HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report_PacketWGRD15-0002 _CEQA15-0002 Stephen Burgess Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 1 of 10
BUTTE COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AGENDA REPORT
Applicant/Owner: Stephen Burgess
File: PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002
APN: 058-160-005
Parcel Size: +77.29 acres
Supervisor District: 1
General Plan: Foothill Residential
Zoning: FR-40 (Foothill Residential, 40-acre minimum parcel size)
Zone Date: November 6, 2012
Location: East of the west branch of the
Feather River, approximately 1,400 feet east of the incorporated Town of Paradise; located on both sides of Jordan Hill Road
approximately 2.0 miles northwesterly of the
Concow Rd. / Pinkston Canyon Rd.
intersection
Request: A grading permit is requested for a grading operation that disturbed approximately three acres of the 77.29-acre
property, for the purposes of leveling and
terracing land for installation of a garden
Planner: Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner
Exhibits:
A. Resolution of Approval with findings
and conditions;
B. Conditions of Approval
C. Vicinity Map and General Plan/Zoning Map D. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Stephen Burgess requests approval of a Grading Permit pursuant to Butte County Code Chapter
13, Article I for a grading operation that disturbed three acres of a 77.29+-acre property for the purpose of leveling and terracing land for the installation of a garden. The grading permit follows
code enforcement action PWCE13-0018 for grading without permit. Site-specific Erosion and
Sediment Control measures are a part of the proposed grading plan, and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) meeting the requirements of the State Department of Transportation (CalTrans)
standard specifications, March 2003 were installed on-site and are incorporated into the project description. The Grading Plan identifies BMP’s of silt fencing, hydroseeding, and straw mulch to
be in place until bare soil is covered. A Grading plan note states “The roads identified on this
grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted structures at this time. Should the
property owner desire to use them for such access the road being used for that access shall be
improved to the minimum acceptable standard, in effect at the time of such request, as required by Butte County Fire (Cal Fire) and the Butte County Public Works Department. The improvements
shall be done under a subsequent grading permit to be issued at that time.”
The project is consistent with the site’s FR-40 zone, Foothill Residential General Plan designation
and other goals and policies of the General Plan. The Public Works Director recommends that the
grading permit be approved. Staff recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA and adoption of the Resolution approving PWGRD15-0002 and CEQA15-0002
for Stephen Burgess, subject to the findings and conditions.
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 2 of 10
PROJECT SETTING:
• The parcel is located on a ridgeline east of the west branch of the Feather River,
approximately 1,400 feet east of the incorporated Town of Paradise and approximately 950 feet from the Town of Paradise’s sphere of influence. The property is located on both sides of Jordan Hill Road approximately 2.0 miles northwesterly of the Concow Rd. / Pinkston
Canyon Rd. intersection.
• Grading activities were conducted in March, 2013 using a backhoe. Vegetative clearing occurred at four locations on the property; grading for terraces occurred at three locations
on the subject property. Grading disturbed approximately three acres of the site and ended
in April, 2013. By the end of September, 2013, erosion control measures were installed.
The owner has proposed BMPs to control erosion, which he is required to maintain, and which are incorporated as Conservation Measure CM#1 below.
• A map note on the grading permit, incorporated as Conservation Measure #2, states: “The
roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted
structures at this time. Should the property owner desire to use them for such access the road being used for that access shall be improved to the minimum acceptable standard, in
effect at the time of such request, as required by Butte County Fire (Cal Fire) and the Butte
County Public Works Department. The improvements shall be done under a subsequent
grading permit to be issued at that time.”
• The property ranges in elevation from approximately 1,250 to 1975 feet. Currently, there
is a shed located on the property. With the exception of a driveway, the shed and grading,
terracing, and clearing activities to date, the project site is undeveloped.
• The project site is located in an ecotone comprised of transitional elements from the valley foothill hardwood-conifer (i.e., blue oak -foothill pine, per Holland, R.F., 1986), and
montane hardwood-conifer communities.
• Surrounding parcels vary in size from approximately 15 to 160 acres. Properties within the project vicinity are zoned Foothill Residential 40-acre minimum parcel size, and
Agriculture 160-acre minimum parcel size. Surrounding land uses include the west branch
of the Feather River to the west, and rural residences and vacant land to the north, east and
south.
• A residence is located approximately 250 feet north of the northern property line.
Residences are located approximately 700 feet south of the southern property line.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant requests approval of a Grading Permit pursuant to Butte County Code Chapter 13,
Article I for a grading operation that disturbed three acres of a 77.29+-acre property for the
purposes of access and leveling land for the installation of a garden or similar use. The grading
permit follows code enforcement action PWCE13-0018, grading without permit. Grading Plans,
to remedy the code enforcement action, are located at
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 3 of 10
http://dspermits.buttecounty.net/Search/permit.aspx and then by entering project number
PWGRD15-0002.
No additional grading is anticipated. Past actions authorized by the grading permit include:
1. Grading of the land; the extent of grading, clearing, and terracing activities comprise
approximately three acres. The applicant has accepted County estimates of cut and fill of
approximately 5,750 cubic yards for the terraces (work has been completed) and 4,495
cubic yard of material for roads (to be completed after approval of grading permit).
2. The maximum height of cut is approximately 4 feet and fill is 2 feet.
3. The maximum slope of the work site is Cuts (H:V) 2:1 maximum, Fills 2:1 maximum.
Two map notes were found critical to avoiding significant environmental effects associated with the grading permit, and are reiterated as conservation measures on the grading permit. Conservation Measure #1: Site-specific Erosion and Sediment Control measures are specified by the proposed grading plan, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) meeting the requirements of the State Department of Transportation (CalTrans) standard specifications, March 2003 were installed on-site. The Grading Plan identifies BMP’s of silt fencing, hydroseeding, and straw mulch to be in place until bare soil is covered. Conservation Measure #2: Since roads will not be improved to County standard with PWGRD15-
0002, development is not authorized with this grading permit. Roads must be permitted and
improved to county standards prior to development on the project site. ANALYSIS
General Plan and Zoning Consistency The project site is designated Foothill Residential and zoned FR-40. Grading activity to terrace
the site is not inconsistent with the GP designation or site zoning, but is guided by General Plan
goals and policies, including but not limited to the following:
Goal COS-7 Conserve and enhance habitat for protected species and sensitive
biological communities.
Policies
COS-P7.7 Construction barrier fencing shall be installed around sensitive resources on or
adjacent to construction sites. Fencing shall be installed prior to construction activities and maintained throughout the construction period.*
No additional grading will be undertaken after approval of the grading permit.
No impact to sensitive resources will result.
Goal COS-8 Maintain and promote native vegetation.
Policies
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 4 of 10
COS-P8.1 Native plant species shall be protected and planting and regeneration of native
plant species shall be encouraged, wherever possible, in undisturbed portions of
development sites. COS-P8.4 Introduction or spread of invasive plant species during construction of
development projects shall be avoided by minimizing surface disturbance; seeding and
mulching disturbed areas with certified weed-free native mixes; and using native,
noninvasive species in erosion control plantings.*
Mitigation Measure MM1 requires that a map note on page 17 of the grading plans, items
3 and 14. shall be modified to delete any reference to nonnative species and shall instead
state, “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for used for revegetating the site.” A note on page 1 of 17 of the grading plans stating “Hydroseed application rate not less than 40 lbs. per acre” shall also be modified to add “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for
used for revegetation of the site.” Since no additional grading is anticipated after approval
of the grading permit, impacts to biological resources will not be substantial.
Criteria for Approval
Chapter 13 of Butte County Code, Section 13-1 contains the following stated purpose for the County Grading permit and standards. Section 13-14 contains the criteria for approval of the
grading permit by the Zoning Administrator.
13-1 Purpose. Butte County is noted for its scenic natural beauty, for its streams, creeks,
and vernal pools, for its diversity of vegetation including rare and endangered plant species, for its fish and other wildlife, and for its sources of water. All of the said resources are
subject to serious damage by improper and uncontrolled grading, including, but not limited
to, erosion and siltation jeopardizing or destroying fish and other wildlife and the disruption
or contamination of sources of water being used for domestic and other purposes.
The purpose of this article is the control of erosion and siltation, the enhancement of slope
stability, the protection of said resources and the prevention of related environmental
damage by establishing standards and requiring permits for grading.
The Grading permit is consistent with the purpose of Chapter 13 Grading. The grading plan proposes a stable site layout, erosion and siltation control measures, a re-vegetation strategy, and
grading consistent with standards contained in Chapter 13. The Department of Public Works has
forwarded the Grading Plans for approval.
13-14 Hearing. (a) Timeframe for hearing. Upon receipt of the director's report, the zoning administrator
shall, in the same manner as provided for in section 24-260 of Chapter 24 of this Code,
schedule a public hearing within forty-five (45) days of receiving the director's report.
(b) Determination by the zoning administrator.
(1) The zoning administrator may consider and act upon grading permit applications that are minor and non-controversial in nature. Grading applications approved by the
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 5 of 10
zoning administrator must generally meet the following criteria: grading will not
adversely affect sensitive human receptors, sensitive biological resources, or cultural
resources.
(2) The zoning administrator may forward grading applications to the planning commission for consideration and action, including any grading applications
recommended by the director for consideration by the planning commission
(3) The determination of the zoning administrator shall be final unless a written appeal
is filed in the same manner as provided in section 24-267 of Chapter 24 of this Code.
An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared for the project which
concluded that grading associated with PWGRD15-0002 will not have a significant impact on
residents, biological resources, or cultural resources with mitigation measures proposed in the
IS/MND and reflected in the conditions of approval for the project. Mitigation measures MM1 and MM2 require the following:
4. Mitigation Measure MM1 (Map Notes Regarding Native Seed Mix) A map note on page 17 of the grading plans, items 3 and 14. shall be modified to delete any
reference to nonnative species and shall instead state, “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for used for revegetating the site”… (sic) 5. Mitigation Measure MM2 (Cultural Resources): Should grading activities reveal the presence of prehistoric or historic cultural resources (i.e.,
artifact concentrations, including arrowheads, and other stone tools or chipping debris, cans, glass, etc.; structural remains; human skeletal remains) work within 50 feet of the find shall immediately cease until a qualified professional archaeologist can be consulted to evaluate the find and implement appropriate mitigation procedures…(sic)
For the full text of the mitigation measures, please see Exhibit B, Conditions of Approval.
PUBLIC COMMENT and LOCAL AGENCY REVIEW
No Comments were received prior to publication of this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared for the project. See
Exhibit D. As mentioned above, two Conservation Measures (CM1 and CM2) were incorporated
into the project description evaluated in the IS/MND as they were critical for minimizing potential effects to the environment,
Even with consideration of CM1 and CM2, an impact was identified to Biological Resources: the
spread of non-native plant species through use of non-native seed mix, potential impacts to oak
woodlands, and potential impacts to sensitive plant species. These impacts were found to be less than significant with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures MM1, along with CM1 and CM2.
Conservation measures and mitigation measures are included as conditions of approval on the
project. See Exhibit B, Conditions of Approval.
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 6 of 10
EXHIBIT A BUTTE COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DECISION ZDN16-00__
GRADING PERMIT PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002
Request to permit grading activities encompassing approximately three acres of a 77.29+ acre site,
to authorize approximately 5750 cubic yards of earthwork for creation of terraces (work has been
completed).
APN: 058-160-005
April 27, 2016
I. The Zoning Administrator has considered the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopts the
Mitigated Negative Declaration subject to the following findings: A. An Initial Study (CEQA15-0002) was completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act. Said Study identified potentially significant
environmental effects and included a mitigation measure that would mitigate such
effects below significant levels.
B. The Zoning Administrator has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all comments received during the review process.
C. On the basis of the whole record before the Zoning Administrator, including the
Initial Study and any comments received, there is no substantial evidence that the
PWGRD15-0002 for Stephen Burgess would have a significant impact on the environment.
D. The custodian of the record is the Land Development Division of the Public Works
Department. The location of the record is 7 County Center Drive, Oroville CA
95965.
E. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of Butte County, which is the Lead Agency.
II. Finds that the collection of fees pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 and 14
CCR 753.5 is required prior to filing a Notice of Determination for the project, unless
the project proponent provides verification from the California Department of Fish and
Game that the project is exempt from the fee requirement. If a required fee is not paid for the project, the project will not be operative, vested or final and any local permits issued for the project will be invalid (Section 711.4 (c) (3)).
III. The Zoning Administrator approves Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 for Stephen
Burgess on a 77.29+ acre site, to authorize approximately 5750 cubic yards of
earthwork to create terraces, which have already been completed, as shown on the grading plans and subject to the following findings and the conditions found in Exhibit
“B”
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 7 of 10
A. Approval of this project will not be detrimental to the general health, safety and
welfare of the public because the measures incorporated into the project plans will
insure that any potential impacts will not adversely affect the surrounding area.
B. The Director of Public Works has reviewed the project, and has determined that the Grading Plan and Erosion Control Plan conforms the standards as set forth in
Chapter 13, Article 1 of the Butte County Code.
Approved By: ______________________, Zoning Administrator
Date:________________
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 8 of 10
EXHIBIT B
Conditions of Approval:
Planning Division
1. All grading activities shall be in conformance with the approved grading and erosion control plans on file with the County of Butte. 2. Conservation Measure CM1 (Stormwater BMPs) Conservation Measure #1 is a list of BMPs (from page 17 of 17 of grading plans), as amended by these conditions of approval:
1. All erosion control measures shall conform to Caltrans standards and the erosion
control plans shown on the construction drawings.
2. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during
construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
3. All mulch may be straw or rice. A certified weed-free native mix shall be for
used for revegetating the site. (Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1)
4. All sandbags may be gravel or sand filled bags unless specified different.
5. All slopes greater than 10% and less than 50% that are free of vegetation shall
have mulch spread prior to a 30% chance of rain.
(No item 6. was provided on plans)
7. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces
to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least twice daily,
preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All clearing, grading,
earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged
over 1 hour.
8. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of
ingress/egress by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock
with a minimum depth of 6" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil
material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed on a
daily basis.
9. The contractor may provide catch basin filters to help remove sediments, oil and
grease and heavy metals from storm water runoff.
10. All on site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 9 of 10
11. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
(No item 12 was provided on plan)
13. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 3 months
shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
14. Hydroseeding to be applied to per State standard specifications sections 20-2.06 and
20-3.03. All seeds shall be in conformance with the California State Seed Law of the Department of Agriculture. Each seed bag shall be delivered to the site sealed and clearly marked as to species, purity, percent germination, dealer's guarantee, and dates of test.
All legume Seed shall be pellet-inoculated at a rate of 2 kg of inoculant per 100kg of seed
(2-lb inoculant per 100-lb seed), per standard specifications section 20-2.10.
Seed – application rate: 40 lbs./acre A certified weed-free
native mix shall be for used for revegetating the site.
Fiber – 100% wood fiber: 1,000 lbs./acre
(Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1)
15. Area treated with temporary soil stabilization shall be maintained to provide adequate erosion control and compliance shall be in accordance with standard specifications
section 6-1.07. Temporary soil stabilization shall be reapplied or replaced on exposed
soils when area becomes exposed or exhibits visible erosion. 3. Map Note Conservation Measure CM2 (Development requires road improvement) The roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any
permitted structures at this time. Should the property owner desire to use them for such
access the road being used for that access shall be improved to the minimum acceptable
standard, in effect at the time of such request, as required by Butte County Fire (Cal Fire) and the Butte County Public Works Department. The improvements shall be done under a subsequent grading permit to be issued at that time.
6. Mitigation Measure MM1 (Map Notes Regarding Native Seed Mix) A map note on page 17 of the grading plans, items 3 and 14. shall be modified to delete
any reference to nonnative species and shall instead state, “A certified weed-free native
mix shall be for used for revegetating the site.” A note on page 1 of 17 of the grading
plans stating “Hydroseed application rate not less than 40 lbs. per acre” shall also be modified to add “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for used for revegetation of the site.”
Plan Requirements: Grading plans shall be edited to require the use a certified weed-
free native seed mix for revegetating the site. Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be satisfied prior final acceptance of the grading permit, and prior to final grading activity. Monitoring: The Butte County Department of Development Services and Department of
Public Works shall ensure that prior to final acceptance of the grading permit; a note will
be placed on the grading plans requiring that a certified weed-free native seed mix be
used for revegetation of the site.
Butte County Department of Development Services
August 10, 2016 Agenda Report for PWGRD15-0002 & CEQA15-0002 for Stephen Burgess Page 10 of 10
7. Mitigation Measure MM2 (Cultural Resources):
Should grading activities reveal the presence of prehistoric or historic cultural resources
(i.e., artifact concentrations, including arrowheads, and other stone tools or chipping debris, cans, glass, etc.; structural remains; human skeletal remains) work within 50 feet of the find shall immediately cease until a qualified professional archaeologist can be
consulted to evaluate the find and implement appropriate mitigation procedures. Should
human skeletal remains be encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of any human remains find immediately.
If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the
opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the disposition of the remains.
Plan Requirements: This measure shall be in effect during all building and site
development plans.
Timing: During grading activities, site preparation and construction.
Monitoring: The Development Services Department will monitor implementation of
this mitigation measure. The developer shall be responsible for notifying the Department
of Development Services and a qualified archaeologist in the event cultural resources are
discovered. The Department of Development Services shall coordinate with the developer and appropriate authorities to avoid damage to cultural resources and determine appropriate action.
Public Works
8. Comply with approved grading and drainage improvement plans and the terms of the
grading permit. 9. Comply with approved erosion and sediment control plans and the terms of the grading
permit.
10. Prior to grading, a construction storm water permit will be required by the State Water
Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing,
excavation, filling, and grading) of one or more acres. The permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction. If a construction storm
water permit is required, place a note on an additional map sheet that states: “The
development of this parcel/final map required a construction storm water permit.
Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are
part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. Development of individual lots may require an additional permit(s).”
Environmental Health Division -No conditions
Note: Changes after public circulation of the document are shown
in underline and strikethrough.
Circulated: July 6 to August 5, 2016
Revised: July 26, 2016
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
BUTTE COUNTY
INITIAL STUDY AND PROPOSED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
(CEQA15-0002)
FOR THE
STEPHEN BURGESS GRADING PERMIT PWGRD15-0002
(APN # 058-160-005)
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 1
1.0 Project Information
1. Project Title: Stephen Burgess Grading Permit Application PWGRD15-0002 /
CEQA15-0002
2. Lead Agency: Butte County Department of Public Works
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965 (530) 538-7266
3. Contact Person: Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner (530) 538-6573
4. Project Applicant: Stephen Burgess
PO Box 4169 Chico, CA 95927
5. Project Location: Figure 1 Location Map
APN 058-160-005 located on Jordan Hill Road east of the Town of Paradise, California. Affected area is approximately three acres on a
77.29+acre parcel.
6. General Plan Designation: Foothill Residential
7. Zoning: FR-40 (Foothill Residential, 40-acre minimum parcel size)
8. Project Description:
The applicant requests approval of a Grading Permit pursuant to Butte County Code Chapter 13, Article I for a grading operation that disturbed three acres of a 77.29+-acre property for the purposes of access and
leveling land for the installation of a garden or similar use. The grading permit follows code enforcement
action PWCE13-0018, for grading without permit. Grading Plans, to remedy the code enforcement action, are located at http://dspermits.buttecounty.net/Search/permit.aspx and then by entering project number
PWGRD15-0002.
Actions authorized by the grading permit include:
1. Grading of the land, the extent of grading, clearing, and terracing activities comprise approximately
three acres. The applicant has accepted County estimates of cut and fill of approximately 5750 cubic yards for the terraces (work has been completed.
2. The maximum height of cut is approximately 4 feet and fill is 2 feet.
3. The maximum slope of the work site is Cuts (H:V) 2:1 maximum, Fills 2:1 maximum.
4. Site-specific Erosion and Sediment Control measures are a part of the proposed grading plan, and
Best Management Practices (BMPs) meeting the requirements of the State Department of Transportation (CalTrans) standard specifications, March 2003 were installed on-site and are incorporated into the project description. The Grading Plan identifies BMP’s of silt fencing,
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2
hydroseeding, and straw mulch to be in place until bare soil is covered. The following BMPs are
proposed to avoid water quality impacts off-site as the result of a storm event.
Conservation Measures Incorporated into the Project Description Conservation Measure CM1 (Stormwater BMPs) Conservation Measure CM1 is a list of BMPs (from page 17 of 17 of grading plans):
1. All erosion control measures shall conform to Caltrans standards and the erosion control plans shown on the construction drawings.
2. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
3. All mulch may be straw or rice. (Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM – See Biological Resources Section)
4. All sandbags may be gravel or sand filled bags unless specified different.
5. All slopes greater than 10% and less than 50% that are free of vegetation shall have mulch spread prior to a 30% chance of rain.
(No item 6. was provided on plans) 7. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces to prevent the
transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning
and after work is done for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities
shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
8. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress by
construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a minimum depth of 6" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil material carried onto street surfaces
by construction equipment shall be removed on a daily basis. 9. The contractor may provide catch basin filters to help remove sediments, oil and grease and
heavy metals from storm water runoff.
10. All on site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically
stabilized. 11. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
(No item 12 was provided on plan)
13. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 3 months shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
14. Hydroseeding to be applied to per State standard specifications sections 20-2.06 and 20-3.03. All seeds shall be in conformance with the California State Seed Law of the Department of
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 3
Agriculture. Each seed bag shall be delivered to the site sealed and clearly marked as to species,
purity, percent germination, dealer's guarantee, and dates of test. All legume seed shall be pellet-
inoculated at a rate of 2 kg of inoculant per 100kg of seed (2-lb inoculant per 100-lb seed), per standard specifications section 20-2.10.
Seed – application rate: 40 lbs./acre
Fiber – 100% wood fiber: 1,000 lbs./acre
(Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1 – See Biological Resources Section) 15. Area treated with temporary soil stabilization shall be maintained to provide adequate erosion
control and compliance shall be in accordance with standard specifications section 6-1.07. Temporary soil stabilization shall be reapplied or replaced on exposed soils when area becomes exposed or exhibits visible erosion.
A second map note is incorporated into the project description, as shown below, because roads will not be improved to County standards. Roads must be permitted and improved to county standards prior to
development. Map Note Conservation Measure CM2 (Development requires road improvement) The roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted structures
at this time. Should the property owner desire to use them for such access the road being used for that
access shall be improved to the minimum acceptable standard, in effect at the time of such request, as required by Butte County Fire (Cal Fire) and the Butte County Public Works Department. The
improvements shall be done under a subsequent grading permit to be issued at that time.”
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 4
9. Environmental Setting:
The parcel is located on a ridgeline east of the west branch of the Feather River, approximately 1,400 feet
east of the incorporated Town of Paradise and approximately 950 feet from the Town of Paradise’s sphere of influence. The property can be accessed from SR 70 via Pinkston Canyon Rd to Concow Rd to Jordan
Hill Rd. The property is located on both sides of Jordan Hill Road approximately 2.0 miles northwesterly
of the Concow Rd. / Pinkston Canyon Rd. intersection. The property ranges in elevation from approximately 1,250 to 1,975 feet. Currently, there is a shed located on the property.
Grading activities were conducted in March 2013 using a backhoe. Vegetative clearing occurred at four locations on the property; grading for terraces occurred at three locations on the subject property. Grading ended in April 2013, and by the end of September 2013, erosion control measures were installed. The
owner has proposed BMPs to control erosion, which he is required to maintain, and which are incorporated as Conservation Measure CM#1 below. Maintenance of the BMP’s may involve additional minor soil disturbance over time.
The grading permit does not propose to improve roads to County standards, and therefore, the grading permit will not enable site development. A map note on the grading permit, incorporated as Conservation
Measure #2, states: “The roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted structures at this time. Should the property owner desire to use them for such access the road
being used for that access shall be improved to the minimum acceptable standard, in effect at the time of
such request, as required by Butte County Fire (Cal Fire) and the Butte County Public Works Department.
The improvements shall be done under a subsequent grading permit to be issued at that time.” The area in
which grading took place encompasses three acres of the 77.29-acre parcel.
General Plan figure COS-2 Vegetative Communities and Wildlife Areas identifies oak woodlands on about one-quarter of the parcel. The Montane Hardwood habitat type is shown at the northwestern corner of the
property and the most of the parcel’s western slope. The Blue Oak – Foothill Pine habitat type is identified
on the southern quadrant of the eastern slope. Roughly the eastern half of the parcel is located in the Winter and Critical Winter Deer Herd Area as shown in Figure 4 of the Biological Resources section of this study
(Figure COS-4, Butte County General Plan). The parcel is also situated within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) for fire protection, and it is identified as a ‘Very High’ Fire Hazard Area.
10. Surrounding Land Uses:
Surrounding parcels vary in size from approximately 15 to 160 acres. Properties within the project vicinity are zoned Foothill Residential 40-acre minimum parcel size, and Agriculture 160-acre minimum parcel
size. Surrounding land uses include the west branch of the Feather River to the west, and rural residences
and vacant land to the north, east and south.
A residence is located approximately 250 feet north of the northern property line. Residences are located
approximately 700 feet south of the southern property line.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 5
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
The following agencies and/or Butte County Departments may be responsible for approvals or review of
the project:
[ ] Environmental Health [X] Public Works [ ] Building Manager
[ ] BCAG [ ] ALUC [ ] LAFCo
[X] Air Quality Management [ ] City of Chico [ ] City of Biggs
[ ] City of Gridley [ ] City of Oroville [X] Town of Paradise
[ ] CA Department of Forestry [ ] CalTrans (Traffic) [ ] Central Reg. Water Quality
[ ] Department of Conservation [ ] Dept. of Fish and Game [ ] Highway Patrol
[ ] Army Corps of Engineers [ ] National Marine Fisheries Service [ ] US Fish & Wildlife Service
[X] Butte County Fire Department/CalFire [X] State Water Quality Control Board
CEQA Guidance
An initial study is conducted by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, an EIR must be prepared if an initial study indicates that the proposed project under review may have a potentially significant impact on the
environment. A Negative Declaration may be prepared instead, if the lead agency prepares a written statement describing the reasons why the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore, why it does not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section
15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a Negative Declaration shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when:
(a) The initial study shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the
agency, that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, or
(b) The initial study identifies potentially significant effects, but:
(1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur, and
(2) There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.
If revisions are adopted in the proposed project in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(b), a negative declaration is prepared.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 6
Figure 1, Aerial Photo
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 May 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 7
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 May 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 8
Figure 2 Zoning Map
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 May 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 9
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 May 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 10
Figure 3 Index (Excerpt from) Grading Plan
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 11
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 12
2.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project; however, with the
incorporation of mitigation measures, “potentially significant impacts are reduced to less than significant level by the project” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15382).
Aesthetics Agricultural/Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards/Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population & Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
3.0 Determination
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 by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures
based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
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.
Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner
_________________________________
Date
Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager
__________________________________
Date
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 13
4.0 Environmental Checklist
1. Aesthetics
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway? X
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site/surroundings? X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X
Setting
General Plan Figures COS-7, COS-8, and COS-9 depict identified scenic resources in Butte County.
Significant scenic resources identified by the General plan are displayed in General Plan Figure COS-7 and are comprised of land-based resources (Butte Creek Canyon, Sacramento River National Wildlife Refuge, Table
Mountain, and Feather Falls Scenic Area) and water-based resources (Philbrook Reservoir, Lake Oroville,
Thermalito Afterbay, and Lake Wyandotte).
Although there are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the County, State Route 70 (SR70) north
of the intersection with State Route 149 (SR149) is included in the California Scenic Highway Program and is considered an eligible State Scenic Highway. SR70 through the Feather River Canyon and a portion of State
Route 32 (SR32) north of Forest Ranch are recognized as County Scenic Highways.
A Scenic Highway Overlay Zone is applied to an area extended 350 linear feet from the centerline of scenic
routes identified in COS-9, including portions of SR 32 north of Chico, Portions of SR70 north of the SR149 intersection, the Skyway, southern portions of SR191 and Pentz Road, portions of SR162 along Lake Oroville, and portions of Forbestown Road and Lumpkin Road.
Discussion
A scenic vista is defined as viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the
benefit of the general public. The project site consists of a blue oak-foothill pine woodland habitat
community, which is dominated by an understory of mixed chaparral composed of Common manzanita, Whiteleaf manzanita, and scrub oak, with associated species such as toyon, California buckeye, and poison
oak. The total parcel encompasses 77.29 acres, however, for the purpose of the Grading Permit, the total
area affected by grading, leveling and terracing activities is approximately three acres. The initial grading, leveling, and terracing operation involved minimal removal of trees and brush and disturbance to the soil
(refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). The remaining 74.29-acre portion of the property has not been affected by grading and terracing activities. No additional grading is anticipated at this time.
a) Less Than Significant. There are no water features or unique geologic features, which are
considered local scenic resources. The graded area cannot be viewed from adjacent roadways or
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 14
parcels (excepting Jordan Hill Road as it traverses the site); therefore, grading activities will have
a less than significant impact on a scenic vista and would not substantially degrade the visual
character of the site and surroundings.
b) No Impact. The project site is located on either side of Jordan Hill Road, east of Paradise. There
are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in Butte County; SR 70 north of the intersection
with Highway 149 is a county designated scenic highway and is considered an eligible State scenic highway. The property is outside these designated areas and is not visible from SR 70. Therefore,
grading activities would have no impact to scenic resources within a designated County scenic highway.
c) Less Than Significant. Refer to the discussion under Item a) above.
d) No Impact. The proposed project would not result in the establishment of a new light source (i.e. residential lighting, streetlights and so forth). Grading activities would not result in a new significant source of lighting, nor would it affect nighttime views in the area.
2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide
Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the CA Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 1220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
X
Setting The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California Resources Agency issued an
Important Farmlands Map for Butte County identifying Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Grazing land. The map is maintained by the State of CA Department of
Conservation and does not designate the subject property as containing any important farmland designations
Various soil types exists onsite. On the western slope of the project site, soils are identified as Griffgulch-Surnuf-Spine Taxadjunct Complex 50 to 70 percent slopes and Typic Haploxeralfs Magnesic-Earlal-
Cerpone-Rock Outcrop complex, 50 to 80 percent slope. At the top of the western slope, near the center of the site, the soils are Paradiso Loam 15 to 30 percent and Paradiso Loam 2 to 15 percent. On the eastern
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 15
slope of the site are Griffgulch Surnuf Complex 15 to 30 percent and Millerridge Boxrobber Complex 30
to 50 percent slopes.
Discussion
a,b) No Impact. The proposed project is the grading and leveling of land to accommodate the
installation of an organic garden or similar use. It is anticipated that horticultural activities will
occur on site in the future.
The State of California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmlands Map does not identify
important farmlands on the project site; rather, it identifies the site as ‘Other Land.’ Additionally, the soils on site are not prime soils, and are designated primarily for rural single-family use. A review of the Butte County General Plan 2030 Land Use Map identifies the property as being
located within an area designated as Foothill Residential (FR-40), 40-acre minimum parcel size. Foothill residential zoning designation allows single-family dwellings at rural densities of 1 to 40 acres per dwelling unit, depending on the zoning.
The site is not important farmland and does not occur on prime agricultural soils; therefore, grading activities would not convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to a non-
agricultural use.
c,d) Less Than Significant. As stated under Item a) above, the site is designated as Foothill Residential
and a zoning designation as FR-40. The project would not result in the rezoning of forest land or
timberland zoned for Timberland production. The project involves the grading and terracing of a three-acre area of a 77.29+-acre site within montane hardwood-conifer and mixed chaparral habitat.
Grading would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use or
non-agricultural use. Refer to Section 4, Biological Resources, Item b) further below for a description of vegetation communities in the project area and on the project site.
e) No Impact. As stated under Item a) above, grading activities would not convert Farmland (Prime,
Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Grading activities will not affect agriculturally-designated
property to the west due to the large size of the parcels and low development potential.
3. Air Quality
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation? X
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including emissions that exceed
X
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 16
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? X
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X
Discussion
Approximately three acres of the site have been cleared of vegetation and/or have already been graded.
Most grading activities are already complete, however, driveway excavation will move approximately 4,495 cubic yards of material after approval of the grading permit, to achieve slopes consistent with Butte
County Code, as shown on sheets 1 and 16 of the grading plans dated 12-15-2014.
The proposed grading plan includes erosion control measures that also serve to reduce dust and particulate matter associated with grading activities, detailed in Conservation Measure CM#1, shown in the project
description in section 1.8. The grading plans contain erosion control measures such as revegetation of the site within three months of the site being inactive and dust control measures such as applying water, and ceasing operation when winds exceed 15 miles per hour averaged over one hour. While these measures
will reduce particulate dust onsite, they differ from Best Practices to Minimize Air Quality and GHG Impacts in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook Guidelines For Assessing Air Quality And Greenhouse Gas Impacts For Projects Subject To CEQA Review, or “BCAQMD Handbook” (October 23, 2014). Best
Practices include ceasing operations whenever winds exceed 15 miles per hour, and revegetation of the site within 14 days of the site being inactive. Standard practices also include posting a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints, amongst other practices not
included in the current map note.
The project will not result in construction or development and will therefore not increase ongoing
operational emissions.
a) Less Than Significant. The property is located in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB), which is divided into two planning sections. Butte County belongs to the Northern Sacramento Valley
Air Basin (NSVAB). The NSVAB has been categorized as “moderately” non-attainment for ozone
and particulate matter.
The County is under the jurisdiction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District
(BCAQMD), a regional agency responsible for regulating sources of air pollution in Butte County.
The BCAQMD is responsible for the preparation of plans for the attainment and maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations for
sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources of air pollution.
The Air Pollution Control Districts and Air Quality Management Districts (Districts) for the counties located in the northern portion of the Sacramento Valley together compromise the
Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area (NSVPA). The NSVPA Districts have committed to jointly prepare and adopt a uniform air quality attainment plan for the purpose of achieving and maintaining healthful air quality throughout the air basin. This triennial update of the NSVPA Air
Quality Attainment Plan (Plan) addresses the progress made in implementing the 2009 Plan and
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 17
proposes modifications to the strategies necessary to attain the California ambient air quality
standard for the 8-hour ozone at the earliest practicable date. The 2012 Plan identifies those portions
of the NSVPA designated as “non-attainment” for the State ambient air quality standards and discusses the health effects related to the various air pollutants. The Plan identifies the air pollution
problems to be addressed on as many fronts as possible in order to make the region a healthier place
to live now and in the future. Like the 2006 and 2009 Plans, the 2012 Plan focuses on the adoption and implementation of control measures for stationary sources, area wide sources, and indirect
sources, and addresses public education and information programs (NSVPA Air Quality Attainment Plan, pg. 3). The scope of proposed grading is small, approximately three acres in size, in a rural environment, with no operational emissions because no construction or development will
accompany the grading. The project will therefore not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an
applicable air quality plan.
b) Less Than Significant. The BCAQMD uses general screening criteria to determine the type and
scope of projects requiring an air quality assessment and/or mitigation. The screening criteria assumes that the projects include best practices for controlling dust and minimizing emissions from
construction equipment for all discretionary projects. Since PWGRD15-0002 does not include
BCAQMD best practices for controlling dust or emissions from construction equipment, these best practices are required as mitigation on the project. With Mitigation Measures MM1 and MM2, the
project will control dust and minimize construction equipment emissions, respectively, consistent with assumptions in the BCAQMD handbook for all discretionary projects.
The BCAMD screening criteria for additional air quality modeling is based on project size and is
focused primarily on the indirect emissions (i.e., motor vehicles, energy use) associated with development. The project will not enable development of the site, as roads to County standards are not proposed. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial indirect emissions from vehicles.
Due to the relatively limited scale of grading required, approximately three acres, construction equipment-related emissions would also be below District emission thresholds for additional modeling. Grading will not violate State or Federal air quality standards or contribute to an existing
air quality violation in the basin as only minor amounts of material has been, and will be moved. Therefore, grading would not result in locally elevated levels of regulated air emissions in close
proximity to sensitive receptors and would not require additional air quality modeling.
c) The project consists of grading and terracing three acres of land. Map notes on the grading permit incorporate dust suppression measures to control erosion associated with future grading activities.
However, these measures are not consistent with the BCAQMD Standard Mitigation Measures for
the reduction of dust and particulate matter as per Section 6.3 of the BCAQMD Handbook. Standard practices from the BCAQMD Handbook are incorporated as Mitigation Measure MM1
below to ensure the site will comply with current BCAQMD best practices as necessary to reduce air quality impacts consistent with the County’s CEQA Handbook. With MM1 and MM2, grading activities do not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;
therefore, there this is a less than significant impact.
d) Less Than Significant. Sensitive populations (i.e., children, senior citizens and acutely or chronically ill people) are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than are the general
population. Land uses considered sensitive receptors typically include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, hospitals, convalescent homes, and retirement homes. The surrounding area is designated as FR-40, suggesting larger adjacent parcel sizes. The nearest
residence is located approximately 250 feet north of the northern property line. Residences are located approximately 700 feet south of the southern property line. Grading activities are
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 18
temporary, and a Dust Suppression Mitigation Measures (MM#1) would be implemented as part
of future grading work, thereby minimizing dust emissions. Therefore, this is a less than significant
impact.
e) No Impact. Grading activities would not result in the creation of objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people.
4. Biological Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
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?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
X
d) 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?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
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?
X
g) A reduction in the numbers, a restriction in the range, or an impact to the critical habitat of any
unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals?
X
h) A reduction in the diversity or numbers of animals
onsite (including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish or invertebrates)? X
i) A deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat
(for foraging, breeding, roosting, nesting, etc.)? X
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 19
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
j) Introduction of barriers to movement of any resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species? X
k) Introduction of any factors (light, fencing, noise, human presence and/or domestic animals) which could hinder the normal activities of wildlife? X
Setting
Oak woodlands are scattered throughout the County but are concentrated in the transition area between the lower valley and higher elevations. Based on General Plan Figure COS-2, Vegetative Communities
and Wildlife Areas, oak woodlands are located on the parcel. The Blue Oak – Foothill Pine habitat type
is identified on the southern portion of the site’s eastern slope. The Montane Hardwood habitat type is shown at the northwestern corner of the property and the most of the parcel’s western slope.
Blue oak-foothill pine woodlands (Holland, R.F., 1986), occurs at slightly higher elevations than blue
oak woodland. Representative tree species include interior live oak, black oak, California buckeye, and gray pines. The understory of blue oak–foothill pine woodlands in Butte County contains several shrub
species clumped together and interspersed with patches of annual grassland. Dominant shrub species
include manzanita, ceanothus, redberry, California coffeeberry, poison oak, blue elderberry, gooseberry, silver lupine, and western redbud (GP EIR, pg. 4.4-12). The project site is located in an
ecotone comprised of transitional elements from the valley foothill hardwood-conifer (i.e., blue oak -foothill pine, per Holland, R.F., 1986), and montane hardwood-conifer communities.
Roughly the eastern half of the parcel is located in the Winter and Critical Winter Deer Herd Area as
shown in Figure 4.
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact. In order to determine the potential for special-status species to occur
within the project site, the California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Inventory (CNPS) and the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) were assessed. Two CNPS-listed species are
shown to occur within a 1-mile radius of the project. The nearest known occurrence for Lewis
Rose’s ragwort (parkera eurycedephala var. lewisrosei) is about 3900 feet to the north of the subject parcel. A generalized location for Jepson’s onion (allium jepsonii) was mapped on the
eastern portion of the subject site. Both species are known to occur with Foothill Woodlands.
The project is a correction to a grading violation, and minimal additional ground disturbance is planned for the site as necessary to implement/maintain BMPs. Therefore, impact to these CNPS-
listed species occurred primarily at time of grading,
Lewis Rose’s ragwort (parkera eurycedephala var. lewisrosei) and/or Jepson’s onion (allium jepsonii) are known to occur within 1-mile of the project site. Because no additional ground
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 20
disturbance is proposed at this time, issuance of the grading permit for past grading activities will
have a less than significant impact on special status species.
Table 4-1 – Special-status species known to occur within 1-mile of project site
Common Name (Scientific Name) Status Associated Habitats Nearest Known Occurrence Lewis Rose’s ragwort
Parkera eurycephala var. lewisrosei CNPS--1B.2
Chaparral, Foothill
Woodland, Yellow Pine Forest ~3900 ft. north
Jepson’s Onion
Allium jepsonii CNPS--1B.2 Foothill Woodland,
Yellow Pine Forest
Generalized location
mapped onsite
CNPS 1A = Plants presumed extinct in California CNPS 1B = Rare or Endangered in California or elsewhere CNPS 2 = Rare or Endangered in California, more common elsewhere
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 21
Figure 4-1 Deer Herd Overlay Zones
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 22
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 23
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) identifies
sensitive natural communities (SNC) based on classifications created by Holland, R.F. (1986),
which includes those communities that, if eliminated or substantially degraded, would sustain a significant adverse impact as defined under CEQA. According to the General Plan EIR, Figure 4.4-
1, Vegetative Communities and Wildlife Areas, the project area is comprised of oak woodland and
conifer forest, which are regionally abundant common natural communities occurring throughout the eastern portion of the County. However, native oaks trees and woodland habitats are declining
statewide because of development and land management practices.
About one quarter of the site (the southwest quadrant) is covered in blue oak-foothill pine habitat, including interior live oak, black oak, and several shrub species such as manzanita, ceanothus,
redberry and California coffeeberry etc. Completed work on the site includes the clearing of four areas and grading of three areas as shown on Figure 3 Index (Excerpt from) Grading Plan. Clearing and grading areas are not located in the southwestern quadrant where oak resources are located.
Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact on oak woodlands.
About half the site (easterly half and northwest corner) is sown as covered in montane hardwood. Other portions of the site consist of natural open areas and the four cleared/graded areas on the
parcel. The graded area on the northwesterly portion of the site occurs primarily on lands without either Blue Oak – Foothill Pine or montane hardwood habitats; grading has resulted in the clearing
of approximately two to three acres of combined habitat. Given the extensive distribution of this
habitat type on site and on surrounding properties, this is a less than significant impact.
c) No Impact. A review of aerial imagery and site photos indicates no Jurisdictional waters are present within the property boundary. The closest jurisdictional drainage, the West Branch of the Feather River, is located approximately 100 to 500 feet west of the project parcel’s western property line and substantially further from cleared or graded areas. The applicant has proposed Conservation Measure# CM1 (Stormwater BMPs). Conservation Measure #1 is a list of BMPs that have been incorporated into the proposed Grading Plan, by the applicant to minimize erosion and sedimentation as a result of grading and thereby minimize water quality impacts off-site. By implementing an Erosion Control Plan, there will be no impacts to Waters of the U.S. and wetlands located offsite. d) Less Than Significant Impact. As noted above, the project area is located within an area designated by the General Plan as Winter Deer Herd Range and Critical Deer Herd Range (GP EIR, Figure 4.4-4, Migratory Deer Herd Areas). There are no barriers to interfere with the movement of
wildlife through the project site. Jordon Hill Road does not pose a significant impediment to migrating deer populations within the area because it runs parallel to the migratory corridor and the West Branch of the Feather River. If the graded area is fenced as part of future uses, it will account
for a three -acre portion of a 77.29-acre parcel, approximately 4 percent of the total parcel acreage. Any fencing of the graded portion of the site would not pose a significant impediment to migrating
deer populations within the area. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact on the movement
of native wildlife species.
e) No Impact. The project site is located in the transitional ecotone from the valley foothill hardwood-
conifer (Blue Oak-Foothill Pine habitat type), and montane hardwood-conifer communities, is
common locally and regionally throughout California, Grading and terracing activities affected a three -acre portion of the property. The project would not conflict with any Butte County tree policy
or ordinance adopted for the long-term preservation of oak woodlands, including the Butte County
Oak Woodlands Management Plan, as described under a) above.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 24
f) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The project site is not located in an area identified
as having an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. Based on available information, the project site is not located in an area of Butte County that will be regulated by the BRCP.
Relative to General Plan policies, the project’s erosion control measures run counter to General
Plan GOAL COS-8 to Maintain and promote native vegetation” and policy COS-P8.4, as noted below.
Policy COS-P8.4 Introduction or spread of invasive plant species during construction of development projects shall be avoided by minimizing surface disturbance; seeding and mulching disturbed areas with certified weed-free native
mixes; and using native, noninvasive species in erosion control plantings.*
Conservation Measure CM1, (See Project Description, section 1.8) reiterates erosion control
measures from a map note on page 17 of the grading plans. Items 3 and 14 in the map note/CM1
reference nonnative species for mulching and seeding the site. This is not consistent with Goal COS-8 or Policy COS-P8.4 calling for certified weed-free native mixes for seeding and mulching;
therefore, Mitigation Measure MM1 requires use of a certified weed-free native mix for
revegetation of the site and the modification of related map notes 3 and 14 on page 17 of the grading plan.
With mitigation to require native seed mix for revegetation of the site consistent with the General Plan, the project would not conflict with the provisions of a local, state, or federal plan for the conservation of habitat.
g) No Impact. Refer to discussion under Item a) above. The project is not located in an area identified as critical habitat, nor is the project in the recovery area for unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals.
h) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item a) and Item b) above. The graded area comprises three acres within a 77.29-acre site, the remainder of the site is undisturbed and
provides habitat for a variety of species. The site contains blue oak–foothill pine woodland habitat,
but clearing and grading activities did not occur within this habitat type. Clearing and grading activities occurred primarily on portions of the site containing montane hardwood habitat. Cleared
and graded areas do not occur within area a designated critical habitat or recovery area for any
listed rare, threatened and endangered species. Animals typically associated with this habitat type are common species, the diversity of which would not be significantly impacted by the removal of
a small portion of their associated habitat.
i) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item c) above. The Feather River, a jurisdictional river occurs approximately 100 to 500 east of grading activities. However, grading
activities were not conducted, and will not be conducted, within the drainage. Fish and wildlife that may use the site and drainage are still able to forage, breed, roost and nest within the surrounding area.
j) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item d) above.
k) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item d) above. No temporary lighting is proposed. In addition, although site activities may include temporary noise associated with
human activity, the proposed project would not result in the establishment of new permanent noise
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 25
or light sources. Temporary noise is not anticipated to be at a level that would substantially alter
the normal activities of wildlife, such as with a residential subdivision, commercial land use
development, or major roadway. Project activities would not increase human presence more than what would be permitted from other allowed uses within this zone.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure MM1 (Map Notes Regarding Native Seed Mix)
A map note on page 17 of the grading plans, items 3 and 14. shall be modified to delete any
reference to nonnative species and shall instead state, “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for used for revegetating the site.” A note on page 1 of 17 of the grading plans stating “Hydroseed application rate not less than 40 lbs. per acre” shall also be modified to add “A certified weed-free
native mix shall be for used for revegetation of the site.”
Plan Requirements: Grading plans shall be edited to require the use a certified weed-free native seed mix for revegetating the site.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be satisfied prior final acceptance of the grading permit, and prior to final grading activity.
Monitoring: The Butte County Department of Development Services and Department of Public
Works shall ensure that prior to final acceptance of the grading permit; a note will be placed on the grading plans requiring that a certified weed-free native seed mix be used for revegetation of the
site.
5. Cultural Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5? X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CA Code of Regulations, §15064.5? X
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature? X
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X
Onsite roadways are not approved by PWGRD15-0002 and no development is enabled by the grading
permit. County Public Works engineers evaluating PWGRD15-0002 estimated approximately 10,245 cubic
yards of material was moved over about three acres of disturbance prior to code enforcement activities and application for the grading permit.
The project was circulated to the Northeast Information Center (NEIC) consistent with Butte County
General Plan policy COS-P.14.2 which states: “As part of CEQA and NEPA projects, evaluations of surface
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 26
and subsurface cultural resources in the county shall be conducted. Such evaluations should involve
consultation with the Northeast Information Center.” A letter from the NEIC is attached as Appendix A to
this study. The NEIC states that the site appears sensitive for prehistoric and historic resources. Portions of the property were evaluated for cultural resources by a professional archeologist; however, due to the
partial nature of the existing survey, a complete survey is recommended by the NEIC.
Discussion
a to c) Less Than Significant with Mitigation. A portion of the site is identified as an
archaeologically sensitive area by the Butte County General Plan EIR. The largely undisturbed site overlooking the Feather River could be the location of historic or pre-historic resources.
Three acres of the 77.29-acre project site have been disturbed by (unpermitted) grading activities and cultural resources were not identified (self-reported) by the applicant in the grading permit
application. Site stabilization measures would consist of the BMPs, as described in Section 9, Item
a) Hydrology and Water Quality. With the proposed grading permit, no construction or significant new earthwork will be performed. Over time, future grading permits may be processed to enable
construction of roads to county standards, which would then allow construction of two single-
family homes and other uses consistent with the FR-20 zone.
In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the disposition of
remains.
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure MM2 (Cultural Resources):
Should grading activities reveal the presence of prehistoric or historic cultural resources (i.e.,
artifact concentrations, including arrowheads, and other stone tools or chipping debris, cans, glass, etc.; structural remains; human skeletal remains) work within 50 feet of the find shall immediately
cease until a qualified professional archaeologist can be consulted to evaluate the find and
implement appropriate mitigation procedures. Should human skeletal remains be encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the
County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of
notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the disposition of the remains.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 27
Plan Requirements: This measure shall be in effect during all building and site development
plans.
Timing: During grading activities, site preparation and construction.
Monitoring: The Development Services Department will monitor implementation of this
mitigation measure. The developer shall be responsible for notifying the Department of
Development Services and a qualified archaeologist in the event cultural resources are discovered. The Department of Development Services shall coordinate with the developer and appropriate
authorities to avoid damage to cultural resources and determine appropriate action.
6. Geology and Soils
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i.) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
X
ii.) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii.) Seismic-related ground failure/liquefaction? X
iv.) Landslides? X
b) Substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
c) Located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-
1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
X
Discussion
a) i. Less Than Significant. The project is located immediately to the north of an inferred
portion of the active Cleveland Hills Fault and approximately 5,700 feet (1.08 miles) north of
the potentially active Big Bend Fault (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-1). Because the project is limited to the past grading and leveling of land without the placement of any new permanent structures,
it does not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of
loss, injury, or death.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 28
ii. Less Than Significant. The project lies within the area of Butte County most likely to be
subject to strong ground shaking. According to the California Geological Survey’s
Probabilistic Seismic hazard Assessment Program, Butte County is considered to be within an area that is predicted to have a 10 percent probability that a seismic event would produce
horizontal ground shaking of 10 to 20 percent within a 50-year period. (GP EIR, pg. 4.6-9)
Additional activities onsite include erosion and sediment control measures. The project is limited to the grading and leveling of land without the placement of new permanent structures,
and therefore it will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death.
iii. Less Than Significant. Within Butte County, the areas of liquefiable soil are found on the
valley floor. (GP EIR, pg. 4.6-10) The project area lies at an elevation of roughly between 1,250 to 1750 feet and is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The project is not located in an area that will be prone to ground failure or liquefaction. In addition, the
project is limited to the grading and leveling of land, including soil stabilization BMPs and an ECP and does not consist of the placement of new permanent structures. Therefore, the project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of
loss, injury, or death.
iv. Less Than Significant. The project lies within an area that has a high landslide potential.
(GP EIR, Figure 4.6-2) The slopes within the project are at ratios of 2:1 with a 1 to 10 percent
slope on the leveled portion. Interim soil stabilization while waiting for vegetation has been achieved using hydro-seed, silt fencing, and straw mulch. The stabilization efforts combined
with the fact that the project is limited to the grading and leveling of land without the placement
of new permanent structures, result in no significant exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project lies within an area that has a high erosion hazard potential. (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-4) As stated earlier, stabilization of exposed soil within the graded area will be accomplished through the use of hydro-seed, silt fencing, and straw mulch.
Additionally, the ECP requires notifying the engineer/QSD should any of the BMP’s fail or become ineffective. Any areas that are not effectively stabilized will be addressed accordingly by replacing BMPs. The implementation of effective stabilization techniques will yield no substantial soil
erosion or loss of topsoil.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. While the project is located in an area identified as having a ‘high’ landslide potential, it is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is considered unstable or that
would become unstable as a result of the project. Therefore, the potential for on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, or collapse is less than significant. According to the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, the soil type within the project area is primarily within Map Unit 719
Griffgulch-Surnuf-Spine taxadjunct complex soils (NRCS 2014). This Unit is composed of very gravelly silt loam, gravelly loam, and very cobbly loam, which are not prone to liquefaction. Sections of the project area are also within the map area 705 Typic Haploxeralfs, magnesic-Earlal-
Cerpone-Rock outcrop complex. This Unit consists of magnesic, very gravelly loam and serpentinite rock outcrops. Additionally, there have been no documented incidents of subsidence in Butte County and the only areas at risk for subsidence are in the valley region (GP EIR, pg. 4.6-
12), not the foothills where the project is located.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. . The project is located in an area with medium to high expansive soil potential (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-3). Expansive soils are generally found in basin deposits in the
low-lying portions of the county near the Sacramento and Feather Rivers as well as localized areas
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 29
elsewhere in the county (GP EIR, pg. 4.6-12). The eastern portion of the project is located adjacent
to the western branch of the Feather River. The western portion of the project is located adjacent
to an unnamed stream. The project site is located in expansive soil areas. However, the project is limited to the grading and leveling of land without the placement of new permanent structures,
result in no significant exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including risk of loss, injury, or death. Upon submittal of building permits for future development, soil expansion will be reassessed in order to be compliant with California Building Code.
e) No Impact. Grading will not include development or use or install septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
Evaluated in
Previous Document
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or
regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
Setting
The earth’s atmosphere naturally contains a number of gases, including (but not limited to) carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), which are collectively referred to as greenhouse gases (GHGs).
GHG emissions are generally numerically depicted (when applicable) as carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e). CO2e represents CO2 plus the additional warming potential from CH4 and N2O. The common unit of measurement for carbon dioxide equivalents is in metric tons (MTCO2e).
These gases trap some amount of solar radiation and the earth’s own radiation, preventing it from passing through earth’s atmosphere and into space. GHG are vital to life on earth; without them, earth would be an icy planet. For example, CO2 is an element that is essential to the cycle of life. In general, CH4 and N2O have 21
and 310 times the warming potential of CO2, respectively. Human-made emissions of GHG occur through the combustion of fuels, as well as a variety of other sources.
A 2006 baseline GHG emission inventory was prepared for unincorporated Butte County. The inventory
identified the sources and the amount of GHG emissions produced in the county. Within Butte County, the leading contributors of GHG emissions are agriculture (43%), transportation (29%), and residential energy
(17%).
A Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted by Butte County on February 25, 2014. The CAP provides a framework for the County to reduce GHG emissions while simplifying the review process for new
development. Measures and actions identified in the CAP lay the groundwork to achieve the adopted General
Plan goals related to climate change, including reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In an effort to implement the measures of the CAP, a development checklist was created to evaluate a new projects
consistency with the CAP, and to identify which GHG emission reduction measures would be implemented with project approval.
Section 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines sets forth guidance for determining the significance of Impacts from
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The guidelines allow impacts from a particular project to be described quantitatively or qualitatively and direct that impacts should be evaluated in consideration of existing
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 30
environmental setting, applicable thresholds of significance, and compliance with regulations and requirements
adopted to implement the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.
Section 15064 (h)(3)of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that a project’s contribution to a cumulative effect may be found ‘not cumulatively considerable’ if the project will comply with the requirements in a previously
approved plan or mitigation program, including plans or regulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions. Butte County has adopted a Climate action Plan (CAP) for the reduction of greenhouse gases. The CAP provides measures that achieve a 15% reduction below 2006 emissions levels by 2020. Since the project
does not require General Plan or Specific Plan amendments, GHG emissions from the project may be consistent with the CAP by demonstrating consistency with the CAP policies in the CAP checklist. The project may be able to rely on the CAP’s environmental findings for the purposes of GHG emissions and climate change, rather
than identifying separate project-level emissions.
Projects that wish to demonstrate consistency with the CAP must demonstrate consistency with all applicable measures and action items from the CAP. For the subject project, consistency with the CAP would not require
special provisions because it is not anticipated to result in housing units, non-residential development, or other greenhouse gas producing activities.
Discussion
a, b) Less Than Significant. The proposed project is the clearing, grading, and terracing of three-acres of land. Generally, GHG emissions that are normally associated with land use projects include
water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Grading and clearing activities will not
result in a long term net increase in GHG emissions. The project created nominal short-term air emissions, particularly with regard to dust; an ECP has been prepared as part of Grading Plan (refer
to Section 3, Air Quality).
The project will not interfere with the State’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, per AB 32, nor would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X
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?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
X
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 31
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
X
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
X
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
X
Setting
The property is located in an area designated by CAL FIRE as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). The project involves the grading and leveling of land and the removal of vegetation
from the graded portion of the site to be placed as large woody debris for erosion control purposes,
according to the grading plan.
Discussion
a) No Impact. The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would not result in such impact.
b) No Impact. The proposed grading activities and site stabilization measures are not anticipated to
result in a release of hazardous materials into the environment. Site stabilization measures should not use hazardous materials that could be released into the environment.
c) No Impact. Grading and clearing activities do not involve any emission or handling of any
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing school. No existing or proposed school facilities are located within a one-quarter mile radius of the project site.
d) No Impact. The property is not included on a list of sites containing hazardous materials, and would
not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. The project site is not included on the Cortese-Knox list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 32
e) No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two
miles of a public airport and the project would not result in permanent structures that expose people
to a safety hazard.
f) No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and the
project would not result in permanent structures that expose people to a safety hazard.
g) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any actions within the roadway that would physically interfere with any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. The project
would not result in an increase in traffic, and thus would not reduce the current level of service of the area road network.
h) Less than Significant. The property is located in an area designated by CAL FIRE as a Very High
Fire Hazard Severity Zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). The project involves the grading and leveling of land and the removal of vegetation from the graded portion of the site. Removed vegetation will be placed as large woody debris to control erosion, consistent with grading plans. This is a
less than significant impact,
9. Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements? X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the 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)?
X
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 off-site?
X
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 which
would result in flooding on- or off-site?
X
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?
X
f) Otherwise degrade water quality? X
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 33
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
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?
X
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
X
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X
Proposed Change to Hydrology
According to Grading Plan sheet 16 of 17, “The existing driveway is sloped slightly to the south and drains
into a 1 foot deep ditch that runs parallel to the driveway. Under the existing condition, all the driveway runoff drains to the bottom of the driveway and into the existing roadside ditch running along Jordon Hill Road. This condition existed prior to the current owners. Per the grading plan, additional erosion control
measures are to be placed as shown” on the grading plans.
Conservation Measure CM1 (Stormwater BMPs) Conservation Measure CM1 is a list of BMPs (from page 17 of 17 of grading plans): 1. All erosion control measures shall conform to Caltrans standards and the erosion control plans
shown on the construction drawings.
2. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during construction to
assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times. 3. All mulch may be straw or rice. (Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1 – See Biological Resources Section)
4. All sandbags may be gravel or sand filled bags unless specified different.
5. All slopes greater than 10% and less than 50% that are free of vegetation shall have mulch spread
prior to a 30% chance of rain.
(No item 6. was provided on plans)
7. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the form of airborne particulates.
Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities
shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 34
8. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress by
construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a minimum depth of
6" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed on a daily basis.
9. The contractor may provide catch basin filters to help remove sediments, oil and grease and heavy metals from storm water runoff.
10. All on site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
11. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
(No item 12 was provided on plan)
13. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 3 months shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
14. Hydroseeding to be applied to per State standard specifications sections 20-2.06 and 20-3.03. All seeds shall be in conformance with the California State Seed Law of the Department of
Agriculture. Each seed bag shall be delivered to the site sealed and clearly marked as to species,
purity, percent germination, dealer's guarantee, and dates of test. All legume seed shall be pellet-inoculated at a rate of 2 kg of inoculant per 100kg of seed (2-lb inoculant per 100-lb seed), per
standard specifications section 20-2.10.
Seed – application rate: 40 lbs./acre
Fiber – 100% wood fiber: 1,000 lbs./acre
(Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1 – See Biological Resources Section)
15. Area treated with temporary soil stabilization shall be maintained to provide adequate erosion control and compliance shall be in accordance with standard specifications section 6-1.07. Temporary soil stabilization shall be reapplied or replaced on exposed soils when area becomes
exposed or exhibits visible erosion.
The Butte County Department of Public Works recommends that the following condition be required of the
grading permit, consistent with the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board.
Prior to grading, a construction storm water permit will be required by the State Water Resources
Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing, excavation, filling, and
grading) of one or more acres. The permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction. If a construction storm water permit is required, place a note on an
additional map sheet that states: “The development of this parcel/final map required a construction
storm water permit. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. Development of
individual lots may require an additional permit(s).”
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 35
Discussion
Less Than Significant Impact.
a) As noted above, map notes for erosion control and State requirements for a stormwater pollution prevention permit ensure that any erosion from grading activities will be mitigated to less than significant amounts. Conservation Measure CM1 includes interim and long-term erosion control measures. State permitting and oversight by the Butte Department of Public Works will ensure measures are implemented and maintained.
b) The Butte County Department of Public Works recommends that the following condition be required of the grading permit, consistent with the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board.
c) Prior to grading, a construction storm water permit will be required by the State Water Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing, excavation, filling, and grading) of one or more acres. The permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control
Board prior to construction. If a construction storm water permit is required, place a note on an additional map sheet that states: “The development of this parcel/final map required a construction storm water permit. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre,
but which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. Development of individual lots may require an additional permit(s).
d) No Impact. No activities associated with the project are anticipated to have any impact on ground
water. Project activities are limited to surface grading for the leveling and terracing of land.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project activities include grading and leveling of land on a
three -acre portion of a 77.29-acre site. The overall direction of drainage on the site will not change.
The terracing, along with erosion BMP’s will serve to slow the rate of runoff from the site, not accelerate it. No streams or rivers will have their course altered as a result of project activities.
d) No Impact. The project does not lie in an area designated as a FEMA flood zone nor is it immediately adjacent to any areas that are designated as flood zones (GP EIR, Figure 4.8-3). Furthermore, the project activities involve the terracing of already sloped land. There is no net
change in the flow of water on or off the site that would lead to an increase in flooding on- or off-site.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not yield an increase in storm water runoff that
would require the use or construction of storm water drainage facilities. As addressed in Item a) above, the Grading Plan and ECP will meet water quality standards and not result in polluted runoff.
f) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Item a) above. The ultimate goal of an Erosion Control
Plan is to prevent degradation of water quality through the prevention of sediment and pollutant runoff. The ECP is project specific and designed to minimize erosion, thereby protecting water
quality.
g-i) No Impact. No development will result from PWGRD15-0002 because roads are not proposed to meet County standards. The proposed project, which is grading and clearing activities, is not
located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Project activities would not result in placing housing
in a 100-year flood hazard area, nor would activities impede or redirect flood flows. The project
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 36
would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding
as a result of levee or dam failure.
j) No Impact. There are no anticipated impacts to the proposed project from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow, as no topographical features of water bodies capable of producing such events occur
within the project site vicinity.
10. Land Use and Planning
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the
general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
X
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan? X
Discussion
a) No Impact. Grading activities have been conducted on a three-acre site within a 77.29-acre property. The site is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and is rural in nature,
with no surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the project is not within an established community and will not have an impact on the physical arrangement of an established community.
b) No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of
Foothill Residential and the FR-40 (Foothill Residential, 40-acre minimum parcel size) zoning designation. The project would neither propose a change in zoning, nor conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the site.
c) No Impact. The project site is not currently located in an area identified as having an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan. In addition, available
information indicates that once approved, the Butte Regional Conservation Plan’s jurisdictional
area will not encompass the project site.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 37
11. Mineral Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
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? X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
X
Discussion
a-b) No Impact. The property is not located in a designated mineral resource zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-
5), and thus would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be
of value to the residents of the state or local importance.
12. Noise
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
X
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
X
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X
A residence is located approximately 250 feet north of the northern property line. Residences are located
approximately 700 feet south of the southern property line.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 38
Discussion
a) No Impact. A residence is located approximately 250 feet north of the northern property line. Residences are located approximately 700 feet south of the southern property line. However, no
additional grading activities are anticipated. Therefore, the project will not expose people to noise
levels exceeding applicable standards; No impact.
b) No Impact. The project encompasses grading and clearing on three acres, which has been
completed. As a result, there would be no potential impact from grading-related groundborne vibrations or noises in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
c) No Impact. The proposed project does not involve uses or activities that would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. No structures or roads are proposed onsite; future development on the site will be subject to a separate grading permit.
Therefore, there would be no impact associated with a permanent increase in ambient noise levels as a result of the project.
d) No Impact. The property is located in a rural area with generally low noise levels and is not subject
to any significant continuous noise. As no additional construction is proposed at this time, the grading permit is not expected to increase area noise levels.
e, f) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles
of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip. As such, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
13. Population and Housing
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) 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)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere? X
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere? X
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant. No population growth associated with the proposed project is expected. Any employment generated by grading activities would be temporary and drawn from the local
work force, and would not create a permanent housing or jobs that would add population to the area.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 39
b, c) No Impact. The project site is vacant. No people or housing will be displaced by the project.
14. Public Services
Would the project: result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need, 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 public services:
Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Discussion
a-e) No Impact. The project includes grading and clearing activities and site stabilization measures on three acres of land. These activities would not result in housing or other development. Future development will require a subsequent grading permit to construct roads to Butte County standards.
Therefore, the project will not generate demand for government services that could result in physical impacts to the environment associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities such as fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public
and quasi-public services.
15. Recreation
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
Discussion
a) No Impact. No significant population growth is anticipated with the proposed project that would generate an increase in demand for existing public or private parks or other recreational facilities
that would either result in or increase the physical deterioration of the facility.
b) No Impact. Project activities does not include residences, roads, or recreational facilities.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 40
16. Traffic and Transportation
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of
the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
X
c) 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?
X
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
X
A map note from page 1 of 17 of the grading plans, (Conservation Measure CM2 in section 1.9) states,
“the roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted structures at this time…” Future development of the site will require “a subsequent grading permit” to construct roads
meeting minimum county road standards “to be issued at that time.”
Without approved access, development cannot be permitted. Therefore, PWGRD15-0002 does not permit development, and the grading permit will not result in any changes with regard to traffic and transportation.
An existing shed appears to be in the right of way for Jordan Hill Road as seen on the County’s Geographic Information System (GIS). However, aerial photography may be inaccurate by several feet.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 41
Discussion
a,b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The proposed project would not conflict with an applicable
plan, ordinance, or policy with regard to the effectiveness of the performance of the circulation system. The proposed project would not generate permanent traffic, as it would not construct
homes or facilities. The grading permit would utilize construction equipment to complete
stabilization of the site, but it would not increase permanent vehicular trips because it would not result in development on site. Therefore, the project would have no impact associated with
transportation or traffic.
c) No Impact. No public use airports have been identified as being located within the vicinity of the project site. The project site is located outside the compatibility zones for the area airports, and
therefore, would not result in a change to air traffic patterns, including increases in air traffic levels or safety hazards.
d) No Impact. The property is accessed from Jordan Hill Road. The issuance of a Grading Permit, and
any site stabilization would not substantially increase hazards due to a transportation design feature. New roadways are not proposed as part of this project.
e) No Impact. No existing residential uses are located on the project site, and the proposed project
would not generate a permanent increase in traffic volumes to cause the existing road network to have inadequate emergency access.
f) No Impact. The proposed project would not generate a permanent increase in population growth to
the project area that would cause an increase in demand for alternative transportation facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
17. Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Water Quality Control Board? X
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
X
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
X
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves/may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
X
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 42
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs? X
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X
A map note from page 1 of 17 of the grading plans, (See Conservation Measure CM2 in section 1.9)
states “the roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted
structures at this time…” Should roads be used for access in the future, they must be improved to minimum acceptable standards at that time. It is anticipated that future development of the site will require “a
subsequent grading permit” to construct roads meeting minimum county road standards “to be issued at that time.”
Since PWGRD15-0002 does not permit development, the grading permit will not result in any changes to
utilities; however, future development would likely be served by domestic water well and individual septic system based on utilization by surrounding residences.
Discussion
a,b,e) No Impact. The project does not include construction and therefore, no expansion of wastewater treatment facilities is proposed.
c) Less than Significant. Grading plans demonstrate existing and proposed drainage patterns with
the grading and terracing of approximately three acres on the project site. Stormwater drainage facilities on the project site would (generally remain) and would be fortified with erosion control
measures such as distributing large woody debris, (waddles, and silt netting). Substantial new
stormwater drainage facilities are not proposed; this is a less than significant impact.
d) No Impact. The site is located in a rural area of Butte County where water services are provided
by individual groundwater wells. The availability of groundwater in the area depends largely upon the geologic, hydrologic and climatic conditions of the project area. Due to prohibitions on future development until approved access is achieved, the project will not require new or expanded water
entitlements.
f, g) No Impact. Grading and clearing activities resulted in green waste that was utilized on-site. Issuance of a Grading Permit would not result in an increase of solid waste to the Butte County
Neal Road Landfill. The project would not impact federal, state, and local statutes related to solid waste.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 43
5.0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Mandatory Findings of Significance Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
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 a
rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
X
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)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
Discussion
a) Less Than Significant with Mitigation. Potential impacts to biological resources were found to be less than significant with mitigation for conservation of oak trees (MM3), for use of native seed
mix in revegetation (MM4 MM1) and to require botanical studies for two sensitive plant species (MM5). Please refer to Section 4, Biological Resources. In addition, the project needs to be was referred to the Northeast Information Center to evaluate potential cultural resources located on the
property that could be examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory (MM6). Please refer to Section 5, Cultural Resources.
b) Less Than Significant with Mitigation. The project is the issuance of a Grading Permit on three
acres of a 77.29-acre parcel. Impacts identified in this Initial Study were found to be less than significant or would have no impact on environmental resources. Adherence to applicable
regulatory requirements, i.e., Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, Dust Suppression Plan, and other
permits or approvals of responsible agencies would ensure less than significant cumulative impacts.
c) Less Than Significant with Mitigation. Based on the preceding environmental analysis and
adherence to applicable local, state and federal regulations, as noted in this document, the proposed
project, with proposed mitigation, would not result in potentially significant cumulative, direct or indirect adverse effects on the environment or human beings.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 44
6.0 Conservation Measures, Mitigation Measures and Monitoring
Requirements
Conservation Measure CM1 (Stormwater BMPs) Conservation Measure #1 is a list of BMPs (from page 17 of 17 of grading plans):
1. All erosion control measures shall conform to Caltrans standards and the erosion control plans shown on the construction drawings.
2. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
3. All mulch may be straw or rice. . (Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1)
4. All sandbags may be gravel or sand filled bags unless specified different.
5. All slopes greater than 10% and less than 50% that are free of vegetation shall have mulch spread
prior to a 30% chance of rain. (No item 6. was provided on plans)
7. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces to prevent the
transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the form of airborne particulates.
Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
8. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress by construction
vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a minimum depth of 6" in conjunction
with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed on a daily basis.
9. The contractor may provide catch basin filters to help remove sediments, oil and grease and heavy metals from storm water runoff.
10. All on site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
11. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
(No item 12 was provided on plan)
13. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 3 months shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
14. Hydroseeding to be applied to per State standard specifications sections 20-2.06 and 20-3.03. All seeds shall be in conformance with the California State Seed Law of the Department of Agriculture.
Each seed bag shall be delivered to the site sealed and clearly marked as to species, purity, percent
germination, dealer's guarantee, and dates of test. All legume seed shall be pellet-inoculated at a rate
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 45
of 2 kg of inoculant per 100kg of seed (2-lb inoculant per 100-lb seed), per standard specifications
section 20-2.10.
Seed – application rate: 40 lbs./acre
Fiber – 100% wood fiber: 1,000 lbs./acre
(Amended by Mitigation Measure #MM1)
15. Area treated with temporary soil stabilization shall be maintained to provide adequate erosion control
and compliance shall be in accordance with standard specifications section 6-1.07. Temporary soil stabilization shall be reapplied or replaced on exposed soils when area becomes exposed or exhibits visible erosion. Map Note Conservation Measure CM2 (Development requires road improvement)
The roads identified on this grading plan have not been approved for access to any permitted structures at this time. Should the property owner desire to use them for such access the road being used for that access
shall be improved to the minimum acceptable standard, in effect at the time of such request, as required by Butte County Fire (Cal Fire) and the Butte County Public Works Department. The improvements shall be
done under a subsequent grading permit to be issued at that time. Mitigation Measure MM1: Map Notes Regarding Native Seed Mix
A map note on page 17 of the grading plans, items 3 and 14. shall be modified to delete any
reference to nonnative species and shall instead state, “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for used for revegetating the site.” A note on page 1 of 17 of the grading plans stating “Hydroseed
application rate not less than 40 lbs. per acre” shall also be modified to add “A certified weed-free native mix shall be for used for revegetation of the site.”
Plan Requirements: Grading plans shall be edited to require the use a certified weed-free native
seed mix for revegetating the site.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be satisfied prior final acceptance of the grading permit, and prior to final grading activity.
Monitoring: The Butte County Department of Development Services and Department of Public Works shall ensure that prior to final acceptance of the grading permit, a note will be placed on the grading plans requiring that a certified weed-free native seed mix be used for revegetation of the
site.
Mitigation Measure MM2 (Cultural Resources): Should grading activities reveal the presence of prehistoric or historic cultural resources
(i.e., artifact concentrations, including arrowheads, and other stone tools or chipping
debris, cans, glass, etc.; structural remains; human skeletal remains) work within 50 feet
of the find shall immediately cease until a qualified professional archaeologist can be
consulted to evaluate the find and implement appropriate mitigation procedures. Should human skeletal remains be encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section
5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of any human remains find immediately.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 46
If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized
representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the
opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the disposition of the remains.
Plan Requirements: This measure shall be in effect during all building and site
development plans.
Timing: During grading activities, site preparation and construction.
Monitoring: The Development Services Department will monitor implementation of
this mitigation measure. The developer shall be responsible for notifying the Department
of Development Services and a qualified archaeologist in the event cultural resources are
discovered. The Department of Development Services shall coordinate with the
developer and appropriate authorities to avoid damage to cultural resources and determine appropriate action.
(MM2 Added for consistency with Chapter 5. Cultural Resources.) 7.0 Preparers and References
Report Preparation and Review
Stacey Jolliffe, Principal Planner, Butte County Development Services, Preparation
Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager, Butte County Development Services, Review
References
Butte County. 2010. Butte County General Plan. October 26, 2010
Butte County. 2010. Butte County General Plan, Draft EIR. April 8, 2010.
Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD). 2008. CEQA Air Quality Handbook,
Guidelines for Assessing Air Quality Impacts for Project Subject to CEQA Review. January 2008.
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game.
Mayer, K.E. and W.F. Laudenslayer. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, CA.
Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals. 2013. Northern Sacramento
Valley Planning Area 2012 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan. Spring 2013.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2006. Soil Survey of Butte Area, California Parts of Butte and
Plumas Counties. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 47
8.0 Consulted Agencies
Consulted Agencies
[ X ] Environmental Health [X] Public Works [ ] Building Manager
[ ] BCAG [ ] ALUC [ ] LAFCo
[ ] Air Quality Management [ ] City of Chico [ ] City of Biggs
[ ] City of Gridley [ ] City of Oroville [X] Town of Paradise
[ ] CA Department of Forestry [ ] CalTrans (Traffic) [X] Central Reg. Water Quality
[ ] Department of Conservation [ ] Dept. of Fish and Game [ ] Highway Patrol
[ ] Army Corps of Engineers [ ] National Marine Fisheries Service [ ] US Fish & Wildlife Service
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 49
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 50
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 51
Grading Permit PWGRD15-0002 / CEQA15-0002 June 2016 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 52