HomeMy WebLinkAboutButteCo_Supplemental Jail Facility_052014
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
BUTTE COUNTY
INITIAL STUDY AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE PROPOSED
BUTTE COUNTY SUPPLEMENTAL JAIL FACILITY
PROJECT CEQA14-0001
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Contents
1 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Proposal ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Determination ................................................................................................................................ 2
2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Project Information ........................................................................................................................ 3
2.2 Purpose of this Document ............................................................................................................. 4
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Supplemental Jail Facility .............................................................................................................. 9
3.3 Project Goals ............................................................................................................................... 13
4 PROJECT SETTING ............................................................................................................................ 14
4.1 Surrounding Land Uses .............................................................................................................. 14
4.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................. 14
5 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS CHECKLIST SETTING ..................................................... 16
5.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................................................ 16
5.2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................................................................... 16
6 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 18
6.1 Aesthetics/Visual Resources ....................................................................................................... 18
6.1.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 20
6.2 Agricultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 21
6.2.1 Agricultural Resources Setting ................................................................................................ 22
6.2.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 22
6.3 Air Quality .................................................................................................................................... 23
6.3.1 Air Quality Setting.................................................................................................................... 24
6.3.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 27
6.4 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 32
6.4.1 Biological Resources Setting .................................................................................................. 32
6.4.2 Impact and Mitigation Analysis ................................................................................................ 37
6.5 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 39
i
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.5.1 Cultural Resources Setting ..................................................................................................... 39
6.5.3 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 40
6.6 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................... 42
6.6.1 Geologic and Soils Setting ...................................................................................................... 42
6.6.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 43
6.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................................................... 46
6.7.1 Greenhouse Gases Setting ..................................................................................................... 46
6.7.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 48
6.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .............................................................................................. 50
6.8.1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Setting ............................................................................. 51
6.8.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 52
6.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ...................................................................................................... 54
6.9.1 Hydrology and Water Quality Setting ...................................................................................... 55
6.9.2 Impact Analysis. .................................................................................................................. 55
6.10 Land Use ..................................................................................................................................... 59
6.10.1 Land Use Setting ................................................................................................................. 60
6.10.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 60
6.11 Mineral Resources ...................................................................................................................... 61
6.11.1 Mineral Resources Setting .................................................................................................. 61
6.11.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 62
6.12 Noise ........................................................................................................................................... 62
6.12.1 Noise Setting ....................................................................................................................... 63
6.12.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 63
6.13 Population and Housing .............................................................................................................. 66
6.13.1 Population and Housing Setting .......................................................................................... 66
6.13.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 67
6.14 Public Services ............................................................................................................................ 68
6.14.1 Public Services Setting ....................................................................................................... 68
6.14.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 68
6.15 Recreation ................................................................................................................................... 70
6.15.1 Recreation Setting ............................................................................................................... 70
6.15.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 70
ii
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.16 Transportation/Traffic .................................................................................................................. 71
6.16.1 Transportation Setting ......................................................................................................... 72
6.16.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 73
6.17 Utilities and Service Systems ...................................................................................................... 75
6.17.1 Utilities and Service Systems Setting.................................................................................. 76
6.17.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 77
6.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065) .................................... 79
6.18.1 Mandatory Findings of Significance Discussion .................................................................. 79
7 MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ................................................... 84
8 ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL.................................................................................... 88
9 CONSULTED AGENCIES: .................................................................................................................. 91
10 PROJECT SPONSOR(S) INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION INTO PROPOSED PROJECT: .. 92
Figures
Figure 1. Project Location…………………………………………………………………………………..6
Figure 2. Local Setting………………………………………………………………………………………7
Figure 3. Supplemental Facility Massing Diagram……………………………………………………….8
Figure 4. Land Use Projects within One Mile of the Project Site………………………………………83
Site Photographs
Photos 1 – 7. Site Photos……………………………………………………………………………………….10
Photos 8 – 11. Views of the Site from Adjacent Parcels………………………………………………………19
Tables
Table 1. General Plan and Zoning Designations Adjacent to the Project Parcel……………………14
Table 2. Butte County Ambient Air Quality Attainment Status - August 2013……………………….25
Table 3. Butte County Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Summary for Ozone 2010 – 2012…..26
Table 4. Butte County Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Summary for PM2.5 2010 – 2012 ….26
Table 5. Current and Draft Butte County Air Quality Management District Thresholds of
Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants of Concern……………………………………………27
Table 6. County 2030 Population, VMT and Pollutant Projections……………………………………28
Table 7. Estimated Non-Attainment Emissions Resulting from the Project………………………….29
Table 8. Landcover within One Half Mile of the Project Parcel………………………………………..33
Table 9. Special-Status Wildlife Species Occurrences - Oroville 7.5 Min Topographic Quad…….35
iii
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Table 10. Special-Status Plant Species Occurrences - Oroville 7.5 Min Topographic Quad………...36
Table 11. 2006 Community Inventory of Greenhouse Fas (GHG) Emissions…………………………47
Table 12. 2006 Government Operations Inventory of GHG Emissions………………………………..47
Table 13. Population Forecasts 2010 – 2035…………………………………………………………….66
Table 14. Housing Forecasts 2010 – 2035……………………………………………………………….66
Table 15. Local Traffic Volume…………………………………………………………………………….72
Table 16. Trip Generation Rates for Jail………………………………………………………………….73
Table 17. Land Use Projects within One Mile of the Project Site 2006 – 2012………………………80
Attachments
Attachment A. Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project. Butte County General Services. February
12, 2014
Attachment B. CalEEMOD Air Quality Emissions Report
Attachment C. Consistency of the Project with the Butte County Climate Action Plan
Attachment D. Comparison between LEED Silver and CALGreen Tier 1 and 2 Measures
Attachment E. Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project Preliminary Drainage Analysis
iv
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
1 SUMMARY
1.1 Project Proposal
The proposed Supplemental Jail Facility would consist of the construction and operation of a two-story
75,000 square foot structure to house inmates and provide space for programs, built in response to the
increase in inmates and parolees transferred from the state of California to Butte County custody as a result
of California Assembly Bill (AB) 109 (the Public Safety Realignment Act or the Realignment Act), passed
on April 4, 2011. The proposed facility would result in a net increase of 58 beds or inmates over the existing
County Jail population and up to eight additional staff.
The approximately 1.5 acre square foot project site would occupy a portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre
parcel at the north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities that
comprise Butte County’s administrative center along County Center Drive, about one and one half miles
north of the Feather River and downtown Oroville. The project parcel is in the midst of lands that have
been developed for decades, in between the existing jail and a photovoltaic facility, about 350 feet east of
State Route 70 and immediately south of the State Water Project Thermalito Power Canal.
1.2 Findings
This Initial Study/Negative Declaration has been prepared to assess the proposed Supplemental Jail
Facility’s potential impacts on the environment. Based upon this assessment, construction and operation
of the proposed Supplemental Jail Facility would not have a significant effect on the environment with
implementation of mitigation measures identified in the environmental analysis presented in Section 6. This
conclusion is supported by the following findings:
1. The proposed Supplemental Jail Facility entails a relatively minor construction project that, when
operating, would accommodate about a ten percent (10%) increase to the current average County
Jail population and staff;
2. Construction and operation of the proposed Supplemental Jail Facility would have:
a. No impact upon agricultural resources, or mineral resources;
b. A less than significant impact upon biological resources, geology and soils (geologic
hazards), land use, population and housing, public services, recreation,
transportation/traffic, and utilities and services; and
c. A less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated for aesthetics/visual resources
(nighttime glare), air quality (fugitive dust and diesel emissions), cultural resources
(subsurface resources), greenhouse gas emissions (diesel emissions), hydrology and
water quality (stormwater runoff and adequate drainage), and noise (construction noise).
For these reasons, construction and operation of the proposed Supplemental Jail Facility would have a less
than significant effect upon the environment. A mitigated negative declaration is proposed and preparation
of an environmental impact report is not necessary.
1
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
1.3 Determination
[ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[X] 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 have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that the proposed project COULD 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.
Prepared by: Chris Thomas, Senior Planner Date
Reviewed by: Charles S. Thistlethwaite Date
Planning Division Manager
2
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Project Information
Project Name: Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project, also referred to as “the proposed project”
or “the proposed facility”.
Type of Project: The proposed project entails construction of an approximately 75,000 square foot, two-
story structure just west of the existing jail, designed to current California Code of Regulations Title 15, Title
24 and LEED Silver (or equivalent) standards, with up to 256 beds, space for inmate programs, and other
supporting facilities necessary to accommodate current and new inmates transferred from state to County
custody as a result of the 2011 AB 109 Public Safety Realignment Act. The proposed Project would be
funded through a state-funded grant process provided by SB 1022 (Adult Local Criminal Justice Facilities
Construction Funding).
Applicant: Butte County General Services.
Review Process: The Butte County General Services, Sherriff’s Office, and the Departments of Public
Health, Public Works, and Development Services will review the proposed project and this Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the County. For other local review, this Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be sent to the City of Oroville, the Butte County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCo), the Butte County Association of Governments, the Thermalito Water and Sewer
District, and the Sewerage Commission, Oroville Region (SC-OR). For State of California review, this Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration will be sent to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control
Board, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Caltrans and, as part of its review of the County’s grant
application under SB 1022, the Board of State & Community Corrections.
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration will be available for public review and comment between
the dates of May 28 and June 30, 2014. The proposed Project and this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration will be considered for approval by the Butte County Board of Supervisors in at least one
publically noticed hearing pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and Butte County Code. Comments
regarding this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration may be sent to the Project Representative and/or
staff contact indicated below.
Project Representative: Grant Hunsicker, Director, General Services Division; (530) 538-2511;
ghunsicker@buttecounty.net
Staff Contact: Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager, Butte County Department of Development
Services; (530) 538-6572; cthistlethwaite@buttecounty.net
Location of Project Documents: This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and reference
documents are available for review at the Butte County Department of Development Services, 7 County
Center Drive, Oroville, Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., and at the
following web site by selecting the Supplemental Jail Facility link:
http://ww w.buttecounty.net/Development%20Services/PLANNING%20DIVISION/IS%20MND%20ND.aspx
Project Location: The proposed facility would be approximately one and one half miles north of downtown
Oroville, located at the north end of Butte County Center on Jail Road (a 800 foot long cul-de-sac of County
Center Drive), on unimproved land immediately west of the existing jail and east of a County photovoltaic
solar facility and State Route 70. The State Water Project Thermalito Power Canal is to the north and the
County administrative offices, Board Chambers, District Attorney’s Office, and courthouse are to the south
3
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
(see Figures 1, 2 and 3). While the project parcels are owned by Butte County, they are within the City of
Oroville.
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: Portion (6.4 acres) of APN 031-020-039 plus a floating easement on APN
031-040-020 and APN 031-040-039. In this document, the term “project parcel” refers to APN 031-020-
039.
Project Size: A final design has not been selected for the proposed facility. However, based on a report
prepared in consultation with the Sheriff’s Office, Butte County General Services (General Services)
estimates the structure would be two stories and about 75,000 square feet in area. The construction pad
would be about 1.5 acres (see Figure 3 and Attachment A).
The proposed facility would include about 256 new beds in 158 cells, plus six rooms for inmate programs
designed to accommodate 24 individuals each. The current jail facility would be retrofitted and as many as
198 of its beds and their cells eliminated, with the resulting space repurposed for various support functions.
There will thus be a net increase of 58 beds or inmates. As part of its response to AB 109, the County is
in the process of hiring up to eight new staff that would work in the proposed facility.
In order to provide a conservative assessment of potential impacts to the environment, this initial study
evaluates a 75,000 square foot facility covering a pad of 1.5 acres, housing an increase of 58 inmates over
the current daily average of 550 and up to eight additional staff.
Applicable Zoning: The City of Oroville zoning for the proposed project site is Public/Quasi Public (PQ).
General Plan: The City of Oroville General Plan designation (adopted 2010) for the proposed project site
is Public Facilities and Services.
The City of Oroville Zoning Code and General Plan are available at the Planning Division, 1735 Montgomery
Street, Oroville, between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:00 pm. The zoning code, general plan and other
documents relevant to the proposed project (including the Martin Ranch subdivision) may also be accessed
at the Planning and Development Services Department web site:
http://www.cityoforoville.org/index.aspx?page=456
Butte County’s General Plan 2030 and supporting documents are available at the Department of
Development Services, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, between the hours of 8:00 am and 3:00 pm, and
at the following web site:
http://www.buttecounty.net/dds/Planning/GeneralPlan.aspx
2.2 Purpose of this Document
An initial study is prepared by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the
environment (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063[a]). A lead agency is “the public agency which has
the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15367).
Butte County intends to apply for a SB 1022 grant for construction funds to build the proposed facility; this
initial study has been prepared in order to evaluate the potential impacts upon the environment should
funding be awarded and the proposed facility built.
The CEQA Guidelines Section 15367 define the term “lead agency” as “…the public agency which has the
principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.” The City of Oroville has land use jurisdiction
over the project site. However, Butte County will be approving, carrying out construction and operating the
proposed facility if it is awarded SB 1022 grant funds. For this project then, Butte County is the lead agency
4
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
and CEQA requires that the County adopt an appropriate document that reflects its independent review of
all potential impacts to the environment resulting from construction and operation of the proposed project
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15084(e).
Assessment of potential environmental impacts must be based upon substantial evidence, defined in Public
Resources Code Section 21080(e)(1-2) as follows:
“…substantial evidence includes fact, a reasonable assumption predicated upon fact, or expert
opinion supported by fact. Substantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated
opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or evidence of social or
economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on the
environment.”
If the initial study determines there is substantial evidence that a project may cause a significant effect upon
the environment, the lead agency must prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) to further study that
impact and to identify any feasible mitigation and project alternatives. If the initial study demonstrates that
there is no possibility that the project would cause a significant environmental impact, the lead agency can
prepare a Negative Declaration. If the initial study finds that an impact on the environment could be
significant, but that changes in the project would reduce all such impacts to a level that is clearly less than
significant, the lead agency may adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Potential impacts to the environment are identified in this initial study but they would be reduced to less
than significant with incorporation of the feasible mitigation measures provided. Therefore, an Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate document for the proposed project to comply with
CEQA.
5
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
7
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
8
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Background
The proposed project would result in the construction and operation of a Supplemental Jail Facility
(proposed project or facility), built in response to the increase in inmates and parolees transferred from the
state of California to Butte County custody as a result of California Assembly Bill (AB) 109 (the Public Safety
Realignment Act or the Realignment Act), passed by the state legislature on April 4, 2011. The AB 109
Realignment Act was a consequence of California’s overall budget crisis, increasing costs of incarceration
in state prisons, and decisions in certain federal lawsuits relating to overcrowding and lack of adequate
services in the state prison system.
In 2011 Butte County anticipated that, at full implementation of the AB 109 process, the County would
assume responsibility for a daily average of approximately 449 offenders, 268 inmates of whom would be
housed in the County Jail and 181 subject to Post-release Community Supervision and living in surrounding
communities (Butte County Community Corrections Partnership, 2011, p. 1). These figures are in addition
to the County jail’s current daily average inmate population of 550.
Inmates and parolees transferred to Butte County custody as part of the AB 109 process have been and
will be relocating in Butte County regardless of whether or not the proposed facility is built. As thoroughly
documented in the 2013 Butte County Jail Needs Assessment (available as indicated in Section 2.1), the
County Jail and associated program facilities are outdated and inadequate for the current population, let
alone the increase that is occurring with ongoing implementation of the AB 109 Realignment Act. The
County is therefore applying for grant funding to build the proposed facility to provide modern and much
needed space for detention, administrative functions and inmate programs. The proposed facility is a
response to and not the cause of the increase in the inmate and parolee population in Butte County that is
resulting from the AB 109 Realignment Act.
3.2 Supplemental Jail Facility
The proposed facility would be constructed on an approximately 65,000 square foot (1.5 acre) pad within
an undeveloped 6.4 acre parcel at the north end of the roughly 110-acre complex of buildings, facilities,
roads and parking lots that comprise Butte County’s administrative hub along County Center Drive, about
one and one half miles north of the Feather River as it passes by downtown Oroville (see Figure 1). The
proposed facility site sits between the existing jail to the east and one of the County’s photovoltaic solar
arrays to the west. State Route 70 is about 350 feet to the west, over a small rise from the proposed project
site. To the south is an approximately 40-foot high hill, on top of which is the County Courthouse,
Administrative Offices and parking lots. To the immediate north is the Thermalito Power Canal, an
approximately 160 foot feet wide, 1.8 mile long concrete lined State Water Project conveyance that carries
water from the Oroville Diversion Dam to the Thermalito Forebay.
Photos 1 through 7 show the proposed facility location and immediate surroundings.
9
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Photos 1 and 2. Panorama looking southwest to west from corner of existing jail at proposed facility site. Solar system is in background, drainage
channel in foreground.
Photos 3 and 4 continue panorama, looking northwest to north; drainage channel in foreground, Thermalito Power Canal just visible mid-picture,
south Table Mountain in distance.
10
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Photo 5. View north of drain to Thermalito Power Canal. Photo 6. Reverse view from Photo 5, looking south at west side of existing
jail.
Photo 7. View uphill towards County Courthouse from south end of project site.
11
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
The two-story facility would be approximately 75,000 square feet with 256 beds and six “Program Rooms”
accommodating up to 24 inmates each who will be participating in various social welfare, life skills and
mental health programs to assist their transition to civilian life. Toilets, showers, storage and other ancillary
space will also be provided, although the kitchen and cafeteria will continue to operate out of the existing
jail. The proposed Facility would operate around the clock throughout the year as a jail while the Program
Rooms would operate during the day and perhaps into the early evening hours. Some limited parking and
loading/unloading space would be included in the site design, with additional parking provided at the
existing lot in front of the Sheriff’s Office. Access would be provided over an existing road that passes
immediately south of the existing jail facility (see Figure 2). Security lighting around the proposed facility
perimeter would be provided by lighting mounted on the structure’s exterior walls.
As many as 198 beds in the existing jail not consistent with contemporary incarceration plans will be
removed and their space utilized for other support functions. Thus, there would be a net increase of 58
beds or inmates over the existing population. Butte County General Services estimates that “with
contemporary electronic controls, the movement of services to the inmates instead of utilizing Sheriff’s staff
to move inmates to services, and the improved utilization of building space being allocated to program
space means that less than five new Sheriff staff will be added despite the size of the new supplemental
facility” (Butte County General Services, 2014, p.4). The 2013 Butte County Jail Needs Assessment
identifies a need for eight new staff as part of the County’s response to AB 109. Whether or not all would
work daily in the proposed facility is unknown at this time; for purposes of this initial study, however, it is
assumed the operation of the proposed facility would include an additional eight staff. Thus the proposed
facility would include an additional 58 inmates and eight staff over current inmate and staffing levels.
Consistent with Butte County General Plan Policy COS-P2.3 and the County’s recently adopted Climate
Action Plan, the proposed facility would be built to U.S. Green Building Council LEED Silver standards or
equivalent, as well as to Code of Regulations Title 15 (Rules and Regulations of Adult Institutions,
Programs, and Parole) and Title 24 (California Building Standards Code). The LEED Green Building
Certification System is a third party certification program that provides nationally accepted benchmarks for
the design, construction and operation of energy efficient buildings. Consistent with greenhouse reduction
measures EN7 and G01 of Butte County’s recently adopted Climate Action Plan, the proposed facility would
have sub-meters installed as part of an “integrated Energy Management System (EMS) to meaningfully
track energy use, analyze the costs and benefits of energy improvements, and inform the annual facility
assessment process.”
Additionally, the County must have a Commissioning Report be prepared by a LEED accredited
professional to insure compliance with the LEED Silver or equivalent standards. A Commissioning Plan is
prepared to insure that a LEED designed structure is built and performing to all LEED standards for energy
efficiency and low pollution emission, including the use of low VOC materials and paints.
As required by state law, a geotechnical report would be prepared for the proposed structure, evaluating
potential hazards associated with seismic stability, erosion, landsliding, expansive soils, and other geologic
hazards evaluated in Section 6.6 of this document. Additionally, a stormwater construction permit and
associated stormwater pollution prevention plan would also be prepared as required by state law for ground-
disturbing projects greater than one acre in size.
The County has considered other potential sites for the proposed facility in the “Public Safety” neighborhood
that encompasses the north portion of the County campus; however, the proposed site, currently supporting
non-native grasses and crossed by a drainage channel, is the most viable because it is flat, will require
minimal grading, is close to the existing jail with which it would share some functions, and may be accessed
with minimal cost by an existing two-lane road running just south of the existing jail facility.
12
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
If awarded funding, the County expects to construct the proposed facility using a traditional Design-Bid-
Build process, contracting as needed for project/construction management, design, inspections necessary
for jail facilities, and construction services.
3.3 Project Goals
The County’s goals for the proposed facility are to:
• Assist the County in complying with the AB 109 Realignment Act;
• Replace an outdated and inefficient jail facility with a facility designed to contemporary standards
fully consistent with California Code of Regulations Title 15, thereby supporting the County’s
responsibilities for public safety, and the health and welfare of inmates and staff;
• Provide a facility that accommodates much needed program space to assist inmates in their
transition to a post-release community setting; and
• Consistent with Butte County General Plan Policy COS-P2.3, construct an energy-efficient
structure complaint with LEED silver or equivalent standards and all applicable California Code of
Regulations Title 24 requirements.
13
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
4 PROJECT SETTING
4.1 Surrounding Land Uses
The proposed facility would be located at the north end of the complex of the Butte County Center offices and
buildings on land that, although owned in fee by the County or the State of California, is within the City of
Oroville. Butte County Center contains offices for most of the County’s Departments; in the northern or “Public
Safety” neighborhood are the Offices of the Sheriff and a number of buildings and offices associated with the
existing County Jail, including Probation, Juvenile Hall, and Witness Protection. The Butte County/CalFire
headquarters, including its administrative headquarters and a fully staffed and equipped fire station, are located
on the northeast corner of Nelson Avenue and County Center Drive, about 3,500 feet by road southeast of the
proposed project site. The Departments of Public Health and Social Services, who may be involved with some
of the programs to be offered at the proposed facility, are located about 1.1 miles southeast of the project site,
just east of the intersection of Grand Avenue and Table Mountain Boulevard.
Surrounding land uses within a half mile of the project parcel are a mix undeveloped lands and parcels
developed with public and residential uses. Parcels immediately to the north of the proposed project site,
across the Thermalito Power Canal, are undeveloped or developed with a U Store It facility, a solar array, and
a water tank, water treatment plant and equipment yard used by Thermalito Water and Sewage District. State
Route 70 is about 300 to 350 feet west of the proposed Facility site (see Exhibit 2); west of State Route 70 are
Nelson Park and, to the south, Nelson School.
Table 1 summarizes relative proportions of the zoning and general plan designations for parcels adjacent to
the project parcel. Some 290 homes are within a half mile of the proposed project site (visible in Exhibit 1);
none are closer than 1,900 feet from where the proposed facility would be located.
Direction APN Ownership Size (Acres)General Plan Zoning
North 031-010-083 State of CA 7.8 Public Open Space
Northeast 031-040-042 State of CA 4.6 State Water Project Open Space
East 031--040-020 State of CA 22.3 Public Public/Quasi Public
South 031-020-042 State of CA 0.7 Public Public/Quasi Public
Southwest 031-020-041 Private 17.6
Retail/ Buisness
Services Residential 2
West 031-020-052
Feather River Rec
and Park District 16.4 Park Public/Quasi Public
Table 1. General Plan and Zoning Designations Adjacent to the Project Parcel
4.2 Environmental Setting
As noted, the proposed project site, at an elevation of about 215 feet above mean sea level, is at the north end
of the Butte County Center complex, on an undeveloped parcel that supports non-native grasses and some
shrubs, between the existing jail and a solar panel facility. A drainage channel that cuts across the project
parcel and empties into the Thermalito Power Canal would have to be relocated or put in a storm sewer pipe if
the proposed facility is built at the location indicated in Figure 3. The drainage channel, which carries seasonal
stormwater runoff from the parking lot and Courthouse uphill, is about six feet deep and between 10 and 20
feet wide.
The immediate vicinity has been developed for decades (the oldest jail facility was built in 1964). As evident in
Figure 1, much of the open space within a half mile of the proposed project parcel consists of undeveloped
14
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
grassland and open water. The Thermalito Power Canal, a 1.8 mile long concrete-lined channel with a bottom
width of 48 feet and 1.5 to 1 side slopes, is an integral part of the Lake Oroville hydropower generating facilities,
hydraulically linking the Diversion Pool to the Thermalito Forebay and conveying water in either direction
between the two facilities. There is no vegetation along its graveled sides.
More generally, the project site is within the northern Sacramento Valley, near its interface with the Sierra
Nevada foothills. Weather in the project vicinity exhibits a Mediterranean pattern with cool, wet winters and hot
dry summers. The coolest months are generally December through February, with low temperatures of about
35°F. July and August tend to be the warmest months, with average high temperatures of about 93°F (BCAG
2007). Brief periods of more extreme low and high temperatures are common.
15
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
5 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS CHECKLIST SETTING
5.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
[X] 6.1 Aesthetics [ ] 6.2 Agriculture Resources [X] 6.3 Air Quality
[X] 6.4 Biological Resources [X] 6.5 Cultural Resources [X] 6.6 Geologic Processes
[X] 6.7 Greenhouse Gases [X] 6.8 Hazards/Hazardous Material [X] 6.9 Hydrology/Water
Quality
[ ] 6.10 Land Use [ ] 6.11 Mineral Resources [X] 6.12 Noise
[X] 6.13 Housing [X] 6.14 Public Services [X] 6.15 Recreation
[X] 6.16 Transportation/Traffic [X] 617 Utilities/Service Systems [X] 6.18 Mandatory Findings
of Significance
5.2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers, except “No Impact” answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on
project-specific factors as well as general standards, (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants based on a project-specific screening analysis.)
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially
Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to
a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from
Section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).
5) “Reviewed Under Previous Document.” Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,
program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
16
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the
following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used: Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures: For effects that are “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
17
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
6.1 Aesthetics/Visual Resources
Would the proposal:
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed Under
Previous Document
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
X
d. Create a new source of
substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
X
6.1.1 Aesthetic/Visual Resources Setting
The proposed facility would consist of a two-story structure, approximately 75,000 square feet in area and
similar in massing to the existing jail, on a 1.5 acre pad at the base of a small hill between the existing jail
and a County-owned and operated photo-voltaic solar energy facility. State Route 70 is not a state-
designated scenic highway in this area.
Views towards the proposed project site are provided in Photos 8 through 11. The view from the project
site to the west, south and east are of County facilities; the view to the north is of the fenced State Water
Project diversion canal and, in the distance, south Table Mountain. The Butte County Superior Court,
administrative offices and parking lots would look down (to the north) on the proposed facility. From State
Route 70, about 350 feet to the west, the proposed structure would be visible to southbound traffic and also
partially visible from Nelson Park just west and across State Route 70. Views from County Center Drive
on the east would be obscured by the existing Sheriff’s Office and Jail. Some properties about 1,500 feet
to the north, near Garden Drive and Table Mountain Boulevard, would be able to see a portion of the
proposed Supplemental Jail Facility through trees and the Thermalito Water and Sewer District water tank.
18
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Photo 8. View south from SR 70 and Garden Drive overpass. Photo 9. View south from Garden Drive of jail, courthouse, solar system.
Photo 10. View west from Table Mountain Blvd near Freeman Trail. Photo 11. View southeast across SR 70 from Nelson Park.
19
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
The current night-time lighting environment includes downward looking security lighting around the existing
jail and other law enforcement buildings; glare onto surrounding properties is minimal.
6.1.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. In general, the visual dominance of a project and its affect upon the sensitivity of a view towards
or from the project site may be used to evaluate impacts to foreground and background visual resources.
The project site and surroundings are developed and not considered part of a scenic vista from an offsite
location. The vista from the proposed project site of south Table Mountain, about one mile to the north,
could be considered scenic; however, no view of that vista from the surrounding buildings would be impaired
with construction of the project. As such, construction and operation of the proposed supplemental Jail
Facility would have no impact on a scenic vista.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. There are no trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings within a state scenic highway, or other
scenic resources on or near the proposed project site and there would be no impact upon such scenic
resources with construction and operation of the project as proposed.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
Less Than Significant Impact. As noted in the environmental setting for this section, the proposed project
site is within an area that has been developed with the jail and other County buildings and facilities for
decades. Except from the north, the proposed project site itself is largely (although, as discussed above,
not entirely) hidden from outside view by other buildings and topography. Given its size and setting, the
proposed project would have a less than significant impact the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant with Incorporation Of Mitigation Measure #1. As discussed in the Project
Description, nighttime exterior security lighting mounted on exterior walls of the proposed facility would be
necessary and may adversely affect southbound traffic on State Route 70 or the nighttime skies
experienced by the residential neighborhood north of Garden Drive at Table Mountain Boulevard if not
directed towards the ground. Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce this potential effect to less than significant
by requiring that all exterior lighting be designed to minimize off-site glare.
Mitigation Measure #1: Minimize Off-Site Glare from Exterior Lighting.
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans
that states:
“All exterior lighting for the proposed supplemental jail facility shall be designed and directed to minimize
nighttime off-site glare. To the extent feasible in consideration of security needs, exterior lighting shall be
downcast so that only the intended area is illuminated and off-site glare is contained, consistent with the
requirements of Title 19, Chapter 19.31 (Development Lighting) of Butte County Code.”
20
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Timing: Exterior lighting shall be included on final building plans subject to approval by the County. Butte
County General Services shall insure that lighting has been installed as specified in the building plans and
consistent with this mitigation measure’s intent to minimize glare to the extent feasible prior to building
occupancy.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall insure that this Mitigation Measure #1 note is included
with (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans, and shall respond to any complaints
regarding off-site glare that may arise.
6.2 Agricultural Resources
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
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
12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by
Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
21
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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
6.2.1 Agricultural Resources Setting
The proposed project would be located on an approximately 1.5 acre site between the existing jail and a
solar energy facility just east of State Route 70 and south of the State Water Project Thermalito Power
Canal. The proposed project site, on land designated as Public Facilities by the City of Oroville General
Plan, has not been in agricultural use since at least the establishment of the 1964 County Jail.
The United States Department of Agriculture Web Soil Survey identifies the proposed project site soil as
Thompson Flat – Oroville, 2 to 9 percent slopes. Thompson Flat is a fine sandy loam and Oroville is a
gravelly fine sandy loam; both are in Hydrologic Soil Group C, poorly drained with low infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted.
The proposed project parcel and surrounding County Center parcels are designated as Urban and Built-Up
Land by the Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Grazing lands are
to the north across the Thermalito Power Canal; however, those parcels south of Garden Drive are
designated for development by the City of Oroville General Plan.
6.2.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact. The proposed project site is not located on or near prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland
of statewide Importance as shown on Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program maps. Construction and
use of the proposed facility will have no impact on these resources.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract?
No Impact. The proposed project site is on land zoned by the City of Oroville for Public and Quasi-Public
22
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Use and is not subject to a Williamson Act Contract. Construction and use of the proposed facility will have
no impact on existing zoning for an agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code
section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The proposed project site is on land zoned by the City of Oroville for Public Use and is not
defined as forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code section 4526)or timberland zoned for Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g)). Construction and use of the proposed Jail Facility will have no
impact on these timber production related lands.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. Please see sub-section (b) and (c); construction and operation of the proposed facility will have
no impact in terms of the loss or conversion of forest land to a non-forest use.
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?
No Impact. The proposed facility will provide jail, program and administrative space for AB 109 inmates
that the County has and will continue to accommodate. As noted in the Project Description, the proposed
facility would provide for an increase in 58 inmates and eight staff. As discussed in Section 6.13 (Population
and Housing) below, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact upon housing demand
that, in turn, could result in conversion of agricultural land. The purpose of the proposed facility is to better
accommodate and serve the County’s inmate population, including AB 109 inmates; given the proportionally
small amount of housing necessary for eight staff, there will be no impact that could result in conversion
of farmland to a non-agricultural use.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.3 Air Quality
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
X
23
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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 releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
X
d. Expose sensitive receptors
to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
e. Create objectionable odors
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
6.3.1 Air Quality Setting
The approximately 1.5 acre project site would occupy a portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre parcel at the
north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities that comprise Butte
County’s administrative center along County Center Drive, located about one and one half miles north of
the Feather River and downtown Oroville. The project parcel is in the midst of lands that have been
developed for decades, about 350 feet east of State Route 70 and immediately south of the State Water
Project Thermalito Power Canal. There are no industrial or manufacturing facilities within three miles of the
proposed project site and traffic on State Route 70 has the most significant daily effect on air quality in the
immediate vicinity. As required by Butte County General Plan Policy COS-P2.3, the proposed facility will
be built to LEED Silver or equivalent standards. LEED is a set of rating systems for the design, construction,
operation, and maintenance of energy efficient, low impact buildings
Air quality is a function of a variety of local and regional influences. Butte County is located within the
Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB), comprising the northern half of California’s 400-mile long Great
Central Valley. The SVAB encompasses approximately 14,994 square miles with a largely flat valley floor
24
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
(excepting the Sutter Buttes) about 200 miles long and up to 150 miles wide, bordered on its east, north
and west by the Sierra Nevada, Cascade and Coast mountain ranges, respectively.
The SVAB, containing 11 counties and some two million people, is divided into two air quality planning
areas based on the amount of pollutant transport from one area to the other and the level of emissions
within each. Butte County is within the Northern Sacramento Valley Air Basin (NSVAB), which is composed
of Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Shasta, Sutter, Tehama, and Yuba Counties.
Emissions from the urbanized portion of the basin (Sacramento, Yolo, Solano, and Placer Counties)
dominate the emission inventory for the Sacramento Valley Air Basin, and on-road motor vehicles are the
primary source of emissions in the Sacramento metropolitan area. While pollutant concentrations have
generally declined over the years, additional emission reductions will be needed to attain the State and
national ambient air quality standards in the SVAB.
Seasonal weather patterns have a significant effect upon regional and local air quality. The Sacramento
Valley and Butte County have a Mediterranean climate, characterized by hot, dry summers and cool, wet
winters. Winter weather is governed by cyclonic storms from the North Pacific, while summer weather is
typically subject to a high pressure cell that deflects storms from the region.
Table 2 provides the attainment setting for criteria air pollutants in Butte County.
Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation
1-hour ozone Nonattainment --
8-hour ozone Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon monoxide Attainment Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Attainment
24-Hour PM10 Nonattainment Attainment
24-Hour PM2.5 No Standard Nonattainment
Annual PM10 Attainment No Standard
Annual PM2.5 Attainment Attainment
Source: Butte County Air Quality Management District, 2013
Table 2. Butte County Ambient Air Quality Attainment Status - August, 2013
Diminished air quality within Butte County largely results from local air pollution sources, transport of
pollutants into the area from the south, the NSVAB topography, and prevailing wind patterns and certain
inversion conditions that differ with the season. During the summer, sinking air forms a “lid” over the region,
confining pollution within a shallow layer near the ground that leads to photochemical smog and visibility
problems. During winter nights, air near the ground cools while the air above remains relatively warm,
resulting in little air movement and localized pollution “hot spots” near emission sources. Carbon monoxide,
nitrogen oxides, particulate matters and lead particulate concentrations tend to elevate during winter
inversion conditions when little air movement may persist for weeks.
As a result, high levels of particulate matter (primarily fine particulates or PM2.5) and ground-level ozone
are the pollutants of most concern to the NSVAB Districts. Ground-level ozone, the principal component
of smog, forms when reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) – together known as ozone
precursor pollutants – react in strong sunlight. Ozone levels tend to be highest in Butte County during late
spring through early fall, when sunlight is strong and constant, and emissions of the precursor pollutants
are highest.
25
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Federal and state standards have been established for six criteria pollutants, including ozone (O3), carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulates less than 10 and 2.5 microns in
diameter (PM10 and PM2.5), and lead (Pb). California has also set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide,
vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles. The nonattainment pollutants of concern for Butte County
are ozone and PM2.5; Tables 3 and 4 summarize recent ozone and PM2.5 trends in Butte County, showing
a need to reduce days exceeding national and state standards.
1-Hour
Observations
1-Hour
Year State State National
2012 0 25 5 0.088 0.08 0.077
2011 0 16 6 0.094 0.081 0.077
2010 0 14 4 0.085 0.078 0.079
Source: California Air Resources Board Air Quality Trends Summary: http//wwww.arb.ca.gov/adam/trends/trends2.php
Table 3. Butte County Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Summary for Ozone 2010 - 2012
Days > Standard 8-Hour Averages
8-Hour
Maximum Maximum
National Standard
Design Value
Nat'l State Nat'l State
2012 **12.1 *15 **28.6 123.3
2011 36.5 12.1 14.6 10.1 15 46.2 35 51.8 66
2010 0 8 10.9 11.5 18 29 51 31.9 39.8
1D.V. = National Design Value
2D.V. = State Designation Value
*There was insufficient (or no) data available to determine the value.
Table 4. Butte County Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Summary for PM2.5 2010 - 2012
Year
Est. Days >
Nat'l '06
Std.
ua
Average Nat'l
Ann. Std.
D.V.¹
State
Annual
D.V.²
Nat'l '06
Std. 98th
Percentile
Nat'l '06
24-Hr Std.
D.V.¹
High 24-Hour Average
Source: California Air Resources Board Air Quality Trends Summary: http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/trends/trends2.php
All concentrations expressed in micrograms per cubic meter.
State and federal exceedances are indicated in bold. An exceedance is not necessarily a violation.
State and national statistics may differ for the following reasons:State statstcs ae based o Caoa appoved sapes, weeas atoa statstcs ae based o sapes usg edea
reference or equivalent methods. State and national statistics may therefore be based on different samplers. State criteria for
Air quality in California is subject to the federal Clean Air Act (administered by the Environmental Protection
Agency) and the more rigorous regulations provided by the California Clean Air Act. The California Air
Resources Board administers the California Clean Air Act and delegates monitoring and regulation to local
Air Quality Management Districts; the Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD) is
responsible for attainment and maintenance of air quality standards in Butte County pursuant to federal and
state Ambient Air Quality Standards.
The BCAQMD acts as a commenting agency for local projects subject to CEQA and discretionary approval
by a lead agency. The BCAQMD CEQA Handbook, which is in the process of being revised, provides
guidance to lead agencies in regards to evaluating potential air quality and greenhouse gas impacts that
could result from construction and operation of a project. The current and draft Handbook thresholds for
non-attainment criteria air pollutants of concern are provided in Table 5.
26
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Pollutant Level A Level B Level C Construction-Related Operational-Related
NOx <25 lbs/day > 25 lbs/day > 137 lbs/day 137 lbs/day, not to exceed
4.5 tons/year 25 lbs/day
ROG <25 lbs/day > 25 lbs/day > 137 lbs/day 137 lbs/day, not to exceed
4.5 tons/year 25 lbs/day
PM10 < 80 lbs/day > 80 lbs/day > 137 lbs/day 80 lbs/day 80 lbs/day
2008 CEQA Handbook DRAFT CEQA Handbook
Table 5. Current and Draft Butte County Air Quality Management District
Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants of Concern
Source: BCAQMD 2008 CEQA Handbook and DRAFT CEQA Handbook, April 2014
The currently applicable thresholds pertain to operational – not construction – emissions. Construction
thresholds were not established for the 2008 CEQA Handbook because they were considered temporary
and therefore less than significant. The draft Handbook is considering construction thresholds as indicated
in Table 5.
6.3.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The California Clean Air Act requires preparation of air quality attainment
plans for designated National and/or California Ambient Air Quality Standards nonattainment or
maintenance areas. In order to meet these standards, attainment plans first project future emissions based
upon growth assumptions for the jurisdictions within a given plan area. Measures are then promulgated to
limit nonattainment emissions to the required standard. In general, a project subject to CEQA conflicts with
or obstructs implementation of the applicable attainment plan if it would result in or induce growth in
population, employment, land use, or regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that is inconsistent with the
growth (and therefore the emission projection) assumptions in the applicable attainment plan.
The applicable air quality plan for Butte County is the Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2012
Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan (2012 Attainment Plan). Although the 2012 Attainment Plan provides
estimated ROG and NOx emissions from 2006 to 2020 for the entire Northern Sacramento Valley, they are
not apportioned by local air district, county or municipality. Baseline and projected population and vehicle
miles travelled data by County are also not provided by the 2012 Attainment Plan. The Butte County
Association of Governments (BCAG) does provide projections for population, employment and VMT
through 2030 for Butte County. As required by the federal Clean Air Act, BCAG also provides a
conformance analysis that provides estimates for pollutant emissions for the County through 2035 that are
based upon population, employment and VMT estimates. Population, employment, VMT and air pollutant
emissions projections are provided in Table 6.
As noted, up to eight additional employees will be working at the proposed facility. The addition of eight
employees would represent approximately 0.3% of BCAG-projected employment growth in the City of
Oroville between the years 2010 and 2035, and therefore would not exceed growth forecasts on which the
BCAG Conformance Analysis is based. Similarly, the 96 daily trips estimated for commuting and visits to
and from the proposed facility in Section 6.16.2(a) would not result in a significant addition to the 2035 VMT
projected in Table 6. Therefore, the project would not conflict with BCAG’s population, employment, VMT
or pollutant emission projections, and its impact would be less than significant in regards to
27
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
2030 BCAG Projections1
VMT 6,439,000
Population 334,842
ROG (lbs/day)3,410
NOx (lbs/day)6,140
CO (lbs/day)22,290
PM (lbs/day)2 670
Table 6. County 2030 Population, VMT and Pollutant
Projections
Source: Butte County General Plan 2030 EIR, Table 4.3-51 2030 Butte County VMT and emissions projections were interpolated
from 2025 and 2035 data presented in the Draft Environmental Impact
Report for the 2008 RTP and the associated Final Conformity Analysis
and Determination .
2 Emissions represent total PM (PM10 + PM2.5)
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #2 and #3. Emissions with
the potential to affect air quality would occur with the building and operation of the proposed facility. The
equipment and land clearance necessary to build the jail structure and its access road would temporarily
emit criteria air pollutants including NOx, diesel particulate matter and fugitive dust. Construction would
involve machinery that burns fuel or uses electrical energy, and the application of architectural coatings that
emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs), collectively acting as ozone precursors. Its operation would
involve various direct and indirect emissions of air pollutants associated with staff and inmate transportation
to and from the facility, energy for lighting, heating, water, wastewater, and solid waste disposal, and
emissions of volatile organic compounds from painted surfaces and asphalt.
As discussed in the Project Description, per Butte County General Plan Policy COS-P2.3 the proposed
facility will be built to LEED silver standard or its equivalent mandating, among numerous other low energy
requirements, the use of low-VOC architectural coatings. Butte County General Services will have a
Commissioning Plan prepared by a LEED accredited professional to insure compliance with the LEED
Silver or equivalent standards, including the use of low-VOC architectural coatings. A Commissioning Plan
is prepared to insure that a LEED designed structure is built and performing to all LEED standards for
energy efficiency and low pollution emission, including the use of low VOC materials and paints. As
indicated in the LEED Silver/CALGreen Tier 1 comparison in Attachment B, the proposed facility will be
approximately equal to the CALGreen Tier 1 energy efficiency standard of 15% above the current Title 24
standards, consistent with Butte County’s Climate Action Plan Government Operations Policy GO8.
CalEEMod 2013.2.2 was used to model the project’s construction and operational emissions. A jail is not
among the default land use types available for CalEEMod and a four year university was selected as the
institutional use most aligned with that of the proposed facility in terms of its multi-use function of housing
and programs. As discussed in Section 6.16.2, 96 additional daily trips for staff and visitors are estimated
for the proposed facility; the mode split between personal vehicles and public transit, walking or cycling is
not known. The CalEEMod report is included as Attachment C.
Nonattainment emissions expected with construction and operation of the proposed facility are provided
28
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
with BCAQMD thresholds in Table 7 and a complete report of emissions and model assumptions are
provided in Appendix B.
Phase ROG NOx Total PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Total PM2.5
Unmitigated Construction 70.0 29.8 7.3 3.0 1.7 4.3
Mitigated Construction 70.0 29.8 4.2 1.3 1.7 2.7
Unmitigated Operation 3.4 4.5 1.3 0.3 0.1 0.4
Mitigated Operation 2.9 4.2 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.4
Table 7. Estimated Non-Attainment Emissions Resulting from the Project (lbs/day)
Model run for worst-case winter emissions scenario. Fugitive dust control per Mitigation Measure #2 incorporated in model. Per
Mitigation Measure #3, all vehicles to comply with applicable CARB regulations for on and off-road vehicles. See Attachment C
CalEEMOD report for assumptions and specific calculations.
Again, and as indicated by Table 5, the BCAQMD does not currently have thresholds of significance for
construction emissions. The draft Handbook proposes a maximum of 137 lbs/day for ROG and NOx and
80 lbs/day for total PM. The modeling results in Table 7 indicate that with incorporation of LEED Silver low
VOC paint standards ROG emissions would be about 70 lbs/day for construction and 8.3 lbs/day for
operation of the proposed project – below the Draft Handbook threshold of 137 lbs/day.
In order to minimize construction dust, NOx and diesel PM, Mitigation Measures #2 and #3 would require
a variety of measures and controls including the use of Tier 3 motors and Level 3 particulate filters on heavy
equipment. These measures have been included in the CalEEMod model results in Table 7. With
construction and operation of the proposed facility according to LEED Silver or equivalent standards and
implementation of Mitigation Measures #2 and #3, the project will have a less than significant impact
upon any BCAQMD air quality standard or in regards to contributing to an existing or projected air quality
violation.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #2 and #3. As indicated in
Table 2, Butte County is non-attainment for 8-hour ozone and 24-hour PM2.5 (federal designations).
Mitigation Measures #2 and #3 will reduce construction-related NOx emissions to less than significant as
discussed in sub-section (b). Operational modeling estimates provided in Table 7 indicate that the
operation of the proposed project will have a less than significant effect in regards to non-attainment
pollutants in Butte County. Regardless, the proposed facility will be built to LEED Silver or equivalent
standards which will further reduce operational energy demand and associated air quality emissions to a
less than significant level.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #2 and #3. Sensitive
receptors are individuals who, by virtue of old or young age or health status, are especially vulnerable to
air pollutant emissions. Typical land uses associated with sensitive receptors include hospitals,
convalescent homes, day care facilities and schools. In this instance, sensitive receptors may include
individuals in the surrounding community or members of the jail population in the future facility (if approved).
As discussed in the Environmental Setting, the nearest residences are about 1,900 feet away; the nearest
school is Nelson School, about 1,800 feet to the southwest (see Exhibit 1).
29
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
With implementation of Mitigation Measures #2 and #3 and construction of the proposed facility according
to LEED Silver or equivalent standards, both operational and construction emissions are expected to be
less than BCAQMD criteria air pollutant thresholds.
The proposed facility is about 350 feet east of State Route 70 and exhaust from passing traffic could, over
time, have an impact upon sensitive receptors among the inmate and staff population. Currently the
BCAQMD CEQA Handbook recommends that the siting of sensitive land uses within 500 feet or a freeway
with more than 100,000 vehicles per day be avoided. As discussed in Section 6.16, the 2012 Caltrans
volume count for State Route 70 shows that on average 20,500 vehicles pass by Nelson Avenue daily. In
any event, the LEED Silver or equivalent standards for the proposed facility require a variety of “Indoor
Environmental Quality” measures, including “Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance,” “Outdoor Air
Delivery Monitoring,” “Increased Ventilation,” and several standards for low-emitting indoor architectural
coatings. As discussed in sub-section (c), the County will have a Commissioning Plan prepared to insure
that the proposed facility is built consistent with LEED Silver or equivalent standards, including those for
indoor air quality that would be protective of the health and welfare of inmates and staff. Accordingly, there
will be a less than significant impact to receptors both outside and within the proposed facility.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #3. Objectionable odors during
construction could include diesel fumes from heavy equipment and fumes from asphalt and architectural
coatings (paint, stains and waterproofing), but these odors would be temporary and dissipate with distance.
Given the substantial distance between the project site and possible sensitive receptors in the surrounding
community, objectionable odors are unlikely to have an impact from either construction or operation of the
proposed facility. Once the proposed facility is operating, the primary source of odors could be solid waste
disposal and the proposed facility would be regularly served by a licensed solid waste hauler. Additionally,
the proposed facility would be connected to a sanitary sewer and odors associated with wastewater would
not be present. Inmates in the existing jail, however, would be less than 150 feet from construction and
diesel fumes may constitute an odor impact (as well as health impact as discussed in Section 6.8.2).
Mitigation Measure #3 would minimize diesel fumes and this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure #2: Ensure Adequate Dust Control During Construction
Plan Requirements: The following note shall be included on (or on an additional page to) building and site
development plans:
“The applicant shall implement the following specific mitigation measures to ensure adequate dust control:
• Water shall be applied by means of truck(s), hoses and/or sprinklers as needed prior to any land
clearing or earth movement to minimize dust emission.
• Haul vehicles transporting soil into or out of the property shall be covered.
• Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp
enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such
areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15
miles per hour.
• On-site vehicles shall be limited to a speed which minimizes dust emissions on unpaved roads.
Unpaved roads may be graveled to reduce dust emissions.
• Haul roads shall be sprayed down at the end of the work shift to form a thin crust. This application
of water shall be in addition to the minimum rate of application.
• Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to
30
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
prevent dust generation.
• Existing roads and streets adjacent to the project shall be cleaned at least once per day if dirt or
mud from the project site has been tracked onto these roadways, unless conditions warrant a
greater frequency.
• Construction workers shall park in designated parking area(s) to help reduce dust emissions.
• Other measures that may be required as determined appropriate by the BCAQMD or Butte County
General Services in order to control dust.
• Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust
complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The telephone
number of the Butte County Air Quality Management District (855-332-9400) shall be visible to
ensure compliance with BCAQMD Rule 200 & 205 (Nuisance and Fugitive Dust Emissions).
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be adhered to throughout all construction phases of the project
(clearance, grading, compaction, paving, construction).
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall ensure that this Mitigation Measure #2 note is included
on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. General Services inspectors shall
spot check and shall ensure compliance on-site. General Services and Butte County Air Quality
Management District inspectors shall respond to nuisance complaints.
Mitigation Measure #3: Minimize Combustion Emissions from Heavy-Duty Construction Equipment
Plan Requirements: The following note shall be included on (or on an additional page to) building and site
development plans:
“The applicant shall implement the following mitigation measures to mitigate combustion emissions from
heavy-duty construction equipment:
• Diesel-powered equipment shall be compliant with all applicable State of California air quality
regulations for on and off-road vehicles.
• Maintain all off-road equipment in proper tune and regularly serviced according to manufacturer’s
specification.
• Electrify equipment where feasible.
• Substitute gasoline-powered for diesel-powered, where feasible.
• Use alternative fueled construction equipment on site where feasible, such as compressed natural
gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be adhered to throughout all construction phases of the project
(clearance, grading, compaction, paving, construction).
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall ensure that this Mitigation Measure #3 note is included
on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. General Services shall insure that
contractor(s) have the requisite California Air Resources Board compliance certificates for on- and off-road
vehicles. General Services and Butte County Air Quality Management District inspectors shall respond to
nuisance complaints.
31
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.4 Biological Resources
Would the proposal:
Potentially Significant Impact
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than Significant Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed Under Previous Document
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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 or 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 and 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 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
6.4.1 Biological Resources Setting
The approximately 1.5 acre project site would occupy a portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre parcel at the
north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities that comprise Butte
County’s administrative center along County Center Drive, about one and one half miles north of the
Feather River and downtown Oroville. Immediately east and south of the project parcel are County
buildings and parking lots; just to the west is a 2.5 acre solar facility and State Route 70. Due north is the
Thermalito Power Canal, a concrete lined conveyance with no riparian or other vegetation.
32
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Landcover data prepared in 2011 for the Butte Regional Conservation Plan (BRCP) designates the
proposed project parcel as “urban.” As indicated in Table 8, landcover within one-half mile of the proposed
project parcel is primarily grassland and urban.
Cover Type Acres Percent of Total
Altered Vernal Pool <1 < 0.1%
Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest 2 0.3%
Disturbed Ground 31 4.2%
Emergent Wetland 5 0.7%
Grassland 244 33.4%
Grassland w/ Vernal Swale Complex 85 11.6%
Irrigated Cropland 21 2.9%
Open Water 38 5.2%
Ranchettes Open 73 10.0%
Urban 232 31.7%
Total 731 100%
Table 8. Landcover within One-Half Mile of the Project
Parcel
Annual Grasslands
Where the ground has not been compacted from previous disturbance associated with construction of the
solar photovoltaic system, the project parcel itself largely supports what may be characterized as annual
grasslands, consisting of non-native grasses and forbs such as medusa head grass, soft chess, and yellow
star thistle. An oak tree and other shrubs at the outlet to the Thermalito Power Canal would not be disturbed
by the proposed project.
The primary landcover within a half mile of the project site which does offer habitat are grasslands north of
the Thermalito Power Canal (see Figure 1). Grasslands can offer habitat for a variety of plants, insects,
amphibians, reptiles, small mammals and birds. Although landcover mapping for the Butte Regional
Conservation Plan shows that the grassland to the north of the Thermalito Power Canal contains vernal
pool swales, they are not present in the proposed project parcel (BCAG, 2012, Figure 3.12).
Jurisdictional Waters of the United States
Waters of the United States (U.S.), including wetlands, broadly include navigable waterways, and tributaries
of navigable waterways, and adjacent wetlands. Although several sub-types have been described,
wetlands are generally considered to be areas that are periodically or permanently inundated by surface
water or groundwater, supporting vegetation adapted to life in saturated soil. Jurisdictional wetlands are
vegetated areas that meet specific vegetation, soil, and hydrologic criteria defined by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE). The USACE, subject to review by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, has
authority to determine the jurisdictional status of waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Jurisdictional
wetlands and Waters of the U.S. include, but are not limited to, perennial and intermittent creeks and
drainages, lakes, seeps, and springs; emergent marshes; riparian wetlands; and seasonal wetlands.
Wetland and waters of the U.S. provide critical habitat components, such as nesting sites and reliable
sources of water for a wide variety of species including, in Butte County, several special-status plants and
wildlife.
Aside from a single cottonwood tree that would be removed with construction of the proposed facility, the
ephemeral drainage channel does not support riparian vegetation and no wetlands are present (see Photos
33
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
1 through 7). As noted, landcover mapping for the Butte Regional Conservation Plan shows vernal pools
are present in the grasslands across the Thermalito Power Canal. A small, seasonal creek descends from
the base of South Table Mountain and a number of seeps are also located in the grasslands north and east
of Table Mountain Boulevard. No wetlands or riparian vegetation are present on the County Center lands
south of the Thermalito Power Canal, however.
Special-Status Species
Many species of plants and animals within the State of California have low populations, limited distributions,
or both. Such species may be considered “rare” and are vulnerable to extirpation as the state’s human
population grows and the habitats these species occupy are converted to agricultural and urban uses. A
sizable number of native species and animals have been formally designated as threatened or endangered
under State and Federal endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as “Candidates”
for such listing and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has designated others as
“Species of Special Concern”. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed its own lists of
native plants considered rare, threatened or endangered. Collectively, these plants and animals are
referred to as “special status species.” California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15065
requires a mandatory finding of significance for projects that have the potential to substantially degrade or
reduce the habitat of a threatened or endangered species, and to fully disclose and mitigate to the maximum
extent feasible impacts to special status resources.
Various direct and indirect impacts to biological resources may result from the small amount of development
enabled by the project, including the loss and/or alteration of existing undeveloped open space that may
serve as habitat. Increased vehicle trips to and from the project site can result in wildlife mortality and
disruption of movement patterns within the project vicinity.
Tables 9 and 10 present the results of a California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) QuickView query
for special-status wildlife and plant occurrences within the Oroville 7.5 Min Quadrangle. The CNDDB
cannot be used solely to predict the presence or lack of presence of wildlife species in a given location.
The potential for occurrence at the project site for the species noted in Tables 9 and 10 were evaluated by
consulting the special-status species accounts provided by the 2012 Draft Butte Regional Conservation
Plan and the Department of Fish and Wildlife Threatened and Endangered Species lists.
34
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Scientific Common Federal State CDFW1
Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle FP ; WL
Low: no suitable nesting habitat and
poor foraging habitat
Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite FP
Low: no suitable nesting habitat and
poor foraging habitat
Haliaeetus
leucocephalus Bald Eagle Delisted Endangered FP
Low: no suitable nesting habitat and
poor foraging habitat
Pandion haliaetus osprey None None WL
Unlikely: no suitable nesting or
foraging habitat
Ardea herodias great blue heron None None -
Unlikely: no suitable nesting or
foraging habitat
Falco mexicanus prairie falcon None None WL
Low: no suitable nesting habitat and
poor foraging habitat
Laterallus
jamaicensis
coturniculus
California black
rail None Threatened FP Unlikely: no marsh habitat
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy
shrimp Threatened None -Unlikely: no vernal pool habitat
Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool
tadpole shrimp Endangered None -Unlikely: no vernal pool habitat
Eumops perotis
californicus
western mastiff
bat None None SSC
Low: prefers deep crevices for
roosting habitat; could feed in and
around site, however
Corynorhinus
townsendii
Townsend's big-
eared bat None
Candidate
Threatened SSC
Low: roosts in caves, tunnels,
mines; very sensitive to
disturbances
Emys marmorata
western pond
turtle None None SSC
None: no wetland or suitable aquatic
habitat
Phrynosoma
blainvillii
coast horned
lizard None None SSC
Low to moderate: prefers exposed
gravelly sandy substrate such as
2 clearings in riparian woodlands, or
annual grassland with scattered
perennial species
Table 9. Special-Status Wildlife Species Occurrences - Oroville 7.5 Min Topographic
Quandrangle
2 California Native Plant Society Designations: 1B.1 - seriously endangered in California; 1B.2 - fairly endangered in
California
1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Designations: SSC - Species of Special Concern; FP - Federally Proposed;
WL - Watch List
3 Potential for occurrence derived from 2013 Butte Regional Conservation Plan Preliminary Public Draft Appendix A
Species Accounts and CDFW Species of Special Concern and Threatened and Endangered Species Accounts, and the
California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System
Regulatory Status Potential for Occurrence at the
Proposed Project Site3
Name
Source: California Natural Diversity Database Quick Viewer for the Oroville Quadrangle
35
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Scientific Common Federal State CDFW
CA Rare
Plant Rank1
Paronychia ahartii
Ahart's
paronychia 1B.1
Low: habitat includes grasslands with
vernal pool, altered vernal pool and
vernal swale complex which are not
present.
Trifolium jokerstii
Butte County
golden clover 1B.2
Low; typically found at margins of
vernal pools but also at edges of
ephemeral streams. Not expected due
to previous and surrounding
disturbances and competition from
non-native grasses.
Juncus leiospermus
var. leiospermus
Red Bluff
dwarf rush 1B.1
Low: inhabits vernally moist habitats,
including vernal pools, within valley
grassland.
Limnanthes floccosa
ssp. californica
Butte County
meadowfoam Endangered Endangered 1B.1
Low: primarily occurs in vernal swales
and along margins of vernal pools on
alluvial terraces. Has been found in
drainage ditches, but not expected
due to previous and surrounding
disturbances and competition from
non-native grasses.
Hibiscus
lasiocarpos var.
occidentalis
woolly rose-
mallow 1B.2
Low: lacks suitable marsh or swamp
habitat.
Castilleja
rubicundula var.
rubicundula pink creamsacs 1B.2
Low: found in valley and foothill
grassland but not expected due to
previous and surrounding
disturbances and competition from
non-native grasses.
2 Potential for occurrence derived from 2013 Butte Regional Conservation Plan Preliminary Public Draft Appendix A Species
Accounts and CDFW Species of Special Concern and Threatened and Endangered Species Accounts, and the California Wildlife
Habitat Relationship System
Table 10. Special-Status Plant Species Occurrences - Oroville 7.5 Min Topographic
Quandrangle
Name Regulatory Status
Potential for Occurrence at the
Proposed Project Site2
1 California Native Plant Society Designations: 1B.1 - plants rare, threatened or seriously endangered in California and elsewhere;
1B.2 - plants rare, threatened or fairly endangered in California or elsewhere
Source: California Natural Diversity Database Quick Viewer for the Oroville Quadrangle
(Note that fall and spring-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and steelhead (Oncorhynchus
mykiss irideus) were included in the Oroville Quadrangle query results but are excluded from Table 9 as
there is no suitable aquatic habitat on or near the proposed project site and no impact could occur to these
species.)
36
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
In regards to sensitive terrestrial plant communities, the CNDDB query noted occurrences in the Oroville
Quadrangle of Great Valley Cottonwood Riparian Forest, Great Valley Willow Scrub, and Northern Basalt
Flow Vernal Pool. None of these terrestrial communities are present on or near the proposed project parcel.
6.4.2 Impact and Mitigation Analysis
Would the proposal:
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project entails a two-story approximately 75,000 square
foot structure set on a pad of about 65,100 square feet (1.5 acres), located on undeveloped but previously
disturbed land between the existing jail, a solar facility, the Thermalito Power Canal and, to the south, the
County Courthouse.
In regards to avian habitat, the project parcel and its environs do not provide suitable nesting habitat for the
bird species listed in Table 9 and, due to its proximity to the County Jail, other intensive land uses and small
size relative to the grasslands north of the Thermalito Power Canal, only marginal foraging habitat for those
species that feed on small mammals. Similarly, western mastiff and Townsend’s big-eared bats (Eumops
perotis californicus and Corynorhinus townsendii, respectively) – which prefer crevices, caves and
otherwise more secluded roosting sites not present in or near the proposed project site – are not expected
to be significantly affected as the proposed facility would occupy a small portion within an already developed
area. Finally, the bare gravelly, sandy substrate found adjacent to and within stream channels that is
preferred by the coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) is not present within the proposed project site.
In regards to the special-status plant occurrences listed in Table 10, all except pink creamsacs (Castilleja
rubicundula var. rubicundula) require or prefer vernally moist habitat that is not present in the proposed
project site. Three species, the CNPS List 1B.2 Butte County golden clover (Trifolium jokerstii), the
endangered Butte County meadowfoam (Limnanthes 37loccose ssp. Californica) and the CNPS List 1B.1
pink creamsacs (Castilleja rubicundula var. rubicundula), while also preferring moist habitat, do occur along
the margins of ephemeral streams and drainage ditches such as that crossing the proposed project site.
However, due to past disturbance and the robust growth non-native grasses which would out-compete
these native species, the potential for their occurrence is low.
The small size of the project site, its location surrounded for decades by development and its lack of
significant wildlife habitat or supporting conditions for locally occurring special-status plant species indicates
that construction of the proposed project will have a less than significant impact, 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.
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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. No riparian or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is apparent
within the project site, nor is it expected to occur given the lack of necessary hydrology and intensive
37
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
disturbances that have occurred in the immediate vicinity for the past decades. According to landcover
mapping done for the Butte Regional Conservation Plan, vernal pools are present in the grasslands across
the Thermalito Power Canal and a number of seeps may be found around the seasonal drainages emerging
from the base of South Table Mountain. The proposed project would have no direct effect upon these or
other wetland features as they are not present within the proposed project parcel, and it is unlikely to have
a significantly greater indirect effect upon vernal pool to the north than presently occurs with operation of
the existing jail facility, the Thermalito Water and Sewer District maintenance yard and other land uses
already in the area.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
or the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means)?
No Impact. No federally protected wetlands (including marsh or vernal pool) are evident in the project site.
As noted, according to landcover mapping done for the Butte Regional Conservation Plan, vernal pools are
present in the grasslands across the Thermalito Power Canal and a number of seeps may be found in the
seasonal drainages emerging from the base of South Table Mountain. Again, the proposed project would
have no direct or indirect effect upon these wetland features. Periodic stormwater runoff drains through the
proposed project site and flows to the Thermalito Power Canal but no wetland features are associated with
this drainage channel. Construction of the proposed facility will not remove, fill or interrupt the flow of
surface water such that a substantial adverse effect on a wetland would occur. Construction and operation
of the proposed facility would have no impact upon any federally protected wetlands.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish and
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede
the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site, located at the northern end of the County
Center campus between two developed parcels, does not provide for the movement of any wildlife species.
While the Thermalito Power Canal may occasionally contain fish, it provides minimal fish habitat due to its
lack of riparian vegetation, supportive and natural channel morphology, and missing benthic community.
As the proposed 1.5 acre project site is surrounded by land uses that have been developed for decades
and does not support any significant habitat, it does not serve as a native resident or migratory wildlife
corridor. The proposed project site is in the vicinity of significant open space to the north and east but,
given its small size in an already developed area, would have a less than significant impact upon the
movement of any native resident or migratory fish and wildlife species or with established native resident
or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree
preservation policy ordinance?
No Impact. Although Butte County does not have an adopted oak tree preservation ordinance, it does
comply with Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 for the mitigation of impacts to oak woodlands. In this
instance however, and as noted in the Project Description and Environmental Setting, there are no oak
woodlands or other protected tree species within the project parcels (aside from a single oak tree near the
outlet to the Thermalito Power Canal which would not be affected). The Butte County and City of Oroville
General Plans do have various policies encouraging avoidance of sensitive natural features such as
wetlands, special-status species and streams, but no such features are in the proposed project site. The
proposed project will have no impact in regards to a conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources such as a tree preservation policy ordinance.
38
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is within the planning area for the Butte Regional
Conservation Plan (BRCP) and this initial study will be forwarded to the BRCP reviewing wildlife agencies.
As of this writing, a preliminary public draft of the BRCP was released for review and comment in December
2012. Final approval of the BRCP is expected by the end of 2014, depending upon the issues that will be
addressed and the duration of the state/federal approval process. Regardless, the small scale of this
project and the lack of significant habitat resources would be expected to have a less than significant
impact upon sensitive biological resources that would require mitigation under the future habitat
conservation plan.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.5 Cultural Resources
Would the proposal:
Potentially Significant Impact
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than Significant Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed Under Previous Document
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? X
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §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
6.5.1 Cultural Resources Setting
The proposed project site is at the north end of the Butte County Center complex of administrative buildings
and facilities, on a parcel that is between lands that have been developed for decades. The Thermalito
Power Canal and Forebay are man-made water bodies constructed in the mid-1960s. A review of historic
maps of the area from 1942 to 1862 shows paper map subdivisions and changes in ownership for the
immediate area but does not reveal any structures or roads crossing the proposed project parcel (although
roads are in the vicinity) prior to the 1960s. A historic resource could have been on the proposed project
parcel but not noted on a map. It appears, to the extent the historic maps indicate, that the proposed project
area was undeveloped range land north of the City of Oroville prior to the 1960s and the construction of the
Thermalito Power Canal. The maps are stored on Butte County’s GIS and available for review at the
Department of Development Services as indicated in Section 2.1 above.
In regards to prehistoric and historic resources, the Butte County General Plan 2030 Draft EIR notes that
the “overall prehistoric archaeological sensitivity of Butte County is generally considered high, particularly
in areas near water sources or on terraces along watercourses” (Butte County 2010, p. 4.5-7).
39
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Pre-European Native Americans are believed to have favored areas above water courses for seasonal
settlements. Although seasonal seeps are evident today near the base of South Table Mountain about one
half mile to the north, the nearest significant naturally occurring water course to the proposed project site is
the Feather River, about one mile to the south. Historic maps from 1932 and 1942 show a small
(presumably seasonal) stream descending from the base of South Table Mountain about 800 feet north of
the proposed project site, crossing the current Forebay area into Thermalito and apparently emptying into
the Feather River near today’s State Route 162 bridge. To the extent such a seasonal stream may have
provided water and attracted game, Native Americans may have located on the bluff above the proposed
project site that is now occupied by the County Courthouse. An archaeological survey was not conducted
for the proposed project site and it is unknown as to whether or not sub-surface cultural resources are
present.
Although South Table Mountain may reasonably be considered a unique geologic feature by virtue of its
volcanic origins and dramatic cliffs, the proposed project site itself is merely at the base of a small hill and
has no surface geologic features of note.
6.5.3 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined
in §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #4. A substantial adverse
change upon a historically significant resource would be one wherein the resource is demolished or
materially altered so that it no longer conveys its historic or cultural significance in such a way that justifies
its inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or such a local register (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5, subd. (b)(2)).
The ground disturbance necessary to construct the proposed facility could impact currently unknown
subsurface cultural resources. There are no historical resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5 evident on the surface of the project parcel. The relatively minor grading to prepare the 1.5 acre
building pad for the supplemental jail structure may uncover presently unknown historical resources that lie
below the surface of the ground. Mitigation Measure #4 requires that all work on the site halt and a
qualified archaeologist and General Services be notified in the event any cultural resources are
encountered during site preparation and construction. Mitigation Measure #4 would reduce the potential
for a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource to less than
significant.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #4. As discussed in 6.6.3(a),
potential impacts in regards to a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource
would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure #4.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #4. There are no unique
paleontological resources or geologic surface features on or near the proposed project site and, given its
soil profile as discussed in Section 6.2, no subsurface geologic features of note are expected to occur. The
40
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
relatively minor grading to prepare the 1.5 acre building pad for the supplemental jail structure may uncover
presently unknown paleontological resources that lie below the surface of the ground. Mitigation Measure
#4 requires that all work on the site halt and a qualified archaeologist and General Services be notified in
the event any cultural resources are encountered during grading and site preparation. Mitigation Measure
#4 would reduce a potential impact to a unique paleontological resource to less than significant.
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #4. An historic Butte County
Cemetery is located about 1,200 feet to the southeast of the proposed project site, just west of County
Center Drive. There is no surface evidence of burials within or near the area proposed for the facility.
However, the relatively minor grading to prepare the 1.5 acre building pad for the supplemental jail structure
may uncover presently unknown human remains that lie below the surface of the ground. Mitigation
Measure #4 requires that all work on the site halt and the immediate notification of the County Coroner if
human skeletal remains are encountered. Should the County Coroner determine that such remains are in
an archaeological context, the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento must be notified
immediately, pursuant to State law, to arrange for Native American participation in determining the
disposition of such remains. Mitigation Measure #4 would reduce a potential impact to human remains to
less than significant.
Mitigation Measure #4. Protection of Cultural Resources Found During Work
Plan Requirements: The following note shall be included on (or on an additional page to) building and site
development plans:
“Should grading activities reveal the presence of 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 150 feet of the find shall cease immediately until a qualified professional archaeologist
can be consulted to evaluate the resources and implement appropriate mitigation procedures. Should
human skeletal remains be encountered, State law requires immediate notification of the County Coroner.
Should the County Coroner determine that such remains are in an archaeological context, the Native
American Heritage Commission in Sacramento shall be notified immediately, pursuant to State law, to
arrange for Native American participation in determining the disposition of such remains.”
Timing: Requirements of Mitigation Measure #4 shall be adhered to during site preparation and
construction.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall ensure that this Mitigation Measure #4 note is included
on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. The contractor and the on-site
supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with this mitigation measure and shall immediately
notify the Butte County General Services should any cultural resources be revealed during project activities.
41
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.6 Geology and Soils
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
2. Strong seismic ground shaking?
3. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
4. Landslides?
X
X
X
X
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site 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 wastewater disposal system where
sewers are not available for the disposal or wastewater?
X
6.6.1 Geologic and Soils Setting
The proposed 1.5 acre project site is located near the base of a small hill on land that slopes very gently to
the north. Seismic and geologic hazards are evaluated in both Section A of the Oroville General Plan
Safety Element and Section III of the Butte County Health and Safety Element. Both Elements and their
Geologic and Seismic Hazards sections are available as indicated in Section 2.1 and are herein
incorporated by reference. Figure HS-3 of Butte County’s Health and Safety Element shows the general
location of active, potentially active and inactive earthquake faults in Butte County, including in the vicinity
of the proposed project. The nearest active fault – that is, a fault that has shown movement within the past
200 (historic) or the past 11,000 years (Holocene) – is the Cleveland Hills fault. The northern terminus of
42
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
the Cleveland Hills fault is just east of Kelly Ridge (about 7.2 miles to the southeast). Two unnamed and
inactive faults are about one to two miles east, and an unnamed fault with an unknown potential for activity
parallels State Route 70 south from its intersection with State Route 149 and passes under the project
parcel. The project site, however, is not within an Alquist- Priolo special studies zone.
Butte County is within the range of seismic activity caused by the tectonically active Pacific Coast and can
expect future seismic events:
“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. This level of ground shaking correlates to a Modified Mercalli intensity of V to VII,
light to strong. As a result of these factors, the California Geological Survey has defined the entire
county as a seismic hazard zone” (Butte County 2010, p. 4.6-9).
The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale measures the intensity of ground shaking on a scale of I to XII, based
on observations of an earthquake’s effect on people, structures and the earth’s surface (Butte County
2010b, p. 4.69). (The 1975 Cleveland Hills earthquake had an estimated magnitude of 5.7 on the Richter
scale.) As stated by the Butte County General Plan 2030 Draft EIR, the area of Butte County most likely
to be subject to strong ground shaking is along the Cleveland Hills Fault.
In regards to other geologic hazards, surface and subsurface soil characteristics influence the potential for
landslides, erosion and expansive soils. The Seismic and Geologic Hazards section of the Butte County
General Plan 2030 Health and Safety Element provides several County-wide maps showing the hazard
potential at the proposed project site for erosion (slight), and expansive soils (moderate), landslides (low to
none), and liquefaction (generally low).
As mapped in the Butte Area, Parts of Butte and Plumas Counties Soil Survey (NRCS 2006), the proposed
project site and hill to the south is underlain by Map Unit 318—Thompson Flat-Oroville, 0 to 9 percent
slopes, a moderately well drained fine sandy and gravelly fine sandy loam with a profile that becomes
increasingly coarse with depth to about 80 inches.
6.6.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
Less than Significant Impact. The project site is not in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone and the
nearest active fault (Cleveland Hills) is about 7.2 miles to the southeast. However, as noted, an inactive
and unnamed fault is believed to pass beneath the proposed project parcel. The proposed facility must be
built according to the California Building Code (incorporating the Uniform Building Code) seismic design
standards for buildings and the California Division of Mines and Geology Guidelines for Evaluating and
Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117 (revised 2008), which includes design and
construction requirements related to fire and structural safety. As there is no evidence of a potential for
surface rupture from the inactive and unnamed fault and the proposed facility must be built to current
43
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
seismic codes, there would be a less than significant impact in regards to a potential for substantial
adverse effects to the structure or those within it as a result of ground rupture.
2. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. While no active faults have been mapped across or within 7.2 miles of the
project site, strong seismic ground shaking could occur with potential risk to the proposed facility. This risk
would be minimized by required compliance with the California Building Code (incorporates the Uniform
Building Code) seismic design standards for buildings and the California Division of Mines and Geology
Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117 (revised
2008), which includes design and construction requirements related to fire and structural safety.
Compliance with these existing building standards would reduce impacts from ground shaking to a less
than significant level.
3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less than Significant Impact. Liquefaction is a process in which uniform sediment subject to infiltration
by groundwater temporarily loses cohesion during ground shaking and behaves as a viscous liquid rather
than a solid, sometimes subsiding in discrete areas. Liquefaction and subsidence occur in level areas with
high groundwater levels and deposits of sand and silt. As noted in the Geologic and Soils Setting, Butte
County GIS data developed for its General Plan update in 2010 indicates the proposed project site has a
“generally low” potential for liquefaction to occur. As the proposed grading site is on gently sloping land,
Thompson Flat – Oroville soils are not characterized by a high water table, and the only substantial body
of water is the concrete lined Thermalito Power Canal, there would be a less than significant impact with
regards to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Finally, and as discussed under Issue
VI((a)ii), the proposed project would be constructed in accordance the California Building Code
(incorporates the Uniform Building Code) seismic design standards for buildings and the California Division
of Mines and Geology Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special
Publication 117 (revised 2008), which includes building standards that would reduce the risks associated
with seismically-induced liquefaction.
4. Landslides?
Less than Significant Impact. When steep slopes become saturated, their soils can lose strength,
resulting in landslides. The proposed project site is on a gentle slope at the base of a small hill; as noted
in the Geologic and Soils Setting, Butte County GIS data developed for its General Plan update in 2010
indicates the proposed project site has a susceptibility of “low to none” to landsliding. The hillside above
the proposed project site has a slope of about 4:1 and a visual inspection does not reveal any indication of
slumping or pressure cracks that indicate a potential for slope failure. In addition, Butte County Public
Works, which has overseen a number of projects in the “Public Safety Neighborhood” over the past two
decades, has no record of slope failure on the hillside above the proposed project site (O’Brien, pers. Com.,
2014).
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant Impact. Soil erosion is the removal of soil by water and wind. As noted in the
Geologic and Soils Setting, Butte County GIS data developed for its General Plan update in 2010 indicates
the proposed project site has a “slight” potential for soil erosion. The proposed project site gently slopes
north towards the Thermalito Power Canal and site preparation would not require significant cut and fill or
modification of the local topography. The proposed project would be required to obtain a National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with
44
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Construction Activities because clearing, grading, and other disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling
and minor or excavation would be greater than one acre. The stormwater permit would require the County
(as applicant) to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project
construction activities, and conduct inspections of the storm water pollution prevention measures and
control practices to ensure conformance with the site SWPPP. Compliance with the NPDES permit would
ensure that construction-related erosion impacts would be less than significant. For discussion of erosion
potential as it relates to water quality, see Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality.
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less than Significant Impact. Subsidence occurs when a large land area settles due to over saturation
or extensive withdrawal of groundwater, oil, or natural gas. Areas susceptible to subsidence are typically
composed of open textured soils with high silt or clay content which is not consistent with the fine sandy to
gravelly sandy Thompson Flat – Oroville soils beneath the proposed project site. Construction of the
proposed facility – a two-story 75,000 square foot building on a 1.5 acre pad – would occur on gently sloping
land and not involve significant cut and fill. As noted, liquefaction is not anticipated as a consequence of
site characteristics or construction and operation of the proposed project. Similarly, lateral spreading,
subsidence, or collapse is not anticipated given the size of the proposed project, the relatively flat terrain
upon which it will be built, and the stable characteristics of the Thompson Flat – Oroville soils which would
underlie it. Regardless, the proposed structure would be built in conformance with the California Building
Code foundation and geological design criteria. This would require a geotechnical study of potential
hazards associated with the underlying soils and, if necessary, measures to insure the structure’s stability
in relation to any potential geotechnical hazard. There will be no impact in regards to potential lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse and a less than significant impact in regards to an off-site
landslide.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils shrink and swell with changes in water content to a degree
that can adversely impact building foundations and roads. The extent of shrinking and swelling is related
to the clay content of soils. Clay rich soils are prone to shrinking and swelling while soils dominated by
sand or gravel components experience commensurately less. As noted in the Geologic and Soils Setting,
Butte County GIS data developed for its General Plan update in 2010 indicates the proposed project site
has a “moderate” potential for expansive soils. As discussed in the Project Description, the proposed facility
would be built consistent with the foundation and geological design criteria in the California Building Code.
This would require a geotechnical study hazards associated with the underlying soils and, as required,
measures to insure the structure would not be threatened by expansive soils. There would therefore be a
less than significant impact with regards to expansive soils.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal or wastewater?
No Impact. The proposed project will be served by sanitary sewer service from the Thermalito Water and
Sewage District and would not include the use of a septic system or alternative wastewater disposal system.
There would be no impact with regard to such wastewater systems.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described, including
preparation of a geotechnical report and issuance of a construction stormwater permit as required by state
45
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
law.
6.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
6.7.1 Greenhouse Gases Setting
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) include naturally occurring and anthropogenic gases that absorb and emit
radiation within the thermal infrared range, trapping heat in the earth’s atmosphere. Naturally occurring
greenhouse gases include water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),
and ozone (O3). Anthropogenic greenhouse gases include CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels,
and halogenated compounds that contain fluorine, chlorine, or bromine such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), which are generally a product of industrial activities. CO2 emissions may be
further distinguished as biogenic (derived from living cells and generated from biological decomposition,
combustion and numerous other processes) and non-biogenic (derived from fossil fuels, limestone, and
other materials transformed by geologic processes).
The different greenhouse gases have varying effects upon global warming. For example, CH4 and N2O
have 21 and 310 times the warming effect of CO2, respectively. In order to evaluate greenhouse gases by
a common metric, individual gases are converted to a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) by multiplying their
values expressed in metric tons per year (MTCO2e) by their global warming potential (GWP). The GWP is
a ratio of a gas’ heat-trapping characteristics relative to CO2, which has a GWP of one (1).
While global warming is a world-wide phenomenon, it may result in a variety of effects at the regional and
local scale. For California these may include (among others) changes in precipitation patterns, reduced
snowpack, drought, heat waves and consequent effects upon air quality, agriculture, biological resources,
and the availability of water for consumptive uses (CAPCOA, 2009).
Although the direct greenhouse gases CO2, CH4, and N2O occur naturally in the atmosphere, human
activities largely associated with the combustion of carbon-based fuels have increased their atmospheric
concentrations since the start of the industrial age. The state of California has adopted a number of statutes
and regulations to control and reduce the emission of GHGs, reflecting a belief that their increasing
concentration will result in a number of deleterious impacts to public health, safety and the environment
through the effects of global climate change (CalEPA 2010).
46
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
In particular, Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, sets a goal to reduce
overall GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 while further directing the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) to create a plan which includes market mechanisms and implements rules to achieve “real,
quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases.” Included are greenhouse gas reductions of
CO2e emissions by 169 million metric tons (MMT), about 30 percent of the state’s projected 2020 emissions
level of 596 MMT CO2e that would occur without the reductions. The AB 32 Scoping Plan, adopted by the
California Air Resources Board on December 11, 2008, provides several strategies to achieve the AB 32
reductions, including energy efficiency measures in buildings such as those included in the proposed
facility’s LEED Silver certification.
A Climate Action Plan is a plan adopted by a jurisdiction to establish baseline greenhouse gas emissions
and provide an assortment of measures to reduce the level of greenhouse gases in a manner consistent
with AB 32. Butte County adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) on February 25, 2014 that is consistent
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b) and AB 32 Scoping Plan requirements for a local jurisdiction to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The City of Oroville does not yet have a Climate Action Plan.
The CAP’s 2006 baseline inventory of community GHG emissions by sector provided in Table 11 shows
that agriculture, transportation and residential energy are responsible for most greenhouse gas emissions
in Butte County.
Table 11. 2006 Community Inventory of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
MTCO2e Percent of Total**
Agriculture 390,400 43%
Transportation 265,450 29%
Residential energy 150,630 17%
Nonresidential energy 61,450 7%
Off-road equipment and vehicles 17,360 2%
Solid waste 13,980 2%
Wastewater 7,970 1%
Water 4,390 <1%
Total 911,630 100%
**Due to rounding, percent of total column may not equal 100%.
2006 GHG EmissionsSector*
Source: Butte County Climate Action Plan, Table 1
Notes:
*Additional sectors(e.g., forestry) were inventoried but not included due to lack of jurisdictional control.
The CAP’s 2006 baseline inventory of government operation GHG emissions is provided in Table 12.
MTCO2e Percent of Total
Neal Road Recycling and Waste Facility 13,700 46%
Empolyee commute and travel 6,030 20%
Building energy 5,840 19%
Vehicle fleet 4,340 14%
Lighting 80 0%
Water and wastewater 10 0%
Government-generated solid waste 10 0%
Total 30,010 100%
Source: Butte County Climate Action Plan, Table 2
2006 GHG EmissionsSector
Table 12. 2006 Government Operations Inventory of GHG Emissions
47
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
For purposes of this evaluation, this constitutes the current baseline GHG emissions for Butte County by
sector and government operation.
The CAP identifies current state and local (County) accomplishments in reducing greenhouse gases, and
identifies a remaining gap of 108,330 MTCO2e by 2020 to achieve the emissions reduction goal of 774,890
MTCO2e (15% below 2006 baseline levels). The CAP then identifies a number of measures to achieve that
reduction, broadly grouped under six focus areas of energy efficiency and renewable energy (EN),
alternative fuel vehicles and equipment (F), transportation (T), agriculture (AG), solid waste (SW), and
government operations (GO).
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b)(2), a project may be determined to have a less than
significant cumulative impact if it is consistent with the requirements of the applicable CAP. This initial
study will evaluate the proposed project’s consistency with Butte County’s CAP as Oroville does not have
an adopted plan to reduce greenhouse gases. Butte County employs a checklist to determine if a project
is consistent with the applicable greenhouse reduction measures in its CAP; that checklist is included as
Attachment D. Those measures are designed to achieve a 15 percent reduction below 2006 levels by
2020.
6.7.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. As modeled in CalEEMod (see Attachment C) with the Mitigation #3
requirement to use Tier 3 construction equipment, GHG emissions from construction and operation of the
proposed project are 2,760 and 8,572 pounds per day of CO2e, respectively. This equates to 1.25 and 3.9
MTCO2e per day, amounting to small fractions of the 2006 baseline GHG emissions and 2020 reduction
goals for Butte County.
Neither Butte County nor the Butte County Air Quality Management District have established a threshold of
significance for the project-level generation of GHG emissions. As discussed in Section 6.7.1, the Butte County
Climate Action Plan is consistent with AB 32 and AB 32 Scoping Plan reduction gals for local governments to
achieve 1990 emission levels by 2020, or a 15% below existing (that is, 2006 baseline) emissions.
Greenhouse gas emissions due to construction activities would be temporary and a very minor percentage
of the 2006 baseline inventory for both community sectors and government operations. Operational
greenhouse gas emissions, while somewhat higher, are still small compared to the baseline inventories
and the emissions reduction of 108,330 MTCO2e by 2020 to meet the goals of the CAP. Finally, as
discussed in sub-section (b), the facility’s LEED Silver or equivalent standards are consistent with several
CAP measures. The proposed facility would therefore have a less than significant impact upon the
environment due to its greenhouse gas emissions.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in the Greenhouse Gases Setting, the applicable plan is the
Butte County CAP, which has a number of measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the County
in a manner consistent with AB 32 and its scoping plan. The proposed project is consistent with the
following CAP greenhouse reduction measures:
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Measures
48
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
EN7. Encourage new nonresidential buildings to meet and exceed CALGreen standards for energy
efficiency, water conservation, and passive design.
CALGreen is the California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title
24, Part 11), which took effect on January 1, 2011 and applies to every residential and
nonresidential building. CALGreen’s mandatory measures address site development, material
resource conservation, energy and water conservation, and indoor environmental quality. CAP
Measure EN7 identifies CALGreen Tier 1 or 2 standards as preferred mitigations for the
environmental impacts of new nonresidential projects. Tier 1 and 2 standards are CALGreen
voluntary measures (specified in Appendix A5 of the Green Building Code) that achieve additional
energy, water and material efficiency and conservation. Depending upon the measures chosen,
CALGreen Tier 1 measures would meet the LEED Silver certification of the proposed facility
(USGBC, 2010 and see Attachment B). Stated alternatively, LEED Silver certification is consistent
with CAP Measure EN7.
EN9. Support distributed generation in new nonresidential development to reduce on-site energy
use.
The Butte County Solar Energy System, consisting of four separate arrays that were completed in
August 2004, produce a total of 997 kilowatts AC or 1.18 Megawatts DC, providing for the electric
demand of three County buildings and preventing an annual 1.164 tons of CO2 emissions (Butte
County 2014). The County intends to increase the output of its Solar Energy System but a specific
proposal and financing has not, at this time, been approved by the Board of Supervisors. At this
time it is unknown what proportion of the proposed facility’s electric demand will be met by the
County’s Solar Energy System (Hunsicker, 2014). However, the fact that distributed generation
would supply a portion of the proposed facility’s electric demand satisfies this policy.
Government Operation Measures
GO1. Improve energy monitoring and tracking.
Consistent with this measure, and as indicated in the Project Description, the proposed facility
would have sub-meters installed as part of an “integrated Energy Management System (EMS) to
meaningfully track energy use, analyze the costs and benefits of energy improvements, and inform
the annual facility assessment process.”
GO2. Improve operations with energy-efficient equipment.
This measure requires installation of automatic sensors to eliminate unnecessary energy use in
energy and lighting, using technologies such as plug loads, occupancy sensors, and timers.
GO8. Construct new buildings to CALGreen Tier 1 standards.
This measure requires that, in “addition to meeting LEED Silver standards (or equivalent) as
required by General Plan COS-P2.3, new County facilities exceeding 3,000 square feet shall meet
CALGreen Tier 1 standards for energy efficiency, a 15% improvement over minimum energy
standards.” As noted in the Greenhouse Gases Setting (and indicated in Attachment B), Tier 1
standards meet the LEED Silver commitment for the proposed project.
GO10. Participate in a leadership or recognition program to promote and support County
sustainability initiatives.
The commitment to construct the facility according to LEED Silver standards would fulfill this
49
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
measure, which is intended to allow the County to lead by example and “act as a positive example
for the community.” LEED Silver certification would allow the County to seek “regional, statewide,
and national recognition for the County’s renewable energy projects in programs such as the US
Environmental Protection Agency’s Green Power Communities Program.”
The Butte County General Plan provides a goal and associated policies for greenhouse gases in the
Greenhouse Gases section (Section I) of the Conservation and Open Space Element. The applicable
Greenhouse Gases goal are evaluated in regards to the proposed project as follows:
• Goal COS-1: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
o COS-P1.1 Greenhouse gas emission impacts from proposed development projects shall
be evaluated as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.
o COS-P1.2 New development projects shall mitigate greenhouse gas emissions on-site or as close to the site as possible.
o COS-P1.4 New development should provide above-ground and natural stormwater facilities and use building designs and materials that promote groundwater recharge.
Construction and operation of the proposed project would be consistent Goal COS-1 because its GHG
emissions are analyzed as required by CEQA in this section. GHG emissions will be mitigated
throughout its life by conformance with the applicable provisions of Butte County’s adopted CAP, in
particular Measure EN7 (Encourage new nonresidential buildings to meet and exceed CALGreen
standards for energy efficiency, water conservation, and passive design).
To conclude, construction of the proposed facility to LEED Silver standards would be consistent with
both the CAP and General Plan Goal COS-1, resulting in a less than significant impact in regards
to the County’s intent to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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
50
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed schools?
X
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites complied 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 or loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
X
6.8.1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Setting
Hazardous substances are regulated under the California Health and Safety Code Chapters 6.95, 6.75 and
6.5 and the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22. Under Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety
Code, a hazardous material
“…means any material that, because of its quantity, concentration or physical or chemical, poses
a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if
released into the workplace or the environment. ‘Hazardous materials‘ include, but are not limited
to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the administering
agency has a reasonable basis for believing that it would be injurious to the health and safety of
persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.”
51
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) is responsible for regulation, handling use and
disposal of toxic materials in California.
The approximately 75,000 square foot project site would occupy a portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre
parcel at the north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities that
comprise Butte County’s administrative center along County Center Drive about one mile north of the
Feather River and downtown Oroville. The project parcel is in the midst of lands that have been developed
for decades and about 350 feet east of State Route 70, and there are no known toxic waste sites within the
project parcel or in its vicinity. Approximately four miles to the south, the Oroville Industrial Area has, at
various times, contained three different federal superfund sites (Koppers, Louisiana Pacific, and Western
Pacific), each involved various types of surface and groundwater contamination. All have been remediated.
The Louisiana Pacific site has been removed from the superfund list and is no longer subject to inspections
or land use limitations. The Koppers and Western Pacific sites are still subject to inspections and restricted
to certain land uses that would not involve significant exposure of the public.
Construction of the proposed project will require the temporary use of diesel-powered heavy equipment.
Diesel particulate matter (diesel PM) is regulated as a toxic air contaminant and, in sufficient quantities, is
damaging to human lung tissue. Automobile and truck emissions are generated by traffic on State Route
70, 350 feet to the west.
6.8.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed facility would not involve the routine transport or disposal
of hazardous materials. The two-story structure would be approximately 75,000 square feet with 256 beds
and six “Program Rooms” for up to 24 individuals each who will be participating in various social welfare,
life skills and mental health programs. Toilets, showers, storage and other ancillary space will also be
provided, although the kitchen and cafeteria will continue to operate out of the existing jail. The proposed
Facility would operate around the clock throughout the year as a jail while the Program Rooms would
operate during the day and perhaps into the early evening hours. Water and wastewater services would
be provided by the Thermalito Water and Sewer District. Energy would be provided by the Butte County
Solar Energy System and, as necessary, PG&E. As such, transport of hazardous materials to and from
the proposed Facility would not occur and there would be a less than significant impact.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in sub-section (a), the proposed facility would not involve the
use of hazardous materials. As such, there would be a less than significant impact in regards to hazards to
the public or the environment.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed schools?
No Impact. The nearest school to the project is the Nelson School, about one third of a mile to the southwest,
across State Route 70. Release of diesel PM during construction would be minimized by Mitigation Measure
#3 and, in any event, would not be expected to impact students or staff at the school. Regardless, Nelson
52
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
School is further away from the site of construction activity than one quarter mile. No emissions or handling of
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials will occur with operation of the proposed project and there will be
no impact to Nelson School.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
No Impact. The nearest Cortese sites are located about four miles to the south; as noted, one has been
remediated and is no longer inspected while the other two have been remediated but are still subject to
inspections every five years. Construction of the proposed project would have no impact in regards to creation
of a significant hazard to the public or environment in relation to a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
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?
No Impact. The nearest airport is the Oroville Airport, located about four miles to the southwest and the
proposed project site is not within the Oroville Airport Land use Plan. There will be no impact in regards to an
airport-related safety hazard to people residing or working in the proposed project area.
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?
No Impact. A review the County’s 2012 aerial photo base map reveals no private air strip within four miles of
the proposed project site. There would be no impact in regards to a safety hazard for people residing or working
in the project area in relation to a private airstrip.
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Butte County Sheriff’s Office has prepared a 2004 Departmental Order
that serves as the emergency response plan for fire risk at the County Jail. The Departmental Order contains
Fire Prevention Plan that identifies a Fire and Life Safety Officer and appropriate training requirements for jail
staff, and a Fire and Life Safety Emergency Plan that specifies procedures for the reporting of emergency
situations, fire suppression, fire call codes for emergency responders, medical emergencies and triage in the
event of injuries and evacuation, and an evacuation plan. The proposed project would have a less than
significant impact in regards to impairing or physically interfering with the provisions of this Departmental
Order.
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
No Impact. The proposed project site is not in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as designated by CAL-Fire
Fire Hazard Severity zone maps (http://www.calfire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps_butte.php). This project
is within the City of Oroville Fire Department’s responsibility area. Cal-Fire and the City of Oroville have in
place a mutual aid agreement that allows for the closest resource to be dispatched to incidents. Although there
are grasses and shrubs in and around the proposed project site and on the hillside to the south, the proposed
facility would be made of fire resistive materials and located on an approximately 1.5 acre pad in-between the
existing jail and a solar photovoltaic array. Fire hydrants are located in the area of the existing jail, and the
53
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
headquarters of Butte County/Cal-Fire is located about one-half mile to the south at the intersection of County
Center Drive and Nelson Avenue. There would be no impact in regards to the exposure of people or structures
to loss, injury or death from wildfire.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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
preexisting 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 storm water drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? X
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped
on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
X
54
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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 or 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
6.9.1 Hydrology and Water Quality Setting
The approximately 1.5 acre project site would occupy a portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre parcel at the
north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities that comprise Butte
County’s administrative center along County Center Drive, about one and one half miles north of the
Feather River and downtown Oroville. The project parcel is in the midst of lands that have been developed
for decades, about 350 feet east of State Route 70 and immediately south of the State Water Project
Thermalito Power Canal.
There are no natural drainages within or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project site. A man-made
drainage ditch that crosses the project parcel and empties into the Thermalito Power Canal would have to
be relocated or put underground. The ditch carries runoff from the project parcel itself, in addition to a
portion of the County Courthouse and administrative offices area uphill and to the south. A preliminary
stormwater runoff analysis prepared for the proposed project and included as Attachment E calculated the
existing 10-year peak runoff from the 6.4 acre project parcel to be about 6.0 cubic feet per second (cfs) and
the 100-year peak runoff to be 8.4 cfs.
Water is provided by the Thermalito Water and Sewer District (TWSD) from a holding tank across the
Thermalito Power Canal. TWSD is currently upgrading its water delivery system (a pipe which carries water
across the Thermalito Power Canal to the existing jail) by running an eight inch pipe up Jail Road to County
Center Drive where an existing main serves other portions of the County buildings and facilities. This will
provide redundancy to the system should one segment have to be shut down for any reason. As discussed
in Section 6.17, TWSD has ample water for its current service area demands, including the proposed
facility.
6.9.2 Impact Analysis.
Would the proposal:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #5. During construction the
proposed project site would be cleared of the existing non-native grasses, exposing soil to potential
stormwater erosion. As the proposed project is greater than one acre, a construction general permit from
55
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board would be required that identifies best management
practices and a stormwater management plan to manage stormwater runoff such that water quality
standards are not violated. Once the proposed project is built and operating, its impermeable surfaces will
contribute more stormwater runoff at a faster rate, with potential impacts to the quality of State Water project
water in the Thermalito Power Canal. Mitigation Measure #5 requires design, implementation and
management of LID stormwater features to minimize runoff and erosion. The LID features, which may
include pervious pavements, on-site detention, and rain gardens, will reduce any off-site impacts to water
to less than significant. Waste discharge requirements, which are necessary when process water
associated with an activity is released into the environment, will not be required for this project.
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 preexisting nearby wells would drop to
a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would rely on piped water provided by TWSD, which
obtains its water by both surface and groundwater sources. The proposed project is estimated to involve
an additional 58 inmates and 8 staff. As discussed in Section 6.17, the 2006 Municipal Services Review
for TWSD does not identify a shortage of drinking water supplies within its surface area and addition of the
proposed project is not expected to substantially deplete its groundwater sources, to the limited extent they
are relied upon. The project site is not in a designated or known groundwater recharge area and, given its
small size, would not have a significant effect upon groundwater recharge in any event. The proposed
project would have a less than significant impact in regards to the depletion of groundwater supplies or
the interference with groundwater recharge.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #5 and #6. The proposed
project would involve construction of a two-story 75,000 square foot structure on a 1.5 acre pad in a
currently undeveloped parcel. No stream or river will be altered but, as noted in the Project Description,
the proposed project would require the relocation of the existing drainage channel that crosses the
proposed project site from the south and empties into the Thermalito Power Canal, draining the proposed
project parcel and portions of the buildings and parking lots that make up the County Courthouse on the hill
to the immediate south. Mitigation Measure #6 requires that a registered and qualified civil engineer
design a new stormwater conveyance that adequately carries stormwater runoff from the currently drained
areas to the south in addition to the proposed project. Note, too, that implementation of the Mitigation
Measure #5 LID stormwater control features is expected to minimize stormwater runoff and erosion from
the site; the re-designed drainage conveyance will essentially provide backup capacity for runoff from the
proposed project site. With proper design of a new stormwater conveyance and implementation of
Mitigation Measure #6, impacts resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site will be less than
significant.
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?
56
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #5 and #6. As discussed in
sub-section (c), the proposed project would not alter the course of a stream or river but would require
relocation or undergrounding of the existing drainage channel. In regard to a substantial increase in the
rate or amount of runoff, the proposed project would result in a small increase in stormwater runoff due to
the impermeable surfaces associated with the 75,000 square foot building on a 1.5 acre pad. Design,
implementation and maintenance of Mitigation Measure #5 LID stormwater features would reduce impacts
related to an increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff to less than significant. Note too that
Mitigation Measure #6 will require a qualified engineer to design a replacement conveyance that provides
adequate capacity for the area currently served plus the proposed project.
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #5 and #6. Construction of
the proposed facility will result in the creation of about 1.5 acres of potentially impermeable surfaces
including the roof and surrounding parking, walkways and pad. These impermeable surfaces will increase
the current amount of runoff leaving the undeveloped site and draining into the Thermalito Power Canal.
The Attachment E preliminary stormwater analysis calculated a peak runoff of 10.8 cfs for the 10 year storm
and 15.2 cfs for the 100 year storm, representing increases of 4.8 and 6.8 cfs over existing conditions (see
Setting), respectively. The preliminary stormwater analysis states that sufficient room exists on the project
parcel - and the topography allows – for a detention basin that would keep the additional stormwater runoff
at existing volumes.
In any event, while the additional unmitigated runoff would not exceed the capacity of the Canal, Mitigation
Measure #5 requires implementation of LID stormwater measures to detain, retain and otherwise minimize
the volume, rate and sediment load of surface runoff leaving the site once the proposed project is built.
With the design, implementation and maintenance of LID features through Mitigation Measure #5 and, if
necessary, a re-located and designed stormwater conveyance through the site as specified by Mitigation
Measure #6, the potential for exceeding the capacity of the drainage system or providing a substantial
additional source of polluted runoff is less than significant.
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. Aside from an increase in stormwater runoff and its pollutants that would
be mitigated by Mitigation Measures #5 and #6, the proposed project would not be a source of other
pollutants that would substantially degrade water quality. Disposal of grey water and sewage will be
handled by piped systems provided by the Thermalito Water and Sewer District. Solid waste disposal will
be handled by licensed solid waste hauler in a manner that does not result in pollutants entering the
environment. The potential that water quality would otherwise be substantially degraded with construction
and operation of the proposed project would be less than significant.
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?
No Impact. According to the FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 790, revised January 6, 2011, the
proposed project site is in Flood Zone X (“Areas of minimal flood hazard from the principal source of flood
in the area and determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain”). As the proposed
project would not be in a 100-year flood hazard area (rather, it is in a 500-year hazard area), there would
be no impact to housing or the proposed facility in regards to risk from a 100-year flood.
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood
57
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
flows?
No Impact. As noted in sub-section (g), the structure is not in a 100-year flood hazard area. There would
be no impact with regard to impeding or redirecting flood flows.
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury, or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Lake Almanor and Lake Oroville are 67 and six miles upstream of the proposed project site, respectively.
Inundation mapping (see Figure SAF-3) provided in the Section B (Flooding) of the City of Oroville General
Plan Safety Element indicates that a failure of Lake Almanor would not inundate the proposed project site.
Failure of Lake Oroville, in contrast, would inundate the proposed project site and much of the surrounding
area. (The Oroville General Plan is available as indicated in Section 2.1.)
The most likely cause of a failure at Oroville Dam would be one or a series of substantial earthquakes. As
discussed in Section 6.6, active and potentially active faults have been mapped in the Oroville area which
could cause an earthquake. Studies following the 1975 Oroville earthquake indicated that the dam could
withstand a 6.5 magnitude event, which is considered to be the largest credible event projected for the
region (California Department of Water Resources, 1977). However, a 2010 report prepared for the Federal
Regulatory Energy Commission recommended that earthquake safety assessment of Oroville Dam be
conducted. To date, the state Department of Water Resources has declined to conduct the assessment,
stating that the Dam meets current seismic safety criteria (Sacramento Bee, 2013). Relying upon the
judgment of the state Department of Water Resources to date, the potential risk to people or the proposed
facility from failure of either Lake Almanor or Oroville Dam is less than significant.
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Seiche and tsunami are both are phenomena that occur with substantial storm or seismic activity in very
large lakes or oceans. Mudflows occur on hillsides with sufficiently steep slopes, precipitation and soil
conditions. The proposed project site is adjacent to the Thermalito Power Canal and at the foot of a 40-
foot hillside. The Thermalito Power Canal does not have the shape or dimensions that could result in a seiche
or tsunami and no impact to the proposed project from these phenomena are expected to occur. (A flood wave
coming down the Thermalito Power Canal as a result of a failure of Lake Oroville is considered in the preceding
sub-section (i).)
There is no evidence of slope failure on the hillside rising above the proposed project site to the south (see
discussion in Section 6.6). That hillside is vegetated with grasses and shrubs and has a relatively gentle slope
of about six percent. There is a less than significant impact with regard to inundation by mudflow.
Mitigation Measure #5. Prepare Low Impact Development Plan to Manage Post-Construction
Stormwater Runoff.
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans
that states:
“In order to minimize the polluting and hydromodification effects of post-construction stormwater runoff from
the Supplemental Jail site (structure, building pad, parking lot, road and any other impermeable surface),
and consistent with General Plan Goal W-4 and Policy W-P1.4, a Low Impact Development (LID) plan shall
be prepared by a licensed and qualified landscape architect or civil engineer that reduces the volume and
rate of stormwater runoff from the site to no more than the estimated runoff of the currently undeveloped
site. LID stormwater features may include, but are not limited to, pervious pavers, vegetated swales,
detention/retention ponds, locally appropriate tree and shrub plantings, and a green roof. The Plan shall
58
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
include calculations regarding the surface runoff to be attenuated, site and construction plans showing the
location and details LID features (including, as may be necessary, irrigation), and a maintenance plan to
insure that the features function as designed.
Timing: The Low Impact Development Plan shall be prepared in consultation with building and site plans
and, if it is necessary, Mitigation Measure #6 for the redesign of the existing stormwater drainage
conveyance. Construction of the Supplemental Jail Facility shall not begin until the wet stamped and signed
Low Impact Development Plan has been approved by Butte County General Services and the Department
of Public Works.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall insure that this Mitigation Measure #5 note is included
with (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. Butte County General Services
shall insure that the provisions of the LID Plan, including maintenance, are implemented as specified and
approved.
Mitigation Measure #6. Redesign Drainage Conveyance (as may be Necessary).
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans
that states:
“If made necessary by development of the Supplemental Jail Facility, a registered and qualified civil
engineer shall re-design the existing drainage channel with sufficient capacity to accommodate existing and
any anticipated drainage for a design storm to be determined by the engineer such that localized flooding
and erosion are avoided. A modified or new drainage conveyance, whether surface or subsurface, shall
be designed in consultation with the Low Impact Development Plan specified in Mitigation Measure #5 in
a manner that maximizes the use of locally adapted, natural vegetation and pervious features while
minimizing hardscape to the extent feasible in order to maintain safe and adequate drainage of the
Supplemental Jail Site and the County Courthouse area served by the existing drainage channel.
Timing: If a modified or new drainage conveyance is determined to be necessary, a site plan shall be
prepared in consultation with the Supplemental Jail Facility building and site plans and the Mitigation
Measure #5 Low Impact Development Plan. Construction of the Supplemental Jail Facility shall not begin
until the wet stamped and signed drainage conveyance plans have been approved by Butte County General
Services and the Department of Public Works.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall insure that this Mitigation Measure #6 note is included
with (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. Butte County General Services
shall insure that the modified or new drainage conveyance is constructed as specified and approved.
6.10 Land Use
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Physically divide an established community? X
59
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
b. Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulations 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
6.10.1 Land Use Setting
The approximately 75,000 square foot project site would occupy a 1.5 acre portion of an undeveloped 6.4
acre parcel at the north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities
that comprise Butte County’s administrative center along County Center Drive, about one and one half
miles north of the Feather River and downtown Oroville. The project parcel is in the midst of lands that
have been developed for decades, in between the existing jail and a photovoltaic facility, about 350 feet
east of State Route 70 and immediately south of the State Water Project Thermalito Power Canal.
Land use in California is largely determined at the local (e.g., county, city or district) level through locally
adopted plans and ordinances. The project site is designated Public Facilities and Services by the City of
Oroville General Plan, which “refers to schools, governmental offices…and other facilities that have a
unique public character” (City of Oroville 2010). The proposed facility is consistent with this land use
designation.
The site is zoned for Public or Quasi-Public Facilities and the proposed Supplemental Jail Facility is a
permitted use.
6.10.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. Construction and operation of the proposed facility would not divide an established community.
b) Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulations 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?
No Impact. The proposed facility would be a public structure with a public purpose (incarceration and
rehabilitation) and is consistent with the City of Oroville’s General Plan and zoning code.
60
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. While there is not a Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community
Conservation Plan currently in effect in Butte County, the proposed project would be within the boundaries
of the Butte County Regional Conservation Plan now be prepared by the Butte County Association of
Governments. The Butte Regional Conservation Plan is nearing completion and may be considered for
adoption by the member jurisdictions in 2014. The approximately 1.5 acre project site would occupy a
portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre parcel in an area designated as “urban” by the Draft Regional
Conservation Plan. As discussed in Section 6.4, the proposed project site has no significant habitat or
other biological resources of value given its location and disturbed condition. The proposed project would
incarcerate up to 256 individuals while also providing a variety of services for those under post-release
community supervision. As such, the proposed facility would not conflict with the Butte Regional Conservation
Plan as it now exists in draft form.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.11 Mineral Resources
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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 delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
X
6.11.1 Mineral Resources Setting
The approximately 1.5 acre project site would occupy a portion of an undeveloped 6.4 acre parcel at the
north end of the roughly 110 acre complex of buildings, roads, parking lots and facilities that comprise Butte
County’s administrative center along County Center Drive, about one and one half miles north of the
Feather River and downtown Oroville. The project parcel is in the midst of lands that have been developed
for decades, about 350 feet east of State Route 70 and immediately south of the State Water Project
Thermalito Power Canal.
Aggregate, metal and other mineral resources are present in widely scattered areas throughout Butte
County. Aggregate resources tend to be along the current or pre-historic margins of larger streams and
rivers; metal resources such as gold are generally limited to placer and hard-rock deposits in the foothill
and mountain regions of the County. There are no designated or known mineral resources within or near
the site.
61
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.11.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
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?
No Impact. There are no designated or known mineral resources (for example, aggregate, precious or
strategic metals) within or near the proposed project site that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. There are no designated or known mineral resources (for example, aggregate, precious or
strategic metals) within or near the proposed project site that have been delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.12 Noise
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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 ground
borne vibration or ground borne 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
62
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.12.1 Noise Setting
As an environmental impact, noise may be defined as unwanted sound that can be a by-product of normal
(day-to-day, regular) or atypical (sporadic, unusual) activities. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes
with normal activities, causes physical harm, or has adverse effects on health.
Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB) and may be
measured in various ways. The City of Oroville General Plan Noise Element evaluates noise according to
the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a
community, with a 5 dB penalty added to evening (7:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m.) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal
(10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m.) noise levels. The Day/Night Average Sound Level, Ldn, is essentially the same as
CNEL, with the exception that the evening time period is not considered and all occurrences during this
three-hour period are grouped into the daytime period.
Noise sources occur in two forms: (1) point sources, such as stationary equipment, loudspeakers, or
individual motor vehicles; and (2) line sources, such as a roadway with a large number of point sources
(motor vehicles) or a train passing by on a railroad line. Sound generated by a point source typically
diminishes (attenuates) at a rate of 6.0 dB(A) for each doubling of distance from the source to the receptor
at acoustically “hard” sites (e.g., developed landscapes) and 7.5 dB(A) at acoustically “soft” sites (e.g.,
undeveloped landscapes). For example, a 60-dB(A) noise level measured at 50 feet from a point source
at an acoustically hard site would be 54 dB(A) at 100 feet from the source and 48 dB(A) at 200 feet from
the source. Sound generated by a line source typically attenuates at a rate of 3.0 dB(A) and 4.5 dB(A) per
doubling of distance from the source to the receptor for hard and soft sites, respectively. Man-made or
natural barriers can also attenuate sound levels.
Construction and operation of a project may produce noise; in turn, a project may place people within an
area of existing noise. The proposed facility would occur in an acoustically soft site. Noise in and around
the proposed project site is not excessive. Occasional low-level noise is apparent from State Route 70
about 350 feet to the west; otherwise, there are no significant sources of noise in the vicinity of the project.
6.12.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal result in:
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?
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The City of Oroville General Plan Noise Element
(available as noted in Section 2.1) provides maximum allowable noise exposure to transportation noise sources
(Table NOI-6) and Non-Transportation Sources (Table NOI-7). Although jails are not one of the land uses
included in Table NOI-6, the maximum allowable exterior and interior noise levels for hospitals and nursing
homes from transportation noise sources are 60 and 45 Ldn/CNEL, dB, respectively.
For non-transportation noise sources, Table NOI-7 does not specify a daytime maximum exposure for transient
lodging, hospitals, or nursing homes. The maximum daytime and nighttime interior noise limits are 40 dB (Leq)
and 60 dB (Lmax) during the daytime and 35 dB (Leq and Lmax) during the nighttime.
Construction of the proposed facility may result in temporary levels of noise that exceed these standards for
some of those who work nearby (although the concrete walls of the existing jail would attenuate such
construction noise for inmates to a less than significant level). These impacts would be temporary; however,
to insure that noise does not continue into the evening and nighttime hours, Mitigation Measure #7 would limit
construction work to daytime hours and require best available noise suppression.
63
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Operation of the proposed facility is not expected to produce significant noise, in particular because inmates in
the existing jail would be within heavy concrete walls. As noted, State Route 70, some 350 feet to the west
over a small rise, is the nearest source of occasional low-level noise.
In regards to potential impacts of State Route 70 noise upon inmates and County staff living and working in the
proposed facility, the City of Oroville General Plan evaluated both current and future noise at several segments
along State Route 70 within the Oroville Urban Sphere. As reported in the Noise Element Table NOI-3, the
nearest segment to the proposed facility that was evaluated for existing (that is, 2006) traffic noise levels was
between Nelson Avenue and Table Mountain Boulevard, where the Ldn value 100 feet from the State Route
70 centerline was found to be 59 dB. As noted, noise in soft acoustic sites attenuates at a rate of 7.5 dB for
each doubling of distance; the noise from State Route 70 at the proposed facility (350 feet to the east) would
thus be about 15 dB lower, or approximately 44 dB, well below the exterior limit of 60 dB provided by Table
NOI-6. The interior noise level is not expected to exceed the Table NOI-6 limit of 40 dB because the concrete
walls of the facility will further attenuate traffic noise (which, in any event, declines substantially during the
nighttime).
Mitigation Measure #7 would reduce construction impacts to less than significant and there would be a less
than significant impact to inmates and staff from State Route 70 noise.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne
noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed facility is not expected to involve the use of any
equipment or processes that would generate high levels of ground vibration, such as pile drivers or blasting.
Construction operations would include dozers, loaders, scrapers, and trucks. (Note that the passage of heavy
equipment and excavation may generate some ground vibration that would typically be imperceptible beyond
50 feet.) Additionally, there are no receptors in the project vicinity that would be considered as sensitive to
ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Thus, the proposed project would have a less than
significant impact with respect to the exposure or generation of excessive ground-borne noise or vibration
levels.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
Less than significant impact. Once constructed, the proposed project would operate as a detention and
rehabilitation facility for about 256 inmates, with programs, other activities and attendant noise contained within
the structure. There may be an occasional need for emergency services such as paramedics but
accompanying siren noise would be brief and not significant. Operation of the proposed facility would have a
less than significant effect upon a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
Less than significant impact. As discussed in sub-section (c), the proposed facility would have a less than
significant impact in regards to a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project.
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?
64
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
No Impact. The proposed facility would be more than three miles northeast of the Oroville Airport and would
not be within an airport land use plan.
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?
No impact. A review of a 2012 aerial photo does not reveal a private airstrip within five miles of the proposed
facility. There would be no impact in regards to the exposure of people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels.
Mitigation Measure #7: Limit Work to Daytime Hours and Provide Best Available Noise
Suppression.
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans that
states:
“In order to minimize evening and nighttime noise impacts to surrounding users, the contractor shall implement
the following measures during construction of the facility:
1. Limit all project activity to daytime hours to the maximum extent feasible (7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.),
Monday through Saturday, with no project activity allowed on Sundays or holidays.
2. Use best available noise suppression devices and properly maintain and muffle diesel engine-driven
construction equipment:
a. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that
are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors
when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area.
c. Utilize quiet air compressors and other stationary noise-generating equipment where
appropriate technology exists and is feasible.
3. Construction equipment shall not be idled for longer than 15 minutes.
4. Locate stationary equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors.
5. The name and phone number of Butte County General Services shall be posted conspicuously at the
entrance(s) to the project site.
Timing: The limitation on work hours, equipment maintenance and use of best available noise suppression
devices shall be adhered to throughout all phases of construction.
Monitoring: General Services shall ensure that Mitigation Measure #9 is placed on (or on an additional page
to) building and site development plans. General Services shall take necessary action to resolve any noise-
related complaints.
65
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.13 Population and Housing
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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
6.13.1 Population and Housing Setting
According to the Butte County Association of Governments, as of May 2013 Butte County and the City of
Oroville had total populations of 221,485 and 15,979, respectively. Table 13 summarizes population
forecasts for Butte County and Oroville from 2010 through 2035.
Jurisdiction
Growth
Scenario 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Total
Increase
2010-
2035
Percent
Increase
2010-
2035
Compound
Annual
Growth
Rate
(CAGR)
2010-2035
Low 14,687 16,442 19,249 22,895 25,069 24,486 12,799 87 2.5
Middle 14,687 16,755 20,063 24,359 26,921 29,770 15,083 103 2.9
High 14,687 17,060 20,856 25,786 28,726 31,995 17,308 118 3.2
Low 84,302 89,223 94,493 99,829 105,550 111,560 27,258 32 1.1
Middle 84,302 90,102 96,311 102,600 109,342 116,424 32,122 38 1.3
High 84,302 90,958 98,083 105,300 113,036 121,163 36,861 44 1.5
Low 221,768 234,524 251,890 272,504 293,285 315,698 93,930 42 1.4
Middle 221,768 236,800 257,266 281,558 306,047 332,459 110,691 50 1.6
High 221,768 239,018 262,503 290,379 318,481 348,790 127,022 57 1.8
Source: Butte County Association of Governments Long-Term Regional Growth Forecasts 2010 - 2035
Oroville
Unincorporated
County
Total County
Table 13. Population Forecasts 2010 - 2035
As required by state law, both Butte County and the City of Oroville are required to plan for adequate
amounts of housing to accommodate anticipated increases in population. Table 14 summarizes forecasts
for housing demand in both Butte County and Oroville for the period 2010 through 2035.
66
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Jurisdiction
Growth
Scenario 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Total
Increase
2010-
2035
Percent
Increase
2010-
2035
Compound
Annual
Growth
Rate
(CAGR)
2010-2035
Low 6,393 7,157 8,379 9,966 10,912 11,964 5,571 87%2.5%
Middle 6,393 7,293 8,733 10,603 11,718 12,958 6,565 103%2.9%
High 6,393 7,426 9,078 11,224 12,504 13,927 7,534 118%3.2%
Low 37,199 39,371 41,696 44,051 46,576 49,228 12,029 32%1.1%
Middle 37,199 39,759 42,499 45,274 48,249 51,374 14,175 38%1.3%
High 37,199 40,137 43,281 46,465 49,879 53,465 16,266 44%1.5%
Low 96,623 102,101 109,513 118,338 127,210 136,782 40,159 42%1.4%
Middle 96,623 103,078 111,813 122,213 132,668 143,948 47,325 49%1.6%
High 96,623 104,030 114,054 125,988 137,986 150,930 54,307 56%1.8%
Source: Butte County Association of Governments Long-Term Regional Growth Forecasts 2010 - 2035
Table 14. Housing Forecasts 2010 - 2035
Oroville
Unincorporated
County
Total County
6.13.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As noted in the Project Description, the increase in 58 inmates and up to
eight staff that would accompany operation of the proposed facility would be in response to the transfer of
inmates from state to County custody under AB 109. The influx of inmates is occurring regardless of
whether or not the proposed facility is built.
While the inmates would be housed in the proposed facility, staff would be housed in the surrounding
communities. Eight individuals represents a negligible percentage of the anticipated population increase
between 2013 and 2020, an amount that would have a less than significant direct or indirect impact on
population growth in the area by virtue of its small size and effect on demand for homes, roads,
infrastructure and other services.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Less than significant impact. As noted in sub-section (a), the addition of up to eight staff would also have
a less than significant impact in regards to a displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing
such that construction of replacement housing elsewhere is necessary.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Less than significant impact. As noted in sub-section (a), the addition of up to eight staff would also have
a less than significant impact in regards to a displacement of substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
67
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.14 Public Services
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public services?
X
b. Fire protection? X
c. Police Protection? X
d. Schools? X
e. Parks? X
f. Other public services? X
6.14.1 Public Services Setting
Policies, programs and regulations to insure the provision of adequate public services are largely within the
domain of State and local government. The proposed facility would be within the City of Oroville but owned
and managed by Butte County. Electric service would be provided by PG&E and augmented by the
County’s Solar Energy System. Water and wastewater would be provided by the Thermalito Water and
Sewer District. Fire protection would be provided by Butte County/Calfire, whose fully staffed and equipped
headquarters is located about 3,500 feet by road to the south. Police protection would be provided by the
Butte County Sheriff’s Office, located immediately to the east. Schools and parks for the eight additional
staff who would work at the proposed facility are provided by a variety of districts in the area. Other services,
including medical emergency service, are provided by the Oroville Hospital.
6.14.2 Impact Analysis
Would construction and operation of the facility result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public services?
a) Fire protection.
Less than significant impact. As noted in the Project Description, the proposed facility would be about
68
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
3,500 feet by road from the fully equipped and staffed headquarters of Butte County/Calfire. The proposed
facility, which is not in a wildland fire hazard area, would be built and regularly inspected to all applicable
fire codes. In as much as the proposed facility would eliminate 198 beds in the existing and outdated jail,
fire standards will be improved. The proposed facility would have a less than significant impact upon the
need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities that could, in turn, cause a significant
environmental impact.
b) Police protection.
Less than significant impact. As discussed in the project report included as Attachment A to this initial
study, and also in the 2013 Butte County Jail Needs Assessment (available as indicated in Section 2.1),
the proposed facility – designed to contemporary incarceration standards – is expected to reduce the
number of law enforcement staff necessary for guard and other duties. However, due to an increase of 58
inmates, and a need for administering and conducting programs to help inmates transition to leaving jail,
up to eight additional staff are expected. This increase would have a less than significant impact in regards
to substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered law
enforcement facilities that could, in turn, cause a significant environmental impact.
c) Schools.
Less than significant impact. There are a variety of elementary through secondary schools in Butte
County and the City of Oroville that could serve the children of the up to eight new staff that would work at
the proposed facility. Assuming an average of two children per new staff member, up to 16 would potentially
require school services. Given the population projections provided in Section 6.13.1, the addition of up to
eight new staff would have a less than significant impact in regards to substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities that could, in turn, cause a
significant environmental impact.
d) Parks.
Less than significant impact. The Feather River Recreation and Park District provides for parks and
recreation in the Oroville Urban Area. Substantial and diverse park facilities and recreation opportunities
are also available at Lake Oroville and the State Water project facilities, and with other parks in the Chico
area. Assuming an average family size of four for the eight new staff, a total of 32 individuals may be
seeking recreational opportunities in the Butte County area. Given the variety and size of park facilities
available in both the Oroville Urban Area and in Butte County, the proposed facility would have a less than
significant impact in regards to substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered park facilities that could, in turn, cause a significant environmental impact.
e) Other public services.
Less than significant impact. Other public services potentially affected by the proposed facility could
include emergency medical services. Butte County is responsible for basic health care in the jail and
provides a variety of health care services to inmates in its Jail Medical Unit. For emergencies, paramedic
services may be provided by CalFire or a variety of local ambulance companies. Oroville Hospital, located
about two miles southeast of the proposed facility, provides a complete range of emergency, in and out-
patient services. Although some increase in emergency services may be reasonably predicted with an
increase of 58 inmates, there would be a less than significant impact in regards to the provision of new or
physically altered medical facilities that could, in turn, cause a significant environmental impact.
In regards to other services that may be required by the increase in inmates at the proposed facility, the
2011 Butte County Public Safety Realignment and Postrelease Community Supervision Implementation
69
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Plan identified a variety of staff needs for probation, behavioral health, and social services. Some, but not
all, of these staffing needs have been met. A main goal of the proposed facility is to provide much needed
program space for inmates who are preparing to transition to a post-release community setting. While the
increase of 58 inmates associated with the proposed project will require more services in support of that
transition, there would be a less than significant impact in regards to the provision of new or physically
altered transition services facilities that could, in turn, cause a significant environmental impact.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.15 Recreation
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. 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. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
6.15.1 Recreation Setting
Parks and recreational open space are generally regulated through park planning standards related to the
per capita need, the distribution of active and passive types of recreation, safety, maintenance and other
factors. There are a number of substantial recreational opportunities within and near the Oroville Urban
Area. State recreation areas include a variety of boating, fishing, hiking, seasonal hunting, bird watching
horseback riding, and cycling opportunities around the several thousand acres of the Lake Oroville State
Recreation Area and the Oroville Wildlife Refuge, including the Thermalito Forebay that is approximately
three quarters of a mile northwest of the proposed facility. The Feather River Recreation and Park District
and the City of Oroville Department of Parks and Trees coordinate to manage a number of regional and
neighborhood parks in Oroville, including River Bend Park on the Feather River and Nelson Park and
Recreational Center just west (across State Route 70) from the proposed facility. Additional recreation
opportunities are available elsewhere in Butte County, including wildlife refuges along the Sacramento
River, extensive national forest lands in the mountains, and Bidwell Park in Chico.
6.15.2 Impact Analysis
Would construction and operation of the proposed facility:
a) 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?
Less than significant impact. Operation of the proposed facility would involve an increase of up 58
inmates and eight County staff. Inmates would not be using area recreational facilities and, assuming each
70
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
staff member is part of a family of four, the addition of 32 residents would have a less than significant impact
in regards to a substantial deterioration of an existing recreational facility.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No Impact. The proposed facility does not include recreational facilities or the construction or expansion
of recreational facilities.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.16 Transportation/Traffic
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
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. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard 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. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g. Conflict with accepted policies, plans or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
X
71
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
6.16.1 Transportation Setting
Access to the proposed facility would be via Jail Road, an approximately 800 foot long cul-de-sac off of
County Center Drive, which is in turn accessible to State Route 70 via Nelson Avenue to the south and
Table Mountain Boulevard/Garden Drive to the north. Pedestrian and cycling connections between County
Center and other areas vary according to the street; for example, Nelson Avenue has a bike lane and
sidewalks while Table Mountain Boulevard is partially fitted with sidewalks and does not have a bicycle
lane. The Butte County Association of Governments operates daily local and regional bus service with
three stops along County Center Drive, including the middle stop at 25 County Center Drive that is about
1,500 feet from the proposed facility. Buses to all parts of Butte County pass through the County Center
hourly during the morning and evening commute.
The principal generators of local traffic are the County, including its employees and citizens who visit for a
wide variety of purposes (the single largest generator of traffic is probably the County Courts). Home Depot,
located on Nelson Avenue near the State Route 70 interchange, and Nelson School just northwest of State
Route 70 and Nelson Avenue, are likely also responsible from some amount of local pulses of vehicular
traffic at different times during the day. In regards to regional traffic, the 2009 State Route 70 Transportation
Corridor Concept Report identifies State Route 70 between State Route 162 and State Route 149 as
Segment 10, a 4-lane divided freeway with a Level of Service of B (“stable flow, but the presence of other
users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable”). According to 2006 Average Daily Traffic data presented
in the Butte County General Plan EIR, the PM Peak Hour traffic on State Route 70 from Grand Avenue to
State Route 149 was 2,800 or a Level of Service C. The 2012 Caltrans state highways traffic volume report
showed average daily State Route 70 traffic passing by Nelson Avenue was 20,500 vehicles.
Locally, brief congestion sometimes occurs at the end of the work day (4:00 to 5:00 pm) at the intersection
of County Center Drive and Nelson Avenue in the south and Table Mountain Boulevard to the east of the
proposed project as County employees leave. 2010 peak hour counts for the nearest two intersections to
the proposed project are provided in Table 15.
Table 15. Local Traffic Volumes
Intersection
Average
Daily
Traffic
Volume
AM Peak
Hour
Volume
PM Peak
Hour
Volume
Average
Daily
Traffic
Volume
AM Peak
Hour
Volume
PM Peak
Hour
Volume
Nelson Ave east of SR
70 7,847 733 738 8,920 990 1,010
Table Mountain Blvd.
south of Nelson Ave 14,622 1,330 1,228 16,910 1,780 1,850
2010 Count 2020 Forecast
Source: Butte County Association of Governments Regioanl Traffic Volume Forecasts, June 2012
The Martin Ranch subdivision project, approved by the City of Oroville in 2013 and discussed in greater
detail in the Section 6.18 cumulative impact analysis, will significantly affect local traffic congestion with
buildout. (Information regarding the Martin Ranch project is available at the Oroville Planning and
Development Services Department website, as indicated in Section 2.1.) A traffic study prepared for the
Martin Ranch project, which consists of 267 single family and 795 multifamily residences, in addition to
commercial and professional land uses, determined significant level of service impacts at 11 intersections
in the area between Grand Avenue and Garden Drive. However, and as discussed in Section 6.18.1,
required intersection improvements were determined to reduce these impacts to less than significant.
72
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Butte County is currently planning curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements along Jail Road, which will
improve pedestrian safety for those walking to and from the existing jail and proposed project area.
6.16.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The inmate housing portion of the project would result in a net increase
of 58 beds at the jail, an addition that would be associated with a marginal increase in vehicle traffic to
transport new inmates to the facility. However, once incarcerated, inmates would not – except in the event
of emergency or perhaps for work assignments – be leaving the facility until their release.
Families and friends of the inmates would be expected to visit (visitation would occur in the older jail, not in
the proposed facility). The average daily visits that would occur as a result of 58 additional inmates is
unknown – some inmates may receive daily visits, others very few. A commensurate increase in visits by
attorneys and health care professionals might also be expected with the additional inmates. Trip generation
created by jails is poorly understood. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
Manual, 9th Edition (2012) has two studies for the land use code “Prison”. It is unclear if those studies
pertain to the proposed facility, which is a County jail that would presumably incarcerate inmates for shorter
periods of time than a prison. David Evans and Associates prepared a trip generation rate analysis for a
proposed jail in Skagit County, Washington which referenced a study for a jail in Des Moines, Washington
with an average occupancy of 476 beds and a March, 2000 study in the Journal of Urban Planning and
Research titled “Trip Generation Rates of Correctional Facilities.” Table 14 summarizes the David Evans
and Associates findings.
Time Period SCORE1 Facility ITE2 Prison LUC
JURP3 (for
Regional jails)
Daily (ADT)1.3 N/A 1.38
AM Peak Hour 0.06 0.1 0.14
PM Peak Hour 0.09 0.05 0.1
Surce: David Evans and Associates, 2013.
Table 16. Trip Generation Rates for Jails (Trips per Bed)
1 South Correctional Entity, Des Moines, Wahsington
2 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th
Edition (2012)
3 Journal of Urban and Regional Planning, March 2000
Using the higher JURP trip generation rates, an additional 58 beds would result in an increase in the
average daily increase of 80 trips, with AM and PM Peak Hour increases of 8 and 6 trips, respectively.
Assuming two daily trips for the eight additional employees at the proposed facility (16 total) would yield a
total increase of 96 average daily trips. In regards to the average daily traffic volumes presented in Table
13, this represents an increase of 1.2 percent if all trips pass by Nelson Avenue east of State Route 70, or
an increase of 0.7 percent of all trips travel by Table Mountain Boulevard south of Nelson Avenue. Neither
73
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
of these increases represents a significant impact on local traffic and, it should be noted, trips will likely be
dispersed beyond these two intersections (for example, north to Garden Drive and the State Route 70
interchange. Finally, an unknown but, it may reasonably be assumed, modest proportion of trips will occur
via the regional buses that stop at 25 County Center Drive.
Accordingly, the proposed facility will have a less than significant impact in regards to a potential 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.
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the
county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
Less Than Significant Impact. As noted, the principal generators of traffic in the area are the County
(employees and citizens visiting the County for a wide variety of reasons), Home Depot on Nelson Avenue,
and Nelson School just west of State Route 70. The City of Oroville General Plan Circulation and
Transportation Element Policy 5.10e strives for a level of Service of C for all arterial and collector streets such
as Nelson Avenue and Table Mountain Boulevard. Per Table 15, both meet the Level of Service C for 2010
peak hour counts for arterials and collectors (890 and 2,550, respectively1). As discussed in sub-section (a),
the trips generated by the proposed facility are small relative to current and forecasted traffic volumes. The
proposed project would have a less than significant impact in regards to an individual or cumulative
exceedance of a Level of Service C established by the City of Oroville for local roads.
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?
No Impact. The proposed facility has no relation to a change in air traffic patterns, including an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
No Impact. The proposed facility will be at the end of Jail Road and not represent a hazard to passing traffic.
There will be no modification of the existing road beyond those improvements noted in the Project Description
and Setting above (that are not a part of the proposed project). There would be no impact in regards to an
increase in hazards due to a design feature.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed facility will be at the end of Jail Road and emergency access to
the proposed facility would take only a marginally longer amount of time than at present with construction of
the project. There would be a less than significant impact that would result in inadequate emergency access.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Less Than Significant Impact. Daily parking would not be necessary for the additional 58 inmates
incarcerated at the proposed facility. However, some parking would be necessary for their visitors as discussed
1 See Table CIR-1 Operational Class and Peak Hour Level-of-Service Thresholds in the Oroville General Plan
Circulation and Transportation Element.
74
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
in sub-section (a) and the additional eight staff. Review of a 2012 aerial photo indicates there is space for
roughly 160 vehicles in the two parking lots east and north of the Sheriff’s Office. Additional space is present
along the connecting roads. According to Butte County General Services, these lots are rarely (if ever) full.
With construction of the proposed facility there would be a less than significant impact in regards to
inadequate parking capacity.
g) Conflict with accepted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g.,
bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
No Impact. The General Plans for both Oroville and Butte County support alternatives to the private vehicle
for transportation and both have bicycle plans in various levels of development and implementation. As noted,
the proposed facility is reasonably close to the regional buses that stop at 25 County Center Drive. Construction
and operation of a jail and associated program rooms would have no impact upon General Plan policies
supporting, for example, bicycle use.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional 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 or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand
in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
X
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? X
75
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes, and
regulations related to solid waste? X
6.17.1 Utilities and Service Systems Setting
Water and Wastewater
Water is provided by the Thermalito Water and Sewer District (TWSD), which has water rights to 8,200
acre-feet of surface water from Concow Lake. Additional backup is provided by five wells (LAFCo, 2006).
Currently, the County Jail area is served by a main line coming across the Thermalito Power Canal from
the District’s water treatment plant and holding facility. The District is upgrading and providing redundancy
to this system by providing additional service with a 14-inch line that will come from Table Mountain
Boulevard via County Center Drive and Jail Road.
Wastewater from the proposed facility would be carried on a County sanitary sewer to Thermalito Water
and Sewer District sanitary sewer lines between Nelson Avenue and the Sewerage Commission, Oroville
Region (SC-OR) regional wastewater treatment plant in the Oroville Industrial Area. The SC-OR is a joint
powers authority that treats waste from three service providers in the Oroville Urban Area: Thermalito Water
and Sewer District, Lake Oroville Area Public Utilities District, and the City of Oroville. The SC-OR waste
water treatment plant has an existing dry weather treatment capacity of 6.5 million gallons per day (mgd)
and a wet weather treatment capacity of 10.6 mgd. The plant discharges treated effluent into the Feather
River in accordance with the terms of a Waste Discharge Permit issued by the Central Valley Regional
Water Quality Control Board. The Waste Discharge permit requires that SC-OR notify the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control Board when its treatment plan is within 48 months of reaching its permitted
capacity.
According to its 2009 LAFCo Municipal Services Review, the SC-OR wastewater treatment plant had the
capacity to treat an additional total dry weather flow of 2,743 equivalent dwelling units before reaching its
permitted capacity. An equivalent dwelling unit equals about 260 gallons of waste water per day; thus, in
2009, the SC-OR treatment plant had a capacity of about 713,180 gallons per day (LAFCo, 2009, p. 3-29).
During peak storm events, inflow and infiltration into the sewer system can result in flows exceeding the
treatment plant’s wet weather treatment capacity of 10.6 mgd. When this occurs, excess flows are diverted
to holding ponds within the treatment plant grounds for later treatment to prevent untreated sewage from
being discharged into downstream water bodies. The holding ponds have capacity for approximately 22
million gallons, which has never been exceeded during a peak storm event.
Stormwater
The proposed project site is currently undeveloped and supports a land cover of non-native grassland.
Stormwater either percolates into the substrate or, with sufficient rainfall, flows into a drainage channel that
empties into the Thermalito Power Canal. The drainage channel also collects runoff from the surrounding
76
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
hillside and a portion of the County Courthouse rooftop and parking lots to the south. As discussed in the
Project Description and Section 6.9, the drainage channel will have to be relocated or placed under ground
with construction of the proposed facility.
Solid Waste
Solid waste disposal would be provided by a private service that takes material to the Neal Road Landfill
about 15 miles to the north off State Route 99 at Neal Road.
6.17.2 Impact Analysis
Would the proposal:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
Less Than Significant Impact. An increase of 58 inmates and up to eight staff will result in a
commensurate increase in the amount of wastewater requiring treatment. There are no specific studies of
water use or wastewater production at the current County Jail. According to Table 2.1 in the 2009 LAFCo
Municipal Services review for SC-OR, the 9,140 District customers were responsible for an average daily
wastewater flow of 2.4 million gallons per day. This equates to roughly 263 gallons of wastewater per
person per day. Using this approximate average, the 58 inmates and 8 staff (66 total) at the proposed
facility would produce about 17,330 gallons of wastewater per day, or about 0.7 percent of the average
daily total of 2.4 million gallons, and about 2.4 percent of the dry weather available capacity of about
713,180 gallons per day. Despite the known inflow and infiltration issues with sanitary sewer lines carrying
effluent to the SC-OR treatment plant, this additional volume is relatively minor in relation to the total volume
and there would be a less than significant impact in regards to exceeding wastewater treatment
requirements pursuant the SC-OR plant’s Waste Discharge Requirements.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The most recent Municipal Services Review for the Thermalito Water and
Sewer District’s water supply was done in 2006 (LAFCO, 2006). At that time, the District’s water rights for
8,200 acre-feet per year from Concow Reservoir were determined to be ample for District growth past 2025.
The LAFCo Review noted that the District’s total annual water consumption of 2.8 million gallons per day
(in 2005) was expected to grow to just almost 5.7 million gallons per day by 2025, well under the 2010
water treatment plant capacity of 10 million gallons per day. A SB 610/221 Water Supply Assessment
conducted for the proposed Martin Ranch East development north of Table Mountain Boulevard near
Garden Drive (Taber, 2013) estimated an average daily water demand of 200 gallons per day per person
within the District. For the 58 inmates and up to eight staff, this would equate to an increased demand of
13,200 gallons per day or roughly 15 acre-feet per year (13,200 x 365 divided by one acre foot or 325,900
gallons). This represents 0.18 percent of the District’s total water rights of 8,200 acre-feet per year, a less
than significant amount in regards to a need for construction of new – or expansion of existing – water
treatment facilities.
As discussed in sub-section (a), the total anticipated daily increase in wastewater with the proposed facility
would be less than one percent of the average figure for the Thermalito Water and Sewer District. There
77
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
would be a less than significant impact in regards to a need for new construction of either water or
wastewater treatment facilities.
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?
Less Than Significant with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures #5 and #6. As discussed in Section
6.9, the proposed project’s approximately 1.5 acres of impermeable surfaces (roof, parking lot, road,
building pad and walkways) would result in a small increase in stormwater runoff as compared with the
current undeveloped site. Mitigation Measure #5 requires the design, implementation and maintenance
of LID stormwater management features to minimize runoff and the pollutants runoff typically carries. In
addition, and if required by the final site design, Mitigation Measure #6 requires that a registered and
qualified civil engineer re-design the existing drainage channel with sufficient capacity to accommodate
existing and any anticipated stormwater runoff. The modified or new drainage conveyance, whether surface
or subsurface, shall be designed in consultation with the Low Impact Development Plan specified in
Mitigation Measure #5 in a manner that maximizes the use of locally adapted, natural vegetation and
pervious features. Hardscape shall be minimized to the extent feasible with maintaining safe and adequate
drainage of the Supplemental Jail Site and the County Courthouse area served by the existing drainage
channel. The 1.5 acres of impermeable surface would not be expected to result in a significant
environmental effect because of new or expanded stormwater drainage facilities. Regardless, with
implementation of Mitigation Measures #5 and #6, any potential impact would be reduced to less than
significant.
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in sub-section (b), the proposed facility’s estimated demand
for water supplies would be less than one percent of the Thermalito Water and Sewer District’s 8,200 acre-
feet annual surface water rights from Lake Concow. Due to its relatively small size, the proposed project
would have a less than significant impact as water supplies will be adequate for the 58 inmates and up
to eight staff without new or expanded entitlements.
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in sub-section (a), the SC-OR treatment plant has adequate
capacity for the anticipated increase in wastewater that will result from the 58 inmates and up to eight staff.
Wastewater from the County Jail is already conveyed to the SC-OR treatment plant via County and
Thermalito Water and Sewer District sanitary sewers and each entity will receive a copy of the initial study
for review and comment. Given the small increase involved with the proposed facility, a less than
significant impact with regards to the provider’s existing commitments is expected.
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid
waste disposal needs?
Less Than Significant Impact. Butte County’s Neal Road Recycling and Waste Facility is the principal
handler of solid waste in Butte County. It is currently permitted to accept 1,500 tons of material per day
78
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
with an estimated closure date of 2033. The proposed facility will receive the same solid waste service that
is provided to the existing jail. The addition of 58 inmates represents an increase of about 11 percent over
the current daily average inmate population of 550. The Neal Road Recycling and Waste Facility is
expected to accommodate an incremental increase in solid waste from the proposed facility with a less
than significant impact upon its permitted capacity.
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes, and regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed facility would be served by a licensed solid waste hauler.
As a County facility, all solid waste handling and disposal would occur consistent with Chapter 31 of Butte
County Code (Solid Waste Collection, Management and Recycling) and the state Integrated Waste
Management Act (AB 939). The proposed facility will not be producing unusual solid waste.
Mitigation Measures: None required with construction and operation of the project as described.
6.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065)
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Reviewed
Under
Previous
Document
a. Have the potential to substantially 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. 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
6.18.1 Mandatory Findings of Significance Discussion
Would the proposal:
a) Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
79
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Given the lack of suitable habitat within and in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed project, and as discussed in Section 6.4, there would be a less than significant potential to
affect special-status or otherwise important biological resources, either by reducing habitat, causing a
species to drop below self-sustaining levels or through a restriction in range of a plant or animal. Examples
of major periods of California history or prehistory are not present on the surface of the proposed project
site; however they may be uncovered during site preparation. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure #4
would reduce this potential impact to less than significant. Mitigation Measures #5 and #6 would limit
impacts to water quality that may affect a wildlife species.
b) 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)?
Less Than Significant Impact. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15355, “’Cumulative impacts’ refers to two
or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or
increase other environmental impacts.
a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate
projects
b) The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from
the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually
minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.”
Using a list approach (as provided by CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)) to determine cumulative
activities in the proposed project area, discretionary development projects for the period between 2006 and
2013 are presented in Figure 4 and Table 17. A one-mile radius was chosen to analyze cumulative impacts
because, in this developed area with a variety of services and utilities present, a smaller radius might unduly
exclude potential cumulative impacts while a larger radius might be too inclusive.
Project Type APN Land Use Jurisdiction Status
Admin Permit 031-180-047 Home occupation County Approved
Use Permit 031-180-034 Second dwelling unit County Approved
Martin Ranch
Subdivision 031-030-031
237 single family lots, 795
multifamily units, 8,400 sf
commercial, 30,000 sf
business/professional City
General Plan Amendment,
rezone and tentative
subdivision map approved
October 3, 2013
Table 17. Land Use Projects Within One Mile of the Project Site 2006 - 2012
Source: Butte County and Oroville GIS, 2014
For Martin Ranch information, see: http://www.cityoforoville.org/index.aspx?page=457
The identified County projects within one mile of the proposed project are negligible; however, the Martin Ranch
project, about 2,000 feet northeast of the proposed project site, represents a substantial nearby land use
change.
80
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
As stated in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (available as indicated in Section 2.1) adopted by
the Oroville City Council on October 3, 2013, the Martin Ranch subdivision would add 267 single family
residential units, 795 multifamily units, 8,400 square feet of commercial uses, and 30,000 square feet of
business/professional land uses. The proposed project would be constructed over a 12-year period, with
construction occurring annually between April and October, beginning in April 2014. Each year, 5.92 acres of
land would develop, with buildout of the full 71 acres occurring after 12 years. The Martin Ranch Initial
Study/Mitigated Declaration concluded, in its Section 3.13 Population and Housing analysis, that “this level of
development is only a small part of the 13,800 new residential units and 10.6 million square feet of new
commercial space that the General Plan identifies for Oroville through 2030…[that] would likely be balanced
by a lower intensity of growth elsewhere in the Oroville Planning Area.”
The Martin Ranch Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration determined potentially significant impacts for air
quality, biological resources, noise, transportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems. However, in each
instance mitigation measures were adopted by the City of Oroville to reduce those impacts to a less than
significant level. In particular:
• A traffic study prepared for the Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration analyzed 13 intersections in the
vicinity of the Martin Ranch project. Buildout of the Martin Ranch project was determined to result in
eleven intersections operating below the target Levels of Service (LOS) specified in the City of Oroville
Transportation Element, including the intersections at County Center Drive and Nelson Avenue and
Table Mountain Boulevard. In order to reduce this impact to less than significant, various
improvements at the affected intersections (including signals, lane widening and roundabouts) are
required to be installed by the project applicant according to a fair share program. The relatively small
increase in traffic that would result from the proposed project would not, with implementation of the
intersection improvements required for the Martin Ranch project, result in an incrementally cumulative
impact in regards to traffic congestion.
• The water supply for Martin Ranch, served by the Thermalito Sewer and Water District, was
determined to be adequate by the Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration. It is not expected that the
relatively small water demand by the proposed facility would result in an incrementally cumulative
impact to the substantial water rights already held by the Thermalito Sewer and Water District and
discussed in Section 6.9.
• Wastewater from Martin Ranch will be collected by the City of Oroville sanitary sewer system and
conveyed to the SC-OR treatment plant. The Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration determined that the
City of Oroville’s existing conveyance capacity is not adequate to meet Martin Ranch’s maximum peak
wastewater flow and a mitigation measure requires the developer to fund construction of necessary
improvements. The existing capacity of the SC-OR treatment plant was determined to be adequate
for anticipated growth in its service area through 2020, including the Martin Ranch project. As the
proposed project’s wastewater will be conveyed by the Thermalito Sewer and Water District’s sanitary
sewers, it will not contribute to conveyance capacity limits for the City of Oroville’s system serving
Martin Ranch. Given the relatively small amount of wastewater
In regards to other incrementally small but cumulatively considerable impacts for the Section 6 analysis, the
proposed project is relatively small, serves a minor increase in the existing inmate and staffing population and
will occur in an area that has been developed for decades. Accordingly, construction and operation of the
proposed project would not contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to the environment.
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
81
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As indicated in the preceding impact analysis,
the proposed project has the potential to result in impacts in regards to aesthetics (nighttime exterior lighting),
air quality (fugitive dust, diesel emissions), cultural resources (subsurface resources), surface water quality
(stormwater runoff and inadequate drainage), and noise (construction equipment). However, for each of these
potential impacts feasible mitigation measures have been proposed and, with their implementation, substantial
direct or indirect adverse effects would be less than significant.
82
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
83
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
7 MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Mitigation Measure #1: Minimize Off-Site Glare from Exterior Lighting.
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans
that states:
“All exterior lighting for the proposed supplemental jail facility shall be designed and directed to minimize
nighttime off-site glare. To the extent feasible in consideration of security needs, exterior lighting shall be
downcast so that only the intended area is illuminated and off-site glare is contained, consistent with the
requirements of Title 19, Chapter 19.31 (Development Lighting) of Butte County Code.”
Timing: Exterior lighting shall be included on final building plans subject to approval by the County. Butte
County General Services shall insure that lighting has been installed as specified in the building plans and
consistent with this mitigation measure’s intent to minimize glare to the extent feasible prior to building
occupancy.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall insure that this Mitigation Measure #1 note is included
with (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans, and shall respond to any complaints
regarding off-site glare that may arise.
Mitigation Measure #2: Ensure Adequate Dust Control
Plan Requirements: The following Mitigation Measure #2 note shall be included on (or on an additional
page to) building and site development plans:
“The applicant shall implement the following specific mitigation measures to ensure adequate dust control:
• Water shall be applied by means of truck(s), hoses and/or sprinklers as needed prior to any land
clearing or earth movement to minimize dust emission.
• Haul vehicles transporting soil into or out of the property shall be covered.
• Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp
enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such
areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15
miles per hour.
• On-site vehicles shall be limited to a speed which minimizes dust emissions on unpaved roads.
Unpaved roads may be graveled to reduce dust emissions.
• Haul roads shall be sprayed down at the end of the work shift to form a thin crust. This application
of water shall be in addition to the minimum rate of application.
• Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to
prevent dust generation.
• Existing roads and streets adjacent to the project shall be cleaned at least once per day if dirt or
mud from the project site has been tracked onto these roadways, unless conditions warrant a
greater frequency.
• Construction workers shall park in designated parking area(s) to help reduce dust emissions.
• Other measures that may be required as determined appropriate by the BCAQMD or Department
of Public Works in order to control dust.
• Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust
complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The telephone
84
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
number of the Butte County Air Quality Management District (855-332-9400) shall be visible to
ensure compliance with BCAQMD Rule 200 & 205 (Nuisance and Fugitive Dust Emissions).
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be adhered to throughout all construction phases of the project
(clearance, grading, compaction, paving, construction).
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall ensure that this Mitigation Measure #2 note is included
on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. General Services inspectors shall
spot check and shall ensure compliance on-site. General Services and Butte County Air Quality
Management District inspectors shall respond to nuisance complaints.
Mitigation Measure #3: Minimize Combustion Emissions from Heavy-Duty Construction Equipment
Plan Requirements: The following note shall be included on (or on an additional page to) building and site
development plans:
“The applicant shall implement the following mitigation measures to mitigate combustion emissions from
heavy-duty construction equipment:
• Diesel-powered equipment shall be compliant with all applicable State of California air quality
regulations for on and off-road vehicles.
• Maintain all off-road equipment in proper tune and regularly serviced according to manufacturer’s
specification.
• Electrify equipment where feasible.
• Substitute gasoline-powered for diesel-powered, where feasible.
• Use alternative fueled construction equipment on site where feasible, such as compressed natural
gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane, or biodiesel.
Timing: Requirements of the condition shall be adhered to throughout all construction phases of the project
(clearance, grading, compaction, paving, construction).
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall ensure that this Mitigation Measure #3 note is included
on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. General Services shall insure that
contractor(s) have the requisite California Air Resources Board compliance certificates for on- and off-road
vehicles. General Services and Butte County Air Quality Management District inspectors shall respond to
nuisance complaints.
Mitigation Measure #4. Protection of Cultural Resources Found During Work
Plan Requirements: The following Mitigation Measure #4 note shall be included on (or on an additional
page to) building and site development plans:
“Should grading activities reveal the presence of 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 150 feet of the find shall cease immediately until a qualified professional archaeologist
can be consulted to evaluate the resources and implement appropriate mitigation procedures. Should
human skeletal remains be encountered, State law requires immediate notification of the County Coroner.
Should the County Coroner determine that such remains are in an archaeological context, the Native
American Heritage Commission in Sacramento shall be notified immediately, pursuant to State law, to
85
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
arrange for Native American participation in determining the disposition of such remains.”
Timing: Requirements of the Mitigation Measure #9 shall be adhered to throughout all phases of the
grading project (clearance, grading, compaction, paving).
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall ensure that this Mitigation Measure #9 note is included
on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. The contractor and the on-site
supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with this mitigation measure and shall immediately
notify the Butte County General Services should any cultural resources be revealed during project activities.
Mitigation Measure #5. Prepare Low Impact Development Plan to Manage Post-Construction
Stormwater Runoff.
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans
that states:
“In order to minimize the polluting and hydromodification effects of post-construction stormwater runoff from
the Supplemental Jail site (structure, building pad, parking lot, road and any other impermeable surface),
and consistent with General Plan Goal W-4 and Policy W-P1.4, a Low Impact Development (LID) plan shall
be prepared by a licensed and qualified landscape architect or civil engineer that reduces the volume and
rate of stormwater runoff from the site to no more than the estimated runoff of the currently undeveloped
site. LID stormwater features may include, but are not limited to, pervious pavers, vegetated swales,
detention/retention ponds, locally appropriate tree and shrub plantings, and a green roof. The Plan shall
include calculations regarding the surface runoff to be attenuated, site and construction plans showing the
location and details LID features (including, as may be necessary, irrigation), and a maintenance plan to
insure that the features function as designed over time.
Timing: The Low Impact Development Plan shall be prepared in consultation with building and site plans
and, if it is necessary, Mitigation Measure #6 for the redesign of the existing stormwater drainage
conveyance. Construction of the Supplemental Jail Facility shall not begin until the stamped Low Impact
Development Plan has been approved by Butte County General Services and the Department of Public
Works.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall insure that this Mitigation Measure #5 note is included
with (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. Butte County General Services
shall insure that the provisions of the LID Plan, including maintenance, are implemented as specified and
approved.
Mitigation Measure #6. Redesign Drainage Conveyance (as may be Necessary).
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans
that states:
“If made necessary by development of the Supplemental Jail Facility, a registered and qualified civil
engineer shall re-design the existing drainage channel with sufficient capacity to accommodate existing and
any anticipated drainage for a design storm to be determined by the engineer such that localized flooding
and erosion are avoided. A modified or new drainage conveyance, whether surface or subsurface, shall
be designed in consultation with the Low Impact Development Plan specified in Mitigation Measure #6 in a
manner that, consistent with General Plan Policy W-P1.4, maximizes the use of locally adapted, natural
86
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
vegetation and pervious features while minimizing hardscape to the extent feasible with maintaining safe
and adequate drainage of the Supplemental Jail Site and the area served by the existing drainage channel.
Timing: If a modified or new drainage conveyance is determined to be necessary, a site plan shall be
prepared in consultation with the Supplemental Jail Facility building and site plans and the Mitigation
Measure #5 Low Impact Development Plan. Construction of the Supplemental Jail Facility shall not begin
until the stamped drainage conveyance plans have been approved by Butte County General Services and
the Department of Public Works.
Monitoring: Butte County General Services shall insure that this Mitigation Measure #8 note is included
with (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans. Butte County General Services
shall insure that the modified or new drainage conveyance is constructed as specified and approved.
Mitigation Measure #7: Limit Work to Daytime Hours and Provide Best Available Noise
Suppression.
Plan Requirements: Place a note on (or on an additional page to) building and site development plans that
states:
“In order to minimize evening and nighttime noise impacts to surrounding users, the contractor shall implement
the following measures to mitigate noise during construction of the facility:
1. Limit all project activity to daytime hours to the maximum extent feasible (7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.),
Monday through Saturday, with no project activity allowed on Sundays or holidays.
2. Use best available noise suppression devices and properly maintain and muffle diesel engine-driven
construction equipment:
a. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that
are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors
when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area.
c. Utilize quiet air compressors and other stationary noise-generating equipment where
appropriate technology exists and is feasible.
3. Construction equipment shall not be idled for longer than 15 minutes.
4. Locate stationary equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors.
5. The name and phone number of Butte County General Services shall be posted conspicuously at the
entrance(s) to the project site.
Timing: The limitation on work hours, equipment maintenance and use of best available noise suppression
devices shall be adhered to throughout all phases of construction.
Monitoring: General Services shall ensure that Mitigation Measure #7 is placed on (or on an additional page
to) building and site development plans. General Services shall take necessary action to resolve any noise-
related complaints.
87
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
8 ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCE MATERIAL
Butte County Association of Governments. Butte County Long-Term Regional Growth Forecasts
2010 – 2035. January 26, 2011. Accessed April 22, 2014 at:
http://www.bcag.org/documents/demographics/pop_emp_projections/Growth_Forecasts_2010-
2035.pdf
Butte County Association of Governments. Preliminary Public Draft Butte Regional Conservation
Plan, appendix A Species Accounts. December 4, 2012. Chico, CA. Accessed April 25 at:
http://www.buttehcp.com/BRCP-Documents/Preliminary-Public-Draft-BRCP/index.html
Butte County Community Corrections Partnership. 2011 Public Safety Realignment and
Postrelease Community Supervision Implementation Plan.
Butte County, 2010a. Butte County General Plan 2030. Available at the Department of Development Services, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA between the hours of 8:00 am and 3:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and at the following web site:
http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/
Butte County, 2010b. Butte County General Plan Draft EIR. Available at the Department of Development Services, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA between the hours of 8:00 am and 3:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and at the following web site:
http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/
Butte County General Services. Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project Description Report.
February 12, 2014. Oroville, CA.
Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission. 2009. Municipal Service Review for
Wastewater Service providers – Oroville Region. Accessed April 25, 2014 at:
http://buttelafco.org/resources/municipal-service-reviews-sphere-influence-plans-0
Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission. June 1, 2006. Municipal Service Review
Domestic Water and Wastewater Providers. Accessed May 6, 2014 at:
http://buttelafco.org/sites/default/files/resources/Final%20MSR.pdf
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), July 2009. Model Policies for
Greenhouse Gases in General Plans: A Resource for Local Government to Incorporate General
Plan Policies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Accessed April 24, 2014 at:
http://www.capcoa.org/documents/
California Department of Water Resources. April 1977. Performance of the Oroville Dam and
Related facilities During the August 1, 1975 Earthquake. Accessed April 24, 2014 at:
https://archive.org/details/up8performanceoforo203calirich
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2014. California Natural Diversity Database Quick View.
Accessed April 24 at:
https://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2014. Threatened and Endangered Species. Accessed
88
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
April 24, 2014 at:
https://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/t_e_spp/
Cal EPA. Climate Action Team Report. 2010. California Environmental Protection Agency.
Sacramento.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (2007). Wildland Fire Hazard Maps.
Caltrans. 2012 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways. State of California Transportation
Agency, Department of Transportation. Accessed April 24 at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/2012TrafficVolumes.pdf
Caltrans. 2009 State Route 70 Transportation Corridor Concept Report. Accessed April 25, 2014
at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist3/departments/planning/tcr/tcr70.pdf
City of Oroville General Plan, 2010
Community Corrections Partnership. Butte County Public Safety Realignment and Postrelease
Community Supervision 2011 Implementation Plan.
David Evans and Associates, September 5, 2013. Memorandum re Trip Generation Rate Analysis
for proposed Skagit County Jail EIS. Accessed April 25, 2014 at:
http://www.mountvernonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2282
Harris & Harris Enterprises. Butte County Jail Needs Assessment Update. April 1, 2013.
Hunsicker, Grant. Director, Butte County General Services. April 24, 2014 Interoffice Memorandum
regarding the percentage of electricity for the proposed facility that will derive from the County’s
solar facilities.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition (2012)
National Resources Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Butte Area, California, Parts of Butte and
Plumas Counties. 2006. United States Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C. Accessed
April 24, 2014 at:
http://soils.usda.gov/survey/online_surveys/california/
O’Brien, Shawn, Assistant Director, Butte County Department of Public Works. Personal
communication regarding no records of slope failure on hillside above proposed project site. May
1, 2014.
Sacramento Bee. “Oroville Dam Earthquake Investigation May Be Needed.” November 29, 2013.
Accessed May 7, 2014 at:
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/29/5955059/oroville-dam-earthquake-
investigation.html#storylink=cpy
United States Green Building Council (USGBC). LEED Certification. Accessed April 24, 2014 at:
http://www.usgbc.org/leed
United States Green Building Council (USGBC). CALGreen Non-Residential comparison to LEED
for Building Design & Construction 2009. Accessed May 6, 2014 at:
89
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
http://www.usgbc-
ncc.org/storage/documents/advocacy/gbcec_2010_calgreen_non_residential_leed_comparison.pdf
90
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■ Planning Division ■ ■ Initial Study - Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility ■ ■ Project CEQA14-0001 ■ May 20, 2014 ■
9 CONSULTED AGENCIES:
[X] Environmental Health [X] Public Works [X] Building Manager
[X] BCAG [ ] ALUC [X] LAFCo
[X] Air Quality Management [ ] City of Chico [ ] City of Biggs
[ ] City of Gridley [X] City of Oroville [ ] Town of Paradise
[ ] CA Department of Forestry [X] CalTrans (Traffic) [X] RWQCB – Redding
[ ] Department of Conservation [X] Dept. of Fish and Game [ ] Highway Patrol
[ ] Army Corps of Engineers [ ] National Marine Fisheries Service [ ] US Fish & Wildlife Service
[X] Thermalito Water and [X] Sewerage Commission Oroville Sewer District Region (SCOR)
91
Attachment A
Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project. Butte County General Services.
February 12, 2014
Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project
Project Description Report
February 12, 2014
For
Development Services California Environmental Quality Act Consideration
By
General Services on Behalf of the Sheriff’s Office
BACKGROUND
The existing main jail was originally constructed in 1964 and despite some expansion and
remodeling effort the 54,500 square foot facility does not meet the needs of the County.
The existing main jail suffers from both physical and functional obsolescence with a cost to cure
in excess of the value of the facility. Physically, this nearly obsolete facility suffers from
deferred maintenance and lacks compliance with California Title 24 accessibility requirements
and the Americans with Disabilities Act. In terms of functional obsolescence, the design of the
existing main jail does not meet the current needs of the County Sheriff’s Office for many
reasons. When the existing main jail was constructed, the key focus of the facility was
incarceration for short periods of time. In today’s environment, inmates are more diverse, they
often remain incarcerated for years, and the focus of the facility is shifting more towards
offering rehabilitation programs aimed at reducing recidivism that require program / training
space. In addition, the existing main jail exceeds its design capacity.
In 2011, with the passage of AB109, the State shifted responsibilities for non-violent inmates to
the County. Since that time, hundreds of inmates have moved from State prisons to become
the responsibility of Butte County. Fortunately, the Butte County Sheriff’s Office has been
proactive in implementing new programs, in other and perhaps even worse buildings than the
existing main jail. While the volume of inmates that are bound for Butte County in the future
due to AB109 is uncertain, it is important to note that this increased population is already here
and is already being accommodated – inadequately – within existing Sheriff’s facilities.
To better enable California counties to accommodate the increased responsibilities under
AB109, SB1022 was established to provide counties a funding source to update facilities to
meet their current needs as of 2014. Unfortunately, Butte County did not receive funding
under SB1022 in 2013 due to lacking a notice of determination relating to compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Now, the County has further defined a single
solution to meet the changing needs of the Sheriff’s Office and is moving forward with CEQA
analysis to ensure the solution is appropriate and to be prepared to execute this solution when
and if the State issues additional funding sources aimed at jail expansion.
PROJECT DETAIL
Key Project Information
A. Applicant: Butte County General Services on behalf of the Sherriff’s Office.
B. General Services Contact: Grant Hunsicker, Director – General Services.
C. Project Name: Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project.
D. Project Location: Portion (6.4 acres) of APN 031-020-039 plus floating easement on APN
031-040-020 and APN 031-040-039.
E. Environmental Setting, Zoning and Land Use:
The subject site is comprised of an irregularly shaped portion of APN 031-020-039 with
the Northern and largest portion of the property gently sloping from South to North and
the site also contains a large drainage channel. The site will be serviced through paved
access on APN 031-040-020 and APN 031-040-039 with access to the local bus stop.
The site is located within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Oroville, but is
owned in fee by the County of Butte. The zoning map for the City of Oroville is PQ
which is a public or quasi-public zoning designation. The property is bounded to the
North by a small strip of land owned by the State Department of Water Resources that
runs parallel with the canal, to the West by highway 70 and County improved space to
the South and to the East.
The site is in Flood Zone X, community panel no. 06007C0790 E; see Exhibit 5 – FIRM
Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 790, Revised January 6, 2011.
The site does not appear to be constrained by any wetlands or sensitive habitats, based
upon the U.S. National Wetlands Inventory Map, see attached Exhibit 6 – U.S. Fish and
Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory Map.
F. Utilities/Service Connections:
Utilities are proximate and include service PG&E, water from the Thermalito Irrigation
District and sewage is provided by the City of Oroville.
Key Design Concepts
Funding through SB1022 requires compliance with guidelines that, to a certain degree, define
how best to design and complete the project. As an example, any facility modified utilizing
SB1022 funding shall meet current building code and accessibility requirements. In addition,
given that applicable funding can only be spent in accommodating current needs, the intention
is to fund a new supplemental facility that will maximize contemporary incarceration
alternatives and, more importantly, space for programs that will reduce recidivism. This
particular set of goals results in an anticipated final design that will be significantly unlike a
traditional jail facility in three respects:
1. Limited Infrastructure
Traditional incarceration facilities commit a large portion of the building foot print and
some of the more environmentally charged activities to infrastructure necessary to run
the facility. As an example, traditional jail facilities typically dedicate large portions of
the facility foot print to Kitchen, Infirmary and Laundry functions. However, in this
project, the existing main jail will provide these functions and the new supplemental
facility foot print will be allocated substantially to program space and incarceration
areas designed to efficiently accommodate current needs.
2. Incarceration Design Concepts
The existing main jail lacks facilities to accommodate special needs inmates. Therefore,
inmates that require special services occupy unnecessarily large areas due to an
inefficient design. In addition, the existing main jail does not provide larger work
centers where inmates are able to participate in group activities found to reduce
recidivism. Simply put, the design of the new supplemental facility will more efficiently
accommodate the needs of the existing population than the existing main jail ever
could.
3. Minimal Staff
Replicating the existing main jail with a new facility of the same design and size would
require a significant increase in Sheriff’s staff to run the facility. However, with
contemporary electronic controls, the movement of services to the inmates instead of
utilizing Sheriff’s staff to move inmates to services, and the improved utilization of
building space being allocated to program space means that less than five new Sheriff
staff will be added despite the size of the new supplemental facility.
It is anticipated that a new supplemental jail facility, with contemporary design features, will
reduce overall traffic in the immediate area as inmates are managed more efficiently than can
be accomplished in the existing main jail.
Project Phases
There are essentially four phases to this project:
1. Off-Site Infrastructure Improvements
As recommended in the Campus Master Plan developed in 2011, with the assistance of
LPA, Inc., the County has included approximately $3m in infrastructure improvements
running South on County Center Drive beginning at Table Mountain Boulevard.
Although the existing improvements appear adequate in meeting the current and
planned needs of this project, the County will be implementing upgrades to curbs and
gutters, sewer, water, gas, data and electrical infrastructure that service the existing
main jail and the planned new supplemental facility.
Access to the new supplemental facility will be provided, by floating easement, over
Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 031-040-020 and APN 031-040-039 (see Exhibit 1 –
Access for a diagram of the parcels). Both are owned by the County in fee and are
located between County Center Drive and the site of the new supplemental facility.
These two parcels are currently improved and provide access to the existing main jail.
The County is in the final design phase of improving this roadway with the inclusion of
curb, gutter and sidewalk accessible to public transportation. In addition, the
Thermalito Water District is in the process installing additional water service to the
existing main jail to provide redundancy in the event of failure.
The current improvements appear to support the existing main jail population and use
and while the improvements to the roadway and to the water service are not
considered part of the new supplemental facility project, such improvements will
support future projects managed by the County in the subject area.
2. On-Site Improvements
The new supplemental facility project includes on-site improvements on a portion of
APN 031-020-039, owned by the County in fee, with a size of approximately 6.4 acres
and is already partially improved with a parking lot (see Exhibit B – Site Location). In
addition to grading and typical site work necessary to accommodate a facility of this
type, the site will also require management of existing storm water that currently flows
to the East in the area depicted as “storm water retention” on Exhibit 3 – Storm Water
Retention Area.
3. Supplemental Jail Building Construction
The new supplemental facility will be no more than two stories and will comply with the
County General Plan requirement of LEED Silver or equivalent, as well as Code of
Regulations Titles 15 and 24. Although conceptual plans have not been finalized, the
facility will be between 50,000 and 75,000 square feet in size. See Exhibit 4-
Supplemental Facility Massing Diagram for further detail regarding building mass,
location and parking.
The new supplemental facility will be comprised of approximately 256 new beds in 158
cells plus 6 Program Rooms designed to accommodate a class size of at least 24. The
new supplemental facility will also provide some storage, security equipment and
minimal visitation areas.
4. Existing Main Jail Modifications
Although existing State funding does not allow remodel of the existing main jail, the
County is planning to eliminate numerous, perhaps as many as 198, beds in “hard cells”
that are not consistent with contemporary incarceration plans and to utilize this space
for other support functions.
The net increase in beds will accommodate the current and existing population. It is
anticipated the construction of a new supplemental facility will not increase, but may decrease,
overall traffic and congestion in the area due to increased efficiency in design.
Project Delivery
Assuming the States funding guidelines remain unchanged, the County plans to deliver the
project using the traditional Design-Bid-Build method. The County is planning to contract for
Project/Construction Management, Design Team, Special Inspection and Construction services.
The County is hopeful that funding will become available in the Spring of 2015, design will take
approximately two years and construction will take approximately three years.
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
Simply put, there are no viable alternatives and the need is urgent. Like the existing main jail,
the new supplemental facility will be a full-time operation, 24 hours per day and 7 days per
week.
The development of the Master Plan included provisions for dividing the campus into different
“neighborhoods” and depicted a new jail facility in the “public safety” neighborhood. Original
concepts suggested that placement of the new supplemental facility just to the South of the
existing main jail would allow for an underground tunnel for inmate travel to the Courthouse to
the South. However, the topography to the South of the existing main jail does not lend itself
well to construction. It has been determined that placement of the new supplemental facility,
to remain proximate to the existing main jail, but to the West instead, is more appropriate as it
will require minimal grading. The location of the new supplemental facility does remain in the
public safety neighborhood and is consistent with the neighborhood concepts outlined in the
Master Plan.
Placement of a new supplemental facility that is not proximate to the existing main jail would
preclude the ability to limit infrastructure improvements that will be provided to the new
supplemental facility from the existing main jail as outlined above and would require more staff
and associated traffic in any alternative location.
Exhibit 1 - Access
Exhibit 2 – Site Location
Exhibit 3 – Storm Water Retention Area
Exhibit 4 – Supplemental Facility Massing Diagram
Exhibit 5 – FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 790, Revised January 6, 2011
Exhibit 6 – U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory Map
Attachment B
CalEEMOD Air Quality Emissions Report
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The total disturbe acreage is 1.5 acres, the max size of the building is 75000 sf. 8 additional employees plus 58 "students" who would make the 96
(1.38 per resident) average daily trips estimated in Section 6.16 of the Initial Study.
Architectural Coating - 50 g/L for nonresidential interior; 250 for non-residential exterior.
Vehicle Trips - 1.38 trips from Section 6.16 of the Initial Study
Land Use Change - 1.5 acres of the 6.4 acre parcel will be converted from grassland to the facility.
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - All equipment must comply with State of CA air quality regulations.
Area Mitigation - Use low VOC coatings for both interior and exterior.
Energy Mitigation - CALGreen Tier 1 standards Section A5.601.22 specify energy efficiency 15% above Title 24 Part 6 energy standards.
Area Coating - Low VOC paint for non-residential interior.
Butte County AQMD Air District, Winter
Butte County Supplemental Jail Project
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
University/College (4Yr)66.00 Student 1.50 75,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 71
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company
2014Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
641.35 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 1 of 24
2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 50.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Exterior 250.00 0.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Interior 250.00 0.00
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV
alue
250 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV
alue
250 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintResidentialInteriorValue 250 50
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 12,130.63 75,000.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.28 1.50
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 2 of 24
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2015 69.9699 29.8005 23.1532 0.0294 5.8759 1.8663 7.3437 2.9739 1.7480 4.3243 0.0000 2,746.050
8
2,746.050
8
0.6442 0.0000 2,759.579
3
Total 69.9699 29.8005 23.1532 0.0294 5.8759 1.8663 7.3437 2.9739 1.7480 4.3243 0.0000 2,746.050
8
2,746.050
8
0.6442 0.0000 2,759.579
3
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2015 69.9699 29.8005 23.1532 0.0294 2.6861 1.8663 4.1539 1.3494 1.7480 2.6998 0.0000 2,746.050
8
2,746.050
8
0.6442 0.0000 2,759.579
3
Total 69.9699 29.8005 23.1532 0.0294 2.6861 1.8663 4.1539 1.3494 1.7480 2.6998 0.0000 2,746.050
8
2,746.050
8
0.6442 0.0000 2,759.579
3
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.29 0.00 43.44 54.63 0.00 37.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 3 of 24
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.0819 7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Energy 0.0514 0.4670 0.3923 2.8000e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 560.3546 560.3546 0.0107 0.0103 563.7648
Mobile 1.2815 4.0284 14.6956 0.0179 1.1943 0.0519 1.2462 0.3195 0.0476 0.3671 1,654.031
5
1,654.031
5
0.0913 1,655.949
2
Total 3.4148 4.4954 15.0949 0.0207 1.1943 0.0874 1.2817 0.3195 0.0831 0.4026 2,214.400
5
2,214.400
5
0.1021 0.0103 2,219.729
3
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.5810 7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Energy 0.0441 0.4010 0.3368 2.4100e-
003
0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 481.1604 481.1604 9.2200e-
003
8.8200e-
003
484.0886
Mobile 1.2439 3.7735 13.9942 0.0166 1.1104 0.0484 1.1588 0.2971 0.0444 0.3414 1,540.593
7
1,540.593
7
0.0856 1,542.390
7
Total 2.8690 4.1746 14.3381 0.0191 1.1104 0.0789 1.1893 0.2971 0.0749 0.3719 2,021.768
5
2,021.768
5
0.0948 8.8200e-
003
2,026.494
7
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 4 of 24
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 1/1/2015 1/28/2015 5 20
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/29/2015 1/30/2015 5 2
3 Grading Grading 1/31/2015 2/5/2015 5 4
4 Building Construction Building Construction 2/6/2015 11/12/2015 5 200
5 Paving Paving 11/13/2015 11/26/2015 5 10
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/27/2015 12/10/2015 5 10
OffRoad Equipment
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
15.98 7.14 5.01 7.79 7.03 9.71 7.21 7.03 9.88 7.61 0.00 8.70 8.70 7.12 14.12 8.71
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 112,500; Non-Residential Outdoor: 37,500 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 1
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 5 of 24
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 7.00 255 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Graders 1 6.00 174 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 255 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 6.00 226 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 1 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 6.00 125 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 130 0.36
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 6 of 24
3.2 Demolition - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 3.0666 29.6778 22.0566 0.0245 1.8651 1.8651 1.7469 1.7469 2,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.6357 2,522.410
4
Total 3.0666 29.6778 22.0566 0.0245 1.8651 1.8651 1.7469 1.7469 2,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.6357 2,522.410
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Clean Paved Roads
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 12.54 10.52 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 12.54 10.52 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 12.54 10.52 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 7 32.00 12.00 0.00 12.54 10.52 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 12.54 10.52 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 6.00 0.00 0.00 12.54 10.52 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 7 of 24
3.2 Demolition - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Total 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 3.0666 29.6778 22.0566 0.0245 1.8651 1.8651 1.7469 1.7469 0.0000 2,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.6357 2,522.410
4
Total 3.0666 29.6778 22.0566 0.0245 1.8651 1.8651 1.7469 1.7469 0.0000 2,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.6357 2,522.410
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 8 of 24
3.2 Demolition - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Total 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.7996 0.0000 5.7996 2.9537 0.0000 2.9537 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.5362 26.8886 17.0107 0.0171 1.4671 1.4671 1.3497 1.3497 1,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.5379 1,813.039
8
Total 2.5362 26.8886 17.0107 0.0171 5.7996 1.4671 7.2666 2.9537 1.3497 4.3034 1,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.5379 1,813.039
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 9 of 24
3.3 Site Preparation - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Total 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.6098 0.0000 2.6098 1.3292 0.0000 1.3292 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.5362 26.8886 17.0107 0.0171 1.4671 1.4671 1.3497 1.3497 0.0000 1,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.5379 1,813.039
8
Total 2.5362 26.8886 17.0107 0.0171 2.6098 1.4671 4.0769 1.3292 1.3497 2.6789 0.0000 1,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.5379 1,813.039
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 10 of 24
3.3 Site Preparation - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Total 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.9143 0.0000 4.9143 2.5256 0.0000 2.5256 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.0666 21.9443 14.0902 0.0141 1.1968 1.1968 1.1011 1.1011 1,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.4418 1,489.077
4
Total 2.0666 21.9443 14.0902 0.0141 4.9143 1.1968 6.1110 2.5256 1.1011 3.6267 1,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.4418 1,489.077
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 11 of 24
3.4 Grading - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Total 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.2114 0.0000 2.2114 1.1365 0.0000 1.1365 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.0666 21.9443 14.0902 0.0141 1.1968 1.1968 1.1011 1.1011 0.0000 1,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.4418 1,489.077
4
Total 2.0666 21.9443 14.0902 0.0141 2.2114 1.1968 3.4082 1.1365 1.1011 2.2376 0.0000 1,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.4418 1,489.077
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 12 of 24
3.4 Grading - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Total 0.0511 0.0755 0.6748 8.6000e-
004
0.0763 7.4000e-
004
0.0770 0.0202 6.6000e-
004
0.0209 72.1680 72.1680 5.2200e-
003
72.2775
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 3.6000 21.5642 15.0041 0.0220 1.4851 1.4851 1.4344 1.4344 2,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.4741 2,065.581
2
Total 3.6000 21.5642 15.0041 0.0220 1.4851 1.4851 1.4344 1.4344 2,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.4741 2,065.581
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 13 of 24
3.5 Building Construction - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.2168 1.7631 2.3980 3.9800e-
003
0.1140 0.0305 0.1445 0.0324 0.0281 0.0605 401.7542 401.7542 3.3700e-
003
401.8250
Worker 0.2043 0.3020 2.6993 3.4200e-
003
0.3052 2.9400e-
003
0.3081 0.0809 2.6500e-
003
0.0836 288.6719 288.6719 0.0209 289.1101
Total 0.4211 2.0651 5.0973 7.4000e-
003
0.4192 0.0335 0.4527 0.1134 0.0307 0.1441 690.4261 690.4261 0.0242 690.9350
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 3.6000 21.5642 15.0041 0.0220 1.4851 1.4851 1.4344 1.4344 0.0000 2,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.4741 2,065.581
2
Total 3.6000 21.5642 15.0041 0.0220 1.4851 1.4851 1.4344 1.4344 0.0000 2,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.4741 2,065.581
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 14 of 24
3.5 Building Construction - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.2168 1.7631 2.3980 3.9800e-
003
0.1140 0.0305 0.1445 0.0324 0.0281 0.0605 401.7542 401.7542 3.3700e-
003
401.8250
Worker 0.2043 0.3020 2.6993 3.4200e-
003
0.3052 2.9400e-
003
0.3081 0.0809 2.6500e-
003
0.0836 288.6719 288.6719 0.0209 289.1101
Total 0.4211 2.0651 5.0973 7.4000e-
003
0.4192 0.0335 0.4527 0.1134 0.0307 0.1441 690.4261 690.4261 0.0242 690.9350
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4041 14.5959 9.1695 0.0133 0.8919 0.8919 0.8215 0.8215 1,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.4054 1,390.982
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4041 14.5959 9.1695 0.0133 0.8919 0.8919 0.8215 0.8215 1,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.4054 1,390.982
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 15 of 24
3.6 Paving - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Total 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4041 14.5959 9.1695 0.0133 0.8919 0.8919 0.8215 0.8215 0.0000 1,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.4054 1,390.982
6
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4041 14.5959 9.1695 0.0133 0.8919 0.8919 0.8215 0.8215 0.0000 1,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.4054 1,390.982
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 16 of 24
3.6 Paving - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Total 0.0830 0.1227 1.0966 1.3900e-
003
0.1240 1.2000e-
003
0.1252 0.0329 1.0800e-
003
0.0340 117.2730 117.2730 8.4800e-
003
117.4510
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 69.5250 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4066 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e-
003
0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 281.4481 281.4481 0.0367 282.2177
Total 69.9316 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e-
003
0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 281.4481 281.4481 0.0367 282.2177
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 17 of 24
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0383 0.0566 0.5061 6.4000e-
004
0.0572 5.5000e-
004
0.0578 0.0152 5.0000e-
004
0.0157 54.1260 54.1260 3.9100e-
003
54.2081
Total 0.0383 0.0566 0.5061 6.4000e-
004
0.0572 5.5000e-
004
0.0578 0.0152 5.0000e-
004
0.0157 54.1260 54.1260 3.9100e-
003
54.2081
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 69.5250 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4066 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e-
003
0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0367 282.2177
Total 69.9316 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e-
003
0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0367 282.2177
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 18 of 24
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Improve Pedestrian Network
Implement Trip Reduction Program
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2015
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0383 0.0566 0.5061 6.4000e-
004
0.0572 5.5000e-
004
0.0578 0.0152 5.0000e-
004
0.0157 54.1260 54.1260 3.9100e-
003
54.2081
Total 0.0383 0.0566 0.5061 6.4000e-
004
0.0572 5.5000e-
004
0.0578 0.0152 5.0000e-
004
0.0157 54.1260 54.1260 3.9100e-
003
54.2081
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 19 of 24
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.2439 3.7735 13.9942 0.0166 1.1104 0.0484 1.1588 0.2971 0.0444 0.3414 1,540.593
7
1,540.593
7
0.0856 1,542.390
7
Unmitigated 1.2815 4.0284 14.6956 0.0179 1.1943 0.0519 1.2462 0.3195 0.0476 0.3671 1,654.031
5
1,654.031
5
0.0913 1,655.949
2
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
University/College (4Yr)157.08 85.80 0.00 444,412 413,181
Total 157.08 85.80 0.00 444,412 413,181
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
University/College (4Yr)10.52 10.52 10.52 6.40 88.60 5.00 91 9 0
5.0 Energy Detail
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
0.402862 0.057107 0.217609 0.161158 0.074558 0.008017 0.014257 0.048971 0.001734 0.001180 0.007420 0.000886 0.004242
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 20 of 24
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.0441 0.4010 0.3368 2.4100e-
003
0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 481.1604 481.1604 9.2200e-
003
8.8200e-
003
484.0886
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.0514 0.4670 0.3923 2.8000e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 560.3546 560.3546 0.0107 0.0103 563.7648
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
University/College
(4Yr)
4763.01 0.0514 0.4670 0.3923 2.8000e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 560.3546 560.3546 0.0107 0.0103 563.7648
Total 0.0514 0.4670 0.3923 2.8000e-
003
0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 560.3546 560.3546 0.0107 0.0103 563.7648
Unmitigated
Exceed Title 24
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 21 of 24
Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
University/College
(4Yr)
4.08986 0.0441 0.4010 0.3368 2.4100e-
003
0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 481.1604 481.1604 9.2200e-
003
8.8200e-
003
484.0886
Total 0.0441 0.4010 0.3368 2.4100e-
003
0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 0.0305 481.1604 481.1604 9.2200e-
003
8.8200e-
003
484.0886
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 22 of 24
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.5810 7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Unmitigated 2.0819 7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.4762 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
1.6050 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 7.1000e-
004
7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Total 2.0819 7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 23 of 24
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Shower
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
10.0 Vegetation
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0952 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
1.4850 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 7.1000e-
004
7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Total 1.5810 7.0000e-
005
7.0500e-
003
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0144 0.0144 4.0000e-
005
0.0154
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Date: 5/19/2014 12:02 PMPage 24 of 24
Attachment C
Consistency of the Project with the Butte County Climate Action Plan
Climate Action Plan Implementation and Monitoring Tool
Development Checklist for CEQA 14‐0001 Supplemental Jail Facility
Project Summary
1. What is the size of the project (in acres?)
2. What types of land uses are included in the project? Check all that apply:
Single family residencesMulti‐family residences
Retail commercialOffice commercial
IndustrialOther (please describe)
3. If there is a residential component to the project, how many units are being proposed?
Single family residences
Multi‐family residences
4. Does the project require any amendments to the General Plan or Specific Plans? If so, please describe.
Standards for CAP Consistency ‐ New Development
YesAdditional notes:
Reduction Measure and Applicable Standard Does the Project Comply? Notes and Comments
EN7: Nonresidential uses: Achieve CALGreen Tier
Note: If 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 checkliston the
following pages. 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. The information in this
checklist should be incorporated into the project’s initial study, negative declaration/mitigated negative
declaration, environmental impact report, and/or project conditions of approval.
Should the project require any General Plan or Specific Plan amendments, the project’s impact on the county
may exceed the assumptions in the CAP’s 2020 forecast, potentially triggering additional emissions not included
in the CAP’s GHG forecast. Projects that are inconsistent with the 2020 forecasts may still use the CAP for
identification of measures and standards for mitigations, but it is recommended that the project identify
separate project‐level emissions using California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) or another tool.
1.5
New jail facility; twostories, 75,000 sf, built to LEED Silver standards.
none
none
No.
Consistency with CAP Measures
The CAP provides measures that achieve a 15% reduction below 2006 emissions levels by 2020. Projects that wish
to demonstrate consistency with the CAP must demonstrate consistency with all applicable measures and
action items from the CAP. Consistency with all applicable measures should be cited as evidence to support
streamlining from the CAP.
CAP measures that regulate new master‐planned developments are provided below. These are minimum
standards that are necessary for CAP consistency. Using the table, identify the project's compliance with
applicable CAP measures. If a project demonstrates consistency with all applicable standards, the project is
eligible to claim consistency with CAP measures and is eligible for CAP streamlining. Additional
No
N/A
kW
YesWhat type of system?
No
N/A
Additional notes:
YeskWh
No
N/A
%
Additional notes:
Yes
No
N/A
Yes
No
N/A
Yes
NoAdditional notes:
N/A
Yes
No
N/AAdditional notes:
Yes
No
N/A Additional notes:
Yes
Nounits
N/A Additional notes:
F2: Construction of new development: Use clean
or alternative fuel equipment (e.g., electricity,
natural gas, hybrid, etc.); or imit the maximum
idling time for all construction equipment to
three minutes or less.
If yes, what type of measure
MM #2 and #3
F3: Residential units: Contain electric vehicle
charging outlets on external walls or in garages.
If yes, how many units will have
chargers?
F1: Nonresidential developments: Provide public
electric vehicle prewiring or conduit.
If yes, how many spaces are
F1: Residential developments: Infrastructure
support the use of neighborhood electric
vehicles (NEVs). Examples: speed limits no
higher than 35 mph, NEV/bike‐only traffic lanes,
and signage alerting drivers to the presence of
NEVs.
If yes, what type of measure
does the project use?
EN9: New nonresidential development: prewire
for solar PV systems and maximize roof space to
accommodate future rooftop solar installations.
Is the project prewired for solar
PV systems?
Yes
No
Please explain other measures
Facility will meet part of its
Reduction Measure and Applicable Standard ComplianceNotes and Comments
EN8: Multi‐family developments: Offset
electricity use by power purchase agreements or
with on‐site solar.
How much electricity will be
offset?
What percent of residential
electricity will be offset?
EN8: New discretionary projects: prewire for
solar PV systems.
Is the project prewired for solar
PV systems?
Yes
No
Additional notes:
EN8: New discretionary developments consisting
of more than 500 residential units: achieve zero
net energy through a combination of energy
efficiency and renewable energy measures (i.e.,
on average, the project will generate more
electricity on‐site each year than it will use).
How much renewable energy
will be generated on‐site?
Solar photovoltaic
Solar water heater
Other
1 standards for energy efficiency, water
conservation, and passive design.
LEED Silver standards are
equivalent to or exceed
CALGreen Tier 1 standards.
Additional Recommended CAP Measures
GO1 Improve energy monitoring and tracking.The project will install sub‐meters
as part of an integrated Energy
Management System (EMS) to
meaningfully track energy use.
CAP Government Operations
Measure
GO8 Construct new buildings to CALGreen Tier 1
standards.
CAP Government Operations
Measure
Requires that “new County
facilities exceeding 3,000 square
feet meet CALGreen Tier 1
standards for energy efficiency, a
15% improvement over minimum
EN7 Encourage new nonresidential buildings to meet
and exceed CALGreen standards for energy
efficiency, water conservation, and passive design.
As discussed in Section 6.7
(Greenhouse Gases), the project
LEED Silver standards are
consistent with CALGreen
standards
General Plan Policy COS2.3
requires County buildings to be
constructed according to LEED
Silver standards.
Reduction Measure and Applicable Standard ApplicabilityNotes
Additional Recommended CAP Measures
This list includes additional measures and actions identified in the CAP that are not directly applicable to master‐
planned developments but may be relevant to a project of this type. These measures should be included in the
project design as feasible.
Attachment D
Comparison between LEED Silver and CALGreen Tier 1 and 2 Measures
This table provides a comparison of a CALGreen Tier 1 standards designed building with a comparative LEED Silver designed building equaling 58 points (2 points short of LEED Gold). It is difficult to provide a true comparison because CALGreen is a building standards code and LEED is a point based system approach. For Example:
There are several items in the CALGreen standards that are not in LEED and therefore no similar or
equivalent LEED points can be attributed.
Many items that are addressed by both CALGreen and LEED are similar but not identical, i.e. energy reduction and water conservation.
LEED points for guided tours and education programs are not building standards and will not be included as part of CALGreen.
2010 CA Nonresidential Building Standards – CALGreen Tier 1
(Example for comparison purposes)
LEED 2009 – New Construction (NC) LEED Silver Building
(Example for comparison purposes)
Scope New Construction – includes core and shell phased projects New Construction and Major Renovations – includes core and shell phased projects
Cost of Implementation Cost of local permit fees for a newly constructed building where applicable Cost to USGBC for registration and certification Cost to GBCI for verification of credits for point total
Verification Verification is provided by governmental enforcing agency primarily through on-site inspections Verification is provided by GBCI by review of forms submitted through the internet by applicant
1 7/12/10
Technical requirements Adopted Mandatory (M) and Elective (E) Standards CALGreen Tier 1 – meet all Mandatory (M) and Tier 1 prerequisites (T-1) plus 5 additional Electives of choice (Tier 1 elective)
Prerequisites (P) and Credit Points (C) 40-49 points = LEED certified. 50-59 points = LEED Silver. 60-79 = LEED Gold. 80+ = LEED Platinum.
Section Site Planning and Development Credit Sustainable Sites
5.106.1 Storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) for projects 1 acre or less; meet requirements of State NPDES (M)
SSp1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention for projects 1 acre or less; meet requirements of EPA’s NPDES (P)
5.106.4.1
5.106.4.2
Bicycle parking: Lockable racks equal to a minimum of 5% of visitor vehicle parking spaces within 200’ of building entrance (M)
Bicycle storage space for tenant-occupants equal to
5% of total parking capacity (M)
SS 4.2 Bicycle storage for 5% all building users within 600’ of building entrance Changing room and shower within 600’ of building for
.5% FTE (C) 1 point
5.106.5.2
Table 5.106.5.2.1 (T-1)
Designated parking for fuel efficient vehicles for
10% of parking capacity (M) Provide stall marking (M)
SS 4.3 Low Emitting & Fuel Efficient Vehicles: Preferred
parking for 5% of total parking capacity, or 20% discount parking fees; alternate fueling stations for 3% parking capacity; low emitting company vehicles for 3% FTE; or vehicle sharing program (C) 3 points
5.106.8 Light pollution reduction for interior and exterior lighting (M) SS 8 Light Pollution Reduction for interior and exterior lighting (C) 1 point 5.106.10 Grading and paving for site drainage away from the building(s) (M)
A5.106.11.2 Table (T-1)
Cool Roof: Full roof heat island reductions of solar reflectance and thermal emittance, or meet SRI
SS 7.2 Cool Roof: Reduction of roof heat island effect, meet SRI for 75% of roof surface, or vegetative roof for 50% of roof area, or a combination (C) 1 point
A5.103.1 (Tier 1 elective) Where feasible, select sites for community conductivity, ½ mile from services (E) SS 2 Development Density & Community Connectivity, ½ mile from services (C) 5 points
2 7/12/10
A5.105.1 (Tier 1 elective) Deconstruction, salvage, and reuse of 75%existing structures, 50% nonstructural interior elements, or
other reusable items (E)
MR 1.1
MR 1.2
Maintain 55% to 95% existing walls, floors and roofs. (C) 3 Points
Maintain 50% of interior non-structural elements. (C)
1 point
Local Jurisdiction (most building sites will
automatically comply within urban areas)
Public transportation access to rail station (1/2 mile) or
bus stop (1/4 mile) (C) 6 points
21 Points
Section Energy Efficiency Credit Energy and Atmosphere
A5.601.2.2 (T-1)
15% Above current 2008 CA energy standards in Title 24, Part 6 (T-1) (T-24 estimated to be 15% to 20% above ASHRAE 90.1)
EA 1 28% above ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 (C) 9 points (approximately equal to CALGreen Tier 1 requirements) (note – CA projects may use 2005 Title 24 Energy Code but not required)
9 Points
Section Water Efficiency and Conservation Credit Water Efficiency
5.303.1.1 Buildings in excess of 50,000 sq. ft.: Sub meter
individual tenant spaces projected to consume more
than 100 gallons per day (M)
5.303.1.2 Sub meter buildings or individual units in buildings
projected to consume more than 1000 gallons per day (M)
5.303.2
(T-1)
30% reduction in indoor potable water use within buildings (M) Fixtures included in calculation:
Showerheads
Lavatory faucets
Kitchen faucets
Wash Fountains
Water Closets
WEp1 20% reduction in indoor potable water use within buildings (P) Fixtures included in calculation:
Lavatory faucets
Water Closets
Urinals
Rinse Sprayers (food establishments)
3 7/12/10
Urinals
5.303.2.1 Multiple showerheads in any single shower shall equal the maximum flow rate of a single showerhead (M)
5.303.4 20% all wastewater reduction generated by the building (M) WE 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies: Reduce potable water building sewage conveyance by 50%) (C) 2 points 5.303.6 Fixtures and Fittings must meet specific referenced standards (M)
5.304. Develop a water budget for landscape irrigation meeting the California Department of Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or meet local ordinance (M)
5.304.2 Sub meter buildings and landscaping separately where landscaping covers 1,000 – 5000 sq. ft. (M)
Note: Req. for 5000 sq. ft. and over are in existing
law
5.304.3 (.3.1
and .3.2)
Weather or soil-moisture based irrigation
controllers and rain sensors for 1000 – 2500 sq. ft. of landscape area (M) Note: Req. for 2500 sq. ft. and over are in existing regulations.
A5.304.4.1 (T-1) Based on the water budget, water for irrigation not to exceed 60% ETo times the landscape area WE-1 50% water use reduction for landscaping (C) 2 points A5.304.7 (Tier 1 elective) Restore 50% of previously developed site with native vegetation (E) SS 5.1 Site Development: Protect or Restore Habitat (C) 1 point 5 Points
Section Materials & Resources Credit Materials and Resources
5.407.1 Weather protection: protect building envelop from irrigation sprinkler spray and weather protect entries and openings (M)
4 7/12/10
5.408.1, .2 Construction waste management plan or meet local ordinance, whichever is more stringent (M)
5.408.3 (T-1) Divert at least 65% construction waste from landfills or meet local land ordinance, whichever is more stringent
MR 2 Divert 50% construction waste from landfills. (C) 1 point
5.408.4 100% of trees, stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils to be used or recycled (M)
5.410.1 Onsite storage and collection of recyclables (M) MRp1 Onsite storage and collection of recyclables (P)
5.410.2 Building commissioning for buildings 10,000 s.f. and over (M) EA 3 Enhanced commissioning: all buildings (C) 2 Points
5.410.4 Testing and adjusting of systems for buildings smaller then 10,000 s.f. (M) See EA 3
A5.405.2.1 Encourages use of building components of certified wood. MR 7 50% of wood used in the project to be FSC certified wood (C) 1 point
A5.405.4 (T-1)
Recycled content: Use a minimum of 10% of recycled materials based on estimated material cost (M)
MR 4 Use 10% recycled materials, based on cost, of total value of materials (C) 1 point
5 Points
Section Environmental Quality Credit Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)
5.503.1 Fireplaces: Direct-vent sealed-combustion gas or wood-burning (M)
5.504.3 Covering of duct openings and protection of mechanical equipment during construction (M)
5.504.4.1 Finish material pollutant control: Adhesives and sealants meeting SCAQMD limits and aerosols meeting Title 17 (M)
EQ 4.1 Adhesives and sealants meeting SCAQMD limits and aerosols meeting Green Seal (C) 1 point
5.504.4.3 Low VOC-emitting paints and coatings meeting ARB control measures and aerosols meeting Title 17. (M)
EQ 4.2 Architectural paints and coatings for walls and ceilings and ferrous metal primers meeting Green Seal; other interior sealers and stains meeting SCAQMD (C) 1 point
5 7/12/10
5.504.4.4 Low VOC-emitting carpet meeting Green Label Plus or other standards (M) EQ 4.3 Low VOC-emitting carpet meeting Green Label Plus, (C) 1 point
5.504.4.4.1 Low VOC-emitting carpet cushion meeting Green Label (M) EQ 4.3 Low VOC-emitting carpet cushion meeting Green Label, no additional points for cushion 5.504.4.5 Composite wood products: Formaldehyde limits meeting ARB’s air toxic control measure (M) EQ 4.4 Composite wood and agrifiber products to contain no added urea formaldehyde (C) 1 point 5.504.4.6 (T-1)
Resilient flooring systems: Low VOC-emitting resilient floor systems meeting CHPS or FloorScore for 80% of total resilient flooring
EQ 4.3 Hard surface flooring meeting FloorScore, credit alternative to carpet system
5.504.5.3 Filters: Provide MERV 8 filters (M) EQ 5 Filters: Provide MERV 13 filters, no additional point
5.504.7 ETS control: When smoking areas are designed they must be at least 25’ from building openings (M)
EQp2 Requires Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) control (P)
5.505.1 Indoor moisture control: Meet or exceed building code and 5.407.2 (M)
5.506.1 Requires outside air ventilation that meets Title 24, Parts 6 and Title 8 or local ordinance. (M) EQ 2* Exceed ventilation requirements of ASHRAE 62.1-2007 by 30% (C) 1 point
5.506.2 CO2 monitoring: Install systems in accordance with Title 24, Part 6 for buildings with demand control vent. (M)
EQ 1 Outdoor air delivery monitoring for CO2 (C) 1 point
5.507.4.1 Acoustical control - Exterior noise transmission with an STC of at least 50 (M)
5.507.4.2 Acoustical control – Interior sound for tenant separations with an STC of at least 40 (M)
5.508.1.1 Ozone depletion and GHG reductions: Install equipment with no CFC’s (M) EAp2 Install equipment with no CFC’s (P)
5.508.1.2 Ozone depletion and GHG reductions: Install
equipment with no CFC’s or Halons (M)
EQ 4 Install equipment with no Halons, CFCs or HCFCs (C)
1 point
A5.504.4.8
(T-1)
Low VOC-emitting thermal insulation meeting
Title 24, Part 12 and CHPS
6 7/12/10
A5.504.1.1, 1.2 (Tier 1 elective) Indoor air quality, including temporary ventilation, during construction (E) EQ 3.1 Indoor air quality management plan during construction (C) 1 point
8 Points
Additional Requirements and Electives Additional Bonus Points
702.3 Special inspections: Qualifications and specifications for special inspector on-site field inspections
101.8 Alternate materials and methods (E) ID 1 Innovation and design process for exemplary performance and innovative strategies, i.e. guided tours
of project, educational outreach programs, electronic
newsletter for building occupants and visitors about the project, etc. (C) 5 bonus points
California licensed architects professional and engineers on design team ID 2 LEED accredited professional used on the project. (C)
1 bonus point
A5.405.1 California material priorities or regional within 500
miles (Tier 1 elective)
RP 1 Regional priority credit for defined region. Meet
USGBC’s environmental zone priority list. points awarded in addition to credit earned in regional materials in MR 5 (C) 4 bonus points
10 Points
LEED Silver requires 50 -59 Points
Sustainable Sites 21 points
Energy and Atmosphere 9 Points Water Efficiency 5 Points Material and Resources 5 Points Indoor Air Quality 8 Points Bonus Points 10 Points
58 total points
7 7/12/10
The following Table is provided to clarify elements of the Tier measures and is intended as informational only. Table 1: NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS: Green Building Standards Code for
CALGreen Tier 1 and Tier 2 Performance Approach
Category Environmental Performance Goal Tier 1 Tier 2
All Minimum Mandatory Meet all of the provisions of Chapter 5 Meet all of the provisions of Chapter 5
Planning and Design
Designated Parking for Fuel Efficient Vehicles 10% of total spaces 12% of total spaces
Cool Roof to Reduce Heat Island Effect Roof Slope < 2:12 SRI 64 Roof Slope > 2:12 SRI 16 Roof Slope < 2:12 SRI 78 Roof Slope > 2:12 SRI 20
1 additional Elective from Division A5.1 3 additional Electives from Division A5.1
Energy Efficiency Energy Performance Exceed 2008 CA Energy Code by 15% Exceed 2008 CA Energy Code by 30%
Water Efficiency and Conservation
Indoor Water Use 30% Savings 35% Savings
Outdoor Water Use 60% of ETo times the landscape area 55% of ETo times the landscape area
1 additional Elective from Division A5.3 3 additional Electives from Division A5.3
Material Conservation and Resource Efficiency
Construction Waste Reduction At least 65% reduction At least 80% reduction
Recycled Content Utilize recycled content materials for 10% of total material cost
Utilize recycled content materials for 15% of total material cost
1 additional Elective from Division A5.4 3 additional Electives from Division A5.4
Environmental Quality
Low-VOC Resilient Flooring 80% of flooring meets CHPS VOC limits 90% of flooring meets CHPS VOC limits
Low-VOC Thermal Insulation Comply with CHPS VOC
limits
Install no-added formaldehyde insulation & comply CHPS VOC limits
8 7/12/10
1 additional Elective from Division A5.5 3 additional Electives from Division A5.5
Additional Measures Added measures shall be achieved across at least 3 categories 1 Additional Elective from any category 3 Additional Electives from any category
9 7/12/10
Attachment E
Butte County Supplemental Jail Facility Project Preliminary Drainage Analysis
ButteCountySupplementalJailFacility
Project
AP#031-020-039
Oroville,CA
PreliminaryDrainageAnalysis
Preparedby:
888ManzanitaCt.,Suite101,Chico,CA95926
530-894-3500Fax530-894-8955
robertsonerickson.com
May14,2014
1
TableofContents
Subject
TitlePage
TableofContents
HydrologySummary
Figure1ProjectArea
ProjectHydrologyCalculations
DetentionFacilitySizingCalculations
Figure2ProjectOpenDetentionBasinOption
Figure3ProjectUndergroundDetentionOption
References
Page#
1
2
3
6
7
12
18
19
20
2
HydrologySummary
PreliminarystudiesandplansarebeingconsideredfortheButteCountySheriff’s
Departmentexpansionofjailfacilitiesadjacenttothecurrentjailbuildingcurrently
locatedat33CountyCenterDrive,OrovilleCalifornia.Thisprojectwillplaceanew
buildingandassociatedparkinglot,driveway,andsidewalkareastoservicethenew
buildingonamostlyvacantpieceofproperty.Thisstudyanalyzesexistingand
proposedstormrunofffromthefutureprojectsiteandofferssomerecommendationsin
handlingstormrunoff.
ExistingProjectSetting&Runoff
Theprojectsizeisabout6.4acresinsize.Theprojectsiteisslightlyhillyandconsists
ofopengrasslands.TothewestisasubstantialsolarcomplexandHighway70.Tothe
southistheButteCountyCourthouse.Totheeastisthecurrentjailandsheriff’s
buildingandtothenorthistheStateDepartmentofWaterResourcescanalservingthe
StateWaterProjectForebayarea.Aportionofthisprojectpropertydoesencompass
theaggregatebasestorageareacurrentlyutilizedbytheSheriff’sDepartment.See
Figure1.
Thereisadrainageditchcrossingthepropertythatservesthesurroundingcounty
buildingproperty.Onthesouthsideoftheproperty,slopesaverage7%andslopeina
northerlydirection.Onthenorthsideofthepropertyitflattensoutsomewhatwithslopes
inthe2-5%range.StormrunofffromthispropertydrainstotheStateofCaliforniaWater
ProjectCanaljustnorthofthisproperty.
UtilizingCountyofButteImprovementStandards,acurrentrunoffcoefficientof0.39was
calculatedfortheentireprojectarea.Timeofconcentrationwascalculatedat11
minutes.Utilizingtherationalmethod,theexisting10-yeareventpeakrunoffis
calculatedtobeabout6.0cubicfeetpersecond(cfs).The100-yearpeakrunoffis
calculatedat8.4cfs.
ProposedProjectConditions
Theproposedprojectconsistsofinstallingadditionalimperviousareasonsomeareas
thatarenownaturalgrasslands.Theimperviousareawillcompriseoftheroofofthe
newjailbuildingplusthesurroundingwalkwaypavements,parking,anddriveway
pavements.
Theexistingdrainageditchthatisnowroutedaroundthewestendoftheexistingjail
storageyardwouldneedtobeplacedundergroundinaproperlysizedpipesystem.
Sincetheprojectareanaturallydrainstowardsthenorth,stormrunoffwouldbe
conveyedsouthtonorthontheproperty.Runofffromtheprojectareacouldberoutedto
adetentionbasinatthenortheastcornerofthesite.Runoffwouldleavethisdetention
facilitynearthenortheastcornerandexitthesitewithinthecurrentdrainageditch
facility.
3
ImpactsandMitigations
Sincetherewillbealargerareaofimperviousareawithintheprojectboundaryarea,itis
recommendedtomitigateadditionalpeakstormrunoffwiththeinstallationofaproject
detention/storagebasintoholdbackandslowdowntheincreasedpeakrunoffflows
anticipated.Acontrolstructurecouldbebuiltwithsometypeoflimitingorifice,weir,
standpipe,orothermeans,thatwouldbesizedtomimicexistingflowconditions.
Additionalstormwaterrunoffcanbemitigatedenroutetotheprojectdetentionbasin
throughtheuseofstrategicallyplacedpermeablepavements,bio-retention/infiltration
planters,andbio-swales.Theprojectdetentionbasincanpotentiallybedesignedasa
largebioswalewithgentleslopesandvegetatedsurfacestoslowrunoff.Thiswill
encouragenaturalfiltration/infiltrationofstormrunoffandalsomeetrunoffqualityand
quantityLowImpactDevelopment(LID)goals.
Calculations
Thesitehydrologywasanalyzedforthe10-yearand100-yearstormscenario.
CalculationswerecompletedusingtheRationalMethod.RainfallIntensity-Duration-
Frequency(IDF)curveswereobtainedfromCountyofButteImprovementStandards.
Storagevolumewascalculatedbyroutingthe10yearstormand100yearstormthrough
adetentionsystembutonlyallowingtheexistingflowratestoleavetheprojectarea.
Thefollowingassumptionsweremadeinordertocalculateproposedprojectrunoff.
Areaofopenspace&landscapeareas:30%or1.92acres
Areaofpavements:2.77acres
Areaofnewbuilding:75,000squarefeetor1.72acres
CalculatedprojectCoefficientofRunoff:0.76
Timeofconcentration:10minutes
Proposedpeakrunoffforthe10yearstormis10.8cfsandthe100-yeareventis15.2
cfs.Routingtheserunoffeventsthroughanopendetentionbasinandlimitingoutflows
toexistingrunoffamountswouldresultinadetentionbasinthatisroughly6,000square
feetinsize.Thiswouldbeanarearoughly76x76feetwithadepthof3feetincluding
4:1sideslopes.SeeFigure2.
Anotherroutinganalysiswascompletedconsideringanundergrounddetentionbasin
wherestoragewouldtakeplacewithinlargepipes.Resultsindicatedthatthiscouldbe
accomplishedbyinstallingjustover600feetof4footdiameterpipe.SeeFigure3.This
optionwouldbefeasibleiftherewasenoughverticaldifferenceintheproposeddesign
elevationstoallowconstructionofanundergroundsystem.
Resultsofhydrologyanddetentionbasinsizingareincludedwithinthisreport.
Conclusion
TheButteCountyJailexpansionprojectwillincreasepeakflowsofstormrunoffdueto
increasedimperviousareasonthesite.Theseflowsshouldbemitigatedbydetaining
thepeakflowscreatedbytheproject.Thiscanbeaccomplishedwithinastorm
4
drainagedetentionbasin.Acontrolstructurewouldlimitflowratesfromthedetention
areatopre-projectlevels.Thisstoragecouldtakeplaceinanopensystemor
undergroundsystem.Althoughanundergroundsystemwouldbeamoreexpensive
option,itcouldallowforuseabovethesystemsuchasparkingordrivewayareas.
Calculationsincludedhereincludethetheoreticalsizingofoneallencompassing
detentionbasintohandlethenentireprojectsite.Sitetopographywouldmakethis
possibleasthepropertyslopesfromsouthtonorth.Thisdetentionfacilitywouldbe
placednearthenorthendatthenortheastcornerwhichisthelowestelevationofthe
property.Thisstrategywouldcloselymatchthedrainagepatternsaspresentedinthe
OrovilleGovernmentCenterCampusMasterPlan,byLPAInc.,adoptedin2012.
Todecreasethesizeofanallencompassingprojectdetentionbasin,additional
elementscouldbeimplemented(tomanagestormrunoff)suchperviouspavements,
infiltration/bio-retentionplanters,andbio-swales.
Aslongastheonsitestormdrainagesystemsdesigned,constructedandaremaintained
properly,thereshouldnotbeanynegativeimpactsdownstreamfromthisproject.
5
6
AreaRunoffOverlandSlopeConcentratedShallowFlow
CoefficientTravelflowdistanceVelocity
(feet)(ft./ft.)(feet)(ft./s.)
0.310.393200.0700.75
Pipe/Channel Pipe/Channel To,OverlandSheetFlowTime=8
TravelVelocityShallowFlowTime=0
(feet)(ft./s.)Pipe/ChannelTime3
6004 TimeofConcentration=11
To=(.66*L^.5*n^0.52)/(S^0.31*i^0.38)8.3
L=length,ft320
n=roughnesscoefficient0.24
S=averageslope0.07
I=intensityofprecipitation100year3.12
Note:Assumedchannelvelocityof4feetpersecond
TimeofConcentration
ButteCountySupplementalJailFacilityProject
Oroville,California
ExistingConditions
hydrology.XLS5/14/2014
7
8
Landscape/
TribAreaPavementGravelBuildingnaturalAreaAreaRunoff
(C=.90)(C=.80)(C=.95)(C=.39)TotalTotalCoefficient
0.90.80.950.39S.F.acres
102867402505802792546.410.43
Totals02867402505802792546.410.43
PavementGravelBuilding/RoofLandscapeAreaAreaRunoff
(C=.90)(C=.80)(C=.95)(C=.30)TotalTotalCoefficient
0.90.80.950.3S.F.acres
1120661075000837662794276.410.76
Totals120661075000837662794276.410.76
ProposedConditions
ExistingConditions
ButteCountySupplemenatalJailFacilityProject
Oroville,California
RunoffCoefficientCalculation
hydrology.XLS5/14/2014
9
10
HydrologyBasinSummary
ProposedJailExpansionProject,ButteCounty
RationalMethod:Q=CIA
Existingwatershedarea(A)=6.41
Proposedwatershedarea(A)=6.41
ExistingConditions
"C"factor=0.43C*A=2.77
TimeofConcentration=11minexisting
ProposedConditions
"C"factor=0.76C*A=4.88
TimeofConcentration=10minproposed
Design
StormExistingExisting Proposed Proposed
EventIntensityFlowrateIntensityFlowrate
(stormyear)inch/hourcfsinch/hourcfs
102.165.982.2210.82
1003.048.423.1215.21
11
10YearStorm
14-May-14STORAGEPONDDESIGN
ORIFICEDISCHARGETABLE
PROJECTButteCountyJailExpansionAP078-280-030PONDDISCHARGE
SUMCA4.88 PERC.RATE 10000MIN/IN DEPTHFT CFS
S.SLOPE=4:1NUMBEROFPONDS=11.3922.028
PONDDIMENSIONS:AVERAGEQOUTPIPE=2.449CFS1.4922.869
WIDTH=52.5FEETPONDVOLUME=8033.9CF1.5923.513
DEPTH=2.15FEETPONDPERCAREA=2308.9SF1.6924.057
LENGTH=52.5FEETTOTALPERCRATE=0.0003CFS1.7924.536
TOTALSTORAGEPROVIDED=8034CFPOND15.5"ORIFICE1.8924.969
TOTALSTORAGEREQUIRED=7943CF5.943MAXDISCHARGE1.9925.367
REQUIRED2.0925.737
STORMDURATIONI10QinQoutQnetSTOR.VOL#VALUE!#VALUE!
(Min)(Sec)(IN/HR)(CFS)(CFS)(CFS)(CU.FT.)#VALUE!#VALUE!
________________________________________________________________#VALUE!#VALUE!
106002.220010.8342.4498.3855031#VALUE!#VALUE!
127202.100010.2482.4497.7995615#VALUE!#VALUE!
159001.92009.3702.4496.9216229#VALUE!#VALUE!
2012001.73008.4422.4495.9947192#VALUE!#VALUE!
2515001.53007.4662.4495.0187526#VALUE!#VALUE!
3018001.34006.5392.4494.0907363#VALUE!#VALUE!
3521001.26006.1492.4493.7007770#VALUE!#VALUE!
4024001.18005.7582.4493.3107943#VALUE!#VALUE!
4527001.10005.3682.4492.9197882#VALUE!#VALUE!
5030001.02004.9782.4492.5297586#VALUE!#VALUE!
5533000.94004.5872.4492.1387056#VALUE!#VALUE!
6036000.86004.1972.4491.7486293#VALUE!#VALUE!
12072000.59002.8792.4490.4303098#VALUE!#VALUE!
180108000.47002.2942.449-0.155-1677#VALUE!#VALUE!
240144000.43002.0982.449-0.350-5047#VALUE!#VALUE!
300180000.38001.8542.449-0.594-10700#VALUE!#VALUE!
360216000.34001.6592.449-0.790-17057#VALUE!#VALUE!
720432000.22001.0742.449-1.375-59412#VALUE!#VALUE!
1440864000.17000.8302.449-1.619-139905#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
12
100YearStorm
14-May-14STORAGEPONDDESIGN
ORIFICEDISCHARGETABLE
PROJECTButteCountyJailExpansionAP078-280-030PONDDISCHARGE
SUMCA4.88 PERC.RATE 10000MIN/IN DEPTHFT CFS
S.SLOPE=4:1NUMBEROFPONDS=11.3922.028
PONDDIMENSIONS:AVERAGEQOUTPIPE=5.798CFS1.4922.869
WIDTH=52.5FEETPONDVOLUME=12501.1CF1.5923.513
DEPTH=3FEETPONDPERCAREA=2676.9SF1.6924.057
LENGTH=52.5FEETTOTALPERCRATE=0.0004CFS1.7924.536
TOTALSTORAGEPROVIDED=12501CFPOND15.5"ORIFICE1.8924.969
TOTALSTORAGEREQUIRED=7331CF8.384MAXDISCHARGE1.9925.367
lineREQUIRED2.0925.737
STORMDURATIONI100QinQoutQnetSTOR.VOL2.1926.085
(Min)(Sec)(IN/HR)(CFS)(CFS)(CFS)(CU.FT.)2.2926.415
________________________________________________________________2.3926.728
106003.120015.2265.7989.42756562.4927.027
127202.960014.4455.7988.64662252.5927.314
159002.720013.2745.7987.47567282.6927.590
2012002.440011.9075.7986.10973312.7927.856
2515002.160010.5415.7984.74271142.8928.114
3018001.88009.1745.7983.37660772.9928.363
3521001.77008.6385.7982.8395962#VALUE!#VALUE!
4024001.66008.1015.7982.3025526#VALUE!#VALUE!
4527001.55007.5645.7981.7664767#VALUE!#VALUE!
5030001.44007.0275.7981.2293686#VALUE!#VALUE!
5533001.33006.4905.7980.6922284#VALUE!#VALUE!
6036001.22005.9545.7980.155559#VALUE!#VALUE!
12072000.83004.0505.798-1.748-12586#VALUE!#VALUE!
180108000.67003.2705.798-2.529-27311#VALUE!#VALUE!
240144000.60002.9285.798-2.870-41334#VALUE!#VALUE!
300180000.53002.5865.798-3.212-57816#VALUE!#VALUE!
360216000.48002.3425.798-3.456-74650#VALUE!#VALUE!
720432000.31001.5135.798-4.286-185139#VALUE!#VALUE!
1440864000.24001.1715.798-4.627-399792#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
13
STORAGEPIPEDESIGN
14-May-1410YearStorm(OrovilleArea)
ORIFICEDISCHARGETABLE
PROJECTButteCountyJailExpansionWaterLevelDISCHARGE
SUMCA4.88DEPTHFTCFS
1.2251.539
PONDDIMENSIONS:AVERAGEQOUTOrifice=4.022CFS1.3252.176
PipeDiameter=2.63FEETPipeVOLUME=3314CF1.4252.665
PipeArea5.433FEETMaxorificeflow=5.97cfs1.5253.077
*LENGTH=610FEET1.6253.441
TOTALPIPESTORAGEPROVIDED=3314CF13.5"ORIFICE1.7253.769
TOTALPIPESTORAGEREQUIRED=5304CF1.8254.071
REQUIRED1.9254.352
STORMDURATIONI10QinQoutQnetSTOR.VOL2.0254.616
(Min)(Sec)(IN/HR)(CFS)(CFS)(CFS)(CU.FT.)2.1254.866
________________________________________________________________2.2255.103
106002.220010.8344.0226.81140872.3255.330
127202.100010.2484.0226.22644822.4255.548
159001.92009.3704.0225.34748132.5255.757
2012001.73008.4424.0224.42053042.6255.960
2515001.53007.4664.0223.4445166#VALUE!#VALUE!
3018001.34006.5394.0222.5174530#VALUE!#VALUE!
3521001.26006.1494.0222.1264466#VALUE!#VALUE!
4024001.18005.7584.0221.7364167#VALUE!#VALUE!
4527001.10005.3684.0221.3463633#VALUE!#VALUE!
5030001.02004.9784.0220.9552866#VALUE!#VALUE!
5533000.94004.5874.0220.5651864#VALUE!#VALUE!
6036000.86004.1974.0220.174628#VALUE!#VALUE!
12072000.59002.8794.022-1.143-8230#VALUE!#VALUE!
180108000.47002.2944.022-1.729-18670#VALUE!#VALUE!
240144000.43002.0984.022-1.924-27704#VALUE!#VALUE!
300180000.38001.8544.022-2.168-39022#VALUE!#VALUE!
360216000.34001.6594.022-2.363-51043#VALUE!#VALUE!
720432000.22001.0744.022-2.949########VALUE!#VALUE!
1440864000.17000.8304.022-3.193########VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
*Theoriticalcalculationtodeterminedepth#VALUE!#VALUE!
of10-yearstormwithin4'diameterpipesystem#VALUE!#VALUE!
contolorificeoutflowlimitedtopre-existingflowof5.98cfs#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
14
STORAGEPIPEDESIGN
100YearStorm(OrovilleArea)
14-May-14
ORIFICEDISCHARGETABLE
PROJECTButteCountyJailExpansionPONDDISCHARGE
SUMCA4.88 DEPTHFT CFS
1.2251.539
PONDDIMENSIONS:AVERAGEQOUTOrifice=5.563CFS1.3252.176
PipeDiameter=4FEETPipeVOLUME=7665CF1.4252.665
PipeArea12.566FEETMaxorificeflow=8.251cfs1.5253.077
LENGTH=610FEET1.6253.441
TOTALPIPESTORAGEPROVIDED=7665CF13.5"ORIFICE1.7253.769
TOTALPIPESTORAGEREQUIRED=7614CF1.8254.071
REQUIRED1.9254.352
STORMDURATIONI100QinQoutQnetSTOR.VOL2.0254.616
(Min)(Sec)(IN/HR)(CFS)(CFS)(CFS)(CU.FT.)2.1254.866
________________________________________________________________2.2255.103
106003.120015.2265.5639.66357982.3255.330
127202.960014.4455.5638.88263952.4255.548
159002.720013.2745.5637.71169402.5255.757
2012002.440011.9075.5636.34576142.6255.960
2515002.160010.5415.5634.97874672.7256.155
3018001.88009.1745.5633.61265012.8256.344
3521001.77008.6385.5633.07564572.9256.528
4024001.66008.1015.5632.53860923.0256.707
4527001.55007.5645.5632.00154043.1256.881
5030001.44007.0275.5631.46543943.2257.051
5533001.33006.4905.5630.92830623.3257.217
6036001.22005.9545.5630.39114083.4257.380
12072000.83004.0505.563-1.512-108883.5257.538
180108000.67003.2705.563-2.293-247643.6257.694
240144000.62003.0265.563-2.537-365333.7257.846
300180000.58002.8305.563-2.732-491803.8257.996
360216000.53002.5865.563-2.976-642863.9258.142
720432000.31001.5135.563-4.050-174951#VALUE!#VALUE!
1440864000.24001.1715.563-4.391-379417#VALUE!#VALUE!
#VALUE!#VALUE!
15
Date:5/14/2014
CalculateAreaofCircleBasedonDepth
CalculateAreaTotalLengthofPipeonSite=610ft
EquivalentLengthofCatchBasins=ft
Diameter(D)=4feetTotal=610ft
CircularAreaChartfromCivilEngineeringReferenceManual,9thEdition,2003,Lindeburg,pageA-15
Depth Area Volume Depth Area Volume
ft ft2 ft3 ft ft2 ft3
d/Darea/D2 d/Darea/D2
0.050.01470.200.24143.50.410.30321.644.852959.2
0.060.01920.240.31187.40.420.31301.685.013054.9
0.070.02420.280.39236.20.430.32291.725.173151.5
0.080.02940.320.47286.90.440.33281.765.323248.1
0.090.03500.360.56341.60.450.34281.805.483345.7
0.100.04090.400.65399.20.460.35271.845.643442.4
0.110.04700.440.75458.70.470.36271.885.803540.0
0.120.05340.480.85521.20.480.37271.925.963637.6
0.130.06000.520.96585.60.490.38271.966.123735.2
0.140.06880.561.10671.50.500.39272.006.283832.8
0.150.07390.601.18721.30.510.40272.046.443930.4
0.160.08110.641.30791.50.520.41272.086.604028.0
0.170.08550.681.37834.50.530.42272.126.764125.6
0.180.09610.721.54937.90.540.43272.166.924223.2
0.190.10390.761.661014.10.550.44262.207.084319.8
0.200.11180.801.791091.20.560.45262.247.244417.4
0.210.11990.841.921170.20.570.46252.287.404514.0
0.220.12810.882.051250.30.580.47232.327.564609.6
0.230.13650.922.181332.20.590.48222.367.724706.3
0.240.14490.962.321414.20.600.4922.407.874801.9
0.250.15351.002.461498.20.610.50182.448.034897.6
0.260.16231.042.601584.00.620.51152.488.184992.2
0.270.17111.082.741669.90.630.52122.528.345086.9
0.280.181.122.881756.80.640.53082.568.495180.6
0.290.1891.163.021844.60.650.54042.608.655274.3
0.300.19821.203.171934.40.660.54992.648.805367.0
0.310.20741.243.322024.20.670.55942.688.955459.7
0.320.21671.283.472115.00.680.56872.729.105550.5
0.330.2261.323.622205.80.690.5782.769.255641.3
0.340.23551.363.772298.50.700.58722.809.405731.1
0.350.2451.403.922391.20.710.59642.849.545820.9
0.360.25461.444.072484.90.720.60542.889.695908.7
0.370.26421.484.232578.60.730.61432.929.835995.6
PipeVolumeCalculationbasedondepthinpipe
ButteCountyJailExpansion
16
0.380.27391.524.382673.30.740.62312.969.976081.5
0.390.28361.564.542767.90.750.63183.0010.116166.4
0.400.29341.604.692863.60.760.64043.0410.256250.3
Depth Area Volume
ft ft2 ft3
d/Darea/D2
0.770.64893.0810.386333.3
0.780.65733.1210.526415.2
0.790.66553.1610.656495.3
0.800.67363.2010.786574.3
0.810.68153.2410.906651.4
0.820.68933.2811.036727.6
0.830.69693.3211.156801.7
0.840.70433.3611.276874.0
0.850.71153.4011.386944.2
0.860.71863.4411.507013.5
0.870.72543.4811.617079.9
0.880.73203.5211.717144.3
0.890.73843.5611.817206.8
0.900.74453.6011.917266.3
0.910.75043.6412.017323.9
0.920.75603.6812.107378.6
0.930.76123.7212.187429.3
0.940.76623.7612.267478.1
0.950.77073.8012.337522.0
0.960.77493.8412.407563.0
0.970.77853.8812.467598.2
0.980.78163.9212.517628.4
0.990.78413.9612.557652.8
1.000.78544.0012.577665.5
17
18
19
References
ButteCountyImprovementStandards,October2006
ButteCountyDetentionBasinSizingSpreadsheet,ButteCountyLandDevelopment
Department
OrovilleGovernmentCenterCampusMasterPlan,LPAInc.,2012
CivilEngineeringReferenceManual,9thEdition,Lindeburg,2003
20