HomeMy WebLinkAboutGRD13-0011_ZA Agenda Report Packet_080614_Final
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 1 of 9 ■
BUTTE COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
AGENDA REPORT – August 6, 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant has requesting approval of a Grading Permit, pursuant to Butte County Code,
Chapter 13, Article I, for past grading activities that resulted in the disturbance of 0.52 acres of a
27.73 acre property, and the total disturbance of 1,380 cubic yards of material. Grading activities
were performed over a one-week period in June 2012 using a small tractor-bulldozer. The grading
included levelling a ridge top with an existing grade of approximately 13 percent, forming two
terraces with a finished grade between 1 and 10 percent.
In accordance with Section 13-8 & 13-10 of Butte County Code, a grading plan and an erosion
and sediment control plan have been prepared to address any potential slope stability and erosion
impacts from the past grading activities. The plans have been reviewed by the Director of the
Department of Public Works and have been found to be in compliance with all applicable
standards.
Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator adopt the Negative Declaration (ND) prepared
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approve the Grading Permit
Applicant: Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Location: The project site is located on the
east side of Condor Road,
approximately 250 feet south of
its intersection with Tippy Top
Road, approximately 10 miles
northeast from the City of
Oroville.
Owner: Big Rock Enterprises, LLC
File #: GRD13-0011 Supervisor
District:
1
Request: Grading Permit Project
Planner:
Rowland Hickel,
Senior Planner
G.P.
FR (Foothill Residential)
Parcel Size:
Exhibits:
A:
B:
C:
D:
E:
27.73 acres
Recommended Findings and
Zoning Administrator Decision
Recommended Conditions of
Approval
Draft Grading Plan
Draft Initial Study/Negative
Declaration
Public & Agency Comments
Zoning:
FR-20 (Foothill Residential, 20
acre minimum parcel size)
APN: 041-370-048
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 2 of 9 ■
GRD13-0011 for Big Rock Enterprises, LLC, subject to the findings in Exhibit A and Conditions
of Approval in Exhibit B.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Site disturbance totals 0.52 acres.
Grading activities were performed over a one-week period in June 2012 using a small
tractor-bulldozer.
Grading activities formed two terraces with 1 to 10 percent slopes on a ridge top with an
existing grading of 13 percent.
Approximately 690 cubic yards of cut and 690 cubic yards of fill were excavated to form
the terraces.
The maximum height of cut is approximately 4 feet and maximum depth of fill is 3 feet.
Maximum and minimum cut and fill slopes vary between 2:1 maximum to 4:1 minimum
(H:V).
No additional materials were imported into the site.
Greenwaste generated as a result of site clearing and grading activities will be mulched on-
site and/or disposed of in a greenwaste facility for composting.
The proposed project includes a Dust Suppression Plan that identifies best management
practices (BMPs) to reduce dust and particulate matter associated with grading activities.
The BMPs of the Dust Suppression Plan, include:
1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust
carried onto street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing, grading,
earth-moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks
or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to
create a crust after each day's activities cease.
2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except
when loading or unloading materials.
3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a
minimum in the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency
of watering shall increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control
District.
4. All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when
winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth-moving, or
excavation operations shall be minimized at all times.
6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14
days shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
7. The applicant shall minimize construction-related exhaust emissions by
maintaining construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper
tune according to manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May
through October) by not allowing construction equipment to be left idling for
long periods.
8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 3 of 9 ■
9. Re-vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to
reduce dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the
County of Butte for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated
with soil binders to prevent dust generation.
11. Abide by the following additional measures during all construction activity:
A. Use alternatives to open burning of vegetative material during all clearing
and construction.
B. Other measures as determined appropriate by AQMD and Department of
Public Works to reduce dust.
An Erosion Control Plan that includes measures Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be
applied to future grading and clearing activities, which will stabilize soils on the project
site for water quality protection and erosion control. The BMPs of the Erosion Control
Plan include:
1. If one or more acres of ground are to be disturbed, a permit must be obtained
from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction.
2. All erosion control measures shall conform to the Caltrans standard
specifications May 2006 and the erosion control plans shown on the
construction drawings.
3. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during
construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times.
4. All slopes with disturbed soils greater than 10% that are free of vegetation shall
have “earth guard” applied or mulch spread and tacked down prior to any 30%
or greater chance of rain.
5. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil
surfaces to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction
sites in the form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces
shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is
done for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities
shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
6. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of
ingress/egress by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6"
angular rock with a minimum depth of 12" in conjunction with an underlay of
filter fabric. Any soil material carried onto street surfaces by construction
equipment shall be removed on a daily basis. (broom clean - do not use water to
wash the street) If equipment traffic is minimal, stabilized entrance may not be
needed. Any sediment tracked off the property and onto paved roadways shall
be swept immediately after each vehicle leaves the site.
7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all
times.
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site
shall be stabilized by applying earth guard or seeded and watered until grass
cover is grown.
9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 4 of 9 ■
order. Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing
collected sediment and repairing deficiencies.
10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall bmp's may become
clogged. Extreme care should be taken to clean BMP's to reduce fugitive
discharge and potential flooding.
11. Applicant may remove temporary BMPs (wattles and silt fencing) once
permanent BMPs have been established.
12. Hydroseed shall be applied to all disturbed areas that are not subject to heavy
wear from construction equipment or other vehicles. Irrigation can be
performed by hand watering or by piped sprinkler system. Seed and mulch
shall be kept moist at all times until germination has occurred. Seed should be
in conformance with California State Seed Law and applied at the following
rate:
Seed – Melica Californica: 10 lbs. /acre
Fiber – 100% wood fiber: 2,000 lbs. /acre
Tack – Scilium based “M” binder 120 lbs. /acre
An Erosion Control Maintenance Plan is proposed that will include measures to monitor
the BMPs used for the control of erosion on the site. The measures include:
1. If BMPs are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours.
Care should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making
repairs.
2. If BMPs have failed, or are ineffective, notify the engineer/QSD to modify the
BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be
installed within 72 hours of approval.
3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re-seeded,
fertilized, and mulch within the planting season. Not less than half the original
application rate should be applied.
4. Straw wattle shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be
replaced annually if required beyond 1 year.
5. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer/QSP, temporary
BMPs may be removed if no longer needed.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES
The project site encompasses 27.73 acres.
Zoning of the project site is Foothill Residential, 20-acre density (FR-20).
The Butte County General Plan designates the project site as Foothill Residential (FR).
The project site is identified as being located in the following constraint areas:
o Moderate to Severe Erosion Hazard Area;
o Moderate Potential for Expansive Soils;
o High Potential for Landslide;
o Very High Wildfire Hazard Zone; and
o State Responsibility Area.
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 5 of 9 ■
No Jurisdictional Waters of the United States are located within the project site boundaries.
Lake Oroville is located approximately 1/2 mile east. Spring Valley Gulch is located
approximately 1/3 mile west.
Site elevations range from 1,320 feet to 1,575 feet above mean sea level.
The site is located atop a ridgeline with approximately 13 percent slopes. The property
slopes approximately 25 percent to the west of the ridgeline and 22 percent to east of the
ridgeline.
The property is primarily undeveloped, except for an existing driveway, four, 500-gallon
water storage tanks, PVC piping and drip lines for the garden area.
The project site is comprised of montane hardwood-conifer habitat, which is dominated by
common manzanita, whiteleaf manzanita, and canyon live oak and conifer tree species.
No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community was identified to be located within
the project site boundaries.
The potential occurrence of two species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species were identified within one-mile of the project site.
Surrounding parcels vary in size from 20 to 40 acres. Properties are zoned FR-20 and FR-
40. Surrounding uses include Lake Oroville Recreation Area, Public Lands, and single-
family residences. The nearest residence is located approximately ½ mile to the west.
ANALYSIS
Erosion control measures incorporated into the project plan will insure that soils on the
project site are effectively stabilized, minimizing the potential for substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil.
The proposed project will not create the potential for landslides in the project area
because the slopes on the disturbed area are from 2:1 (maximum) to 4:1 (minimum),
with 1 to 10% slopes on the terraced portion. Additionally, erosion control measures
incorporated into the project plans will stabilize sediment within the disturbance area,
minimizing the potential for landslides.
No candidate, sensitive, or special-status species would be adversely affected by the
proposed project because no suitable habitats for the identified species are located
within the project site.
No permanent improvements are proposed that would be impacted by expansive soils
identified on the project site. In the event any future improvements are proposed, the
applicant will obtain any necessary engineering or soils analysis to insure that
structures will not be affected.
Adjacent waterways will not be adversely affected by the proposed project because the
nearest waterways are located over ½ mile from the project site, and erosion control
measures are proposed with the grading permit application.
The proposed project will not create the potential for wildfires because the project
includes the removal of fire prone vegetation from the project site.
The Director of Public Works has reviewed the project, and has determined that the
Grading Plan and Erosion Control Plan conforms the standards as set forth in Chapter 13,
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 6 of 9 ■
Article 1 of the Butte County Code.
The proposed project is consistent with the designated zoning and land use of the project
site.
AGENCY COMMENTS
The project was reviewed by the Butte County Public Works Department, Butte County
Environmental Health Division, Butte County Fire Department/CalFire, and the Butte County
Assessor.
Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed project, and included conditions of
approval that will be incorporated into the approved grading plans.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) commented that electric transmission lines are
located within the property boundaries, and that PG&E will need to review grading plans
to ensure compliance with clearance requirements.
The State of California, State Clearinghouse, commented that the Negative Declaration had
been circulated to select state agencies in compliance with CEQA review requirements.
The review period closed on May 22, 2014, and no state agencies submitted during the
review period.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public comments were received.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073(a), the Initial Study/Negative Declaration
(IS/ND) for this application was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for a 30-day review by state
agencies and the public. The review period occurred began April 23, 2014 and ended on May 22,
2014. A Notice of Intent to adopt a negative declaration was published in the Chico Enterprise
Record and Oroville Mercury Register, with notices of the documents availability mailed to
adjacent property owners within 300 feet.
The collection of fees pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 is required, prior to filing a
Notice of Determination for the project, unless the project proponent provides verification from
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that the project is exempt from the fee requirement.
If a required fee is not paid for a project, the project will not be operative, vested or final and any
local permits issued for the project will be invalid (Section 711.4 (c) (3)).
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 7 of 9 ■
EXHIBIT A
BUTTE COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DECISION ZDN14-00__
GRADING PERMIT GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC)
Approval of grading and erosion control plans for past grading
activities encompassing 0.52 acres of a 27.73 acre property, resulting
in the total excavation of 1380 cubic yards.
APN: 041-370-048
August 6, 2014
I. The Zoning Administrator has considered the Initial Study and Negative Declaration in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopts the
Negative Declaration subject to the following findings:
A. An Initial Study was completed in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act. Said Study did not identify any significant environmental effects with
approval of the project;
B. The Zoning Administrator has considered the Negative Declaration, together with
comments received during the review process.
C. On the basis of the whole record before the Zoning Administrator, including the
Initial Study and comments received, there is no substantial evidence that the
Grading Permit for Big Rock Enterprises, LLC, Planning Division File No.
GRD13-0011, with conditions here attached, would have a significant effect on the
environment.
D. The custodian of the record is the Land Development Division of the Public Works
Department. The location of the record is 7 County Center Drive, Oroville CA
95965.
E. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the
County, which is the Lead Agency.
II. The Zoning Administrator approves Grading Permit GRD13-0011, subject to the following
findings and Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B:
A. Approval of this project will not be detrimental to the general health, safety and
welfare of the public because the measures incorporated into the project plans will
insure that any potential impacts will not adversely affect the surrounding area.
B. The Director of Public Works has reviewed the project, and has determined that
the Grading Plan and Erosion Control Plan conforms the standards as set forth in
Chapter 13, Article 1 of the Butte County Code.
Approved By: _______________, Zoning Administrator
Date:______________
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 8 of 9 ■
EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Submit grading and drainage improvement plans to the Land Development Division for
review and approval. Comply with approved plans and terms of the grading permit.
2. Submit erosion and sediment control plans to the Land Development Division for review
and approval. Comply with approved plans and terms of the grading permit.
3. Provide a performance bond and labor and material bond for the construction of the
required improvements in an amount approved by the Director of Public Works.
4. Prior to grading, a construction storm water permit will be required by the State Water
Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing,
excavation, filing, and grading of one or more acres. The permit must be obtained from
the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction. If a construction storm
water permit is required, place a note on an additional map sheet that states: “The
development of this parcel/final map required a construction storm water permit.
Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are
part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. Development of
individual lots may require an additional permit(s).”
5. The applicant shall implement the following best management practices for dust
suppression during all proposed grading and clearing activities:
1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust
carried onto street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing grading,
earth-moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks
or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to
create a crust after each day's activities cease.
2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except
when loading or unloading materials.
3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a
minimum in the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency
of watering shall increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control
District.
4. All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when
winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour.
5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth-moving, or
excavation operations shall be minimized at all times.
6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14
days shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown.
7. The applicant shall minimize construction-related exhaust emissions by
maintaining construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper
tune according to manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May
■ Butte County Department of Development Services ■
■ August 6, 2014 ■ GRD13-0011 (Big Rock Enterprises, LLC) ■ Page 9 of 9 ■
through October) by not allowing construction equipment to be left idling for
long periods.
8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
9. Re-vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to
reduce dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the
County of Butte for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated
with soil binders to prevent dust generation.
11. Abide by the following additional measures during all construction activity:
A. Use alternatives to open burning of vegetative material during all clearing
and construction.
B. Other measures as determined appropriate by AQMD and Department of
Public Works to reduce dust.
6. 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 50 feet of the find shall cease
immediately until a qualified professional archaeologist can be consulted to evaluate the
remains and implement appropriate mitigation procedures. Recommencement of
development activities shall not occur until clearance is provided by the Butte County
Department of Development Services. Should human skeletal remains be encountered,
State law requires immediate notification of the County Coroner ((530) 538-7404). 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. A notation of the above described measure shall be made to
the final grading and erosion control plans.
041-370-044-000
041-370-048-000 041-370-048-000
041-370-021-000041-370-035-000
C o n d o r R d
Tippy Top Rd
NorthStar
ENGINEERING
Civil · Surveying ·Architecture & Design
Water Resources ·Environmental · GIS
Imagery Source:USDA - FSAAugust 2012;Inset Imagery:National GeographicMap Date: 8APR14Drawn By: CJW
!I
1 inch = 199 feet
Big Rock Enterprises LLC- Grading Permit -
Figure 1A: Location Map 1
Legend
Project Area
Butte Co. Parcel
Within Section 34 of T21N, R4E Butte County, CACherokee USGS 7.5' Quad
0 120 24060
Feet
Project Area
Draft Initial Study and
Proposed Negative Declaration
for the
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit
APN 041-370-048
Lead Agency: Butte County Department of Public Works
Prepared By:
March 2014
111 Mission Ranch Blvd., Suite 100, Chico, CA 95926
P: 530.893.1600 F: 530.893.2113
www.northstareng.com
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 1
Project Information
1. Project Title: Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit Application
2. Lead Agency: Butte County Department of Public Works 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 (530) 538-7266
3. Contact Person: Rowland Hickel, Senior Planner
(530) 538-7150
4. Project Applicant: Big Rock Enterprises, LLC PO Box 2027 Grass Valley, CA 95949 (530) 217-7546
5. Project Location: Figure 1A and 1A – Location Maps
APN 041-370-048, located on the east side of Condor Road, approximately 250 feet south of its intersection with Tippy Top Road in the Oroville area, CA in Butte County. Affected area is approximately 0.52 acres on a 27.73-acre parcel. Latitude: 39.6344N, Longitude: 121.5105W
6. General Plan Designation: Foothill Residential
7. Zoning: FR-20 (Foothill Residential, 20-acre minimum parcel size); Military Airspace (MA) Overlay Zone
8. Environmental Setting: The property is situated approximately 10 miles northeast of the City of Oroville, east of State Route 70 (SR 70) in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada’s on a ridgeline between Spring Valley Gulch and Lake Oroville in the southeast portion of Butte County, California. The property can be accessed from SR 70 via Cherokee Road, Rocky Top Road, and Tippy Top Road. The property itself is bisected by Condor Road and Pacific Gas and Electric Company powerlines. The project site is located approximately 250 feet south of the Tippy Top Road and Condor Road intersection. The ridgeline between Spring Valley Gulch and Lake Oroville runs north/south. From this ridgeline, the property slopes about 25 percent to the west and 22 percent to the east. The property ranges in elevation from approximately 1,320 to 1,575 feet. The property drains to the northeast into Lake Oroville and to the northwest into Spring Valley Gulch. Spring Valley Gulch drains into Lake Oroville near the confluence of the West Branch and the North Fork of the Feather River. The property is primarily undeveloped, with the exception of an existing driveway and grading and clearing activities that have already taken place. The grading and clearing activities are described in more detail in the Project Description. There are four 500-gallon water storage tanks located within the project boundaries that are routinely filled by truck.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 2
The project area is comprised of montane hardwood-conifer habitat that includes both conifer and hardwood tree species. Common associates in montane-conifer habitat are ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, incense cedar, California black oak, tanoak, Pacific madrone, Oregon white oak, and other localized species. Considerable ground and shrub cover resembling mixed chaparral habitat occurs within the property as well. Chaparral occurs on foothill slopes, within the understory of woodlands, and at higher elevations throughout Butte County. This plant community is adapted to wildfires and, at lower elevations, dominated by common manzanita, whiteleaf Manzanita, and scrub oak, with associated species such as toyon, California buckeye, and poison oak. At higher elevations, whiteleaf manzanita may be the only dominant shrub, and it often occurs on serpentine or gabbro substrates (GP EIR, pg. 4.4-15). Vegetation in the area where the leveling activities occurred primarily consisted of woody shrubs, canyon live oak, and conifer tree species. While grading activities avoided the thickest stands of vegetation located on the property, an unknown quantity of various plant species (including trees and shrubs) were removed during grading activities. The area in which grading took place encompasses 0.52 acres of the 27.73-acre parcel.
9. Surrounding Land Uses: Surrounding parcels vary in size from 20 to 40 acres. Properties are zoned Foothill Residential, 20 and 40-acre minimum parcel size. Surrounding land uses include Lake Oroville Recreation Area, Public Lands, and single-family residences. The nearest residence from grading activities is located approximately 0.50 miles to the west, off Tippy Top Road. Lake Oroville is located approximately 0.60 miles to the east of the site.
10. Project Description: The applicant requests approval of a Grading Permit pursuant to Butte County Code Chapter 13, Article I for a grading operation that disturbed 0.52 acres of a 27.73-acre property for the purposes of leveling land for the cultivation of medical marijuana. Disturbance to the site included the leveling of approximately 0.52 acres of land within the property. Grading activities were conducted over a one-week period in June 2012 using a small tractor-bulldozer. An above ground, gravity fed irrigation system consisting of four 500-gallon water storage tanks, PVC piping, and drip line was installed to provide water to the garden. Water is purchased at an off-site location and trucked to the project site on an as-needed basis. Vegetation in the area where the leveling activities occurred consisted primarily of woody shrubs, canyon live oak, and conifer tree species. While grading activities avoided the thickest stands of vegetation located on the property, several trees of unknown species were removed, Figure 2, Grading Plan. The Grading Permit request includes the following estimates of grading, cut, and fill (please note, that final grading will take place once the Grading Permit is issued): 1. Grading of the land; the extent of grading, clearing, and terracing activities comprise approximately 0.52 acres. The applicant has leveled the existing land cutting approximately 690 cubic yards and filling approximately 690 cubic yards. 2. The maximum height of cut is approximately 4 feet and fill is 3 feet. 3. The maximum and minimum slope of the work site is Cuts (H:V) 2:1 maximum, 4:1 minimum; Fills 2:1 maximum, 4:1 minimum. A Grading Plan has been prepared for grading activities on the 0.52-acre portion of the 27.73-acre site. The grading excavations that are the subject of this Initial Study and Grading Permit have
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 3
already taken place. According to the applicant, grading and clearing activities took place in June 2012, prior to implementation of erosion control measures. County approval of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Erosion Control Maintenance Plan measures have been incorporated into the project. The purpose of the Erosion Control Maintenance Plan is to ensure that the existing grading and clearing activities do not result in water quality impacts off-site as the result of a storm event. Grading and clearing activities have resulted in stockpiles of green waste within the project area. This waste will be mulched on-site and/or disposed of at a composting facility. The Grading Plan identifies BMPs to be applied to future grading and clearing activities, which will consist of stabilizing the site for water quality protection and erosion control. The following is a list of BMPs proposed to be implemented as part of the Grading Plan: 1. If one or more acres of ground is to be disturbed, a permit must be obtained from the state water resources control board prior to construction. 2. All erosion control measures shall conform to the Caltrans standard specifications May 2006 and the erosion control plans shown on the construction drawings. 3. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times. 4. All slopes with disturbed soils greater than 10% that are free of vegetation shall have earth guard applied or mulch spread and tacked down prior to a 30% chance of rain. 5. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour. 6. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a minimum depth of 12" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed on a daily basis. (broom clean- do not use water to wash the street) If equipment traffic is minimal, stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off the property and onto paved roadways shall be swept immediately after each vehicle leaves the site. 7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times. 8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall be stabilized by applying "earth guard" or seeded and watered until grass cover is grown. 9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper order. Inspect the sediment control devices after each storm, removing collected sediment and repairing deficiencies.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 4
10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall bmp's may become clogged. Extreme care should be taken to clean BMP's to reduce fugitive discharge and potential flooding. 11. Applicant may remove temporary BMP’s (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent BMP’s have been established. 12. Hydroseed shall be applied to all disturbed areas that are not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles. Irrigation can be performed by hand watering or by piped sprinkler system. Seed and mulch shall be kept moist at all times until germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the California State Seed Law and applied at the following rate: Seed – Melica Californica: 10 lbs/acre Fiber – 100% wood fiber: 2,000 lbs/acre Tack – Scilium based “M” binder 120 lbs/acre The Grading Plan for the property also includes a Dust Suppression Plan that identifies BMPs to reduce dust and particulate matter associated with grading activities. These include: 1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust carried onto street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing grading, earth-moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. 2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except when loading or unloading materials. 3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a minimum in the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency of watering shall increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control District. 4. All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour. 5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation operations shall be minimized at all times. 6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14 days shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown. 7. The applicant shall minimize construction-related exhaust emissions by maintaining construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May through October) by not allowing construction equipment to be left idling for long periods. 8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 5
9. Re-vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to reduce dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the County of Butte for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. 10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 11. Abide by the following additional measures during all construction activity: A. Use alternatives to open burning of vegetative material during all clearing and construction. 12. Other measures as determined appropriate by AQMD and Department of Public Works to reduce dust As previously stated, the project includes the preparation of an Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, which is part of the Grading and Erosion Control Plan. The following is a list of measures that will be implemented as part of the Erosion Control Maintenance Plan: 1. If BMP’s are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs. 2. If BMP’s have failed, or are ineffective, notify the engineer/QSD to modify the BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed within 72 hours of approval. 3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re-seeded, fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original application rate should be applied. 4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be replaced annually if required beyond 1 year. 5. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer/QSP, temporary BMP’s may be removed if no longer needed. The use, storage, and disposal of chemicals associated with subsequent uses within the project boundaries are subject to all applicable laws, regulations, and permits.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: The following agencies and/or Butte County Departments may be responsible for approvals or review of the project:
• Butte County Public Works
• Butte County Department of Development Services - Planning Division
• Butte County Fire Department
041-370-044-000
041-370-048-000 041-370-048-000
041-370-021-000041-370-035-000
Co
n
d
o
r
R
d
Tippy Top
R
d
NorthStar
ENGINEERING
Civil · Surveying · Architecture & Design
Water Resources · Environmental · GIS
Imagery Source:USDA - FSAAugust 2012;Inset Imagery:National GeographicMap Date: 8APR14Drawn By: CJW
!I
1 inch = 199 feet
Big Rock Enterprises LLC- Grading Permit -
Figure 1A: Location Map 1
Legend
Project Area
Butte Co. Parcel
Within Section 34 of T21N, R4E Butte County, CACherokee USGS 7.5' Quad
0 120 24060
Feet
Project Area
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 6
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Co
n
d
o
r
R
d
Ch
e
r
o
k
e
e
R
d
Highway 7
0
Rock
y
t
o
p
R
d
Tippy Top Rd
Suel Dr
Flag Canyon Rd
Dutzel Ln
Vinton Gulch
R
d
Lo
s
R
a
n
c
h
o
s
R
d
Patterson Ln
Humpyback Rd
Cr
y
s
t
a
l
P
i
n
e
s
R
d
Peridot Pl
C
h
r
i
s
h
e
l
l
e
W
a
y
James
"
W
.
P
.
"
R
d
Zonalea Ln
Presid
e
n
t
H
a
y
e
s
L
n
Sh
e
r
m
a
n
W
a
y
L
o
u
i
s
e
L
n
NorthStar
ENGINEERING
Civil · Surveying · Architecture & Design
Water Resources · Environmental · GIS
Imagery Source:
USDA - FSA
August 2012;
Inset Imagery:
National Geographic
Map Date: 28MAR14
Drawn By: CJW
!I
1 inch = 2,217 feet
Big Rock Enterprises LLC- Grading Permit -
Figure 1B: Location Map 2
Legend
Project Area
roads
Within Section 34
of T21N, R4E Butte County, CACherokee USGS 7.5' Quad
0 1,500 3,000750
Feet
Project Area
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 8
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 10
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 14
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards, (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants based on a project-specific screening analysis.) 2) All answers must take account of the 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) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier 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.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 15
Environmental Checklist
1. Aesthetics
Would the project: Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway? X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site/surroundings? X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X
Discussion a) Less Than Significant. The property is located on the foothill slopes of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and consists of a mixed Chaparral habitat community, which is dominated by common manzanita, whiteleaf Manzanita, and scrub oak, with associated species such as toyon, California buckeye, and poison oak. This habitat’s visual character dominates the site. The total parcel encompasses 27.73 acres, however, for the purpose of the Grading Permit, the total area affected by grading and leveling activities is approximately 0.52 acres. The grading operation involves removal of trees and brush and temporary disturbance to the soil. In addition, only a portion of the site has been affected by grading and leveling activities. The perimeter of the site is screened by native vegetation. Water features, unique geologic features, and wildlife habitat areas are considered scenic resources within Butte County. The site cannot be viewed from adjacent roadways, and is generally not visible from Lake Oroville, therefore grading activities will have a less than significant impact on a scenic vista and would not substantially degrade the visual character of the site and surroundings. b) No Impact. The project site is located approximately 2.0 miles southeast of State Route 70 (SR 70). Although there are no officially designated State scenic highways in Butte County, SR 70 north of the intersection with Highway 149 is a county designated scenic highway and is considered an eligible State scenic highway. A Scenic Highway Overlay Zone extends 350 linear feet from the centerline of scenic routes (GP EIR, pg 4.1-7). Although the property is accessed from SR 70 via Cherokee Road, it is 2.0 miles from SR 70, and is outside this Zone and is not visible from SR 70. Therefore, grading activities would have no impact to scenic resources within a designated County scenic highway. c) Less Than Significant. Refer to the discussion under Item a) above.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 16
d) No Impact. The proposed project would not result in the establishment of a new light source (i.e. residential lighting, streetlights and so forth). Grading activities would not result in a new significant source of lighting, nor would it affect nighttime views in the area.
2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the CA Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 1220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? X
Discussion a,b) No Impact. A review of the Butte County General Plan 2030 Land Use Map identifies the property as being located within an area designated as Foothill Residential FR-20 (Foothill Residential, 20-acre minimum parcel size). Foothill Residential zoning designation allows
single-family dwellings at rural densities of 1 to 40 acres per dwelling unit, depending on
the zoning. The proposed project is the grading and leveling of land to accommodate a medical marijuana garden as allowed under Butte County Ordinance #4051. Grading activities would not convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to a non-agricultural use. c,d) Less Than Significant. As stated under Item a) above, the site is designated as Foothill Residential and a zoning designation as FR-20. The project would not result in the rezoning of forest land or timberland zoned for timberland production. The project involves the grading of a 0.52-acre area of a 27.73-acre site within montane hardwood-conifer and mixed chaparral habitat. Grading would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use or non-agricultural use. Refer to Section 4, Item b) further
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 17
below for a description of vegetation communities in the project area and on the project site. e) No Impact. As stated under Item a) above, grading activities would not convert Farmland (Prime, Unique or of Statewide Importance) pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency.
3. Air Quality
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? X c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including emissions that exceed 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
Discussion a) Less Than Significant. The property is located in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB), which is divided into two planning sections. Butte County belongs to the Northern Sacramento Valley Air Basin (NSVAB). The NSVAB has been categorized as “moderately” non-attainment for ozone and particulate matter. The County is under the jurisdiction of the Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD), a regional agency responsible for regulating sources of air pollution in Butte County. The BCAQMD is responsible for the preparation of plans for the attainment and maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations for sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources of air pollution. The Air Pollution Control Districts and Air Quality Management Districts (Districts) for the counties located in the northern portion of the Sacramento Valley together compromise the Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area (NSVPA). The NSVPA Districts have committed to jointly prepare and adopt a uniform air quality attainment plan for the purpose of achieving and maintaining healthful air quality throughout the air basin. This triennial
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 18
update of the NSVPA Air Quality Attainment Plan (Plan) addresses the progress made in implementing the 2009 Plan and proposes modifications to the strategies necessary to attain the California ambient air quality standard for the 8-hour ozone at the earliest practicable date. The 2012 Plan identifies those portions of the NSVPA designated as “non-attainment” for the State ambient air quality standards and discusses the health effects related to the various air pollutants. The Plan identifies the air pollution problems which are to be cooperatively addressed on as many fronts as possible in order to make the region a healthier place to live now and in the future. Like the 2006 and 2009 Plans, the 2012 Plan focuses on the adoption and implementation of control measures for stationary sources, area wide sources, and indirect sources, and addresses public education and information programs (NSVPA Air Quality Attainment Plan, pg. 3). The project consists of clearing and grading of 0.52 acres of land. The Grading Plan for the property includes a Dust Suppression Plan that identifies best management practices (BMPs) that reduce dust and particulate matter associated with grading activities. These BMPs are consistent with the BCAQMD Standard Mitigation Measures for the reduction of dust and particulate matter as per Section 6.3 of the BCAQMD Handbook. These BMPS include: 1. Conduct daily cleanup. This practice shall include removal of mud and dust carried onto street surfaces by construction vehicles. During clearing grading, earth-moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. 2. Cover haul trucks with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times, except when loading or unloading materials. 3. Water all exposed earth surfaces. This practice shall be conducted at a minimum in the late morning and at the end of the day. Further, the frequency of watering shall increase if required by the Butte County Air Pollution Control District. 4. All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour. 5. The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation operations shall be minimized at all times. 6. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of 14 days shall be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown. 7. The applicant shall minimize construction-related exhaust emissions by maintaining construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications and during smog season (May through October) by not allowing construction equipment to be left idling for long periods. 8. All on-site vehicles should be limited to a speed of 15 mph on unpaved roads.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 19
9. Re-vegetate exposed surfaces. This shall be completed as soon as possible to reduce dust emissions. The Dust Suppression Plan shall be submitted to the county of butte for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. 10. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 11. Abide by the following additional measures during all construction activity: A. Use alternatives to open burning of vegetative material during all clearing and construction. 12. Other measures as determined appropriate by AQMD and department of public works to reduce dust Therefore, although this project will result in grading related dust and particulate matter emissions, no further construction or construction vehicle related emissions would occur. Grading activities do not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; therefore, there is a less than significant impact. b, c) Less Than Significant. The BCAQMD uses general screening criteria to determine the type and scope of projects requiring an air quality assessment and/or mitigation. These criteria are based on project size and are focused primarily on the indirect emissions (i.e., motor vehicles) associated with residential, commercial and industrial development. Due to the relatively limited scale of grading required, 0.52 acres, construction related emissions would not exceed District emission thresholds. Therefore, grading will not violate State or Federal air quality standards or contribute to an existing air quality violation in the basin as only minor amounts of material has been, or will be moved. Therefore, grading would not result in locally elevated levels of regulated air emissions in close proximity to sensitive receptors. d) No Impact. Sensitive populations (i.e., children, senior citizens and acutely or chronically ill people) are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the general population. Land uses considered sensitive receptors typically include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, hospitals, convalescent homes, and retirement homes. The surrounding area is designated as FR-20, which means that adjacent parcel sizes are twenty acres or greater in size. The nearest resident or structure is approximately 0.50 miles west of grading activities. In addition, grading activities are temporary, and a Dust Suppression Plan will be implemented as part of future grading work; thereby minimizing dust emissions. There are no other sensitive receptors in proximity to the project site. e) No Impact. Grading activities would not result in the creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
4. Biological Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 20
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X
g) A reduction in the numbers, a restriction in the range, or an impact to the critical habitat of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals? X
h) A reduction in the diversity or numbers of animals onsite (including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish or invertebrates)? X
i) A deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat (for foraging, breeding, roosting, nesting, etc.)? X j) Introduction of barriers to movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 21
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact k) Introduction of any factors (light, fencing, noise, human presence and/or domestic animals) which could hinder the normal activities of wildlife? X
Discussion a) Less Than Significant Impact. Two species within a 1-mile radius of the project area qualify as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Neither of these species or their habitats will be adversely affected by the project. The project area falls within pallid bat range. Pallid bats are primarily a crevice roosting species, and select daytime roosting sites where they can retreat from view (i.e., rocky cliffs, old buildings, bridges, caves, mines, and hollow trees). Based on a review of site photographs and aerial imagery of the surrounding area, sub-marginal roosting habitat exists within the project area. See Table 1 for a list of the species with their nearest proximity to the project perimeter. See Figure 3 – CNDDB Map for a map that shows the locations of these species relative to the project area.
Table 1 – Species within a 1-mile Radius of Property
Species Common Name Nearest Proximity to Project Adversely affected by Project
veiny monderella 3,400 feet (possibly extirpated) No, does not grow in/near project area
pallid bat Range covers project area No, sub-marginal habitat present within project area
b) Less Than Significant Impact. According to the General Plan EIR, Figure 4.4-1, Vegetative Communities and Wildlife Areas, portions of the project area are designated as conifer and oak woodland. These common natural communities occur throughout the eastern portion of the County and are abundant in the region. Many conifer forest types occur within Butte County, all of which are dominated by conifers but vary in the dominant species and elevations at which they occur. Vegetation within the project area is characteristic of montane hardwood-conifer forest, which occurs at lower elevations below 4,000 feet. In this forest type, California black oak, bigleaf maple, white alder, and dogwood occur with conifers such as Douglas fir, incense cedar, and ponderosa pine. This forest type generally has little understory except in areas of disturbance (GP EIR, pg 4.4-8). Oak woodlands are scattered throughout the county but are concentrated in the transition area between the lower valley and higher elevations of the county. Based on site photos and aerial imagery, the project area consists of vegetation known to occur within oak woodlands. According to the General Plan, blue oak–foothill pine, is co-dominated by foothill pines and blue oaks and occurs at slightly higher elevations than blue oak woodland. Other representative tree species include interior live oak, valley oak, and California buckeye. The
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 22
understory of blue oak–foothill pine woodlands in Butte County contains several shrub species clumped together and interspersed with patches of annual grassland. Dominant shrub species include manzanita, ceanothus, redberry, California coffeeberry, poison oak, blue elderberry, gooseberry, silver lupine, and western redbud (GP EIR, pg 4.4-12). The project involved the grading of 0.52 acres of land within a 27.73-acre parcel, roughly 2 percent of the total acreage. During the grading process an unknown quantity of trees and shrubs were removed. As mentioned above, vegetative communities surrounding the project site are designated as conifer and oak woodland by the General Plan. However, based on site photographs and aerial imagery of the surrounding area, the 0.52-acre project site consisted of vegetation consistent with montane hardwood-conifer habitat, which occurs throughout California and is not considered a sensitive natural community. This forest type generally has little understory except in areas of disturbance (Mayer and Laudenslayer, 1988). Site photographs and aerial imagery show the site contains a substantial understory comprised of chaparral vegetation and habitat, an indication the site has experienced past disturbances. Given the small size of the project site in relation to property, impacts to the vegetation community would be less than significant. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) identifies sensitive natural communities (SNC) based on classifications created by Holland, R.F. (1986), which includes those communities that, if eliminated or substantially degraded, would sustain a significant adverse impact as defined under CEQA. Sensitive natural communities are important ecologically because their degradation and destruction could threaten populations of dependent plant and wildlife species and significantly reduce the regional distribution and viability of the community. NorthStar consulted the CNDDB to identify SNC occurring within the project area. No sensitive natural communities were identified within the property boundaries or surrounding area, nor is there any other riparian habitat located on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated relative to the riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. c) No Impact. The US Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulate the discharge of dredged or fill material into jurisdictional waters of the United States, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The term “Waters of the United States” is an encompassing term that includes “wetlands” and “Other Waters.” Wetlands have been defined for regulatory purposes as follows: “Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” Other Waters of the United States are seasonal or perennial water bodies, including lakes, stream channels, drainages, ponds, and other surface water features, that exhibit an ordinary high-water mark but lack positive indicators for one or more of the three wetland parameters (i.e., hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology) (33 CFR 328.4). No Jurisdictional Waters of the United States are present within the property boundary. The property is located on a ridgeline between Spring Valley Gulch and Lake Oroville. The nearest receiving Water of the U.S. is Lake Oroville, which is located approximately 0.50 mile east of the property. The land between the project area and Lake Oroville is heavily vegetated. There is no risk of adverse effects through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means to Lake Oroville.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 23
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is located within an area designated by the General Plan as Critical Deer Herd Range (GP EIR, Figure 4.4-4, Migratory Deer Herd Areas). At this time, there is no fencing around the parcel or affected area. If the graded area is fenced as part of future uses, it will account for a 0.52-acre portion of a 27.73-acre parcel, approximately 2 percent of the total parcel acreage. The fencing of the graded portion of the site would not pose a significant impediment to migrating deer populations within the area. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact on the movement of native resident wildlife species. e) Less Than Significant. The site consists of montane hardwood-conifer habitat, which occurs throughout California and is not considered a sensitive natural community. Grading activities will affect less than 2 percent of the total parcel. The project would not conflict
!I
0 0.3 0.60.15
MilesBig Rock Enterprises LLC - Grading Permit -
FIGURE 3:CNDDB Occurrences Map
Project Area Source:NorthStar EngineeringImagergy Source:USDA FSA (August 2012)CNDDB Data Provided By: Ca Dept of Fish & WildlifeMap Date: 28MAR14Drawn By: CJW
NorthStar
ENGINEERING
Civil · Surveying · Architecture & Design
Water Resources · Environmental · GIS
Project Area
Legend
Project Area
1 Mile Project Buffer
CNDDB Occurences
pallid bat
veiny monardella
1 in = 0.34 miles
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 25
Page Intentionally Left Blank.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 26
with any Butte County tree policy or ordinance adopted for the long-term preservation of oak woodlands; including the Butte County Oak Woodlands Management Plan. f) No Impact. The project site is not located in an area identified as having an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. g) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to discussion under Item a) above. The project is not located in an area identified as critical habitat, nor is the project in the recovery area for unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals. h) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item a) and Item b) above. The graded area comprises 0.52 acres within a 27.73-acre site, the remainder of the site is undisturbed and provides habitat for a variety of species. The site consists of montane hardwood-conifer habitat, which occurs throughout California and is not considered a sensitive natural community, nor is the area a designated critical habitat or recovery area for any listed rare, threatened and endangered species. This forest type generally has little understory except in areas of disturbance. Based on a review of site photographs and aerial imagery the site contains a substantial understory comprised of chaparral vegetation and habitat, an indication the site has experienced past disturbances. Animals typically associated with this habitat type are common species, the diversity of which would not be significantly impacted by the removal of a small portion of their associated habitat. i) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item h) above. The project site does not contain habitat for any fish species. Given the size of the area that was graded, wildlife that may use the site are still able to forage, breed, roost and nest within the surrounding area. j) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item d) above. k) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion under Item d) above. In addition, although site activities may include temporary lighting and noise associated with human activity, the proposed project would not result in the establishment of a new permanent light source. Temporary lighting and noise is not anticipated to be at a level that would substantially alter the normal activities of wildlife, such as with a residential subdivision, commercial land use development, or major roadway.
5. Cultural Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5? X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CA Code of Regulations, §15064.5? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 27
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact 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
Discussion a, b) No Impact. The site and the immediate surrounding vicinity are not designated as archaeological or historically sensitive areas. In addition, there are no known cultural resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The existing 0.52-acre of a 27.73-acre project site has been disturbed by grading activities and unknown historic resources have not been discovered. Further activities on the site would consist of stabilizing the site for water quality protection and erosion control. Additional grading activities are not anticipated. Site stabilization measures would consist of the best management practices (BMPs), as described in Section 9, Item a) Hydrology and Water Quality. c) No Impact. Due to the project site’s location, lack of outcroppings, or unique geologic features on the property and that existing disturbance has not revealed any sub-surface resources, continued grading and clearing activities are not likely to directly or indirectly destroy sub-surface resources. d) No Impact. There are no known grave sites within the project limits. Therefore, the disturbance of human remains is not anticipated. However, in the unlikely event that human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of any human remains find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery, and must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD will have the opportunity to make recommendations to the NAHC on the disposition of the remains.
6. Geology and Soils
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 28
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact i.) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? X
ii.) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii.) Seismic-related ground failure/liquefaction? X iv.) Landslides? X b) Substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? X e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? X
Discussion a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Less Than Significant. The project is located immediately to the east of an inferred portion of the active Cleveland Hills Fault and approximately 6 miles south of the potentially active Big Bend Fault (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-1). The project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Because the project is limited to the grading and leveling of land without the placement of permanent structures, it will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death. ii. Less Than Significant. The project lies within the area of Butte County most likely to be subject to strong ground shaking. According to the California Geological Survey’s Probabilistic Seismic hazard Assessment Program, Butte County is considered to be within an area that is predicted to have a 10 percent probability that a seismic event would produce horizontal ground shaking of 10 to 20 percent within a 50-year period. (GP EIR, pg. 4.6-9) Because the project is limited to the grading and leveling of land without the placement of permanent structures, it will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death. iii. Less Than Significant. Within Butte County, the areas of liquefiable soil are found on the valley floor. (GP EIR, pg 4.6-10) The project area lies at an elevation of roughly between 1,480 and 2,505 feet and is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 29
project is not located in an area that will be prone to ground failure or liquefaction. In addition, the project is limited to the grading and leveling of land, including soil stabilization BMPs and an Erosion Control Maintenance plan and does not consist of the placement of permanent structures. Therefore, the project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death. iv. Less Than Significant. The project lies within an area that has a high landslide potential. (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-2) The slopes within the project are at ratios of 2:1 with a 1-10 percent slope on the leveled portion. Interim soil stabilization while waiting for vegetation will be achieved using hydroseed with tacifier, mulch, and seed. The stabilization efforts combined with the fact that the project is limited to the grading and leveling of land without the placement of permanent structures, result in no significant exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or death. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project lies within an area that has a high erosion hazard potential. (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-4) As stated earlier, stabilization of exposed soil within the graded area will be accomplished through the use of hydroseed (containing mulch, seed, and tacifier) as well as aggregate base. Additionally, the Erosion Control Maintenance Plan requires notifying the engineer/QSD should any of the BMP’s fail or become ineffective. Any areas that are not effectively stabilized will be addressed accordingly by replacing BMPs. The implementation of effective stabilization techniques will yield no substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is considered unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project. Therefore, the potential for on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, or collapse is less than significant. As stated earlier, the soil type within the project area is not prone to liquefaction. Additionally, there have been no documented incidents of subsidence in Butte County and the only areas at risk for subsidence are in the valley region (GP EIR, pg 4.6-12), not the foothills where the project is located. d) No Impact. The project is located in an area with low expansive soil potential (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-3). Expansive soils are generally found in basin deposits in the low-lying portions of the county near the Sacramento and Feather Rivers as well as localized areas elsewhere in the county (GP EIR, pg 4.6-12). The project site is not located in expansive soil areas. e) No Impact. The project will not use or install septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 30
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X
Discussion a, b) The proposed project is the grading and clearing of 0.52 acres of land. Generally, GHG emissions that are normally associated with land use projects include: water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Grading and clearing activities will not result in a long term net increase in GHG emissions. The project will have short-term air emissions, particularly with regard to dust; a Dust Suppression Plan has prepared as part of Grading Plan (refer to Section 3, Air Quality). The project will not interfere with the State’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, per AB 32, nor would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 31
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X
Discussion a) No Impact. The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would not result in such impact. b) No Impact. The proposed grading activities and site stabilization measures are not anticipated to result in a release of hazardous materials into the environment. c) No Impact. Grading and clearing activities do not involve any emission or handling of any hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing school. No existing or proposed school facilities are located within a one-quarter mile radius of the project site. d) No Impact. The property is not included on a list of sites containing hazardous materials, and would not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. The project site is not included on the Cortese-Knox list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. e) No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport and the project would not result in permanent structures that expose people to a safety hazard. f) No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and the project would not result in permanent structures that expose people to a safety hazard. g) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any actions within the roadway that would physically interfere with any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. The project would not result in an increase in traffic, and thus would not reduce the current level of service of the area road network.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 32
h) No Impact. The property is located in a very high fire hazard severity zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.7-1). However, given that the project is the grading and leveling of land and the removal of fire prone vegetation, this should reduce the potential for wildland fire. Grading activities would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of wildland fires.
9. Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? X
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
X
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? X
f) Otherwise degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 33
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X
Discussion a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is the grading of 0.52-acre site, and thus is required to prepare an Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, which will be submitted to the Butte County Public Works Department for review and approval as part of the Grading Plan permit process. Compliance with these measures would ensure the project would not violate any water quality standards. The project proponent will implement the following BMPs that are intended to minimize erosion and runoff from the site: 1. If one or more acres of ground is to be disturbed, a permit must be obtained from the state water resources control board prior to construction. 2. All erosion control measures shall conform to the Caltrans standard specifications may 2006 and the erosion control plans shown on the construction drawings. 3. Interim erosion control measures may be needed and shall be installed during construction to assure adequate erosion control facilities are in place at all times. 4. All slopes with disturbed soils greater than 10% that are free of vegetation shall have earthguard applied or mulch spread and tacked down prior to a 50% chance of rain. 5. Dust control measures in the form of water application to all exposed soil surfaces to prevent the transport of soil from exposed surfaces on construction sites in the form of airborne particulates. Watering of exposed soil surfaces shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. All clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 15 mph averaged over 1 hour. 6. To minimize the tracking of mud and dirt and to stabilize the point of ingress/egress by construction vehicles the contractor should place 4" to 6" angular rock with a minimum depth of 12" in conjunction with an underlay of filter fabric. Any soil material carried onto street surfaces by construction equipment shall be removed on a daily basis. (broom clean- do not use water to wash the street). If equipment traffic is minimal, stabilized entrance may not be needed. Any sediment tracked off property and onto paved roadways shall be swept clean immediately after each vehicle leaves the site. 7. Haul trucks shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers at all times.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 34
8. If the construction site is to remain inactive longer than 14 days then the site shall be stabilized by applying either "earth guard" or seed and water (until grass cover is grown). Other methods may be acceptable if approved by engineer. 9. Inspect sediment control devices before each storm to verify they are in proper order. Inspect bmp's after each storm, removing collected sediment and repairing deficiencies. 10. During long periods of rain and high intensity rainfall bmp's may become clogged. Extreme care should be taken to clean BMPs to reduce fugitive discharge and potential flooding. 11. Applicant may remove temporary BMPs (wattles and silt fencing) once permanent bmp's have been established. 12. Hydroseed shall be applied to all disturbed areas that are not subject to heavy wear from construction equipment or other vehicles. Irrigation can be performed by hand watering or by piped sprinkler system. Seed and mulch shall be keep moist at all times until germination has occurred. Seed should be in conformance with the California State seed law and applied at a the following rate: a. Seed - melica californica: 10 lbs/acre b. Fiber - 100% wood fiber: 2,000 lbs/acre c. Tack - scilium based "m" binder 120 lbs acre The Grading Plan will also include the implementation of an Erosion Control Maintenance Plan. The purpose of the Erosion Control Maintenance Plan is to identify all potential sources of sediment runoff and all potential sources of pollutant runoff and mitigate them accordingly. Measures in the Erosion Control Maintenance Plan that are designed to prevent runoff incorporate a series of BMPs, which are applied and monitored by the County and the applicant. BMPs which will be utilized at this project site include but are not limited to: 1. If BMP’s are damaged in a storm, repairs should be completed within 72 hours. Care should be exercised to minimize damage and protected areas while making repairs. 2. If BMP’s have failed, or are ineffective, notify the engineer/QSD to modify the BMP or specify an alternative. The modification or alternative should be installed within 72 hours of approval 3. If seeds fail to germinate, or they germinate and die, the area must be re-seeded, fertilized, and mulched within the planting season. Not less than half the original application rate should be applied. 4. Straw wattles shall have a minimum functional longevity of 1 year and shall be replaced annually if required beyond 1 year. 5. Upon permanent stabilization, and approval of the engineer/QSP, temporary BMP’s may be removed if no longer needed.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 35
b) No Impact. No activities associated with the project are anticipated to have any impact on ground water. There is no well located on the property and project activities are limited to surface grading for the leveling of land on 0.52 acres of a 27.73-acre parcel. Currently, water is stored on-site in four 500-gallon water tanks. Water is purchased at an off-site location and trucked to the project site on an as-needed basis. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project activities include grading and leveling of land on a 0.52-acre portion of a 27.73-acre site. The overall direction of drainage on the site will not change. The leveling will serve to slow the rate of runoff from the site, not accelerate it. No streams or rivers will have their course altered as a result of project activities. d) No Impact. The project does not lie in an area designated as a FEMA flood zone nor is it immediately adjacent to any areas that are designated as flood zones (GP EIR, Figure 4.8-3). Furthermore, the project activities involve the leveling of already sloped land. There is no net change in the flow of water on or off the site that would lead to an increase in flooding on- or off-site. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not yield an increase in storm water runoff that would require the use or construction of storm water drainage facilities. As addressed in Item a) above, the Grading Plan and Erosion Control Maintenance Plan will meet water quality standards and not result in polluted runoff. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Item a) above. The ultimate goal of an Erosion Control Maintenance plan is to prevent degradation of water quality through the prevention of sediment and pollutant runoff. The Erosion Control Maintenance Plan is project specific and designed to minimize erosion, thereby protecting water quality. g-i) No Impact. The proposed project, which is grading and clearing activities, is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Project activities would not result in placing housing in a 100-year flood hazard area, nor would activities impede or redirect flood flows. The project would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of levee or dam failure. j) No Impact. There are no anticipated impacts to the proposed project from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow, as no topographical features of water bodies capable of producing such events occur within the project site vicinity.
10. Land Use and Planning
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 36
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
X
Discussion a) No Impact. Grading activities have been conducted on a 0.52-acre site within a 27.73-acre property. The site is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and is rural in nature, with no surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the project will not have an impact on the physical arrangement of an established community. b) No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Foothill Residential and the FR-20 (Foothill Residential, 20-acre minimum parcel size) zoning designation. The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the site. c) No Impact. The project site is not located in an area identified as having an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan.
11. Mineral Resources
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
X
Discussion a-b) No Impact. The property is not located in a designated mineral resource zone (GP EIR, Figure 4.6-5), and thus would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the residents of the state or local importance.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 37
12. Noise
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X
Discussion a) Less Than Significant. The Butte County Board of Supervisors passed Ordinance #4053, Noise Control on March 26, 2013. The Ordinance became effective on April 25, 2013. The Ordinance states:
Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, demolition, paving or
grading of any real property or public works project located within 1,000 feet of
residential uses, provided said activities do not take place between the following hours:
• Sunset to sunrise on weekdays and non-holidays;
• Friday commencing at 6:00 p.m. through and including 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, as
well as not before 8:00 a.m. on holidays;
• Saturday commencing at 6:00 p.m. through and including 10:00 a.m. on Sunday; and,
• Sunday after the hour of 6:00 p.m .
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 38
Provided, however, when an unforeseen or unavoidable condition occurs during a construction project and the nature of the project necessitates that work in process be continued until a specific phase is completed, the contractor or owner shall be allowed to continue work into the hours delineated above and to operate machinery and equipment necessary to complete the specific work in progress until that specific work can be brought to conclusion under conditions which will not jeopardize inspection
acceptance or create undue financial hardships for the contractor or owner. Considering the short-term nature of any additional grading activities and the provisions of the Noise Ordinance, the temporary and periodic increase in noise levels is less than significant. b) Less Than Significant. The project encompasses grading and clearing on 0.52 acres, most of which has been conducted. Any additional grading activities would be temporary, occur during less sensitive daytime hours, and short in duration. As a result, any potential impacts from grading-related groundborne vibrations or noises would not be significant. c) No Impact. The proposed project does not involve uses or activities that would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Noise associated with any additional grading and clearing activities would be temporary. d) Less Than Significant. The property is located in a rural area with generally low noise levels and is not subject to any significant continuous noise. The nearest residence is approximately 0.50 miles west of project activities. Any additional grading activities on the site would temporarily generate an increase in noise levels on and adjacent to the site. However, noise levels would be temporary and would not be in excess of local standards. e, f) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip. As such, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
13. Population and Housing
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 39
Discussion a) Less Than Significant. No significant population growth associated with the proposed project is expected. Any employment generated by grading activities would be temporary and drawn from the local work force, and would not create a permanent population growth to the area. b, c) No Impact. As stated under Item a) above, grading activities will not generate a permanent increase to the local population that would displace existing housing or add a substantial number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
14. Public Services
Would the project: result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact
a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X
Discussion a-e) No Impact. The project includes grading and clearing activities and site stabilization measures on 0.52 acres of land. These activities would not result in substantial physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities including fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public and quasi-public services.
15. Recreation
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With
Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 40
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X
Discussion a) No Impact. No significant population growth is anticipated with the proposed project that would generate an increase in demand for existing public or private parks or other recreational facilities that would either result in or increase the physical deterioration of the facility. b) No Impact. Project activities does not include recreational facilities.
16. Traffic and Transportation
Would the project: Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
X
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 41
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? X
Discussion a) Less Than Significant. Grading activities has the potential to generate short-term changes to the traffic volumes to the area road network. Vehicle trips may be generated from the arrival and departure of construction workers. In addition, heavy truck trips could be generated from hauling equipment and materials to and from the project site. The potential increase in traffic volumes from these activities would be temporary and would not create a substantial impact to the operating conditions of the area road network. b) Less Than Significant. As stated in Item a) above. c) No Impact. No public use airports have been identified as being located within the vicinity of the project site. The project site is located outside the compatibility zones for the area airports, and therefore, would not result in a change to air traffic patterns, including increases in air traffic levels or safety hazards. d) No Impact. The property is accessed from Tippy Top Road via a dirt driveway. The issuance of a Grading Permit, and any additional grading, clearing, or site stabilization would not substantially increase hazards due to a transportation design feature. New roadways are not proposed as part of this project. e) No Impact. No existing residential uses are located on the project site, and the proposed project would not generate a permanent increase in traffic volumes to cause the existing road network to have inadequate emergency access. f) No Impact. The proposed project would not generate a permanent increase in population growth to the project area that would cause an increase in demand for alternative transportation facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
17. Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Water Quality Control Board? X
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 42
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves/may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? X
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? X g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X
Discussion a,b,e) No Impact. The project does not include construction or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities. c) No Impact. No existing stormwater drainage facilities are located on the project site and none would be required with approval of the proposed project due to project site having adequate area within the project site to allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground before leaving the site. d) No Impact. Currently, water is stored on-site in four 500-gallon water tanks. Water is purchased at an off-site location and trucked to the project site on an as-needed basis. Therefore, the project will not require new or expanded water entitlements. f-g) No Impact. Grading and clearing activities has resulted in stockpiles of green waste within the project area. This waste will be mulched on-site and/or disposed of in a green waste facility for composting. Issuance of a Grading Permit would not result in an increase to the Butte County Neal Road Landfill. The project would not impact federal, state, and local statutes related to solid waste.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 43
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Mandatory Findings of Significance Potentially Significant
Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Less Than Significant No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
Discussion a) Less Than Significant. Potential impacts to biological resources were found to be less than
significant, (refer to Section 4, Biological Resources). In addition, there are no known cultural resources located on the property that are examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory (refer to Section 5, Cultural Resources). b) Less Than Significant. The project is the issuance of a Grading Permit on 0.52 acres of a 27.73-acre parcel. Impacts identified in this Initial Study were found to be less than significant or would have no impact on environmental resources. Adherence to applicable regulatory requirements, i.e., Erosion Control Maintenance Plan, Dust Suppression Plan, and other permits or approvals of responsible agencies would ensure less than significant cumulative impacts. c) Less Than Significant. Based on the preceding environmental analysis and adherence to applicable local, state and federal regulations, as noted in this document, the proposed project would not result in potentially significant cumulative, direct or indirect adverse effects on the environment or human beings.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 44
Preparers and References
Report Preparation and Review Kamie Loeser, Senior Planner, NorthStar Engineering, Preparer Andrew Anderson, Assistant Environmental Planner and Biologist, NorthStar Engineering Carol Wallen, QSP, Biologist, NorthStar Engineering, GIS/Graphics Rowland Hickel, Senior Planner, Butte County Development Services, Reviewer Chuck Thistlethwaite, Planning Manager, Butte County Development Services
References Butte County. 2010. Butte County General Plan. October 26, 2010 Butte County. 2010. Butte County General Plan, Draft EIR. April 8, 2010. Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD). 2008. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Guidelines for Assessing Air Quality Impacts for Project Subject to CEQA Review. January 2008. Mayer, K.E. and W.F. Laudenslayer. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, CA. Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals. 2013. Northern
Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2012 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan. Spring 2013. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2006. Soil Survey of Butte Area, California Parts of Butte
and Plumas Counties. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Big Rock Enterprises, LLC Grading Permit March 2014 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Page 45
Acronyms and Abbreviations Agencies, Boards, Commissions, Districts: BCAQMD ......................................................................................................... Butte County Air Quality Management District CARB ............................................................................................................................................... California Air Resources Board DFW ..................................................................................................................... (California) Department of Fish and Wildlife DWR .................................................................................................................... (California) Department of Water Resources DTSC .................................................................................................. (California) Department of Toxic Substances Control EPA ............................................................................................................................................ Environmental Protection Agency FEMA .......................................................................................................................... Federal Emergency Management Agency NOAA ............................................................................................................... National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration NSVAB ............................................................................................................................ Northern Sacramento Valley Air Board USFWS ........................................................................................................................... United States Fish and Wildlife Service Guidelines, Policies, Programs, Regulations: AB ..........................................................................................................................................................................................Assembly Bill A-P EFZ ................................................................................................................. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act BCGP ......................................................................................................................................................... Butte County General Plan CEQA ................................................................................................................................... California Environmental Quality Act CESA ......................................................................................................................................... California Endangered Species Act CFR ........................................................................................................................................................ Code of Federal Regulations CVP ...................................................................................................................................................................... Central Valley Project CWA ............................................................................................................................................................................... Clean Water Act EIR ..................................................................................................................................................... Environmental Impact Report ESA.................................................................................................................................................................. Endangered Species Act HCP ............................................................................................................................................................ Habitat Conservation Plan IWRP ........................................................................................................................................... Integrated Water Resources Plan NCCP ............................................................................................................................... Natural Community Conservation Plan OCAP ...................................................................................................................................... (SWP) Operations Criteria and Plan PRC .................................................................................................................................................................... Public Resources Code SWP ......................................................................................................................................................................... State Water Project Miscellaneous: AF ................................................................................................................................................................................................... Acre-feet AFA ....................................................................................................................................................................... Acre-feet per Annum CNDDB .............................................................................................................................. California Natural Diversity Database CNPS .................................................................................................................................................California Native Plant Society CSC ....................................................................................................................................... California Species of Special Concern dB ................................................................................................................................................................................................ Decibel(s) FIRM ......................................................................................................................................................... Flood Insurance Rate Map GHG .......................................................................................................................................................................... Green House Gases kWh ................................................................................................................................................................................... Kilowatt hours PM10 / 2.5 ............................................................................................................. Particulate Matter less than 10 / 2.5 Microns TAF .......................................................................................................................................................................... Thousand Acre-feet
BUTTE COUNTY
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR
GRADING PERMIT
APPLICANT: Big Rock Enterprises LLC DATE: 1/16/14
AGENT: APN: 041-370-048
FILE #: GRD13-0011 PLANNER: Hickle
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Those items checked are conditions of approval.
PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CHECKED CONDITIONS:
1. Submit grading and drainage improvement plans to the Land Development Division for review and
approval. Comply with approved plans and terms of the grading permit.
2. Submit erosion and sediment control plans to the Land Development Division for review and
approval. Comply with approved plans and terms of the grading permit.
3. Provide a performance bond and labor and material bond for the construction of the required
improvements in an amount approved by the Director of Public Works.
B. DRAINAGE
1. A plan for a permanent solution for drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Public Works. The drainage plans shall detail existing drainage conditions and shall specify how
drainage waters shall be detained or retained onsite and/ or conveyed to the nearest natural or publicly
maintained drainage channel or facility and shall provide that there shall be no increase in the peak
flow runoff to said channel or facility.
2. Demonstrate that the grading does not adversely affect the carrying capacity of areas where base flood
elevations have been determined.
3. Pay drainage impact fees per Article XI, Chapter 3 of Butte County Code.
4. Prior to grading, a construction storm water permit will be required by the State Water Resources
Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing, excavation, filling, and
grading) of one or more acres. The permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control
Board prior to construction. If a construction storm water permit is required, place a note on an
additional map sheet that states: “The development of this parcel/final map required a construction
storm water permit. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but
which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. Development of
individual lots may require an additional permit(s).”
C. LEGAL LOT STATUS
1. Prove to the satisfaction of the public works director that the parcel of the subject application is a
legal parcel.