln
Street. The City and County have an automatic aid agreement in place so both stations
would respond to any call for emergency fire services. Annexation of the property will change
the primary fire respondent from Butte County to the City of Oroville. This change will not,
however, have a significant effect or change the way fire protection services are delivered
due to the existing cooperative agreement between City and County fire departments
The Oroville City Council has adopted the Fire Department Standards of Coverage Guidelines
in order to guide future growth issues. The goal statements include:
• Fire Department travel times should place a first-due unit at scene within five minutes
travel time, for 90% of fire and medical incidents.
• Fire Department units shall be located and staffed such that an effective response force
of four units with eight personnel minimum shall be available to all areas of the City
within a maximum of ten minutes travel time, for 90% of all structure fires.
The project is currently outside of the 5- minute response contour. To address the fact that
much of the west side of Oroville isn't within the desired response time, the City of Oroville, in
September 2006, formed two community facilities districts: CFD No. 2006-1 Westside Public
Safety Facilities; and CFD 2006-2 Public Safety Services. CFD 2006-1 was formed to provide a
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 41 Initial Study
funding mechanism to mitigate the increased need for new public safety facilities, primarily a
new fire station to be located in the vicinity of the Oroville Municipal Airport, which will include
within it a small police substation. CFD 2006-2 was formed to fund on-going fire, police, and
code enforcement services that are needed as a result of additional development. To
mitigate the impacts on fire and police services, all new development in the area that is
essentially west of Highway 70 will be required to annex into both of these districts and will be
subject to the collection of fees and revenues to fund additional public safety facilities and
services.
According to the Oroville General Plan, as future development occurs, the OFD plans to
locate new stations within the community. Four new satellite stations are proposed within the
Planning Area. The City of Oroville has recently instituted a fire impact fee for all new
developments that will be used to develop these new facilities. Construction of those
individual projects and their potential physical impacts on the environment would be disclosed
during the CEQA process. In addition, two community facilities districts have been created to
recapture the cost of providing police and fire services to new development. As the proposed
project is not expected to place significant additional demands on the need for new fire
station facilities that may have a physical impact on the environment, project impacts are
considered less than significant with mitigation.
MM 13.1 Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the subdivision shall annex in to both CFD
2006-01 and CFD 2006-02.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of Final Map
EnforcementlMonitoring: City of Oroville.
b) Police Protection?
The proposed project site is currently served by the Butte County Sheriff's Department for
police services. The Sheriff's department is significantly impacted and is unable to provide
services to a growing population. With annexation of the site police responsibilities will change
to the Oroville City Police Department. According to the Environmental Review Guidelines for
the City of Oroville, significance and potential for impact is based on a project's potential to
impact adopted service levels and response times that would result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police facilities.
The project would create a minor increase demand for police protection services. However,
The City of Oroville has recently instituted a police impact fee for all new developments that
will be used to develop police protection services. According to the Oroville Police
Department, there are currently 26 sworn officers for the City of Oroville. Typically, adequate
level of service is considered to equate to I officer per 1,000 residents. With a population of
13,550 (latest data as of 2005), the ratio is closer to 2 officers per 1,000 residents at full
department staffing levels. As the population increase as a result of the project would be
minimal (430 persons), thereby reducing the ratio but not below adequate levels, the project
would not increase the need for new police facilities that may have a physical impact on the
environment.
The City has not adopted service ratios, response times or other similar objectives that would
clearly illuminate the impacts of development on police protection. According to the
Environmental Review Guidelines for the City of Oroville, significance and potential for impact
is based on a project's potential to impact adopted service levels and response times that
would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered police facilities. In September 2006, the City of Oroville formed two
community facilities districts: CFD No. 2006-1 Westside Public Safety Facilities; and CFD 2006-2
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 42 Initial Study
Public Safety Services. CFD 2006-1 was formed to provide a funding mechanism for new
public safety facilities, primarily a new fire station to be located in the vicinity of the Oroville
Municipal Airport, which will include within it a small police substation. CFD 2006-2 was formed
to fund on-going fire, police, and code enforcement services that are needed as a result of
additional development. To mitigate cumulative impacts, all new development in the area
that is essentially west of Highway 70 will be required to annex into both of these districts and
will be subject to the collection of fees and revenues to fund additional public safety facilities
and services. Therefore, potential impacts to police services from the project are considered
less than significant with mitigation (see MM 13.1).
C) Schools?
The State Education Code §17620(a)(1) states:
"The governing board of any school district is authorized to levy a fee,
charge, dedication, or other requirement against any construction within the
boundaries of the district, for the purpose of funding the construction or
reconstruction of school facilities."
Government Code §65995(b)(1) limits the base amount of allowable developer fees. Through
payment of this amount, a developer satisfies the statutory requirements and the payment is
deemed to be full and complete mitigation. Projects requiring legislative approval (such as
rezoning and General Plan amendments) may be considered to have additional impacts by
interested school districts or the City. Neither the City nor the School District has adopted a
separate fee schedule for legislative projects. If is expected that the project would increase
demand for school facilities and services as families with children would move into the
residences. Development fees on new residential construction and the proceeds are used for
the construction of new school facilities. The payment of school impact fees is intended to
offset the potential impact of development on school facilities. Under Government Code
Section 65996(b), as amended by the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, the
payment of impact fees is to be considered full and adequate mitigation for potential impacts
on schools. Annexation of the property will have no effect on the provision of school services.
Therefore, the project's impact on local schools is considered less than significant.
d) Parks?
Two small parks owned by the City of Oroville (Bedrock Park and Rotary Park) are located on
the south bank of the Feather River, approximately 2.8 miles driving distance from the project
site. Feather River Recreation and Parks District has also made significant improvements to
Riverbend Park, a community/regional park facility located along the Feather River which is
also on the south bank of the Feather River and within approximately 2.7 miles of the project
site.
The 1995 Oroville General Plan identifies existing and future recreation facilities within the
Oroville Planning area and establishes a park ratio between 3 and 5 acres of neighborhood
and community parks per 1,000 residents. In total, there are approximately 29.3 acres of
recreational facilities provided and maintained by the City and 248. 7 acres provided and
maintained by the Feather River Recreation and Park District to serve Oroville. For the City with
a population of approximately 14,400 people the 278 acres of park and recreation facilities
represent a ratio of 19.3 acres per thousand population. However, the facilities also serve the
unincorporated population within the sphere of influence of the City which has an additional
population of approximately 25,600. Based on the total SOI population of 40,000 people, the
ratio is 6.95 acres of park land per thousand population.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 43 Initial Study
In addition toCity and FRRPDfacilities there bosignificant amount ofState recreation facilities
inthe [)nzviUearea that are readily accessed byresidents. These facilities include hiking and
biking fn]i|s' wafer bodies, open space, picnic areas, camping facilities, and fishing access.
TheThenno|itu Foneboybwithin l miles cfthe projectond access fothe FoneboyRecoao|ion
area isapproximately l.5miles away.
The requirement for pork land and the ratio of pork land to population is not o CEQA
requirement. CEQA only serves to address the physical environmental effect of developing
new parks. Communities normally include podm in their general plans to provide for omonitios
fotheir residents that help promote obetter quality oflife. The method fofinance new parks
changed radically after the adoption of Proposifion 13 with general funds collected as part of
property taxes being replaced byfees levied on new development. In order fomeet to
continue meeting the ratio ofpark land toresidents, the City of (}roviUe Code Section 7C'
Development Impact Fees, requires new residential developments to pay o fee for the
ncquisihVn, improvement, or expansion of park facilities. The payment ufin'|ieo fees allow
smaller project to pay rather than construct new park facilities, the construction of which
vvoo|d he m CEQA issue due to the physical change to the environment. Upon receiving
adequate fees the City will develop additional pork facilities as identified in the capital
facilities plan. Appropriate CE{JA documents will be prepared for the construction of the park
at that time. Projects paying their fair share fees, or dedicating parkland in-lieu of fees' are
considered to have mitigated their potential impacts on parks by providing the City with funds
to acquire, improve, or expand neighbor hood and community parks to serve new residents.
The project is also providing some recreation facilities and open space within the project itself.
Based nnthe existing park facilities in the area, the payment of the adopted in lieu fee, and the
proposed open space within the project, thepr jectisnotexpectedtop|ocedgnificont
additional demands onthe need for new park facilities. The project's impoctsonpnrksore
considered less than significant.
e) Other Public Facilities?
Currently, there are no adopted service levels or other performance objectives for other public
facilities that are linked to the provision of new facilities or expansion of existing facilities that
might result in environmental impacts. The City may adopt or establish sen/ice levels and
performance objectives. Significance and potential for impact will be hoomd on o project's
potential to impact adopted service levels and performance objectives if it would result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision ofnew mrphysically altered
other public facilities. The new residents would generate onadditional demand ongeneral
governmental services but not to the extent that new physical infrastructure will be necessary.
Based onthe evaluation ofthe project's direcfondindirecfirnpoctsongrnvvthdiscussedin
this document and the absence of adopted service levels or performance objectives in the
General Plan, the project's potential impacts toservice levels and performance objectives
would beLess Than Significant.
City ofOrnv0e Los O0vosTSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Poge44 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
14. RECREATION.
n) Would the project increase the use pfexisting El 1:1
neighborhood and regional parks orother
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b\ Does the project include recreational facilities, or
require the construction Vrexpansion of
recreational facilities, which might have on
adverse physical effect onthe environment?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
o) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and reg/ono/ parks or other
recreational foc///f/es such that substantial physical deterioration o/ the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
With the full build out of the project, approximately 396 new residents can be anticipated. If is
expected that some portion of the residents will periodically use |nco| recreation facilities. Unlike
roads, there is no generally accepted correlation between population and pork usage or on
accepted way to measure pork capacity or park usage. There are o number of recreation
facilities that might potentially be used by residents of this project. The closest recreation facility
is |heThermo|ifn Fmreboy'which primarily provides wafer access swimming' fishing' hiking, and
picnic facilities. The Nelson Sports Park complex which includes playing fie|ds, o swimming poo|,
horseshoe facilities, picnic and bbq area, and play area is approximately. Other recreation
facilities are located within 2.8 miles including Bedrock Pork, Riverbend Pork' Hammon Pork
and others. Some of these parks are maintained by the City of {}rovi||e and some by the
Feather River Recreation and Pork District.
The FRRP[} claims that new residents will have o significant adverse environmental impact on
the District's parks due to individual and cumulative effects from more people using pork
facilities which will result in on accelerated and disproportionate physical deterioration in their
facilities and increased maintenance costs. This claim has been reviewed and found to be
unsupported by substantial evidence. First, the District has not provided any supporting
documentation on the carrying copnci|y, number of users or historic deterioration rates for any
of its pork facilities. Direct observation of the District's facilities fend to indicate that they do
not appear to used to oupodfy and are capable of serving m significantly larger number of
people. FRRPD is requesting that the City of 0rovi||e adopt development impact fees on behalf
of the district to mitigate for the increased maintenance costs and deterioration of the existing
pork facilities. By law development impact fees cannot be utilized for maintenance activities
only the development of new facilities.
Additionally, parks are meant to be used by people. A fundamental goal of the FRRPD is to
encourage people to increase park usage. To that end' the District holds special events which
othoot more users, including users from outside ofthe district, to local parks. Regardless nfhow
many people use the District's facilities there is p base level of park maintenance that is
required. VVutehng must be done. |ovvns need to he mowed' weather fakes n toll on facilities,
City of O/ov0Ae Los {)0vns 7S/W & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 45 Initial Study
etc. Pork hzcjlities, like any other infrastructure, deteriorate with time and usage. CEQA
**cognized this fondornenhz| principle in the built environment and found that the
maintenance and replacement cfexisting facilities isonactivity the poses aless than significant
tothe environment under Sections l53Oland lJ302ofthe CEQAGuidelines.
With respect tocumulative impacts claimed bythe District, in2OO2residents o[ the FRRPDvoted
to approve a benefit assessment district supported by an annual tax added to their real estate
tax bill. The tax is collected by Butte County and disbursed to the Pork District as o separate
fund for maintenance nfFRRPDfacilities. All ofthe lots proposed inthis subdivision, oswell osall
other proposed subdivisions within the district, are subject to this special assessment. In addition,
with new development there will be on increased pn)podv tax base which will generate
additional revenues fothe FRRPD.
The District claims 5'649 new dwelling units along with 15'819 new residents have either been
approved or are pending approval within the City. This is somewhat misleading in that the City
only approves potential lots. The actual development of homes is depenclant on several factors
most importantly, the economy. New home construction within the City has averaged
approximately 80 dwellings per year with 84 new dwelling permits being issued in 2007. Based
on historic building data it could take up 40 to 50 years to develop 5.649 new dwellings.
Additionally, the district claims that every new resident will be o user oftheir facilities which is
unsupported by any data. Studies on pork usage indicate that o significant portion of the
population never visit local or regional parks and that park usage is highly correlated with the
proximity ofpark facilities with most users living within less than a mile nfthe park facility (2006
Rand Corp. Study hMp://*/w"w.nzndoPg/pubs/technico[nspods/TR357/). The Obhicf also fails
to recognize that new pork hzci|ities, as identified in City of (}n/viUe (}enonz| Plan will be
constructed to accommodate new populations thereby providing new facilities which will off-
set the use of existing parks. Another fact that has been ignored is the increasing use of private
sports clubs and private nrcnaohon facilities such as tennis and racquetball facilities which
continue to provide other recreational opportunities thereby lessening usage of local parks.
Based on theses facts, the use of regional pork facilities will increase at o naha equal to the
growth nofe of the community of between 07 and 1.5% per year which is the historic rate and
not an accelerated rate. Thensfone, there will not be o significant cumulative adverse impact
to the maintenance of District facilities caused by accelerated deterioration of the facilities
resulting from new development. The impact to existing recreation facilities will be less than
significant.
b} Does the project include recreational facilities, or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have on adverse ph>n/co/effecton the environment?
The project will not include an on site recreation facility. A recently approved project
adjacent to the project south of Feather Avenue includes o small recreation amenity for
reddenfs, which is approximately 2.5 acres in size. Improvements will include o walking path,
playground and picnic faci|ihes, grass area, and o & court basketball facility. The impacts of
constructing the facility were addressed in the CEL]A document for the Village at Roddy Creek
subdivision. This project may be asked to construct addition amenities within the new pork
depending upon project timing. The amenities could include o bathroom and addition play
structures within the improved pork area. |rnpocfs from the construction of new pork facilities
will beless than significant.
City of[)nov///e Los C)0vos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 46 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in ❑ ❑ Z ❑
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion
at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level ❑ ❑
of service standard established by the City General
Plan or the Butte County Association of
Governments for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ❑ H ❑
either an increase in traffic levels 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 dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ Z ❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ Z ❑
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a Would the project cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number
of vehicle trips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
The northern boundary of the project site abuts Grand Avenue, the western boundary abuts
18th Street, the southern boundary Feather Avenue, and the eastern boundary abuts rural
land and Ruddy Creek. Access to the site will be directly off Grand Avenue, Feather Avenue
and 18fh Street and will be fed by Grand Avenue from the north and CA-162 from the south. In
addition, 16th street will be developed between Grand Avenue and Feather Avenue.
The project, with proper planning, proposes to develop 165 single family residential lots with
two roads that will connect through from Grand to Feather Avenue with one access point on
18th Street. A project will typically have a potentially significant impact if the traffic added by
the project to the existing traffic volumes exceed the LOS C standard for the roadway
functional classification, or exceed LOS D where the General Plan policy 5.10e states LOS D is
acceptable. Projects that generate no more than 500 average daily trips are considered to be
less than significant in their effect on a existing roadway level of service unless the project
contributes 100 or more peak hour trips to an existing roadway or intersection that is operating
at an unacceptable level of service.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 47 Initial Study
A traffic analysis was performed for an adjacent project (Estates at Ruddy CreeK) in August,
2006 by Lumos & Associated, Civil Engineers. The study included the Los Olivos Subdivision in its
calculations and assumptions. CalTrans was also consulted in the preparation of the traffic
study. The analysis looked at the following intersections and road extensions:
Existing Intersections
1. Grand Avenue at 18th Street
2. Feather Avenue at 18th Street
3. CA-162 at 18th Street
4. CA-162 at Larkin Road
The main finding of the report indicate that Trip generations for single family homes show that
the project will add approximately 1,646 daily trips to the roadway system with 64% of those
trips using the road network south of the project site to Highway 162. The other 36% of the
project traffic is expected to utilize the road network north of the site assessing Grand Avenue
to Highway 70. The level of service is expected to decrease slightly and the delay is expected
to increase slightly with the addition of the project. However, levels of service will remain within
the City of Oroville's acceptable level at or above C for the existing condition plus project. For
the cumulative condition, incorporating other nearby approved development, the SR-162
approaches change to a level of service F.
The existing levels of service for all intersections are A or B with the exception of the Highway
162/Larkin Road intersection southbound approach which operates at a LOS C at the a.m.
peak hour and a LOS D at the p.m. peak hour.
With the project, the LOS will only change at the southbound approach of Highway 162 and
181h Street which will go from a LOS B at both a.m. and p.m. peak hours to a LOS C at both
peak hours. In the cumulative condition, the southbound approach of Highway 162 and 1811
Street will operate at a LOS F in both peak hours. The Highway 162/Larkin Road intersection
southbound approach will also operate at a LOS F for both peak hours and the northbound
approach will operate at a LOS E in the a.m. and F in the p.m.
Ultimately, it is anticipated that the Highway 162/18th Street intersection will be closed, to be
replaced with a new 4-leg intersection at Highway 162/201h Street which will be controlled by a
traffic signal light which will address the cumulative LOS issues. The City has completed an
nexus study for overall traffic impacts to area intersections and traffic impact fees are
collected at time of building permits to address this cumulative impact. This project will only
have a very small contribution the cumulative volumes and the overall impacts to the
roadway system is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated and payment
of impact fees.
The traffic report recommended 4 mitigation measures. However, two of the recommended
mitigation measures are statutory requirements of the City of Oroville and will be required as
conditions of the project, rather than mitigation measures:
1. Improve the project frontage according to City standards including curb, gutter,
and sidewalk etc.
2. Design new roadways per the governing agency standard specifications and
plans.
Mitigation Measure:
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 48 Initial Study
MM 15.1 Contribute a fair share amount to the installation improvements at SR 162/SR99
intersection and for a new traffic signal at the 18th/20th Street/Larkin Road and
Highway 162 intersection and/or the closure of the 18th Street intersection and
improvements to 201h Street and pro rata share contributions to signalizations at 14th
Street and Highway 162 and 12th Street and Highway 162.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of Final Map
EnforcementlMonitoring: City of Oroville.
Mitigation Measure:
MM 15.2 Contribute to the adopted Mitigation Fee Program(s) as required, to help fund
cumulative impacts to local roadways and their intersection improvements.
Timing/Implementation: Prior to approval of Final Map
Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Oroville.
b) Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the City Genera/ Plan or the Butte County Association of Governments for
designated roads or highways?
According to the 1997 City of Oroville Transportation Improvement Program and the 2001 City
of Oroville Non-Residential Traffic Impact Fee Program for 21 Key Intersections, the cumulative
traffic-related impacts of new development in Oroville would cause the Levels of Service (LOS)
on the City's designated arterial roads, collector streets, and intersections to fall below the
standards, as described in the Oroville General Plan Circulation Element. The two referenced
traffic studies identified required improvements in order to maintain the adopted LOS and the
"fair share" portion of the cost of these improvements for various types of development. The
Oroville City Council recently adopted traffic impact fees in order to offset the cost of street
improvements made necessary because of new development in the City. Therefore, the
project applicant is required to pay a Traffic Circulation System Roadways Improvement Fee
that is based upon a "fair share" portion of the cost of implementing the improvements
identified in the 1997 City of Oroville Transportation Improvement Program and the 2001 City of
Oroville Non-Residential Traffic Impact Fee Program for 21 Key Intersections.
According to the findings of the traffic analysis, impacts resulting from the proposed project
and other pending projects will contribute to cumulative impacts at local intersections as well
as contributing to an overall cumulative impact within the Oroville urban. The payment of the
adopted traffic mitigation fees will address this cumulative impact. Therefore, this potentially
significant impact is reduced to a level that is less than significant with mitigation incorporated
by payment of the described traffic impact fee (as mentioned above in a) and which is
covered in Mitigation measure 15.2, above.
c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic
levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
The Oroville Municipal Airport is considered to be a general aviation facility with the capacity
to handle a daily air traffic volume of up to 70,000 flights. However, airport runways are only
designed for aircraft with a gross weight of up to 50,000 pounds. This weight limitation
precludes the airport from being used for regular commercial jet service (e.g. Boeing 737).
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 49 Initial Study
Although the proposed project would result in an approximate increase of 350 persons and
contribute to a potential increase in passenger air traffic, the project would not necessitate
regularly scheduled commercial air service from the Oroville Municipal Airport. Residents
requiring such service would utilize airports in Chico or Sacramento.
In addition, the proposed project is not located in an Airport Influence Area (AIA) Overlay
Zone as designated in the Oroville Zoning Code, Section 26-68. Therefore, no specific
avoidance measures are necessitated in regards to the physical, visual, or electronic forms of
interference. The Butte County ALUC reviewed the proposed project at their December 2006
meeting and found it to be compatible with the Butte County Airport Land use Plan and the
operations of the Oroville Municipal Airport.
As the project would not necessitate changes in operations or expansion of the Oroville
Municipal Airport and as the project would not interfere with air traffic patterns, the impacts of
the project on air traffic are considered less than significant.
d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., form equipment)?
The City relies on the design specifications found in the California Department of
Transportation - Highway Design Manual (HDM), currently the Fifth edition, and the City's
adopted construction standards to determine whether there is a potential for hazard from
project design features. Projects which propose design features inconsistent with the
requirement Caltrans HDM or City Construction standards are considered to present the
potential for significant impact. The project would result in additional trips and automobile
access onto 18th Street, Feather Avenue, and Grand Avenue. All of these roads are straight
with good visibility and sight-distance and will meet City and Caltrans design standards. The
project would not introduce potentially incompatible traffic, as the vehicle composition
associated with this project would be mostly cars and small passenger trucks. The Oroville
Public Works Department would have final review of the project street design, ensuring that
the project is in compliance with transportation standards. Therefore, project impacts to
roadway hazards are considered less than significant.
e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
The City of Oroville requires all projects to conform to the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code -
General Provisions for Safety (1994 U.F.C. Sections 901-902). The U.F.C. requires that project
plans for fire apparatus and personnel access must be submitted to the Fire Department for
review and approval prior to construction.
According to the tentative subdivision map, access to the development would be provided at
five separate points providing emergency vehicles different options for accessing the inferior
of the development. As plans for the proposed project have been submitted to the Oroville
Fire Department for review and approval and as the proposed project meets Uniform Fire
Code requirements and provides adequate access for emergency vehicles, the project would
have a less than significant impact on emergency access.
f) Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity?
Section 26-49 of the Oroville Zoning Code specifies parking requirements by use. Projects that
provide parking facilities that meet the requirements of the Code are considered to have
adequate parking capacity and a less than significant impact. The project proposes both on-
street and off-street parking. The project must comply with the parking requirements set forth
in Section 26-49 of the Oroville City Code, which requires two off-street parking spaces per
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 50 Initial Study
dwelling unit. Each home will be constructed with a 2-car garage and room for two off-street
driveway parking spaces for a total of 660 potential off-street parking spaces. This meets the
City's requirements for off-street parking which is 2 spaces per dwelling unit for a total of 330
spaces. As the proposed project will comply with Oroville City Code off-street parking
requirements, impacts to parking are considered less than significant.
g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Local transit service is provided primarily by the B Line. The B Line is a single fixed bus route
available to the general public. The 17 1/2 mile fixed route provides service from the Butte
County Center on County Center Drive to Las Plumas High School in the southern part of
Oroville, passing through Thermalito, Oroville, and South Oroville. The route maintains signed
bus stops in business districts within the City, and flag stops within residential areas of the City.
The B Line maintains a Transit Center within downtown Oroville at the corner of Montgomery
Street and Myers Street where riders can transfer to the Butte County Transit System. The
closest bus stop is at 14th Street and Oro Dam Boulevard, approximately 4,800 feet from the
project.
Other local and regional inter-city transit services available within the City of Oroville include
the following:
• Oroville Express - A ticket based dial-a-ride service for the elderly and disabled
within the City of Oroville.
• Butte County Transit (BCT) - Provides inter-city service between Oroville and Chico
with eight round trips per day, as well as service to Paradise, Gridley, and Biggs.
• Western Greyhound Lines- Provides daily inter-city service between Oroville and the
nearby communities of Chico, Redding, Marysville, and Sacramento, as well as
more distant locations.
The 1995 Oroville General Plan and the 1998 Oroville Urban Area Bicycle Plan contain policies
adopted for the purpose of supporting alternative transportation. In addition, the Countywide
Bikeway Master Plan prepared by the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG) in
September, 1998, and adopted by the City of Oroville, establishes a system of ultimate
bikeways and trails within the Oroville area. As the project would comply with the City of
Oroville General Plan policies and the Oroville Urban Area Bicycle Plan, conflicts with plans or
policies supporting alternative transportation are considered less than significant.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the E]
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new wafer or ❑ ❑ Z ❑
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 51 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑ ❑ ❑
stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ 21 ❑
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has 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 project's solid
waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ M
regulations related to solid waste?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) b) and e) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board, result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, or result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected demand, in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
As discussed in "8a)," the project proposes to connect to the wastewater collection system of the
Thermalito Irrigation District (TID), which has a sewer lines located in adjacent road right-of-
ways. Treatment of the wastewater will be provided by SCOR, the regional treatment facility
located on South Fifth Street. Wastewater is treated at the SCOR facility and discharged into
the Feather River under the authority of federal and State permits. The RWQCB is responsible
for issuing discharge permits and reviewing monitoring data on the qualify of effluent
discharged into the Feather River.
A three-party agreement between the City of Oroville, Thermalito Irrigation District, and the
Lake Oroville Area Public Utility District established the Sewerage Commission - Oroville Region
(SC-OR), which operates a sewage treatment facility that serves a large part of the Oroville
Planning Area. Domestic and permitted industrial waste collected by the sewer systems
owned by the City, Lake Oroville Area Public Utility District (LOAPUD) and by Thermalito
Irrigation District (TID) flows to the SC-OR facility where if undergoes conventional treatment
and is then discharged into the Feather River. The project will generate a domestic waste
water flow which will enter into the sanitary sewer system. The SC-OR plant operates under a
number of permits including a National Pollution Discharge Elimination (NPDES) permit issued
by the California Regional Water Qualify Control Board (RWQCB). That permit has been issued
based on a designed average dry weather flow of 6.5 mgd. The plant currently receives
approximately 3.2 mgd average dry weather flow. However, the plant receives significantly
City of Oroville Los Clivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 52 Initial Study
higher wet weather flows that are a result of inflow and infiltration from the individual member
agency infrasstructure. These wet weather flows must be treated before being discharged. In
2005/2006 the peak wet weather flow was 11.4 mgd which exceeded the wet weather
treatment plant capacity of 10.6 MGD. When high wet weather flows exceed the treatment
capacity of the plant the discharge of untreated wafer is avoided by the fact the plant
facilities include holding ponds which can temporarily store excess flows for later treatment.
The excess storage capacity is approximately 22 million gallons. Under extreme rainfall events
untreated water could be released from the facility due to excessive inflows. An inflow and
infiltration study conducted by the City and SC-OR in 1982 concluded that, due to I&I, in any
given year there is a 50% chance that CS-OR's hydraulic capacity will be exceeded and a
20% chance that SC-OR's treatment capacity will be exceeded. The project will add
incremental flows into the plant that can be handled during the dry weather but have the
potential to exacerbate wet weather flows. Cumulatively, as the number of dwelling units in
the Oroville area increase, a solution to the wet weather flows will have to be found, either by
decreasing I&I or expanding plant capacity. Decreasing I&I is the responsibility of the three
member agencies that are served by SC-OR. This is a regional issue that is beyond the scope
of this project to address. This project alone does not trigger the need for the expansion of the
SC-OR facility and could not pay for such an expansion. Nor is this project responsible for
solving existing I&I problems.
Sewage flows from the Thermalito area as well as an area served by the City of Oroville
collection system are collected by SC-OR's West Interceptor. The West Interceptor is a trunk
line located in the Hwy. 162 right-of way and it carries flows eat over the Feather River towards
the SC-OR treatment facility. The West Interceptor has reached its capacity on one or more
occasions due to wet weather events. Options to solve the wet weather flows are to either
decrease the I&I in the system or increase the size of the Westside interceptor and associated
pump stations.
The I&I is a maintenance issue that both TID and the City would have to address. Both options
are large scale projects that cannot be attributed to any one project and the cost of
performing the upgrades will have to be shared between existing and new development.
From a CEQA perspective, neither the I&I solution nor the West Interceptor expansion will
represent a significant impact to the environment as all work would fake place within existing
improved rights-of-way. Improvements to the West Interceptor, when needed, will most likely
be financed through connection fees for new construction. At the current time there isn't a
funding mechanism in place to proceed with either solution. This project will be conditioned
to pay a fair share cost of any required modifications to the West Interceptor provided the fee
has been adopted and is in place at time of building permit application. Any increase in the
SCOR plant capacity to handle wet weather flows will have to be addressed similarly and fees
put in place to cover those costs.
Cumulatively, the member agencies at one time had issued will serve letters for development
project which total upwards of 6,000 dwelling units. Many of those will-serve letters, which
were good for 12 months have expired and have the projects they were issued for are not
being pursued at this time. SCOR has expressed significant concerns that the increased flows
from these potential dwelling units combined with existing wet weather flows will exceed the
ability of the plat to process all waste wafer without illegal discharges. While if can't be
predicted at what rate these homes will be constructed, historical housing growth has been
about I% per year which s reflected by building permit activity which varies between 60 and
150 homes per year. Even if growth rates double or triple, it will take 15 to 20 years to absorb
6,000+ dwellings.
The SC-OR Board of Directors recently adopted a $53 million capital improvement plan which
includes expansion to their treatment plant and replacement of the west side interceptor.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 53 Initial Study
Along with the plan, SC-OR also adopted new sewer hook up fees to cover the cost of the
improvements. Sewer hook up fees for new dwelling increased from approximately $1,700 to
$4,200 effective November 1, 2007. The plant expansion will accommodate 30,000 dwelling
units within the Oroville urban area which is the equivalent of an approximate population of
75,000 people. SC-OR also stated that they currently still have capacity of approximately 2,800
new dwelling units in the area. This figure represents a 7-10 year remaining life of the existing
treatment facility. It will also allow SC-OR to collect fees towards future improvements during
that time period.
TO has existing sewer lines in Grand Avenue, 18th Street and Feather Avenue which have the
potential to sere the project. Capacity will have to be shown before the map is finalled and
some improvements to the existing system may be necessary to accommodate the design of
the project. No offsite sewer infrastructure improvements are anticipated. The provision of
sewer service the site is not dependant on the property being annexed into the City. TID can
provide sewer to the unincorporated areas within its service area boundary. Due to this fact
and the fact that sewer trunk lines are already in the streets adjacent to the project site,
annexation of the project into the City will not induce further growth or result in the extension
of services that would induce further growth. As the proposed project would not, on an
individual basis, exceed the existing SC-OR facility capacity, no new treatment facilities would
be required.
Final approval of infrastructure improvements by the Thermalito Irrigation District and SC-OR
approval as to any development that will require changes to the Westside Interceptor, and
adherence to conditions as established by the Thermalito Irrigation District and payment of
fees for water and sewer are considered sufficient in reducing potential environmental
impacts related to the extension of wafer and wastewater infrastructure to a level that is
considered less than significant.
c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
As the proposed project would introduce impervious surfaces, including paved roads and
driveways, concrete sidewalks, rooftops, and other hardscape to an area currently vegetated
with grasslands, the project requires the construction of sformwater drainage facilities in order
to handle the additional surface runoff.
As described in the Hydrology section, a drainage retention basin is to be developed on the
eastern portion of the site. The facility, as required by the City of Oroville, will be designed to
attenuate peak flow runoff to pre-development levels. The development of the detention
facility is in an area adjacent to an intermittent drainage course, Ruddy Creek. The detention
facility will not encroach into Ruddy Creek with the exception of one outfall structure as
discussed in 4 c. above. The construction of the proposed storm water drainage facilities is
therefore, considered to be less than significant.
d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
The Thermalito Irrigation District currently provides water services to approximately 2,700
municipal and residential customers. Total annual water consumption is currently 2,800 AF
(acre-feet), with approximately 950 of the customers being residential. This demand is
expected to grow to 3,300 acre-feet in 2010, 3,920 acre-feet in 2015 and 4,712 acre feet in
2020. Even in the driest years the watershed has always replenished the reservoir to spill, thus
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 54 Initial Study
the water source has not changed over time. This supply is approximately three times the
current annual demand.
The District's water treatment plant has a capacity of 10 MGD (million gallons per day). This is
sufficient to meet the current demand of approximately 5 MGD. The design of the plant will
also allow for a future expansion when needed. Even though water treatment capacity is
available the delivery infrastructure will need to be evaluated according to TID's water system
model and upgrades of expansion to lines may be required to serve the project with
adequate flows for domestic and fire purposes. These upgrades will occur within the right's of
ways of existing roads and will not represent a significant impact to the environment.
All of the 165 lots will be connected to Thermalito Irrigation District's (TID) domestic water
system by extension of water lines located in roads adjacent to the project. TID's requirements
for providing service are payment of District fees and compliance with District standards.
Based on this information new sources of wafer supply or new water entitlements would not be
required to serve this project and the impact would be less than significant.
f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the project's solid waste disposal needs?
The franchised solid waste collection service for Oroville (Norcal Waste) uses the Norcal Waste
System Ostrom Road Landfill in Yuba County as the disposal site for solid waste collected in the
Oroville Planning Area. According to the latest data collected by the California Integrated
Waste Management Board, the Ostrom Road facility had a remaining capacity of 25.7 million
tons as of December 2004. The estimated cease operation date for the facility is 2062, based
on an annual average growth rate of 2% for the service area. As facilities get within 15 years of
their capacity, the State requires that provisions be made for future land fill facilities. The City's
compliance with AB 939 through its Source Reduction and Recycling Element and through the
mutually adopted County Integrated Waste Management Plan is considered to be adequate
mitigation for potential impacts on the capacity of the landfill.
Norcal Waste operates a Materials Recovery facility (MRF) at its Fifth Avenue transfer station in
Oroville. All solid waste collected in the Oroville city limits is transported to the MRF where
recyclable materials are sorted from the waste stream. The purpose of the MRF is to meet the
mandate of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), which requires
a 50%reduction in waste going to the landfill. The MRF is part of the City of Oroville's strategy to
reduce waste going to the landfill as outlined in the City's Source Reduction and Recycling
Element. As the Norcal Ostrom Road Landfill has adequate capacity to accommodate solid
waste beyond the year 2060, the project will have a less than significant impact on landfill
capacity.
g) Would the project comply with federal, state and loco/statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
As the proposed project has been reviewed by the City of Oroville Department of Public Works
for compliance with regulations related to solid waste operations, and as the project would be
required to comply with all applicable local, State, and federal regulations, the project would
have no impact associated with compliance with regulations related to solid waste.
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 55 Initial Study
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade FJ
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 animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually El ❑
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
"Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a 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 that
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
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 animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory?
As discussed in the Biological Resources section of this document, the site has been examined
for the presence of rare, threatened or endangered plants and animals and none were found.
Habitat does exist that could support species that are protected by the migratory Bird Act of
are of interest to the California Native Plant Society. Gallaway Consulting conducted site visit
to affirm that no significant biological resources currently exist on the site. However, the site
represents potential habitat for several species of concern and pre-construction surveys for
nesting raptors and certain special status plants are recommended as discussed in section 4 of
the document. A small amount of seasonal wetlands will be affected by the project and will
have to be filled but this change will not significantly affect the habitat of any wildlife species
or cause any species population to decrease below self-sustaining levels.
As discussed in the Cultural Resources section of this document, based upon the past history of
disturbance on this site, it has been determined that there are no significant historical
resources on site. Therefore, project impacts to biological and historical resources remain at a
level that is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
City of Oroville Los Ofivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 56 Initial Study
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
"Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a 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?
The proposed project may have cumulatively considerable impacts on police and fire
protection services, and traffic conditions at intersections on state Route 162, as discussed in
Sections 13 and 15, Transportation and Traffic, of this Initial Study. The traffic analysis prepared
for the project by Lumos & Associates found that even without development of the project,
significant growth in population and development within the Oroville area will result in
significant increases in traffic volumes which will worsen the Levels of Service to unacceptable
levels. Though development of the proposed project would not significantly impact any of the
roadways or intersections within the vicinity of the proposed project, the project would
contribute to an increase in daily trips and volume of vehicles on area roadways.
Cumulative fire and police protection impacts are addressed by the implementation of MM
13.1. Traffic conditions would worsen whether or not the proposed project is implemented.
Payment of the fair share fees and implementation of MM 15.1 and MM15.2 would offset the
proposed project's increase in the number of vehicle trips and the contribution to congestion
at intersections to a level that is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Neither the site nor the project has the potential to create significant adverse effect to human
beings. The project will be providing housing for people in accordance with adopted site
development and building code standards. Though Section 6 does discuss the potential for
some landslides, current construction and grading requirements make this potential less than
significant. There are no unusual physical characteristics to the property that present hazards
to the future population residing there. The project is within the overflight zone C for the
Oroville Municipal Airport but is not within a zone that carries a significantly higher risk of
accident as confirmed by the Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The risk to
humans is therefore considered to be less than significant.
V. PROJECT DATA
A. Project Description
1. Type of Project: Tentative Subdivision Map
2. Proposed Density of Development: 165 dwelling units on 35.19 acres
3. Access and Nearest Public Roads: Frontage on 18th Street, Grand Ave., and Feather
Avenues, all public roads
4. Method of Sewage Disposal.- SCOR and Thermalito Irrigation District
5. Source of Water Supply: Thermalito Irrigation District
6. Proximity of Power Lines: Existing adjacent to the project site
7. Potential for Further Land Divisions or Development: No
B. Environmental Setting
1. Terrain
a. General Topographic Character: gently sloping land draining from west to east
b. Slopes: Range between 0-15%
c. Elevation: Between 200 feet to 168 feet above mean sea level
d. Limiting Factors: 100 year flood plain on easterly 4.25 acres of the site
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 57 Initial Study
2. Natural Hazards Vfthe Land
e. UBC Earthquake Zone: Seismic Zone 3
f. Distance to /\|qoist-Pho|oZone: 5.9 miles
g. Erosion Potential: Low to moderate
h. Landslide Potential: Low
i Fire Hazard: urbanized, low
i Expansive Soil Potential: Moderate hzLow
k Liquefaction Potential: Low
3. Visual/Scenic Resources: Views of Table Mountain
4. Ambient Noise: local roadways, short term construction noise
5. Sensitive Receptors: None
6. Vegetation: Olive frees, annual grasses, scattered blue oaks
7. Wildlife Habitat: Limited, The site islargely planted inonolive orchard and has
limited habitat value.
8. Archaeological and Historic Resources inthe Area: Low potential
9. City General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential with a request for a General
Plan Amendment toall Medium/High Density Residential
10. Existing Zoning: RL (Residential large |nU with u request for o /enzno to R-1 with o
Planned Development overlay
I ]. Existing Land Use on Site: l mobile home located near Grand Avenue and one
garage/shop located neat |fy» Street, olive frees.
12. Surrounding Area
n. Land Uses: Vacant land, Low density residential
b. Zoning: Rl. RL, County AR
c. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
13. Character ofSite and Area: The proposed project site is identified on the USG3 as
OroviUe' California Quadrangle map. This 35.19 acre pVnc*| of land is q largely n
undeveloped parcel surrounded by residentially developed land and undeveloped
land slated for urban land uses.
City VfOrVv0le Los O0vos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 58 Initial Study
V1. REFERENCES
I Biological Assessment for the Los Olivos Subdivision. Prepared by Gallaway Consulting
March 2006.
2. Butte County Air Quality Management District Indirect Source Review Guidelines
3. Butte County Interim Farmland Map of 2004. Prepared by the California Department of
Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, July, 2005.
4. City of Oroville Environmental Review Guidelines
5. City of Oroville Fire Department Standard of Coverage Study
http://www.cityoforoville.org/coverstandards.html
6. City of Oroville General Plan
7. City of Oroville General Plan Diagram
8. City of Oroville Zoning Code
9. City of Oroville Zoning Map
10. Wetlands Delineation prepared by Gallaway Consulting March 2006
11. Correspondence regarding the Transportation Impact Study from Caltrans, District 3.
12. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for Cearalo Development Prepared by
Holdredge & Kull Geotechnical Cousultants, May 2005.
13. Ruddy Creek Residential Transportation Analysis. Prepared by Lumos & Associates, dated
August 8, 2006.
14. USGS Oroville, California 7.5' Series Quad, 1976
CONSULTED AGENCIES
N Butte Co ALUC ❑ CA Dept Conservation Feather River Rec & Parks Dist
Z Butte Cc Air Quality M CA Dept Fish and Game ❑ LOPUD
❑ Butte Co Assoc of Gov ❑ CA Dept Water Resources ❑ SFWP
❑ Butte Co Ag Comm Z CA Regional Water Quality Z Thermalito Irrigation Dist
❑ Butte Co Assessor Z CA Dept Transportation Z SC-OR
❑ Butte Co Env Health Z US Army Corps ❑ Oroville Elementary
❑ Butte Co Planning Dept ❑ US Fish and Wildlife Z Oroville High School
IN Butte Co Public Works ❑ SBC Pacific Bell ❑ Palermo Union School Dist
❑ Butte Cc Farm Bureau Z PG&E ❑ Thermalito Union School Dist
Z Butte LAFCo ❑ El Media Fire District ❑ Union Pacific Railroad
City of Oroville Los Olivos TSM & Rezone
May, 2008 Page 59 Initial Study