CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 46
o Lot grading (as shown on the Improvement Plans) to ensure off-site flows not routed through the project's storm drainage system do not change in character, location, or volume.
o Mitigation of storm water runoff flows as noted above to prevent postdevelopment flows from exceeding pre-development flows. • Marking for Storm Drainage Inlets. All storm drain inlets are to be marked with "No Dumping- Drains to River" using brass markers purchased from the City of Fortuna Public Works Division, or other supplier approved by the Public Works Division. • Notice of Special Development Conditions. A "Notice of Special Development Conditions'' shall be recorded noting the need for any private storm drainage easements to be created on any of the lots of this development, as determined by the approved final grading and drainage plan. The Notice shall state that no structures, uses, or modification of ground elevations shall be allowed that obstruct storm water runoff within the drainage easement(s).
As described in detail above, most of the circulation, mobility, and infrastructure improvements would be replacement facilities to be located within existing footprints or new facilities within existing disturbed areas. However, components of the water distribution, wastewater collection, and stormwater collection systems may involve new bridge attachments over, aerial pipes over, horizontal directional drilled stream crossings under, or the establishment of stormwater discharges to, the stream and riparian areas of Strongs and Mill Creek. The details of these facilities, such as the number, type, size, design, or location are not known at this time. The ultimate location and design of such facilities may trigger the need for approvals by state agencies under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne), Section 402 of the CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Section 1602, and each of which would be subject to its own CEQA process.
PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES
Proposed changes to zoning classifications within the MDSP Area are intended to facilitate development consistent with MDSP objectives, assure consistency with General Plan Land Use Designations and Mill District Focus Area policy, amended as proposed. Existing City zoning classifications do not provide the flexibility needed to implement General Plan Mill District Focus Area policy and proposed MDSP objectives. Two principal zoning designations, Light Industrial (M1) and Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T), are proposed for MDSP areas intended for employment related development and overall implementation of the broad range of uses allowed in the Mill District (MD) General Plan Land Use Designation. The MDSP proposes creation of a new “Q” Qualified Combining Zone (Q) pursuant to Fortuna Zoning Regulations Section
17.04.090. The Q zone will be combined with any principal zoning district where analysissupports adding or deleting principal permitted or conditional uses.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 47
The draft MDSP Q zone contains a table indicating which uses are principally or conditionally permitted and additional tables that define lot sizes and other development standards and building requirements. The proposed design guidelines would also be a part of the proposed MDSP Q zone. The draft MDSP Q zone is contained in Attachment X of the draft MDSP. Properties that are zoned Multifamily Residential (R-M) would not change, but the “Q” qualified zone relating to drainage issues would be removed given that MDSP drainage planning would address this issue.
Table 6: Existing and Proposed Zoning Classifications Within MDSP Boundary Proposed Zoning Changes Within the MDSP Area Boundary
Area Acres
Zoning Classification
Existing Proposed
1 5.90 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
2 4.18 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/NULL Public Facility (PF) 3 52.94 Heavy Industrial (M2) Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
4 0.23 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
5 0.49 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
6 14.97 Multifamily Residential (R-M) Multifamily Residential (R-M) 7 1.05 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) 8 0.51 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) Multifamily Residential (R-M) 9 0.84 Multifamily Residential (R-M) Multifamily Residential (R-M) 10 2.35 Multifamily Residential (R-M) Multifamily Residential (R-M) 11 7.95 Heavy Industrial (M2) Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
12 12.04 Heavy Industrial (M2) Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
15 0.80 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T);
Emergency Shelter (ES)
Light Industrial (M1)/Commercial
Thoroughfare (C-T)/Q
Table 7: Existing and Proposed Zoning Classifications Outside MDSP Boundary Proposed Zoning Changes Outside the MDSP Area Boundary
Area Acres
Zoning Classification
Existing Proposed
13 0.63 Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T);
Emergency Shelter (ES)
Public Facility (PF)
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 48
Proposed Zoning Changes Outside the MDSP Area Boundary
Area Acres
Zoning Classification
Existing Proposed
14 0.5 Heavy Industrial (M2) Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T); Emergency Shelter (ES)
16 6.91 Freeway Commercial (FC) Public Facility (PF)
PROJECTED BUILDOUT
The current owner of the former PALCO mill site, has identified a conceptual development plan for site buildout, Figure 4, Proposed Fortuna Mill Commerce Center Improvements. This conceptual development plan, called the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center, is not intended to precisely define individual building footprints or locations, but rather estimates how development may be best arranged within the site and the total estimated building area given site dimensions, topography, resources, surrounding uses, and lot requirements. The Fortuna Mill Commerce Center comprises Areas 3, 5, 12, and 15 on Figure 3: Land Use and Zoning Change Areas within and Outside the MDSP. Table 6: Existing and Proposed Zoning Classifications displays the building square footage within the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center by land use type. Table 8:
MDSP Area Assumed Buildout shows the full buildout of other vacant and developable land within the MDSP Area based on the likely floor area ratio of 0.5 and the maximum density of 29 dwelling units per acres.
Table 8: MDSP Area Assumed Buildout
Fortuna Mill Commerce Center
Conceptual Development Plan
Expected Use Type Square Feet
Hotel 72,000
Retail 56,900
Retail Flex 43,200
Commercial Services 33,000
Flex Industrial 88,500
Industrial 84,900
Warehouse 381,000
Total 759,500
Summary Total Square Feet
Commercial 205,100
Industrial 554,400
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 49
Other Mill District Specific Plan
Full Buildout
Area
Square
Feet Dwelling Units
Area 1 80,412 0
Are 11 140,089 0
Area 9 0 20
Area 10 0 55
It is also assumed that some level of mixed-use development will occur within the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center or elsewhere within the MDSP Area. As a result, a total of 100 units, including the 75 units proposed in Areas 9 and 10 are assumed to be development by project buildout.
It should be noted that the maximum theoretical development potential for the MDSP Area based on the maximum density or intensity allowed under the proposed Mill District Land Use Designation is significantly greater than the anticipated buildout described above. If the land planned Mill District and zoned primarily for employment-related uses were to develop at its maximum potential, a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 0.8, over 2,800,000 square feet could result.
Additionally, if land zoned primarily for residential uses were developed at its maximum potential density of 29 units per acre, 770 total units could result. This Supplemental EIR evaluates the impacts associated with total anticipated MDSP Area development including the FMCC concept plan, or a total of 980,500 square feet of employment related development and 100 residential units. The Proposed SEIR does not analyze maximum buildout potential of all allocated land uses within the MDSP Area, because it is not reasonably foreseeable based upon past and current development and population growth trends, and such buildout is highly speculative.
Development within the proposed MDSP area is projected to occur over time, based on market demand, and on an applicant-initiated build-to-suit basis rather than according to a phased buildout schedule that involves substantial speculative development, although some speculative buildings may be constructed. Given that there is no defined schedule and no readily available demographic or economic data that could support an objective absorption rate for MDSP buildout, this SEIR assumes that buildout would occur within the next 15 to 20 years. Factors that could affect MDSP buildout include local and regional economic and demographic trends, such as the development of the Humboldt Bay Offshore Wind Heavy Lift Marine Terminal and Nordic Aquafarms Project at the Redwood Marine Terminal, and the expansion of Cal Poly Humboldt.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 50
2.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
According to Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impacts refer to:
“Two or more individual effects which, when considered together are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of a project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probably future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.”
Additionally, Section 15130(a) of the CEQA Guidelines States:
“An EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable… When the combined cumulative impact associated with the project’s incremental effect and the effects of other projects is not significant, the EIR shall briefly indicate why the cumulative impact is not significant and is not discussed in further detail in the EIR… An EIR may determine that a project’s contribution to a significant cumulative impact will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and thus is notsignificant…if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact.”
Pursuant to Section 15130(b)(1)(A) of the CEQA Guidelines, a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts may be used as the basis of the cumulative impacts analysis
2.9 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED
Approvals required for development of the proposed project may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Amendment of the Fortuna General Plan 2030 to modify the Mill District Land Use Designation and Mill District Focus Area policy to allow and encourage a range of industrial uses, allow development within the MDSP 100-year floodplain consistent with General Plan; and replace Industrial and Commercial square footage caps. • Amendment of the City of Fortuna General Plan Land Use Map to apply Land Use Designations as set forth in the MDSP Area Land Use Map; • Amendment of the City of Fortuna Zoning Map to apply Zoning Classifications as set forth in the MDSP Area Zoning Map;
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 51
• Approval of the MDSP to establish the land use and regulatory framework for the physical development of the project site. The MDSP would provide design guidelines and detailed standards for the development of the project site, and would eliminate the need to obtain separate entitlements where such would otherwise be required under the current applicable zoning regulations;
• Adoption of an ordinance establishing a “Q” Qualified Combining Zone to implement the allowed uses, development standards, design guidelines, and other development criteria in a manner consistent with the MDSP.
Additionally, subsequent development projects may also require review and approval by various departments or agencies outside of the City, including but not limited to those listed below. It should be noted that the following actions are associated with the future development of the City as it develops pursuant to the General Plan. That is, actions of the types listed here would occur whether or not the proposed Project was approved, and as such, these actions are listed as general items and are not directly associated with the proposed Project. • Future development within the 100-year floodplain or other FEMA-mapped flood hazard area would need to be consistent with the developments required under the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program. Any development proposal within the regulatory floodplain/floodway will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Floodplain Administrator.
• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permits will be required for grading activities of 1 acre or larger. The developer must file a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit pursuant to the NPDES regulations established under the CWA. This permit requires preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, which is intended to prevent degradation of surface and groundwater during the grading and construction process. • Future development affecting Waters of the U.S. or adjacent wetlands would need to fill out a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA).
• Prior to obtaining a CWA Section 404 permit, a future development may also need to obtain a water quality certification or waiver from the Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal CWA.
• Future development affecting native habitat within the bed, bank, channel, or riparian corridor may need a Streambed/Bank Alteration Agreement issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code.
• Future uses of parcels covered by a covenant recorded for the site, including APNs 200- 363-060, 202-021-020, 202-011-046, 201-331-016, 201-331-013, 201-331-010, 201-331- 012, and 201-331-017 (Covenant and Environmental Restriction on the Property), should
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 52
be communicated to the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board in advance, and shall be subject to Article III – Development, Use and Conveyance of the Burdened Property, which details the restriction on development and allowable use.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 53
3. ISSUES REQUIRING CHANGES TO
PRIOR EIR
3.1 LAND USE
3.1.1 LAND USE AND LAND USE PLANS
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in Section 3.1 which is related to CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XI, Land Use and Planning.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FEIR FINDINGS
Potentially adverse impacts associated with land use were analyzed in section 3.1, Land Use and Land Use Plans, of the previous FEIR, which largely coincides with the Land Use and Planning topic XI, questions (a) and (b) in Appendix G of CEQA. The previous FEIR found that impacts relating to XI(a), physically dividing an established community, would be beneficial because the policies of the Fortuna General Plan 2030 and Mill District Focus Area would increase rather than decrease connectivity.
Regarding impact topic XI(a), the potential to conflict with applicable land use plans, policies and regulations adopted to avoid or mitigate environmental effects, the implementation of the Fortuna General Plan 2030 and Mill District Focus Area were determined to be less than significant relating to the City of Fortuna Zoning Regulations, Humboldt County Regional Transportation Plan, and the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The previous FEIR found that even though the General Plan contained policies and programs to encourage infill development and reduce impacts to prime farmland, that because the Fortuna General Plan 2030 included land use designations, land use policies, and programs to annex portions of the unincorporated areas it would conflict with County Agricultural land use and zoning designations adopted by the County to preserve prime farmland by re-designating some of this farmland for urban use. However, this conclusion did not relate to the Mill District Focus Area, which was already within the City of Fortuna, so there was no potential for the Mill District Focus Area to conflict with County agricultural land use and zoning designations adopted to preserve prime farmland.
The previous FEIR also evaluated potential land use impacts to “negative community character, substantial land use conflicts, or an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land (Mill District Area Plan).” The previous FEIR noted that while Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines does not identify “negative community character” as an evaluative environmental issue, it was included to provide a more in-depth analysis of the potential land use impacts of the proposed
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 54
Mill District Area Plan. The previous FEIR found that implementation of the Proposed Mill District Area Plan as a mixed-use area, which was previously planned and zoned for industrial uses, will not result in negative community character, substantial land use conflicts, or an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land.
The Land Use and Land Use Plans section of the previous FEIR also included an analysis of the then current impact topic Appendix G X(c), whether the Fortuna General Plan 2020 would conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan, which is now Appendix G Biological Resources IV(f). The previous FEIR determined that The Planning Area, including the Mill District Focus Area, is not subject to any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan and therefore, no impact would occur.
Since the certification of the previous FEIR, the following substantial changes are proposed to the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element and Mill District Focus Area land use policies:
• Mill District (MD) Land Use Designation. The mixed-use MD Land Use Designation is proposed to be changed to allow “small-and large‐scale light industry” and “compatible heavy industrial uses” that are “well integrated and compatible with the surrounding community” and the Floor Area Ratio is proposed to be increased from 0.5 to 0.8, which is the same as surrounding commercial areas.
• Goal and Policy LU -14, Focus Area: Mill District. The Mill District Focus Area Policy is proposed to be amended in the following manner:
o LU‐14.1, Compatible Uses, adds “industrial” to the listing of compatible uses and adds a sentence to illustrate how potential land use conflicts within and adjacent to the Mill District would be addressed by “applying appropriate land use designations and implementing appropriate development standards, buffer widths, and designs to minimize impacts from future development on existing and planned development in surrounding areas”.
o LU‐14.3 Open Space and Parkland, removes the reference to “parkland” in the title and requirement to preserve the 100-year floodplain for public access and trail development, and removes references to Mill District Area Plan, which was never adopted.
o LU‐14.4 Balanced Transportation, is modified to be more inclusive by replacing “streets and roadways system” with “transportation system” and to “include“ modes of travel other than vehicles rather than “utilize.” This change is emphasized in the changes to the Mill District Focus Area implementation program which changes the reference to the preparation of a connectivity map to provide for all transportation modes.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 55
Also, since the adoption of Fortuna General Plan 2030, the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Commission adopted an update to the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) in 2021. The Mill District Focus Area was located outside of the areas affected by the ALUCP at the time the Fortuna General Plan 2030 Final Program Environmental Impact Report was certified but is now within the Airport Influence Area Review Area 2 and Horizontal and Conical Surfaces of the Airport Protected Airspace for Rohnerville Airport.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Fortuna General Plan previously evaluated the environmental setting in terms of land use and there are no changes within the Mill District that would affect the environmental setting.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
The Fortuna General Plan previously described the federal and state regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
State
The Fortuna General Plan previously described the federal and state regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
Regional and Local
The Fortuna General Plan previously evaluated the local and regional land use regulatory setting and except for the 2021 update to the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), adopted in 2021, is an update to the state-mandated airport land use compatibility plan for the areas around the public-use airports in Humboldt County. Within the City of Fortuna, the ALUCP applies to land use in areas surrounding Rohnerville Airport, the runway for which is located approximately 2,000 feet south of the City boundary.
The basic function of the ALUCP is to promote compatibility between the airport and surrounding land uses. ALUCP sets forth criteria and policies which the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Commission uses in fulfilling its duty to review certain airport and adjacent land use proposals around public use airports in Humboldt County. Additionally, the ALUCP sets compatibility criteria applicable to local agencies in their preparation or amendment of land use plans and ordinances and to landowners in their design of new development.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 56
The ALUCP establishes Airport Influence Areas (AIAs) that represent the geographical extent of the ALUC’s authority and define areas where noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight notification policies and compatibility criteria are applied to certain proposed future land use policy actions. AIA Review Area 1 represents the area in which the policies and compatibility criteria associated with noise, safety, airspace protection and overflight notification apply. AIA Review Area 2 represents the area in which only airspace protection and overflight notification policies are applicable.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Significance Thresholds
The proposed Project will have a significant land use impact if it would:
A. Physically divide an established community;
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; or
C. Results in negative community character, substantial land use conflicts, or an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land (Mill District Area Plan).
This analysis addresses the significance criteria from the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, X. Land Use and Planning items (a) and (b). Significance threshold “C” is an impact topic specific to the Fortuna General Plan.
Methodology
The analysis in this section focuses on the compatibility of land uses identified in Mill District Land Use Designation, Mill District Focus Area policy, and the Mill District Specific Plan with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental impact and analyzes whether development facilitated by the project, or its proposed policies would physically divide communities. This section also analyzes whether the proposed land use and policy changes would result in negative community character, substantial land use conflicts, or an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 57
Project Impacts and Mitigation
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The Project was found to have no impact on an established community in the previously certified FEIR.
The previously certified FEIR noted that “(t)he proposed plan does not include proposals for the construction of new highways, railways, levees, utility infrastructure, large-scale development projects, or other improvements that are most often associated with physically dividing established communities.” The previous FEIR further states that “(t)he proposed plan facilitates development and redevelopment activities within the proposed focus areas and the expansion of development in the proposed annexation areas. However, no road closures are proposed within these areas or within any other portions of the General Plan Planning Area. Furthermore, roads constructed as part of new development within the proposed annexation areas could increase rather than decrease connectivity to, within, and across these areas. Finally, the proposed plan: (1) includes a proposal to develop a seasonal pedestrian undercrossing within the Strongs Creek channel as part of NCRA’s proposed River to Headwater trail system; and (2) requires the provisions of bikeways and pedestrian trails associated with new large development projects facilitated by the proposed plan. In addition, mitigation in Section 4.1 of (previous FEIR) requires improvements to certain roadways and intersections. These would all increase rather than decrease connectivity within the Planning Area.”
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. The MDSP would provide a street connection between Newburg Road and South Fortuna Boulevard at the Redwood Shopping Center that would improve connectivity for all modes of travel, provide an essential component of the Strongs Creek Trail which connects the eastern portion of the City and the Riverwalk Area, and provide multiple connections to the Great Redwood Trail. In addition, the Financing Plan associated with the Mill District Specific Plan defines proportionate share contributions from property within the project area towards important intersection improvement projects within the City.
The MDSP will continue to provide street connections and multi-modal pathway connections and is intended to become an integral part of the City transportation system. Given that the proposed changes to the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element and the MDSP policies and performance measures are comparable to the Mill District Focus Area policy that was analyzed in the previous FEIR, the potential impacts are comparable and would not change the prior finding that the MDSP will not divide an established neighborhood.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures would be required.
Impact LU-01: Would the project physically divide an established community?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 58
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The previous FEIR found that the potential for the Fortuna General Plan 2030 and Mill District Focus Area policy to conflict with applicable land use plans, policies and regulations adopted to avoid or mitigate environmental effectsto be less than significant as it relates to the City of Fortuna Zoning Regulations, Humboldt County Regional Transportation Plan, and the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Other plans analyzed in this section of the previous FEIR are inapplicable to the Mill District Focus Area because they were only applicable within unincorporated areas.
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. Although not a change to the General Plan or Mill District Focus Area policy, the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Commission adopted an update to the Humboldt County ALUCP in 2021. The Mill District Focus Area was within the Horizontal and Conical Surfaces of the Airport Protected Airspace for Rohnerville Airport but previously outside of the areas affected by the ALUCP located and is now within the ALUCP Airport Influence Area (AIA) Review Area 2. The following is an analysis of the potential for the Mill District Specific Plan to conflict with plans that were adopted to avoid or mitigate environmental effects in regards to the Humboldt County ALUCP.
The Mill District Focus Area was located outside of the areas affected by the ALUCP at the time the Fortuna General Plan 2030 Final Program Environmental Impact Report was certified but is now within the AIA Review Area 2 which fully includes the Horizontal and Conical Surfaces of the Airport Protected Airspace for Rohnerville Airport. AIA Review Area 2 contains policies relating to airspace protection and overflight notification policies. AIA Review Area 2 does not contain policies that relate to airport noise or areas where noise and/or safety concerns may require limitations on the types of land use or the intensities or densities that may be developed. As a result, the ALUCP does not affect the range of allowable uses within the MDSP or the location, intensity, or density of such uses.
All of the MDSP Area is within AIA Review Area 2 and ALUCP Airspace Protection Compatibility Policies (Section 3.4) and Overflight Notification Policies (Section 3.5) are applicable to the MDSP Area. Airspace Protection Compatibility policies relate to tall structures, trees, other objects, or high terrain on or near airports, may constitute hazards to aircraft in flight. The ALUCP Airspace Compatibility Policy Map for Rohnerville Airport (Figure 9-3) shows the 14 Code of Federal Impact LU-02: Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 59
Regulations (CFR) Part 77 outer approach surface and associated transitional surface overlaying City of Fortuna boundaries. Part 77 establishes standards to protect airspace by defining imaginary surfaces in areas around airports that relate to structure height limitations. The location of each imaginary surface is based on the category or type of approach of each runway.
The Horizontal Surface is a plane 150 feet above the specifically defined airport elevation that extends out in all directions 10,000 feet from the runway. The Conical Surface is a surface that surface extending outward and upward from the periphery of the horizontal surface at a slope of 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet. The Pond Street Area, Residential Area, and the northern portion of the Central Area are within the Conical Surfaces of the Airport Protected Airspace (FAR Part 77) for Rohnerville Airport and the remainder of the MDSP Area is within the Horizontal Surface.
The elevation of the Rohnerville Airport is between 340 and 390 feet above sea level and the highest elevation of the MDSP Area is approximately 60 feet above sea level. Therefore, the Horizontal Surface above the MDSP Area is at least approximately 430 feet above ground level (the elevation of the Horizontal Surface at the Mill District is 340’ + 150’ = 490’ minus 60’ = 430 feet above ground level) and the Conical Surface extends upward from that point at a slope of 20 to 1. The MDSP Area is approximately 7,500 feet from the nearest point of the Rohnerville Airport runway. FAA Part 77.9 requires that an applicant file a notice with the FAA if a proposed construction or alteration exceeds an imaginary surface above a runway, which would be approximately 75 feet above the Rohnerville Airport runway at the distance of the MDSP Area from the runway, or an elevation of 355 feet above ground level (7,500 feet multiplied by a slope of 100 to 1). Given that the maximum building height within the MDSP Area is 48 feet, a building that is designed in a manner consistent with the MDSP could not trigger FAA noticing requirements relating to building height.
In addition, the ALUCP and FAA requirements prohibit the release of any substances that would impair aircraft operations, including dust, steam, light emissions, (either direct or indirect), electrical interference, glare, smoke, and other potential hazards to flight from the property. The MDSP requires design review for new development, which would consider the potential for the generation of dust or glare and contains a performance standard relating to noise and screening that implements Fortuna General Plan 2030 policies relating to glare and dust. In particular, Policy LU‐7.1, Minimize Nuisances, requires that industrial development avoid creating substantial pollution, glare, or other significant activity that would negatively affect adjacent uses and other areas of the city and Fortuna Municipal Code Section 17.05.110, Landscaping and screening.
To the extent that any proposed construction or alteration within the MDSP would trigger FAR Part 77 requirements to notice the FAA relating to height, the applicant must complete and
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 60
submit to the FAA, Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, at least 45 days before the start date of the proposed construction or alteration or the date an application for a construction permit is filed, whichever is earliest. In addition, if the City of Fortuna determines that a proposed use within the MDSP would generate potential hazards to aircraft in flight such as uses creating electrical interference, confusing lights, glare, or other disturbances that are also restricted from areas beneath the airspace protection surfaces, ALUCP Policy GP-4, Actions that Always Require ALUC Review, would require that the City of Fortuna refer the proposed permit to the ALUC prior to approval.
The maximum height for new or altered buildings within the Project site allowed under the Fortuna General Plan, MDSP, and Fortuna Zoning Regulations would not constitute hazards to aircraft in flight and the permit process for design review would ensure that land uses do not generate emissions, such as light, glare, and smoke that would impair aircraft operations. These ongoing requirements would reduce the potential for conflicts from the Mill District Specific Plan to the implementation of the ALUCP to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The previous FEIR evaluated potential land use impacts relating to “an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land (Mill District Area Plan),” The previous FEIR noted that while Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines does not identify “negative community character” as an evaluative environmental issue, it was included to provide a more in-depth analysis of the potential land use impacts of the proposed Mill District Area Plan.
The previous FEIR noted that this is not a significance threshold identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, but was added in order to provide a more in-depth analysis of the potential land use impacts of the proposed Mill District Area Plan. The previous FEIR found that the implementation Mill District Land Use Designation as a mixed-use area (which was previously planned and zoned for industrial uses) and Mill District Focus Area policy, will not result in negative community character, substantial land use conflicts, or an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land.
Impact LU-03: Would the project result in negative community character, substantial land use conflicts, or an inadequate amount of industrially-designated land?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 61
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. The Mill District Specific Plan includes proposed changes to Land Use Element policies that include allowing a range of industrial uses instead of only “compatible light industrial uses” in areas Planned Mill District – MD. The Mill District is intended to be a mixed-use area with single‐use and vertical and horizontal mixed‐use development. This change would allow a full range of light industrial uses and is paired with MDSP performance standards and design guidelines to ensure that development be compatible with adjacent uses.
The MDSP also applies noise and screening performance standards that specify that parcels adjacent to existing or proposed residential areas provide attenuation measures such as structural features, construction materials, landscaping, and increased setbacks to reduce heat, trespassing, vibration, glare, dust, air quality impacts, or other annoyances and to reduce noise levels for proposed residential uses to at or below the City’s 60 dB Ldn exterior and 45 dB Ldn interior noise standards. In addition, the screening of off-street parking spaces that abut a residential use is required along all interior property lines pursuant to and consistent with (Fortuna Municipal Code Section 17.05.110D, Landscaping and screening). These criteria were prepared to be consistent with Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element policies LU-4, Residential Development, LU-5, Neighborhood Conservation & Enhancement, LU-6, Commercial Development, LU-7; Industrial Development, LU-14, Mill District Focus Area, and Fortuna Municipal Code Section 17.05.110 standards relating to landscaping and screening.
The policies and performance standards described above, all of which are consistent with General Plan policies intended to avoid or mitigate environmental effects, and the requirement that projects be consistent with design guidelines and that would be implemented as part of a conditional use permit, would ensure that the proposed changes to the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element Mill District Focus Area policies, the proposed MDSP and Fortuna Zoning implementation would continue to result in less than significant impacts to community character or land use conflicts.
Mill District Specific Plan Changes - Inadequate Industrially-Designated Land. Regarding the amount of industrially-designated land, the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Map identifies two City areas approximately 80 acres in total that are designated Industrial (IND). Of the 80 acres zoned for industrial uses, 27 acres are south of Main Street area and west of 7th Street, and 53 acres are in the Dinsmore Drive area. The previous FEIR found that “the amount of land to be designated Industrial (IND) under the proposed plan will more than meet the City’s projected demand for industrial land through the year 2030.” The previous FEIR also indicated that two areas identified for future annexation were planned for industrial uses: The Riverwalk District (approximately 94 acres) and the Rohnerville Airport Annexation Area (approximately 104 acres that have not yet been annexed). Since the adoption of the General Plan in 2010, the Riverwalk District has been annexed to the City and the Riverwalk District General Plan Land Use Designation was applied. The Zoning that was applied to this area, Commercial Thoroughfare (C-
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 62
T) and Freeway Commercial (F-C) allow only “light service industries,” which include “bakeries, creameries, soft drink bottling plants, cleaning and drying plants, laundries, printing and engraving plants, and any other plant of a similar nature” (and only as an accessory use in the FC Zone). As a result, the Riverwalk Area is no longer available for industrial use.
The City has indicated that industrial space is in demand within the City and should likely be accommodated within the Mill District. The Mill District has historically had over 300,000 building square feet of industrial space and extensive outdoor industrial uses. Most of the Central Area of the MDSP Area (the central portion of the former mill site) is subject to a land use covenant that limits future uses only to industrial uses due to historic contamination unless comprehensive soil and ground water remediation is completed. The Creek Riparian and Trails Areas and the Residential Area would not allow industrial uses due to the Zoning classification that is proposed to be applied and highly restrictive stream and riparian protections.
The addition of industrial as an allowable use in the Mill District Land Use Designation, (outside of the Creek Riparian and Trails Areas and the Residential Area), will ensure the City continues to meet the projected demand for industrial land and offset the loss of industrial land in the Riverwalk District and the potential that the Airport Area may be annexed for other than industrial uses. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact will occur.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 63
3.1.2 ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Economic impacts are analyzed in the Prior FEIR in Section 3.3, however, this is not an impact topic area in Appendix G of CEQA.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FEIR FINDINGS
Potentially adverse environmental impacts associated with anticipated economic effects were analyzed in section 3.3, Economic Impacts, of the previous FEIR. However, this is not an impact topic area in Appendix G of CEQA. However, an EIR is required to analyze a project’s significant physical impact on the environment and when a proposed development project is subject to CEQA, both direct and indirect (or “secondary”) impacts of the project on the physical environment must be analyzed. Economic and social impacts of a project, though they may be included in a CEQA document, are not to be treated as “significant” impacts on the physical environment, as defined. To the extent that there is a direct or indirect causal connection between a change in economic or social circumstances and a change in the physical environment, the economic or social change may be used to establish whether the physical change is “significant.”
The previous FEIR states that “California case law has established that CEQA may require urban decay or deterioration (e.g., blight) to be considered as an indirect environmental effect of a proposed project” and uses a threshold of significance that the proposed General Plan implementation would have a significant economic impact if it results in the development of new commercial (retail and office) or industrial space which exceeds the absorptive capacity for those uses in Humboldt County, potentially resulting in blight conditions. The stated rationale in the previously certified FEIR for this significant impact threshold was that if the supply of new commercial or industrial space in Fortuna exceeds the estimated new County-wide demand for such space, then there would be excess space supply, which could reasonably be expected to result in idle, unused commercial, office or industrial space which could potentially lead to blight.
The previous FEIR found that the potential for the implementation of the proposed plan to cause blight conditions would be less than significant because polices are included in the General Plan that would cap new commercial space in Fortuna at 973,460 square feet and new industrial space 400,000 square feet. These caps equal 26.7% and 30% of the County’s projected 2030 commercial and industrial space demand, which is estimated to not exceed the absorptive capacity for these uses within the entire county, and therefore the development of the new commercial and industrial space subject to those caps would not result in blight conditions in the City of Eureka or in other parts of Humboldt County.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 64
Since the certification of Fortuna General Plan 2030 Final Program Environmental Impact Report, the following substantial changes are proposed to the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element policies relating to economic effects:
• LU‐6.6 Targeted Commercial Use and Development Levels. Policy LU‐6.6 and Program LU‐ 8, which cap commercial development levels are proposed to be modified to remove specific square footage “caps” and replace the caps with an annual monitoring and reporting program to track new commercial development and conditions relating to urban decay and report annually to the Planning Commission and City Council whether urban decay or other indications of overbuilding or high vacancies are occurring, identify City programs to limit urban decay, attract businesses, and encourage increased business activity.
• LU‐7.4 Targeted Industrial Use and Development Levels. Policy LU‐7.4 and Program LU‐9, which cap industrial development levels is proposed to be modified to remove specific square footage “caps” and replace the caps with an annual monitoring and reporting program to track new commercial development and conditions relating to urban decay and report annually to the Planning Commission and City Council whether urban decay or other indications of overbuilding or high vacancies are occurring, identify City programs to limit urban decay, attract businesses, and encourage increased business activity. • Previous FEIR, Draft PEIR Table 3.1-6, Proposed General Plan Buildout Calculations. The Project is anticipated to result in a maximum building area of approximately 926,150 square feet (651,486 square feet of industrial uses and 276,658 of commercial uses) and 100 new residential units, instead of 300,000 square feet of commercial building area and 300 new housing units as previously analyzed within the Mill District. This is a net reduction of approximately 23,342 square feet of commercial space and 200 residential units within the Mill District and the City, and a net increase of approximately 651,500 square feet of industrial space.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Fortuna General Plan previously evaluated the environmental setting in terms of economic impact and there are no changes proposed within the Mill District that would affect the environmental setting.
REGULATORY SETTING
The Fortuna General Plan previously described the federal, state, and local regulatory setting relating to economic impacts and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 65
Significance Thresholds
The proposed Project will have a significant land use impact if it:
A. Results in the development of new commercial (retail and office) or industrial space which exceeds the absorptive capacity for those uses in Humboldt County, potentially resulting in blight conditions.
This analysis does not address a significance criterion from CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. Related to urban decay. CEQA Guidelines Section 15131 states that “(e)conomic or social information may be included in an EIR or may be presented in whatever form the agency desires.” “Economic or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment. An EIR may trace a chain of cause and effect from a proposed decision on a project through anticipated economic or social changes resulting from the project to physical changes caused in turn by the economic or social changes. The intermediate economic or social changes need not be analyzed in any detail greater than necessary to trace the chain of cause and effect. The focus of the analysis shall be on the physical changes.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15131(b) also provides that “(e)conomic or social effects of a project may be used to determine the significance of physical changes caused by the project.” For example, the level of significance of a physical division of a community from the installation of rail lines could be measured by the social effect on the community.
The rationale from the previous FEIR for the significant impact threshold above is as follows (Page
3.3 ‐ 4):
“If the supply of new commercial or industrial space in Fortuna exceeds the estimated new County-wide demand for such space, then there would be excess space supply. In this case, the estimated excess supply could reasonably be expected to result in idle, unused commercial, office or industrial space which could potentially lead to blight.
The determination of “significant” impacts in this analysis is based on Humboldt County as a whole since the regional commercial center is outside the City of Fortuna (e.g., the City of Eureka). As indicated in the policy background information above, new development in Fortuna would have a mixture of positive and negative economic impacts on existing businesses in Fortuna. For example, while new development would bring additional competition to existing Fortuna businesses, it would also bring additional shoppers from outside the City which would benefit existing Fortuna retailers. Additional development in the City’s redevelopment area would also provide a fiscal stimulus to the area that would benefit existing Fortuna businesses and community members based on the collection of any related sales or property taxes. At the County level, however, more commercial, office or industrial space in Fortuna could potentially result in fewer sales
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 66
and employment in these sectors in other jurisdictions unless there was sufficient overall growth in the commercial, office or industrial sectors. This could create the potential for blight impacts in those other jurisdictions.”
Urban decay is typically associated with the development of large commercial retail centers, particularly those that include “big box” retail uses that may result in economic impacts on existing commercial businesses. Urban decay can occur if new large retail centers capture a significant share of retail expenditures that contribute to the economic viability of the existing businesses. If existing businesses close because of competitive pressures and the buildings cannot readily be re-leased, general deterioration and decay of the buildings and properties is possible. This could be considered an indirect environmental impact.
Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) is the leading court case relating to urban decay. In Bakersfield, which involved the construction of supercenter stores, the court reviewed a series of decisions concerning the circumstances that require an EIR to address neighborhood deterioration and concluded proposed new shopping centers do not trigger a conclusive presumption of urban decay. However, when there is evidence suggesting that the economic and social effects caused by the proposed shopping center ultimately could result in urban decay or deterioration, then the lead agency is obligated to assess this indirect impact.
Many factors are relevant, including the size of the project, the type of retailers and their market areas and the proximity of other retail shopping opportunities.
Methodology
The previous FEIR defines the methodology for this analysis and lists a series of assumptions relating to the buildout period (2030), defines the commercial and industrial market area, market and demand factors, and projected demographic growth rates.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The analysis in this section focuses on whether the modification of existing General Plan Land Use Element policies and implementation programs that establish commercial and industrial “target” use levels and seek to equitably distribute such use levels within Land Use Designations within the City, and their replacement with ongoing programs to monitor commercial and industrial development and conditions within the City relating to urban decay and to report on such conditions as part of the annual General Plan report, coupled with the approval of the Mill Impact ECO-01: Would the project result in the development of new commercial or industrial space which exceeds the absorptive capacity for those uses in Humboldt County, potentially resulting in blight conditions?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 67
District Specific Plan, would result in economic or social changes that would cause substantial and adverse physical changes that would cause urban decay.
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The previously certified FEIR found that the potential for the Fortuna General Plan 2030 to result in the development of new commercial (retail and office) or industrial space that exceeds the absorptive capacity for those uses in Humboldt County, potentially resulting in urban decay (blight conditions), would be less than significant.
Implementation of the proposed Fortuna General Plan 2030 could result in 973,460 square feet of new commercial space and 400,000 square feet of new industrial space in Fortuna, which represent 26.7% and 30% of the County’s projected 2030 commercial and industrial space demand. This level of development was determined to not exceed the absorptive capacity for these uses so it would therefore not result in blight conditions, or urban decay.
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. The following substantial changes are proposed to the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element policies relating to economic effects:
Policy LU‐6.6 and Program LU‐8, which cap commercial development levels are proposed to be modified to remove specific square footage “caps” and replace the caps with an annual monitoring and reporting program to track new commercial development and conditions relating to urban decay and report annually to the Planning Commission and City Council and where urban decay or other indications of overbuilding or high vacancies are occurring, identify City programs to limit urban decay, attract businesses, and encourage increased business activity. The following shows the specific changes to Policy LU‐6.6 and Program LU‐8:
LU‐6.6 Targeted Commercial Use and Development Levels. To grow consistent with projected commercial absorption rates and avoid overbuilding that could result in high vacancy rates, the City shall designate monitor commercial use development levels (square footage) within the City as well as track conditions relating to urban decay within Downtown and established shopping centers. To equitably distribute commercial uses.
LU‐8 Track new commercial development, pursuant to Policy LU-6.6, by focus area or City neighborhood as well as conditions relating to urban decay, in particular within Downtown and other shopping centers, in coordination with local associations and regional economic development organizations. Where urban decay or other indications of overbuilding or high vacancies are occurring, identify available or new City programs to limit urban decay, attract businesses, and encourage increased business activity. Report on development levels and where development is occurring, urban decay conditions, and other findings related thereto, to the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the annual General Plan annual report.
The City shall allow new commercial development, up to the following levels, to equitably distribute sales and employment generating uses in the City and annexation areas:
• Commercial (COM) 168,000 SQ.FT.
• Office (OFF) 172,000 SQ.FT.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 68
• Central Business District (CBD) 35,000 SQ.FT.
• Mill District (MD) 250,000 SQ.FT.
• Fortuna Blvd (CMU) 146,000 SQ.FT
• Riverwalk District (RWD ) 150,000 SQ.FT
Policy LU‐7.4 and Program LU‐9, which cap industrial development levels are proposed to be modified to remove specific square footage “caps” and replace the caps with an annual monitoring and reporting program to track new commercial development and conditions relating to urban decay and report annually to the Planning Commission and City Council and where urban decay or other indications of overbuilding or high vacancies are occurring, identify City programs to limit urban decay, attract businesses, and encourage increased business activity. The following shows the specific changes to Policy LU‐7.4 and Program LU‐9:
LU‐7.4 Targeted Industrial Use and Development Levels. To grow consistent with projected industrial absorption rates and avoid overbuilding that could result in high vacancy rates, the City shall designate monitor industrial use development levels (square footage) to within the City as well as track conditions relating to urban decay equitably distribute industrial uses.
LU‐9 Track new industrial development, pursuant to Policy LU-7.4, by focus area or City neighborhood as well as conditions relating to urban decay. Where urban decay or other indications of overbuilding or high vacancies are occurring, identify available or new City programs to limit urban decay, attract businesses, and encourage increased business activity.
Report on development levels and where development is occurring, urban decay conditions, and other findings related thereto, to the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the annual General Plan annual report. The City shall allow new industrial development, up to the following levels, to equitably distribute sales and employment generating uses in the City and annexation areas:
• South of Main Street in City 100,000 SQ.FT.
• Riverwalk District Annexation 150,000 SQ.FT
Rohnerville Airport Annexation 150,000 SQ.FT
The MDSP is anticipated to result in a total building area of approximately 926,150 square feet (651,486 square feet of industrial uses and 276,658 of commercial uses), instead of 300,000 square feet of commercial building area, and result in approximately 100 new housing units, previously analyzed within the Mill District. This level of development would result in approximately 23,342 square feet less commercial building area within the Mill District and the City, and approximately 351,500 square feet more industrial square feet within the City. No industrial space was previously allocated to the Mill District. It should be noted that the maximum theoretical development potential for the MDSP Area based on the maximum density or intensity
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 69
allowed under the proposed Mill District Land Use Designation is significantly greater than the anticipated buildout described above. If the land planned Mill District and zoned primarily for employment-related uses were to develop at its maximum potential, a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 0.8, over 2,800,000 square feet could result. This level of development would far exceed industrial related development within the region in the past and projected demographic growth and is therefore considered unforeseeable and not analyzed further.
The prior analysis presumed that if the supply of new commercial or industrial space in Fortuna potentially exceeded the estimated new County-wide demand for such space during the planning period, there would be excess space supply and the presumed excess supply would reasonably be expected to result in idle, unused commercial, office or industrial space which would lead to blight, or urban decay. The prior analysis listed a series of General Plan policies that were intended to cap growth in commercial and industrial building area consistent with projected absorption rates and avoid overbuilding. Chief among the General Plan policies that limit the potential for urban decay are the caps on the amount of commercial and industrial development permitted in the City established by Policies LU-6.6 and -7.4, and Programs LU-8 and LU-9.
This section analyzes whether it is reasonable to presume that replacing existing commercial and industrial square footage caps and allocated maximum square footages by land use or City area with policies and programs to monitor development levels and economic conditions within the City, would cause urban decay.
The previous FEIR evaluated the employment-generating market effects that could occur within the City on a county-wide basis, suggesting that the county is the market area for commercial and industrial development and not the City. The analysis evaluated the “demand” for future commercial and industrial space, which refers to the space needs of workers in commercial and industrial space-utilizing occupations based on projected City demographic levels (population and employment growth) at buildout. The previous FEIR treated all land planned for commercial uses in the same manner, regardless of the commercial use type that may be developed within them (automobile sales or service, office, professional, retail sales large or small, retail services, or visitor accommodations), and assumed that the development of such land, beyond a level commensurate with demographic growth, would equally have the potential to cause urban decay. The previous FEIR also presumed that the development of industrial land beyond a level commensurate with demographic growth would have potential to cause urban decay.
Following the adoption of the Fortuna General Plan in 2010, a comprehensive update to the Humboldt County General Plan was adopted in 2017, and the City of Eureka General Plan update was adopted in 2018. Neither General Plan included caps on commercial or industrial development nor did either jurisdiction’s EIR presume that the adoption of the general plan updates had the potential to result in “urban decay”:
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 70
The Humboldt County General Plan plans 3,247 acres of land for industrial uses, 1,819 acres of which are considered developable and projected that 2,728,856 square feet of industrial development will occur during the planning period (2040). The maximum floor area ratio for industrial land is 3.0 and the land use map could allow 237,706,920 square feet of industrial development within these areas, which is over 80 times the projected development of industrial square footage during the planning period. The General Plan also planned 2,418 acres of land for commercial uses, 1,588 acres of which are considered developable and projected that 238,378 square feet of commercial development will occur during the planning period (2040). The maximum floor area ratio for commercial land is 3.0 and the land use map could allow 207,519,840 square feet of commercial development within these areas. This represents hundreds of times the projected development of commercial square footage during the planning period.
The City of Eureka General Plan Update Economic Development Policy Paper evaluated industrial development within the County and concluded that “If the City were to maintain its fair share of this growth, based on its existing share of countywide industrial employment (i.e., jobs in the four industry sectors identified above), it would capture an estimated 210 new industrial or warehouse-oriented jobs through 2040. This would be sufficient to support absorption of between 210,000 and 262,500 square feet of building space.” The report suggested that the City of Eureka needed to identify additional land to accommodate potential industrial development. The City of Eureka General Plan EIR did not contain assumptions that the supply of commercial or industrial land could result in an oversupply of constructed building space that would exceed population growth related absorption rates. The EIR did not evaluate the potential for blight or urban decay. The EIR suggested that the development of vacant or underutilized industrial sites would have a beneficial impact relating to blight.
City of Fortuna tracking of commercial and industrial square footage in relation to Policy LU‐6.6 Targeted Commercial Use and Development Levels and Program LU‐8 and LU‐7.4 Targeted Industrial Use and Development Levels and Program LU‐9 since 2010, shows the following.
Table 9: City of Fortuna Tracking of Commercial and Industrial Square Footage Commercial
Land Use Designation Allocation
New sf to
Date
Balance
Remaining
Commercial (COM) 168,000 19,665 148,335
Office (OFF) 172,000 31,000 141,000
Central Business Districted (CBD) 35,000 0 35,000
Mill District (MD) 250,000 0 250,000
Fortuna Blvd. (CMU) 146,000 16,768 129,232
Riverwalk District (RWD) 150,000 34,648 115,352
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 71
Totals 921,000 102,081 818,919
Industrial
Area Allocation
New sf to
Date
Balance
Remaining
South of Main Street 100,000 9,000 91,000
Riverwalk District Annexation (RWD)1 150,000 0 150,000
Rohnerville Airport Annexation 150,000 0 150,000
Totals 400,000 9,000 391,000
The Riverwalk District was annexed to the City of Fortuna in 2013 and approximately 30 percent, or 57 acres of the area was planned for industrial uses. Of the portion of the Riverwalk Annexation Area planned Industrial, approximately 60 percent is used for aggregate processing facilities, approximately 25 percent contains a portion of the City wastewater treatment plant and dog park, and the remainder contains mostly commercial services or light industrial uses along Dinsmore Drive and about 2.5-acres along the far western edge of an auto wrecking yard that is almost entirely planned Riverwalk District. As indicated previously, the Rohnerville Airport Annexation Area has not been annexed and there are currently no plans to process an annexation application for this area.
The conceptual development plan for the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center and the assumed development plan for the remaining portion of the MDSP Area not zoned residential is as follows:
Table 10: Mill District Conceptual or Assumed Buildout
Commercial Use Type Square Feet
Fortuna Mill Commerce Center Hotel 72,000
Retail 56,900
Retail Flex 43,200
Commercial Services 33,000
Other MDSP Areas Hotel / Restaurant 80,412
Total Commercial 285,512
Industrial
Fortuna Mill Commerce Center Flex Industrial 88,500
General Industrial 84,900
Warehouse 381,000
Other MDSP Areas General Industrial 140,089
Total Industrial 694,489
Total Square Feet 980,001
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 72
The FMCC has not identified tenants for the building space in the conceptual development plan or if significant space is intended to be developed on a speculative basis. The MDSP Area is a unique site within the City and region, given its proximity to services, infrastructure, and transportation routes as well as its location as an urban infill site. Only 9,000 square feet of flexible industrial space has been developed within the City in the last 14 years and no major industrial developments have occurred in the region during this period.
As stated in the project description, development within the proposed MDSP area is projected to occur over time, based on market demand, and on an applicant-initiated build-to-suit basis rather than according to a phased buildout schedule that involves substantial speculative development, although some speculative buildings may be constructed. Given that there is no defined schedule and no readily available demographic or economic data that could support an objective absorption rate for MDSP buildout, this EIR assumes that buildout would occur within the next 15 to 20 years. Factors that could affect MDSP buildout include local and regional economic and demographic trends, such as the development of the Humboldt Bay Offshore Wind Heavy Lift Marine Terminal and Nordic Aquafarms Project at the Redwood Marine Terminal, and the expansion of Cal Poly Humboldt. Future unknown factors could also affect the demand for industrial space in Fortuna or the region.
The previous FEIR presumed that that if the Fortuna General Plan allowed commercial or industrial development levels that exceed the Humboldt County 2030 county-wide commercial and industrial space demand estimates, urban decay may occur in the City of Eureka or in other parts of the County. As indicated above, this assumption is not consistent with the methodologies of the CEQA analyses of other more recent General Plans in the County, as land planned for commercial and industrial development in the County could allow square footage levels more than 50 times greater than projected.
The current land use cap policies do not require that development occur at a pace commensurate with demographic growth and could allow all allocated development in one project or all development allowed city-wide within a short period of time. This disconnect could inadvertently allow urban decay to occur, in spite of its intent.
The proposed amendments to Land Use Element policy and implementation programs would remove specific square footage commercial and industrial caps as well as the allocation of square footage by land use designation within the City. The removal of policies and programs that establish commercial and industrial square footage caps and the allocation of square footage by land use designation or area within the City would not in and of itself result in new building square footage or change where or when new commercial or industrial development would occur. The proposed Land Use Element policy and implementation programs would maintain the original policy objective, presumably to prevent urban decay and to track the distribution of development
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 73
but do so through an ongoing monitoring and reporting program that engages the public, City policymakers, and interested parties rather than through a potentially arbitrary cap.
Given that the FMCC development concept or other development within the MDSP does not identify future tenants and does not establish a specific commercial or industrial land use program to be developed according to a phasing schedule and would instead likely be developed over time according to regional demand, the removal of land use caps is replaced by an ongoing monitoring and reporting program, the proposed Land Use Element amendments and MDSP would not be presumed to result in urban decay.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 74
3.2 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.2.1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in section 4.1 which coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XVI, Transportation/Traffic. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) became a threshold to measure transportation impacts in for CEQA review in 2020 and was not analyzed as the transportation impact in the previous FEIR.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FEIR FINDINGS
Section 2.7, Issues of Controversy and Issues to be Resolved, of the previous FEIR Project Description identified “(t)raffic and circulation impacts that may result from General Plan implementation (i.e., increased vehicle miles traveled, the circulation systems capacity to handle increased traffic demands)” as an area of controversy and evaluates the “ability of existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities to accommodate projected growth…(and) limited opportunities.” However, the transportation, or Roadway and Highway System analysis in Chapter 4, Transportation & Circulation, did not consider increased vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as a transportation threshold of significance. The previous FEIR did provide some analysis of VMT in Section 2.6, Energy Conservation, where the Environmental Setting, under the heading “Gasoline,” states that “(b)ecause of its rural nature, Humboldt County residents have a higher vehicle miles traveled (VMT) than do more densely populated regions,” and finds that that because only about 57% of the City’s working age population works in the City of Fortuna “percapita motor vehicle use, trip length, and resulting VMT are higher for Fortuna residents than if a greater proportion of the City’s working age population worked within the city limits.” In Impact 5.6‐1: Inefficient, Wasteful or Unnecessary Consumption of Energy, the previous FEIR lists General Plan land use and transportation policies and programs designed to reduce motor vehicle trips, reduce VMT, and maximize, transit use, including to:
1) provide a balance of residential and employment-generating uses, provide compact and mixed-use development, encourage infill, discourage leapfrog development, and provide housing near employment centers; and,
2) extend transit to new development, provide trails and bicycle paths in new development, and provide transit and non-vehicular connectivity.
The analysis in Section Impact 5.6‐1: Inefficient, Wasteful or Unnecessary Consumption of Energy, concluded that due to the land use and transportation policy relating to VMT, the proposed plan will not result in the inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy, and a less than significant impact will occur. In spite of this finding, an analysis of transportation impacts relating to VMT to determine if the General Plan exceeded an applicable threshold of
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 75
significance indicating a significant impact. This Section evaluates whether the MDSP would result in a significant VMT impact when compared to regional averages for Humboldt County.
Section 4.2, Transportation and Circulation, of this SEIR describes each of the transportation CEQA topics, other than VMT, that were analyzed in the previous FEIR where MDSP impacts were found to have no substantial change from previous analysis, including 4.2.1-1 Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (including exceeding, either individually or cumulative, LOS standards) potential impact; 4.2.1-2 substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses; 4.2.1-3 result in inadequate emergency access: 4.2.1-4 result in inadequate parking capacity; 4.2.2-1 discourage or interfere with pedestrian circulation; 4.2.2-2 increased need for new pedestrian facilities;
4.2.2-3 discourage or interfere with bicycle circulation; 4.2.2-4 increased need for new bicycle facilities; 4.2.3-1 discourage or interfere with fixed route transit service; and 4.2.3-2 generate an increase in transit ridership.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Plan area is located between Highway 101 and South Fortuna Boulevard between Newburg Road to the north and Kenmar Road to the south. A private road to be named later runs north/south though the middle of the area and does not currently provide public access to the area. Additional access to the Plan area is from South 15th Street, South 16th Street, Spring Street, 1st Avenue, and 2nd Avenue.
Existing Street Network
Highway 101 is the primary north/south route connecting Fortuna to Eureka/Del Norte County in the north and Garberville/Mendocino County to the south and identified on the California Road System map as an Other Freeway or Expressway. It runs along the western edge of the Plan area and provides a high amount of visibility for the Mill District. Within the City of Fortuna, Highway 101 is a four-lane highway with on/off ramps at Kenmar Road/Riverwalk Drive, 12th Street (which are located at the north and sound ends of the Mill District, providing excellent freeway access to the Plan area), and 3rd and Main Street.
South Fortuna Boulevard is a Minor Arterial that runs north/south along the eastern edge of the Plan area. It reaches from Kenmar Road in the south to Main Street/Rohnerville Road in the north. It is a four-lane divided roadway with a vegetated median, on-street parking, and signalized major intersections. Only a short portion of the street, from approximately Kenmar Road to the southern entrance of the Safeway shopping center has a designated bike lane in both traffic directions.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 76
Newburg Road is Major Collector and an important east-west Fortuna City street that extends east from 12th Street to the eastern City of Fortuna boundary. The Highway 101, Fortuna Downtown and Riverwalk Area Complete Streets and Connectivity Planning Study, November 2016, indicated that the intersection of 12th Street and Newburg Road is a two way stop controlled intersection that operates at a level of service “D” at the AM peak and at a level of service “F” at the PM peak. The City of Fortuna is carrying out the 12th Street Interchange Modernization Project which identifies a preferred design concept as a five-leg roundabout at the 12th Street/US 101 NB Ramps intersection that incorporates a realigned Newburg Road as the fifth leg (North Roundabout). The existing Newburg Road connection to 12th Street would be closed by creating a cul-de-sac.
Kenmar Road is a two-lane two-way street that provides access to residential areas between Ross Hill Road and Rohnerville Road and identified on the California Road System map as a Minor Arterial. The US 101 southbound ramp at Kenmar Road operates at level of service “F” during the PM peak hour and the northbound ramp operates at acceptable levels of service during AM and PM peak hours. The Kenmar Road and Eel River Drive intersection operates at level of service “E” during AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of Kenmar Road, Ross Hill Road, and South Fortuna Boulevard is currently signalized but often experiences acceptable delays during morning and evening commute times. The city is in the process of redesigning the intersection to improve traffic flows and pedestrian/cyclist safety. The redesign of Kenmar Road is likely to include roundabouts at the west and east US 101 interchanges and may include the Kenmar Road and Eel River Drive intersection.
South 15th and 16th Streets are short north/south running dead end roads that extend south from Newburg Road. They provide access to residential units in the northeastern section of the Plan area.
Spring Street is a north/south running road that extends from Newburg Road and travels south to connect with 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Avenues. It primarily provides access to residential units in the northeastern section of the Plan area with minimal commercial access. 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Avenues are short east/west running roads that extend west from South Fortuna Boulevard, insect with Spring Street, and then dead end to the west. They provide access to residential units and some commercial areas in the northeastern section of the Plan Area.
Currently there are no public north/south routes within the Plan area and there are only very limited east/west routes that serve the residential area on the eastern side. The residential area north of Third Street has a natural grid-configuration, but largely functions as a cul-de-sac neighborhood. Future residential, commercial, and mixed-use development potential would be enhanced by increasing connections between Newburg Road and South Fortuna Boulevard.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 77
Transit
RTS Service and the Mill District. The Redwood Transit System (RTS) provides limited intercity transit service to Fortuna via a mainline route that extends north-south between the communities of Scotia and Trinidad. The RTS provides connectivity for the communities of Eureka, Arcata, Fortuna, McKinleyville, Westhaven, Trinidad, Fields Landing, Rio Dell, Scotia, and King Salmon, as well as Cal Poly Humboldt, College of the Redwoods, and the California Redwood Coast-Humboldt County Airport. In addition, the Southern Humboldt Intercity (SHI) fixed route service runs north-south between Eureka and Benbow, traveling through Fortuna as well as Rio Dell, Redcrest, Weott, Meyers Flat, Miranda, Phillipsville, Redway, and Garberville along the way.
There are three RTS bus stops adjacent to the Mill District: (1) South Fortuna Blvd. & Spring St. (O'Reilly Auto Parts); (2) South Fortuna Blvd. & Strongs Creek Drive (Strongs Creek Shopping Center); and (3) Kenmar Drive and Eel River Drive (Fortuna Park & Ride).
Fortuna Transit Service. The City of Fortuna operates the Fortuna Transit Service, which is a demand-response, curb-to-curb transportation service that provides rides for seniors ages 50 and older or disabled persons who are unable to drive. People younger than 50 years old may also be eligible for Fortuna Transit services if they provide a medical note stating they are unable to drive.
Passengers can schedule rides by calling dispatch. Passengers can make reservations up to one month in advance for medical appointments, one week in advance for other types of appointments, and the day before for purposes such as shopping.
Fortuna Transit operates almost entirely within city limits, using two zones as general guidance (a north zone and a south zone). These zones were developed to maximize service efficiency and effectiveness. Passengers can schedule rides Monday through Friday between 8:30 AM and 4:00 PM. Since 2018, Fortuna Transit has also provided transportation outside of city limits to Eureka for medical appointments on Tuesdays between 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM.
Pedestrian/ Bicycle/Trails
The City of Fortuna has an extensive network of sidewalks along city streets. However, according to the General Plan, barriers often exist such as utility poles and incomplete pathways that create widespread gaps in the system. There is also a limited bicycle network that primarily consists of Class III bike routes (a bike route designated by signs or pavement markings for shared use with pedestrians or motor vehicles but have no separated bike right-of-way or lane striping) with some Class II bike lanes (bike lanes established along streets and are defined by pavement striping and signage to delineate a portion of a roadway for bicycle travel) along major roadways. Some walking trails exist including the Riverwalk Trail along the Eel River and the Rohner Park Trails.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 78
The City seeks to create more pedestrian and cyclist facilities and plans to host the Great Redwood Trail which is a 320-mile-long rail to trail project stretching from San Francisco to Humboldt Bay along the entirety of, or portions of, the North Coast Railroad Authority rights-ofway (NCRA ROW) and other properties. A portion of the trail is planned to run along NCRA ROW, along most of the western edge of the Plan area adjacent to Highway 101. The John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail also cross though portions of the southern portion of the Plan Area along Strongs and Mill Creek. The John Campbell Memorial Greenway will provide important recreational access for walkers and hikers to and across the southern portion of the Mill District. The John Campbell Memorial Greenway is proposed to be connected to the Great Redwood Trail which would provide recreational access for walkers and hikers within the Plan area.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR described the federal regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
State
Senate Bill 743
SB 743, passed in 2013, required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop new State CEQA guidelines that address transportation impact metrics under CEQA. On December 28, 2018, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to add Section 15064.3 determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts, which states that generally, VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. In addition to making VMT the preferred metric, Section15064.3(a) also prohibited the use of delay from being used to determine environmental impacts stating, “Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) (regarding roadway capacity), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.” This prohibition is reinforced by the CEQA Statute 21099(b)(2), “Upon certification of the guidelines by the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency pursuant to this section, automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” Beginning on July 1, 2020, the provisions of 15064.3 and 21099 applied statewide.
Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA The Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, December 2018) provides advice and recommendations to CEQA lead agencies on how to implement SB 743. This includes technical
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 79
recommendations regarding the assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures to reduce VMT. Lead agencies may consider and use these recommendations at their discretion.
The Technical Advisory also provides guidance on impacts on transit. Specifically, the Technical Advisory suggests that lead agencies generally should not treat the addition of new transit users as an adverse impact. As an example, the Technical Advisory suggests that “an infill development may add riders to transit systems and the additional boarding and alighting may slow transit vehicles, but it also adds destinations, improving proximity and accessibility. Such development also improves regional vehicle flow by adding less vehicle travel onto the regional network.” Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide The Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG) (Caltrans, May 20, 2020) provides directions to lead agencies regarding compliance with SB 743 from Caltrans’ perspective. The TISG replaces the Caltrans’ 2002 Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies and is for use with local land use projects. The TISG largely endorses the OPR Technical Advisory for VMT impact analysis and includes the following objectives. • Guidance in determining when a lead agency for a land use project or plan should analyze possible impacts to the state highway system (SHS), including its users. • Guidance for Caltrans land use review that supports state land use goals, state planning priorities, and GHG emission reduction goals.
• Statewide consistency in identifying land use projects’ possible transportation impacts, to the SHS, and to identify potential non-capacity increasing mitigation measures. • Recommendations for early coordination during the planning phase of a land use project to reduce the time, cost, and/or frequency of preparing a Transportation Impact Study or other indicated analysis.
Interim Local Development and Intergovernmental Review Safety Review Practitioners Guide
The Interim Local Development and Intergovernmental Review (LDIGR) Safety Review Practitioners Guide (Caltrans, December 2020) provides guidance to Caltrans districts and lead agencies for analyzing safety impacts of projects on the state highway system (SHS). A proposed land use project or plan may affect the SHS by adding new automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian trips to state roadways; modifying access to state roadways; or affecting the safety of connections to or travel on state roadways. Caltrans is responsible for reviewing these projects and identifying opportunities for projects to contribute to safety improvements, where justified.
Regional and Local
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 80
Variety in Rural Options of Mobility (VROOM) 2022-2042
The Variety in Rural Options of Mobility (VROOM) 2022-2042, which is the Regional Transportation Plan for the seven incorporated Humboldt County cities and the County of Humboldt that is updated every four years by the Humboldt County Association of Governments (HCAOG), is tailored to address the distinctive rural mobility needs of Humboldt County1. The plan embodies a long-term vision to improve transportation in the region through the following:
• Climate Change Mitigation: The plan underscores initiatives aimed at reducing transportation-related emissions, in alignment with broader environmental sustainability goals. It seeks a transportation system that minimizes its carbon footprint to reduce the impacts on climate change from regional development.
• Infrastructure Resilience: It emphasizes the need for resilient transportation infrastructure that can withstand natural disasters and sea-level rise induced by climate change. By promoting the upgrade and maintenance of critical infrastructure, it aims to ensure the longevity and reliability of the transport network in the face of evolving climate challenges.
• Sustainable Mobility: Advocates for a sustainable, equitable, and well-connected transportation network that caters to the diverse mobility needs of the community. This includes promoting alternative modes of transportation and improving accessibility to reduce dependency on personal vehicles.
• Community Alignment: Ensures that transportation plans resonate with community values and priorities. It underscores the importance of community engagement in shaping transportation policies that are synchronized with local needs and aspirations. • Regulatory Compliance: Stresses the importance of adherence to state and federal transportation regulations, ensuring that the transportation strategies are compliant with the prevailing legal and regulatory frameworks.
Transit Development Plan (TDP) 2023-2027
The Transit Development Plan (TDP) 2023-2027, a plan by HCAOG that seeks to refine the transit system in Humboldt County, including the Redwood Transit System that serves Fortuna and the City-operated Fortuna Transit that is a demand-response, curb-to-curb transportation service that provides rides for seniors ages 50 and older or disabled persons who are unable to drive.
The objective of the TDP is to better meet the mobility needs of the residents. The following are the core elements and primary objectives outlined in this plan2:
• Service Evaluation: A thorough analysis of existing transit services to identify areas of improvement and ensure that the transit system is effectively meeting the mobility needs of the community.
1 https://www.hcaog.net/sites/default/files/vroom_2022-2042_full_report_0.pdf 2 https://www.hcaog.net/sites/default/files/compressed_p226140_humboldt_cty_tdp_- _draft_final_v2_no_appendices.pdf
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 81
• Performance Metrics: Establishing clear and measurable metrics for evaluating transit performance. This involves setting benchmarks that can help in assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of transit services.
• Capital Plan Formulation: Identifying and planning for capital needs to ensure that the transit system is well-resourced and equipped to deliver reliable services. This includes budgeting for new transit vehicles, facilities, and other critical infrastructure. • Funding Exploration: Exploring various funding opportunities to secure the necessary financial resources for transit enhancement. This includes identifying potential grants, partnerships, and other funding sources that can help in supporting the transit development goals.
• Marketing Strategies: Developing robust marketing strategies to promote and augment transit usage within the community. This includes campaigns to raise awareness about transit services and incentives to encourage more people to use public transportation.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Significance Thresholds
This analysis will address CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, Transportation, significance criteria XVII(b). All other transportation impact topics were adequately addressed in the previous FEIR, as described in Section 4.2, Transportation and Circulation, of this SEIR. A significant impact would occur if the project:
b) conflicts with or is inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b).
Methodology
GHD prepared a Technical Memorandum, “VMT Option 2 / Smart Growth Score”: Methodology, Land Use Scenario Analysis, Thresholds of Significance, Significance Determinations and Mitigations, (hereafter Technical Memorandum), attached to this SEIR as Appendix B for this analysis which:
• describes the proposed methodology for assessing transportation impacts in the City of Fortuna consistent with SB-743 and current CEQA Guidelines, • presents the methodology as applied to several land use scenarios in the City of Fortuna, and
• provides suggested thresholds of significance in assessing impacts for various project types.
The scenarios analyzed in the Technical Memorandum quantitative analysis include the baseline existing condition, the existing condition plus the proposed MDSP, General Plan buildout without
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 82
the proposed MDSP (cumulative condition), and the General Plan buildout plus the proposed MDSP.
The City of Fortuna does not have am adopted VMT CEQA threshold. Therefore, the Technical Memorandum uses the threshold set by the California Air Resources Board for the Shasta Regional Transportation Agency as the CEQA threshold for this analysis. The Shasta Regional Transportation Agency was selected because it covers an area with reasonably similar demographics and geography. This threshold would require that the MDSP achieve a total smart growth score that improves the deviation from the ideal smart growth score of 100 by at least 4 percent higher than existing regional average for Humboldt County, where “100” is ideal and the Countywide average deviation is 25.70. The smart growth score evaluates the land use characteristics of each neighborhood within a jurisdiction to assess the potential for interacting with complementary land uses through non-auto trips, and calculating scores measuring the land use diversity, density, and proximity to destinations. Land use characteristics represent the number of households, retail jobs, and non-retail jobs within analysis zones, which are hexagons sized so that the distance from the center of any given hexagon to the opposite edge of a neighboring hexagon is 0.5 miles, which represents a comfortable walking and biking distance.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
Previously Identified Level of Significance. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) became a threshold to measure transportation impacts in for CEQA review in 2020. VMT was therefore not analyzed as a transportation impact in the previous FEIR, which was certified in 2010. VMT was considered in the energy impacts analysis regarding the inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy. Based on the proposed General Plan land use and transportation policy, which has since been adopted, a determination of less than significant impact was made.
The previous FEIR evaluated 4.1-1, Cause an Increase in Traffic That is Substantial in Relation to the Existing Traffic Load and Capacity of the Street System (Including Exceeding, Either Individually or Cumulative, LOS Standards); 4.1-2, Substantially Increase Hazards Due to a Design Feature or Incompatible; 4.1-3, Result in Inadequate Emergency Access; and 4.1-4, Result in Inadequate Parking Capacity.
In Impact 4.1-1, Cause an Increase in Traffic That is Substantial in Relation to the Existing Traffic Load and Capacity of the Street System, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan would generate an estimated 79,002 additional daily automobile trips on the local roadway and highway Impact 3.2.1-01: Would the implementation of the MDSP result in a smart growth score whose deviation from the ideal score of “100” is at least 4% lower than the existing regional average deviation from the ideal score for Humboldt County, where the Countywide average deviation from the ideal score is 25.70?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 83
system which is a substantial increase in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. At buildout, 18 of the 26 study intersections were expected to operate at an unacceptable LOS and will require improvement. One of these intersections identified for improvement (South Fortuna Boulevard/Newburg Road) relates to access in the MDSP but is not included within it.
In Impact 4.1-2, Substantially Increase Hazards Due to a Design Feature or Incompatible, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan contained specific policies and programs that would minimize hazards by establishing design standards for a variety of traffic, transit, and a variety of transportation modes. Other policies, including land use and circulation concepts, integrated early in the design phases of citywide development would minimize land use conflicts. Future intersection and roadway designs would need to comply with applicable standards, ensuring appropriate geometry for the safe movement of all types of transportation.
In Impact 4.1-3, Result in Inadequate Emergency Access, the previous FEIR determined future intersection and roadway designs would need to comply with applicable standards, ensuring appropriate geometry for the safe movement of all types of transportation and would result in adequate emergency vehicle access.
In Impact 4.1-4, Result in Inadequate Parking Capacity, the previous FEIR found that while the General Plan would facilitate new development, development would be required to design parking areas based upon the specific parking requirements generated by a particular land use.
The City’s current Zoning Code-required parking standards would also ensure adequate parking.
Vehicle Miles Traveled. The criteria for assessing transportation impacts has shifted from Level of Service (LOS), to VMT since General Plan 2030, including Mill District Focus Area policy, was adopted and the previous FEIR was certified. VMT impact analysis considers the total or average miles traveled by vehicles in an area, with a focus on reducing travel distances and associated environmental impacts like greenhouse gas emissions. Projects that reduce VMT support sustainability goals, such as promoting public transit and reducing urban sprawl. In contrast, LOS assesses roadway and intersection performance based on vehicle traffic volume and delay, aiming to improve vehicle movement efficiency, often through infrastructure expansions like road widening. While a focus on reducing VMT encourages alternative transportation and compact development, focusing on LOS improvements can lead to increased vehicle use and carcentric infrastructure.
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. The proposed MDSP continues to apply the Mill District (MD) land use designation within the specific plan area. Proposed General Plan Land Use Element amendments, the MDSP policies and performance measures, and the implementing zoning overlay would result in some changes from the Mill District Focus Area policy evaluated in the previous FEIR. The following describes the proposed changes that could have an effect on VMT.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 84
The Mill District (MD) Land Use Designation is a mixed-use land use designation, and a General Plan amendment is proposed to expand the compatible uses within the Mill District Land Use Designation to allow a range of industrial uses, rather than just compatible light industry, and to allow the nonresidential uses to occur at the same intensity levels as adjacent areas along South Fortuna Blvd, which allows a 0.8 FAR. Changes to Land Use Element policy regarding targeted commercial and industrial use levels within the City, which are intended to limit overbuilding that could result in high vacancy rates, would remove square footage caps that are applied to certain areas (a maximum of 250,000 square feet of commercial is allocated to the Mill District) and to certain Land Use Designations and replace the caps with an active ongoing monitoring and reporting program.
The MDSP would implement the range of allowable uses defined in the Mill District (MD) Land Use Designation and Mill District Focus Area policy, as amended, through an area specific zoning overlay that would allow single use residential, commercial, or industrial developments and mixed-use development developments as principal permitted uses. The overlay zone would also implement design guidelines through a discretionary permit that are intended to assure compatibility between uses.
The previous FEIR assumed that 300 dwelling units and up to 300,000 square feet of commercial uses (employing approximately 700 persons) would occur at buildout in the Mill District (note that only 250,000 could be permitted based on Land Use Element Program LU-8). The projected buildout of the MDSP Area described in Section 2.7 of the Project Description lists anticipated uses and building square footage based on a conceptual development plan for Fortuna Mill Commerce Center site prepared by the owner of a substantial portion of the MDSP Area and buildout estimates for the remainder of the MDSP prepared by City staff: 205,100 square feet of new commercial, 554,400 square feet of new industrial, and 100 additional dwelling units. Given that the General Plan and Zoning could allow all residential or all commercial/industrial development, or any mixture thereof, the actual residential and commercial development density and intensity and uses at buildout could be different than what is in the conceptual plan.
However, the anticipated uses and building square footage listed in Section 2.7 of the Project Description purposes of this SEIR is considered reasonable for purposes of this analysis.
VMT Analysis Methodology
The following is a summary of the methodology used to determine smart growth scores that are contained in the Technical Memorandum. A complete description of the methodology is contained in the Technical Memorandum.
The smart growth score reflects the land use characteristics, comprised of the proximity of housing to commercial and service uses, that will influence whether people walk, ride, or drive to their destinations and the vehicle miles travelled by vehicle if driving is chosen. Each of these
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 85
characteristics are quantified in the land use inputs, diversity scores, density scores, and destinations scores described below. This analysis divides Fortuna into geographic units which are hexagons that are sized so that the distance from the center of any given hexagon to the opposite edge of a neighboring hexagon is 0.5 miles. The size of hexagons for this analysis is based on survey data of typical distances for walking trips by Americans, meaning that all the land use within a given hexagon and that of its six neighboring hexagons are within comfortable walking and biking distance.
Computing Land Use Inputs
• For each hexagon, the existing land uses within it are quantified, including the number of households, retail jobs (service jobs that typically attract more trips by customers than commute trips by employees), and non-retail jobs (industries where the majority of trips are made by employees rather than customers).
Computing Diversity Scores
• Scores are computed to measure the potential for interaction with complementary land uses, each representing a different type of transaction:
o Jobs/Housing Diversity = the number of jobs, retail, and non-retail, in the seven hexagons compared to the number of households in the same hexagons, which represents a person’s ability to walk to work or home-based work (HBW) trips. The jobs/housing diversity index represents an individual’s opportunity to walk to/from their place of employment from where they live based on the mix of residential and employment land use within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones.
o Retail/Housing Diversity = the number of retail jobs in the seven hexagons compared to the number of households in the same hexagons, which represents the opportunity to walk or bike locally for non-work trips, or homebased other (HBO) trips. The retail/housing diversity index represents an individual’s opportunity to walk from their home to shopping trips based on the mix of residential and retail land use within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones.
o Job/Mix Diversity = the number of retail jobs compared to non-retail jobs in the seven hexagons, which represents the opportunity for interactions between complimentary nonresidential uses to use walking or bicycling modes, or non-home-based work (NHB) trips. The jobs mix diversity index represents the opportunity for interaction between retail and non-retail users based on the mix of employment types within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 86
Computing Density Scores
• Residential and employment density affect average travel behavior and VMT. o Residential density score = the number of households in each hexagon divided by the acreage of the hexagon.
o employment density score = total number jobs in each hexagon by the acreage of the hexagon.
o Density values are normalized to a 0 to 100 scale, where the hexagon with the highest density score for the region, in this case Humboldt County, receives a score of 100 and the lowest receives a score of 0.
Computing Destinations Scores
• For each hexagon, a destinations score is computed for each of three trip types (home-based work, home-based other, and non-home-based work trips) • The factors used to compute the destinations score for each trip type are from the regional travel demand model and include the “attractions” (the location of the ending point of a trip such as offices, shopping areas, schools, airports, etc.) and the travel impedance (the speed of the journey).
Combining the Individuals Scores into an Aggregate Score • The number of tips generated by each hexagon is determined by multiplying the land uses (households, retail employees, and non-retail employees) for each hexagon by assumed trip generation rates derived for each trip type (home-based work, homebased other, and non-home-based work trips). • The total trips for each hexagon are converted into percentages by trip type and then adjusted based on elasticities to reflect the percentage change in vehicle trips or vehicle miles of travel given a percentage change in density or diversity The score is displayed in relative terms on a scale of 1 to 100, with 1 being the worst score possible and 100 the best.
• Scores are computed for each hexagon within the City of Fortuna and the hexagons that represent the MDSP Area and for the county as a whole to compare against the City and project area scores.
This methodology was validated by GHD using travel behavior data from Replica, a data and information provider to public agencies and the private sector, for the seven incorporated cities in Humboldt County as an independent check as to whether the underlying assumptions regarding travel behavior for this tool reflect actual travel behavior. Replica represents movement by combining data from three primary sources: public use population census data, proprietary locational data from telecommunications and other IT infrastructure in the region,
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 87
and field observations data from customer public agencies (ground truth). It is used by many public agencies for VMT-related work. Sections 2.3.1 through 2.3.4 of the Technical Memorandum show the graphical comparison between the output of the smart growth scores for Jobs/Housing Diversity, Retail/Housing Diversity, Mode Split for Short Trips, and Destinations and Replica data confirming the validity of this tool.
MDSP VMT Analysis
The conceptual development plan for Fortuna Mill Commerce Center site prepared by the owner of a substantial portion of the MDSP Area and buildout estimates for the remainder of the MDSP prepared by City staff was the basis for the Project specific impact analysis. The MDSP land use inputs were used in combination with existing conditions (land use and trip estimates of existing uses within the City of Fortuna) and the cumulative condition, which is the buildout of the General Plan land uses without including any of the land use associated with the Mill District project.
Existing Condition. Most of the City’s land use and associated vehicle trips are concentrated through the center of the City, in the land use designations flanked by north-south, major roadways, Main Street and Rohnerville Road to the east and west, which includes much of the City’s Commercial pockets and low-density residential land use areas, Central Business District, Corridor Mixed Use areas, and east-adjacent to the Mill District area. While, more generally, residential and employment uses are located in similar areas of the City, the hexagons with the highest concentrations of households and jobs are in different hexagons. • Land Uses and Total Trips
o Existing Residential Land Use. The highest concentrations of residential land use are in the center of the City, east of Fortuna Blvd, near 12th and Main Streets, Kenmar Road and West School Street from U.S. 101 to Rohnerville Rd. o Retail Land Use. Retail and service jobs are also most concentrated near Main Street and Fortuna Blvd, as well as near Redwood Way, where Providence Redwood Memorial Hospital is located.
o Non-Retail Land Use. Non-retail jobs are mostly concentrated near 12th and Main Streets, and slightly south, near U.S. 101 and Riverwalk Dr. o Total Trips. Total trips are also most concentrated in hexagons near 12th and Main streets, and along Fortuna Blvd and School Street, in areas where residential and employment uses are concentrated.
Citywide Land Use Diversity and Density (Existing Condition). The table below shows the citywide total diversity score for Fortuna, 74.0 or a deviation from the ideal score of 26.0, which indicates that the land use mix in Fortuna is housing-rich, and the jobs mix reflects more retail/service than non-retail/service employment. This is not unusual, given that Fortuna has
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 88
historically been a smaller, residential center within central Humboldt County. These scores suggest that the types of future development that would improve the smart growth scores should emphasize employment, specifically non-retail employment, rather than residential and retail uses as well as emphasize land use diversity and density. See Figure 3.2a for a disruptive map showing the overall smart growth score for the existing condition.
Table 11: Citywide Land Use Diversity and Density Scores (Existing Condition) Diversity Scores Density Scores
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Deviation
from Ideal
Score
63.2 69.0 65.0 21.7 3.4 86.1 74.0 26.0
Land Use Diversity and Density - Existing Condition plus MDSP. This analysis assumes that the proposed Fortuna Mill Commerce Center Conceptual Site Plan plus the other vacant and developable land within the MDSP would add an additional 100 residential units, 646 retail jobs and 1,212 non-retail jobs within the four hexagons that cover the project area. The table below shows the existing condition (citywide total diversity score for Fortuna) plus the MDSP project scenario. With the addition of the MDSP at buildout, the overall citywide score improves by 0.3, from a score of 74 to 74.3, respectively and the deviation from the ideal score improves from the existing condition deviation of 26.0 to 25.7.
Table 12: Diversity and Density Scores Existing Condition plus MDSP Diversity Scores Density Scores
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Deviation
from Ideal
Score
54.6 71.6 60.0 20.4 6.4 87.5 74.3 25.7
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 89
Figure 6 (3.2a): Overall Smart Growth Score for the Existing Condition
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 90
Figure 7 (3.2b): Overall Smart Growth Score for the General Plan Buildout Plus MDSP
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 91
Land Use Diversity and Density - General Plan Buildout without the MDSP. The General Plan Buildout without the MDSP scenario includes the land use distributions associated with the existing condition, plus the land use growth anticipated as part of the City’s General Plan buildout, without including any of the land use associated with the Mill District project. General Plan buildout assumptions were supplied by the City based on information from the most recent General Plan update. The citywide diversity, density, destinations and overall trip-weighted scores for the General Plan Buildout without the MDSP scenario. As shown, the citywide score improves by 0.2 between the Existing Condition and the General Plan Buildout without the MDSP scenario scenarios, from a score of 74 to 74.2, respectively and the deviation from the ideal score improves from the existing condition deviation of 26.0 to 25.8.
Table 13: Diversity and Density Scores General Plan Buildout without the MDSP Diversity Scores Density Scores
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Deviation
from Ideal
Score
57.0 68.0 61.7 29.2 4.1 86.0 74.2 25.8
Land Use Diversity and Density - General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP. The table below shows the citywide total diversity score for the Fortuna based on the General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP condition is 75.1, while Jobs/Housing, Jobs Mix, and Retail/Housing are 55.2, 74.3 and 59.1, respectively, which results in an improvement in the overall citywide scores, from a total weighted score of 74 in the existing condition and the deviation from the ideal score improves from the existing condition deviation of 26.0 to 24.9. See Figure 3.2b for a disruptive map showing the overall smart growth score for the existing condition.
Table 14: Land Use Diversity and Density Scores General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP Diversity Scores Density Scores
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Deviation
from Ideal
Score
55.2 74.3 59.1 27.8 5.8 87.4 75.1 24.9
Conclusion. The tables above show that the total citywide score improves from the Existing Condition with each alternative. In the General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP scenario, the citywide score improves the most, from 74.0 in the Existing Condition to 75.1, and the deviation from the ideal score also improves from 26.0 under the existing condition to 24.9. However, the threshold of significance for this impact would require that the MDSP achieve a total smart
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 92
growth score that improves the deviation from the ideal score of “100” by at least four percent when compared to the existing regional average deviation from the ideal score for Humboldt County, where the Countywide average deviation from the ideal score is 25.70 and the deviation from the ideal for the General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP scenario would need to be 24.67 for a less than significant impact.
The following table shows the deviation from the ideal smart growth score compared to the countywide smart growth score that would be required for the General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP to have a less than significant impact.
Table 15: Ideal Smart Growth Score Compared to the Countywide Smart Growth Score Ideal Score "A" 100.00
Countywide Average "B" 74.30
Deviation from Ideal "C" = A - B 25.70
4% Less Deviation than Average "D" = C x 0.96 24.67
Required Score for Less-than-significant "E" = A - D 75.33 While the score in the General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP scenario does improve compared against the Existing Condition, the General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP scenario would still result in a significant impact based on the threshold score of a 75.33 shown in the table above. The Technical Memorandum in Section 5.1, Alternative Project Land Use Mix, provides suggested changes to the land use mix (potential households, retail and non-retail jobs) of MDSP conceptual development scenario that would be is closer to the ideal land use and density mix and would likely generate vehicle fewer trips, and lower VMT. The suggested changes, which are to the assumed number of residential units and do not suggest a change the assumed number of jobs, are the minimum land use mix that would generate results below the threshold of significance for the Existing Condition plus MDSP and General Plan Buildout Plus the MDSP scenarios.
As described in the Mill District Specific Plan Changes above, the General Plan and Zoning proposed to be applied to the MDSP Area could allow all residential development or all commercial/industrial development, or any mixture thereof. The actual residential and commercial development density and intensity and uses at buildout could be very different than the conceptual development plan for Fortuna Mill Commerce Center site prepared by the owner of a substantial portion of the MDSP Area and buildout estimates for the remainder of the MDSP.
Because the conceptual development plan and the proposed General Plan and Zoning to be applied to the MDSP Area could allow a land use mix that exceeds the CEQA VMT threshold, the VMT impacts of the proposed MDSP would be considered potentially significant.
The following new Policies are recommended to be added to Goal LU-1 in the Citywide Growth and Development and Goal LU-14 Focus Area: Mill District of the Land Element as mitigation
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 93
measures to lessen potential VMT impacts of the proposed MDSP and implementation of the Fortuna General Plan. The potential efficacy of these mitigation measures cannot be determined at this time. As a result, project-related VMT is considered a significant and unavoidable impact.
Mitigation Measure
Proposed Policy LU-1.20
The City shall work with HCAOG to incorporate findings and recommendations of the ongoing Multimodal and Vibrant Neighborhood Planning Project, or other similar HCAOG planning efforts, to develop and implement policies and programs to be included in the City General Plan, or other appropriate plans, and projects related to the City’s transportation system to reduce automobile dependency for local trips.
Proposed Policy LU-14.5
To the extent feasible, the proposed developments within the MDSP Area and within a walkable
0.5-mile distance to the Mill District shall seek to incorporate residential uses to complement proposed non-residential uses within the Mill District in order to achieve a more balanced land use mix within the City of Fortuna.
Proposed Policy LU-14.6
The City shall work with the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center property owner and applicant for development within the MDSP Area to implement a Class I trail through the Mill District as part of the Great Redwood Trail and/or Strongs Creek Trail in order to provide a continuous active transportation corridor between Fortuna Boulevard and Newburg Road / 12th Street, as specified in the Mill District Specific Plan (MDSP) Bicycle and Pedestrian Access performance standard and shown on the circulation diagram.
Proposed Policy LU-14.8
The City shall work with HCAOG to incorporate findings and recommendations of the ongoing Multimodal and Vibrant Neighborhood Planning Project, or other similar HCAOG planning efforts, to plan and implement projects to improve low stress connectivity of nonmotorized transportation modes between the Mill District site and the surrounding established neighborhoods.
Significance After Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 94
3.3 NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
3.3.1 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in section 5.4 Cultural Resources which coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factors V, Cultural Resources and XVII, Tribal Cultural Resources.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FEIR FINDINGS
The potential impacts on archaeological, historical, and paleontological resources within the General Plan Planning Area were considered less-than-significant with the implementation of protective General Plan policies and programs. The Eel River Valley's history of Native American occupation and the presence of archaeological finds suggest possible subsurface resources.
However, a Sacred Lands File Check by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)showed negative results. The General Plan Planning Area contains one historic building on the National Register of Historic Places, a historic district, and 72 other buildings, roads and sites known to be 45 years of age or older and the General Plan contains specific policies and programs intended to avoid substantial adverse changes in the significance of historical resources. None of these historic resources are located within the Mill District Focus Area.
The previous FEIR assumed that the Planning Area likely contains paleontological resources, and found that the General Plan contains programs that will avoid destruction of “unique” paleontological resources. Additionally, there was a potential for undiscovered human remains or archeological resources; however, General Plan policies and existing laws were determined to be sufficient to result in the identification of archaeologically-sensitive sites, the identification of any archaeological resources identified during archaeological field surveys or unearthed during construction activities, the assessment of these resources for significance, and the application of required mitigation measures for any identified/unearthed resources determined to be “historically significant” or “unique”.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The following environmental setting information is excerpted from the Cultural Resources Investigation Report of the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center which is included in this SEIR as Appendix C.
Archaeology
Pleistocene-Holocene Transition—The Post Pattern (11,500 to 8,000 cal BP)
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 95
The earliest evidence for human occupation of northwestern California is labeled the Post Pattern. This pattern is characterized by fluted projectile points and flaked stone crescents. There has been no evidence for this occupation in the project vicinity or anywhere in Humboldt County, California. An isolated fluted point was found on the coast in Mendocino County (Simons et al. 1985). The best evidence for the Post Pattern comes from the Borax Lake site in Lake County.
Even though no intact cultural strata could be identified at the site, the presence of fluted points, stone crescents, and very large obsidian hydration rim measurements all indicate a Terminal Pleistocene or very Early Holocene occupation.
Early Holocene—Borax Late Pattern (8,000 to 5,000 cal BP) Contemporary archaeological theory posits that the original inhabitants of Humboldt County are represented by Borax Lake Pattern artifacts including the Borax Lake Widestem projectile point, handstones, millingslabs, small serrated bifaces, and cobble spalls. The first Archaic or Early period sites discovered in Humboldt County are CA-HUM-245 and 246 located on Pine Ridge (Flynn and Roop 1975, Jackson 1977). These sites acted to tie this area into the broader Borax Lake Pattern that was known throughout all other areas of northern California during this period.
Hildebrandt and Hayes documented artifact assemblages associated with this pattern at sites along Pilot Ridge, to the south of the Pine Ridge area (West, Hildebrandt, and Hayes 1984). The significance of early to mid-Holocene archaeological assemblages in northern California lies in their antiquity and in the physical environment during this period. These assemblages reflect lifeways of 4,000-8,000 years ago during a warmer and drier climate which caused an expansion of Oak woodlands into higher elevations (West 1984). It has been proposed that this expansion of optimal resource patches resulted in distinct, highly mobile, upland focused subsistence systems represented by unique tool assemblages (West 1984, Hildebrandt and Hayes 1984).
The Borax Lake Pattern within far northern California also includes locations in lowland riverine environments as identified by Sundahl and Henn at CA-TRI-1008 on the Trinity River and again in Shasta County at CA-SHA-475 along a tributary of the Pitt River (1993). Although hypotheses regarding environmental change and subsequent highly mobile montane adaptations have been advanced, they have not been tested on a broad scale within the North Coast Range (Fredrickson 1974, Clewett and Sundahl 1983, Hildebrandt and Hayes 1984, West 1984, White 2000) until Angeloff (2011) reported on his analysis of existing collections from Pilot Ridge, Squaw Creek and Cox Bar. Angeloff (2011) identifies distinct tool assemblages along Pilot Ridge at sites CA-HUM573, HUM-577, and HUM-367, while lower elevation sites contained relatively broad and homogeneous stone tool assemblages. This analysis suggests a relatively sedentary lifestyle in the upland areas associated with specialized use areas and stable village areas potentially relying on an expanded elk and deer population tethered to sparse water sources.
Middle Holocene Gap—Mendocino Pattern (5,000 cal BP to cal AD 500)
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 96
During the middle period, upland areas of Humboldt County seem to have been virtually abandoned, likely due to a change in environment from a warm and dry middle Holocene to a cooler and wetter late Holocene that reduced the volume of subsistence resources in upland areas. According to G. James West’s (1984) palynological analysis of data acquired on Pilot Ridge in Humboldt County, coniferousforests began to encroach on the upland areas during this period, effectively reducing the number of subsistence resources available to human beings. The archaeological record pertaining to upland areas reveals a relatively low artifact count attributable to the middle period (Hildebrandt and Hayes 1984) but this is likely a direct result of the relative dearth of synthesized archaeological information in northwestern California.
Hildebrandt (2007) notes that the transition from the Borax Lake Pattern to the later Mendocino Pattern (3,000 cal BP to cal AD 500) through the Middle Holocene is not well understood. There is almost no visible record dating between 5,000 and 3,000 cal BP, although it is unclear whether this represents a reduction in human population at the time, or simply a lack of well-dated archaeological remains from then region corresponding with this time period.
Use of these upland areas may have been task-specific during the middle period (Cassidy 1992) and therefore concentrated in discrete upland areas but visited just as intensively as the earlier inhabitants who sought a broader array or a more dispersed resource base within the more productive altithermal upland environment. Some coastal sites do provide evidence of occupation during this period, indicating to Hildebrandt (2007) that we may not be recognizing materials from this period.
The Mendocino Pattern first appears around 3,000 cal BP and continues in the North Coast Ranges through the Late Holocene until cal AD 500. Sites associated with this period in the region are specialized hunting camps found on ridgetops at higher elevation and generally include concave-base, side-notched, and corner-notched dart points; handstones and millingslabs; flake tools; and occasionally mortars and pestles. Hildebrandt and Hayes (1984) argue that these camps reflect logistical forays from more permanent villages along the major river valleys, and that the subsistence pattern of fish and acorn storage supported a more sedentary lifeway.
Recent excavations at Jedediah Smith State Park in Del Norte County offer evidence of riverine occupation during the Mendocino Pattern time period (Tushingham 2009). In contrast to the coastal and uplands record, it appears that people were living intensively on the rivers of northern California during this period.
Additionally, artifacts representing the middle period have been associated with distinct mobility patterns that may have influenced the use of upland areas. Specifically, the McKee Uniface has been used as a marker of middle period land use. This artifact is highly distinct in its morphology, being a formed unifacial tool metrically discrete from other unifacial artifacts. Cassidy (1992)
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 97
studied the manufacture, use, and re-use of these artifacts at the Doe Peak site in northeastern California.
The Doe Peak site was dated using obsidian hydration data to between 2,500 and 3,300 years before present, which roughly concurs with Hildebrandt and Hayes (1984) determination of this artifact type representing the period between 1,100 and 2,800 years before present in the North Coast Ranges. Hildebrandt suggests further chronometric analysis of this artifact type may be in order. The Center for Indian Community Development-Cultural Resource Facility has recently conducted archaeological excavations along Tip-Top Ridge. Obsidian hydration analysis of a McKee Uniface from Tip-Top Ridge returned a relative date of 2,100 years before present (Burns 2007). In all cases, a relative reconstruction of the typological sequence places this artifact type solidly between 2,000 and 3,500 years before present.
Cassidy accurately distinguishes the flint knapping technique used in the manufacture of this artifact type as blade-core reduction, as evidenced by the preponderance of prepared blade cores at the site (1992). Using extensive evidence, Cassidy concludes that the formed artifacts and debitage found at the Doe Peak site represent a specialized tool manufactured in a distinct manner (1992). She further ventures that the combination of these factors suggests a specialized technological organization reflecting residentially mobile subsistence strategies as seen in the Inuit by Binford.
The evidence strongly suggests that the Doe Peak site was used by people who were residentially mobile and definitely using a distinct technological organization and stone tool reduction technique. What is clear from Cassidy’s (1992) research is that the McKee Uniface was used as a hafted tool, most likely a projectile point as evidenced through reworking in the haft and breakage patterns reminiscent of projectile points. Additionally, mobility patterns as argued by Cassidy (1992) from the evidence at the Doe Peak site does suggest a relatively mobile settlement subsistence system was used by the manufacturers of this artifact type. While this period of time may reflect a decrease in use of the upland areas of northwest California, it more likely represents a highly specialized use of the upland areas. Archaeological expressions of middle period sites should leave evidence of highly specialized maintainable and durable tools that would leave less of a deposit in the archaeological record relative to earlier societies.
Late Period (Post cal AD 500)
The archaeological theory pertaining to this area focuses on Late Period riverine and coastal based subsistence patterns. The late period was a time of increased populations and constricted resource bases; this led to intensive use and management of riverine and coastal resources as well as an increase in use and management of upland areas. During annual salmon runs people lived along the rivers; in the summer, people would break down into smaller groups, moving into smaller residential bases in coastal or upland areas (Whittaker 2006). Hildebrandt (2007) notes
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 98
that the details of Late Period occupation are not as clear for inland riverine areas as for the coast, due to the lack of excavated sites. Golla (2007)suggests that the Late Period archaeological signature likely relates to the migration of Algic and Athabaskan groups into the area between cal AD 100 and cal AD 800. These migrations likely pushed the Yuki out of portions of their more northern territory into something similar to the boundaries noted at European contact. This period also fits into the estimated time depth for the differentiation of southern Athabaskan dialects. Artifact assemblages reflecting this period reflect a substantially more sedentary residential base with artifacts such as toggle harpoons, net spacers, net weights, zoomorphs, calendar stones, Hopper mortars and pestles, large bifaces, phallic charmstones, Olivella beads, Tuluwat Barbed projectile points, adze heads, stylized pestles and mortars, and abalone pendants, among a variety of other artifacts. Temporal indicators for late period archaeological deposits are arrow sized projectile points, and bowl and hopper mortars and pestles among a wide variety of specialized tools found at task specific sites.
Tribal Cultural Resources
The General Plan Planning Area and MDSP project site is within the traditional territory of the Wiyot tribe. The closest ethnographically recorded village site was at the mouth of Strong’s Creek (tswokërok; Loud site BB), now approximately 0.52-miles west, however Llewelyn Loud’s 1918 ethnographic map indicates the configurations of Strong’s Creek and the Eel River were somewhat different from the modern day. No known Wiyot use was made of the project area.
There were three tribal groups, all speaking the Wiyot (Sulatelak) language. The Wiyot group occupied the lower Eel River, from its mouth up to just below the confluence with the Van Duzen River, and south across the Ferndale bottom and up to Bear River Ridge (Rohde 2014:5). The Patawats inhabited the lower Mad River, from its mouth to just below Blue Lake; the McKinleyville area north to Little River, and part of Mad River Slough. The Wiki held the Humboldt Bay and its surroundings.
There was only one dialect [of the Wiyot language] for the region bounded on the north by the valley of Little River, and on the south by the Bear River mountains. To the east the same dialect was spoken along Mad River for two or three miles above Blue Lake, and up Eel River for a mile or two above the mouth of the Van Duzen. On both of these rivers the eastern boundary of the Wiyot is where the deep cañons begin (Loud 1918:249).
The general picture of Wiyot geography provided by the various sources shows population concentrations along the lower stretches of the Mad and Eel Rivers and around Humboldt Bay.
From there, Wiyot territory radiated outward, up the drainages of those three areas, to boundary lands along Little River to the north, high country ridgelines to the east, and Bear River Ridge to the south. The mountainous borderlands were often prairie areas used for hunting and gathering and were sometimes subject to dispute. Loud defines the Wiyot boundary line most precisely,
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 99
and the other sources, to the extent that they specify exact locations, generally concur. Four lowland locations were in border zones, and in these cases there is disagreement about which tribal groups claimed them.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 is a piece of legislation designed to preserve historical and archaeological sites in the United States. The Act created the National Register of Historic Places, the list of National Historic Landmarks, and the State Historic Preservation Offices. It emphasizes the importance of preserving historical properties and cultural heritage, and requires federal agencies to evaluate the impact of all federally funded or permitted projects on historic properties. Through Section 106 of the NHPA, federal agencies are mandated to consult with appropriate state and local officials, Indian tribes, and other interested parties to consider the effects of their projects on historic properties and to seek ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 is a federal law that mandates federal agencies and museums receiving federal funding to disclose information regarding Native American cultural items in their possession. These items include human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony. The law requires these institutions to provide detailed inventories and summaries of such items to affiliated tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations. Upon a valid claim, these institutions must facilitate the repatriation or proper disposition of the cultural items to the appropriate tribes or organizations.
NAGPRA aims to address historical injustices by ensuring the respectful treatment and return of cultural items to their rightful custodians.
State
California Public Resources Code
Public Resources Code section 5020 et seq. is California’s state historic preservation statute. This statute does not prohibit local control of historic properties. Rather, it assists local entities in encouraging historic preservation. Public Resources Code section 5020.1 established the California Register of Historic Resources, which is the authoritative listing and guide to be used by cities to identify existing historic resources deserving of protection. Once a historic site is included in the register, any project that may have an adverse impact on the site is subject to
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 100
heightened scrutiny under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA defines historic resources more broadly than does federal law, and includes both procedural and substantive project review requirements and imposes stricter environmental review requirements than required for federal review under NEPA.
Regional and Local
Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO)
The Wiyot Tribal Historic Preservation Office, one of a growing number of Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPOs) throughout the United States, is responsible for protecting, preserving, and managing Wiyot cultural resources on tribal land. The THPO also reviews public and private development within Wiyot ancestral territory, advising and assisting in identification and mitigation of significant resources. The THPO program was established under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, is administered by the National Park Service, and funded through annual Congressional appropriations.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Significance Thresholds
Proposed General Plan implementation will have significant impacts to cultural resources if it would:
1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological or historical resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines §15064.5;
2. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource; or
3. Disturb any human remains, including Native American remains interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Potential impacts 1-3 are not analyzed here but are further addressed in Chapter 4: Impacts Found to Have No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis.
This analysis will address significance criteria from the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, V. Tribal Cultural Resources (a) and (b).
Appendix G criteria include:
1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes that are geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred places,
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 101
and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Methodology
An archeological survey was prepared by the Archaeological Research and Supply Company (ARCS) in December 2023, in consultation with the Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria and the Wiyot Tribe. The ARCS survey and report were prepared consistent with CEQA compliance procedures by a consultant who meets the Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (National Park Service [NPS], 1983) for archaeology.
On March 15, 2024, Pursuant to Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52, the City of Fortuna requested a Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC provided the City with the list on March 19, 2024. On March 25, 2024, all Tribes included in the Tribal Consultation List were formally notified of the opportunity to request consultation for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, Tribal cultural resources located within the project site.
On March 30, 2024, the City received a response from the Wiyot Tribe expressing satisfaction that the projects’ activities do not appear to represent a source of significant impact(s) on Tribal cultural resources. The Wiyot Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPO) office requested government to government consultation if cultural resources appear during project work and that inadvertent archaeological discovery protocols apply for any ground-disturbing activities of the proposed project.
The City received a request for consultation from the Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria (BRBRR) on April 15, 2024. City staff including the City Manager and Community Development Director met with BRBRR THPO at City Hall on April 22, 2024, and at the project site on April 30, 2024. BRBRR THPO requested inadvertent archeological discovery protocols including increasing the stop work buffer around potential Tribal cultural resource discovery to 100 feet and to receive all MDSP documents.
The 90-day consultation request window pursuant to Senate Bill 18 closed on Monday, June, 24, 2024 with no additional Tribal consultation requests received.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 102
Project Impacts and Mitigation
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The previous FEIR evaluated Archaeological Resources, 5.4-1; Historical Resources, 5.4-2; Paleontological Resources, 5.4-3; and Human Remains, 5.4-4.
In Impact 5.4-1, Archaeological Resources, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan will facilitate future development within the Planning Area and that ground disturbing activities associated with the construction of this development could affect “historically significant” or “unique” archaeological resources. However, the General Plan contains policies and programs that will avoid substantial adverse changes in the significance of archaeological resources and the proposed project does not change policies relating to archeological resources.
In Impact 5.4-2, Historical Resources, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan would not facilitate major changes in land uses designations at historic places or in a historic district that is located in the MDSP Planning Area. The previous FEIR found that General Plan policies and programs would avoid substantial adverse changes in the significance of historical resources and a historic resources evaluation conducted for the MDSP Planning Area did not identify any historic findings.
In Impact 5.4-3, Paleontological Resources, the previous FEIR found that although the General Plan would facilitate development, the General Plan included programs that would avoid destruction of “unique” paleontological resources. A historic resources evaluation for the MDSP Planning Area did not identify any prehistoric findings.
In Impact 5.4-4, Human Remains, the previous FEIR found that although there is potential for undiscovered human remains within the General Plan Planning Area due to a long history of Native American residency in the Eel River Valley, adherence to existing federal laws and regulations in conjunction with the proposed General Plan policy and program would protect any human remains that may be discovered.
Mill District Specific Plan.
An archeological survey was prepared by the Archaeological Research and Supply Company (ARCS) in December 2023 for approximately 69 acres comprised of 21 Assessors Parcels. This survey supplements previous surveys conducted by the same consultant in 2021 and 2022, which together cover the entire Fortuna Mill Commerce Center portion of MDSP Area. No historic or prehistoric resources were identified as a result of these investigations.
Impact 3.3.1-01: Would the implementation of the MDSP disturb any human remains, including Native American remains interred outside of formal cemeteries?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 103
ARSC requested a Sacred Lands Search from the NAHC in 2021. The Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria and the Wiyot Tribe were contacted to inform them of the project and request background research. These information requests resulted in no comments from either entity regarding the presence of known archaeological or cultural sites within the project vicinity. The Bear River Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) recommended proceeding with the survey.
In January 2024, the Bear River THPO conducted a site visit with ARSC, which resulted in no further comments or change in recommendation for archaeological monitoring during ground disturbance of native soils. ARSC spoke with the Wiyot THPO over the phone, who determined that a site visit was not necessary but that recommended that monitoring during project implementation be required.
ARSC carried out the survey in two parts. The first surveys were conducted in 2021 and 2022 and covered 53-acres over nineteen (19) parcels (largely the MDSP Central and Strongs Creek Areas).
The second survey, conducted in December 2023, included a total of 16-acres on two parcels (largely the remainder of the Strongs Creek and Mill Creek Areas, and the portion of the Creek Riparian and Trails rea outside the Great Redwood Trail right of way). Surface visibility ranged from 0-10% during the initial survey, as nearly the entire project area is obscured by asphalt, and 0-50% during the amended survey, with some graded areas of exposed soil. In those areas where asphalt was not present and visibility was obscured by vegetation, systematic shovel probes and surface scrapes were employed at 15-meter intervals wherever possible. Zero (0) historic or prehistoric cultural markers were found as a result of the surveys.
The surveys determined that Fortuna Mill Commerce Center development which encompasses the largest undeveloped areas of the MDSP, will have “No Impacts with Conditions, as defined by CEQA”, and will not affect significant historic resources provided the following archaeological recommendations included in. Section 1.5 of the survey report are followed:
• Archaeological monitoring of any subsurface ground disturbance occurs within the very limited areas containing undisturbed soils which may be sensitive for cultural resources outlined in Appendix D - previous Geotechnical Investigations and Cultural Sensitivity Maps.
• No other archaeological work is recommended for this project and inadvertent discovery protocol should be followed. There is always a potential of finding buried archaeological resources. If these or any other project conducted on these properties inadvertently expose cultural resources, all work shall halt within 100 feet of the find and a qualified archaeologist and tribal representative(s) should be contacted immediately to evaluate the find, as per the attached inadvertent discovery protocol (Appendix A - Inadvertent Discovery Tear Sheet).
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 104
The MDSP is subject to applicable California law relating to the policies and programs associated with Archaeological, Cultural & Historical Resources Goal NCR-7 in the General Plan Natural and Cultural Resources Element to foster the identification, protection, and enhancement of the City’s archeological, historical, and paleontological resources.
In addition, the MDSP contains a performance standard regarding the inadvertent discovery of cultural resources during ground-disturbing activities. Should potentially significant historic or archaeological materials be encountered, such as concentrations of historic artifacts (including bottles and ceramics), prehistoric artifacts (such as chipped chert or obsidian, arrow points, and groundstone mortars and pestles), culturally modified ash-stained midden soils from pre-contact Native American habitation sites, concentrations of fire-altered rock, burned or charred organic materials, or remains of historic structures like stone-lined building foundations, wells, or privy pits, all ground-disturbing activities must be immediately suspended. Activities may resume only in areas that are at least 66 feet away from the discovery site, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Revised Guidelines, Title 14 CCR 15064.5(f). Although this standard expands protections beyond the requirements contained in the policies and programs of the General Plan Natural and Cultural Resource Element (in particular Program NCR‐41, which address the potential impacts of proposed development on historic, archaeological and paleontological resources), it is not consistent with the recommendations in the ARSC archaeological resources survey for the project, which specifies 100 feet rather than 66 feet.
The archeological survey did not identify historic or prehistoric resources but suggested that resources could be present. The survey report recommended cultural resource monitoring for specific areas containing undisturbed soils and inadvertent discovery protocols that specify that work shall halt within 100 feet of the find and a qualified archaeologist and tribal representative(s) should be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. The recommendations contained in the survey report exceed the performance measures contained in the MDSP. As a result, mitigation measures are required to avoid impacts to human remains, including Native American remains, or Tribal Cultural Resources. Therefore, impacts from the project could be significant without the incorporation of mitigation that would require that MDSP performance measures provide the protections specified in the ARSC survey report recommendations.
Mitigation Measure
CUL-1. Revise MDSP Cultural Resources Performance Measure as follows:
Archaeological monitoring shall be required for any subsurface ground disturbance occurring within undisturbed soils which may be sensitive for cultural resources outlined in A Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center Final Report, Appendix D -previous Geotechnical Investigations and Cultural Sensitivity Map, which include (1) SHN Geotechnical Boring Location and ARSC sensitivity overlay Map; (2) SHN
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 105
Test Pit Logs (2005), sensitive soils: Pages 25, and 27-29 of Document; (3) Geotechnical Test Pit Location with APE Aerial Overlay and Archaeological Monitoring Area Map; and (4) Archaeological Monitoring Area and APE Aerial Overlay Map, 1:3,000 Scale.
Ground-disturbing activities shall be immediately halted upon the discovery of potentially significant Tribal cultural resources, historic, or archaeological materials such as (but not limited to) concentrations of historic artifacts (e.g., bottles, ceramics) or prehistoric artifacts (chipped chert or obsidian, arrow points, groundstone mortars and pestles), culturally altered ash-stained midden soils associated with pre-contact Native American habitation sites, concentrations of fire altered rock and/or burned or charred organic materials, and historic structure remains such as stone-lined building foundations, wells or privy pits. Contact the City of Fortuna, a professional archaeologist and representatives from the Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria and the Wiyot Tribe. The professional historic resource consultant, Tribes and City officials will coordinate, provide an assessment of the find and determine the significance and recommend next steps. If human remains are encountered, all applicable requirements of the California Health and Safety Code and Public Resources Code shall be followed.
Ground-disturbing project activities may continue in areas at least 66 100 feet from the site of discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant after the incorporation of the above mitigation measure.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 106
3.4 PARKS, RECREATION, AND VISUAL RESOURCES
3.4.1 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in section 6.1 Parks, Recreation and Open Space which coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XVI, Recreation.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FEIR FINDINGS
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would accommodate new development for an additional 13,415 residents which would necessitate the creation of 67 acres of new community parkland to be consistent with General Plan policy regarding park dedication requirements and Quimby Act requirements. Additionally, the plan accommodates increased utilization of existing park and recreational facilities from population growth and includes policies and programs to ensure that existing park/recreation facilities are adequately maintained to accommodate increased use. Furthermore, the General Plan designates 778.4 acres as Open Space and enhances trail connectivity to accommodate projected growth. The previous FEIR determined that the land allocated for parks and open spaces will meet the growing demand, resulting in a less-than-significant impact overall.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Riverwalk District land use change area of the Project is adjacent to Overlook Park, a City Park. Overlook Park is a Mini/Pocket park approximately 4,000 square feet in size, not including the parking area or trailhead. Overland Park is located within City street right of way in the Riverwalk District Focus Area on the levee just north of River Lodge overlooking the Eel River.
This park is an important scenic and recreational resource for community members and visitors and contains a small drought-resistant garden area and a picnic table.
The nearest recreational resource outside of the Project area is Newburg Park, a City Park at the intersection of Rohnerville and Newburg Roads. The Project site is linked to Newburg Park by the proposed Strongs Creek trail, which will extend from Overlook Park, through the MDSP Area, to Newburg Park and continue to the Headwaters Forest Reserve. This pathway is designed to connect directly to the Riverwalk Area through a creekside trail that passes beneath the Northwestern Pacific Rail line and US Highway 101, emerging at Alamar Way.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR described the federal and state regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 107
State
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR described the federal and state regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
Regional and Local
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR evaluated the local and regional land use regulatory setting and except for the 2011 update to the City’s municipal code regarding Open Space for Multifamily Development, the 2012 Regional Bicycle Plan, the 2014 John Campbell Memorial Greenway, and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan, there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan The John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Master Plan envision a trail that will provide Fortuna with multiple benefits, including transportation alternatives, active recreation, economic vitality, environmental preservation and resource restoration. The Master Plan sets the direction for opportunistic and incremental implementation over time. Part of Phase 3 for the Master Plan is a Highway 101 Overcrossing (1a), which is tied to implementation of Mill District Area Plan. The ultimate vision is for a linear park and multi-use trail connecting the Eel River to the Headwaters Forest Reserve, providing improved recreational and nonmotorized access within the community. The project will improve east-west connectivity, link regional trails, and bolster Strongs Creek wetland restoration efforts.
Regional Bicycle Plan
The Humboldt Regional Bicycle Plan (HCOAG 2018) is a regional plan that includes the City of Fortuna and is intended to facilitate projects and programs that will help build a bikeway system that makes bicycling throughout Humboldt County a safe, convenient, and practical means of transportation for all residents and visitors. Priority infrastructure projects will link adjoining jurisdictions’ bicycle routes and thereby build a regional bicycle network. The Regional Bicycle Plan recommends a series of bikeways to connect all cities and unincorporated areas in the County, and also provide connections to adjacent counties. Table 4.6 City of Fortuna — Proposed Bikeway Projects, identifies a series of Class I, II, and II bikeways, including the 4.3-mile-long John C. Campbell Memorial Parkway and Class I Bikeway from the River Lodge to the eastern City limit as being priority projects.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Significance Thresholds
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 108
Proposed General Plan implementation will have significant parks, recreation and open space impacts if it:
A. Results in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park and recreational facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable performance objectives;
B. Results in the increased use of existing parks or recreational facilities such thatsubstantial physical deterioration of the facilities will occur or accelerate; or C. Create an increased demand for access to open space that cannot be met.
Thresholds A and B are addressed in Chapter 4: Impacts Found to Have No Substantial Change from previous Analysis. Further analysis was not performed because the MDSP does not propose changes to parks-related policies and programs (including park dedication requirements) that would impact increased demand for public parks. It also maintains or enhances connectivity and access to open space through the provision of the Strongs Creek Trail and connections to the Great Redwood Trail.
This analysis addresses the significance criteria from the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, XV.
Recreation items (a) and (b). Significance threshold “C” is an impact topic specific to the Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR.
Appendix G criteria include:
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?
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? Methodology
The methodology to assess park, recreation and open space impacts of the Fortuna General Plan used in the previous FEIR relied on:
• Demand for parks and recreational facilities will increase within the Planning Area with increased development and population growth.
• The City’s parkland dedication requirement established through Policy PROS‐1.5, Parkland Standards and Deduction, (e.g., five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents) is used in this analysis to assess park demand under the proposed plan.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 109
Project Impacts and Mitigation
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The previous FEIR evaluated Increased Demand for Public Parks, 6.1-1; Increased Use of Existing Park and Recreational Facilities, 6.1-2; and Increased Demand for Access to Open Space, 6.1-3. This expansion would be supported by policies including park dedication requirements, ensuring adequate new park space without the need for further mitigation.
In Impact 6.1-1, Increased Demand for Public Parks, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan, accommodating new development for an additional 13,415 residents, would necessitate the creation of 67 acres of new community parkland to meet Quimby Act requirements.
In Impact 6.1-2, Increased Use of Existing Park and Recreational Facilities, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan allowed for increased utilization of existing park and recreational facilities due to population growth and development intensification, but would maintain these facilities adequately to handle the increased demand through development requirements.
In Impact 6.1-3, Increased Demand for Access to Open Space, the previous FEIR found that the General Plan anticipated a rise in population to 24,904, thereby increasing the need for open space. This was addressed by designating 778.4 acres as Open Space and enhancing trail connectivity, thus providing substantial public access benefits. Considering developments in surrounding areas, it was expected that the allocation of land for parks and open spaces in regional plans will sufficiently meet the growing demand, resulting in a less-than-significant impact overall.
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. The proposed project does not change General Plan Parks policies and programs which are associated with Goal PROS-1, to provide a variety of parks that serve community needs and attracts and encourages active use by Fortuna’s community members, workforce, and visitors, and does not change park dedication requirements. The proposed project would amend the Fortuna General Plan Land Use Element Mill District Focus Area Policy LU‐14.3, Open Space and Parkland, to remove the requirement that the 100-year floodplain within the Mill District be maintained as open space. This amendment would maintain the requirement to provide for public access and trail development but would limit this requirement to the 100-foot and 75-foot streamside setbacks from Strongs and Mill Creeks, respectively, where the Strongs Creek Trail is proposed to be located and provide connections to the Great Redwood Trail. The Mill District 100-year floodplain area was not part of the 778.4 acres of land designated as Open Space by the Fortuna General Plan that, in combination with Impact 3.4.1-01: Would the implementation of the MDSP create an increased demand for access to open space that cannot be met.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 110
policies associated with General Plan Goal PROS-1 and Pedestrian Facilities Goal TC4 (to develop safe and pleasant pedestrian ways that provide recreation opportunities), were determined to result in beneficial impacts relating to increased demand for open space access.
The expanded Strongs Creek and Mill Creek setbacks remain protective of riparian habitats while enabling the John Campbell Memorial Greenway and other trails under General Plan Policy LU14.3. The setbacks of 100 feet for Strongs Creek and 75 feet for Mill Creek are more protective than Natural and Cultural Resources Element Program NCR‐15 which directs the City to prepare a streamside management and wetland protection ordinance that would safeguard a minimum buffer zone of 50 feet around perennial streams and 25 feet around ephemeral streams, with the protective zones measured from the upper edge of the stream bank and can accommodate the proposed Strongs Creek Trail. General Plan Natural and Cultural Resources Policy NCR‐2.1, Riparian Corridor Protection, limits activities within buffer areas to passive recreational uses (hiking, biking, sightseeing, horseback riding) like the Strongs Creek Trail.
The Riverwalk District land use change area is directly adjacent to and could be an expansion of Overlook Park in the Riverwalk Area and is directly connected to the John Campbell Memorial Greenway, which will pass through the MDSP, and Riverwalk Pathway. Once purchased, planned, designed, approved, funded, and constructed, the Riverwalk District land use change area would add approximately seven and one-half acres of new parkland to the City. In addition, any new residential subdivisions within the Mill District would be required to dedicate parkland or pay in lieu fees consistent with General Plan Parks Policy PROS‐1.5, Parkland Standards and Dedication, and City of Fortuna Municipal Code Chapter 16.24, Dedications, Title 16, Subdivisions.
The amendment to Policy LU-14.3 to remove the requirement that the 100-year flood plain be maintained as open space does not reduce the land within the City and General Plan Planning Area designated as Open Space (OS), as enumerated in previous FEIR, Draft PEIR Table 3.1-5. The expansion of Overlook Park and Strongs Creek Trail connectivity through the MDSP, defined by General Plan Policy LU-14.3 and the transportation concept of the MDSP set forth in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Access performance criteria, do not change General Pan policies or programs relating to the provision of open space and collectively enhance recreational opportunities for the community and would therefore not result in changes that would affect the previous FEIR determination that impacts to open space would be beneficial.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be beneficial or less than significant without mitigation.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 111
3.5 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
3.5.1 FLOODING
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in section 8.5 Flooding which coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor IV, Hydrology and Water Quality.
SUMMARY OF PRIOR EIR FINDINGS
EIR findings for the Fortuna General Plan Planning Area indicate several potential flood-related impacts due to the inclusion of lands within the 100-year flood hazard areas as identified by FEMA. There is a risk of flooding to developments and populations during 100-year storm events because not all new construction is mandated to be elevated above the Base Flood Elevation.
Mitigation measures require amending the Fortuna City Code to require that all buildings within these flood zones be elevated to or above the Base Flood Elevation and implementing hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for developments within these areas to ensure no increase in Base Flood Elevation levels. The Sandy Prairie Levee provides partial protection for portions of the General Plan Planning Area and the General Plan contains a series of policies intended to plan for and address flood hazards relating to this levee. With the mitigation to amend the Municipal Code to require that all buildings in the 100-year floodplain elevate the lowest floor to or above the Base Flood Elevation level and requiring a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis that demonstrates that the development will not increase Base Flood Elevation levels within the floodplain, General Plan flood impacts were determined to be less than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The previous FEIR described the environmental setting in terms of flooding. As part of MDSP planning several reports related to drainage and flooding have been prepared by engineering consultants GHD Group that better describe the MDSP Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design Area, including a floodplain encroachment analysis (included as Appendix D) and a Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design technical memo (included as Appendix E) that contains drainage infrastructure analyses.
Figure 8: Flood Hazard Zones and the Project Site below shows the project relationship of the FEMA flood hazard zones to the Project Site.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 112
Figure 8: Flood Hazard Zones and the Project Site
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 113
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR described the federal and state regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
State
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR described the federal and state regulatory setting relating to land use and there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
Regional and Local
The Fortuna General Plan previous FEIR evaluated the local and regional land use regulatory setting and except for the 2011 update to the Fortuna Municipal Code and 2015 Humboldt County Low Impact Development Standards, there are no changes that would affect the Mill District.
City of Fortuna Municipal Code
The City of Fortuna Municipal Code Title 15 Buildings and Construction, contains Chapter 15.58 Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction. These regulations specify the requirements for construction in special flood hazard areas, including anchoring, construction materials and methods, and elevation and floodproofing to which all permits must comply.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Significance Thresholds
The proposed Project would have a significant flood-hazard impact if it would:
a) Place housing or other structures within a 100-year Flood Hazard Area as mapped on FEMA FIRM map;
b) Place within a 100-year Flood Hazard Area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows; or
c) 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.
This analysis addresses the significance criteria from the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, IX.
Hydrology and Water Quality (g), (h), and (i).
Appendix G criteria include if the project would:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 114
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)?
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?
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? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
The previous FEIR does address significance criteria (a)-(g), (h), and (j) from CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, IX. Hydrology and Water Quality in other sections. These sections are addressed in Chapter 4: Impacts Found to Have No Substantial Change from previous Analysis. The following is a brief explanation for why no further analysis was performed in this section:
Criteria (a) is addressed in the previous FEIR under 5.1-3, Water Quality Standards and Waste Discharge Requirements. This is not analyzed in this section because the MDSP will adhere to City stormwater and LID requirements and comply with RWQCB requirements relating to existing soil and groundwater contamination.
Criteria (b) is addressed in the previous FEIR under 5.1-1, Groundwater Supply/Recharge. This is not analyzed in this section because the Planning Area for the MDSP is not identified as an important groundwater recharge area in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan.
The MDSP would protect the Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian area and comply with City of Fortuna flood and low impact development requirements and would therefore not increase impacts relating to Groundwater Supply/Recharge.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 115
Criteria (c) is addressed in the previous FEIR under 7.3-1, Alter Existing Drainage Patterns Leading to Substantial Erosion or Siltation. The MDSP will to adhere to General Plan policies and programs that minimize sedimentation/erosion and any changes to the quantity and/or quality of water discharged into the municipal storm drain system as well as continue to adhere to City regulations for flood control, drainage, and grading permits, as well as storm water runoff controls under the State’s NPDES programs that mitigate potential impacts associated with increased runoff. As there are no alterations to the course of streams or rivers proposed, the potential impacts remain unchanged.
Criteria (d) is addressed in the previous FEIR under 7.3-2, Increase Surface Runoff Leading to Increased Flooding. The MDSP will adhere to General Plan policies and programs that require the City to inspect and maintain drainage system facilities that adequately convey 25-year storm event runoff; the programming of improvements at such time as any storm drain facilities reach 90% of capacity; and require new development to route runoff through on-site bioretention measures and demonstrate that adequate storm drainage can be provided.
Criteria (e) is addressed in the previous FEIR under 7.3-3, Exceed Existing or Planned Storm Water Drainage System Capacity. As mentioned above, the MDSP will adhere to General Plan policies and programs that will not create or contribute runoff water in excess of the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems.
Criteria (f) is addressed in the previous FEIR under 7.3-4, New or Expanded Storm Drainage Facilities. Any construction activities facilitated by the MDSP are regulated by the NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit. Compliance with the storm water permit during construction activities requires the preparation of a SWPPP that contains BMPs to control the discharge of pollutants, including sediment, into local surface water drainages. In addition to complying with the NPDES programs, the MDSP will follow General Plan policies and programs to reduce impacts associated with construction of new storm water drainage facilities.
Criteria (j) is not addressed in the previous FEIR. However, the Fortuna General Plan Planning Area is outside of Humboldt County Tsunami Hazard Areas (California Department of Conservation, 2024). (California Department of Conservation. (2024). Humboldt County Tsunami Hazard Areas, https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/humboldt) Methodology
A floodplain encroachment analysis was performed by GHD using the City’s existing HEC-RAS model, which was developed and calibrated based on FEMA’s HEC2 model files for the Flood Insurance Rate Study and updated using the most recent topographic information. The HEC-RAS model was used to calculate the water surface profile and inundation areas for both the Base Condition (natural profile) and the Proposed Project Condition (Encroached). The Proposed
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 116
Project Condition was developed by iteratively using the HEC-RAS encroachment methodology, Method 1, where the encroachment limits were specified. The proposed encroachments were limited to areas outside of the floodway and within the floodway fringe. The encroachment limits were adjusted to cause less that one foot of rise within the floodway fringe, minimal changes to upstream inundation areas, and cause no impact to roadways crossing Strongs Creek.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
Previously Identified Level of Significance. The previous FEIR evaluated impacts to structures within the 100-year flood area in Impact 8.5‐1, Place Housing or Other Structures Within a 100‐ Year Flood Hazard Area; impacts from structures within the 100-year flood area impeding or redirecting flood flows in Impact 8.5‐2, Place Structures Within a 100‐Year Flood Hazard Area That Could Impede or Redirect Flood Flows; and exposing people to flood risk in Impact 8.5‐3:
Flooding ‐‐ Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk Involving Flooding, Including as a Result of Levee Failure.
In Impact 8.5‐1, Place Housing or Other Structures Within a 100‐Year Flood Hazard Area, identified that the proposed General Plan implementation will allow the development of new housing or other structures within a 100-year Flood Hazard Area as mapped on a FEMA FIRM map and determined that policies that require new residential development, essential facilities and large public assembly facilities located within the 100-year to be elevated above base flood levels (HS‐7.6 Regulating Land Uses in the 100‐Year Floodplain), requires flood hazards studies for development in such areas (HS‐7.8 Flood Hazards Study) as well as flood proofing (HS‐7.12 Flood Control Design Criteria). However, the analysis concluded impacts of the General Plan 2030 would be potentially significant without the incorporation of a mitigation measure that required that all buildings constructed within the 100-year floodplain be elevated so that the lowest floor is at or above the Base Flood Elevation level.
In Impact 8.5‐2, Place Structures Within a 100‐Year Flood Hazard Area That Could Impede or Redirect Flood Flows, the previous FEIR found that impacts of the General Plan 2030 would be potentially significant without the incorporation of a mitigation measure that requires that studies required to be performed prior to development per HS‐7.8, Flood Hazards Study, and PFS‐
5.14. Drainage Studies also include a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis that demonstrates that Impact 3.5.1-01: Would the implementation of the MDSP
A. Place Housing or Other Structures Within a 100‐Year Flood Hazard Area which would impede or redirect flood flows or expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding.
B. Place within a 100-year Flood Hazard Area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows; C. 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?
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 117
the development will not increase Base Flood Elevation levels within the floodplain, i.e., no rise is permitted within the 100-year floodplain.
In Impact 8.5‐3, Flooding ‐‐ Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk Involving Flooding, Including as a Result of Levee Failure, the previous FEIR found that impacts of the General Plan 2030 would be less than significant with the implementation of General Plan 2030 policies designed to ensure that flood issues associated with the levee are quickly identified and resolved.
Mill District Specific Plan Changes. As part of the adoption of the MDSP, Mill District Focus Area Policy LU‐14.3, Open Space and Parkland, is proposed to be modified to allow development within the 100-year floodplain. The MDSP would continue to be subject to policies from the General Plan Health & Safety Element relating to flooding and Chapter 15.58 of the Fortuna Municipal Code that regulates construction in flood-prone areas. Development within the floodplain would be required to follow strict standards that minimize the potential for flood damage, including elevating structures above the base flood elevation.
The MDSP Area is within the Strongs Creek Floodplain which is within the greater Eel River floodplain. The Strongs Creek watershed is one of the largest watersheds in Fortuna, with several smaller watersheds such as Jameson Creek and Mill Creek as tributaries. The City experiences localized flooding along Strongs Creek near its confluence with the Eel River at Dinsmore Drive and Loop Road. All of the MDSP Area south of Strongs Creek is within the 100-year floodplain (The Mill Creek Sub Area and Strongs and Mill Creek riparian areas) and 6.1 acres of the Strongs Creek Sub Area, while the remainder of the MDSP and project is in an area of minimal flood hazard. Figure X shows the regulatory floodway and the 100-year floodplain for the MDSP Area and surrounding area.
A substantial portion of the MDSP Area was a mill site that was closed approximately 20 years ago with most of the buildings removed. The former mill site is now comprised of predominantly impermeable areas, including asphalt and concrete paving, compacted aggregate base, and gravel fill. Mixed-use development, including residential, commercial, and industrial, are present in the northeast and along the eastern edge, while vegetated areas remain largely undisturbed in the Strongs and Mill Creek riparian area and on either side of the railway within the Great Redwood Trail right of way on the western perimeter. Development is proposed primarily within existing disturbed areas, involving the replacement of remaining asphalt, concrete, gravelly fill and limited vegetated areas with other impervious structures like buildings, loading docks, sidewalks, and paving.
The Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development, Technical Memorandum, December 2023 (GHD) used the definition of risk established by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), where risk shall mean the consequences associated with the probability of flooding attributable to an encroachment. Risk factors associated with the
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 118
implementation of a proposed action includes, but are not limited to, the following: 1) change in land use, 2) change in impervious surface area, 3) fill inside the floodplain, and 4) change in the 100-year water surface elevation (WSE).
The Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development was performed to evaluate the proposed conceptual site plan Fortuna Mill Commerce Center, in compliance with General Plan policy PFS-5.14, Drainage Studies, and Policy HS‐7.8, Flood Hazards Study. This Technical Memorandum (Appendix D) determines the limits of encroachments by new construction within the floodplain, which is divided into floodway fringe and floodway that will cause a specified change in water surface elevation. The encroachment limits were adjusted to define the encroachment boundary that would cause less than one foot of rise within the floodway fringe, minimal changes to upstream inundation areas, and cause no impact to roadways crossing Strongs Creek.
Figure 9: Base Condition (Natural Profile) - 100 Year Event. Source: Appendix D
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 119
Figure 10: Proposed Project Condition (Encroached Profile) - 100 Year Event. Source: Appendix D
Figure 11: Water Surface Elevation for Base and Encroached Conditions. Source: Appendix D
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 120
Figure 12: Change in Water Surface Elevation Between Base and Encroached Conditions.
Source: Appendix D
The Floodplain Encroachment Analysis concluded the following:
1. Change in land use - Surrounding land uses consist of residential, commercial, industrial, and other uses common to an urban environment. The proposed Project includes the redevelopment of a previous wood mill site. Existing impervious areas will be used for the construction of buildings and parking areas.
2. Change in impervious surface area – The Proposed Project will be constructed on areas that are currently impervious. The existing impervious area will be converted to parking areas or buildings.
3. Fill inside the floodplain - There is no proposed fill within the floodway.
4. Change in the 100-year WSE - There would be no encroachment within the floodway.
Encroachment within the floodway fringe would result in a change in the WSEs of less than one foot and significant change to the extent of flooding off site. A profile of the water surface elevations for the Base and Encroached condition are shown in Figure 6.
The change in water surface elevation between the Base and Encroached conditions may be seen in Figure 7. Changes in water surface elevation and inundation areas were minimal and did result in increased impact to properties upstream (east of Fortuna Boulevard).
Mill District Focus Area Policy LU-14.3, as modified, applies a 100-foot streamside setback from Strongs Creek and 75-foot setback from Mill Creek and provides for public access and trail development within the setback area. Development within the Strongs and Mill Creek 100-year
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 121
floodplain would be outside riparian buffers and the floodway and subject to City of Fortuna Health & Safety Element policy and Municipal Code regulations for flood hazard reduction.
The City of Fortuna is proposing to change the land use of the portion of APN 200-362-005 outside the MDSP Area within the City of Fortuna in Riverwalk area, from Riverwalk District (RD) to Parks, Greenways, & Recreation (PRK) to support future acquisition of this property for future parks planning and implementation. This area appears to have been a part of historic lumber mill operations and currently contains about an acre of formerly paved or concrete area and a portion of the Riverwalk Overlook parking lot area.
The City seeks to acquire this land to preserve the important riverfront area, maintain public access, and for potential future public recreation development. The Parks, Greenways, & Recreation (PRK) land use designation allows indoor and outdoor recreational uses, golf courses, equestrian uses, trails, and public/quasi‐public uses with a maximum floor area ratio of 0.10. The City proposes to rezone this area from Freeway Commercial (FC) to Public Facility (PF), where Public services and administrative offices, parks, public schools, and certain child care and community care facilities are principally permitted. Future development by the City would be subject to CEQA and general plan conformance review to ensure consistency with General Plan storm drainage and flood hazard policies and regulations.
The portion of APN 200-362-005 within the City of Fortuna is located behind the Eel River levee and is outside of the 100-year floodplain, but a portion of the parcel is within the 500-year floodplain. APN 200-362-005 and the River Lodge area are protected by the Sandy Prairie levee, which has effectively removed the portion of the City of Fortuna west of HWY 101 from the Eel River floodplain. The General Plan Health and Safety Element contains a series of policies and programs that are intended to address levee hazards and maintain levee protections.
Environmental impacts relating to levees were fully analyzed in the previous FEIR Impact 8.5‐3:
Flooding ‐‐ Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk Involving Flooding, Including as a Result of Levee Failure, and the proposed land use change to APN 200-362-005, which is currently planned for commercial uses and protected by Sandy Prairie Levee, does not affect the conclusions of that evaluation.
Consistent with the recommendation of the Floodplain Encroachment Analysis, the conceptual development plan does not show any development within the Floodway. While changes in the MDSP will permit development in flood-prone areas, new development would be required to be elevated above the 100‐year Base Flood elevation, adhere to General Plan drainage and flood hazard policies and Municipal Code flood hazard reduction regulations. MDSP performance standards require that individual development proposals implement all drainage improvements necessary to accommodate the increased runoff of the development proposal and to provide an
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 122
adequate level of flood protection to the development proposal, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
In addition, MDSP performance standards require that development within the 100-year floodplain be consistent with the Health and Safety Element policies relating to flood hazards, in particular Policy HS‐7.6, Regulating Land Uses in the 100‐Year Floodplain, and City of Fortuna Municipal Code Title 15, Division 2, Floodplain Management Regulations. These General Plan policies, including expanded riparian setback buffer for Strongs and Mill Creeks, and City regulations, combined with MDSP performance measures, would minimize potential flood hazards, resulting in less than significant anticipated impacts relating to housing or other structures within a 100‐Year Flood Hazard Area, structures that could impede or redirect flood flows within a 100‐Year Flood Hazard Area, and people or structures that could be involved in flooding.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 123
4. IMPACTS FOUND TO HAVE NO
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE FROM
PREVIOUS ANALYSIS
4.1 LAND USE
4.1.1 Population and Housing
The previous FEIR section (3.2) analysis coincides with CEQA Appendix G environmental factor XIV, Population and Housing, with the exception of FEIR impact 3.2‐3: Consistency with Adopted Regional Fair‐Share Housing Demand Forecasts, which analyzes whether the proposed plan will limit housing development substantially below the adopted regional fair-share housing allocation, thereby requiring other jurisdictions to pick up this demand.
4.1.1-1 POPULATION GROWTH INDUCEMENT POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan does not directly induce substantial population growth because it does not contain specific development proposals but could indirectly induce substantial population growth by increasing the amount of land designated for residential use by both designating undeveloped land for urban development and increasing the intensity of existing urban development. The General Plan includes policies and programs to ensure that Fortuna’s future growth will proceed in an orderly manner, but the General Plan would still facilitate substantial growth inducement resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts for which no feasible mitigation measures were identified. The proposed MDSP identifies a conceptual development layout for planning purposes but does not include specific proposals for development. The MDSP continues to plan for a mixture of urban land uses and replaces specific caps on commercial and industrial square footage with an ongoing monitoring program intended to avoid urban decay. The proposed changes to the General Plan and MDSP would not change the finding from the previous FEIR that potential indirect growth allowed by the General Plan could have significant and unavoidable impacts.
4.1.1-2 POPULATION AND HOUSING DISPLACEMENT POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan did not include specific development proposals and, therefore, would not have the potential to directly displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. While the General Plan would facilitate infill, reuse and redevelopment in the urban core and would facilitate new development at the urban/rural interface, the Land Use Map would not require that newly non-conforming residential uses be removed. In addition, policies to protect existing residential uses were included. The MDSP continues to plan the Mill District
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 124
Focus Area for reuse and redevelopment with mixed-uses and it does not include policies or specific development proposals that would have the potential to directly displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. The MDSP allows new residential development in areas that are designated Mill District and maintains zoning for multiple family where existing residential uses are present and includes detailed performance measures to assure land use compatibility between uses. As a result, the proposed changes to General Plan and MDSP would not change the previous FEIR finding that impacts relating to the potential for the General Plan to directly displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing would be less than significant.
4.1.1-3 CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED REGIONAL FAIR-SHARE HOUSING DEMAND FORECASTS POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan increased the amount of land where residential is the primary use, and the amount of land where residential use is permitted is sufficient to meet the then-current adopted regional fair-share housing allocation (2007-2014. The City’s current certified Housing Element continues to accommodate the regional fair-share housing allocation.
The MDSP does not include land that is a part of the Inventory of Affordable Housing Sites as identified in the current certified Housing Element (2019-2027). As a result, the proposed MDSP would not affect the conclusion that the Fortuna General Plan will not require other jurisdictions in the region to accommodate the anticipated growth.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 125
4.2 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
4.2.1 ROADWAY AND HIGHWAY SYSTEM
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (4.1) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XVII, Transportation and Traffic, with the exception of 4.1-1, Cause an Increase in Traffic That is Substantial in Relation to the Existing Traffic Load and Capacity of the Street System (Including Exceeding, Either Individually or Cumulative, LOS Standards).
4.2.1-1 CAUSE AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC THAT IS SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE EXISTING
TRAFFIC LOAD AND CAPACITY OF THE STREET SYSTEM (INCLUDING EXCEEDING, EITHER INDIVIDUALLY OR CUMULATIVE, LOS STANDARDS) POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR analysis of level of service impacts found that implementation of the General Plan would generate a substantial increase in daily automobile trips on the local roadway and highway system in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. At buildout, 18 of the 26 study intersections were expected to operate at an unacceptable level of service (LOS) and will require improvement. With implementation of the mitigation measures and the General Plan policies, all of the critical intersections identified were anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS, except for one that is located in the far northwestern edge of the City and not near to the MDSP. The operations of this intersection are not affected by the MDSP and therefore the MDSP would not worsen this significant impact. However, level of service is no longer considered impacts under the CEQA.
The previous FEIR identified the Mill District Focus Area as the fourth highest daily vehicle trip generator during the General Plan planning period. Therefore, the Mill District was a significant contributor to the need for off-site transportation infrastructure improvements. The MDSP includes a traffic level of service analysis that was prepared to determine fair share responsibility for off-site intersection improvements. The intersectionsidentified by this analysis are all among the intersections included in previous FEIR Mitigation Measure 4.1-1a (intersection improvements to be implemented when financially feasible or as development occurs to maintain the LOS at acceptable levels). MDSP policy and performance standards would require fair share financial contributions towards the improvement of intersections that are affected by the buildout of the project. Any intersection improvements that are related to the MDSP would be carried out by the City and subject to CEQA review and any potential significant environmental impacts would be addressed by the City at that time. The MDSP does not result in level of service impacts beyond those identified in the previous FEIR.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 126
4.2.1-2 SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE HAZARDS DUE TO A DESIGN FEATURE OR INCOMPATIBLE USES POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that implementation of the Transportation & Circulation Policies under Goal TC-1, to develop a safe, convenient, and uncongested road networks and programs contained in the General Plan would minimize hazards by establishing design standards for a variety of transportation modes and impacts would therefore be less than significant. Other policies that were found to lessen impacts were land use and circulation concepts that were intended to be designed early in the design phases of citywide development to minimize land use conflicts. Future intersection and roadway design would be required to meet applicable standards including appropriate geometry for the safe movement of all types of transportation.
The MDSP will continue to implement General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element policies and would therefore not change impacts relating to hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses.
4.2.1-3 RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that intersection and roadway design in the future would have to meet applicable standards that include appropriate geometry and emergency vehicle access. The MDSP would continue to be consistent with application of the General Plan standards and roadway design guidance evaluated in the previous FEIR, which found that no mitigation measures were required and that impacts were expected to be less than significant.
4.2.1-4 RESULT IN INADEQUATE PARKING CAPACITY POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that although implementation of the General Plan would facilitate new development, the designs for which would be subject to existing regulations regarding off-street parking requirements generated by a particular land use and impacts would therefore be less than significant. The adopted General Plan Mill District Focus Area includes Policy LU‐14.5, Parking Standards, which allows reduced parking standards and/or on‐street parking in the Mill District to reflect the increased intensity of development and accessibility by transit and other modes of travel. The MDSP implements this General Plan policy by allowing parking standards to be reduced and/or on-street parking be counted towards parking to reflect the increased intensity of development and accessibility by transit and other modes of travel and by encouraging shared parking. In addition, the City’s Zoning Code defines required off-street parking standards and the proposed policies and Programs would further ensure that adequate parking is provided. The MDSP would implement General Plan policy and would therefore not change the conclusions of the previous FEIR.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 127
4.2.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (4.2) coincides with aspects of potential impacts (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 and (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 within the XVII. Transportation and Traffic topic in Appendix G of CEQA.
4.2.2-1 DISCOURAGE OR INTERFERE WITH PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that implementation of the General Plan would facilitate residential and commercial development and could generate a substantial demand for safe and convenient pedestrian facilities. The implementation of General Plan Pedestrian Facilities policies and programs would result in the creation of new facilities that would maintain or improve pedestrian circulation and result in a less than significant impact. The MDSP includes performance standard related to transit services and pedestrian access that are intended to facilitate a safe and convenient street system in the Mill District that supports commerce and facilitates multimodal transportation including the use of public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities for employees, residents, and visitors. These changes do not introduce any new significant impacts to pedestrian facilities.
4.2.2-2 INCREASED NEED FOR NEW PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that implementation of the General Plan would facilitate residential and commercial development and could generate a substantial demand for safe and convenient pedestrian facilities. Specific General Plan Pedestrian Facilities policies and programs would facilitate the development of these new facilities intended to serve present and future demand and therefore result in a less than significant impact. The MDSP includes performance standard related to transit services and pedestrian access that are intended to facilitate a safe and convenient street system in the Mill District that supports commerce and facilitates multimodal transportation including the use of public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities for employees, residents, and visitors. These changes do not introduce any new significant impacts to pedestrian facilities.
4.2.2-3 DISCOURAGE OR INTERFERE WITH BICYCLE CIRCULATION POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found implementation of the General Plan could generate a substantial demand for safe and convenient bicycle facilities. Implementation of the General Plan Bicycle &
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 128
Trail Facilities policies and programs would result in new bikeways, bicycle parking, and bicycle programsthat would maintain or improve bicycle circulation to serve existing and future demand in Fortuna. For this reason, impacts were found to be less than significant. The MDSP includes performance standards related to bicycle and pedestrian access that are intended to facilitate a safe and convenient street system in the Mill District that supports commerce and facilitates multimodal transportation including the use of public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities for employees, residents, and visitors. These changes do not introduce any new significant impacts to bicycle facilities.
4.2.2-4 INCREASED NEED FOR NEW BICYCLE FACILITIES POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that General Plan implementation could generate a substantial demand for new bicycle facilities. However, implementation of the bicycle specific policies, projects, and programs contained in the General Plan would also result in the development of new bikeways, bicycle parking, and bicycle programs as a component of new development and a function of the City to serve both existing and future bicycling needs in Fortuna. The MDSP includes performance standard related to bicycle and pedestrian access that are intended to facilitate a safe and convenient street system in the Mill District that supports commerce and facilitates multimodal transportation including the use of public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities for employees, residents, and visitors. These changes do not introduce any new significant impacts to bicycle facilities.
4.2.3 Public Transportation
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (4.2) coincides with aspects of potential impact (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 within the XVII.
Transportation and Traffic topic in Appendix G of CEQA.
4.2.3-1 DISCOURAGE OR INTERFERE WITH FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT SERVICE POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that implementation of the General Plan has the potential to impact public transportation when new land uses create an increase in transit ridership, and when new development occurs in areas that are not currently served by the fixed route bus system. The General Plan includes policies that require the funding and expansion of transit service that is responsive to growth patterns that was determined to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The MDSP does not interfere with fixed route transit service and includes policy, standards, and improvements that are intended to provide on-site transit services at location(s) that provide convenient connections to the Great Redwood Trail, marked crossings of the new through road and walking or biking access points to Fortuna Mill Commerce Center development.
As such, there are no expected changes to level of impact related to fixed route transit service.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 129
4.2.3-2 GENERATE AN INCREASE IN TRANSIT RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that new development facilitated by the General Plan could result in an increase in transit ridership. The General Plan policies promote coordination with the Humboldt Transit Authority and the Redwood Transit Service and would support public transit services to meet the local and regional needs of residents and visitors. Impacts related to transit ridership were found to be less than significant. The MDSP may increase transit ridership but must be consistent with the General Plan policies described above and includes policy regarding coordination with the Humboldt Transit Authority and the Redwood Transit Service to promote and support public transit services consistent with policies in the General Plan so there would be no change in potential impacts.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 130
4.3 NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.3.1 HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (5.1) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor IX, Hydrology and Water Quality.
4.3.1-1 GROUNDWATER SUPPLY/RECHARGE POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would facilitate population growth that would increase the demand for groundwater and affect groundwater recharge rates by increasing the amount of impervious surfaces. The previous FEIR found that at buildout the City’s water demand would more than double but this will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies because annual recharge of the Eel River Groundwater Basin would still exceed the increased withdrawals by a large margin; an increase in demand under the proposed plan will be partially offset by a reduction in groundwater use by agriculture; and the proposed plan contains specifics policies and programs to minimize water use and maximize water conservation. Under buildout of the General Plan urban acreage will increase, but this increase would represent less than 1% of the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin. Furthermore, the proposed plan contains specific policies and programs to minimize development of impervious surfaces and maximize recharge. For these reasons impacts to groundwater supply/recharge were found to be less than significant.
The MDSP Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design for the MDSP included an evaluation of the City of Fortuna water supply considering the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and General Plan 2030 projections and found that the estimated MDSP daily water based on the conceptual Mill District layout is less than that of the previously analyzed water demand. In addition, the MDSP Area is not identified as an important groundwater recharge area for the Eel River (Eel River Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan, Final Plan, Humboldt County, 2022 – Figure 14 Important Recharge Areas). The only portion of the City of Fortuna identified as an important groundwater recharge area in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan are the portions of Upland Carlotta Recharge Area between the east side of Eel River Drive and the bluff. Therefore, development within the MDSP would not impact groundwater recharge. In addition, the MDSP expands protections for the Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian area and requires compliance with City of Fortuna flood and low impact development requirements.
As such, the MDSP would not change anticipated potential impacts relating groundwater supply/recharge.
4.3.1-2 RUNOFF WATER QUALITY POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would guide and facilitate new development which would include new impervious surfaces and activities that could deposit pollutants onto these
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 131
impervious surfaces, which could be transported in stormwater runoff. Existing federal, state, county, and city regulations, plans, and permits minimize pollutants in urban runoff. The adopted General Plan policies and programs were found significantly enhanced city requirements for new developments to include stormwater pollution reduction facilities and implement best management practices (BMPs) that reduce both point and non-point source stormwater pollutants during construction and operation. Impacts relating to water quality were determined to be less than significant and no mitigation measures were required.
The MDSP performance standards requires new development to incorporate stormwater pollution reduction facilities and implement best management practices (BMPs) during construction and operation, effectively minimizing both point and non-point source stormwater pollutants and require that new construction comply with Low Impact Development standards.
This would maintain water quality standards and therefore not change impacts relating to runoff water quality.
4.3.1-3 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would facilitate and guide future development which will increase flows to the City’s municipal waste water treatment plant and result in an increase City stormwater and treated wastewater discharges to the Eel River. City stormwater and treated wastewater discharges to the Eel River occur under National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits. Any increases in City discharges would be required to be consistent with these permits issued by the RWQCB consistent with discharge requirements of the North Coast Basin Plan. The General Plan also includes policies and programs designed to minimize wastewater and stormwater flows as well as pollutants in these flows. The previous FEIR determined that impacts relating to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would be less than significant. The MDSP would be required to adhere to General Plan policy relating to wastewater and stormwater quality, adhere to City stormwater and LID requirements, and comply with RWQCB requirements and would therefore not change the previous FEIR impact determination.
4.3.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in section (5.2), which coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor IV, Biological Resources with the exception of (e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance and (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. The potential impacts of (e) are evaluated in the previous FEIR under Land Use, 3.1-2:
Conflict with Applicable Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations Adopted to Avoid or Mitigate
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 132
Environmental Effects and (f) is evaluated in the previous FEIR under Land Use, 3.1-4: Conflict with any Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan.
4.3.2-1 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The California Natural Diversity Database search performed for the previous FEIR found that four special-status plant species and three special-status animal species occur in the planning area, and suggested that ten other special-status plant species and eleven other special-status animal species have the potential to occur in the General Plan Planning Area. The development of urban uses in portions of the Planning Area known or likely to contain special status species has the potential to cause substantial adverse impacts to these species, either directly or through habitat modification. The General Plan contains policies and programs designed to minimize impacts to special-status species and their habitat, and the proposed Land Use Diagram designates large tracts of undeveloped forest and prairie that represent potential special-status species habitat as open spaces, greenways, recreation, or very low urban use. The Strongs Creek through the Mill District Focus Area was found to support Coho Salmon and Coastal Cutthroat Trout, which are special status species. The General Plan policies and programs were found to reduce or avoid the significant impacts of the General Plan to less than significant levels. The MDSP is subject to General Plan policies related to special status species and riparian protections. The MDSP would not alter the presence or absence ofspecial-status species or decrease the land planned for open space, greenways, recreation, or very low urban use, and enhances protections of Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian areas. As such, the MDSP does not change impacts to specialstatus species and their habitat.
4.3.2-2 WILDLIFE AND FISH MANAGEMENT POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that creeks within the General Plan Planning Area represent movement corridors for listed fish species, while the riparian threads along these creeks, the bluffs, and the hillside forested areas in the eastern portion of the Planning Area represent movement corridors for listed terrestrial wildlife species. The General Plan Land Use Diagram designates some of these areas for urban uses which could result in the conversion of wildlife movement corridors and wildlife movement areas to urban uses, fragment existing wildlife habitat, and/or limit wildlife movement opportunities. However, the General Plan includes policies and programs designed to preserve these wildlife movement corridors to which the MDSP would be required to adhere.
MDSP policies enhance Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian area protections and do not alter General Plan policies and programs that are designed to preserve wildlife movement corridors which therefore does not change the previous FEIR determination anticipating lessthan significant impacts.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 133
4.3.2-3 WATERCOURSES AND WETLANDS POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan Planning Area included approximately 30 mapped wetlands and 13 of these could be impacted by development allowed by the Land Use Diagram.
However, the General Plan contains policies and programs designed to avoid significant impacts to watercourses and wetlands, including but not limited to adopting buffer areas and land use controls around these features similar to Humboldt County’s SMA Ordinance. In addition, federal and state regulations (Clean Water Act, Rivers and Harbors Act, etc.) require that any new development that could impact such features obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (USACE, FWS, RWQCB, DFW, etc.) intended to avoid significant impacts to watercourses and wetlands. Based on General Plan 2030 Figure 5-2, Wetlands, and an aquatic resources report prepared for the undeveloped portions of the project site (which is included in this SEIR as Appendix F), the MDSP does not include mapped wetlands and contains policies and performance measures intended to enhance the General Plan protections for Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian areas and therefore does not affect policies and programs designed to protect wetlands.
4.3.2-4 RIPARIAN HABITAT AND OTHER SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES POTENTIAL IMPACT:
A California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) search performed for the previous FEIR did not identify any sensitive natural communities within the General Plan’s Planning Area, but did record three such communities within the vicinity. While development and activities permitted under the General Plan Land Use Diagram could result in substantial adverse effects to any sensitive natural communities that may be present, the General Plan includes policies and programs designed to minimize such impacts. By complying with applicable laws and regulations, and implementing General Plan policies and programs, the General Plan will not have substantial adverse effects on sensitive natural communities. The MDSP enhances protections of Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian areas and does not affect policies and programs designed to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and the implementation of these policies and programs.
4.3.3 AGRICULTURAL & TIMBER RESOURCES
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (5.3) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor topic II, Agriculture and Forestry Resources.
4.3.3-1 CONVERT PRIME FARMLAND POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR shows existing farmland and timberland in Figure 5-4 and found that the Planning Area for the General Plan contains 923 acres of prime farmland. The project site and MDSP Area are not shown as either prime or non-prime agricultural land. The General Plan Land
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 134
Use Diagram designated an estimated 289 acres of prime farmland for urban use. General Plan policies and programs require clustering where development is proposed on prime farmland, the adoption of a land evaluation and site assessment system and encourages the continuation of existing agricultural activities to minimize farmland conversion. With restrictions on development as part of each proposed land use designation, and with implementation of the proposed policies and programs, the amount of prime farmland converted to non-agricultural use will be lower than the 289-acre estimate. The previous FEIR assumed that some proportion of the existing 289 acres of prime farmland would be converted to non-agricultural use, resulting in significant unavoidable impacts with no feasible mitigation available. Given that the project site and MDSP Area do not contain either prime or non-prime agricultural land, the adoption of the MDSP would not change this significance determination.
4.3.3-2 CONVERT TIMBERLAND POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR shows existing farmland and timberland in Figure 5-4 and determined that the Planning Area for the General Plan contains 861 acres of timberland. The Land Use Diagram designates the majority of this timberland as Open Space (OS) or Parks, Greenways & Recreation (PRK). Based on Figure 5-4, the project site and MDSP Area do not contain timberland. The General Plan Land Use Diagram designated approximately 290 acres of existing timberland for urban uses. Policies contained in the General Plan are intended to lessen the amount of timberland converted. However, the previous FEIR assumed that some proportion of the existing 290 acres of timberland designated for urban use will be converted. Given that the project site and MDSP Area do not contain timberland, the adoption of the MDSP would not change this significance determination.
4.3.3-3 CONFLICT WITH AGRICULTURAL ZONING OR WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACTS POTENTIAL IMPACT:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan Land Use Diagram designates the majority of agricultural and timber areas within the City boundary and the SOI for the same or compatible use and does not conflict with existing agricultural zoning. Approximately 396 acres of farmland and timberland under Williamson Act contract are in the SOI portion of the Planning Area (Figure 5-4). The General Plan does not designate any of this land for urban use (i.e., all Williamson Act parcels are designated AG or another agriculture-friendly use = Open Space (OS) or Parks, Greenways & Recreation (PRK). The previous FEIR determined that the General Plan does not designate any of the farmland and timberland under Williamson Act contract for urban use and would not conflict with existing Williamson Act contracts. No land within the project site or MDSP Area is zoned for agricultural use or subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the MDSP would not affect this significance determination.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 135
4.3.3-4 INVOLVES OTHER CHANGES THAT COULD RESULT IN CONVERSION OF FARMLAND TO NON-AGRICULTURAL USE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that agricultural operations can be incompatible with non-agricultural uses and suburban residents may object to the hours of operation, emissions, smells, and sounds associated with agricultural production. The General Plan designated land for residential development adjacent to existing agricultural activities that could lead to land use conflicts and eventual conversion of existing farmland to non-agricultural use. However, the proposed plan contains policies such as a “right to farm” ordinance that will limit such conflicts and conversion.
The project site is planned for and zoned for urban uses, and not adjacent to agriculture or timber uses. The adoption of the MDSP would not alter the determination relating to potential impacts from other General Plan changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use.
4.3.4 MINERAL AND SOIL RESOURCES
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (5.5) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor VII, Geology and Soils.
4.3.4-1 LOSS OF ABILITY OF A KNOWN MINERAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that there are four aggregate extraction sites located within the unincorporated area along the General Plan Planning Area’s westerly boundary, two of which extend partially into the City of Fortuna. The proposed Land Use Diagram designates these sites for Industrial and Agricultural uses, neither of which specifically permits aggregate extraction operation and the previous FEIR included a new policy as mitigation that specifically permits the continued operation of existing mineral resource recovery/extraction operations to prevent a potentially significant impact that could occur if the adoption of the General Plan were to result in the loss of a delineated mineral resource recovery/extraction site.
Based on Humboldt County Surface Mining & Reclamation Act mapping, the Project site, including the Riverwalk District land use change area and the MDSP Area, does not contain aggregate extraction sites and would not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to the potential for the loss of ability of a known mineral resource.
4.3.4-2 LOSS OF A DELINEATED MINERAL RESOURCE RECOVERY/EXTRACTION SITE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that there are four aggregate extraction sites located within the unincorporated area along the General Plan Planning Area’s westerly boundary, two of which extend partially into the City of Fortuna. The proposed Land Use Diagram designates these sites for Industrial and Agricultural uses, neither of which specifically permits aggregate extraction
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 136
operation and the previous FEIR included a new policy as mitigation that specifically permits the continued operation of existing mineral resource recovery/extraction operations to prevent a potentially significant impact could that could occur if the adoption of the General Plan were to result in the loss of a delineated mineral resource recovery/extraction site.
Based on Humboldt County Surface Mining & Reclamation Act mapping, the Project site, including the Riverwalk District land use change area or the MDSP Area, does not contain aggregate extraction sites and would not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to the loss of a delineated mineral resource recovery/extraction site.
4.3.5 ENERGY CONSERVATION
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (5.6) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor VI, Energy except it does not include an analysis of potential impact (b) conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.4.3.5-1.
The General Plan determined that buildout would roughly double energy consumption within the Planning Area, and that the General Plan includes measures related to land use, transportation, and energy efficiency and energy conservation that would ensure that energy is not used in an inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary manner and, as a result, determined that the General Plan would not allow the use of energy in an inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary manner. The MDSP does not change policies relating to land use or transportation that would result in a different significance determination relating to the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 137
4.4 PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND VISUAL
RESOURCES
4.4.1 VISUAL RESOURCES
The analysis in the previous FEIR section (6.2) coincides with the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor I, with the exception of impact
4.4.1-1 SCENIC VISTAS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
Scenic vistas exist within the General Plan Planning Area and include northerly and easterly views of forested bluffs and meadows; westerly views of the Eel River and agricultural landscapes; and southerly views of the Van Duzen River and the Eel River Valley. The General Plan includes policies and programs that will minimize obstructions of such views and ensure that view corridors are created and protected in new development and land use designations will limit residential density and non-residential FAR. The General Plan was determined to not have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas. The MDSP Area was not identified as an area that could potentially block vistas from certain locations. In addition, the proposed MDSP contains design guidelines that would limit any potential for future MDSP development projects to impact scenic vista. The Riverwalk District land use change area is located within an area that could potentially block vistas from certain locations and would no longer be planned for commercial development that could potentially block views of scenic vistas. Therefore, the MDSP and Riverwalk District land use change area would not increase impacts to scenic vistas.
4.4.1-2 SCENIC RESOURCES – NATURAL FEATURES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan Planning Area contains or is adjacent to several natural scenic resources, including the forested hillsides and meadows, bluffs, the Eel and Van Duzen Rivers, the creeks and their associated riparian corridors, and agricultural landscapes. While development permitted under the General Plan Land Use Diagram would intrude into and/or replace some of the existing natural resources in the General Plan Planning Area, policies and programs are included in the General Plan to minimize and/or avoid such intrusion/replacement. As a result, the General Plan was determined to not substantially damage natural scenic resources. The MDSP Area, outside of the Strongs and Mill Creek and riparian areas for which the MDSP strengthens protections, and Riverwalk District land use change area (aside from views of the Eel River from Riverwalk Drive, the top of the Eel River levee and from River Lodge and the Riverwalk area) were not considered to be natural scenic resources, which were assumed to include the forested hillsides and meadows, bluffs, the Eel and Van Duzen Rivers, the creeks and their associated riparian corridors, and the agricultural landscapes. The MDSP and the Riverwalk District land use change area would not substantially damage these natural scenic resources and
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 138
could not intrude into and/or replace some of the natural scenic resources identified. Therefore, the MDSP and Riverwalk District land use change area would not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to scenic resources- natural features.
4.4.1-3 SCENIC RESOURCES – URBAN FEATURES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan Planning Area contains multiple urban scenic resources, including Fortuna’s Downtown, Rohnerville Historic District, and 75 other historic or eligible buildings, roads or sites.
Development and redevelopment permitted under the General Plan could intrude into and/or replace some of these resources. However, General Plan land use designations include limits on the size and mass of new buildings to ensure that new development is consistent with existing development, and a wide range of urban design, aesthetics, and historic preservation policies and programs are proposed to preserve existing urban scenic resources and the previous FEIR determined that implementation would not substantially damage the visual integrity of Fortuna’s historic resources. The proposed Project does not change policies that are intended to protect the City’s urban scenic resources and the MDSP and Riverwalk District land use change area do not contain urban scenic resources or historic buildings and would not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to scenic resources- urban features.
4.4.1-4 VISUAL CHARACTER POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The visual character of the City of Fortuna is of a small rural community dominated by forested hillsides, bluffs, the Eel River, the Rohnerville Plateau, agricultural land, and rural residential development in the topographically diverse outskirts, and one- to three-story residential, commercial and industrial development, parks, and riparian corridors in the flatter urban core.
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan could potentially affect the rural small town character of Fortuna by removing or modifying the existing scenic resources, the existing visual character of the City, and/or introducing new development that is inconsistent with its existing visual character. The General Plan contains policies and programs that are intended to ensure that the existing visual character of the historic areas, neighborhoods, downtown, and other areas that contribute to the visual character of the City are preserved, resulting in a determination of less than significant impacts to visual character. The MDSP does not change policies that are intended to protect the City’s visual character, contains comprehensive design guidelines that are consistent with the General Plan Community Design policy and requires discretionary review for the construction of all buildings and landscapes and would therefore not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to visual character.
4.4.1-5 LIGHT AND GLARE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The light environment of the General Plan Planning Area was found to be “small town” in character with urban core lighting that transitions to a scattering of residential lighting associated
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 139
with rural residential uses to unlit hillside, forest, and meadow areas. The General Plan maintains the existing pattern of development and associated nighttime outdoor lighting is largely maintained. The designated five focus areas, including the Mill District Focus Area, and some other parts of the urban core, commercial, industrial, mixed use and public uses are designated for uses that are sometimes accompanied by high intensity lighting that may interfere with nighttime views. The General Plan contains policies and programs designed to ensure that lighting is controlled such that it does not conflict with nighttime views, and the previous FEIR determined that potential impacts were less than significant. The MDSP contains design guidelines that includes criteria specifically relating to light and glare that prohibits continuous all-night lighting except lighting intended exclusively for security purposes and further requires lighting that is appropriately scaled and the avoidance of over-lighting. Therefore, the MDSP would not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to light and glare.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 140
4.5 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
4.5.1 WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (7.1) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XIX, Utilities and Service Systems.
4.5.1-1 WATER SUPPLY POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR determined that the City had access to an adequate water supply to support buildout and impacts to water supply would therefore be less-than-significant. An analysis of water supply conducted for the MDSP (included in this SEIR as Appendix E) found that water use associated with the conceptual Mill District layout is less than that of the previously analyzed water demand under the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and General Plan 2030.
Therefore, the MDSP would not change previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to water supply.
4.5.1-2 WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan will increase development in underdeveloped and/or underutilized areas, particularly within the proposed Focus Areas and Annexation Areas, including the Mill District Focus Area. Future development will connect to the City’s water system infrastructure and could exacerbate any existing system and pressure zone deficiencies. The City’s five-year Capital Improvement Plan prioritizes water system improvement projects within the Planning Area. The General Plan also includes policies and programs designed to reduce impacts associated with new or expanded water supply and distribution facilities. With implementation of these policies and programs, and with completion of improvement projects identified in the City’s five-year CIP, implementation of the General Plan was determined to not significantly impact the City’s water system.
A water supply and distribution analysis conducted for the MDSP (included in this SEIR as Appendix E) found that the water distribution and treatment system located outside the MDSP area is adequate to support the buildout of anticipated development and identified needed improvements within the MDSP including the installation of water mains, valves, services, meters, back-flow preventers, and hydrants. New facilities would be designed to accommodate the FMCC and other MDSP area development. Most water distribution facilities would be located within public roadways, private roadways with public utility easements, or areas adjacent to the travel way with public utility easements. However, components of the water distribution, wastewater collection, and stormwater collection systems may involve new bridge attachments over, aerial pipes over, horizontal directional drilled stream crossings under, or the establishment of stormwater discharges to, the stream and riparian areas of Strongs and Mill Creek. The details
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 141
of these facilities, such as the number, type, size, design, or location are not known at this time.
The ultimate location and design of such facilities would be subject to their own CEQA process and may trigger the need for approvals by state agencies under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne), Section 402 of the CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Section 1602. Therefore, the MDSP would not change previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to water distribution and treatment system.
4.5.2 WASTEWATER COLLECTION, TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (7.2) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XIX, Utilities and Service Systems.
4.5.2-1 WASTE TREATMENT OR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan will increase residential, commercial, and industrial development within the General Plan Planning Area which will increase discharges into the City’s municipal waste water treatment plant. Because City stormwater and treated wastewater discharges to the Eel River currently occur under the existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits, any future increases in City discharges to the river will occur consistent with these permits. In addition, proposed policies and programs will minimize wastewater flows and pollutants in these flows by requiring that all new development to construct sewer infrastructure and route runoff through bioretention features; and require the City to comply with requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act and other discharge regulations and permits. As a result, the impact was determined to be less than significant. Development within the MDSP would be subject to NPDES requirements, General Plan policy relating to sewer and stormwater flows, and applicable Low Impact Development requirements and would therefore not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to waste treatment or waste discharge requirements.
4.5.2-2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR determined that at General plan buildout, service population increases will generate increased wet-weather flows that would exceed the existing dry- and wet-weather capacities of the WWTP, but that General Plan policies and programs requiring that the City immediately embark on planning to upgrade the capacity of the WWTP and limits development to the availability of adequate WWTP capacity. Therefore, the treatment capacity of the WWTP would not be exceeded. The MDSP would not change such policies and would therefore not affect the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to wastewater treatment capacity.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 142
4.5.2-3 IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTING NEW OR EXPANDED WASTEWATER FACILITIES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The implementation of the General Plan will require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. However, no specific development projects or wastewater facility improvements were proposed as part of proposed plan, so the specific environmental effects associated with constructing any new or expanded wastewater facilities cannot be identified at this time.
The existing wastewater system infrastructure within the FMCC area are antiquated and would require replacement to support the proposed development scenario. Improvements would include the installation of wastewater mains, lift stations, and service connections. The MDSP Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design (included in this SEIR as Appendix E) provides a feasible conceptual design for the wastewater collection system to meet minimum City design standards. Most wastewater facilities would be located within public and private roadways, private roadways with public utility easements, or areas adjacent to the travel way with public utility easements. However, components of the wastewater collection system may involve new bridge attachments over, aerial pipes over, horizontal directional drilled stream crossings under, or the establishment of stormwater discharges to, the stream and riparian areas of Strongs and Mill Creek. The details of these facilities, such as the number, type, size, design, or location are not known at this time. The ultimate location and design of such facilities may trigger the need for approvals by state agencies under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne), Section 402 of the CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Section 1602, and each of which would be subject to its own CEQA process. Therefore, the MDSP would not change previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts to wastewater collection system.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 143
4.5.3 STORM WATER DRAINAGE
The analysis in the Previous FEIR in section (7.3) coincides with potential impact (C)(iii) for CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor X, Hydrology and Water Quality and potential impact (a) for environmental factor XIX, Utilities and Service Systems.
Since the adoption of the General Plan in 2010, the cities of Eureka, Arcata, Fortuna, and Trinidad and portions of Humboldt County are now subject to the State Water Quality Control Board’s general permit for municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4 General Permit). Condition E.12 of the MS4 General Permit requires local agencies to ensure that development projects comply with post-construction stormwater requirements based on “low impact development” (LID) standards. These standards are intended to maintain a site’s pre-development runoff characteristics by using design techniques that capture, treat, and infiltrate stormwater on site.
Under direction from the Regional Water Board, the North Coast Stormwater Coalition, which includes the City of Fortuna, prepared the Humboldt LID manual to be consistent with the Statewide MS4 permit. The Humboldt Low Impact Development (LID) Standards mandate that all storm drainage facilities incorporate LID Best Management Practices (BMPs). LID is a site design approach aimed at replicating pre-development hydrology through methods such as infiltration, interception, reuse, and evapotranspiration. This approach uses small-scale, landscape-based BMPs like vegetated natural filters and bioretention areas (e.g., vegetated swales and rain gardens) to manage and filter stormwater runoff. Guidelines for this approach were outlined in the Humboldt Low Impact Development Stormwater Manual which was updated most recently updated in 2016.
Key elements of LID include preserving environmentally sensitive site features such as riparian buffers, wetlands, steep slopes, and native vegetation. For developments, LID practices must be designed to manage stormwater runoff from all impervious surfaces, based on the 85th percentile of a 24-hour storm event, as per historical local rainfall data or using formulas from established standards like the Urban Runoff Quality Management manual.
Additionally, the City of Fortuna requires compliance with the MS4 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit as outlined in the Humboldt County LID Stormwater Manual.
Specific requirements for "Regulated Projects" under the MS4 permit include:
• Ensuring post-project runoff rates do not exceed pre-project rates for the 25-year, 24- hour storm event.
• Preparation of detailed stormwater drainage reports including maps and calculations. • Location of drainage facilities in public rights-of-way or in unobstructed easements.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 144
Furthermore, any new subdivisions must install comprehensive stormwater drainage systems designed to manage potential runoff from both within and outside the subdivision. These systems must prevent flood damage in accordance with local codes.
For larger projects that significantly increase impervious surfaces, hydromodification controls are required to maintain runoff rates at or below pre-project levels for the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. These controls must consider site-specific soil infiltration rates, and if these are low, alternative measures may need to be discussed with permitting authorities.
4.5.3-1 ALTER EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERNS LEADING TO SUBSTANTIAL EROSION OR SILTATION POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
At General Plan buildout, the City of Fortuna urbanized area will increase by 28% and the added volume of storm water runoff could lead to erosion of unlined drainage facilities and creeks within the General Plan Planning Area and leave sediment deposits in the creeks and Eel River.
The General Plan includes policies and programs to minimize sedimentation/erosion and any changes to the quantity and/or quality of water discharged into the municipal storm drain system.
The Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design Technical Report for the Mill District (included in this SEIR as Appendix E) used a digital elevation model and existing storm drain infrastructure locations to delineate and identify six drainage management areas (DMAs) within the Mill District, based on existing discharge locations, which include: Newburg Road; Pond Street; Storm drain north to Railroad; north Culvert to Railroad and U.S. 101; south Culvert to Railroad and U.S. 101; Strongs Creek from north; and Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from south. This report provides contains a preliminary design for a feasible storm drainage system with recommendations for the minimum bioswale area with storage/treatment that each DMA would need to provide to meet minimum low impact development requirements, and identifies drain pipe, drain inlets, and manholes that are likely to be located within the rights of way of public streets or easement associated with private streets to convey stormwater to the discharge locations.
Most of the infrastructure improvements would be replacement facilities to be located within existing footprints or new facilities within existing disturbed areas. However, components of the stormwater collection systems may involve the establishment of stormwater discharges to the stream and riparian areas of Strongs and Mill Creek. The details of these facilities, such as the number, type, size, design, or location are not known at this time. The ultimate location and design of such facilities may trigger the need for approvals by state agencies under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (PorterCologne), Section 402 of the CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Section 1602, and each of which would be subject to its own CEQA process. This, together with
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 145
City review of flood control, drainage, and grading permits, and storm water runoff controls under the State’s NPDES programs demonstrate that the MDSP will not change impacts relation to erosion or siltation potential.
4.5.3-2 INCREASE SURFACE RUNOFF LEADING TO INCREASED FLOODING POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR stated that a gradual increase in impervious cover associated with new development, particularly within the proposed Focus Areas, such as the Mill District Focus Area, and Annexation Areas, could increase storm water runoff by up to 28%. The City has been monitoring the performance of its storm drain system through periodic updates of its Storm Drainage Master Plan and has been repairing deficiencies in the system as funding has permitted.
The General Plan contains policies and programs that require the City to inspect and maintain drainage system facilities that adequately convey 25-year storm event runoff; the programming of improvements at such time as any storm drain facilities reach 90% of capacity; and require new development to route runoff through on-site bioretention measures and demonstrate that adequate storm drainage can be provided. With implementation of these proposed policies and programs, the General Plan was found to not substantially increase the rate or volume of surface runoff in a manner that could result in on- or off-site flooding.
The Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design for the MDSP Area (included in this SEIR as Appendix E) provides a feasible design and recommendations for the minimum bioswale area with storage/treatment that each Drainage Management Area that would need to meet minimum low impact development requirements. In addition to being consistent with General Plan policy regarding storm drainage and be consistent with the City Storm Drainage Master Plan, designs for drainage improvements would be required to meet the standards specified in the Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design Technical Report and be consistent with the MDSP storm drainage performance standards. This, together with City review of flood control, drainage, and grading permits, and storm water runoff controls under the State’s NPDES programs demonstrate that the MDSP would not change the level of significance of impacts relating surface runoff.
4.5.3-3 EXCEED EXISTING OR PLANNED STORM WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM CAPACITY POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
For the same reasons discussed under impact 4.5.3-3 Exceed Existing or Planned Storm Water Drainage System Capacity Potential Impacts, the proposed plan will not create or contribute runoff water in excess of the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 146
4.5.3-4 NEW OR EXPANDED STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
Construction activities are regulated by the NPDES general construction storm water permit.
Compliance with the storm water permit during construction activities requires the preparation of a stormwater pollution prevention program that contains BMPs to control the discharge of pollutants, including sediment, into local surface water drainages. In addition to complying with the NPDES programs, the proposed plan contains policies and programs to reduce impacts associated with construction of new storm water drainage facilities. As described above, the Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design for the MDSP Area provides a feasible design and recommendations that would meet state and City standards for storm drainage systems and discharges. For these reasons, the proposed MDSP will not change impacts associated with the construction of new storm water drainage facilities and expansion of existing facilities.
4.5.4 SOLID WASTE
As analyzed in the previous FEIR in section (7.4) which coincides with potential impacts (d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals and (e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste for CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XIX, Utilities and Service Systems.
4.5.4-1 INCREASED SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
At full buildout, the General Plan Planning Area population is projected to increase which the previous FEIR determined would result in a 120% increase of solid waste generated. The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate solid waste disposal needs at full buildout. In addition, General Plan policy PFS6.3, New Development, requires that all new development provide for have appropriate provisions for solid waste storage, handling, and collection, PFS-6.6, Construction Waste Recycling, requires the recycling of construction waste, to reduce the impact on landfills in accordance with State regulatory requirements, and Programs PFS-21 and 21 require the City to contract solid waste and recycling collection services with an appropriate vendor and comply with state requirements relating to recycling construction waste and waste diversion. The MDSP would be subject to all General Plan requirements relating to recycling, solid waste diversion and disposal and would therefore not affect the previous FEIR determination that City is served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate solid waste disposal requirements of the General Plan.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 147
4.5.4-2 NON-COMPLIANCE WITH MANDATED SOLID WASTE REDUCTION REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
AB 939 required cities to reduce their solid waste streams 50% by 2000 and 70% by 2015 and as of the time of General Plan adoption the City of Fortuna was not in compliance with state required reductions in its solid waste stream. The General Plan contains policies and programs designed to reduce, recycle, and re-use solid waste generated in the City, which were intended to bring the City into compliance with state requirements, in particular PFS‐6.6, Construction Waste Recycling, and Program PFS‐20, which requires that the City incorporate a requirement for the recycling of 50 percent of construction waste. The MDSP would be subject to these policies and programs, and thus would not alter the potential impacts evaluated by the previous FEIR.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 148
4.5.5 GAS, ELECTRICITY, AND COMMUNICATIONS
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (7.5) coincides with aspects of CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XIX, Utilities and Service Systems potential impact (a) require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.
4.5.5-1 GAS, ELECTRIC AND COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan facilitates development which the previous FEIR determined could more than double at build out and in turn almost double the demand for electricity and natural gas, respectively. The permitted new development could either include the extension of natural gas, electricity and communication infrastructure to serve it or require system-wide improvements to the local natural gas, electricity and communication systems. The General Plan includes specific policies and programs that require energy conservation in new construction, the support of renewable energy sources and alternative energy technologies, and coordination with pertinent agencies when extending new services to reduce the potential impacts associated with new infrastructure. The MDSP would be subject to these policies and programs and would therefore not change the previous FEIR’s potential impacts related to gas, electric and communications facilities.
4.5.6 LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FIRE PROTECTION
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (7.6) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XIV, Public Services.
4.5.7-1 INCREASED DEMAND FOR POLICE SERVICES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan at buildout is expected to increase the General Plan Planning Area population, creating demand for additional City of Fortuna Police Department officers to maintain current officer to resident ratios. The General Plan contains policies and programs that require the City to maintain adequate police staffing levels, provide sufficient police facilities and equipment, and promote public safety education programs. These policies and programs ensure that the City maintains adequate police protection despite projected growth under the proposed plan.
Development within the MDSP would be subject to General Plan policy relating to police service levels, therefore the MDSP will not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts from increased demand for police services.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 149
4.5.7-2 INCREASED DEMAND FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
General Plan buildout will increase the General Plan Planning Area population creating additional demand for volunteer firefighters to maintain current firefighter to resident ratios. The General Plan contains specific policies and programs that require the City to support the efforts of the Fortuna Fire Protection District in providing fire protection services, maintaining adequate equipment and firefighting personnel, and maintaining mutual aid agreements. These policies and programs will ensure that the City maintains adequate fire protection through buildout under the proposed plan. Development within the MDSP would be subject to all General Plan policies regarding service levels, therefore the MDSP will not change the previous FEIR significance determination relating to impacts from increased demand for fire protection services.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 150
4.5.7 SCHOOLS
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (7.7) coincides with the school aspect of potential impact (a) for CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XV. Public Services.
4.5.7-1 SCHOOL SERVICES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
Fortuna General Plan buildout has the potential to impact schools in the Planning Area and previous FEIR assumed that buildout would result in an increase in the demand for school facilities and services in the City. The General Plan includes policies and programs designed to minimize school impacts, and new development will be required to pay the State-mandated school impact fees which are considered by the State to represent full mitigation for impacts to schools. The MDSP would be subject to General Plan Policies and school impact fees and would therefore not result in changes to impacts relating to school services.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 151
4.6 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
4.6.1 AIR QUALITY
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (8.1) coincides with all potential impacts for CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor III, Air Quality, and aspects of environmental factor VII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions potential impact (b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
4.6.1-1 CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The North Coast Air Basin is in “attainment” for all criteria pollutants except inhalant particulate matters with a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10) which is in “nonattainment”. The previous FEIR determined that the General Plan would generate less than significant levels of PM10 during construction but would exceed PM10 significance thresholds and thus could contribute to an obstruction of the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District’s (NCUAQMDs) PM10 Attainment Plan. The General Plan includes policies and programs intended to reduce construction and operational air emissions of PM10, and the NCUAQMD has a standard set of emission reduction measures that new development must comply with during construction and operation. However, despite implementing these policies, programs, and requirements, operational emissions were still expected to exceed the NCUAQMD threshold for PM10 under the Attainment Plan. This impact was found to be significant and unavoidable with no mitigation measures available beyond those provided by existing regulations, the General Plan Land Use Diagram, and the General Plan’s policies and programs. The MDSP maintains the Mill District as a mixed-use development area and must comply with all applicable NCUAQMD rules and regulations and General Plan policies to implement air emission reduction measures. As such, the proposed MDSP would not alter the potential impacts to the air quality management plan evaluated by the previous FEIR.
4.6.1-2 VIOLATE AIR QUALITY STANDARDS OR CONTRIBUTE SUBSTANTIALLY TO EXISTING/PROJECTED AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR determined that construction activities under the General Plan would produce air emissions. It anticipated that these activities would result in pollutant emissions below NCUAQMD thresholds for all criteria pollutants except carbon monoxide (CO). However, the CO emissions from construction were determined to be temporary, and activities are required to comply with NCUAQMD rules and regulations. Despite the inclusion of policies and programs in the General Plan that are intended to reduce CO emissions, the FEIR concluded that construction activities could potentially exceed the NCUAQMD threshold for CO.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 152
New development permitted by the General Plan would also generate operational emissions of criteria pollutants. These emissions would come from stationary sources such as heaters, woodburning fireplaces, restaurant exhaust, and industrial activities, as well as mobile sources including motor vehicles. The FEIR found that operational emissions would exceed NCUAQMD thresholds for reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), CO, and particulate matter (PM10). Even with compliance to applicable NCUAQMD rules and regulations, the promotion of mixed-use development for efficient land use and reduced motor vehicle use, and the implementation of policies and programs to lower operational emissions, the General Plan would still result in operational emissions above NCUAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10.
The MDSP does not include changes to the General Plan air quality policies and programs and is subject to NCUAQMD regulations pertaining to air quality. As such, the MDSP would not alter the findings from the previous FEIR relating to the potential for violations of air quality standards or contributions to existing/projected air quality violations.
4.6.1-3 RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE NET INCREASE OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS FOR WHICH THE REGION IS IN NON-ATTAINMENT POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the North Coast Air Basin is in “attainment” for the criteria pollutants ozone and PM2.5, but is in “non-attainment” for the criteria pollutant PM10. The General Plan’s implementation was found to generate PM10 during both construction and operation, and emissions associated with the General Plan during operation would be above the NCUAQMD significance threshold. This was found to be significant and unavoidable with no mitigation measures available beyond those required by existing regulations, the General Plan Land Use Diagram, and the General Plan’s policies and programs. The MDSP shall adhere to General Plan policies and programs that make air quality a consideration in the approval of new development. As such, the MDSP would not alter the potential impacts evaluated by the previous FEIR.
4.6.1-4 EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS OR OTHER DANGEROUS CONDITIONS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would facilitate new development which would in turn generate construction and operational emissions of criteria pollutants. However, the previous FEIR identified the relatively low density of development permitted under the General Plan and the relatively low volume of traffic compared to larger urbanized areas as being lessthan-significant for potential to generate substantial pollutant concentrations.
The previous FEIR determined that the City of Fortuna is a small rural community with no potential to develop large toxic air contaminants (TAC) generators, which are highly regulated and must comply with applicable regulations to avoid dangerous concentrations. The General
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 153
Plan contains policies and programs to avoid exposure to TACs. The MDSP would be subject to these General Plan policies or programs and would therefore not alter the potential impact on pollutant concentrations or other dangerous conditions as evaluated by the previous FEIR.
4.6.1-5 CREATE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would facilitate the development of agriculture, restaurants, industrial facilities, and a variety of other uses that are often associated with objectionable odors. The General Plan includes policies requiring all new businesses to minimize odors to an undetectable level off-site. The MDSP would adhere to these policies leaving anticipated potential impacts unchanged.
4.6.1-1 CONFLICT WITH THE STATE GOAL OF REDUCING GHG EMISSIONS UNDER AB 32 POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan contains a substantial number of policies and programs that would minimize potential GHG emissions and maximize energy efficiency and alternative forms of transportation. The Land Use Diagram proposes an energy-efficient land use pattern where higher density uses are concentrated in the urban core. However, the previous FEIR determined that when combined with the emissions likely to be generated by all other development in the state during the time horizon of the proposed plan that the proposed plan will contribute to a state-wide inability to meet its AB 32 GHG emission reduction goals and potential General Plan impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Since the adoption of the General Plan, the City of Fortuna has been collaborating with Humboldt County and all incorporated cities within the County to prepare a regional Climate Action Plan (CAP) to address the challenges of climate change. The primary goal of the CAP is to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from local sources. Upon adoption by the City of Fortuna, the MDSP would be subject to the GHG emissions targets of the CAP and any applicable programs within the CAP that are intended to reduce emissions. Given that only a preliminary CAP has been prepared, this SEIR cannot determine that implementation of the MDSP would not result in less than significant GHG emissions. As a result, the MDSP would not alter the finding of the previous FEIR that implementation of the Fortuna General Plan would contribute to a state-wide inability to meet its AB 32 GHG emission reduction goal.
4.6.2 NOISE
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (8.2) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor XIII, Noise except for 8.2-1: Exposure of New Noise-Sensitive Uses to Existing Noise in Excess of Applicable Standards, which is not evaluated by CEQA.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 154
4.6.2-1 EXPOSURE OF NEW NOISE-SENSITIVE USES TO EXISTING NOISE IN EXCESS OF APPLICABLE STANDARDS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan’s Planning Area contained several large stationary noise sources and multiple mobile noise sources that generate noise levels above existing and proposed City standards at adjacent properties. The General Plan Land Use Diagram permits new urban development, including new noise-sensitive uses adjacent to some of these noise generators and the Health and Safety Element contains a series of policies and programs designed to minimize exposure to substantial existing noise levels. The MDSP is subject to General Plan policies and programs relating to exposure of new uses to noise levels above applicable standards and contains performance standards and design guidelines that would ensure that noise levels for residential uses are at or below the City’s 60 dB Ldn exterior and 45 LDN interior maximum noise levels. As the MDSP does not propose changes in General Plan noise related policies or programs and includes specific performance measures to ensure General Plan compliance, there are no expected changes in potential impacts.
4.6.2-2 RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL TEMPORARY/PERIODIC INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that construction activities associated with the development facilitated by the General Plan would generate temporary periodic stationary and mobile source noise throughout the time horizon of the proposed plan. Where proximate to existing noise- sensitive uses, this construction noise could temporarily exceed both the State’s and proposed recommended maximum acceptable exterior noise exposure levels although the FEIR determined that the General Plan’s programs and policies would avoid any such exposure. The MDSP is subject to General Plan policies and programs related to exposure of new uses to noise levels above applicable standards and contains performance standards and design guidelines that would ensure that noise levels for residential uses are at or below the City’s maximum 60 dB LDN exterior and 45 LDN interior noise levels. As the MDSP does not propose changes in General Plan noise related policies or programs and includes specific performance measures to ensure General Plan compliance, there are no expected changes in potential impacts.
4.6.2-3 RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL PERMANENT INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan Land Use Diagram permits: (1) the development of new stationary noise sources in proximity to existing noise-sensitive uses; (2) the development of new noise- sensitive uses adjacent to existing mobile noise sources (e.g., existing streets); and (3) new urban development that would increase traffic on, and mobile-source noise along, existing streets. The previous FEIR found that due to General Plan policy, impacts relating to new stationary sources of noise and noise associated with mobile noise sources on new noise sensitive uses would be less than
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 155
significant. However, the FEIR found that the there are no feasible policies or mitigation measures to avoid exposure of existing noise-sensitive uses to increases in traffic noise above applicable standards. The MDSP proposes changes in development standards that would be implemented primarily through the adoption of a “Q” zone. The proposed Q zone development standards incorporate City of Fortuna development standards that address noise. Due to these development standards, MDSP would not alter the potential impact of stationary noise source impacts or mobile noise source impacts on new noise sensitive areas. As mobile noise source impacts on existing noise sensitive uses are unavoidable, the MDSP does not alter these impacts either.
4.6.2-4 EXPOSURE TO EXCESSIVE GROUND BORNE NOISE OR VIBRATION POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
Construction activities associated with new development permitted under the General Plan could result in ground-borne noise and vibration. However, there are General Plan policies and programs designed to shield sensitive receptors from ground-borne noise or vibration via the use of berms and setbacks, and limiting construction activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
The MDSP does not change the policies or programs concerning ground-borne noise or vibration and so the MDSP would not alter potential impacts.
4.6.2-5 EXPOSURE TO EXCESSIVE AIRPORT NOISE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that development permitted under the proposed General Plan could expose new development around Rohnerville Airport to excessive noise. However, General Plan policies and programs require that new development be consistent with the noise standards of the ALUCP and would not expose new development to excessive airport/airplane noise levels.
The MDSP Planning Area is outside of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour lines reflecting noise exposure for the Rohnerville Airport in the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. As the MDSP would not alter the policies and programs and is outside of the airport noise exposure areas, adoption of the MDSP would not alter potential airport noise impacts.
4.6.3 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (8.3) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor VII, Geology and Soils potential impacts (a) directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault, (ii) strong seismic ground shaking, (iii) seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, and (iv) landslides.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 156
4.6.3-1 FAULT RUPTURE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The eastern portion of the General Plan Planning Area is bisected by the Little Salmon Fault and two associated fault traces, each of which has an established Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone around them. The General Plan contains policies and programs that require the City to regulate and prohibit new development in these zones which limits potential fault rupture impacts to less than significant levels. The MDSP Area and project site are not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone nor do they contain fault traces. As the MDSP does not contain faults and does not propose changes to policies and programs prohibiting new development around these faults, the MDSP will not change impacts relating to fault rupture.
4.6.3-2 STRONG SEISMIC GROUND SHAKING POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan Planning Area is within a region of high seismicity and is likely to experience strong ground shaking during the time horizon of the General Plan.
General Plan policies and programs require the City to map high-risk geologic hazard areas, prohibit new critical facilities in mapped geologic hazard areas, and adopt guidelines for evaluating and mitigating geologic hazards. New development facilitated by the General Plan must also comply with California Building Standards Code requirements for site investigations, design, and construction. The MDSP is subject to these policies and programs and the California Building Code and would therefore not alter potential impacts relating to strong seismic ground shaking.
4.6.3-3 LANDSLIDES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The General Plan contains policies and programs regarding the mapping of high geologic hazard areas including landslide areas, the prohibition of new critical facilities in mapped geologic hazard areas, and guidelines for evaluating and mitigating geologic hazards. The previous FEIR found that these policies and programs in addition to compliance with California Building Code requirements for new development would reduce the potential risk for damage associated with landslides. The terrain within the MDSP Planning Area is flat, does not contain historic landslides, and is within an area identified as relatively stable in relation to seismic safety hazards according to Humboldt County webGIS seismic safety and slope stability hazards mapping. Adoption of the MDSP would not alter potential landslides impacts.
4.6.3-4 LIQUEFACTION, LATERAL SPREADING, SUBSIDENCE AND EXPANSIVE SOILS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR identified the Eel River Valley as being underlain by the Hookton Formation which includes coastal plain and fluvial deposits and found that given the unconsolidated nature of this formation and its proximity to the Eel and Van Duzen Rivers, portions of the Planning Area
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 157
for the General Plan, including the MDSP Area are subject to varying levels of liquefaction, lateral spreading, subsidence, and expansive soils. However, the General Plan contains policies and programs designed to lessen potential hazards and development must comply with the California Building Code. The previous FEIR determined that impacts would be less than significant. New development within the MDSP would be required to be consistent with General Plan policy and the California Building Code and would therefore not change the level of impact found in the previous FEIR.
4.6.4 HUMAN MADE HAZARDS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (8.4) coincides with aspects of CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials potential impacts (a) create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, (b) create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, (c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, (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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area, and (f) impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
4.6.4-1 EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND EVACUATION PLANS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that new development facilitated by the General Plan would increase the need for emergency response and evacuation planning. However, the General Plan has policies and programs that require the City to coordinate with allied agencies in emergency response planning and to maintain its emergency response plan to ensure that emergency response and evacuation planning and the implementation of these policies and programs would result in less than significant impacts. The adoption of the MDSP would not alter City emergency response planning or preparedness.
4.6.4-2 RELEASE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that development activities allowed under the General Plan could result in the release of hazardous materials associated with the routine transport, use and storage of hazardous materials; upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials; and disturbance of listed hazardous materials sites and asbestos-containing structures. The
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 158
General Plan’s Land Use Diagram permits new agricultural, residential, commercial, and industrial activities that may routinely transport, use, and store hazardous materials. The General Plan contains policies and programs that would reduce such risks to less-than-significant levels. The MDSP would be subject to all General Plan policy and local and station regulations relating to the release of hazardous materials and would not change hazardous materials related impacts.
4.6.4-3 EMISSION OR HANDLING OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NEAR SCHOOLS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan does not include proposals for new school sites or hazardous materials facilities. The General Plan contains policies and programs designed to minimize any potential exposure hazard to school The proposed MDSP does not alter the less than significant impacts finding in the previous FEIR.
4.6.4-4 AIRPORT HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH INCOMPATIBLE LAND USE POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan contains policies and programs to ensure that development within Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones is limited to that permitted within each zone by the Humboldt County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working around the Airport. The MDSP Area is not located within an Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone and would therefore not result in airport hazards associated with incompatible land uses.
4.6.4-5 AIRPORT HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH CHANGES IN FLIGHT PATTERNS POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would not result in any related changes in air traffic patterns or associated safety risks for Arcata-Eureka Airport or Rohnerville Airport. The MDSP would be consistent with the Fortuna General Plan and is not within airport land use compatibility area and would therefore not change the significance determination for this impact topic.
4.6.5 WILDLAND FIRES
The analysis in the previous FEIR in section (8.6) coincides with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G environmental factor IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials potential impact (g), expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 159
4.6.5-1 INCREASE EXPOSURE TO WILDLAND FIRES POTENTIAL IMPACTS:
The previous FEIR found that the General Plan would designate some non-urban portions of the Planning Area subject to high fire hazards for urban uses. Policies and programs contained in the General Plan would reduce the wildland fire hazard, but the previous FEIR determined that mitigation measures were required to reduce potential impacts within wildland fire hazard areas.
Based on the State mapping of Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Area (areas within cities) for Humboldt County, the MDSP is mapped as “Unzoned,” which indicates that fire hazard severity is less than “Moderate.” Therefore, the MDSP is not subject to high or moderate fire hazard severity and as such would not increase exposure to wildland fires potential impacts and would therefore not affect the previous determination regarding the potential to increase exposure to wildland fires.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 160
5. MANDATORY CEQA TOPICS
5.1 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
An EIR must disclose the significant unavoidable impacts that will result from implementation of a proposed project. Section 15126(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that an EIR should explain the implications of such impacts and the reasons why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding such impacts. The previous FEIR disclosed the significant environmental impacts and significant unavoidable adverse impacts of the General Plan in the impact analysis in Chapters 3 through 8. Implementation of the proposed MDSP would result in the alteration of the physical environment. The proposed MDSP includes policies and proposes mitigation measures that either reduce or eliminate potentially significant impacts to a level below significance.
The previous FEIR determined that certain impacts would remain significant and unavoidable after implementation of the General Plan. Impacts to agricultural resources, air quality, hydrology/water quality, noise, transportation/circulation and utilities/services systems were unable to be mitigated to a level below significance. The addition of commercial and industrial space, infrastructure and utilities, and residential units as a result of the amendments to the General Plan and implementation of the MDSP does not change this determination.
5.1.1 LAND USE
The previous FEIR analyzed the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts related to Land Use and Planning, in particular conflict with County Agricultural land use and zoning designations adopted to preserve prime farmland by re-designating some of this farmland for urban use and cumulative significant unavoidable land use impacts by creating inconsistencies with Humboldt County’s existing land use designations and zoning in currently unincorporated portions of the Planning Area (3.1-2: Conflict with Applicable Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations Adopted to Avoid or Mitigate Environmental Effects). The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
5.1.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING
The previous FEIR analyzed the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts related to Population and Housing and found that the General Plan would facilitate substantial growth inducement (3.2-1: Population Growth Inducement) resulting from General Plan implementation. The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 161
5.1.3 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION IMPACTS
The previous FEIR analyzed the significant and unavoidable adverse Transportation And Circulation impact related to exceeding City level of service standards (4.1-1: Cause an Increase in Traffic That is Substantial in Relation to the Existing Traffic Load and Capacity of the Street System (Including Exceeding, Either Individually or Cumulative, LOS Standards) resulting from General Plan implementation. The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR. In addition, this SEIR found that the conceptual development plan and the proposed General Plan and Zoning to be applied to the MDSP Area could allow a land use mix that would exceed the CEQA VMT threshold and the VMT impacts of the proposed MDSP would be considered significant and unavoidable. VMT was not analyzed as a CEQA impact in the previous FEIR.
5.1.5 AGRICULTURAL & TIMBER RESOURCES
The previously certified FEIR analyzed the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts related to agricultural and timber resources due to General Plan implementation relating to the conversation of agricultural and timber land and conflict with County agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts (5.3-1: Convert Prime Farmland, 5.3-2: Convert Timberland, 5.3-3:
Conflict with Agricultural Zoning or Williamson Act Contracts). The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
5.1.6 AIR QUALITY
The previous FEIR discussed the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts related to air quality of General Plan implementation, including conflict with the PM10 Attainment Plan, emissions of ROG, NOx, CO and PM10 above regional thresholds, and conflict with the state goal of reducing GHG emissions under AB 32 (8.1-1: Conflict With or Obstruct Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Management Plan, 8.1-2: Violate Air Quality Standards or Contribute Substantially to Existing/Projected Air Quality Violations, 8.1-3: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Criteria Pollutants for which the Region is in Non-Attainment, and 8.1-6: Conflict with the State Goal of Reducing GHG Emissions Under AB 32). The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
5.1.7 NOISE
The previous FEIR discussed the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts related to noise generation from implementation of the General Plan, including permanent increases in ambient noise levels due to mobile noise sources (8.2-3: Result in a Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels. (Mobile noise source impacts on existing noise sensitive uses). The
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 162
changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
5.2 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF
RESOURCES
CEQA Guidelines §15126.2(c) requires an EIR to include a discussion of significant irreversible environmental changes since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar uses. Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitment of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.
The previous FEIR evaluated the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources in Section 11.3, Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes. The proposed plan would not result in significant impacts after mitigation with respect to water, electricity, natural gas, fossil fuels, potential mineral resource extraction sites, and potential environmental accidents, because of the substantial number of policies and programs in the General Plan to minimize the use of water, electricity, natural gas, and fossil fuels, the use of such resources would not occur in an unnecessary, inefficient or wasteful manner. However, the General Plan would result in significant unavoidable losses of prime farmland and timberland, and contribute to a significant cumulative loss of sensitive plant and animal species habitat, by designating current areas of prime farmland, timberland, and sensitive species habitat for future urban use. In this respect, the proposed plan would result in significant irreversible environmental changes, even though a substantial number of policies and programs are proposed that would both minimize the loss of such resources and ensure that such loss does not occur in an unnecessary, inefficient or wasteful manner.
The commitment of resources resulting from the implementation of the General Plan was fully evaluated in the previous FEIR. The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
5.3 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
Growth inducing impacts address the implications of the project for growth inducement in the project vicinity or broader area. Under CEQA, a project is generally considered to be growth inducing if it results in any of the following:
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 163
1) Extension of urban services or infrastructure into a previously un-served area; 2) Extension of a transportation corridor into an area that may be subsequently developed; or
3) Removal of obstacles to population growth (such as designation of an area for development that is not currently designated for development, or provision of major new public services to an area where those services are not currently available) The previous FEIR evaluated growth inducing impacts in Section 11.2, Growth‐Inducing Impacts.
The General Plan re-designate lands currently designated for agricultural and timber use to urban use, especially in potential future Annexation Areas, and re-designated lands currently designed for low-density urban use to higher-density urban use, especially in the Focus Areas. Each of these actions were determined to result in the removal of obstacles to development that would foster economic and population growth. The General Plan also includes policies and programs designed to promote home ownership and economic activity in the City, thus further fostering economic and population growth. As a result, the General Plan was found to be growth inducing.
The changes to the General Plan and the adoption of the MDSP do not change the conclusions presented in the previous FEIR.
CITY OF FORTUNA MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT SEIR
AUGUST 2024 164
6. EIR Preparers
6.1 LEAD AGENCY
City of Fortuna
City Manager (interim)..................................................................................Amy Nilsen City Manager (prior).............................................................................Merritt Perry, PE Community Development Director.............................................................Shari Meads Public Works Director..........................................................................Brendan Byrd, PE
6.2 EIR CONSULTANT
Planwest Partners, Inc. (EIR)
Principal...............................................................................................Vanessa Blodgett Project Manager............................................................................................John Miller Associate Planner...................................................................................Sarah Wickman GIS Analyst..................................................................................................Jason Barnes
6.3 SUB CONSULTANTS
GHD (Technical Reports)
Project Manager.............................................................. Brett Vivian, PE Civil Engineer Patrick Sullivan ..................................................................................... PE Civil Engineer Todd Tregenza...................................................................AICP Transportation Planner Donald Hubbard ......................................................... TE, ACIP, Transportation Planner Azadeh Heydari ...............................................................................PE., Traffic Engineer Paige Peel ..........................................................................AICP Transportation Planner Pete Duin .................................................................................................................... EIT Kerry McNamee..........................................................................Environmental Planner
DRAFT MDSP SEIR
APPENDIX A
Attachment D
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft August 2024
Table of Contents
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Introduction.................................................................................................................... 3 HISTORY OF THE AREA.......................................................................................................................................... 3 THE MILL DISTRICT TODAY.................................................................................................................................... 4 FORTUNA MILL COMMERCE CENTER.................................................................................................................... 5 WHAT IS A SPECIFIC PLAN?................................................................................................................................... 5 SPECIFIC PLAN PROCESS ....................................................................................................................................... 5 HOW TO USE THE MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN.................................................................................................. 6 Chapter 2: Vision.............................................................................................................................. 7 GUIDING PRINCIPLES ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Chapter 3: Land Use, Open Space & Design .................................................................................... 10 AREAS OF THE MILL DISTRICT .............................................................................................................................10 OPEN SPACE........................................................................................................................................................12 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE...................................................................................................................................13 LAND USE PROGRAM..........................................................................................................................................15 LAND USE POLICIES.............................................................................................................................................15 DESIGN GUIDELINES............................................................................................................................................18 ZONING...............................................................................................................................................................19 NONCONFORMING LAND USES ..........................................................................................................................21 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ..............................................................................................................................21 Chapter 4: Circulation; Infrastructure & Community Services......................................................... 24 STREET NETWORK...............................................................................................................................................24 TRANSPORTATION CONCEPT..............................................................................................................................25 CITY UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................................28 OTHER SERVICES AND UTILITIES .........................................................................................................................34 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES POLICIES AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .................................................34 Chapter 5: Infrastructure Financing ................................................................................................ 37 DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.........................................................................................................37 FINANCING PLAN ................................................................................................................................................37 INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .............................................................................39 Chapter 6: Implementation And Relationship To Other Documents................................................ 41 CITY OF FORTUNA GENERAL PLAN, 2030............................................................................................................41 CITY OF FORTUNA ZONING REGULATIONS .........................................................................................................41 OTHER PLANS......................................................................................................................................................42 City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Figures
Mill District Specific Plan Area Location Map
Mill District Sub Areas
Mill District Specific Plan Land Use Map
Mill District Specific Plan Zoning Map
Mill District Specific Plan Circulation Plan
Mill District Specific Plan Conceptual Water System Layout Mill District Specific Plan Conceptual Sanitary Sewer
Mill District Specific Plan Conceptual Drainage
Tables
Conceptual Land Use Program
Summary of Public Facility Program Estimated Facilities, Costs, and Funding Sources Appendices
Appendix A Mill District Qualified (Q) Zone Draft Ordinance Appendix B Mill District Specific Plan General Plan Consistency Analysis City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Mill District Specific Plan (Specific Plan or Plan) implements the City of Fortuna General Plan and serves as a tool to guide the orderly development of land. The area is envisioned as a high quality industrial and commercial infill site that supports mixed use development, and the Specific Plan establishes planning and development standards to realize this vision. It plans for the redevelopment of a former lumber mill site and surrounding lands that are conveniently located close to Fortuna’s downtown area, two U.S. 101 exits, and the Fortuna Boulevard commercial corridor.
Chapter One: Introduction. Chapter One establishes the purpose of the Specific Plan and its history and physical context. The Specific Plan will guide future decisions regarding land use, intensity of development, circulation, public services, and the necessary infrastructure improvements to support future growth. The Plan will provide a mechanism for ensuring that future development and infrastructure will be feasible, coordinated, and efficient. The Specific Plan envisions the project area as an important and diverse center for local and regional economic, employment, tourism, and residential growth and development.
Chapter Two: Vision. This chapter provides the guiding principles for development within the Plan area. The principles are based on input from community stakeholders, City staff, technical consultants, the City Council and Commissions, and requirements of State law and City policies and regulations. The guiding principles provide broad, overarching guidance for the development of the Specific Plan area.
The policies and performance measures implementing each of the guiding principles are presented fully in the related Specific Plan chapters. The chapters include Land Use, Open Space & Design, Circulation; Infrastructure & Community Services; Infrastructure Financing; and Specific Plan Implementation & Relationship to Other Documents. The objectives, policies and performance measures, and zoning represent statements of intent that will guide the implementation of the Specific Plan. They are intended to work in conjunction with the policies of existing City documents.
Chapter Three: Land Use, Open Space & Design. This chapter describes the characteristics and locations of the various land uses that will develop in the Specific Plan area based a conceptual plan for the former mill site. Land use characteristics include the type of development and uses permitted within the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan consists of six sub areas, including the Pond Street Area, Existing Residential Area, Creek Riparian and Trails Area, Central Area, Strongs Creek Area, and the Mill Creek Area. Overall, the Specific Plan envisions a compatible integration of land uses. The land use plan will allow for a range of uses including light industrial, flex space, commercial, office, and residential. The design guidelines are intended to assure attractive and cohesive building and landscape design and compatibility between uses.
Chapter Four: Circulation; Infrastructure & Community Services. This chapter describes the circulation, infrastructure, and public services improvements necessary to accommodate anticipated Specific Plan area development and provides implementing policies and performance measures.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |2
Significant improvements are necessary to enhance connectivity from the Specific Plan area to surrounding areas and to support wastewater flows to the Tom Cooke Memorial Wastewater Treatment Plant. The proposed plans for the public infrastructure elements will provide individual property owners, developers, and the City with a framework of improvements necessary to support future development in the Specific Plan area. Existing and future needs for increased demand for police and fire services, as well as electric, natural gas, and telecommunication systems within the Specific Plan area, are also briefly discussed in this chapter, which can be enhanced through the implementation of the Specific Plan goals, policies, and programs.
Chapter Five: Infrastructure Financing. This chapter summarizes the infrastructure improvements to be constructed or reconstructed to implement the Specific Plan and the general cost, Identifies the distribution of cost burdens to the different land uses, and describes the various options for financing public improvements.
Chapter Six: Implementation and Relationship to other Documents. This chapter describes the steps needed to implement the Specific Plan and the relationship of the Specific Plan to other City documents. The Specific Plan also relies on the City’s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |3
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The Mill District Specific Plan area (Mill District or MDSP area) comprises approximately 104 acres generally bordered by Newburg Road to the north, the South Fortuna Boulevard corridor to the east, U.S. 101 to the west, and Kenmar Road to the south. A significant element of the MDSP Area is the 73- acre former Pacific Lumber Company (PALCO) mill Fortuna site, which was an important local economic engine for the City from its inception in the 1970’s to its closure in 2004. The size and location of the former mill site provides an exceptional economic development opportunity for the community, the property owner, and the surrounding developed and undeveloped commercial areas.
The MDSP area is comprised of a large, underutilized infill industrial area with several owners, and a mixed residential neighborhood of predominantly single-family homes, with some multifamily and commercial buildings. The largest industrial property has recently changed hands and the area is poised for future growth and redevelopment due to several factors.
Firstly, the MDSP area is unique in Humboldt County because it is a large infill site with two adjacent highway access points; nearby infrastructure and utilities with sufficient potential capacity; easy access to restaurants, services, and housing, and the community is generally supportive of its development.
Secondly, the City of Fortuna is taking an active role in Mill District development planning. The City independently initiated specific plan preparation in the fall of 2021, recognizing that the then current owner of the former PALCO Mill property was not engaged in planning, marketing, improving, or developing this important site. And finally, approximately 64 acres of the former PALCO Mill portion of the MDSP Area was sold to a developer in 2023 and is now being actively marketed as the Fortuna Mill Commerce
Center (FMCC).
The Mill District, particularly the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center as envisioned in the Specific Plan will transform the most underutilized area of the City into an important hub for economic, employment, tourism, and residential
development as encouraged and allowed by the General Plan and Zoning Regulations.
HISTORY OF THE AREA
Residential subdivisions in the north east of the MDSP Area occurred in the mid-1900’s. As of the 1940’s, the center portion of the MDSP area and the area along the rail line were almost entirely agricultural land. By 1956, various timber-related uses were developed including timber ponds, a veneer plant, boilers and kilns. The PALCO Fortuna mill was constructed in the 1970’s City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |4
and occupied approximately 73-acres. The PALCO Fortuna mill was an important local economic engine for the City from the 1970’s to its closure in 2004.
THE MILL DISTRICT TODAY
Since the mill’s closure in the early 2000’s most mill buildings have been demolished. A former mill building and approximately eight acres of the mill site was sold to Wendt Construction company in 2007.
The Wendt site has been modified and improved and is now operated as a multi-tenant light industrial complex. Other portions of the former mill site have become blighted, representing a physical barrier for the surrounding area and a source of nuisance complaints and fires. The Sequoia Gas Company operates a propane gas delivery operation within six acres on the west side of the rail line that was never a part of the PALCO mill. The residential area in the northeast of the MDSP area has not changed significantly since it was originally developed.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |5
FORTUNA MILL COMMERCE CENTER
The Fortuna Mill Commerce Center is the name given by the property owner to approximately 64 acres of the former 73-acre PALCO Fortuna mill. The FMCC offers easy access to Hwy 101 as well as nearby retail amenities. The FMCC property owner’s concept plan envisions development that will accommodate the wide variety of uses allowed by the Mill District General Plan Land Use Designation and zoning. Building designs and construction are intended to contain modern features and functionality and may be modified to suit individual tenant needs.
WHAT IS A SPECIFIC PLAN?
Under California Law (Government Code Sections 65450 through 65457) cities and counties may adopt specific plans to develop policies, programs and regulations to support the implementation of their General Plan. A specific plan can serve as an effective tool to implement the General Plan and as a bridge between land use policy and development regulations for large development projects.
This Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the requirements for specific plans in Sections 65450 to 65457 of the California Government Code. The Specific Plan includes text and diagrams that generally describe the following:
• The distribution, location and extent of all land uses; • The proposed distribution, location, extent, and intensity of major components of public infrastructure such as transportation and drainage systems and other essential facilities needed to support the land uses;
• Standards and criteria which specify how the development of the Mill District will proceed; • Statements of consistency between the Specific Plan and the goals and policies contained in the General Plan; and
• A program of implementation measures such as regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to complete the essential facilities to allow for the development of the Specific Plan area.
SPECIFIC PLAN PROCESS
The City of Fortuna initiated the preparation of the Specific Plan in 2021. This staff-led effort was conducted in close coordination with the property owners at the time, regional economic developers, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Mill District Specific Plan involved public outreach that consisted of stakeholder meetings, community workshops, and public hearings.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |6
Participants included residents, business owners, and public agencies. Input was solicited on goals for the Specific Plan, including development standards and land uses.
HOW TO USE THE MILL DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN
This Specific Plan is the policy document guiding development in the Mill District Specific Plan area. It addresses issues of land use, zoning, infrastructure, and circulation. The Specific Plan also includes a financing plan for the development of public infrastructure. The Financing Plan provides a guiding framework to fund the construction of public infrastructure improvements needed for planned development. A supplemental environmental impact report (SEIR) was also prepared for the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan works in conjunction with the Fortuna General Plan, 2030 which is the City of Fortuna’s overarching planning document and the City of Fortuna Zoning Regulations to provide development regulations and site-specific land use policies.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |7
CHAPTER 2: VISION
This chapter sets forth the vision and guiding objectives for MDSP area development. The implementing goals and policies implementing each of the principles are contained in the related chapters of the Specific Plan. MDSP chapters include Land Use, Open Space & Design, Circulation; Infrastructure & Community Services, Infrastructure Financing, and Implementation and Relationship to Other Documents.
The MDSP area land use plan will allow for a range of development and uses that will support, improve, and increase the City’s economic, employment, tourism, and residential potential. Factors that are expected to drive area development over the coming years include location, development potential, innovation sources, and community support.
The guiding principles and goals provide an overarching vision and direction for the development of the MDSP area. They will establish a framework in which measures for implementation of the Specific Plan will be created and prioritized. The goals and policies were developed to work in conjunction with the policies of existing City documents including:
• Fortuna General Plan 2030, 2010
• John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan, 2014 • City of Fortuna Housing Element, 2019
• City Fortuna Drainage Master Plan, 2005
• City of Fortuna Local Road Safety Plan, 2021
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The Mill District Specific Plan is intended to:
• Compatible Single‐Use and Mixed‐Use developments:
o Allow a variety of compatible uses in the Mill District including industrial, retail, manufacturing, civic, tourism and lodging, entertainment, office, commercial, medical, recreation and open space, mixed use, and residential among other uses. o Provide building frontages, landscape designs, and landscape buffer strips to ensure that future development is attractive and compatible with adjacent uses. o Plan for water, drainage, and wastewater infrastructure to address the needs of new development and the existing housing areas along 15th, 16th, and Spring Streets and to accommodate the vacant land planned for multifamily uses. o Allow for unique uses and establishments that may benefit from proximity to, or high visibility from, U.S. 101, including in the southern portion of the Mill District. o Continue South Fortuna Boulevard shop front commercial and mixed use development into the Mill District along the new through road with off street parking located behind and to the side of buildings.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |8
o Encourage pedestrian-oriented development of varying scale and size along the new through road near South Fortuna Boulevard and along the Newburg Road portion of the Mill District.
• Leverage the Mill District location advantage:
o Maximize the benefits of:
• exceptional access to, and visibility from, U.S. 101, and • equal proximity to downtown Fortuna via 12th Street or Fortuna Boulevard, which will enhance the importance of the 12th Street corridor.
• Provide for a balanced transportation network:
o Design a safe and convenient street system in the Mill District that supports commerce and facilitates multimodal transportation including the use of public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities for employees, residents, and visitors.
o Integrate interchange and roundabout improvements for -12th Street and Kenmar Road into Mill District designs, enhancing the Mill District’s already excellent freeway access.
o Make private connections to the interior industrial land from Newburg Road, South Fortuna Boulevard, and the new through road that also supports a potential future Mill District public street network. o Provide direct public connections to the John Campbell Memorial Greenway / Strongs Creek Trail and the Great Redwood Trail o Allow for a potential Pond Street connection from the new through road and accommodate a potential future widening of 15th Street. • Protect the industrial character within the core of the Mill District in a manner compatible with existing and planned residential and commercial areas:
o Create sites for flexible commercial / industrial uses that allow for a range of building types and spaces compatible with adjacent uses. o Integrate building design and landscaping criteria to demonstrate compatibility with the surrounding residential and commercial areas. o Remediate parcels restricted by environmental land use covenant as feasible to provide for the maximum range of allowable uses. Where costs are prohibitive maximize potential industrial uses/development. . • Protect and enhance the Strongs and Mill Creek riparian areas and provide beneficial and integrated open space areas.
o Designate streamside management area buffers and practices adequate to protect and enhance the Strongs and Mill Creek riparian corridors. o Accommodate appropriate passive recreation improvements within the Strongs and Mill Creek setbacks that integrate with the John Campbell Memorial Greenway / Strongs Creek Trail.
o Ensure Low Impact Development (LID) areas are coordinated with stormwater requirements to address stormwater runoff from new development and integration with constructed wetland improvements City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |9
within and adjacent to streamside management area buffers. o Consider, and where appropriate, allow new development within the Strongs and Mill Creek 100-year floodplain that is outside riparian buffers and the floodway consistent with City of Fortuna flood hazard reduction regulations.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |10
CHAPTER 3: LAND USE, OPEN SPACE & DESIGN
This chapter describes the location, influences, and land use characteristics for the MDSP area. Land use characteristics include the type of development and uses permitted within the area. The land use designations and development program correspond to and implement the development concepts for the MDSP area including the subareas described in this chapter.
AREAS OF THE MILL DISTRICT
The 104-acre Mill District Specific Plan area is characterized by existing residential uses in the northeast and mostly underutilized or vacant former industrial lands elsewhere. The area is divided into six subareas: 1) Pond Street Area, 2) Existing Residential Area, 3) Creek, Riparian and Trails Area, 4) Central Area, 5) Strongs Creek Area, and 6) Mill Creek Area. Each area has distinct characteristics which are described below.
Pond Street Area. The Pond Street Area is approximately 6.0 acres and located in the north west corner of the MDSP area. It is bounded by the 12th street U.S. 101 interchange in the west and the Great Redwood Trail right of way on the east. The dimensions and developable area of the Pond Street Area will change with the construction of the 12th Street/Newburg Road roundabout which will convert the northern portion of the site to the southeast quarter of the roundabout.
Development that benefits from proximity to U.S. 101 and the interchange is anticipated in this area. At this time, it appears that that once the roundabout is developed, access to the Pond Street Area site will likely be across the Great Redwood Trial right of way from the new through road within the Central Area.
Existing Residential Area. The Existing Residential Area is approximately 20.0 acres and comprises the northeast quadrant of the MDSP area. It is bounded by 15th Street and the former mill site fence line on the west, Newburg Road in the north, commercial properties along the west side of Fortuna Boulevard on the east, and 3rd Avenue in the south. The Existing Residential Area is almost entirely built out with single- and multi-family residential units and contains two large, underdeveloped properties that are planned for future residential development.
Creek Riparian and Trails Area. The Creek Riparian and Trails Area is approximately 12.0-acres and includes the Strongs and Mill Creek stream and riparian buffer area and the Great Redwood Trail corridor through the MDSP area. The proposed Strongs Creek and Mill Creek buffers are protective of the riparian areas and would accommodate the John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail and other trail connections to the Great Redwood Trail.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |11
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |12
Central Area. The approximately 50.5-acre Central Area is bounded by the Great Redwood Trail Authority right of way in the west, Newburg Road in the north, the Residential Area in the east and the Strongs Creek Area in the south. It contains the existing industrial building and most of the now demolished former mill buildings. The planned larger industrial and distribution-related building are proposed to be within this area. The Central Area will be visible from U.S. 101 and visually buffered by required landscaping along the proposed public street that will connect Newburg Road and South Fortuna Boulevard.
Strongs Creek Area. The approximately 8.5 acre Strongs Creek Area is bounded by the Central Area in the north, the southern boundary is the Strongs Creek riparian buffer, the western boundary is the Great Redwood Trail Authority right of way, and the eastern boundary is undeveloped commercial land along the west side of Fortuna Boulevard. The Strongs Creek Area is anticipated to accommodate a range of industrial and commercial uses.
Mill Creek Area. The approximately 8.4-acre Mill Creek Area is bounded by Strongs and Mill Creek in the north and east, the Great Redwood Trail Authority right of way in the west and Kenmar Road in the south. It is connected to the rest of the MDSP area by the Strongs Creek Trail, Great Redwood Trail Authority right of way and a narrow bridge across Strongs Creek that will be used only for emergency access. The Mill Creek Area has a high degree of visibility from U.S. 101 and will have excellent freeway access from the proposed Kenmar roundabout.
OPEN SPACE
The Fortuna General Plan 2030 has an objective of preserving open space in and around the Strongs and Mill Creek riparian area. The General Plan Natural and Cultural Resources Element contains policies that establish 50-foot minimum buffers to protect streams and their riparian areas. The General Plan Land Use Element Mill District Focus Area policies
expand these buffers to 100 feet for Strongs Creek
and 75 feet for Mill Creek, described above as the
Creek Riparian and Trails Area. The John Campbell
Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail, as it
passes through the MDSP area, will be located
within this buffer and will be sited in a manner to
protect important habitats. The Strongs Creek Trail
is also intended to provide multiple connections to
the Great Redwood Trail, which is also an
important MDSP open space component.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |13
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
A single General Plan Land Use Designation, Mill District (MD), is applied within the MDSP area. The following is a description of the Mill District (MD) Land Use Designation.
Mill District - Land Use Character: This designation provides for single‐use and vertical and horizontal mixed‐use development that is well integrated and compatible with the surrounding community. The MDSP utilizes design and landscaping guidelines as criteria to demonstrate the compatibility of proposed non-residential uses with the existing or planned residential areas.
Allowable non-residential uses are diverse and accommodate a broad range of development type and intensity including:
• flexible commercial / industrial uses
• small and large manufacturing
• warehousing, transportation and distribution
• medical, office, professional services, and civic uses • open space, parks, and recreation facilities
• industrial producers, fabricators, and artisans
• commercial, retail, restaurants, entertainment, and lodging • mixed-uses and live-work spaces
• and other similar and compatible uses
Mill District - Density/Intensity: The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for mixed‐use development shall not exceed 2.0. The FAR for nonresidential uses shall not exceed 0.8. Residential densities shall be in the range of 7.0 to 29.0 units per gross acre.
The Mill District Land Use Designation also allows residential uses. The zones described below are intended to facilitate residential development in the Existing Residential Area as a principally permitted use with objective design standards and allow residential development as a conditional use in all other areas to ensure land use compatibility. Requiring a conditional use permit in all areas outside the Existing Residential Area is in part due to soil contamination from past mill related uses, which are reflected by land use covenants (Covenant and Environmental Restriction on the Property) recorded against eight Assessor’s Parcels in the Central and Strongs Creek Areas. The existing land use covenants include soil and groundwater management requirements (Soil and Groundwater Management Plan) due to environmental impacts from historic use as an operating lumber mill. Land uses in these areas are generally limited to industrial uses unless cleanup is planned, conducted, and completed according to the requirements of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |14
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |15
LAND USE PROGRAM
Assumptions have been made relating to the distribution of land uses and proposed intensities for future MDSP area development. The assumptions are not meant to be prescriptive, but rather to help envision an overall level of future development within the 104-acre MDSP area. The assumptions also serve to inform infrastructure and service planning and environmental review. Based on the conceptual development plan submitted by the current property owner, the MDSP is anticipated to result in a maximum building area of approximately 980,500 square feet. Of this, 760,000 square feet are anticipated within the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center with the remaining 220,500 square feet occurring within other vacant or underutilized areas governed by the Mill District General Plan Land Use Designation.
MDSP implementation is anticipated to result in approximately 100 new housing units over three vacant or underutilized parcels which each average approximately one acre in area. It should be noted that the MDSP allows a broad range of single-use and mixed-use development, so the ultimate combination and type of development may be different than currently anticipated. In addition, the maximum theoretical MDSP area development potential (if all property were to be developed at its maximum allowable intensity, which is unlikely) is significantly greater than the anticipated buildout described above and that is included in the following table.
Use Type Existing Planned or Proposed
Non-Residential
Hotel 116,000 SF
Retail 94,900 SF
Retail Flex 43,200 SF
Commercial Services 12,000 SF 33,000 SF
Flex Industrial 88,500 SF
Industrial 40,000 SF 223,900 SF
Warehouse 381,000 SF
Residential
Single Family 58 Units n/a
Multiple Family 16 Units 100 Units
LAND USE POLICIES
The following goals and policies are intended to guide the development of land uses within the MDSP area.
Goal LU-1. Transform the former mill site into a center for industrial, commercial, and mixed-use development.
Goal LU-2. Strengthen and support the City’s economic base and attract new development to Fortuna and the region.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |16
Goal LU-3. Strengthen the community through the installation of needed site improvements to stimulate employment and economic growth and an important link in the John Campbell Memorial Trail system.
Goal LU-4. Implement performance standards and guidelines to assure high quality site and building design, to ensure environmental protection and the timely and orderly development of the Mill District.
Policy LU-1. A broad range of compatible development is permitted in the Mill District including industrial, retail, office, service commercial, recreation, and medium and high-density residential uses, consistent with the Land Use element and Land Use diagram.
Policy LU-2. Mill District design and development shall promote this area as one of Fortuna and the region’s key employment centers.
Policy LU-3. Strongs and Mill Creek riparian corridors shall be protected and enhanced as crucial links in the “River to Forest” public walkways system as identified in the General Plan.
Policy LU-4. The Mill District’s design and development shall be compatible with adjacent uses. The following factors shall be considered in reviewing proposals for the development new and/or expanding Mill District uses:
• Buildings shall be oriented to the street, residential areas, and transit services, wherever feasible;
• The site plan for individual projects shall include orientation, placement, and landscape features to integrate the new development with surrounding uses and existing physical development or open spaces;
• The site plan shall promote safe, convenient, and barrier-free multi-modal travel within the District, between the District and adjacent uses, and to and from transit stops; • The site plan promotes public safety;
• The site is well integrated with the rest of the city; • The site plan promotes convenient access to streets, the bike and trail network, and public transit services;
• Off-street parking areas should be located in the side and rear yards and designed to be compatible with adjacent residential uses;
Policy LU-5. Loading and service areas shall be screened, landscaped, and located to avoid conflict between pedestrian and vehicular traffic, and sited away from adjacent residential areas to the greatest extent feasible;
Policy LU-6. Design elements shall foster a sense of neighborhood identity including street signs, street lights, building materials and style, building signage, landscaping including street and parking lot trees, and public spaces.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |17
Policy LU-7. Public infrastructure upgrades and extensions shall be timed to coincide with site development.
Policy LU-8. Mill District streets shall accommodate the movement of large trucks and include public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and shall maximize the safety of all street users:
• Safe and convenient access shall be provided for pedestrians between buildings and transit stops, parking areas and other buildings and facilities. • The Mill District shall be designed to support safe and efficient operation of the adjacent arterial and/or collector roads and promote active transportation, and public transportation usage;
• The Mill District design shall facilitate the use of the great Redwood Trail; and • The portion of the Strongs Creek “River to Forest” trail within the Mill District shall connect with access points to the Riverwalk area, Strongs Creek Plaza, and the Great Redwood Trail.
Policy LU-9. The City shall require the construction of a street through the Mill District that connects Newburg Road and South Fortuna Boulevard at Redwood Way to facilitate convenient walking, biking, truck, and automobile flow through the MDSP area. Appropriate connections shall be provided to Pond Street, to existing Mill District industrial and commercial development, and to adjacent businesses near the intersection at South Fortuna Boulevard.
Policy LU-10. The City shall encourage development of the Mill District to be implemented in phased steps and that identifies the needs for, timing of, and financing for essential public infrastructure improvements.
Policy LU-11. The City shall encourage the cleanup of soil and or groundwater in areas subject to recorded covenants to allow full use of property within the MDSP area.
Policy LU-12. The City shall require MDSP area construction contractors to report any evidence of potential soil contamination to the City and shall require that any newly discovered contamination be investigated and remediated.
Policy LU-13. Reduced parking standards and/or on-street parking may be permitted to reflect the increased intensity of development and accessibility by transit and other modes of travel.
Shared parking is encouraged where it can be demonstrated that uses are complimentary.
Policy LU-14. Public safety and crime prevention measures recommended by the City of Fortuna Police Department should be incorporated into the design of future MDSP Area developments to the maximum extent feasible.
Policy LU-15. New development within the MDSP shall be submitted to the Fortuna Fire Protection District for review of Fire Code requirements, emergency access, signage, water supply and pressure, proposed fuel modification, and other measures to protect against structure and City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |18
wild fires. Measures recommended by the Fortuna Fire District shall be incorporated into the design of future MDSP area developments unless the City explicitly approved otherwise.
DESIGN GUIDELINES
All proposed industrial or commercial buildings shall undergo discretionary design review to demonstrate their conformance with the proposed MDSP Design Guidelines. The principal objective of the design guidelines is to assure compatibility with existing neighboring development, to maintain and enhance the aesthetic quality of Fortuna’s major travel corridors, and to improve the overall quality of the urban environment.
Permits for residential and mixed-use buildings shall conform to City-wide objective design standards for mixed-use and multi-family residential development. The MDSP design guidelines are contained in Appendix A and are generally summarized in the following:
Site Layout and Building Design.
• Facades visible from public streets should include architectural features such as reveals, windows and openings, changes in color and texture to add differentiation to the building elevation and reduce its visual mass.
• Noise generating functions should be located as far as possible from adjacent properties.
Buffer and Landscape Design
• Landscaping is required along the street and property lines and between buildings containing different uses to enhance the appearance and provide a development buffer adjacent to residential development with plantings, earth berms, low walls to achieve compatibility.
Parking Lot and Frontage Design
• Minimize the number of access drives to promote motorized and non-motorized safety while allowing for efficient and flexible access to the site. • Entry drives should be enhanced with ornamental landscaping, low-level decorative walls, monument-type signs, and decorative.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |19
ZONING
The MDSP relies on several of the Principal Zoning Classifications found in Title 17 of the City of Fortuna Municipal Code. The MDSP will use the following classifications as shown in the zoning map (Figure 3-3):
Multifamily Residential (R-M). The R-M district is intended for areas of the city where mediumhigh density residential development is appropriate. The R-M district is applied in areas of existing medium-high density areas, areas with existing lower density development that could accommodate higher densities, and undeveloped areas where higher density and large-scale development projects are appropriate. Maximum building height varies based on building setbacks but is generally the lesser of 40 feet or three stories.
Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T). The C-T district establishes areas where retail, wholesale, highway, and heavy commercial uses, along with amusement, transient, residential, warehousing and distribution, maintenance, repair, and servicing activities. C-T districts are to be established in zones of two acres or larger and shall be located only in the immediate vicinity of arterial streets, freeways, or the service/frontage drives thereof. There is a maximum building height of 48 feet.
Freeway Commercial (FC). The FC district is intended to be applied in areas of the city where it is reasonable to permit and protect commercial development that primarily serves the traveling public. This zone classification is intended to be applied only to areas that can be viewed from Highway 101. There is a maximum building height of 48 feet.
Light Industrial (M-1). The M-1 district establishes areas where light manufacturing, wholesaling, storage, and transfer functions can serve the community’s need for industrial activities that are compatible with nearby commercial and residential uses. The M-1 zone is consistent with the industrial land use designation of the Fortuna General Plan.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |20
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |21
The MDSP strives to provide flexibility in the location and use of industrial and commercial buildings to create a vibrant industrial, commercial, and mixed-use center. To facilitate this flexibility, C-T and M-1 zones are applied together to some MDSP areas (outside of the Existing Residential Area). to allow the development of a diverse uses in a coordinated manner.
MDSP Q Zone. Fortuna Zoning Code Section 17.04.090 allows the application of a Qualified combining zone (Q-zone) to any principal zone where modification of principally and conditionally permitted uses supports General Plan implementation so long as the qualified uses are specified in the ordinance applying the Q-zone.
A Q-zone will be applied to most MDSP areas where the C-T/M-1 zones are applied together and will almost exclusively govern the principally and conditionally permitted uses as well as related development and performance standards and regulations including but not limited to building design, height, setbacks, residential density, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) parking, and landscaping. The MDSP Q-zone allows a broad range of principally and conditionally permitted uses under the categories of Retail Sales, Retail Services, Professional Services, Industrial, Lodging, Residential, Open Space and Parks, and Civic Uses.
MDSP areas that are exclusively zoned R-M or C-T, will not receive the Q-zone overlay and the standards and regulations of each applicable zoning district will apply.
The MDSP Q-zone is summarized in the following and contained in Appendix A.
NONCONFORMING LAND USES
The MDSP allows the continuation of existing non-conforming uses in their current MDSP area locations.
The nonconforming use regulations set forth in Title 17 of the Zoning Code shall apply to nonconforming uses and to the use of nonconforming buildings, structures, and lots. The MDSP does not require the relocation of existing nonconforming uses; however, new uses that are incompatible or inconsistent with the MDSP will not be permitted.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Land Use
All new MDSP area development shall comply with applicable MDSP policies and performance standards including the Zoning Regulations, Q Zones, design guidelines, and the Financing Plan.
Noise and Screening
Parcels adjacent to existing or proposed residential areas shall provide attenuation measures such as structural features, construction materials, landscaping and increased setbacks to reduce heat, trespassing, vibration, glare, dust, air quality impacts, or other annoyances and to reduce noise levels for proposed residential uses to at or below the City’s 60 dB Ldn exterior and 45 LDN interior noise standards. (Fortuna General Plan Goals LU-4, LU-5, LU-6, LU-7; Policies LU-4.4, LU-4.6, LU-5.1, LU-5.2, LU-6.3, LU-7.1; and Programs LU-5, LU-6, and LU-7; and Fortuna Municipal Code Section 17.05.110).
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |22
Screening of off-street parking spaces that abut a residential use shall be required along all interior property lines pursuant to and consistent with Fortuna Municipal Code Landscaping and screening requirements.
Biological Resources
• Each MDSP area development shall incorporate and implement all of the applicable policies, standards, and mitigations included in relevant City of Fortuna plan(s) to avoid, eliminate, or reduce impacts upon riparian areas, wetlands, and special status species to a less than significant level.
• Each MDSP development project shall obtain all necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and all necessary Streambed Alteration Agreements from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the California Fish and Game Code.
• No tree shall be removed during nesting season (January 15 through August 31) unless a qualified biologist has surveyed the tree and found no evidence of nesting activity. The biologist may establish an avoidance buffer around occupied nests if there is a significant potential for take of the species or potential for inadvertent destruction of the nest. The buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on the biology of the species present and surrounding habitat (typically a starting point of 300 feet for most birds and 500 feet for raptors but may be reduced as approved by the biologist). No construction or ground-disturbing activities shall be conducted within the buffer until the biologist has determined that the nest is no longer being used for breeding or rearing and has informed the construction supervisor that activities may resume.
Cultural Resources
• Ground-disturbing activities shall be immediately halted upon the discovery of potentially significant historic or archaeological materials such as (but not limited to) concentrations of historic artifacts (e.g., bottles, ceramics) or prehistoric artifacts (chipped chert or obsidian, arrow points, groundstone mortars and pestles), culturally altered ash-stained midden soils associated with pre-contact Native American habitation sites, concentrations of fire altered rock and/or burned or charred organic materials, and historic structure remains such as stone-lined building foundations, wells or privy pits. Ground-disturbing project activities may continue in areas at least 100 feet from the site of discovery.
Hazardous Substances
• A Covenant and Environmental Restriction is recorded for the each of the following APNs 200- 363-060, 202-021-020, 202-011-046, 201-331-016, 201-331-013, 201-331-010, 201-331-012, and 201-331-017, in their entirety, and references soil and groundwater management requirements (Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, or SGMP) due to known environmental impacts caused by historic lumber mill operations and numerous Underground Storage Tank releases. • Any soil excavation activities shall be performed pursuant to an appropriate and fully implemented Health and Safety Plan and in accordance with a SGMP to protect human and environmental health. As per the covenant recorded for the site, the property “shall be used in such a manner as to avoid potential harm to persons or property that might result from any hazardous materials that might remain deposited on portions of the Burdened Property.” City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |23
• As per Article III – Development, Use and Conveyance of the Burdened Property, which details the restriction on development and allowable use, the use restrictions are as follows:
o Development and use shall be restricted to industrial and commercial. o No residence for human habitation shall be permitted. o No hospitals shall be permitted.
o No public or private schools for persons under 21 years of age shall be permitted. o No care or community centers for children or senior citizens shall be permitted. o No owner / operator shall conduct excavation without a permit. Excavation involving any contaminated soils shall be managed by the owner / operator in accordance with all applicable laws and orders existing for the property.
o Well construction, drilling or boring for the purpose of extracting water for any use shall not be permitted unless expressly stated otherwise in writing from the Board. o Any excavation conducted at the Burdened Property shall require a Health and Safety Plan (HASP) in accordance with the SGMP.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |24
CHAPTER 4: CIRCULATION; INFRASTRUCTURE &
COMMUNITY SERVICES
This chapter defines the infrastructure, utilities, and services that support current and future businesses, employees, residents, and visitors. It addresses major infrastructure necessary to serve existing and proposed land uses and planned development including water, sewer, storm drainage and dry utilities.
This chapter also discusses other public services and community amenities including public safety and services for employees and residents.
STREET NETWORK
The MDSP area is generally located between Highway 101 and South Fortuna Boulevard between Newburg Road to the north and Kenmar Road to the south. The existing roadway network within and around the MDSP area includes a mix of local roads, collectors, and arterials. Arterials emphasize high mobility for through traffic, while local roads emphasize property access, and collector streets attempt to achieve a balance between mobility and access. Roadways within the project area are described below.
• US Highway 101 is a four-lane freeway at the Kenmar
Road and 12th Street interchanges with two mixed-flow
lanes in both the northbound and southbound
directions. There are northbound and southbound
exits at Kenmar Road and 12th Street that provide
direct access to the southern and northern portions of
the MDSP area, respectively.
• South Fortuna Boulevard is an arterial roadway that
provides two travel lanes in each direction (northsouth) at the eastern edge of the MDSP area. • Kenmar Road is a collector roadway that provides one
travel lane in each direction (east-west) and bounds
the MDSP area on the south side.
• Newburg Road is an east-west collector roadway that
provides one travel lane in each direction at the
northern edge of the MDSP area.
• Local Streets:
o An unnamed future street extending from
Newburg Road to Kenmar Road.
o South 15th and 16th Streets are 40-foot wide north/south running dead end roads that extend south from Newburg Road and provide access to residential units in the northeastern section of the MDSP area.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |25
o Spring Street is a 40-foot wide north/south running road that extends from Newburg Road and travels south to connect with 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Avenues. It primarily provides access to residential units in the northeastern section the MDSP area with minimal commercial access.
o 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Avenues are 40-foot wide east/west running roads that extend west from South Fortuna Boulevard, intersect with Spring Street, and then dead end to the west. They provide access to residential units and some commercial areas in the northeastern portion of the MDSP Area.
o Pond Street is a private road that provides access from 12th Street to several properties in the northwest corner of the MDSP.
TRANSPORTATION CONCEPT
A transportation analysis was prepared to assess the performance of the City transportation system under existing conditions and under future conditions including traffic associated with the expected development of the MDSP. The transportation analysis examines whether operations will degrade below City standards and what improvements will be required to accommodate the proposed development.
The analysis considered City’s plans to replace the existing US 101 interchanges at 12th Street and Kenmar Road with roundabouts. The MDSP area is situated directly adjacent to these planned roundabouts and the plans for these facilities were required to be modified for the MDSP.
The Great Redwood Trail right of way is located within the MDSP area and the state of California and local agencies are engaged in comprehensive master planning for its construction. The MDSP area includes Great Redwood Trail connections from planned development and the John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail. The Strongs Creek Trail is a multi-use trail that passes through the southern portion of the MDSP area on its path from Redwood Way to the Riverwalk area. The Strongs Creek Trail will provide a substantial recreational amenity to the City and provide active transportation opportunities for employees, residents and visitors within the MDSP area.
The City seeks to enhance transit service to the MDSP area by providing bus stops along the new MDSP through street connecting Newburg Road and South Fortuna Boulevard. The transit stops are proposed to be centrally located within the MDSP area and to provide direct connections to the Great Redwood Trail.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |26
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |27
Planned development within the MDSP area, including the FMCC development concept, will require the following on- and off-site circulation and mobility improvements:
Street Access
• New Through Road. Install new public roadway, or developer owned roadway open to public use and subject to an irrevocable offer of dedication, extending from a point along Newburg Road generally across from Sunnybrook Drive to South Fortuna Boulevard across from Redwood Village Shopping Center south access road. The cross section shall contain two vehicle lanes and a left turn lane within 78-foot right of way containing Class II bike lanes, gutters, curbs, sidewalks, streetlights, and public utility easements. Landscaping on both sides of street to be installed and maintained by owner outside the right of way. The New Through Street shall also include the following associated improvements, to be approved by the City Engineer:
o Pond Street Access across the Great Redwood Trail to the New Through Street, subject to reimbursement by owners of those properties (current APNs 200-381-001 through - 009)
o Provide access from the New Through Street and all necessary easements and geometries to current APNs 202-011-046 through –048 and 202-011-050 to support truck traffic and development consistent with this MDSP with multiple access points. o Provide access from the New Through Street to parking lot serving current APNs 202- 021-013 and 202-021-019.
o Maintain fire, police, utility, and emergency access across the Strongs Creek bridge between the “lower valley industrial park area” in the Strongs Creek Area and the Kenmar Road freeway commercial area.
• New Through Road / Newburg Road Intersection Improvements. Install intersection improvements as specified in the traffic analysis currently underway or as approved by the City Engineer.
• New Through Road / South Fortuna Boulevard Intersection Improvements. Install traffic signal and associated intersection improvements as specified in the traffic analysis currently underway or as approved by the City Engineer.
• Newburg Road Frontage Improvements. Install frontage improvements on the south side of Newburg Road along property boundary for approximately 1,175 feet (actual distance may be decreased by the future installation of the 12th Street roundabout) from 12th Street to 15th Street, including pavement, as necessary, Class II bike path from 15th Street to South Fortuna Boulevard, gutter, curb, sidewalk, streetlights, public utility easements, or as approved by the City Engineer.
• Kenmar Road Intersection Improvements. Install intersection improvements as specified in the traffic analysis currently underway or as approved by the City Engineer. • Kenmar Road and South Fortuna Boulevard Frontage Improvements. Install frontage improvements on the north side of Kenmar Road and South Fortuna Boulevard along property boundary for approximately 750 feet (actual distance may be decreased by the future installation of the Kenmar Road roundabout) from the property boundary with the Great Redwood Trail to the southeast corner of the property along South Fortuna Boulevard, including pavement, as necessary, Class II bike path, gutter, curb, sidewalk, streetlights, public utility easements, or as approved by the City Engineer. Construction of the John Campbell Memorial City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |28
Trail through the MDSP may be incorporated as the required pedestrian and bicycle improvements.
• Off-Site - Newburg Road/South Fortuna Boulevard Intersection Improvements. Contribute a proportionate share of costs to conduct and implement optimization of signal timing plan and install improvements as specified in the traffic analysis currently underway or as approved by the City Engineer.
• Off-Site - Kenmar Road/Ross Hill Road Intersection. Contribute a proportionate share of costs to construct intersection improvements as specified in the traffic analysis currently underway or as approved by the City Engineer.
• Off-Site - U.S. 101 – Newburg Road and Kenmar Road Interchanges. Contribute a proportionate share of costs to construct roundabouts at Kenmar Road and US 101 north and south bound ramps and roundabout at 12th Street/Newburg Road/Riverwalk Drive/Pond Street/U.S. 101 north bound ramp.
Transit Access
• Transit Services. Implement transit-related improvements on the west and/or east sides of the new through road to provide on-site transit services at location(s) that provide convenient connections to the Great Redwood Trail, marked crossings of the New Through Road and walking or biking access points to Fortuna Mill Commerce Center development. Transit-related improvements shall be sited and constructed to the standards of the Humboldt Transit Authority or as approved by the City Engineer.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
• Strongs Creek Trail. Construct the John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail, a Class I Bikeway (Multi-Use Path) as defined in the John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan (2014, or refinements thereof), which is planned to cross through southern portions of the MDSP area along Strongs and Mill Creek. Trail improvements include:
o Dedication of trail right of way of approximately 50 feet; o Installation of a footbridge across Mill Creek; and
o Trail(s) meeting Class I Bikeway standards extending along the south and north side of Strongs Creek (using the existing bridge to cross Strongs Creek) to the Great Redwood Trail and on the west side of Mill Creek to the Kenmar Road roundabout. • Great Redwood Trail. Install connections meeting Class I Bikeway standards between the Great Redwood Trail and Eel River Drive at locations specified by the City Engineer, including the installation of crosswalks with median pedestrian refuge area (if required). Install accessible crosswalks and sidewalk ramps to provide access from the Great Redwood Trail to the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center.
CITY UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Water Supply and Distribution
The existing City of Fortuna water system, including source capacity, treatment, storage, and transmission, located outside the MDSP area, is adequate to support the projected buildout of anticipated development. The existing water system infrastructure within the FMCC and other parts of the MDSP area is aging, undersized, and located in a manner that conflicts with development plans, and City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |29
as such would require substantial improvements to support the proposed development scenario and maintain connections to existing City service areas. Improvements would include the installation of water mains, valves, services, meters, back-flow preventers, and hydrants. Most water distribution facilities would be located within public and private roadways, private roadways with public utility easements, or areas adjacent to the travel way with public utility easements. New facilities would be designed to accommodate the FMCC (to the maximum possible extents given the surrounding City distribution system) and other planned development within the MDSP area. The size of buildings identified in the proposed development scenario may require site-specific improvements to provide needed fire flow (in addition to the City main distribution infrastructure), potentially including privately owned and maintained on-site water storage tanks and pumps.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |30
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |31
Wastewater Collection and Treatment
The City wastewater treatment and disposal facilities located at the Tom Cooke Memorial Wastewater Treatment plant are adequate to support the buildout of the MDSP Area, however, the wastewater facilities that would convey wastewater from the MDSP area to the Fortuna Wastewater Treatment Plant are not adequately sized to accommodate the MDSP area at full buildout. The project site includes several potential alternatives for upgrades to the backbone collection system, including but not limited City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |32
to an alignment along Newburg Road and 12th Street to the Loni Drive interceptor, as well as alignment along Sunnybrook Lane or Meadowbrook Drive to a larger facility located on the south side of Rohner Creek that intersects 12th Street to the Loni Drive interceptor. Each alternative would involve the replacement of existing gravity flow wastewater facilities within their existing alignment with larger facilities sized to accommodate existing development, the MDSP area, and other new development consistent with the General Plan within the sewer basin. Which alternative is selected will likely be based on feasibility, lifecycle cost, and maintenance responsibility. Other design alternatives could also be considered to provide sewer services to the site.
The existing wastewater system infrastructure within the FMCC and other parts of the MDSP Area would require substantial improvement or replacement to support the proposed development scenario.
Improvements would include the installation of wastewater mains, lift stations, and service connections.
Most facilities would be located within public rights of way, and private roadways with public utility easements, or areas adjacent to the travel way with public utility easements. New facilities would be designed to accommodate the FMCC and other planned development within the MDSP Area.
Storm Drainage
The FMCC and other planned development within the MDSP Area would be required to design and construct facilities that accommodate stormwater flows according to City of Fortuna standards as well as regional Low Impact Development standards for municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s).
The topography of the Mill District area and past excavation and fill, generate the need for the former mill site property to accept stormwater flows from some adjacent property. In order for planned residential development to occur in the existing residential area in the north east of the MDSP Area, storm drainage improvements would need to be designed and constructed to accommodate stormwater flows directed west through the former mill site. If it is found that the infrastructure needs to be increased in size to accommodate the development of adjacent parcels, a buyback agreement could be developed for the FMCC developer to recuperate costs.
Low-lying areas not adjacent to existing drainage infrastructure would need to establish new stormwater outfalls to the adjacent creeks. All new outfalls would need to be appropriately designed and permitted through the various resource agencies.
In areas where proposed development will discharge stormwater to existing facilities, it will be the responsibility of the developer to improve offsite infrastructure as necessary to accommodate increased stormwater flows. Conversely, development could provide additional onsite storage or other peak flow mitigation measures to eliminate capacity impacts on downstream receiving facilities.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |33
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |34
OTHER SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Fire Protection
The Fortuna Fire Protection District (District) provides fire protection to the City of Fortuna including the MDSP area. The District’s headquarters fire station is located within 1,000 of the existing residential area and approximately 2,000 feet from proposed new entrances from Newburg Road and South Fortuna Boulevard. The District will be responsible for ensuring adequate fire protection and that on-site suppression systems meet Fire Code requirements. In addition, the analysis of the water distribution system serving the MDSP area indicates that the fire flows required for the largest proposed industrial buildings may be inadequate. The District may require installation of private on-site systems, including storage tanks and pumps to ensure fire safety.
• Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrants shall be installed every 500 feet within residential areas, and 300 feet within commercial areas, at locations approved by the Fortuna Fire Protection District and City of Fortuna Improvement Standards.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES POLICIES AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Circulation
• Construct applicable elements of, or contribute proportionate share costs, the MDSP Circulation Plan relating to street access, transit access, and bicycle and pedestrian access specified herein. • A new street, currently unnamed shall be a public street, Minor Collector Classification. Dedicate rights of way to the City of Fortuna consistent with the requirements of the City Engineer. This street shall be renamed according to City requirements to avoid potential future public safety problems or public confusion because it is “sound alike” name with an existing public street. • New development shall provide the public and private circulation improvements that are listed in the MDSP and as specified by the City Engineer.
Water System
• Construct applicable elements of, or contribute proportionate share costs, the MDSP water supply and distribution system specified herein.
• Water Mains. Water mains, as sized by the developer’s engineer, and approved by the City Engineer, shall be extended within the MDSP AREA in accordance with the City of Fortuna Improvement Standards, Section V-3, page 15.
• Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrants shall be installed every 500 feet within residential areas, and 300 feet within commercial areas, at locations approved by the Fortuna Fire Protection District and City of Fortuna Improvement Standards, Section V-3, page 15. A letter of approval from the Fortuna Fire Protection District, including a schematic diagram of approved fire hydrant locations, shall be provided prior to approval of the improvement plans. Provide easements to the Fortuna Fire Protection District for any on-site fire hydrant. • Fire Flow. If additional fire flow is required for specific development(s) within the MDSP AREA the applicant shall site and design on-site water storage tanks and pumps, so that adequate pressure and flows can be provided; or provide other means, acceptable to the Fortuna Fire Protection District and the City Engineer, to supply adequate water pressure and fire flows to the project.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |35
• Water System Appurtenances. Water valves shall be installed in accordance with City of Fortuna Improvement Standards, Article V – Water Systems. All dead-end mains shall be provided with a standard blow off or other acceptable means of flushing in accordance with the City of Fortuna Improvement Standards, Article V – Water Systems. Backflow prevention shall be provided at all landscape irrigation and fire service connections.
Wastewater System
• Sewer Interceptor. Contribute a proportionate share of cost towards the construction of the Loni Drive Interceptor and trunk facilities located between the MDSP Area and that facility that are necessary to convey MDSP Area wastewater to the Tom Cooke Memorial Wastewater Treatment plant. No entitlement (tentative maps, conditional use permits, building permits or other entitlements) shall be granted for development which results in a cumulative wastewater flow exceeding the capacity of the Loni Drive sewer interceptor, until the Public Works Director determines that improvements to that facility have been constructed and are available, adequate, and reliable to serve buildout of the Mill District Specific Plan and the surrounding region.
• Construct applicable elements of, or contribute proportionate share costs towards, the MDSP Area wastewater collection and treatment system specified herein. • Sewer Collection System. Sewer mains, as sized by the developer’s engineer, and approved by the City Engineer, shall be extended within the project in accordance with the City of Fortuna Improvement Standards, Article VI – Sanitary Sewers.
• Sewer Main Sizing. The minimum size of sewer mains shall be 8”, except for final runs within culde-sacs, or other areas where there is no possibility of future extension of the sewer main.
Sewer manholes shall be installed at a maximum spacing of 300 feet. Sewer cleanouts to grade may be installed at the end of final runs within cul-de-sacs, other areas where there is no possibility of future extension of the sewer main, or at the end of a sewer main that will likely be extended in the future. Sewer cleanouts to grade can be installed no further than 150 feet from a manhole.
Storm Drainage
• Construct applicable elements of, or contribute proportionate share of costs toward, the MDSP storm drainage system specified herein.
• Drainage Master Plan Preparation. Prior to the approval of tentative maps, the issuance of building permits for new development or the approval of improvement plans, a drainage master plan for the Mill District Specific Plan area shall be prepared. The master plan shall identify the approximate size and location of new drainage facilities and upgrades to existing drainage facilities necessary to serve proposed Specific Plan development. Areas not affected by the implementation of the drainage master plan can proceed on a case-by-case basis as determined by the City Engineer. Drainage facilities could include, but would not be limited to:
o The expansion or modification of existing storm drain facilities; o Establishment of sub regional or regional detention basins; and/or o The preservation of natural drainage areas.
• Drainage Master Plan Consistency. Individual development proposals within the Specific Plan area shall be required to implement all drainage improvements identified by the detailed drainage master plan as being necessary to accommodate the increased runoff of the City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |36
development proposal and to provide an adequate level of flood protection to the development proposal, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Individual development proposals within the Specific Plan area may modify the proposed facilities shown in the master plan so long as the intent of the master plan and the City’s design standards are upheld, and subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
• Flood Plain Requirements. Any development proposed in the regulatory flood zones shall be consistent with the requirements and provisions of General Plan Health and Safety Element Policy HS‐7.6, Regulating Land Uses in the 100‐Year Floodplain, allows development in in the 100‐year floodplain, and City of Fortuna Municipal Code Title 15, Division 2, Floodplain Management Regulations. Any development in the floodplain shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Floodplain Administrator.
• Low Impact Development Standards. New development shall comply with the requirements of the Humboldt County Low Impact Development Stormwater Manual.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |37
CHAPTER 5: INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING
NOTE: This Chapter is currently in progress, the details outlined below including public improvements, cost estimates, and potential funding sources will be finalized prior to adoption.
DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
Transportation
Parks, Open Space & Trails
Storm Drainage
Water
Sewer
FINANCING PLAN
This Financing Plan sets forth a plan to finance the public facilities required to serve the MDSP area. The purposes of the Financing Plan are to:
• Establish the policy framework for financing the required infrastructure improvements. • Specify the infrastructure improvements to be constructed, reconstructed, or acquired in the development of the MDSP area and the associated costs.
• Identify the distribution of cost burdens to the different land uses in the MDSP area. • Identify funding sources to pay for the infrastructure improvements. • Describe fee programs to pay for the infrastructure improvements.
Financing Plan elements must work together to provide the optimal balance of fees and private/public financing so as not to burden undeveloped land while also assuring that necessary facilities are constructed when needed. The goals of the Financing Plan are to:
• Fully fund all facility and infrastructure improvements when the improvements are needed to serve the project.
• Use existing fee programs to the extent possible and identify new fee programs. • Make maximum use of" pay-as-you-go" mechanisms.
• Make appropriate use of grant funding or other appropriate state or federal programs to support infrastructure development, private (developer) financing, existing fee programs, new fee programs, and reimbursement agreements to fund improvements when needed.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |38
Summary of Public Facility Program Estimated Facilities, Costs, and Funding Sources (To be provided) Implementation of the Financing Plan may include the following:
• Development Exactions, where developers will be required to privately finance public infrastructure for on-site road, sewer, water, and drainage improvements, to the extent adequate facilities are not already in place.
• Assessment Districts as financing tools that are subject to the approval of the majority of landowners and that allow for the collection of special assessments to finance infrastructure improvements built within the Assessment District and to finance the operation and maintenance of such improvements. Assessment Districts ensure that each property owner pays a fair share of the costs of needed improvements over a period of years at reasonable interest rates. They also ensure that the costs are spread across all properties that benefit from the improvements.
Facility
Estimate
of Total
Cost
Potential Funding Source
STIP/Grants
Capacity
Charges
Developer
Proportional
Share
Enhanced
Infrastructure
District (EIFD)
Sewer
Capacity
Increase
Project for
Loni Drive
Interceptor
Transportation
Infrastructure
Kenmar Rd &
US 101
Interchange
12th Street,
Newburg
Road, and
Dinsmore
Drive
Interchanges
with US 101
South Fortuna
Boulevard and
Newburg Road
Intersection
South Fortuna
Boulevard,
Kenmar Road,
and Ross Hill
Road
Intersection
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |39
• Development impact fees and reimbursement agreements. • Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD) are financed through tax increment generated from the growth in property taxes collected from within a designated district boundary.
Credits and Reimbursements
A developer who funds the construction of public improvements may be eligible for credit or reimbursement. The eligibility criteria within the credit and reimbursement agreement may include, but not be limited to, the following: (i) a developer pays or contributes more than is required to serve their project or mitigate actual impacts from the MDSP; (ii) a developer is required to advance the funding for or otherwise construct public improvements earlier than is required to serve the MDSP; or, (iii) to mitigate actual impacts from the MDSP. Specific terms of credit and reimbursement agreements will be subject to future negotiations between the developer and the City. To the extent credits exceed the amount of applicable fees the developer would pay, the developer may enter into a credit/reimbursement agreement with the City, which would describe the terms of reimbursement to the developer and the ability of the developer to assign the credits to other MDSP area projects.
INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
• All development within the MDSP area, new and existing, regardless of private or public ownership, shall be subject to the payment of applicable fees, assessments, special taxes, and any other charges in accordance with any subsequent infrastructure financing plan adopted by the City Council for the MDSP, including any authorized adjustments thereto as provided within such infrastructure financing plan, and any other fees adopted by the City in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, or pursuant to any other enabling law. Such infrastructure financing plan may include but is not limited to roadway, transit, water supply, sanitary sewer, drainage, fire protection, landscape and lighting facilities, and utilities. • No subsequent entitlements including but not limited to rezones, tentative subdivision maps, use permits and variances; or building permits shall be approved for the MDSP area unless one of the following has occurred:
o A MDSP area infrastructure financing plan has been adopted by the City Council and the resulting financing mechanism has been implemented; or
o Prior to issuance of any building permit, an agreement, in a form acceptable to the City of Fortuna, shall be executed which obligates the owner, lessor or lessee to:
Contribute a cash amount, determined by the Public Works Director, to the Financing Plan to finance the cost of infrastructure improvements, apportioned to the individual project; and
Contribute to the Financing Plan annually a cash amount determined by the City Manager for maintenance, apportioned to the individual project, in the MDSP area.
o No entitlement (tentative maps, conditional use permits, building permits or other entitlements) shall be granted for development which results in a cumulative wastewater flow exceeding the capacity of the Loni Drive sewer interceptor, until the Public Works Director determines that improvements to that facility have been City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |40
constructed and are available, adequate, and reliable to serve buildout of the Mill District Specific Plan and the surrounding region.
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |41
CHAPTER 6: IMPLEMENTATION AND
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS
Property owners seeking to undertake development projects will need to consult, in addition to the MDSP, the following documents:
• City of Fortuna General Plan, 2030
• Title 17 of the City Code, Zoning Regulations
• MDSP Design Guidelines; and
• MDSP Finance Plan.
The following is a summary of the actions and supporting documents that have been approved or will be approved at the time of the MDSP's adoption.
CITY OF FORTUNA GENERAL PLAN, 2030
State law requires each city and county to prepare and adopt a comprehensive and long-range general plan for its physical development (California Government Code Section 65300). A comprehensive general plan provides a jurisdiction with a consistent framework for land use decision-making. The general plan is sometimes called the “constitution” for land use development to emphasize its importance to land use decisions. The general plan and its maps, diagrams, and development policies form the basis for the city’s zoning, subdivision, and public works actions. Under California law, no specific plan, area plan, community plan, zoning, subdivision map, nor public works project may be approved unless the City finds that it is consistent with the adopted general plan.
The City’s General Plan sets forth the policy for land use and development throughout Fortuna. MDSP zoning, development standards, design guidelines, and goals and policies must be consistent with the General Plan. As noted in the land use chapter of this document, the City’s General Plan establishes the MDSP area as a key opportunity area and employment center.
The MDSP has been prepared in accordance with goals, policies and diagrams of the City of Fortuna General Plan, 2030, as adopted in October 2010. The General Plan contains the Mill District (MD) Land Use Designation which is applied only within the MDSP area. In addition, Goal LU-14, Focus Area: Mill District, contains a number of policies that were crafted by the City only for, and applicable to the MDSP area. These Mill District-specific policies have been refined through the MDSP planning process. The MDSP has been drafted to be consistent with these and other General Plan policies such as those relating to land use, community design, circulation, natural resources, and economic development. A policy by policy analysis of General Plan consistency is contained in Appendix B.
CITY OF FORTUNA ZONING REGULATIONS
The City of Fortuna Zoning Regulations, Title 17 of the City of Fortuna Municipal Code, govern development and land uses within the City. Certain Zoning Districts that are enumerated in the Zoning City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Draft May 2024 Page |42
Regulations are applied within the MDSP area, including Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T); Light industrial (M-1); and Multifamily Residential (R-M). A Q-zone has been applied to portions of the MDSP where Light Industrial (M-1) / Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) or Freeway Commercial (FC) zoning has been applied separately or together. The Q-zone almost exclusively governs the principally and conditionally permitted uses as well as related development and performance standards and regulations including but not limited to building design, height, setbacks, residential density, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) parking, and landscaping.
The R-M Zone, and other Zoning Code and MDSP regulations will apply to areas intended primarily for residential uses.
OTHER PLANS
The following plans, studies, and codes will continue to guide the design and development of each respective study area. The relevant plans, studies, and codes are listed and summarized in further detail as follows. • City Fortuna Drainage Master Plan, 2005
• John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan, 2014 • U.S. 101 12th Street and Kenmar Road Interchange Roundabout Project Planning City of Fortuna Drainage Master Plan, 2005
Storm drainage is an important issue in the MDSP area, given portions of the area are within the 100-year flood plain and flood way. The City prepared a drainage analysis and Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center conceptual plan, consistent with the City Fortuna Drainage Master Plan, 2005, to ensure that there would be no significant drainage impacts.
John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan, 2014 The City adopted the John Campbell Memorial Greenway and Strongs Creek Trail Final Master Plan in 2014.
This plan defines a linear park along the bank of Strongs Creek including a paved pedestrian and bicycle route through the City between Highway 101 and Rohnerville Road. The Strongs Creek Trail passes through the MDSP area is an important component of the MDSP planning process. Its construction is intended to occur as part of the MDSP implementation.
U.S. 101 12th Street and Kenmar Road Interchange Roundabout Project Planning The City of Fortuna has received funding through the Humboldt County Association of Governments to plan and design the U.S. 101 12TH Street and Kenmar Road Interchanges. These interchanges are identified as improvements in the Fortuna General Plan 2030 Transportation & Circulation Element and are included as mitigations in the General Plan Program EIR. The City prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Kenmar Road Interchange (State Clearing House No. 2022120278) and prepared a Notice of Completion on December 12, 2022. The City is in the process of preparing preliminary designs and will conduct an environmental review for the 12TH Street Interchange. The MDSP and Fortuna Mill Commerce Center conceptual designs have been prepared in a manner consistent with the needs and designs of these projects and City staff is consulting closely with Caltrans regarding potential project-related encroachments near these interchanges.
DRAFT MDSP SEIR
APPENDIX B
Technical Memorandum
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way.
The Power of Commitment
11230253 1
July 02, 2024
To Shari Meads, City of Fortuna Community Development Director From Paige Peel, GHD; Todd Tregenza, GHD Project No. 11230253 Project Name PWP Fortuna Mill District Specific
Subject “VMT Option 2 / Smart Growth Score”: Methodology, Land Use Scenario Analysis, Thresholds of Significance, Significance Determinations and Mitigations
1. Introduction
This memorandum describes the proposed methodology for assessing transportation impacts in the City of Fortuna consistent with SB-743 and current CEQA Guidelines, presents the methodology as applied to several land use scenarios in the City of Fortuna, and provides suggested thresholds of significance in assessing impacts for various project types. The scenarios analyzed in this memorandum include the baseline existing condition, the existing condition plus project, and cumulative condition plus project, whereby the “project” refers to the proposed land use associated with the Mill District Specific Plan.
SB-743 addresses a range of topics and aims to better promote statewide policies that (a) combat climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and particulates; (b) encourage infill development and a diversity of uses instead of sprawl; and (c) promote multi-modal transportation networks, providing clean, efficient access to destinations and improving public health through active transportation. As part of implementing SB 743, revisions to CEQA Section 15064.3 that describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts went into effect statewide on July 1, 2020.
CEQA gives lead agencies broad discretion over analytical methodologies. CEQA Guidelines §15064.3(b)(4), which is new with SB-743, reads:
“Methodology. A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revisions to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.”
No particular methodology or metric is mandated; the choice is left to the lead agency. In making this choice, an agency should bear in mind what sort of criteria the legislature had in mind for determining the significance of transportation impacts goals of SB-743. These were expressed in PRC §21099(b)(1), “Those criteria shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 2
The methodology described in this memorandum is based on the one developed for the Sacramento Blueprint Project – the ground-breaking study of how smart growth policies could lead to reductions in vehicle-miles traveled (VMT). The Blueprint Project represented a sea change in how transportation impacts were analyzed, because it demonstrated that conventional travel demand models have inherent blind spots that make them insensitive to the effects of residential and employment density, neighborhood design, and a diversity of land uses in close proximity to one another (the 3 D’s). It went a step further and developed procedures external to traffic models to forecast the effects of the 3 Ds on travel behavior. This work won a host of awards including US-EPA’s National Award for Smart Growth Achievement, FHWA’s Transportation Planning Excellence Award, the American Institute of Architects’ Presidential Citation, and AMPO’s National Award for Outstanding Achievement in Metropolitan Transportation Planning.
The following sections describe the methodological approach for assessing transportation impacts in Fortuna, adapted from The Blueprint Project approach described above.
2. Methodology
Design parameters
In setting out to design a tool to replace traditional travel demand modeling for SB-743 analysis, our team kept these key design parameters in mind:
• The tool must be capable of analyzing and measuring the components of SB-743’s description of impact criteria, namely: “Those criteria shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (PRC§ 21099(b)(1)) • The tool should provide useful information beyond what can be obtained using a travel demand model alone.
• The tool must be of practicable use in-house by agency staff with limited resources. So:
o The tool should use data that is readily available.
o It should be possible to input the background data once (the initial set-up by consultants) and thereafter only need input data for the project being analyzed (by agency staff).1 o The tool should work on software already available to most planning and public works departments in California, rather than on specialized modeling software. o Run times should be relatively short—minutes rather than hours. o It should be easy to use; ideally staff can learn it in the course of a single afternoon.
The need for quantitative analysis on widely-available software led to the decision to use a spreadsheet-based tool. The next section describes the characteristics of the tool developed and the associated methodology.
2.1 Analysis Steps
Data shows that when housing is in close proximity to commercial and service uses, people will walk or bike to those destinations at least some of the time, and even if they drive, the trips will be short (i.e., low vehicle miles traveled (VMT) trips). 2. Similarly, the likelihood of people walking or biking to work, rather than driving, depends on the distance between their homes and workplaces. So, measures of proximity are also measures of the 1 Background data may need to be periodically updated in the future, if the background data inputs become outdated based on local or regional residential or employment growth. This can be done in GIS at the parcel level and editing the input data, or by identifying the hexagon zones in which growth has occurred and applying a growth factor as appropriate. This may require assistance from a consultant, depending on the technical capacity and/or access to software of the involved City staff. 2 Section 15064.3(b)(3) provides for an analysis of transportation impact to be based on proximity to destinations.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 3
potential for VMT reduction. The methodology presented herein consists of determining the land use characteristics of each neighborhood within a jurisdiction to assess the potential for interacting with complementary land uses through non-auto trips, and calculating scores measuring the land use diversity, density, and proximity to destinations. These scores are referred to herein as “smart growth scores.” The steps in the methodology are shown in flow chart in Figure 1 and are described in detail below.
Compute Base Land Use Inputs
1) The analysis area—the city of Fortuna and its sphere of influence (SOI)—and the Humboldt County region were divided into hexagons. A hexagon was identified as within the City’s SOI if the centroid of the hexagon is within the SOI boundary. The hexagons are sized so that the distance from the center of any given hexagon to the opposite edge of a neighboring hexagon is 0.5 miles. The size of the hexagons was based on survey data of typical distances for walking trips by Americans, meaning that all the land use within a given hexagon and that of its six neighboring hexagons are within comfortable walking and biking distance.
2) The existing land uses in each hexagon3 were then grouped into three categories as follows:
• Residential, measured in households
• Retail, measured in jobs. This category includes services such as banking and beauty salons that typically attract more trips by customers than commute trips by employees • Non-retail, also measured in jobs. This includes office, industrial, and agricultural jobs where the majority of trips are made by employees rather than customers. 3) The three land use categories for each hexagon and its six neighbors are aggregated to represent the land use characteristics available within comfortable walking distance to people in the hexagon.
Computing Diversity Scores
4) Based on the data from the preceding step, the following scores are computed to measure the potential for interaction with complementary land uses, each representing a different type of transaction:
• Jobs/Housing Diversity: This is the relative number of jobs, retail, and non-retail, in the seven hexagons compared against the number of households in the same seven hexagons. This represents a person’s ability to walk to work. If a car is used, then the distance traveled will be short. In traffic forecasting, this type of trip is termed a home-based work (HBW) trip. • Retail/Housing Diversity: This is the relative number of retail jobs in the seven hexagons compared to the number of households in the same seven hexagons. This represents the opportunity to walk or bike locally for non-work trips. If a car is used, then the distance traveled will be short. In traffic forecasting this type of trip is termed a home-based other (HBO) trip. • Job/Mix Diversity: This is the relative number of retail jobs compared to non-retail jobs in the seven hexagons. This represents the opportunity for interactions between complimentary nonresidential uses to use walking or bicycling modes. An example of this would be someone walking from their office to a restaurant or coffee shop. If a car is used, then the distance traveled will be short. In traffic forecasting this type of trip is termed a non-home-based work (NHB) trip.
3 Existing households and jobs by hexagon were estimated using Humboldt County parcel data, 2020 occupied housing unit estimates from the 2020 Decennial Census and 2019 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) employment by industry data.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 4
The formulas for these indices are as follows:
Jobs/Housing Diversity =1-[(b*HHs-EMP)/(b*HHs + EMP)]
Job Mix Diversity = 1-[(c*REMP-NEMP)/(c*REMP + NEMP)]
Retail/Housing Diversity = 1-[(b*HHs-REMP)/(b*HHs + REMP)] Where:
HH = Number of households
REMP = Number of Retail and Service Jobs
NEMP = Number of Non-Retail Jobs
EMP = Total number of jobs (i.e., REMP + NEMP)
b = total regional employment / total regional households c = total regional non-retail jobs / total regional retail jobs d = total regional retail/service employment / total regional households These formulas produce scores for individual hexagons that represent how far they deviate from a perfect balance of land uses. These scores range from -1 to 1, with a score of 0 indicating an ideal mix of land uses (no deviation from the ideal) and scores of -1 and 1 indicating that only one of the land uses is present (maximum deviation from the ideal mix).
The ideal mix of land uses, found in the formulas as “a”, “b”, and “c”, was determined from the county-wide mix of the three land use types. The rationale for this is the fact that land uses tend to balance when viewed over a large area. For example, government jobs may be concentrated in one part of the region and industrial jobs in another, while residences and shops are distributed among various other communities. However, when taken together, the housing, retail, and non-retail uses in a region tend to occur in the correct proportions for that particular region.
5) The scores for the three types of diversity are then mapped using GIS software. If a two-color scheme is used, as shown in Figure 10, for example, then it is easy to identify which areas of the analysis area have a good local balance of land uses and which areas have a relative over-concentration of one type of land use.
Computing the Density Scores
6) Studies have shown that residential and employment density affect average travel behavior and VMT.
In the case of residential density this is because dense communities tend to be comprised of smaller dwelling units, with fewer residents and thus fewer trips/unit. In the case of employment density this is due to interactions not just between retail and non-retail jobs, but also due to trip chaining between businesses, such as parking once and walking to several destinations, or delivery vehicles making multiple stops within a neighborhood.
The residential density score is computed by dividing the number of households in each hexagon by the acreage of the hexagon, then normalizing the calculated score to a 0 to 100 scale, where the hexagon with the highest density score for the region, in this case Humboldt County, receives a score of 100 and the lowest receives a score of 0. Similarly, the employment density score is computed by dividing the total number jobs in each hexagon by the acreage of the hexagon.
Computing the Destinations Scores
7) The destinations score for each hexagon is then computed for each of three trip types. It is computed from the regional travel demand model as the sum, for all hexagons in the study area, of the attractions This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 5
in a hexagon times the trip distance from the hexagon’s TAZ to the hexagon in question. Or, expressed another way:
Destinations = Sum [Attractions(j)*Travel Impedance(i,j)] for all regional TAZs “j” A destinations score is computed separately for HBW, HBO, and NHB trips.
Combining the Individuals Scores into an Aggregate Score 8) The land uses from Step 2 are multiplied by the trip generation rates shown in Table 1 to find the number of HBW, HBO, and NHB trips generated by each hexagon.
Table 1: Trip Generation Rates
Trip Purpose
Trip Generation Rate
Household Retail Job Non-Retail
Job
Home-Based Work 2.2 1.2 1.7
Non-Home-Based 1.0 8.1 1.9
Home-Based Other 5.9 8.2 0.8
Total 9.0 17.5 4.4
9) The number of trips of each type is then converted into a percentage of trips for each type. This percentage will vary depending on the hexagon. For example, an industrial area will be mostly HBW trips with some NHB and few if any HBO, while a residential area will have many HBO, some HBW, and few NHB.
10) The elasticities of VMT with respect to density and diversity from the Blueprint project are then applied separately to HBW, HBO, and NHB trips. The result is an estimated reduction in the VMT for each trip type. This is scored in relative terms on a scale of 1 to 100, with 1 being the worst score possible and 100 the best.
11) Then the overall score for each hexagon is then computed by combining the effect on HBW, HBO, and NHB trips by weighting the effect on each trip type by the percentage of trips from that hexagon that are that type.
12) A combined score for a jurisdiction can then be computed using an average of the scores of each hexagon in the jurisdiction, weighted by the number of trips generated by the hexagon.
Computing Countywide Score
Using the same methodological steps above, the existing countywide score was computed to compare against the existing citywide score to aid in establishing thresholds of significance.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 6
Figure 1: Overview of Methodology
Key
Divide Analysis
Area into
Hexagons
Retail/Housing
GIS Task
Computation
Data from Model
Data from Research
Outputs
Households
Retail Jobs
Non-Retail Jobs
for each Hexagon
Aggregate to Hex &
6 Neighbors
JobMix Diversity
Compute
Jobs/Housing
Diversity
NonHome-Based
Home-BasedOther
Home-Based Work
Trip-Gen Rate by
Land Use
NonHome-Based
Home-BasedOther
Total Home-Based
Work Trips for
Each Hex
NonHome-Based
Home-BasedOther
% of Trips that are
for Home-Based
Work
1 2
3 4 8
Elasticities
9 Retail/Housing
JobMix Diversity
Jobs/Housing
Diversity Map
5 JobDensity
Compute
Residential
Density for
each Hexagon
6 NonHome-Based
Home-BasedOther
Home-Based Work
Destinations
Model Distance
Skim Matrix Model Trip Table
7 Reductions for NHBTrips
Reductions for HBOTrips
Relative VMTReductions for
HBW Trips (scale 1 to 100)
10 Combined Score by
Jurisdiction
12 Combined Score for
each Hexagon
11 This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 7
2.2 Using the Methodology to Evaluate Projects
The city-wide score discussed above is appropriate when the city as a whole is the project, as would be the case for a general plan update. A similar procedure is used when the project is a sub-set of the city, say in a single hexagon or several hexagons. In the case of a single hexagon, the score for that hexagon is compared directly to the threshold of significance. In cases where the project extends over several hexagons, then the score for the project as a whole is calculated as the weighted average of the project’s hexagons. The weighting is based on the number of trips generated by each hexagon. Suggested thresholds of significance are discussed in further detail in Section 3.2.
2.3 Validating the Methodology
Prior to using this, or any other, analytical tool for CEQA analysis, it is best practice to test whether the results are supported by substantial evidence. In this case we felt it prudent to check the results with recent data in Caltrans District 1 region. We therefore used Replica data on travel behavior from the seven incorporated cities in Humboldt County as an independent4 check of whether the tool’s underlying assumptions regarding travel behavior are borne out in the field. Replica represents movement by combining data from three primary sources: public use population census data, proprietary locational data from telecommunications and other IT infrastructure in the region, and field observations data from customer public agencies (ground truth). It is used by many public agencies for VMT-related work.
2.3.1 Jobs/Housing Diversity Score
The Jobs/Housing Diversity score is a measure of the neighborhood-scale balance between workers’ residential location and their job location. The underlying assumption is that people take proximity to their workplace into account when choosing their home, and vice-versa. So, a person may choose to live in a neighborhood close to their job or, conversely, may seek jobs that are close to their home, or may simply be better aware of job opportunities in their neighborhood compared to more distant locales. While not everyone will choose to live close to their work, the higher percentage that do so will reduce average VMT by making walking and biking viable options to driving and, if the traveler does drive, shortening the length of the vehicle trip.
Figure 2 graphs the Jobs/Housing Diversity score of each city against the share of work trips that are under ½ mile in length. The data shows a very strong relationship between the two (the R-square5 is 0.94), which confirms that the underlying assumption is correct; when people live in close proximity to workplaces, they are more likely to have short work trips.
4 “Independent” meaning that the data set used to test the methodology was different from the data set used to develop the methodology. 5 R-square (R²) is the proportion of variation in Y (in this case the Diversity score) explained by the independent variable X (the percentage of shopping trips that are under ½ mile). An R² of 0.94 means 94% of the variation in the output can be explained by the input variable.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 8
Figure 2: Jobs/Housing Diversity Score vs Share of Work Trips That Are Under 1/2 Mile
2.3.2 Retail/Housing Diversity Score
The Retail/Housing Diversity score is a measure of the neighborhood-scale balance between shoppers’ residences and opportunities to shop and eat locally. The underlying assumption is that if people have such opportunities close to their homes, then they will increase the percentage of short shopping trips they take relative to longer ones. This will reduce VMT by making walking and biking viable options to driving and, if the traveler does drive, shortening the length of the vehicle trip.
Figure 3 is a graph showing the relationship between each city’s Retail/Housing Diversity score and the share of shopping trips6 that are under 1/2 mile. The data shows a strong relationship between the two (the R-square is 0.64), which confirms that the Retail/Housing Diversity score is a good indication of whether residents will, in fact, do more of their shopping locally.
Figure 3: Retail/Housing Diversity Score vs Share of Shopping Trips That Are Under 1/2 Mile 6 The figures shown are for trips under Replica’s Shop, Eat, and Other categories. This excludes trips in the Work, Social, School, Recreation, Errands, and Commercial (freight) categories.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 9
2.3.3 Mode Split for Short Trips
As mentioned in the preceding discussion, the fact that a higher percentage of trips are short in places with good Diversity scores reduces VMT for trips made by automobile. However, even greater reductions in VMT occur when people choose to use non-auto modes for these trips, thus reducing the VMT for those trips to zero. The next check was to see whether the underlying assumption that non-auto modes would form a significant share of short trips was true.
Figure 4 shows the percentage of trips of all types under ½ mile in each of the cities that is made by walking or biking. In every case walking and biking accounted for more than half of short trips. This confirms the assumption that locally balanced land uses will not only reduce the length of auto trips but also reduce the number of auto trips made.
Figure 4: Percentage of Trips Under 1/2 Mile by Walking and Biking
2.3.4 Destinations
The Destinations score is a measure of how far a particular location is from the places that attract trips, such as offices, shopping areas, schools, airports, etc. While the Diversity scores are indicative of the likelihood of a person making short trips, Destinations measures the likelihood that they will make long trips. The underlying assumption is that people living in places with a high Destinations score will make long trips less frequently and so generate less VMT per capita.
Figure 5 graphs each city’s Destinations score against the share of trips originating in that city that are over 16 miles long7. The data confirms the fact that the Destinations score is strongly indicative of the propensity to make long trips; i.e. the higher the score, the fewer long trips are made. 7 The 16-mile distance was chosen based on the distance intervals available in Replica’s database.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 10
Figure 5: Destinations Score vs Share of Trips That Are Over 16 Miles
2.4 Advantages of the Methodology
This methodology offers several practical advantages:
a) Ease of Use: It does not require expensive software and special training to use, as is the case with most traffic models. City staff can evaluate projects in-house using GIS and Excel. b) Nuanced, Informative Results: Unlike other methodologies, whose output is a just a number saying the VMT is high or low, this methodology provides a clear indication of the underlying causes of high or low auto use. For example, at the project level it might show the analyst that a proposed housing project is in a location that lacks local shopping opportunities and might be improved with the addition of locally serving retail. At the general plan level, it might show that a city as a whole is tilted too far towards residential uses and that additional residential development would increase VMT if not mitigated by contemporaneous local retail and non-retail developments. It would even tell the user which type of development would be more helpful in reducing VMT, retail or non-retail. c) Appropriate Scale: While this methodology cannot substitute for a convention traffic model for forecasting over large geographic areas (entire counties), it is likely to provide a more accurate representation of travel behavior in a small town than is possible with a conventional model. This is because traffic models incorporate certain necessary simplifications, such as centroid connectors and frictionless intersections, that are inconsequential when forecasting long trips but are highly distorting when forecasting trip-making over small areas. With a total area of just over 5 square miles, Fortuna is the sort of compact, walkable city better suited to a proximity-based model than a trip-based model.
2.5 Limitations of the Methodology
As is the case with any tool, there are situations where the smart growth score is useful and other situations where it either cannot be used or where some other methodology might be better suited to the task. The main limitations to the tool are:
• It can only be used to analyze land development projects. Transportation projects require a different analytical methodology.
• It was designed for use in analyzing smaller jurisdictions that are not part of a large, contiguous urban area. In small, relatively isolated towns trips tend to be either long, to another jurisdiction, or short, This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 11
within the jurisdiction. In such circumstances a focus on balancing land uses within the jurisdiction can reduce the longer trips by substituting local destinations in place of more distant ones. Moreover, the short distances within the jurisdiction create the potential for a significant percentage of trips to be made by non-auto modes. Conversely, a city that is part of a large contiguous urban area is likely to have a lot of medium-length trips that are not represented well in this tool. A conventional traffic model would work better in that case.
• The smart growth score is not suitable for places with substantial fixed-route transit use, because transit is not represented in the tool. Fixed route transit plays such a minor role in the transportation networks of most small jurisdictions in California8 that its inclusion is not worth the additional complexity it would entail. The dial-a-ride services that are sometimes available are analogous to auto trips and so are already represented in the model.
3. Scenario Analysis
Development in the Mill District is expected to occur over the planning horizon of the City’s General Plan. Thus, a series of incremental development scenarios were analyzed to assess the impact of the proposed land uses associated with the Mill District Specific Plan on the City’s smart growth landscape. The following sections describe the analysis results associated with the “VMT Option 2 / Smart Growth Score” methodology as applied to each of the analysis scenarios presented herein, including:
1. Existing Condition
2. Existing Plus Project
3. Cumulative Condition (General Plan Buildout Without Project)
4. Cumulative Plus Project (General Plan Buildout Plus Project)
3.1 Existing Condition
The following sections discuss the components that comprise the proposed “VMT Option 2 / Smart Growth Score” methodology for the existing condition scenario. The estimated distribution of existing land uses, as well as the results for the diversity and density, and overall score for the existing condition within the City of Fortuna are presented herein. The citywide score for the existing condition supports the recommended threshold of significance discussed in Section 4: Thresholds of Significance.
3.1.1 Land Use and Trip Estimates
Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8, respectively, show the estimated distribution of households, retail jobs and non-retail jobs by hexagon zone within the city. Figure 9 shows the distribution of total trips associated with this estimated distribution of land uses. As shown, most of the city’s land use and associated vehicle trips are concentrated through the center of the city, in the land use designations flanked by north-south, major roadways, Main Street and Rohnerville Road to the east and west, which includes much of the city’s Commercial pockets and low-density residential land use areas, Central Business District, Corridor Mixed Use areas, and east-adjacent to the Mill District area. While, more generally, residential and employment uses are located in similar areas of the city, the hexagons with the highest concentrations of households and jobs are in different hexagons, as shown by the variation between Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8. Toward the outer limits of the city and within the city’s SOI outside city limits, residential and employment land use and trips are less concentrated.
8 It does not show up at all in the Replica data for jurisdictions in Humboldt County.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 12
3.1.1.1 Residential Land Use
The highest concentrations of residential land use are through the center of the City, east of Fortuna Blvd, as well as slightly northwest near 12th and Main Streets, Kenmar Road and southeast near W School Street from U.S. 101 to Rohnerville Rd. While some households are located in the outskirts of the City limits/SOI, residential use is sparsely concentrated.
3.1.1.2 Retail Land Use
Retail and service jobs are also most concentrated near Main Street and Fortuna Blvd, where most local commercial is located, as well as near Redwood Way, where Providence Redwood Memorial Hospital is located, along School Street, and Riverwalk Dr. The outskirts of the city limit and within the sphere of influence inside city limits has very few or no retail/service use.
3.1.1.3 Non-Retail Land Use
Non-retail jobs are mostly concentrated near 12th and Main Streets, and slightly south, near U.S. 101 and Riverwalk Dr. There are some non-retail jobs in other areas of the City to the southeast, but these are sparsely concentrated. The north side of the city features very few non-retail jobs.
3.1.1.4 Total Trips
Unsurprisingly, total trips are also most concentrated in hexagons near 12th and Main streets, and along Fortuna Blvd and School Street, where both residential and employment uses are most concentrated.
Source Zone Households
by Hex
� 0-4
� 5-12
� 13-24
� 25 -39
� 40-55
�
-
-
-
-
�
c::::J
�
56 -84
85 -108
109 -158
159 -192
193 -339
Hex Zones
Outside Fortuna
SOI
City Boundary
Sphere of
Influence (SOI)
Boundary
Highways
Paper Size ANSI A
1,750 3,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
llgrdretlglcflUS\fureka\Projects\5611125l3:J32\G S\Maps\Workingl 12500262_ vMT Ol=(ion 2_3J23 0:::tol::€r Up:ja:e\12500262_VMTOl=(im2_2D23_0::::tOOer_Update.�llY Print date 13NCN2D23-C812
<!3:M 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
DISTRIBUTION OF
EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 6
Data source City Bourda:y, SOI Bourda:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 2D22 ;
Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21 World Imagery Maxar erected Cly p;:ieel Source Zone Retail/Service
Jobs
c=J
c=J
c=J
c=J
-
-
-
-
-
-
c=J
b:l
c::J
0 -1
2-2
3-4
5 -10
11 -20
21 -29
30-74
75 -123
124-216
217 -339
Hex Zones
Outside Fortuna
SOI
Sphere of
Influence
Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Paper Size ANSI A
1,750 3,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
llgrdretlglcflUS\fureka\Projects\5611125l3:J32\G S\Maps\Workingl 12500262_ vMT Ol=(ion 2_3J23 0:::tol::€r Up:ja:e\12500262_VMTOl=(im2_2D23_0::::tOOer_Update.�llY Print date 13NCN2D23-C813
<!3:M 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
DISTRIBUTION OF
EXISTNG RETAIL/SERVICE JOBS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 7
Oa:a soLrCe City Bourda:y, SOI Bourda:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 2D22 ;
Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21. World Image y MaxarWorld Image y Maxar Crea:ed Cly p;:ieel Service Jobs
� 0-1
�2-3
�4-5
- 6-12
- 13-22
- 23-38
- 39-70
- 71 -117
-
�
Cl
c::J
118 -187
Hex Zones
Outside Fortuna
SOI
Sphere of
Influence
Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Paper Size ANSI A
1,750 3,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
llgrdretlglcflUS\fureka\Projects\5611125l3:J32\G S\Maps\Workingl 12500262_ vMT Ol=(ion 2_3J23 0:::tol::€r Up:ja:e\12500262_VMTOl=(im2_2D23_0::::tOOer_Update.�llY Print date 13NCN2D23-C813
<!3:M 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
DISTRIBUTION OF
EXISTING NON-RETAIL/SERVICE
JOBS BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 8
Oa:a soLrCe City Bourda:y, SOI Bourda:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 2D22 ;
Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21. World Image y MaxarWorld Image y Maxar Crea:ed Cly p;:ieel Source Zone Total Trips by
Hex
c=J 0-22
c=J 23-54
c=J 55 -113
c=J 114 -226
- 227 -402
- 403-854
-
-
-
-
c=J
b:l
c::J
855 -1,429
1,430 -2,377
2,378 -3,157
3,158 -7,253
Hex Zones
Outside Fortuna
SOI
Sphere of
Influence
Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Paper Size ANSI A
1,750 3,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
llgrdretlglcflUS\fureka\Projects\5611125l3:J32\G S\Maps\Workingl 12500262_ vMT Ol=(ion 2_3J23 0:::tol::€r Up:ja:e\12500262_VMTOl=(im2_2D23_0::::tOOer_Update.�llY Print date 13NCN2D23-C814
<!3:M 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
DISTRIBUTION OF
EXISTING TOTAL TRIPS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 9
Data swrce City Bwrdary, SOI Bwrdary, Streets Fortuna GIS, 2D22; Higlways TIGER, 3J21. Waid lma;i1:1y Ecrtffitar Gecgrap'lCs Wcrld lma;ie y Earth1a:
Geogr�hcs. erected Cly p;:ieel
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 17
3.1.2 Land Use Diversity
Figure 10, Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13 show the diversity indices results, as well as total trips or employment by hexagon, associated with the areas within the City’s SOI. As discussed in the methodology section of this memorandum, the jobs/housing, retail/housing and jobs mix diversity formulas produce scores for individual hexagons that range from -1 to 1, with a score of 0 indicating an ideal mix of land uses and scores of -1 and 1 indicating that only one of the land uses is present. The diversity score is calculated based on the sum of land use within a given hexagon and its surrounding six hexagons (neighbor hexagons). The results computed for each of these indices in Fortuna are discussed below.
3.1.2.1 Jobs/Housing Diversity
The jobs/housing diversity index represents an individual’s opportunity to walk to/from their place of employment from where they live based on the mix of residential and employment land use within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones. A score of -1 within this index represents too much employment, while a score of 1 indicates too much housing, and 0 represents an ideal mix of jobs and housing. Figure 10 shows the jobs/housing diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the number of total trips associated with each hexagon.
As shown, the jobs/housing diversity scores indicate that much of the city, specifically at the north, east and southeastern ends, is imbalanced toward too much housing, with scores closer to 1 in darker orange hues.
Conversely, areas flanking US 101 lean towards too much employment, with scores closer to -1 in darker purple hues. However, the number of trips associated with these areas must also be considered, which is indicated by the presence and size of the circles within the hexagonal areas. While these areas do not score as well as the more central areas on the jobs/housing diversity index, there are also few or no trips coming from these areas, so these area’s impact on the city’s total diversity is diminished.
In most of the central areas of the city, along Main Street through the Central Business District and adjacent to Corridor Mixed Use areas, where land use and trips are more concentrated, the jobs/housing diversity is relatively balanced with most scores ranging from -0.3 to 0.3 (lighter colored hexagons). This indicates that these areas generally provide the opportunity for people to live, work and access services in close proximity.
3.1.2.2 Retail/Housing Diversity
The retail/housing diversity index represents an individual’s opportunity to walk from their home to shopping trips based on the mix of residential and retail land use within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones.
A score of -1 within this index represents too much retail relative to nearby housing, while a score of 1 indicates too much housing relative to opportunities to shop locally, and a score of 0 indicates an ideal mix. shows the retail/housing diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the number of total trips associated with each hexagon.
Similar to the jobs/housing diversity in Fortuna, the retail/housing diversity shows imbalances on the outskirts of the city (red and orange hexagons); however, there are fewer, or no trips associated with these areas. While areas through the central city tend to be slightly more balanced (lighter colored hexagons), the areas with the highest concentration of trips lean slightly more towards retail, indicating there are more retail jobs than housing compared to the ideal mix, as shown by the pink and red hexagons (more retail/service land use) with larger circles (more trips). West of U.S. 101 near Riverwalk Dr is the most imbalanced toward more retail/service land use (darker red hexagons), where there are also a moderate number of trips.
3.1.2.3 Jobs Mix Diversity
The jobs mix diversity index represents the opportunity for interaction between retail and non-retail uses based on the mix of employment types within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones. A score of -1 within this index represents too much non-retail/service employment relative to retail uses, while a score of 1 indicates This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 18
too much retail/service employment, and 0 represents an ideal mix. Figure 11 shows the jobs mix diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the home-based work trips associated with each hexagon.
As shown in Figure 12, throughout much of the city, retail and non-retail employment is in different areas (the red and blue hexagons). While there are some areas with a high number of home-based work trips that are relatively balanced (lighter hexagons), the hexagons in the center of the city, east of the Mill District area, lean more toward retail/service jobs.
3.1.2.4 Overall Diversity Score
The total diversity index combines the three diversity indices scores and weights these scores based on the number of trips associated with the source hexagon. Considering trips in the total diversity score negates the impact of areas with few land use types and few or no trips on the overall diversity score.
Figure 13 shows the total diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the number of total trips associated with each hexagon. As shown, and similar to the three indices discussed previously, the central areas of the city with higher concentration of trips are relatively well-balanced, while areas toward the northern and southern city limits are more imbalanced.
3.1.3 Land Use Density
The density scores use a relative rather than absolute scoring system, calculating the residential and employment density within the source hexagon, and normalizing the score relative to the densities throughout the rest of the County. The residential density score is computed by dividing the number of households in each hexagon by the acreage of each hexagon, then normalizing the calculated score to a 0 to 100 scale, where the hexagon with the highest density score in the County receives a score of 100 and the lowest receives a score of 0. Similarly, the employment density score is computed by dividing the total number jobs in each hexagon by the acreage of the hexagon and normalizing the score to a 0 to 100 scale. The overall density score by jurisdiction is then also weighted by total trips.
The hexagon with the highest residential density in the County is in the City of Arcata, at/near the university.
Residential density in this location is about 10 households per acre. Since the residential density in this hexagon is the highest in the County, the hexagon receives a score of 100. Comparatively, the hexagon in the City of Fortuna with the highest residential density has about 5.5 households per acre, resulting in a residential density score of 54.9.
The hexagon with the highest employment density in the County is located in the City of Eureka, which has about 60 jobs per acre distributed across the hexagon. Since the density scores are normalized to 100 based on the highest density in the County, this hexagon receives a score of 100. Comparatively, the hexagon with the highest employment density in Fortuna has about 9 jobs per acre distributed across the hexagon, which receives a score of 14.3.
3.1.4 Proximity to Regional Destinations
The trip-weighted average destinations score for the City of Fortuna is 86.1, on a scale of 0 to 100, with zero being the worst and 100 being the best. The average destinations scores for the hexagons within the City of Fortuna’s sphere of influence range between 83 and 88. Although there is little variation in the destinations score within the city’s sphere, there is a lot of variation throughout the County as a whole. While the City features some proximity to regional destinations compared to the rest of the County, cities like Arcata and Eureka serve as the main hubs for regional destinations. Outlying communities, which are further for destinations within close proximity tend to have higher VMT per capita.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 19
3.1.5 Smart Growth Scores Summary
3.1.5.1 Citywide Score
The citywide smart growth score results for Fortuna are shown in Table 2, and presented in Figure 14.
As shown in Table 2, the citywide total diversity score for the Fortuna sphere of influence is 74.0, while Jobs/Housing, Jobs Mix, and Retail/Housing are 63.2, 69.0, and 65.0, respectively. Comparing these results with the results presented in Figure 10, Figure 11 and Figure 12, indicates that the land use mix in Fortuna is housing-rich, and the jobs mix leans towards retail/service over non-retail/service employment. This finding makes sense given that Fortuna is a smaller, residential center within the Humboldt County region.
Taken together, these results suggest that future development in Fortuna should, on the whole, emphasize increasing employment, specifically non-retail employment, rather than residential and retail uses, to improve the land use mix and avoid transportation significant impacts based on the methodology proposed herein.
However, the residential, retail and non-retail uses within a given hexagon zone and its neighbors will need to remain balanced in comparison to the regional ideal mix, meaning that non-retail jobs should be added where there are already retail jobs and residential land use, but fewer non-retail uses. Conversely, if retail jobs are added, this should be in locations where there are already non-retail jobs and residential use, but fewer retail jobs. If jobs are added in locations that are already jobs-rich and there is little residential land use within close proximity, residential land use should be added to ensure there is a balanced land use mix that will allow for interaction between complementary land use in close proximity, and thus, result in lower VMT impacts.
Table 2: Citywide Scores: Existing Condition
Diversity Scores Density Scores
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs
Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
63.2 69.0 65.0 21.7 3.4 86.1 74.0
Legend
Jobs-Housing c=J 0.11- 0.20
Diversity c=J 0.21 - 0.30
--1.00 --0.90
(More Jobs) 0.31 - 0.40
--0.89 --0.80 0.41 - 0.50
--0.79 --0.70 0.51 - 0.60
--0.69 --0.60 0.61 - 0.70
--0.59 --0.50 0.71 - 0.80
--0.49 --0.40 - 0.81- 0.90
c=J -0.39 --0.30 - 0.91 - 1.00 (More
Housing)
c=J -0.29 --0.20 Hex Zones
c=J -0.19--0.10 c=J Outside Fortuna
c=J -0.09- 0 SOI
c=J 0.01 - 0.10
Trips
0 0
0 1 - 400
401 - 2500
2501 - 4835
Sphere of
� Influence
Boundary
0 4836-7523
c:::J City Boundary
Highways
Streets
Paper Size ANSI B
1,250 2,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet
\\gliile!lgh::f\US\Elreka\Prqocts\551112:a3'262\GIS\M�s\Wcrkirg\12593:J32_ 'vMT Optim 2_2D23 0::::tOOer Update\ 12593:J32_ 'vMTOption2_3J23 _ 0:::tol::H _ Up:ja: e aprY Print dcte 13 Nov 3J23- 0023
<st:H 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
EXISTING JOBS/HOUSING
DIVERSITY & TOTAL TRIPS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 10
Oa:a swrce City Bomdary, SOI Bomdary, Streets Fa1ma GIS, 3J22; Higlways TIGER, 3J21. Waid lmaJE1Y Ma,m:Waid lma;i1:1y Ma,;a:Created by ppeel Legend
Retail-Housing Diversity
Custom
--1.00 --0.90 (More
retail/service)
--0.89 --0.80
--0.79 --0.70
--0.69 --0.60
--0.59 --0.50
c=J 0.11 - 0.20
c=J 0.21 - 0.30
- 0.31- 0.40
0.41 - 0.50
- 0.51- 0.60
0.61 - 0.70
- 0.71- 0.80
- 0.81- 0.90
- 0.91 - 1.00 (More
housing)
c=J Hex Zones Outside
Fortuna SOI
Trips
0 1 - 400
0 401 - 2500
0 2501 - 4835
0 4836-7523
Paper Size ANSI B
1,250 2,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet
c::::J
\\gliile!lgh::f\US\Elreka\Prqocts\551112:a3'262\GIS\M�s\Wcrkirg\12593:J32_ 'vMT Optim 2_2D23 0::::tOOer Update\ 12593:J32_ 'vMTOption2_3J23 _ 0:::tol::H _ Up:ja: e aprY Printdcte 13Nov3J23-0031
Sphere of
Influence Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Streets
<st:H 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
EXISTING RETAIL/HOUSING
DIVERSITY & TOTAL TRIPS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 11
Data source City Bourda:y, SOI Bourda:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 3J22; Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21Waid lma;i1:1y Ma,;a:Created by ppeel � 011- 0.20
--1 00 --0.90 (More Non-� 0.21 - 0.30
Retail/Service) 0.31 _ 040
-0.89 --0.80
-0.79--0.70
-0.69 --0.60
-0.59 --0.50
-0.29--0.20
� -0.19--0.10
� -0 09- 000
0.01 - 0. 10
- 041- 0.50
- 0.51 - 0.60
- 0.61 - 0.70
- 0.71 - 0.80
- 0.81- 0.90
- 0.91 - 100 (More Retail/
Service)
� Hex Zones Outside
Fortuna SOI
Home-Based Work Trips �
• 0- 1
0 2- 423 c::J
0 424- 845
0 846- 1268
Paper Size ANSI B
1,250 2,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
Sphere of Influence
Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Streets
\\gliile!lgh::f\US\Elreka\Prqocts\551112:a3'262\GIS\M�s\Wcrkirg\12593:J32_ 'vMT Optim 2_2D23 0::::tOOer Update\ 12593:J32_ 'vMTOption2_3J23 _ 0:::tol::H _ Up:ja: e aprY Print dcte 13Nov3J23-0034
ca:H 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
EXISTING JOBSMIX DIVERSITY
& WORK-BASED TRIPS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 12
Data swrce City Bw1fa:y, SOI Bw1fa:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 3J22; Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21. World Image y Ea:tffitar Gecgr�hcsWorld Image,')' Ea:tffitar Gecgrap'lCs(;reatedby ppeel
Overall Diversity
c=J
c=J
c=J
c=J
-
-
-
-
-
-
c=J
CJ
c:::J
0 00 -0 10 (More
diverse)
0.11 -0.20
0.21 -0.30
0.31-040
041 -0.50
0.51 -0.60
0.61 -0.70
0.71 -0.80
0.81-0.90
0.91 -100 (Less
diverse)
Hex Zones Outside
Fortuna SOI
Sphere of Influence
Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Paper Size ANSI A
1,750 3,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
llgrdretlglcflUS\fureka\Projects\5611125l3:J32\G S\Maps\Workingl 12500262_ vMT Ol=(ion 2_3J23 0:::tol::€r Up:ja:e\12500262_VMTOl=(im2_2D23_0::::tOOer_Update.�llY Print date 13NCN2D23-00:l3
<!3:M 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
EXISTING OVERALL
DIVERSITY & TOTAL TRIPS
BY HEX ZONE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 13
Data source City Bourda:y, SOI Bourda:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 2D22 ;
Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21. World Image y Ea:thstar Geogr�hcs. Crea:ed Cly p;:ieel Overall Smart Growth Score
c=J
c=J
c=J
c=J
-
-
-
-
-
-
c=J
CJ
c:::J
0-10 (Worst/Furthest
from Ideal Score)
11 -20
21 -30
31 -40
41 -50
51 -60
61 -70
71 -80
81 -90
91 -100 (Best/Closest
to Ideal Score)
Hex Zones Outside
Fortuna SOI
Sphere of Influence
Boundary
City Boundary
Highways
Paper Size ANSI A
1,750 3,500
US Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAO 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
llgrdretlglcflUS\fureka\Projects\5611125l3:J32\G S\Maps\Workingl 12500262_ vMT Ol=(ion 2_3J23 0:::tol::€r Up:ja:e\12500262_VMTOl=(im2_2D23_0::::tOOer_Update.�llY Print date 13NCN2D23-0033
<!3:M 5 d
CITY OF FORTUNA
VMT ANALYSIS
EXISTING OVERALL
SMART GROWTH SCORE
Project No. 12586262
Revision No.
Date November 2023
FIGURE 14
Data source City Bourda:y, SOI Bourda:y, Stree!s Fortuna GIS, 2D22 ;
Higl"ways TIGER, 2D21 World Imagery Maxar erected Cly p;:ieel This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 25
3.2 Existing Condition Plus Project Scenario
3.2.1 Land Use and Trip Estimates
The Existing Plus Project scenario includes the land use distributions associated with the existing condition, plus the land use changes associated with proposed Mill District project. Table 3 shows the assumed projectrelated land use changes associated with the Mill District Conceptual Site Plan. As shown, the project is assumed to add an additional 100 residential units, 646 retail jobs and 1,212 non-retail jobs within the four hexagons that cover the project area.
Table 3: Project-Related Land Use Changes
Project
Hexagons
Project-Related Changes
HouseholdsRetail
Jobs
NonRetail
Jobs
16595 0 315 170
16466 0 63 0
16722 100 56 915
16849 0 212 127
Total 100 646 1,212
3.2.2 Smart Growth Scores Summary
Table 4 shows the citywide diversity, density, destinations and overall trip-weighted scores for the Existing Plus Project scenario. As shown, the overall citywide score improves by 0.3 between the Existing Condition and the Existing Plus Project scenarios, from a score of 74 to 74.3, respectively.
Table 4: Citywide Scores: Existing Plus Project Scenario Diversity Scores Density Scores
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs
Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
54.6 71.6 60.0 20.4 6.4 87.5 74.3
3.3 Cumulative Condition: General Plan Buildout Without Project The Cumulative Condition scenario includes the land use distributions associated with the existing condition, plus the land use changes anticipated as part of the City’s General Plan buildout, without including any of the land use associated with the Mill District project. General Plan buildout assumptions were supplied by the City based on information from the most recent General Plan update.
3.3.1 Smart Growth Scores Summary
Table 5 shows the citywide diversity, density, destinations and overall trip-weighted scores for the Cumulative (General Plan Buildout) scenario. As shown, the citywide score improves by 0.2 between the Existing Condition and the Cumulative scenarios, from a score of 74 to 74.2, respectively.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 26
Table 5: Citywide Scores: Cumulative (General Plan Buildout) Scenario Diversity Scores Density Scores
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs
Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
57.0 68.0 61.7 29.2 4.1 86.0 74.2
3.4 Cumulative Plus Project Condition: General Plan Buildout Plus Project
The following sections discuss the components that comprise the proposed VMT Option 2 / “Smart Growth Score” methodology for the Cumulative Plus Project scenario. This scenario is based on the City’s General Plan Buildout assumptions, as well as the land use changes associated with the proposed Mill District project.
The estimated distribution of existing land uses, as well as the results for the diversity, density, destinations and overall score for the Cumulative Plus Project condition are presented herein.
3.4.1 Land Use and Trip Estimates
Figure 15, Figure 16, and Figure 17, respectively, show the estimated distribution of households, retail jobs and non-retail jobs by hexagon zone within the city. Figure 18 shows the distribution of total trips associated with this estimated distribution of land uses.
3.4.1.1 Residential Land Use
Similar to the existing condition, the highest concentrations of residential land use in the cumulative condition are through the center of the City, east of Fortuna Blvd, as well as slightly northwest near 12th and Main Streets, Kenmar Road and southeast near W School Street from U.S. 101 to Rohnerville Rd. While some households are located on the outskirts of the City limits/SOI, residential use is less concentrated than through the City’s center.
3.4.1.2 Retail Land Use
In the Cumulative Plus Project scenario, retail and service jobs are most concentrated in the hexagons near Main Street, 12th Street, Riverwalk Dr and Fortuna Boulevard. The outskirts of the city limit and the areas within the city’s sphere of influence have very few or no retail/service use.
3.4.1.3 Non-Retail Land Use
The greatest concentration on non-retail/service jobs in the Cumulative Plus project scenario are located in the hexagons covering the Mill District Site Area. There are very few non-retail/service jobs in the areas toward the outskirts of the city limits and the City’s sphere of influence.
3.4.1.4 Total Trips
In the Cumulative Plus project scenario, total trips are concentrated through the City’s center, with the greatest concentrations found along Main Street, Fortuna Boulevard and the Mill District Site Area.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 31
3.4.2 Land Use Diversity
Figure 19, Figure 20, and Figure 21, show the three diversity indices results, as well as total trips or workbased trips by hexagon, associated with the areas within the City’s SOI for the Cumulative Plus Project scenario. As discussed in the methodology section of this memorandum, the jobs/housing, retail/housing and jobs mix diversity formulas produce scores for individual hexagons that range from -1 to 1, with a score of 0 indicating an ideal mix of land uses and scores of -1 and 1 indicating that only one of the land uses is present.
The diversity score is calculated based on the sum of land use within a given hexagon and its surrounding six hexagons (neighbor hexagons). The results computed for each of these indices in Fortuna are discussed below.
3.4.2.1 Jobs/Housing Diversity
The jobs/housing diversity index represents an individual’s opportunity to walk to/from their place of employment from where they live based on the mix of residential and employment land use within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones. A score of -1 within this index represents too much employment, while a score of 1 indicates too much housing, and 0 represents an ideal mix of jobs and housing. Figure 19 shows the jobs/housing diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the number of total trips associated with each hexagon for the Cumulative Plus Project scenario.
As shown, the jobs/housing diversity scores show that the areas to the northwest, east and southwestern sides of the City’s sphere of influence are imbalanced toward too much housing, with scores closer to 1 in darker orange hues. The areas within the Mill District Site Area, and east of US 101 and the Mill District, on the other hand, are imbalanced toward more jobs, with scores leaning more toward -1, shown in the hexagons with purple hues. Additionally, the land use added by the General Plan and the Mill District project add a sizeable number of trips, as shown by the size of the circles within those hexagons. Because the diversity score is weighted by the number of trips associated with each hexagon, the imbalances in hexagons with a greater number of associated trips will result in a greater impact on the city’s total diversity score.
In most of the central areas of the city, along Main Street through the Central Business District and adjacent to Corridor Mixed Use areas, where land use and trips are more concentrated, the jobs/housing diversity is relatively balanced with most scores ranging from -0.3 to 0.3 (lighter colored hexagons). This indicates that these areas generally provide the opportunity for people to live, work and access services in close proximity.
Additionally, these areas feature a relatively higher number of trips compared to the areas on the outskirts of the City, so these areas have more of an impact on the overall scores for the City.
3.4.2.2 Retail/Housing Diversity
The retail/housing diversity index represents an individual’s opportunity to walk from their home to shopping trips based on the mix of residential and retail land use within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones.
A score of -1 within this index represents too much retail relative to nearby housing, while a score of 1 indicates too much housing relative to opportunities to shop locally, and a score of 0 indicates an ideal mix. Figure 20 shows the retail/housing diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the number of total trips associated with each hexagon for the Cumulative Plus Project scenario.
Similar to the jobs/housing diversity scores in Fortuna, the retail/housing diversity scores shown in Figure 20 indicate imbalances toward the outskirts of the City, as well as the areas east of US 101. The areas toward the outskirts of the City on the north, east and south lean more toward too much housing, with scores leaning more toward +1, shown in the hexagons in darker orange hues. However, the trips associated with darker orange hexagons that are imbalanced toward housing rather than jobs are associated with fewer trips; thus, diminishing the impact on the City’s overall diversity scores.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 32
The hexagons covering the Mill District project area and the areas west of US 101 lean toward retail jobs rather than housing, as shown by the darker red hues. Trips are also moderate to high in these areas, which increases the impact of the imbalances in these areas on the City’s overall score.
3.4.2.3 Jobs Mix Diversity
The jobs mix diversity index represents the opportunity for interaction between retail and non-retail uses based on the mix of employment types within a given hexagon zone and its surrounding zones. A score of -1 within this index represents too much non-retail/service employment relative to retail uses, while a score of 1 indicates too much retail/service employment, and 0 represents an ideal mix. Figure 21 shows the jobs mix diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the home-based work trips associated with each hexagon, for the Cumulative Plus Project scenario.
As shown in Figure 21, through much of the City’s center, where the greatest number of estimates trips are concentrated, retail and non-retail employment in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario is relatively balanced.
However, there are some hexagons east of Fortuna Boulevard that lean too far towards more retail/service jobs than non-retail jobs. Moreover, compared to the jobs mix diversity for the Existing Condition, shown in Figure 12, the Cumulative Plus Project scenario shows a more balanced job mix diversity across the City overall, and more specifically within the hexagons covering the Mill District, where trips are concentrated.
3.4.2.4 Overall Diversity Score
The total diversity index combines the three diversity indices scores and weights these scores based on the number of trips associated with the source hexagon. Considering trips in the total diversity score negates the impact of areas with few land use types and few or no trips on the overall diversity score. Figure 22 shows the total diversity calculated for the areas within the City’s SOI, as well as the number of total trips associated with each hexagon for the Cumulative Plus Project condition. As shown, and similar to the three indices discussed previously, the central areas of the city with higher concentration of trips are relatively well-balanced, while areas toward the northern and southern city limits are more imbalanced.
3.4.3 Land Use Density
As stated previously, the density scores use a relative rather than absolute scoring system, calculating the residential and employment density within the source hexagon, and normalizing the score relative to the densities throughout the rest of the County. The residential density score is computed by dividing the number of households in each hexagon by the acreage of each hexagon, then normalizing the calculated score to a 0 to 100 scale, where the hexagon with the highest density score in the County receives a score of 100 and the lowest receives a score of 0. Similarly, the employment density score is computed by dividing the total number jobs in each hexagon by the acreage of the hexagon and normalizing the score to a 0 to 100 scale. The overall density score by jurisdiction is then also weighted by total trips.
With the land use added in the Cumulative Plus Project condition, the hexagon with the highest residential density in the County is in Fortuna. Residential density in this location is almost 12 households per acre. Since the residential density in this hexagon is the highest in the County, the hexagon receives a score of 100.
The hexagon with the highest employment density in the County is located in the City of Eureka, which has about 60 jobs per acre distributed across the hexagon. Since the density scores are normalized to 100 based on the highest density in the County, this hexagon receives a score of 100. Comparatively, the hexagon with the highest employment density in Fortuna has about 17 jobs per acre distributed across the hexagon, which receives a score of 28.1.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 33
3.4.4 Proximity to Regional Destinations
In the Cumulative plus Project condition, the trip-weighted average destinations score for the City of Fortuna is
87.4, on a scale of 0 to 100, with zero being the worst and 100 being the best. The average destinations scores for the hexagons within the City of Fortuna’s sphere of influence range between 85 and 90. While the City features some proximity to regional destinations compared to the rest of the County, and local destinations added by the land use changes associated with the Cumulative Plus project condition, cities like Arcata and Eureka still serve as the main hubs for regional destinations.
3.4.5 Smart Growth Scores Summary
The citywide smart growth score results for Fortuna are shown in Table 6, and presented in Figure 23.
As shown in Table 6, the citywide total diversity score for the Fortuna sphere of influence in the Cumulative Plus Project condition is 75.1, while Jobs/Housing, Jobs Mix, and Retail/Housing are 55.2, 74.3 and 59.1, respectively, which results in an improvement in the overall citywide scores, from a total weighted score of 74 in the existing condition.
Table 6: Citywide Diversity Scores
Diversity Scores Density Scores
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs
Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
55.2 74.3 59.1 27.8 5.8 87.4 75.1
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 39
4. Thresholds of Significance
CEQA analyses performed under SB-743 require the use of thresholds, as was the case for the LOS-based analyses they replaced. These thresholds may be adopted for general use or may be chosen ad hoc for use on individual projects. We recommend that the City establish three types of thresholds, namely:
1) Thresholds for Screening by Size: CEQA offers categorical exemptions for very small projects from having to do EIRs, both because of the negligible impact they are likely to have on the environment and because the expense of performing an EIR might make small projects unviable. We recommend that the City use the Class 1, for small expansions of existing uses, and Class 3, for new small projects, exactly as they are written in CEQA Guidelines §15301 and §15303. Some jurisdictions are experimenting with converting the thresholds in the CEQA guidelines, which are measured in square feet, into some sort of equivalent in vehicle trips per day. We do not recommend this, because it involves a series of assumptions that may prove difficult to defend9, and in any case offers no significant advantages for Fortuna over the sections as written. 2) Thresholds for Land Development Projects: The methodology described in this memo is intended for use in analyzing land use projects. As with other aspects of SB-743, there is a lot of uncertainty regarding how the thresholds should be set. OPR’s Technical Advisory suggested using a threshold requiring a 15% reduction in VMT over existing conditions. The 15% number originated in CARB’s California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, where it was computed as the average reduction statewide that would be needed to achieve the State’s GHG reduction goals. However, this state-wide average may not be appropriate for all jurisdictions, and CARB has more recently set higher targets in some MPO areas and lower targets in others. For example, CARB’s latest plan calls for a 19% reduction in VMT for the state’s four largest MPOs10 down to less than 10% for some of the smaller MPOs. Fortuna is not in an MPO region, and thus is not included in CARB’s target setting. For that reason, we suggest using the targets for Shasta RTA, as it is both the geographically closest MPO and demographically most similar MPO to Fortuna. CARB set the target for Shasta RTA at a 4% reduction in average per-capita VMT.
3) Thresholds for Transportation Projects: As stated earlier, it is the intent of SB-743 that lead agencies use, criteria that “... shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (PRC §21099(b)(1)).
We recommend setting a threshold that explicitly focuses on balancing transportation modes within the city. An example would be:
“A project’s impacts shall be deemed significant if it results in a percentage increase in road capacity higher than the percentage increase in bicycle or multi-use capacity.” Note that this threshold would make all active transportation projects presumptively less-thansignificant. It would not preclude the City from undertaking road expansion projects, but it would mean that such projects would need to include expansion of the bicycle facility system as well. As written, it would require a 1%-to-1% expansion of the two systems, but it could easily be tweaked to require a 1%-to-2% or 3% expansion of bike facilities to help that system catch up with the facilities offered to cars.
The countywide score is computed in the same fashion as described for the citywide condition. The countywide score is used to calculate the threshold of significance proposed in Table 7. Based on the 4 percent threshold referenced above, an impact threshold could be established that aims to achieve a total smart growth score for the City that is at least 4 percent higher than existing regional averages for Humboldt County. The method for 9 Among other things, a threshold based solely on the number of trips generate would be vulnerable to challenge for not taking trip length into account.
10 SCAG, MTC, SANDAG, and SACOG
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 40
determining the difference in score required for a less than significant impact is shown in Table 7. As shown, a less than significant impact would require a Citywide score of 75.33.
Table 7: Threshold Based on Countywide Average and Deviation From Ideal Ideal Score 100.0 (A)
Countywide Average 74.3 (B)
Deviation from Ideal 25.70 (C) = (A) - (B)
4% Less Deviation than Average 24.67 (D) = (C) * .96
Required Score for Less-than-significant 75.33 (E) = (A) - (D)
5. Summary of Results
As shown in Table 8, the total weighted citywide score improves slightly from 74.0 in the Existing Condition to
74.3 in the Existing Plus Project scenario. In the Cumulative Plus Project scenario, the citywide score improves more from 74.0 in the Existing Condition to 75.1 in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario. While the score in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario does improve compared against the Existing Condition, the Plus Project scenario would still result in a significant impact based on the threshold score of a 75.33 shown in Table 7.
Table 8: Citywide Scores by Scenario
Project
Scenario
Diversity Scores Density Scores
Average
Destinations
Total
Weighted
Score
Jobs/
Housing
Diversity
Jobs
Mix
Diversity
Retail/
Housing
Diversity
Residential
Density
Employment
Density
Existing
Condition 63.2 69.0 65.0 21.7 3.4 86.1 74.0
Existing
Plus Project 54.6 71.6 60.0 20.4 6.4 87.5 74.3
Cumulative
Condition 57.0 68.0 61.7 29.2 4.1 86.0 74.2
Cumulative
Plus Project 55.2 74.3 59.1 27.8 5.8 87.4 75.1
5.1 Alternative Project Land Use Mix
The transportation impacts associated with the proposed Mill District project are significant and unavoidable.
However, a change in the project’s proposed land uses could result in a more balanced land use mix that is closer to the ideal mix and is estimated to be associated with fewer trips, and lower VMT. A more ideal land use mix for the Mill District project is presented in Table 9 for both the Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus project conditions. This represents the changes to residential land use of the Mill District project, without reducing the proposed number of jobs, that would be required for the results to be below the threshold of significance in both scenarios.
As shown in Table 9, without reducing the number of jobs, 275 households would need to be added to hexagon 16595, while an additional 240 households would need to be added to the 100 residential units already This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 41
As shown in Table 9, without reducing the number of jobs, 275 households would need to be added to hexagon 16595, while an additional 240 households would need to be added to the 100 residential units already proposed in hexagon 16722 for the project to result in a less than significant impact in the Existing Plus Project condition. In the Cumulative Plus Project scenario, 130 households would need to be added to hexagon 16595, while 80 households would need to be added to the 100 residential units already proposed in hexagon 16722 for the project to be less than significant.
Table 9: Potential Alternative Land Use Mix with Residential Emphasis Project
Hexagons Households
Retail /
Service Jobs
Non-Retail /
Service Jobs
Existing Plus Project Scenario
16595 275 315 170
16466 0 63 0
16722 340 56 915
16849 0 212 127
Cumulative Plus Project Scenario
16595 130 315 170
16466 0 63 0
16722 180 56 915
16849 0 212 127
6. CEQA Mitigation Strategies
The following strategies have been identified as potential mitigation strategies for CEQA mitigation of the transportation impacts identified to be associated with the proposed Mill District project.
1. To extent feasible, the project developer shall seek to incorporate residential uses into the Mill District and within a walkable 0.5-mile distance to the Mill District to complement proposed non-residential uses and result in a more balanced land use mix.
2. The City shall work with the developer to implement a Class I trail through the Mill District as part of the Great Redwood Trail and/or Strongs Creek Trail to provide a continuous active transportation corridor between Fortuna Boulevard and Newburg Road / 12th Street, as specified in the Mill District Specific Plan (MDSP) Bicycle and Pedestrian Access performance standard and shown on the circulation diagram.
3. The City shall work with HCAOG to incorporate findings and recommendations of the Multimodal and Vibrant Neighborhood Planning project to reduce automobile dependency for local trips through policies, programs, and projects related to the City’s land-use plan and transportation system.
4. The City shall work with HCAOG to incorporate findings and recommendations of the Multimodal and Vibrant Neighborhood Planning project specifically related to improving low stress connectivity of nonmotorized transportation modes between the Mill District site and the surrounding established neighborhoods.
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way. 11230253 42
5. The City shall, in its next land use plan update, work to implement policies that enable a mix of complementary non-residential and residential uses to be developable in portions of the City that have otherwise homogenous land use patterns.
6. The City shall work with the project developer to provide improved transit infrastructure to facilitate better access to existing and planned transit service opportunities.
DRAFT MDSP SEIR
APPENDIX C
Complete Report on File with the City
February 2024 A Cultural Resource Evaluation of the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center, Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA.
COVER PAGE
A. FORTUNA MILL COMMERCE CENTER, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CA, APNs 200-363-007, 200-363-060, 202-011-061, 201-082-007, 201-091-006, 201-092-026, 201-092-027, 201-092-037, 201-331-008, 201-331-009, 201-331-010, 201-331-012, 201-331-013, 201-331-014, 201-331-015, 201-331-016, 201-331-017, 202-021-020, 202-021-021, 202-021-022, 202-022-001, 69-ACRES TOTAL
B. COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
C. RIZZO & ASSOCIATES LLC
D. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Historic Resource Evaluation of Significance
2. Twenty-one parcels, 69-acres total
3. Commercial industrial development
4. Unfettered access to property, very poor visibility 0-50%, E. THIS REPORT IDENTIFIES AND INVENTORIES HISTORIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE
PROJECT AREA AND PROVIDES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR THE NEED FOR FURTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK.
F. RESULTS
1. RESOURCES IN AND OUT OF APE: NONE.
2. RESOURCES AFFECTED OR NOT BY PROJECT: NONE.
3. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: 0-50% VISIBILITY; SURVEYED THE ENTIRE 69-ACRES.
4. REQUESTED ACTION BY SPECIFIC LAW: ARCHAEOLOGICAL
MONITORING OF GROUND DISTURBANCE REQUESTED IN VERY
LIMITED AREAS OF THE CENTRAL EAST-WEST-WEST AXIS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA. NO OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK PER CEQA VIA HUMBOLDT COUNTY ORDINANCES.
5. CONTACT: NICK ANGELOFF 707-407-6205; [email protected]
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND SUPPLY COMPANY
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND SUPPLY COMPANY
February 2024 A Cultural Resource Evaluation of the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center, Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA.
A Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fortuna Mill Commerce Center Final Report
Fortuna, Humboldt County, California
Fortuna 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle
Location: APNs 200-363-007, 200-363-060, 202-011-061, 201-082-007, 201-091-006, 201-092-026, 201-092-027, 201-092-037, 201-331-008, 201-331-009, 201-331-010, 201-331-012, 201-331-013, 201- 331-014, 201-331-015, 201-331-016, 201-331-017, 202-021-020, 202-021-021, 202-021-022, 202-022- 001
69-acres
Prepared by:
Nick Angeloff, MA
Cydney Lanthier, BA
Rianna Bowen, MA
Jessica Bedell
Archaeological Research and Supply Company
440 Wildwood Avenue
Rio Dell, CA 95562
Prepared for:
Rizzo & Associates LLC
258 Sutton Place
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
February 2024
CONFIDENTIAL
DRAFT MDSP SEIR
APPENDIX D
718 Third Street,
Eureka, California 95501
United States
ghd.com
The Power of Commitment
GHD
Floodplain Encroachment
Analysis for Proposed Mill
District Development
Technical Memorandum
Planwest Partners, Inc.
December 12, 2023
The Power of Commitment
EXP: 9/30/2024
Project name PWP Fortuna Mill District Specific
Document title Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development Project number 11230253
File name Floodplain Encroachment Analysis.docx
Status
Code
Revision Author Reviewer Approved for issue
Name Signature Name Signature Date
S4 Patrick Sullivan Brett Vivyan Brett Vivyan 12/12/20
23 GHD
718 Third Street,
Eureka, California 95501, United States
T +1 707 443 8326 | F +1 707 444 8330 | E [email protected] | ghd.com © GHD 2023
This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose of assessing our offer of services and for inclusion in documentation for the engagement of GHD. Unauthorized use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
The Power of Commitment i
Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Scope and limitations 4
2. Background 4
2.1 Floodplains and Floodway 4
2.2 Regulatory Setting 5
2.3 Special Flood Hazards in the Project Area 5
2.4 Methodology 6
3. Design Standards 7
4. Floodplain Analyses 7
5. Summary of Potential Encroachments 9
6. References 11
Table index
Table 1. Base Condition (natural profile) Results - 100-YR Event 1 Table 2. Proposed Project (Encroached) Condition (natural profile) Results - 100-YR Event 3 Figure index
Figure 1. Mill District Site Vicinity Map 2
Figure 2. Site Location Map 3
Figure 3.National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer (NFHLV) flood map for the Project Area. The map presents the regulatory floodway along Strongs Creek as well as the 100-year flood floodplain (shown in blue). Note that due to limited scaling options in the web viewer, the map does not show the full extent of the Project Area. 6 Figure 4.Base Condition (Natural Profile) – 100-YR Event 8 Figure 5.Proposed Project Condition (Encroached Profile) – 100-YR Event 9 Figure 6.Water Surface Elevation for Base and Encroached Condition 10 Figure 7.Change in Water Surface Elevation Between Base and Encroached Conditions 11 Appendices
Appendix A HEC-RAS Results
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 0 GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 1
1. Introduction
The Project is located within the Strongs Creek Floodplain of the Mill District, in Fortuna California (Figure 1). The City of Fortuna is working to complete the “City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan”. Under this plan, the City of Fortuna is working with the new purchaser of the former mill site that is located east of Highway 101, south of Newburg Road, and west of Fortuna Boulevard. The purchased property comprises the majority of what is known as the Fortuna General Plan Mill District. The new purchaser plans to develop the property. However, prior to development a floodplain encroachment analysis is needed to demonstrate that the proposed development’s effect on Base Flood Elevation (BFE) will be an allowable encroachment within the Strongs Creek Floodplain, consistent with the City’s participation in the National Floodplain Insurance Program (NFIP). This report presents the findings of the floodplain encroachment analysis for the Project. The site location and Project boundary are shown in Figure 2.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requires communities participating in the NFIP to adopt FEMA flood insurance rate maps and implement standards that protect again flood damage for new development. The objective of performing the floodplain encroachment analysis is to identify the limits of allowable encroachment within the Mill District on Strongs Creek, consistent with the City’s participation in the NFIP and City standards.
FEMA publishes several guidance documents that outline technical and reporting requirements for conducting a flood risk analysis. The following FEMA guidance documents were referenced during the development of this floodplain encroachment analysis:
– Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping: Riverine Mapping and Floodplain Boundaries Guidance (FEMA 2022)
– Data Capture Technical Reference (FEMA 2019)
– Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Database Technical Reference: Preparing Flood Insurance Rate Map Databases (FEMA 2019)
– Flood Insurance Rate Map and Flood Insurance Study (2011).
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 2 Figure 1. Mill District Site Vicinity Map
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 3 Figure 2. Site Location Map
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 4
1.1 Scope and limitations
This report: has been prepared by GHD for Planwest Partners, Inc. and may only be used and relied on by Planwest Partners, Inc. for the purpose agreed between GHD and Planwest Partners, Inc. as set out in section 1 of this report.
GHD otherwise disclaims responsibility to any person other than Planwest Partners, Inc. arising in connection with this report. GHD also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent legally permissible.
The services undertaken by GHD in connection with preparing this report were limited to those specifically detailed in the report and are subject to the scope limitations set out in the report. The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on assumptions made by GHD described in this report. GHD disclaims liability arising from any of the assumptions being incorrect.
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on conditions encountered and information reviewed at the date of preparation of the report. GHD has no responsibility or obligation to update this report to account for events or changes occurring subsequent to the date that the report was prepared.
GHD has prepared this report on the basis of information provided by Planwest Partners, Inc. and others who provided information to GHD (including Government authorities), which GHD has not independently verified or checked beyond the agreed scope of work. GHD does not accept liability in connection with such unverified information, including errors and omissions in the report which were caused by errors or omissions in that information.
2. Background
2.1 Floodplains and Floodway
A floodplain is the low-lying area adjacent to a river or watercourse that is comprised primarily of river and flood deposits. Floodplains are dynamic features of the river landscape and portions of the floodplain are subject to erosion, deposition, and flooding. The area of the floodplain that is impacted depends on the location of the river’s active channel and frequency and severity of flooding events. The floodway is the area within the floodplain that actively conveys floodwaters during flood events. The size and shape of the floodway may change based on the severity of the flood. Floodway areas develop naturally but can also be constructed or altered by engineering techniques. For example, the size of the floodway area within the floodplain can be designated by installation of levees, which limit the extent of floodwaters to the floodway area.
The purpose of conducting the floodplain encroachment analysis is to determine if development on the floodplain may cause adverse upstream and downstream impacts that can threaten life and property during flooding events. FEMA defines a floodway as a tool to assist communities in balancing development within the floodplain against the resulting increase in flood hazard (FEMA 2021). It further defines a regulatory floodway as being the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land area that is reserved from encroachment in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water-surface elevation by more than a designated height (FEMA 2021). For most communities that participate in FIRM, including the City of Fortuna, the designated height is 1 ft.
FEMA will develop a floodway area for a community as part of a Flood Insurance Study and the floodway are usually shown on the Community’s FIRM map. Development within an adopted regulatory floodway is restricted unless it can be shown through a no-rise certification that the development will not cause any increase in flood stage (0 ft rise). If development is to occur on the floodplain, but outside the floodway, it must be shown that the development will not result in more than a 1ft rise in flood elevation. Without this allowable 1 ft rise in areas of the floodplain that are outside of the floodway, development in the floodplain would be severely limited.
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 5
2.2 Regulatory Setting
Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management, 1977)
Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management) (1977) directs all federal agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains, and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative. Requirements for compliance are outlined in Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 650, Subpart A (23 CFR 650A) titled “Location and Hydraulic Design of Encroachment on Floodplains” (2015).
If the preferred alternative involves significant encroachment onto the floodplain, the final environmental document (final Environmental Impact Statement or finding of no significant impact) must include:
• The reasons why the proposed action must be located in the floodplain. • The alternatives considered and why they were not practicable. • A statement indicating whether the action conforms to applicable state or local floodplain protection standards.
California’s National Flood Insurance Program
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the nationwide administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is a program that was established by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to protect lives and property, and to reduce the financial burden of providing disaster assistance. Under the NFIP, FEMA has the lead responsibility for flood hazard assessment and mitigation, and it offers federally-backed flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and business owners in communities that choose to participate in the program. FEMA has adopted the 100-year floodplain as the base flood standard for the NFIP. FEMA is also concerned with construction that would be within a 500-year floodplain for proposed projects that are considered “critical actions,” which are defined as any activities where even a slight chance of flooding is too great. FEMA issues the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for communities that participate in the NFIP. These FIRMs present delineations of flood hazard zones.
In California, nearly all of the state’s flood-prone communities participate in the NFIP, which is locally administered by the California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) Division of Flood Management. Under California’s NFIP, communities have a mutual agreement with the state and federal governments to regulate floodplain development according to certain criteria and standards, which are further detailed in the NFIP.
2.3 Special Flood Hazards in the Project Area
The National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer (NFHLV) presents the flood hazard data that is available for the City of Fortuna and the Project area (FEMA 2023). The NFHLV shows areas with special flood hazards, including the regulatory floodway, as well as areas with minimal flood hazards. Figure 3 shows these features for the Project area; however, Figure 3 was downloaded directly from the NFHLV and due to limited available scaling options does not show the full extent of the Project area. The figure shows that there is a regulatory floodway for Strongs Creek through the Project area. It shows that the portion of the Project area south of Strongs Creek is within the 100-year floodplain, while most of the Project area north of Strongs creek is in an area of minimal flood hazard. GIS layers for the regulatory floodway and the 100-year floodplain are downloadable from the NFHLV and were utilized in the floodplain encroachment analysis.
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 6 Figure 3. National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer (NFHLV) flood map for the Project Area. The map presents the regulatory floodway along Strongs Creek as well as the 100-year flood floodplain (shown in blue). Note that due to limited scaling options in the web viewer, the map does not show the full extent of the Project Area.
2.4 Methodology
GHD completed this floodplain encroachment analysis using the City’s existing HEC-RAS model, which was developed and calibrated based on FEMA’s HEC2 model files for the Flood Insurance Rate Study and updated using the most recent topographic information. The floodplain encroachment analysis determines the limits of encroachment that will cause a specified change in water surface elevation. To determine the change in water surface elevation, the program must first determine a natural profile with no encroachments. This base profile is typically computed using the one percent chance (100-yr) discharge. The computed profile will define the floodplain.
The extent and depth of the river for the base condition (natural profile) are calculated based on current existing conditions, as represented in the City’s existing HEC-RAS model.
The floodplain is divided into two zones: the floodway fringe and the floodway. The floodway fringe is the area blocked by the encroachment. The floodway is the remaining portion of the floodplain in which the one-percent chance event must flow without raising the water surface more than the target amount (allowable surcharge). The proposed floodplain encroachment conditions are based on the footprint of the proposed development and is focused on being outside of the FEMA mapped floodway (see Figure 3) and guided by initial encroachment analysis using HEC-RAS steady flow analysis Method 1 – user defined right and left encroachment stations. The HEC-RAS floodplain encroachment procedure compares the natural profile (existing conditions geometry) to the encroached condition GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 7 profile run. It is an iterative process where the left and right encroachment stations are determined by overlaying the project footprint to floodplain map to determine the encroachment stations, as defined by the edge of proposed buildings or other fill. The model results are used to evaluate the change in water surface level and extents of flooding in the floodway fringe and any change in flooding conditions upstream of the site.
GHD identified the extents of floodplain encroachments that result in a 1-foot rise (the maximum allowable for conformance with NFIP) within the Mill District and associated rise upstream of Fortuna Boulevard, downstream of Highway 101 and south of Kenmar Road. GHD also identified the extents of floodplain encroachments that result in no rise to developed areas upstream of Fortuna Boulevard, downstream of Highway 101, or south of Kenmar Road.
3. Design Standards
FEMA Standards
The FEMA standards are employed for design, construction, and regulation to reduce flood loss and to protect resources. Two types of standards are often employed: design criteria and performance standards.
A design criterion or specified standard dictates that a provision, practice, requirement, or limit be met, e.g., using the 1% annual chance (100-yr) flood and establishing floodway boundaries so as not to cause more than a 1-ft increase in flood stages.
A performance standard dictates that a goal is to be achieved, leaving it to the individual applicant as to how to achieve the goal, e.g., providing protection to the regulatory flood, keeping post development stormwater runoff the same as pre-development, or maintaining the present quantity and quality of water in a wetland.
The 1% annual chance flood and floodplain have been adopted as a common design and regulatory standard in the United States. The NFIP adopted this event in the early 1970s, and all federal agencies adopted the event as a standard with the issuance of Executive Order 11988. States or local agencies are free to impose a more stringent standard within their jurisdiction.
4. Floodplain Analyses
As discribed in Section 2.4, Methodology, HEC-RAS was used to calculate the water surface profile and inundation areas for both the Base Condition (natural profile) and the Proposed Project Condtion (Encroached). The Proposed Project Condition was developed by iteratively using the HEC-RAS encroachmet methodogy, Method 1, where the encroachment limits were specified. The proposed encroachments were limited to areas outside of the floodway and within the floodway fringe. The encroachment limits were adjusted to cause less that one foot of rise within the floodway fringe, minimal changes to upstream inundation areas, and cause no impact to roadways crossing Strongs Creek. The Base Condition model results are shown in Figure 4 and listed in Appendix A Table 1. The results of the Proposed Project Conditions (Encroached) are shown in Figure 5 and listed in Appendix A Table 2.
GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 8 Figure 4. Base Condition (Natural Profile) – 100-YR Event GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 9 Figure 5. Proposed Project Condition (Encroached Profile) – 100-YR Event
5. Summary of Potential Encroachments
As defined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), risk shall mean the consequences associated with the probability of flooding attributable to an encroachment. It shall include the potential for property loss and hazard to life during the service life of the bridge and roadway. Risk factors associated with the implementation of the proposed action includes, but are not limited to, the following: 1) change in land use, 2) change in impervious surface area, 3) fill inside the floodplain, and 4) change in the 100-year water surface elevation (WSE).
1. Change in land use - Surrounding land uses consist of residential, commercial, industrial, and other uses common to an urban environment. The proposed Project includes the redevelopment of a previous wood mill site.
Existing impervious areas will be used for the construction of buildings and parking areas.
2. Change in impervious surface area – The Proposed Project will be constructed on areas that are currently impervious. The existing impervious area will be converted to parking areas or buildings.
3. Fill inside the floodplain - There is no proposed fill within the floodway.
4. Change in the 100-year WSE - There would be no encroachment within the floodway. Encroachment within the floodway fringe would result in a change in the WSEs of less than one foot and significant change to the extent of GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 10 flooding off site. A profile of the water surface elevations for the Base and Encroached condition are shown in Figure 6. The change in water surface elevation between the Base and Encroached conditions may be seen in Figure 7. Changes in water surface elevation and inundation areas were minimal and did result in increased impact to properties upstream (east of Fortuna Boulevard).
Figure 6. Water Surface Elevation for Base and Encroached Condition GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development 11 Figure 7. Change in Water Surface Elevation Between Base and Encroached Conditions
6. References
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2023. FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer. Accessed July 2023: FEMA's National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer (arcgis.com) Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2021. Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping: Floodway Analysis and Mapping. Accessed July 2023: *Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping (fema.gov) Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2019. FEMA Flood Map Service Center | Search All Products. Retrieved April 19, 2023, from FEMA website: https://map1.msc.fema.gov/firm?id=06023C1209F.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. Flood Insurance Rate Map Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. Flood Insurance Study Federal Highway Administration. 1994. “Location and Hydraulic Design of Encroachment on Flood Plains.” FederalAid Policy Guide. Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 650, Subpart A (23 CFR 650A December 7, 1994, Transmittal 12. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/fapg/cfr0650a.htm GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development A-1 Appendix A
HEC-RAS Results
Table 1. Base Condition (natural profile) Results - 100-YR Event Reach River
Sta Profile Q Total
Min
Ch El
W.S.
Elev
Crit
W.S.
E.G.
Elev
E.G.
Slope
Vel
Chnl
Flow
Area
Top
Width
Froude
# Chl
MainChannel 8049.76 FIS 100 YR 2140 58.57 74.51 66.7 74.76 0.001689 4.1 571.46 100.64 0.21 MainChannel 7994.96 FIS 100 YR 2140 60.75 73.44 68.71 74.03 0.004858 6.25 374.96 54.5 0.35 MainChannel 7867.99 FIS 100 YR 2140 59.1 72.33 68.6 73.12 0.009651 7.17 310.42 50.55 0.45 MainChannel 7736.62 FIS 100 YR 2140 57.58 72.05 65.99 72.47 0.002287 5.35 443.84 64.03 0.29 MainChannel 7585.58 FIS 100 YR 2140 57.37 71.66 66.88 71.98 0.004309 5.2 545.57 95.63 0.27 MainChannel 7495.72 FIS 100 YR 2170 55.88 71.48 64.45 71.8 0.00112 4.59 528.06 89.81 0.25 MainChannel 7324.84 FIS 100 YR 2170 54.93 71.28 64.12 71.6 0.001132 4.93 555.23 98.09 0.25 MainChannel 7219.78 FIS 100 YR 2170 53.31 71.31 61.67 71.49 0.000453 3.72 778.02 108.58 0.17 MainChannel 7126.89 FIS 100 YR 2170 54.39 69.84 65.93 71.24 0.021473 9.59 240.89 41.66 0.52 MainChannel 6988.09 FIS 100 YR 2170 53.43 67.33 63.74 68.34 0.018766 8.16 279.03 58.92 0.57 MainChannel 6824.88 FIS 100 YR 2170 53.84 67.06 61.47 67.54 0.001665 5.82 453.84 64.34 0.31 MainChannel 6712.93 FIS 100 YR 2170 52.44 66.97 60.81 67.33 0.001437 5.13 524.68 77.87 0.27 MainChannel 6670.14 FIS 100 YR 2170 52.77 66.67 61.66 67.21 0.004003 6.19 403.37 66.17 0.34 MainChannel 6506.65 FIS 100 YR 2170 51.81 65.73 60.84 66.48 0.004665 7.43 374.2 61.08 0.39 MainChannel 6352.14 FIS 100 YR 2170 51.65 65.58 59.64 65.98 0.001613 5.56 476.9 65.04 0.28 MainChannel 6194.4 FIS 100 YR 2170 49.24 64.95 58.7 65.58 0.003975 6.71 404.09 63.46 0.34 MainChannel 6049.51 FIS 100 YR 2170 49.27 64.41 59.19 64.96 0.004302 6.49 438.63 100.22 0.35 MainChannel 5894.6 FIS 100 YR 2170 50.15 63.53 59.35 64.23 0.004827 7.2 362.14 58.34 0.39 MainChannel 5698.02 FIS 100 YR 2170 49.21 63.38 57.15 63.7 0.001207 4.67 531.08 80.58 0.26 MainChannel 5526.79 FIS 100 YR 2170 47.29 62.44 58.5 63.29 0.00429 7.65 321.33 51.33 0.44 MainChannel 5383.33 FIS 100 YR 2170 48.57 62.52 55.97 62.95 0.000763 5.28 456.03 64.79 0.28 MainChannel 5238.28 FIS 100 YR 2290 47.97 62.03 57.34 62.76 0.001606 7.17 392.29 75.25 0.4 MainChannel 5113.34 FIS 100 YR 2290 49.15 61.92 56.68 62.43 0.002946 5.9 466.35 83.87 0.32 MainChannel 4977.83 FIS 100 YR 2290 48.21 61.36 56.56 62.04 0.002573 6.84 390.77 53.45 0.37 MainChannel 4923.24 FIS 100 YR 2290 47.75 61.17 56.21 61.77 0.002909 6.27 375.59 49.42 0.37 MainChannel 4818.71 FIS 100 YR 2290 45.17 60.68 55 61.41 0.003335 7.02 371.49 60.52 0.37 MainChannel 4323.6 FIS 100 YR 2290 43.79 59.26 54.3 59.67 0.003309 5.97 613.06 196.22 0.31 MainChannel 4124.29 FIS 100 YR 2290 44.84 58.89 53.12 59.24 0.001436 4.99 628.99 147.82 0.28 MainChannel 4016.24 FIS 100 YR 2290 42.66 58.67 52.6 59.06 0.001716 5.42 554.3 99.93 0.28 MainChannel 3845.26 FIS 100 YR 2290 44.59 57.99 52.47 58.63 0.003538 6.57 411.05 63.48 0.34 MainChannel 3711.63 FIS 100 YR 2730 44.32 57.66 52.23 58.26 0.002171 6.36 492.59 95.01 0.34 MainChannel 3417.89 FIS 100 YR 2730 42.52 56.77 57.37 0.004534 6.73 516.62 116.17 0.37 MainChannel 3275.43 FIS 100 YR 2730 40.62 56.59 50.11 56.95 0.001572 5.01 667.7 122.73 0.27 MainChannel 3200.66 FIS 100 YR 2730 41.31 55.86 51.48 56.72 0.004076 7.91 447.06 90.56 0.41 MainChannel 2972.3 FIS 100 YR 2730 41.08 55.35 55.88 0.002651 6.21 555.11 110.34 0.34 MainChannel 2887.84 FIS 100 YR 2730 38.33 55.05 49.36 55.66 0.002402 7.15 555.84 83.49 0.33 MainChannel 2775 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.19 55.07 48.09 55.36 0.001318 4.93 750.12 105.25 0.24 GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development A-2 MainChannel 2634.06 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.96 54.89 48.04 55.19 0.001162 5.08 754.78 98.15 0.24 MainChannel 2570.7 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.17 54.86 45.18 55.12 0.000652 4.75 860.98 102.66 0.2 MainChannel 2453.31 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.88 54.75 46.86 55.05 0.000563 4.56 765.56 136.22 0.23 MainChannel 2268.7 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.23 54.38 47.9 54.85 0.002356 7.15 689.11 124.03 0.31 MainChannel 2131.87 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.85 54.36 45.31 54.61 0.000753 4.3 998.87 450.75 0.2 MainChannel 2032.86 FIS 100 YR 2730 37.08 54.22 47.68 54.51 0.001276 4.97 871.55 216.96 0.25 MainChannel 1888.8 FIS 100 YR 2730 37.92 53.85 47.44 54.29 0.001678 5.76 617.82 102.04 0.28 MainChannel 1808.54 FIS 100 YR 2730 40.39 53.38 47.68 54.2 0.000294 7.48 497.97 95.79 0.37 MainChannel 1793.84 FIS 100 YR 2730 40.28 53.41 48.11 54.16 0.00031 6.95 395.27 80.99 0.37 MainChannel 1628.31 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.97 51.43 47.35 52.96 0.000389 9.93 274.98 44.07 0.52 MainChannel 1613.35 FIS 100 YR 2730 37.87 52.04 44.25 52.33 0.0008 4.47 684.76 76.7 0.22 MainChannel 1604.39 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.86 52 43.6 52.32 0.000893 4.64 639.13 59.9 0.22 MainChannel 1596.35 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.48 52.01 43.97 52.31 0.000872 4.45 658.13 64.65 0.22 MainChannel 1582.26 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.5 51.94 44.04 52.29 0.001125 4.83 628.72 81.34 0.25 MainChannel 1568.93 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.24 51.77 45.27 52.26 0.001851 5.71 533.43 75.84 0.3 MainChannel 1553.99 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.59 51.63 45.38 52.22 0.002045 6.39 518.6 78.92 0.32 MainChannel 1532.3 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.06 51.65 45.32 52.15 0.001895 5.9 566.04 90.44 0.31 MainChannel 1516.89 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.5 51.66 44.94 52.1 0.001685 5.47 587.82 94.55 0.29 MainChannel 1502.27 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.44 51.64 44.89 52.08 0.001589 5.53 616.75 115.38 0.29 MainChannel 1488.13 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.51 51.64 44.79 52.05 0.001431 5.34 665.29 144.27 0.28 MainChannel 1474.78 FIS 100 YR 2730 34.88 51.66 44.94 52.01 0.001331 4.94 697.28 144.9 0.26 MainChannel 1441.44 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.01 51.55 45.9 51.95 0.001771 5.29 638.23 139.57 0.29 MainChannel 1431.36 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.07 51.29 46.06 51.91 0.00329 7.03 578.98 129.54 0.39 MainChannel 1397.01 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.39 51.09 45.95 51.8 0.002969 7 509.27 129.24 0.37 MainChannel 1389.11 FIS 100 YR 2730 34.99 51.21 51.28 0.000622 3.21 2244.72 870.68 0.16 MainChannel 1329.8 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.75 51.18 45.07 51.24 0.000376 2.67 2708.9 1137.54 0.14 MainChannel 1218.37 FIS 100 YR 2810 35.61 51.16 45.29 51.19 0.000303 2.32 3341.96 1373.2 0.12 MainChannel 1177.79 FIS 100 YR 2810 33.15 51.14 43.64 51.18 0.000252 2.7 3715.81 1546.2 0.12 MainChannel 1032.84 FIS 100 YR 2810 34.75 51.14 44.11 51.16 0.000126 1.72 4688.59 1729.05 0.08 MainChannel 983.01 FIS 100 YR 2810 34.52 51.14 44.22 51.15 0.000119 1.49 5187.85 2120.97 0.07 MainChannel 944.39 FIS 100 YR 2810 35.08 51.13 43.85 51.14 0.000132 1.7 5121.11 2179.68 0.08 MainChannel 814.43 FIS 100 YR 3350 33.98 51.11 43.81 51.12 0.00016 1.79 5643.21 2331.07 0.08 MainChannel 717.68 FIS 100 YR 3350 31.94 51.09 42.59 51.11 0.000124 1.86 6434.78 2530.64 0.08 MainChannel 584.05 FIS 100 YR 3350 33.28 51.08 44.06 51.09 0.000132 1.62 5947.3 2110.66 0.08 MainChannel 364.87 FIS 100 YR 3350 33.33 51.03 45.3 51.05 0.000266 1.9 3698.2 992.66 0.09 MainChannel 257.01 FIS 100 YR 3350 31.91 50.02 42.17 50.89 0.003296 7.83 772.53 846.21 0.34 MainChannel 245.41 FIS 100 YR 3350 31.93 50 42.24 50.58 0.002496 6.75 663.16 861.74 0.29 MainChannel 61.07 FIS 100 YR 3350 32.18 49.25 44.11 50.41 0.002126 9.03 456.25 51.93 0.43 MainChannel 55.46 FIS 100 YR 3350 32.12 49.24 43.93 50.39 0.00213 9.02 481.32 59.78 0.43 MainChannel 0 FIS 100 YR 3350 32.14 48.41 44.94 50.19 0.003167 11.34 452.08 93.49 0.55 GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development A-3 Table 2. Proposed Project (Encroached) Condition (natural profile) Results - 100-YR Event Reach
River
Sta Profile
Q
Total
Min
Ch El
W.S.
Elev
Crit
W.S.
E.G.
Elev
E.G.
Slope
Vel
Chnl
Flow
Area
Top
Width
Froude
# Chl
MainChannel 8049.76 FIS 100 YR 2140 58.57 74.51 66.7 74.76 0.001689 4.1 571.46 100.64 0.21 MainChannel 7994.96 FIS 100 YR 2140 60.75 73.44 68.71 74.03 0.004858 6.25 374.96 54.5 0.35 MainChannel 7867.99 FIS 100 YR 2140 59.1 72.33 68.6 73.12 0.009651 7.17 310.42 50.55 0.45 MainChannel 7736.62 FIS 100 YR 2140 57.58 72.05 65.99 72.47 0.002287 5.35 443.84 64.03 0.29 MainChannel 7585.58 FIS 100 YR 2140 57.37 71.66 66.88 71.98 0.004309 5.2 545.57 95.63 0.27 MainChannel 7495.72 FIS 100 YR 2170 55.88 71.48 64.45 71.8 0.00112 4.59 528.06 89.81 0.25 MainChannel 7324.84 FIS 100 YR 2170 54.93 71.28 64.12 71.6 0.001132 4.93 555.23 98.09 0.25 MainChannel 7219.78 FIS 100 YR 2170 53.31 71.31 61.67 71.49 0.000453 3.72 778.02 108.58 0.17 MainChannel 7126.89 FIS 100 YR 2170 54.39 69.84 65.93 71.24 0.021473 9.59 240.89 41.66 0.52 MainChannel 6988.09 FIS 100 YR 2170 53.43 67.33 63.74 68.34 0.018763 8.16 279.05 58.93 0.57 MainChannel 6824.88 FIS 100 YR 2170 53.84 67.06 61.47 67.54 0.001665 5.82 453.86 64.34 0.31 MainChannel 6712.93 FIS 100 YR 2170 52.44 66.97 60.81 67.33 0.001437 5.13 524.7 77.87 0.27 MainChannel 6670.14 FIS 100 YR 2170 52.77 66.67 61.66 67.21 0.004003 6.19 403.4 66.18 0.34 MainChannel 6506.65 FIS 100 YR 2170 51.81 65.73 60.84 66.48 0.004664 7.43 374.23 61.08 0.39 MainChannel 6352.14 FIS 100 YR 2170 51.65 65.58 59.64 65.98 0.001613 5.56 476.94 65.04 0.28 MainChannel 6194.4 FIS 100 YR 2170 49.24 64.96 58.7 65.58 0.003975 6.71 404.14 63.47 0.34 MainChannel 6049.51 FIS 100 YR 2170 49.27 64.41 59.19 64.96 0.0043 6.49 438.73 100.23 0.35 MainChannel 5894.6 FIS 100 YR 2170 50.15 63.53 59.35 64.23 0.004824 7.2 362.23 58.35 0.39 MainChannel 5698.02 FIS 100 YR 2170 49.21 63.38 57.15 63.7 0.001206 4.67 531.21 80.59 0.26 MainChannel 5526.79 FIS 100 YR 2170 47.29 62.45 58.5 63.29 0.004286 7.64 321.44 51.35 0.44 MainChannel 5383.33 FIS 100 YR 2170 48.57 62.53 55.97 62.95 0.000762 5.28 456.18 64.81 0.28 MainChannel 5238.28 FIS 100 YR 2290 47.97 62.03 57.34 62.76 0.001604 7.17 392.49 75.35 0.4 MainChannel 5113.34 FIS 100 YR 2290 49.15 61.92 56.68 62.43 0.002943 5.9 466.59 83.91 0.32 MainChannel 4977.83 FIS 100 YR 2290 48.21 61.36 56.56 62.04 0.00257 6.84 390.96 53.46 0.37 MainChannel 4923.24 FIS 100 YR 2290 47.75 61.17 56.21 61.78 0.002905 6.27 375.77 49.43 0.37 MainChannel 4818.71 FIS 100 YR 2290 45.17 60.68 55 61.41 0.00333 7.01 371.77 60.57 0.37 MainChannel 4323.6 FIS 100 YR 2290 43.79 59.28 54.3 59.69 0.003265 5.94 617.24 196.37 0.31 MainChannel 4124.29 FIS 100 YR 2290 44.84 58.92 53.12 59.26 0.00142 4.97 632.61 148.15 0.28 MainChannel 4016.24 FIS 100 YR 2290 42.66 58.69 52.6 59.08 0.001698 5.4 556.94 100.18 0.28 MainChannel 3845.26 FIS 100 YR 2290 44.59 58.03 52.47 58.66 0.003499 6.54 413.13 63.7 0.34 MainChannel 3711.63 FIS 100 YR 2730 44.32 57.7 52.23 58.3 0.002142 6.34 496.19 96.37 0.34 MainChannel 3417.89 FIS 100 YR 2730 42.52 56.83 57.42 0.004405 6.66 523.75 117.82 0.37 MainChannel 3275.43 FIS 100 YR 2730 40.62 56.66 50.11 57.01 0.001532 4.96 675.72 123.64 0.26 MainChannel 3200.66 FIS 100 YR 2730 41.31 55.95 51.48 56.78 0.00393 7.81 455.37 91.54 0.4 MainChannel 2972.3 FIS 100 YR 2730 41.08 55.47 55.98 0.002517 6.1 568.53 111.16 0.33 MainChannel 2887.84 FIS 100 YR 2730 38.33 55.18 49.36 55.77 0.002296 7.04 566.97 84.27 0.32 MainChannel 2775 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.19 55.2 48.09 55.49 0.001264 4.86 764.06 107.22 0.23 MainChannel 2634.06 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.96 55.03 48.04 55.32 0.001109 5 768.6 98.81 0.24 MainChannel 2570.7 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.17 55 45.18 55.26 0.000633 4.7 875.45 106.1 0.2 MainChannel 2453.31 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.88 54.89 46.86 55.18 0.000545 4.52 784.98 141.42 0.22 MainChannel 2268.7 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.23 54.55 47.9 54.99 0.002237 7.01 710.06 129.16 0.3 MainChannel 2131.87 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.85 54.54 45.31 54.77 0.000688 4.14 1083.71 486.85 0.19 MainChannel 2032.86 FIS 100 YR 2730 37.08 54.4 47.68 54.68 0.001189 4.84 912.58 235.27 0.24 MainChannel 1888.8 FIS 100 YR 2730 37.92 54.04 47.44 54.46 0.0016 5.67 640.19 171.11 0.27 MainChannel 1808.54 FIS 100 YR 2730 40.39 53.59 47.68 54.38 0.000276 7.32 512.93 99.85 0.36 MainChannel 1793.84 FIS 100 YR 2730 40.28 53.62 48.11 54.34 0.000291 6.82 403.63 85.37 0.36 GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development A-4 Reach
River
Sta Profile
Q
Total
Min
Ch El
W.S.
Elev
Crit
W.S.
E.G.
Elev
E.G.
Slope
Vel
Chnl
Flow
Area
Top
Width
Froude
# Chl
MainChannel 1628.31 FIS 100 YR 2730 39.97 51.8 47.35 53.24 0.00035 9.62 283.88 44.43 0.49 MainChannel 1613.35 FIS 100 YR 2730 37.87 52.37 44.25 52.65 0.000728 4.34 708.63 78.36 0.21 MainChannel 1604.39 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.86 52.33 43.6 52.64 0.000818 4.52 659.21 60.57 0.22 MainChannel 1596.35 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.48 52.34 43.97 52.62 0.000795 4.32 679.82 65.24 0.21 MainChannel 1582.26 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.5 52.28 44.04 52.61 0.001014 4.67 657.07 84.06 0.23 MainChannel 1568.93 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.24 52.13 45.27 52.58 0.001641 5.49 561.3 78.48 0.29 MainChannel 1553.99 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.59 52.01 45.38 52.54 0.001806 6.12 549.06 81.73 0.3 MainChannel 1532.3 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.06 52.03 45.32 52.48 0.00166 5.64 601.06 93.38 0.29 MainChannel 1516.89 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.5 52.04 44.94 52.44 0.001472 5.23 624.25 97.2 0.27 MainChannel 1502.27 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.44 52.02 44.89 52.42 0.001397 5.3 664.3 133.22 0.27 MainChannel 1488.13 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.51 52.03 44.79 52.39 0.001234 5.07 723.12 152.53 0.26 MainChannel 1474.78 FIS 100 YR 2730 34.88 52.04 44.95 52.36 0.001153 4.7 754.74 156.77 0.24 MainChannel 1441.44 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.01 51.96 45.9 52.31 0.00149 4.99 696.3 144.1 0.27 MainChannel 1431.36 FIS 100 YR 2730 36.07 51.75 46.14 52.28 0.002688 6.54 642.26 142.31 0.35 MainChannel 1397.01 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.39 51.58 45.95 52.18 0.00245 6.54 581.16 165.5 0.34 MainChannel 1389.11 FIS 100 YR 2730 34.99 51.68 51.74 0.000542 3.08 2128.24 675.41 0.15 MainChannel 1329.8 FIS 100 YR 2730 35.75 51.66 45.07 51.7 0.000309 2.49 2687.1 940 0.13 MainChannel 1218.37 FIS 100 YR 2810 35.61 51.58 45.29 51.66 0.000483 3.01 2032.66 575 0.15 MainChannel 1177.79 FIS 100 YR 2810 33.15 51.41 43.64 51.62 0.000774 4.78 1565.73 540 0.21 MainChannel 1032.84 FIS 100 YR 2810 34.75 51.37 44.11 51.51 0.000666 4.01 1622.06 506.66 0.18 MainChannel 983.01 FIS 100 YR 2810 34.52 51.35 44.22 51.47 0.000759 3.79 1733.74 693.46 0.18 MainChannel 944.39 FIS 100 YR 2810 35.08 51.27 43.85 51.39 0.000594 3.63 1996.43 834.32 0.17 MainChannel 814.43 FIS 100 YR 3350 33.98 51.21 43.81 51.3 0.000588 3.45 2398.74 869.74 0.16 MainChannel 717.68 FIS 100 YR 3350 31.94 51.19 42.59 51.25 0.000352 3.14 3053.41 976.4 0.13 MainChannel 584.05 FIS 100 YR 3350 33.28 51.15 44.06 51.2 0.000325 2.55 3306.89 1048.32 0.12 MainChannel 364.87 FIS 100 YR 3350 33.33 51 45.3 51.08 0.000817 3.32 2096.26 672.64 0.16 MainChannel 257.01 FIS 100 YR 3350 31.91 50.02 42.17 50.85 0.003194 7.71 768.95 576.87 0.34 MainChannel 245.41 FIS 100 YR 3350 31.93 50 42.24 50.58 0.002496 6.75 663.16 861.74 0.29 MainChannel 61.07 FIS 100 YR 3350 32.18 49.25 44.11 50.41 0.002126 9.03 456.25 51.93 0.43 MainChannel 55.46 FIS 100 YR 3350 32.12 49.24 43.93 50.39 0.00213 9.02 481.32 59.78 0.43 MainChannel 0 FIS 100 YR 3350 32.14 48.41 44.94 50.19 0.003167 11.34 452.08 93.49 0.55 GHD | Planwest Partners, Inc. | 11230253 | Floodplain Encroachment Analysis for Proposed Mill District Development A-5 ghd.com The Power of Commitment
DRAFT MDSP SEIR
APPENDIX E
Technical Memorandum
This Technical Memorandum is provided as an interim output under our agreement with Planwest Partners, Inc.. It is provided to foster discussion in relation to technical matters associated with the project and should not be relied upon in any way.
The Power of Commitment
11230253 1
August 28, 2024
To Brendan Byrd PE
(City of Fortuna)
Contact No. 707.267.2275
Copy to Vanessa Blodgett (PlanWest Partners) Email [email protected] From Brett Vivyan PE Project No. 11230253
Project Name PWP Fortuna Mill District Specific
Subject Utility and Infrastructure Conceptual Design
Introduction
The City of Fortuna (City) is evaluating the redevelopment of the Mill District and has developed a conceptual layout of site development primarily consisting of light industrial and commercial uses (Figure 1).
Redevelopment of the site will require utility infrastructure consisting of new, replacement and or relocation of potable water, sewer, stormwater, electrical, gas, and communications facilities meeting City, County, State and Federal standards. The follow technical memorandum provides an analysis and conceptual layout of feasible facilities to support the evaluation of the redevelopment of the Mill District for the City’s Mill District Specific Plan.
Purpose of this Memorandum
The purpose of this Memorandum is to provide analyses of conceptual utility and infrastructure layouts for the purpose of evaluating redevelopment of the Mill District for the Mill District Specific Plan. Conceptual design of infrastructure includes water, sewer and drainage.
8/28/2024 EXP: 9/30/2025
FIGURE 1
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date August 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 01 Mill District_ConceptLayout.mxd
Print date: 28 Aug 2024 - 11:52
Conceptual
Site Layout
Mill District
Planning Area
Proposed
Development
Concept
Building
Loading Dock
Sidewalk
Paving
Vegetated
11230253 3
Water Infrastructure
Overview
Conceptual water distribution design includes an evaluation of the existing distribution systems’ ability to meet projected use of the Mill District and achieve minimum design requirements, as identified in the City of Fortuna Standard Details (City of Fortuna, 2018).
Water Supply Systems Design Standards
Relevant City sewer design standards included in the development of the conceptual water system layout are as follows:
1. Distribution System and Layout
1.1. The Distribution System shall be:
1.1.1.Within the road right-of-way of city streets except where easements are necessary to provide a circulating system, and
1.1.2.In grid form, wherever possible.
1.2. The distribution system shall be equipped with a sufficient number of valves so that no single valve shutdown will result in removing from service:
1.2.1.A transmission main, or
1.2.2.A length of pipe greater than five hundred (500') feet, or
1.2.3.More than two fire hydrants.
1.3. All mainline tees shall have three gate valves, one on each branch.
2. Water main pipeline sizing:
2.1. Minimum diameter – six (6) inches
2.2. Distribution system sizing shall be that which provides for:
2.2.1.Full fire requirements of the American Insurance Association (not less than 1,500 gallons per minute for a five-hour duration), and
2.2.2.The domestic requirements for peak summer flows
3. Fire hydrants:
3.1. Hydrants required at all street intersections (located to minimize risk of damage by traffic)
3.2. Hydrant spacing (measured along street frontage):
3.2.1.Residential areas - five hundred (500') feet
3.2.2.Commercial areas - three hundred (300') feet
3.3. Number of hydrants on a main between intersecting lines:
3.3.1.6-inch main: no more than one
3.3.2.8-inch main: no more than two
Assumptions
The performance of this analysis makes the following assumptions:
• The EPANET Model was provided by the City and is assumed to be accurate and calibrated. No additional verification of the City model was performed • It was assumed that fire suppression would be for only one fire at a time. • The fire demands were provided by the developer and it is assumed that these values are appropriate for the proposed development.
11230253 4
• In the case of a fire, all City groundwater pump stations would produce at the maximum production rate.
• In the case of a fire, all reservoirs would have sufficient water stored to meet the fire suppression water demand volume.
• Proposed water demand for domestic, commercial, and industrial uses at the site will be significantly less than fire suppression demands.
• Proposed water demand for domestic, commercial, and industrial uses will be determined at later stages of design and water supply volume capacity will be determined at that time. This analysis only focuses on the analysis of the City’s water supply system to meet proposed fire suppression demands.
Water Demand
Municipal Water Demand
Municipal water demand includes domestic, public, commercial, and industrial uses. The municipal water demands for the proposed project consist of commercial, industrial and residential users. An analysis of water demands was performed by Humboldt County for the Eel River Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GHD Inc., 2022), which Fortuna resides within. Demands were estimated for public lands, schools, community buildings, motels, restaurants, heavy industry, wood products, miscellaneous commercial, and light industrial parcels. Water use for the parcel is based upon land use zoning, parcel improvements, and parcel size. With commercial and industrial parcels identified, a demand rate based on the equivalent number of dwelling units is applied to each unique parcel. The equivalent dwelling unit values are determined based on the building square footage. The County planning department provided water consumption per day per square foot of building for various types of zoning, as summarized in Table 1. Residential water use from the City’s Urban Water Management Plan were used to estimate usage per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) (City of Fortuna, 2020). The data was provided as Excel files that were exported from the County parcels database.
The proposed project has six building types: hotel, retail, retail flex, commercial services, flex industrial, industrial, residential and Warehouse. The proposed water demands for each building type were estimated multiplying the sum of each building type area by the appropriate building type water demands, from Table 1.
Residential use was estimated using EDUs. The results are presented in Table 2. The proposed project water demand was estimated at 64,900 gal/day.
With the City’s well field production rate of 1200 gpm, the proposed project water demand could be met within 30 minutes of additional pumping. This is attainable with the City’s current water production infrastructure and operation.
Table 1. Municipal Water Demands by Building Type
Description Assumed Building Category Water Use (gallons per thousand sq ft per day)
Comm – Motel, Rest, Serv Stn Lodging 189
Commercial Golf Course Other 48.9
Commercial Mini-Warehouse Warehouse and Storage 9.3
Commercial Office Office 40
Commercial Retail, 2000 and above Mercantile 34.3
Commercial Retail, to 1999 square feet Mercantile 34.3
Commercial Warehouse Warehouse and Storage 9.3
Commercial, Garage Warehouse and Storage 9.3
11230253 5
Description Assumed Building Category Water Use (gallons per thousand sq ft per day)
Commercial, Misc Other 48.9
Common Area, Commercial Other 48.9
Full-Service Restaurant Fast Food or Small Restaurant 68 Heavy Industrial, Wood Product Other 48.9
Industrial – Light Other 48.9
Misc Light Industrial Other 48.9
Public Land, Schools, Non-Taxable Entities Other 48.9
Public Utilities Other 48.9
Residential Single and Multi-Family
Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU)
181
(gallons per day/EDU)
Table 2. Proposed Project Water Demand
Building Type Building Area (ft2) Water Use (gal/thousand ft2/day) Water Demand (gal/day) Hotel 116,000 189 21,924
Retail 94,900 34.3 3,255
Retail Flex 43,200 34.3 1,482
Commercial Services 33,000 40 1,320
Flex Industrial 88,500 48.9 4,328
Industrial 223,900 48.9 10,949
Residential 100 EDUs 181 (gal/EDU/day) 18,100
Warehouse 381,000 9.3 3,543
Proposed Project Total Water Demand 64,900
The City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and General Plan 2030 projections estimated and analyzed water use for the Mill District with a greater number of residential dwellings and less commercial and industrial area. Based on the 2020 residential water use of 181 gal/day and estimated commercial water use of 40 gal/thousand ft2/day, the estimated daily water use of the conceptual Mill District layout is less than that of the previously analyzed water demand, shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Estimated Urban Water Management Plan Water Use Building Type Quantity Water Use Water Demand (gal/day) Residential Dwelling Units 300 dwelling units 181 gal/day* 54,300 Commercial Services 282,500 ft2 40 (gal/thousand ft2/day) 11,300 Estimated Urban Water Management Plan Total Water Demand 65,600 * (City of Fortuna, 2020)
Fire Suppression Demand
Fire suppression water demand is the amount of water required to fight a fire in a building. Fire suppression demand is typically measured in gallons per minute (GPM) and is determined based on a variety of factors 11230253 6
such as the size of the building, the type of building materials, the occupancy level, and the potential hazards.
For the analysis of the proposed project the fire suppression water demand was determined by dividing the project site into sub-areas that would be served by a unique portion of the pipe network. The demand for each sub-area was determined based on the largest building in the sub-area. The fire suppression demand for each building is presented in Table 4. The total volume of fire suppression water may be calculated by multiplying the fire flow rate by the required firefighting duration, which is typically one or two hours. Both volumes are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Fire Suppression Demand.
Sub-Area Building Type V-B (ft2) Fire Flow (gpm) 1 Hour Volume (gal) 2 Hour Volume (gal) A 33,600 5,000 300,000 600,000
B 212,400 8,000 480,000 960,000
C 39,900 5,500 330,000 660,000
D 29,600 4,750 285,000 570,000
EPANET Modeling
A model of the City’s water system was developed using EPANET as a tool for understanding the movement of drinking water within the distribution system. EPANET is a software application, developed by the U.S. EPA Center for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, used to model water distribution systems. For this analysis, EPANET Version 2.2, Build 2.2.0. The model may be used to design and size new water infrastructure, retrofit existing aging infrastructure, optimize operations of tanks and pumps, reduce energy usage, investigate water quality problems, and prepare for emergencies. In this analysis, the City’s original model is referred to as the Existing model.
The model simulates potable water pumped from wells, storage in water tanks and flow through the distribution system. The model simulates flow through the water distribution system via pipes, referred to as links. The pipes (links) are joined at specific points, referred to as junctions. Valves, air release valves, check valves, pressure reduction valves, reducers, couplers, and pumps are a special type of junctions that have specific flow or head loss features. The water demands throughout the system are assigned at junctions. The model simulates the flow throughout the system and calculates the flow and velocity through each of the pipes (links) and calculates the pressure at each junction. An excerpt of the City’s EPANET model showing the proposed project site is presented in Figure 2.
11230253 7
Figure 2 City of Fortuna Existing Condition EPANET Model.
The City’s Existing model was assumed to be calibrated and validated. The Existing model was used as the basis for the Base Condition model and Proposed Condition model.
Base Condition
The Base Condition model was developed by first running the Existing model. Flow and water pressure values were calculated for all pipes and junctions. The Existing model was then modified to include the proposed new pipes (links). The new pipe locations are shown in Figure 3, highlighted in yellow. All pipes are 12-inch C-900 PVC pipe. The new pipes were located such that a minimum pipe size of 12-inch would serve each proposed building and would connect to the existing pipe network where a 12-inch pipe existed. This requires installing new pipes and upsizing several existing pipes. No new load or water demands were assigned to the new Junctions for the Base Condition model simulation. The Base Condition model was run to verify that there were no significant changes in pressure or flow between the Existing model and the Base Condition model. The Base Condition model consisted of the following components:
– Number of Junctions: 382
– Number of Reservoirs: 1
– Number of Tanks: 13
– Number of Pipes: 479
– Number of Pumps: 21
Mill District
11230253 8
– Number of Valves: 7
– Number of Pressure Zones: 8
– Flow Units: GPM
– Headloss Formula: Hazen-Willimas
The Base Condition model was run with existing water demand loads applied to establish base line pressures and flows throughout the water distribution system. California Code of Regulations requires that public water distribution system should be operated in a manner to assure that the minimum operating pressure in the water main at the user service line connection throughout the distribution system is not less than 20 pounds per square inch (psi) at all times (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 22 § 64602). The City typically maintains system water pressure of not less than 30 psi. For this analysis a pressure lower than 30 psi was selected as a low-pressure warning level and pressure lower than 20 psi would result in a failure of the system to meet that demand. The results of the simulation indicated that there were 18 locations that had pressure below 30 psi and 14 locations below 20 psi (Figure 4). Eight of these locations were tanks or reservoirs where pressures are expected to be low. The remaining low-pressure Junctions are summarized in Table 5 and are associated with the suction side of pump stations or reservoirs. There was one exception, Junction J-386, which was located at the top of a hill in the Forest Hills Subdivision.
11230253 9
Figure 3 Base Condition EPANET Model with Proposed New Pipes Water Demand Loads
Applied to Junction J-201
for Building A
Water Demand Loads
Applied to Junction 62
for Building B
Water Demand Loads
Applied to Junction
MD-3
for Building C
Water Demand Loads
Applied to Junction J-211
for Building D
Option A: Replace Existing
Pipe with 12-inch diameter
pipe
Option B: New 12-inch
diameter pipe connect
Option A: Replace Existing
Pipe with 12-inch diameter
pipe
Option B: New 12-inch
A diameter pipe connect
B
11230253 10
Figure 4 Exiting EPANET Model Low Pressure Nodes
Junction J-24
Junction J-52
Junction J-60
Junction 156
Junction J-66
Junction J-296
Junction J-297
Junction J-377
Junction J-381
Junction J-386
Mill District
11230253 11
Table 5. Base Condition Low Pressure Junctions
Junction Node ID GPM ft psi Comment
Junc J-24 0 246.53 28.83 In Zone 5 Home Ave suction side of Pump Station Junc J-52 2.29 246.55 15.84 In Zone 3 Stewart St Stewart Reservoir Junc J-60 0 284.21 15.26 In Zone 4 suction side of Underhill Pump Station Junc 156 3.46 294.04 25.58 In Zone 3 Stewart St suction side of Stewart Pump Station
Junc J-66 0 296.94 5.61 In Zone 3 Vancil St suction side of Pump Station/Hydro Pneumatic Tank
Junc J-296 0 246.53 27.53 In Zone 5 Home Ave suction side of Pump Station Junc J-297 0 246.56 9.77 In Zone 3 Stewart St suction side of Stewart Pump Station
Junc J-377 0 296.94 4.31 In Zone 3 Vancil St suction side of Pump Station/Hydro Pneumatic Tank
Junc J-381 0 366.17 12.21 In Zone 8 Compton Heights Reservoir Junc J-386 0.69 415.05 26.02 In Zone 8 Top of Forest Hills Subdivision Proposed Conditions
The City’s water delivery system was evaluated for the ability to meet the proposed projects fire suppression water demand by applying the fire suppression demand loads at locations where the Proposed Condition model would serve water to the proposed buildings. The proposed project fire suppression demands were summarized in Table 4 and were applied to the Proposed Condition model at the locations shown in Figure 4.
The results of the simulation were then evaluated to determine if the supplied fire suppression demand reduced pressure in the system below a specified pressure. The Junctions listed in Table 5 were exceptions to these evaluations, however, any further lowering of pressure in these locations would also indicate a failure of the water system to meet the requested fire suppression demand. If a proposed fire suppression demand resulted in failure of the system to meet the requested fire suppression demand, the demand was lowered by 500 gpm and the results were re-evaluated. This process was repeated until an acceptable water supply rate was achieved.
Building A Proposed Condition Analysis
The proposed fire suppression demand for Building A was 5000 gpm and applied to J-201. The results of this simulation indicated that the City’s water supply system was not able to meet this demand and maintain the specified minimum pressures throughout the system. The fire suppression demand was lowered by 500 gpm and re-simulated until minimum pressures throughout the system were achieved. A fire suppression demand of 4000 gpm resulted in acceptable residual pressure in the water supply system. Model results are provided in Appendix A.
Building B Proposed Condition Analysis
The proposed fire suppression demand for Building B was 8000 gpm and applied to Junction 62. The results of this simulation indicated that the City’s water supply system was not able to meet this demand and maintain the specified minimum pressures throughout the system. The fire suppression demand was lowered by 500 gpm and re-simulated until minimum pressures throughout the system were achieved. A fire suppression demand of 4000 gpm resulted in acceptable residual pressure in the water supply system. Model results are provided in Appendix A.
11230253 12
Building C Proposed Condition Analysis
The proposed fire suppression demand for Building C was 5500 gpm and applied to Junction MD2. The results of this simulation indicated that the City’s water supply system was not able to meet this demand and maintain the specified minimum pressures throughout the system. The fire suppression demand was lowered by 500 gpm and re-simulated until minimum pressures throughout the system were achieved. A fire suppression demand of 5000 gpm resulted in acceptable residual pressure in the water supply system. Model results are provided in Appendix A.
Building D Proposed Condition Analysis
The proposed fire suppression demand for Building D was 4750 gpm and applied to Junction J-211. The results of this simulation indicated that the City’s water supply system was not able to meet this demand and maintain the specified minimum pressures throughout the system. The fire suppression demand was lowered by 250 gpm and re-simulated until minimum pressures throughout the system were achieved. A fire suppression demand of 4000 gpm resulted in acceptable residual pressure in the water supply system. Model results are provided in Appendix A.
Conceptual Design
The conceptual system layout is shown in Figure 5 and summarized in Table 6. The City of Fortuna’s water supply system was evaluated to determine if it could meet the domestic water demands and fire suppression demands for the Concept Site Plan and conceptual water.
Table 6 Conceptual sewer layout components, quantities, and cost.
Component Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Cost
12” Diameter Pipe C900 Feet 6,500 $300 $1,950,000
Valve Cluster Spacing of 500 feet Each 15 $12,000 $180,000 Fire Hydrant Spacing of 300 feet in Commercial Areas Each 22 $7,500 $165,000 Total $2,295,000
The domestic water demand was estimated at 30,064 gal/day. With the City’s well field production rate of 1200 gpm, the proposed project water demand could be met within 30 minutes of additional pumping. This is attainable with the City’s current water production infrastructure and operation.
The proposed project fire suppression water demand and the City’s water supply system was evaluated at four specific locations for Buildings A, B, C, and D. The proposed project included installing new 12-inch water lines that connected to the existing system. The proposed new pipes were aligned to create a service loop, that would provide redundancy in supply. Each new pipe section included a connection to an existing 12-inch water line. In some cases, this required the replacement and upsizing of existing pipes to ensure that there was a 12- inch water main connecting to the new pipes.
The analysis was performed using the City’s existing EPANET water model, which was modified to include the proposed project pipe system modifications and connections. The analysis found that the City’s water system was insufficient to meet the specified fire suppression demands. However, the analysis also provided the maximum fire suppression flow that could be supplied for each building. Fire suppression appurtenances, such as sprinklers, storage tanks, or booster pumps, would need to be included in further development plans in order to meet code requirements. It should be noted that minor modifications to the proposed pipe alignment should have minimal influence on the analysis result as long as the proposed water pipelines are a minimum of 12- inch and connect to an existing 12-inch water supply line. A summary of the findings is presented in Table 7.
Existing 8" Water Line
Existing 10" Water Line
Existing 6" Water Line
Existing 6" Water Line
Existing 12" Water Line
Existing 12" Water Line
Existing 12" Water Line
Building A
Building B
Building C
Building D
FIGURE 5
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date August 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 05 Mill District Conceptual Water.mxd
Print date: 28 Aug 2024 - 11:56
Conceptual
Water System Layout
Water System
Existing Water
Line
Existing Line to
Be Removed or
Abandoned
New 12" Water
Line
Proposed
Development
Concept
Building
Loading Dock
Paving
Sidewalk
Vegetated
Mill District
Planning Area
11230253 14
Table 7. Fire Suppression Water Supply Analysis Summary Location Proposed Fire Suppression
Demand (gpm)
Maximum System Supply (gpm) System Deficiency
(gpm)
Building A 5000 4000 1000
Building B 8000 4000 4000
Building C 5500 5000 500
Building D 4750 4000 750
11230253 15
Offsite Improvements
No offsite improvements are recommended as a part of the Mill District development for water system infrastructure.
11230253 16
Sewer Infrastructure
Overview
Conceptual sanitary sewer design is limited by existing site constraints and proposed flow contributions of the proposed development. Constraints include existing capacity of the system, sewer connection elevations, and site topography Figure 6. Two sewer sheds exist on the boundary of the Mill District. The sewer shed along the northern boundary in Newburg Road (Drainage Area C) provides gravity flow to the wastewater treatment plant to the north and west. Areas of this portion of the system have been identified as under capacity and have experienced sanitary sewer overflows in the past and have been identified in the City’s Sewer Master Plan for increased capacity. The sewer sheds to the east and south (Drainage Areas D and E) flow to the Strongs Creek Lift Station where flows are conveyed through a force main to wastewater treatment plant. The Strongs Creek Lift Station and contributing sewer sheds are not currently limited in capacity. The boundary between the sewer sheds, near the proposed Eel River Road and South Fortuna Boulevard intersection, exhibits the highest sewer invert elevations and topography. Given the existing capacity deficiencies of the gravity system to the north and available capacity contributing to the Strongs Creek Lift Station, conveyance to the lift station is preferred.
Sewer Design Standards
Relevant City sewer design standards included in the development of the conceptual sewer system layout are as follows (City of Fortuna, 2018):
1. The Sanitary Sewer System shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the criteria established by the American Society of Civil Engineers in the "Manual of Engineering Practices No. 60, Gravity Sanitary Sewer Design and Construction"
2. The Sanitary Sewer System shall be within the road right-of-way of city streets except where easements are necessary to provide a gravity flow system.
3. Sanitary Sewer Mains:
3.1. Minimum diameter – six (6) inches
4. Sanitary Sewer Manholes
4.1. Non more than 300’ apart on a common main, and at additional locations such as changes in grade, pipe size, or alignment as required by the City Engineer.
A minimum slope of 0.5% was assumed for the conceptual design of gravity pipes to meet minimum velocity of 2 ft/sec during Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF).
A minimum cover of two (2) feet was assumed based on minimum cover of existing sewer infrastructure within roadways.
#*
#*
Strong's Creek
Lift Station
Fortuna Blvd
Rim Elev. ~67 ft
Invert Elev. ~56 ft
( Connection Not Viable)
Ground Elev. ~60 ft
Ground Elev. ~48 ft
Ground Elev. ~48 ft
Newburg Rd
Rim Elev. ~50 ft
Invert Elev. ~47 ft
CCC Lift Station
Sewer Drainage
Area C
Sewer Drainage
Area D
Sewer Drainage
Area E
FIGURE 6
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date August 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 06 Mill District Sanitary Sewer Constraints.mxd
Print date: 28 Aug 2024 - 12:31
Existing Sanitary Sewer
and Elevations
Existing Force
Main
Existing Gravity
Main
#* Lift Stations
Proposed
Development
Concept
Building
Loading Dock
Paving
Sidewalk
Vegetated
Mill District
Planning Area
11230253 18
Conceptual Design
Feasibility was evaluated based on connections to existing infrastructure, minimum slope for gravity flow pipes, and resulting bury depth. The following sewer collection configurations were evaluated and deemed not viable:
• A gravity system that drains from the northern area, near Newburg Road, south along the proposed Eel River Road and east to a connection point in South Fortuna Boulevard o Connection point elevation is above that of the Newburg Road area and does not allow for gravity flow
• A gravity system that drains from the Newburg Road area to south of Strongs Creek o Ground elevations increase between Newburg Road and the proposed east-west alignment of Eel River Road and would result in the gravity sewer to be over 25-ft deep • A gravity system that drains from the high elevation area at the proposed east-west alignment of Eel River Road to a connection Newburg Road
o A 0.5% slope from the connection point elevation south results A feasible, conceptual sewer system layout was developed to meet the minimum design standards and was evaluated using the model developed for the Fortuna Sewer Master Plan. Modeled flows were developed based on land use and estimated occupancy of the conceptual site plan. The resulting conceptual design is presented in Figure 7 and consists of a gravity system serving the northern area of the Mill District and flowing to a lift station at Newburg Road, and a gravity system for the remainder of the Mill District flowing to a lift station south of Strongs Creek and pumped directly to the existing Strongs Creek Lift Station. Model results are presented in Figure 8 through Figure 11. The conceptual system components are listed in Table 8.
Table 8 Conceptual Sewer Layout Components, Quantities and Cost.
Component Description* Units Quantity Unit
Cost
Cost
6” Diameter
Gravity Pipe
Minimum slope 0.5%
Bury depth 5-13 feet
feet 5,200 $150 $780,000
48” Diameter
Manhole
Gravity system only each 31 $12,000 $372,000
4” Diameter
Force Main
feet 540 $250 $135,000
6” Diameter Creek Crossing each 2 $25,000 $50,000
Lift Station
(North Mill
District)
ADWF = 33 gpm
PDWF = 69 gpm
PWWF = 125 gpm
Working Volume of Wetwell = 8,500 gallons
Volume between the pumps on and off levels
Pump on levels should be below the gravity inlet
Estimated as approximately 2 hours of PDWF
each 1 $350,000 $350,000
Lift Station
(South Mill
District)
ADWF = 38 gpm
PDWF = 67 gpm
PWWF = 76 gpm
Working Volume of Wetwell = 8,000 gallons
Volume between the pumps on and off levels
Pump on levels should be below the gravity inlet
Estimated as approximately 2 hours of PDWF
Two pumps, each rated at 42 gpm at 11-ft TDH
each 1 $350,000 $350,000
Total $2,037,000
* ADWF – Average Dry Weather Flow
PDWF – Peak Dry Weather Flow
PWWF – Peak Wet Weather Flow
TDH – Total Dynamic Head
#*
#*
#*
#*
MD_16
Strong's Creek
Lift Station Connection
Strong's Creek Crossing
Newburg Rd Connection
Mill Creek Crossing Alternative Design:
Lift Station Direct to Existing Force Main
CCC LS
Strong's Creek LS
MD_27
MD_13
MD_12
MD_11
MD_10
MD_09
MD_08 MD_07
MD_06
MD_05
MD_04
MD_03
MD_02
MD_01
MD_LS_S
MD_LS_N
MD_24
MD_14
FIGURE 7
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date August 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 07 Mill District Conceptual Sanitary Sewer.mxd
Print date: 28 Aug 2024 - 12:34
Conceptual
Sanitary Sewer Plan
Proposed 4"
Force Main
Proposed 6"
Gravity Main
Proposed Mill
District Manhole
#*
Proposed Mill
District Lift
Station
Existing Force
Main
Existing Gravity
Main
#* Existing Lift
Stations
Proposed
Development
Concept
Building
Loading Dock
Paving
Sidewalk
Vegetated
Mill District
Planning Area
11230253 20
Figure 8 Profile of MH MD_06 to Newburg connection during PWWF Figure 9 Profile of MH MD_07 to Strongs Creek connection during PWWF 11230253 21
Figure 10 Profile of MH MD_24 to Strongs Creek during PWWF Figure 11 Profile of MH MD_09 to Strongs Creek connection during PWWF 11230253 22
Offsite Improvements
The current Draft Sewer Master Plan (SMP) evaluated needed future improvements to existing lines that will serve the Mill District (GHD, 2023). Preliminary model runs tested the load points of the Mill District development and loading it to the closest manholes/connection sewers imparts greater stress on the system than if most if not all of it was routed south toward the Strong’s Creek pump station, as much of this future development would naturally go to the Newburg Road system if this closest-load- point-logic was followed.
These simulation runs show that the increase in flow does not stress the incoming lines to the Strong’s Creek pump station and the pumps keep up with additional flow. Therefore, for the purposes of establishing a baseline Near-Term and Future loading strategy, the majority of the Mill District development loads will go south towards Strong’s Creek pump station, with only the current parcels directly touching Newburg Rd draining north, and all subsequent hydraulic capacity results figures will reflect this loading strategy.
The Draft SMP recommends that the City should prioritize rehabilitation efforts and upsizing infrastructure along Newburg Road. Recommendations to increase the capacity of the downstream line include digging and replacing approximately 824 feet of existing 6-inch diameter pipe, 444 feet of 15-inch diameter pipe, 52 feet of 21-inch diameter pipe, 361 feet of 24-inch pipe, five manholes and associated lateral reconnections, inspections and testing (See Attachment 1).
The Average Dry Weather Flow of the most upstream, existing line along Newburg Road, that requires increased capacity is 501.4 gpm. Using the estimated, future contribution to this system of 33 to 70 gpm, a proportional cost share, based on this flow range and the contributing Mill District flow to Newburg Road of 6.2 to 17% is recommended, based on the proposed flows contributing 33 to 70 gpm of the total 534.4 to 604.4 gpm. Estimated costs of improvements are shown in Attachment 1. 11230253 23
Drainage Infrastructure
Overview
The conceptual site plan proposes to redevelop approximately 70 acres the Mill District that are largely comprised of areas exhibiting previous development characteristics, such as asphalt and concrete paving, compacted aggregate base, and gravel fill. The following analysis utilizes the conceptual site plan and existing conditions to develop a conceptual stormwater infrastructure layout.
Stormwater Design Standards
Relevant City stormwater design standards included in the development of the conceptual stormwater system layout are as follows (City of Fortuna, 2018):
1. The City of Fortuna requires that all development comply with the requirements of the City’s MS4 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit a outlined in the Humboldt County Low Impact Development (LID) Stormwater Manual.
2. In Low Impact Development "Regulated Projects", when the MS4 permit requires a bioretention facility be installed, then the following additional conditions are required:
2.1. The post-project runoff rate(s) shall not exceed the pre-project runoff rate(s) for the 25-year 24-hour storm event.
2.2. Stormwater drainage reports shall:
2.2.1.Include maps/drawings that use contour intervals of 5 feet or less.
2.2.2.Identify drainage management areas, basins, drainage structures, and lid site design measures, correlated to calculations.
3. Drainage facilities:
3.1. Shall be located in the public right-of-way where feasible, or in perpetual unobstructed easements of appropriate width.
3.2. Shall ensure the acceptance and disposal of runoff without damage to streets or to adjacent properties.
4. Additional subdivision requirements:
4.1. A stormwater drainage system, including but not limited to storm sewers, drainage channels, and drainage pumps, as may be necessary for adequate drainage of storm waters, surface waters, and/or springs, shall be installed in each subdivision
4.2. The drainage system shall be designed to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside of the proposed subdivision.
4.3. If any portion of land within boundaries shown on a final map is subject to special flood hazards by storm waters, the design shall be in accordance with the requirements of the City of Fortuna Municipal Code (15.58).
Relevant Design Criteria and requirements from the Humboldt County Low Impact Development (LID) Stormwater Manual are as follows (Humboldt County, 2021):
1. Regulated Projects Include: Projects other than Single-Family Homes that create or replace greater than or equal to 5,000 square feet of impervious surface are considered to be Regulated Projects.
2. Hydromodification Project are:
2.1. Specific Regulated Projects, projects that create and/or replace greater than or equal to 1 acre of impervious surface and create a net increase in impervious surface.
2.1.1. The required performance standard for hydromodification control consists of maintaining postproject runoff at or below pre-project flow rates for the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. Additionally, if 11230253 24
a hydromodification site contains greater than 50% fines (No. 4 sieve) then a soil percolation test is required to determine if percolation is greater than or less than one inch per hour.
2.1.1.1. Hydromodification Requirements: Compliance with this standard can be met through the use of self-retaining areas (as referenced in Section 6.1.1 Types of Drainage Management Areas). However, soil infiltration rates on-site must be taken into account using American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D 6913 Standard Test Methods for Particle Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis and ASTM D 7928 Standard Test Methods for Particle Size Distribution (Gradation) of Fine-Grained Soils Using the Sedimentation (Hydrometer) Analysis ASTM D 422 standard test method for particle size analysis of soils the hydromodification design storm requirement. Sites with infiltration rates less than 1.0 inch per hour do not meet the hydromodification requirements using the self-retaining ratio method; alternatives to the self-retaining area will need to be discussed with the jurisdictional permitting authority. According to Web Soil Survey: Sieve any soil passing sieve size 4 is determined to be fine. For this area ~95% should be passing sieve size 4 (according to Web Soil Survey) so, percolation test required.
Methodology
This drainage infrastructure analysis was completed using topographic survey data gathered by Kolstad Land Surveyors collected between October, 2021 through March, 2022 and supplemented with the City of Fortuna’s 2012 photogrammetry. Land cover was assigned based on survey data notes, existing land use and the conceptual site plan.
GHD utilized ArcMap and the SCS curve method to estimate runoff depth and volume based on land use classifications for the project area under existing and proposed conditions. In ArcMap, a digital elevation model and existing stormdrain infrastructure locations were used to delineate and identify six drainage management areas (DMAs) within the Mill District, based on existing discharge locations (Figure 12). Existing land use characterization was determined for each DMA and subsequently used to determine the rainfall runoff curve number in the SCS runoff method (Figure 13, Table 9). Existing land cover and area by DMA are presented in Table 10. Rainfall runoff curve numbers for proposed conditions were assigned based on the conceptual site plan (Figure 14, Table 11). DMAs for existing and proposed conditions were assumed to remain the same, and drainage infrastructure located to maintain current runoff areas. Rainfall depth for use in the SCS curve method, based on design standards are shown in Table 12. Rainfall intensities shown in Table 12 are used in the Rational Method to calculate runoff flows for the 25-year storm event for use in pipe sizing.
Newburg Rd
Newburg Rd
North Culvert
to Railroad and 101
South Culvert
to Railroad and 101
Stormdrain North
to Railroad
Strongs Creek
from North
Strongs Creek
from South
Pond Street
FIGURE 12
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date July 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 12 Mill DistrictExistingWatersheds.mxd
Print date: 18 Jul 2024 - 12:03
Existing
Drainage Management Areas (DMAs)
Existing Drainage Mangement
Areas (DMAs)
Newburg Rd
Pond Street
Stormdrain North to Railroad
North Culvert to Railroad and 101
South Culvert to Railroad and 101
Strongs Creek from North
Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from South
Existing Mill District Stormdrain Pipes
Newburg Rd
Newburg Rd
North Culvert
to Railroad and 101
South Culvert
to Railroad and 101
Stormdrain North
to Railroad
Strongs Creek
from North
Strongs Creek
from South
Pond Street
FIGURE 13
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date July 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 13 Mill DistrictExistingCurveNumber.mxd
Print date: 18 Jul 2024 - 12:17
Existing Cover and Curve Number
Drainage Management Areas (DMAs)
Existing Cover (Curve Number)
Asphalt or Concrete (98)
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial Mixed (94)
Compacted Base Rock and Gravel (90)
Gravely Fill Atop Natural Soil (90)
Mixed Cover - Residential (83)
Vegetated (70)
11230253 27
Table 9 SCS Runoff Method Curve Numbers
Row Labels Hydrologic Soil Group Curve Number
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk
C
98 Asphalt or Concrete 98
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 94
Compacted Base Rock and Gravel 90
Gravely Fill 85
Mixed Cover - Residential 83
Vegetated 70
Table 10 Existing Land Cover by Drainage Management Area.
Drainage Management Area and Existing Land Cover Acres
Newburg Rd 26.9
Asphalt or Concrete 5.6
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 4.1
Mixed Cover - Residential 17.2
Pond St 5.6
Vegetated 2.5
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 3.1
Stormdrain North to Railroad 26.8
Asphalt or Concrete 16.8
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 6.8
Mixed Cover - Residential 3.2
North Culvert to Railroad and 101 6.4
Asphalt or Concrete 6.4
South Culvert to Railroad and 101 11.4
Asphalt or Concrete 3.9
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 5.0
Compacted Base Rock or Gravel 2.5
Strongs Creek from North 19.8
Vegetated 1.1
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 1.6
Compacted Base Rock or Gravel 8.8
Gravely Fill 8.3
Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from South 12.7
Vegetated 2.4
Gravely Fill 10.3
Total 104.1
Newburg Rd Newburg Rd
North Culvert
to Railroad and 101
South Culvert
to Railroad and 101
Stormdrain North
to Railroad
Strongs Creek
from North
Strongs Creek
from South
Pond St
FIGURE 14
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date July 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 14 Mill DistrictProposedCurveNumber.mxd
Print date: 18 Jul 2024 - 12:27
Proposed Cover and Curve Number
Drainage Management Areas (DMAs)
Proposed Cover (Curve Number)
Loading Dock (98)
Building (98)
Sidewalk (98)
Paving (98)
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial Mixed (94)
Mixed Cover - Residential (83)
Vegetated (70)
Existing Drainage Mangement Areas (DMAs)
Existign Stormdrain Pipes
11230253 29
Table 11 Proposed Land Cover by Drainage Management Area.
Drainage Management Area and Proposed Land Cover Acres
Newburg Road 26.9
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 4.1
Existing Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 4.1
Existing Mixed Cover - Residential 17.2
New Vegetated Area 1.5
Pond St 5.6
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 5.6
Stormdrain North to Railroad 26.8
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 15.5
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 6.8
Mixed Cover - Residential 3.2
New Vegetated Area 1.3
North Culvert to Railroad and 101 6.4
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 5.3
New Vegetated Area 1.1
South Culvert to Railroad and 101 11.4
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 5.5
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 5.0
New Vegetated Area 0.9
Strongs Creek from North 19.8
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 15.5
Existing and New Vegetated 4.3
Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from South 12.7
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 10.4
Existing and New Vegetated 2.3
Total 104.1
Table 12 Rainfall Events for Evaluation
Frequency Depth (in) Intensity (in/hr)
85th percentile (Water Quality Event, Humboldt County LID Manual) 0.65 2 yr (Humboldt County LID Manual, Hydromodification Projects) 3.53 0.147 25 yr (City of Fortuna Drainage Design) 5.85 0.244
11230253 30
Drainage Infrastructure Analysis
As discussed previously, much of the Mill District is comprised of areas exhibiting previous development characteristics, such as asphalt and concrete paving, compacted aggregate base, and gravel fill. Existing mixed cover uses include residential and commercial industrial along the eastern edge of the Mill District.
Undisturbed vegetated areas are limited to the corridor along Strongs Creek and along the western edge of the Mill District. Proposed development is largely focused on existing disturbed areas. Increased runoff associated with the proposed site plan is limited to the replacement of gravelly fill areas and limited undisturbed vegetated areas with impervious development such as buildings, loading docks, sidewalks and paving. The conceptual site plan results in an increase in vegetated areas within all DMAs except the DMA south of Strongs Creek (Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from South). The existing conditions runoff for the 2-year and 25-year for each DMA is presented in Table 13. The proposed conditions runoff for the 85th percentile, 2-year and 25-year for each DMA is presented in Table 14. Based on the requirements set forth in the Humboldt County LID Manual for hydromodification projects and City of Fortuna design standards, the conceptual site plan is to treat the 85th percentile runoff and result in no increased discharge for the 2-year and 25-year. The required treatment and changes to the 2-year and 25-year are presented in Table 15.
Table 13 Existing Conditions Runoff
DMA Acres 2-year Acre-ft 25-year Acre-ft
Newburg Rd 26.87 5.21 10.03
Pond St 5.6 0.95 1.86
Stormdrain North to
Railroad 26.82 6.74 11.83
North Culvert to Railroad
and 101 6.43 1.77 3.01
South Culvert to Railroad
and 101 11.40 2.78 4.95
Strongs Creek from North 19.84 3.71 7.26
Strongs Creek and Mill
Creek from South 12.72 1.96 4.11
Total 104.08 22.17 41.20
Table 14 Proposed Conditions Runoff
Acres Acres 2-year Acre-ft 25-year Acre-ft 85th Acre-ft Newburg Rd 26.87 4.92 9.65 0.27
Pond St 5.6 1.54 2.62 0.10
Stormdrain North to
Railroad 26.82 6.47 11.48 0.72
North Culvert to Railroad
and 101 6.43 1.57 2.75 0.21
South Culvert to Railroad
and 101 11.40 2.78 4.92 0.31
Strongs Creek from North 19.84 4.48 8.04 0.55
Strongs Creek and Mill
Creek from South 12.72 2.66 4.87 0.32
Total 104.08 22.88 41.72 2.38
11230253 31
Table 15 Changes to the 2-year and 25-year Runoff as a Result of Proposed Conditions and Required 85th Percentile Storm Event Treatment
DMA Required Detention Conceptual Design
Vegetated Area (Acres) Drainage Area
(Acres)
2-year
Acre-ft
25-year
Acre-ft
85th
Acre-ft
Newburg Rd 26.87 -0.29 -0.38 0.27 1.49
Pond St 5.60 0.59 0.76 0.10 0.76
Stormdrain North to Railroad 26.82 -0.27 -0.35 0.72 1.33 North Culvert to Railroad and 101 6.43 -0.20 -0.26 0.21 1.06 South Culvert to Railroad and 101 11.40 0.002 -0.03 0.31 0.88 Strongs Creek from North 19.84 0.77 0.77 0.55 4.30
Strongs Creek and Mill Creek
from South 12.72 0.70 0.76 0.32 2.31
The Strongs Creek from North and Strongs Creek, Mill Creek from South, and South Culvert to Railroad and 101 DMAs result in increased runoff for the 2-year and or 25 year rainfall event. The remaining DMAs result in a decrease in runoff. The 85th percentile runoff is to be treated in all DMAs due to the hydromodification requirements.
Conceptual Design
Potential Stormwater LID Placements
Common LID facilities include rain gardens or bioswales to capture and infiltrate stormwater runoff prior to discharge to the stormwater system. Rain gardens and bioswales typically consist of three design layers:
pervious backfill, bioretention soil media, and ponding. The pervious backfill and bioretention soil media achieve infiltration rates that meet County LID requirements and ponding depth allows for the temporary storage of runoff. An underdrain may be implemented if infiltration rates of the native soil result in ponding in excess of 72 hours to reduce potential issues with vector control. Typical section and void space, layer thickness and total runoff storage for bioswales are presented in Figure 15 and Table 16. Treatment and storage requirements and recommendations of bioswales are presented in Table 17. 11230253 32
Figure 15 Typical Bioswale Cross Section
Table 16 Typical Bioswale Runoff Storage
Rain Garden Layer Void Space Layer Thickness (ft) Storage/ft2(ft3) Ponding 100% 0.5 0.50
Bioretention Soil Media 30% 1.5 0.45
Pervious Backfill 40% 1.0 0.40
Total 3 1.35
Table 17 Design Treatment and Storage Requirements and Recommendations of Bioswales.
DMA Required Detention Recommended
Minimum Bioswale
Area with
storage/treatment of
1.35 ft3 per ft2(Acres)
Conceptual
Design
Available
Vegetated
Area (Acres)
2-year
Acre-ft
25-year
Acre-ft
85th
Acre-ft
Newburg Rd 0.27 0.20 1.49
Pond St 0.59 0.76 0.10 0.76 0.76
Stormdrain North to Railroad 0.72 0.53 1.33
North Culvert to Railroad and 101 0.21 0.16 1.06
South Culvert to Railroad and 101 0.002 0.31 0.23 0.88
Strongs Creek from North 0.77 0.77 0.55 0.57 4.30
Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from South 0.70 0.76 0.32 0.76 2.31 Total 2.06 2.29 2.48 3.21 12.13
Conceptual Stormwater Pipe Size and Alignments
Discharge from each DMA flows to existing stormwater infrastructure. The Rational Method was used to estimate cumulative discharge from each DMA (Table 18). Assuming a 0.5% minimum slope, roughness coefficient of 0.013 for HDPE or reinforced concrete pipes, the peak flows vary from 1.2 to 5.3 cfs. A minimum 11230253 33
pipe diameter of 18-inches accommodates the resulting flows. A conceptual stormwater pipe layout is shown in Figure 16. Two parcels are anticipated to require a connection to the drainage infrastructure within the Conceptual Site Plan. Drainage from these parcels can be accommodated through the proposed vegetated areas and maintain conveyance within the Newburg Road DMA.
Table 18 Rational Method Runoff Flows for 25-year Rainfall Event Drainage Management Area and Proposed Land Cover Acres C 25-year Max Flow (CFS) Newburg Road 26.9 0.72 4.7
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 4.1 0.9
Existing Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 4.1 0.8
Existing Mixed Cover - Residential 17.2 0.7
New Vegetated Area 1.5 0.17
Pond Street 5.6 0.90 1.2
Existing Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 5.6 0.9
Stormdrain North to Railroad 26.8 0.82 5.3
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 15.5 0.9
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 6.8 0.8
Mixed Cover - Residential 3.2 0.7
New Vegetated Area 1.3 0.17
North Culvert to Railroad and 101 6.4 0.77 1.2
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 5.3 0.9
New Vegetated Area 1.1 0.17
South Culvert to Railroad and 101 11.4 0.80 2.2
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 5.5 0.9
Mixed Cover - Commercial Industrial 5 0.8
New Vegetated Area 0.9 0.17
Strongs Creek from North 19.8 0.74 3.6
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 15.5 0.9
Existing and New Vegetated 4.3 0.17
Strongs Creek and Mill Creek from South 12.7 0.77 2.4
New Building, Loading Dock, Paving, Sidewalk 10.4 0.9
Existing and New Vegetated 2.3 0.17
Newburg Rd
DMA: 26.87 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.27 ac-ft
2-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.29 ac-ft
25-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.38 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 1.49 acres
North Culvert to Railroad and 101
DMA: 6.43 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.21 ac-ft
2-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.20 ac-ft
25-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.26 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 1.06 acres
South Culvert to Railroad and 101
DMA: 11.40 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.31 ac-ft
2-year Storm Volume Increase: 0.002 ac-ft
25-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.03 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 0.88 acres
Stormdrain North to Railroad
DMA: 26.82 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.72 ac-ft
2-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.27 ac-ft
25-year Storm Volume Reduction: -0.35 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 1.33 acres
Strongs Creek from North
DMA: 19.84 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.55 ac-ft
2-yr Storm Volume Increase: 0.77 ac-ft
25-yr Storm Volume Increase:: 0.77 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 4.3 acres
Strongs Creek from South
DMA: 12.72 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.32 ac-ft
2-yr Storm Increase: 0.70 ac-ft
25-yr Storm Increase: 0.76 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 2.31 acres
Pond St
DMA: 5.6 Acres
Required Treatment (85th Percentile): 0.1 ac-ft
2-year Storm Volume Reduction: 0.59 ac-ft
25-year Storm Volume Reduction: 0.76 ac-ft
Proposed Vegetated Area: 0.76 acres
FIGURE 16
0 150 300 450 600
Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
11230253
Date July 2024
City of Fortuna Mill District Specific Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD83 California zone 1 ftUS
Paper Size ANSI A
o Data source: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community. Created by: bvivyan
N:\US\San Diego\Projects\561\11230253\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\Figure 16 Mill DistrictProposedDetentionAndTreatment.mxd
Print date: 18 Jul 2024 - 12:45
Conceptual Drainage Infrastructure &
Drainage Management Areas (DMAs)
Treatment and Storage
Stormwater Pipes
Existing Stormdrain Pipe
Existing Drainage
Mangement Areas
(DMAs)
Proposed
Development
Concept
Building
Loading Dock
Paving
Sidewalk
Vegetated (Available for
Runoff Treatment and
Storage)
Mill District Planning
Area
11230253 35
The conceptual system components are quantified in Table 19.
Table 19 Conceptual Drainage Layout Components, Quantities and Cost.
Component Description* Units Quantity Unit Cost Cost
18” Diameter
HDPE Pipe
Minimum slope 0.5%
Bury depth 5-15 feet
Feet 5,700 $200 $997,500
Drain Inlets Gravity system only Each 25 $2,500 $62,500 Manholes 48-inch Each 20 $12,000 $240,000
Bioretention Basins 70,000 SF SF 70,000 $30 $2,100,000
Total $3,400,000
Offsite Improvements
The City’s 2005 Storm Drain Master Plan indicated that the 48” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) storm drain that parallels the railroad tracks near 12th Street is undersized for the estimated 25-year runoff event. This pipe segment is located downstream of the Mill District contributions to the Newburg Road stormdrain system. The City was not experiencing any flooding or drainage problems in this area, therefore it is probably of sufficient size and slope and does not require any improvements. If development methods incorporate onsite stormwater detention in this area to avoid increasing the runoff entering the drainage system, offsite improvements are not needed. Any increase in runoff would require increased capacity improvements to the downstream stormdrain system. The estimated 25-year flow of the 48” RCP storm drain is 110 cfs. Given the existing system does not experience flooding and is likely of sufficient capacity, it is recommended that the cost of upsizing of the storm drain pipes to convey the additional runoff be the responsibility of the party imparting increased flow. 11230253 36
References
City of Fortuna. (2018). Standard Details. Fortuna: City of Fortuna.
City of Fortuna. (2020). Urban Water Management Plan. Fortuna: City of Fortuna.
GHD. (2023). Draft Sewer System Master Plan Update. Eureka: City of Fortuna.
GHD Inc. (2022). Eel River Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Eureka: Humboldt County Department of Public Works.
Humboldt County. (2021). Humboldt Low Impact Development Stormwater Manual. Eureka: County of Humboldt.
11230253 37
Attachment 1: Draft Sewer Master Plan Project
Recommendations
WWTP
21-inch 24-inch15-inch
14 13
15 232
25 18-inch 14-inch
12-inch
FIGURE E-24
0 110 220 330 440 550
US Feet
Project No.
Revision No. 0
12559529
Date 21 Dec 2023
City of Fortuna
Sewer Master Plan
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
Page Size: ANSI A
Data source: World Street Map: Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, NGA, USGS, NPS World Street Map: Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, NGA, USGS. Created by: jclark2 \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Eureka\Projects\561\12559529\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\12559529_SMP_AppendixA\12559529_SMP_AppendixA.aprx - 12559529_E02_Mapbook_RevC
Print date: 21 Dec 2023 - 09:07
Gravity Sewer CIP Project 14A
Legend
Pump Stations
CIP Project Zone
Manholes
Non CIP Project
Manholes
Forcemain
City Limits
Parcels
Mini-Basin Area
Capacity Upsize
Project
CIP Project Basin
14A
CIP Project Pipes
(Reccomendations)
Dig and Replace
CIPP
CCTV
Non CIP Project
Pipes
GHD | City of Fortuna | 12559529 | Sewer System Master Plan Update 70 This document is in draft form. The contents, including any opinions, conclusions or recommendations contained in, or which may be implied from, this draft document must not be relied upon. GHD reserves the right, at any time, without notice, to modify or retract any part or all of the draft document. To the maximum extent permitted by law, GHD disclaims any responsibility or liability arising from or in connection with this draft document.
Table E-46 Project 14A – Full Project Detailed Opinion of Probable Cost Description Unit Unit Cost Quantity Total Cost
Pre-Construction Cleaning and CCTV
Inspection
LF $20
- -
Bypass Pumping LS $24,300 1 $24,000
6-inch Dig and Replace LF $270 824 $222,000
6-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $81 - -
8-inch Dig and Replace LF $297 - -
8-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $68 - -
10-inch Dig and Replace LF $324 - -
10-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $74 - -
12-inch Dig and Replace LF $378 - -
12-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $101 - -
14-inch Dig and Replace LF $378 - -
14-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $101 - -
15-inch Dig and Replace LF $392 444 $174,000
15-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $108 - -
16-inch Dig and Replace LF $392 - -
16-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $108 - -
18-inch Dig and Replace LF $405 - -
18-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $115 - -
21-inch Dig and Replace LF $419 52 $22,000
21-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $122 - -
24-inch Dig and Replace LF $432 361 $156,000
24-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $128 - -
30-inch Dig and Replace LF $446 - -
30-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $135 - -
36-inch Dig and Replace LF $459 - -
36-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $149 - -
42-inch Dig and Replace LF $473 - -
42-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $162 - -
60-inch Dig and Replace LF $648 - -
60-inch Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) LF $270 - -
Dig and Replace Lateral to Property Line EA $8,100 34 $272,000 Manhole Rehabilitation/Replacement EA $4,725 5 $24,000
Post Construction CCTV Inspection LF $6 1,681 $10,000
Non-CIP Project CCTV Inspection LF $6 - -
Construction Subtotal $905,000
Mobilization (12%) $109,000
Project Subtotal $1,013,000
Contingency (30%) $304,000
Engineering (7%) $71,000
Construction
Management (7%) $71,000
Administration (2%) $20,000
Project Total $1,479,000
GHD | City of Fortuna | 12559529 | Sewer System Master Plan Update 71 This document is in draft form. The contents, including any opinions, conclusions or recommendations contained in, or which may be implied from, this draft document must not be relied upon. GHD reserves the right, at any time, without notice, to modify or retract any part or all of the draft document. To the maximum extent permitted by law, GHD disclaims any responsibility or liability arising from or in connection with this draft document.
Table E-47 Project 14A – Upsize Portion of Construction Subtotal Cost Upsize Description
From Size To Size Unit Unit Cost Quantity Total Cost
6-inch 8-inch LF $297 - -
8-inch 10-inch LF $324 - -
10-inch 12-inch LF $378 - -
12-inch 15-inch LF $392 444 $173,904
14-inch & 15-inch 18-inch LF $405 - -
16-inch & 18-inch 21-inch LF $419 52 $21,804
21-inch 24-inch LF $432 361 $156,082
Dig and Replace Lateral to Property Line EA $8,100 17 $138,931 Manhole Rehabilitation/Replacement EA $4,725 3 $12,052
Post Construction CCTV Inspection LF $6 858 $5,210
Upsize Subtotal (Portion of Entire Project Construction Subtotal) - $507,983
DRAFT MDSP SEIR
APPENDIX F
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION
FOR THE
±70-ACRE FORTUNA MILL STUDY AREA
CITY OF FORTUNA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Rizzo & Associates
1960 Los Alamos Road
Santa Rosa, CA 95409
Prepared by:
2280 Grass Valley Hwy #306
Auburn, California 95603
(530) 888-0130
OCTOBER 2023
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Location and Setting ............................................................................................................................ 1 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 4 FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Climate .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Soils ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................................. 14 Perennial Stream ......................................................................................................................... 14 REFERENCES AND OTHER SOURCES ........................................................................................................ 16
FIGURES
Figure 1. Site & Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2. Aerial Photo ............................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3. Soils Map ................................................................................................................................... 5 Figures 4a-c. Ground Site Photos ........................................................................................................ 8-10 Figures 4d-f. Aerial Site Photos ......................................................................................................... 11-13 Figure 5. Aquatic Resources Delineation Map ................................................................................... 15 TABLES
Table 1. Aquatic Resources within Fortuna Mill Study Area .......................................................... 14
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Fortuna Mill Three Parameter Data Sheets
Appendix B. Plant Species Observed on the Fortuna Mill Study Area Appendix C. USACOE Aquatic Resources Spreadsheet
Fortuna Mill Salix Consulting, Inc.
Aquatic Resources Delineation 1 October 2023
AQUATIC RESOURCE DELINEATION
FOR THE ±70-ACRE
FORTUNA MILL STUDY AREA
INTRODUCTION
Location and Setting
Salix Consulting, Inc. (Salix) prepared an aquatic resources delineation for the ±70-acre Study Area located between Highway 101 and South Fortuna Boulevard in the City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, California. The approximate coordinates for the center of the property are 40°35'01.10" N and 124°09’01.85” W. It is situated in Section 2 of Township 2 North and Range 1 West on the Fortuna California 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangle (Figure 1).
The Study Area is located within the City of Fortuna and is the location of the former Pacific Lumber Company Fortuna Mill that was closed in June of 2005. The site was cleared of structures by mid-2010. The impervious surfaces from the lumber mill operations are still present at the site today including structural foundations, driveways, parking areas, and outdoor storage areas. The General Plan for the City of Fortuna designates the Study Area as a “Mill District (MD)”. The site is outside of California’s Coastal Zone (Coastal Act Section 30103) which lies approximately 1,700 feet to the west.
Surrounding land uses include suburban residential land uses to the north, suburban and mixed commercial uses to the east, State Route 101 and an abandoned railroad line to the west, propane tank and fuel storage to the Norwest and road and highway infrastructure to the south. The confluence of Strongs Creek and Mill Creek occur on the property in the southern portion of the Study Area (Figure 2).
Contact Information:
Applicant:
Rizzo & Associates
Fortuna Mill Commerce Center
1960 Los Alamos Road
Santa Rosa, CA 95409
Contact:Vincent M. Rizzo
Delineated by:
Salix Consulting, Inc.
2280 Grass Valley Hwy. #306
Auburn, California 95603
Contact: Jeff Glazner
STUDY AREA
STUDY AREA
D!
±
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
Source Map:
USGS Topographic Map
Fortuna Quad 1:24,000
S2&11 T02N R01W SITE AND VICINITY MAP
Fortuna Mill
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Figure 1
S Fortuna Blvd
Newburg Rd
Riverwalk Dr
Eel River
£¤101
Eel River Rd
Strongs Creek Mill Creek
Figure 2 ±
0 500 1,000
Feet
Study Area (±70 acres)
Aerial Source: 07-25-2023,
Salix Consulting, Inc.
AERIAL MAP
Fortuna Mill
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Fortuna Mill Salix Consulting, Inc.
Aquatic Resources Delineation 4 October 2023
METHODOLOGY
Aquatic resources were delineated on July 25 and 26, 2023, by Jeff Glazner. The delineation was conducted according to the 1987 Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) as amended by the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regional Supplement, Version 2.0 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). The boundaries of the aquatic resources were observed in the field and mapped using a Trimble Catalyst DA2 GPS (submeter). Three three-parameter Data Forms were filled out at three locations (Appendix A).
Information on soils of the study area was obtained from the U.S. Department of Agriculture – National Resource Conservation Service’s online Web Soil Survey (USDA 2022). In the field, a Munsell Color (2015) chart was used to determine moist soil colors.
Appendix B is a list of plants observed during the delineation, along with the scientific name and wetland status of each species. Where a plant species observed has a wetland indicator status (not upland or UPL), plant nomenclature follows the National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5 (USACE 2020). Otherwise, species names are according to The Jepson Flora Project (Jepson eflora) or more recent publications if the nomenclature for any species has changed.
FINDINGS
Climate
The warmest month of the year is typically August with an average maximum temperature of 60.2 degrees. The coolest month of the year is typically January with an average high temperature of 46.9 degrees. January, February, and March are the coolest months of the year with all three having an average minimum temperature of 42.7 degrees. Total annual precipitation is 47 inches with the month of December receiving the most rain fall (9 inches). Summer months are typically dry with very little rainfall recorded between June and September (Climate-Data.org. 2023).
Soils
The study area has one soil map unit labeled as 1010 Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent (Figure 3).
1010 Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent This soil is primarily considered Urban lands (65 percent) with 35 percent consisting of the Friendlycity soil map unit. These soils are found in low elevations of 20-160 feet where the mean annual precipitation ranges between 44 and 48 inches. They are typically found on terraces and alluvial fans. They are moderately well drained and the depth to the water table ranges between 20 and 39 inches. They typically do not flood, do not pond are not considered a hydric soil. The soil is formed from alluvium derived from metamorphic and sedimentary rock.
Eel River
£¤101
Eel River Rd
Strongs Creek Mill Creek
Riverwalk Dr
Newburg Rd
S Fortuna Blvd
Figure 3 ±
0 500 1,000
Feet
Study Area (±70 acres)
Aerial Source: 07-25-2023,
Salix Consulting, Inc.
Data Source: Natural Resources
Conservation Service (2023)
SOILS MAP
Fortuna Mill
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Soil Components
1010 - Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent Fortuna Mill Salix Consulting, Inc.
Aquatic Resources Delineation 6 October 2023
In addition to the characteristics of the native soil described by the NRCS, the site includes gravel and paved surfaces throughout much of the Study Area. These surfaces alter the drainage and other key characteristics of this soil map unit.
Hydrology
The site is in the Strongs Creek-Eel River HUC12 (180101051102) watershed which is part of the Lower Eel HUC8 (18010105) watershed. The hydrology of the site is dominated by two perennial streams that are tributaries to the Eel River: Strongs Creek and Mill Creek. Mill Creek has a 1,700-acre watershed east of the Study Area and is dominated by the built environment of the City of Fortuna. Mill Creek is a tributary to Strongs Creek. Strongs Creek is the largest natural drainage in the City of Fortuna with a 5,200-acre watershed north and east of the Study Area. When the tributaries of Strongs Creek are included, the overall watershed is nearly 10,700 acres in area. The watershed includes urban stormwater runoff and flows from natural areas.
The majority of the site drains the expansive impervious surfaces as sheet flows.
Stormwaters are ultimately conveyed to Strongs Creek which passes under State Route 101 and enters the Eel River ±5,250 to the northwest of the Study Area.
The southern portion of the Study Area drains into Mill Creek which enters the Study Area from the south under Kenmar Road. Mill Creek is situated adjacent to the eastern edge of the Study Area for ±1,170 feet flowing north to a confluence with Strongs Creek within the Study Area Boundary.
There is evidence of settling ponds and drainage ditches that were likely a part of the mill operations in the past, but these areas are no longer maintained or functioning as originally intended and in some cases the hydrology of these stormwater features have been subsequently modified through maintenance of the property.
Vegetation
Vegetation within the Study Area is mapped as a land-cover type. A land-cover type is defined as the dominant character of the land surface discernible from aerial photographs and field reconnaissance, as determined by vegetation, water, or human uses. The Study Area contains four primary landcover types: pavement, ruderal (unpaved), blackberry scrub, and riparian with perennial stream. Representative site photos of the Study Area are presented in Figures 4a-c and aerial site photos are presented in Figures 4c and 4f.
Pavement
This landcover type includes the impervious surfaces associated with the former mill site that covers most of the northern area of the site. This land-cover includes structural foundations, parking areas, and large open impervious surfaces. Vegetation is sparse in the majority of the urban land-cover but cracks in the asphalt, and areas where the impervious surface is not present support herbaceous and woody vegetation including Fortuna Mill Salix Consulting, Inc.
Aquatic Resources Delineation 7 October 2023
fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and willows (Salix spp.).
Ruderal
The ruderal land-cover type includes areas regularly disturbed by human activity such as surface grading and weed abatement, recent removal of debris and vehicular travel.
Common species include Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), large sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum ordoratum), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and rough cat’s ear (Hypochaeris radicata).
Blackberry Scrub
Himalayan blackberry is an invasive shrub that tends to colonize areas that are not too dry and not regularly cleared. These areas are found primarily along fencelines, cut slopes, and areas that have been left fallow for years. It often forms a monoculture due to its density but on this property, fennel is a very common cohabitant.
Riparian Woodland along the Perennial Streams
Both Strongs Creek and Mill Creek support mature riparian woodland corridors that are rooted below and above the top of bank. It varies in width from less than 100’ along Mill Creek to about 200’near the confluence of Strongs Creek and Mill Creek. The most common tree along the streams is red alder (Alnus rubra). Willow, primarily arroyo willow, are abundant along all reaches of the streams. Other species within the riparian habitat include, California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus), giant horsetail (Equisetum telemateia), English ivy (Hedera helix), and western sword fern (Polystichum munitum).
Figure 4a
SITE PHOTOS
Fortuna Mill Property
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Looking north along Eel River Drive where it crosses Strongs Creek.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Looking south along Eel River Drive where it crosses Strongs Creek Photo date: July 26, 2023
Figure 4b
SITE PHOTOS
Fortuna Mill Property
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Looking south along Eel River Drive towards the southern end of the Study Area and the riparian woodland associated with Mill Creek.
Photo date: July 25, 2023
Looking southwest over gravel pad and a row of Monterey Cypress just north of Strongs Creek. Photo date: July 26, 2023
Figure 4c
SITE PHOTOS
Fortuna Mill Property
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Strongs Creek just east of the Eel River Drive bridge crossing with red alder and English ivy on steep banks. Photo date: July 25, 2023 Strongs Creek with red alder stand and dense Himalayan blackberry along steep banks. Photo date: July 26, 2023
Figure 4d
AERIAL PHOTOS
Fortuna Mill Property
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Looking south with Strongs Creek to the west adjacent to SR 101.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Overview of the Study Area looking southeast.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Figure 4e
AERIAL PHOTOS
Fortuna Mill Property
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Looking north to the northern half of the Study Area where no aquatic resources are present.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Looking north over the Study Area with Mill Creek to the east and its confluence with Strongs Creek in the center of the image.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Figure 4f
AERIAL PHOTOS
Fortuna Mill Property
City of Fortuna, Humboldt County, CA
Looking south to the southern end of the Study Area where Mill Creek passes under Kenmar Road and enters the site.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Looking south over the Study Area and the confluence of Mill Creek and Strongs Creek.
Photo date: July 26, 2023
Fortuna Mill Salix Consulting, Inc.
Aquatic Resources Delineation 14 October 2023
Aquatic Resources
Two aquatic resource features are mapped within the Study Area and are summarized in Table 1 below. Discussion of these features follows the table. The Aquatic Resources Delineation Map is presented in Figure 5.
Table 1.
Aquatic Resources within Fortuna Mill Study Area
Type Acreage
Other Waters
Perennial Stream/Strongs Creek (PS-1) 0.962
Perennial Stream/Mill Creek (PS-2) 0.613
Total 1.575
Perennial Stream
The Study Area has two perennial streams that pass through the southern third of the site: Strongs Creek (PS-1) and Mill Creek (PS-2). Together the streams are 1.575 acres or approximately 2.3 percent of the Study Area.
Strongs Creek is a named stream on the USGS Fortuna Quad map and is a tributary to the Lower Eel River. Strongs Creek enters the Study Area from the northeast near South Fortuna Boulevard and trends from east to west along a ±1,450’ reach before it exits the property to the west near the abandoned railroad property and State Highway right-ofway. The boundary of PS-1 is defined by the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) which was identified during the field assessments in July of 2023. The upland area above the OHWM is riparian habitat and is not considered to be an aquatic resource. Much of the vegetation above and below the OHWM is the same so the OHWM boundary is the key distinction between upland habitat and the riverine aquatic resource.
Mill Creek is a perennial stream that is a tributary of Strongs Creek. Mill Creek enters the Study Area at the southern end of the site at Kenmar Road and flows northward through the Study Area near the eastern edge until it reaches a confluence with Strongs Creek. Mill Creek is a smaller and narrower stream that primarily supports willow and less red alder.
Fortuna Mill Salix Consulting, Inc.
Aquatic Resources Delineation 16 October 2023
REFERENCES AND OTHER SOURCES
Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson manual: vascular plants of California, second edition.
University of California Press, Berkeley.
City of Fortuna. 2005. Storm Drainage Master Plan.
Climate-Data.org. Weather by Month//Weather Averages – Fortuna Temperature Data 1991-2021. Rainy Days Data 1999-2019. https://en.climate-data.org/northamerica/united-states-of-america/california/fortuna-15735/#climate-table.
Accessed September 2023
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1.
Munsell Color. 2015. Munsell Soil Color Charts. GretagMacbeth. New Windsor, NY.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
__________________________. 2020. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5. http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.
USDA/NRCS. Web Soil Survey, Humboldt County, California, http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed:
September 2023.
Appendix A.
Three Parameter Data Sheets
Appendix B.
Plant Species Observed in Study Area
Appendix B. Fortuna Mill - Plants Observed - Wetland Status - July 2023 Taxon Common Name Wetland Status
Agrostis capillaris Colonial bent FAC
Agrostis stolonifera Creeping bent FACW
Aira caryophyllea Silver European hairgrass FACU
Alnus rubra Red alder FACW
Amaranthus palmeri Palmer's amaranth FACU
Anthemis cotula Mayweed FACU
Anthoxanthum odoratum Large sweet vernal grass FAC
Artemisia douglasiana California mugwort FAC
Arundo donax Giant reed FACW
Avena fatua Wild oat UPL
Baccharis pilularis subsp. pilularis Baccharis UPL
Briza maxima Rattlesnake grass FAC
Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's purse FACU
Centaurea melitensis Tocalote UPL
Centaurea solstitialis Yellow starthistle UPL
Centaurium erythraea European centaury FAC
Cichorium intybus Chicory FACU
Cirsium arvense Canada thistle FACU
Cirsium vulgare Bull thistle FACU
Conium maculatum Poison hemlock FACW
Cortaderia jubata Urguayan pampas grass FACU
Cynodon dactylon Bermudagrass FACU
Cynosurus echinatus Hedgehog dogtail UPL
Cyperus esculentus Nut grass FACW
Cytisus scoparius Scotch broom UPL
Dactylis glomerata Orchard grass FACU
Daucus carota Queen Anne's lace UPL
Delairea odorata German-ivy UPL
Digitaria sanguinalis Hairy crabgrass FACU
Dipsacus sativus Fuller's teasel UPL
Epilobium ciliatum Hairy willow-herb FACW
Equisetum telemateia subsp. braunii Giant horsetail FACWEschscholzia californica California poppy UPL Eucalyptus camaldulensis Red gum FAC
Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum UPL
Euonymus occidentalis var. occidentalis Western burning bush FACW Fallopia japonica Japanese knotweed FACU
Festuca arundinacea Tall fescue FACU
Taxon Common Name Wetland Status
Festuca perennis Italian ryegrass FAC
Foeniculum vulgare Sweet fennel UPL
Galium aparine Goose grass FACU
Geranium molle Dove's-foot geranium UPL
Hedera helix English ivy FACU
Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox-tongue FAC
Hirschfeldia incana Short-podded mustard UPL
Holcus lanatus Common velvet grass FAC
Hypochaeris radicata Rough cat's-ear FACU
Juncus bufonius Toad rush FACW
Juncus effusus Soft rush FACW
Lactuca saligna Willow lettuce UPL
Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce FACU
Lamium amplexicaule Deadnettle UPL
Lathyrus latifolius Perennial sweetpea UPL
Leontodon saxatilis Long-beaked hawkbit FACU
Leucanthemum vulgare Ox-eye daisy UPL
Linum bienne Narrowleaf flax UPL
Lonicera involucrata var. ledebourii Twinberry FAC
Lotus corniculatus Bird's-foot trefoil FAC
Lythrum hyssopifolia Hyssop loosestrife OBL
Malva nicaeensis Bull mallow UPL
Matricaria discoidea Pineapple-weed FACU
Melilotus albus White sweetcover UPL
Mentha pulegium Pennyroyal OBL
Panicum capillare Witchgrass FACU
Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW
Physocarpus capitatus Pacific ninebark FACW
Pinus radiata Monterey pine UPL
Plantago lanceolata English plantain FAC
Poa annua Annual bluegrass FAC
Polypogon monspeliensis Annual beard grass FACW
Polystichum munitum Western sword fern FACU
Populus trichocarpa Black cottonwood FAC
Prunella vulgaris var. vulgaris Common self-heal FACU
Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii Douglas-fir FACU
Raphanus sativus Wild radish UPL
Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FAC
Rubus parviflorus Thimbleberry FAC
Rubus ursinus California blackberry FACU
Taxon Common Name Wetland Status
Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC
Rumex pulcher Fiddle dock FAC
Rumex salicifolius Willow dock FACW
Salix exigua var. hindsiana Hind's willow FACW
Salix hookeriana Coastal willow FACW
Salix lasiandra var. lasiandra Pacific willow FACW
Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow FACW
Salix sitchensis Sitka willow FACW
Sambucus racemosa var. racemosa Red elderberry FACU
Scrophularia californica California figwort FAC
Silybum marianum Milk thistle UPL
Sonchus oleraceus Common sow-thistle UPL
Spergularia rubra Ruby sand-spurrey FAC
Spiraea douglasii Douglas' spirea FACW
Stachys chamissonis Coast hedgenettle OBL
Trifolium hirtum Rose clover UPL
Trifolium repens White clover FACU
Trifolium subterraneum Subterranean clover UPL
Umbellularia californica California bay FAC
Urtica dioica Stinging nettle FAC
Vicia benghalensis Purple vetch UPL
Zeltnera muehlenbergii June centaury FAC
Appendix C.