CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 20, 2022
7:00 P.M.
NOTICE: IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE SPREAD OF THE COVID-19 VIRUS, THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 52953(e) AND CITY OF LIVINGSTON CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2021-71.
WE ENCOURAGE ALL MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING VIA TELECONFERENCE BY CALLING (520) 525-8911. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATING VIA TELECONFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT.
ADDITIONALLY, THE MEETING WILL BE STREAMED ON YOUTUBE LIVE htt9§://www.youtube.com/ channel/ UCB ZmQZIHELh-ECEPZ2VwZq
PERSONS WHO ATTEND THE MEETING ARE ASKED TO FOLLOW THE CURRENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC HEALTH GUIDANCE.
(Some Councilmembers may be participating in the meeting remotely via teleconferencing consistent with the Government Code Section 52953(e) and City of Livingston City Council Resolution No. 2021-71.) Notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a Regular Meeting on September 20, 2022, at the City Council Chambers, 1416 C Street, Livingston, California or conducted pursuant to the Government Code Section 52953(e) and City of Livingston City Council Resolution No. 2021-71.
Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Persons requesting accommodation should contact the Deputy City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to this meeting at (209) 394-8041, Ext. 121. Any writings or documents pertaining to an Open Session item provided to a majority of the members of the legislative body less than 72 hours prior to the meeting shall be made available for public inspection by email If requested. Public comments can be submitted via emailed at citycouncil@>livingstoncity.com. Comments must be received by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the City Council meeting in order for them to be distributed to the Council prior to consideration of the matter. You will need to provide: Meeting date, item number, name, email and comment (please limit to 300 words or 3 minutes). Please include: PUBLIC COMMENT in the subject for the email. Written comments will not be read aloud at the meeting, but will be reported as received for the record. If you do not receive an acknowledgement of receipt by 4:00 p.m., please call the City Clerk's Office at (209) 394-8041, Ext. 121 (Note: This technology is not a guaranteed method). 1 REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence - First Responders and Military Members.
Roll Call.
Closed Session Announcements.
Changes to the Agenda.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Next Resolution No.: 2022-57
Next Ordinance No.: 650
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE GIVEN THE SAME TIME ALLOTMENT FOR COMMENTS {3 MINUTES) AS NORMALLY ALLOWED FOR MEETINGS SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER N-08-21
This section of the agenda allows members of the public to address the City Council on any item NOT otherwise on the agenda. Members of the public, when recognized by the Mayor, should come forward to the lectern, and identify themselves. Comments are normally limited to three (3) minutes. In accordance with State Open Meeting Laws, no action will be taken by the City Council this evening. For items which are on the agenda this evening members of the public will be provided an opportunity to address the City Council as each item is brought up for discussion.
AW ARDS, PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS
1. Presentation by Jennifer Hidalgo, District Representative for the Office of Senator Anna Caballero: Overview of 2022 Young Legislators Program
2. Presentation by Mayor Aguilar: Proclamation recognizing Hispanic Heritage Month
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
City Staff Announcements and Reports.
City Manager Announcements and Reports.
City Council Members' Announcements and Reports.
Mayor's Announcements and Reports.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine or non-controversial and will be enacted by one vote, unless separate action is requested by the City Manager or City Council Member. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the City Council or City Manager request that specific items be removed. 2 3. WAIVING OF READING OF ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS
City Council Waive the Reading in Full of Ordinances and Resolutions on Agenda and Adopt by Reading the Title only, Unless Otherwise Requested by the Mayor or a Council Member
4. AUTHORJZE REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS
Resolution Proclaiming a Local Emergency and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the Legislative Bodies of the City of Livingston Pursuant to Brown Act Provisions
5. RATIFY CHECK WARRANTS
Ratify Warrant Register Dated September 8, 2022
6. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2017-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES), ANNEXATION N0.2
Resolution Declaring its Intention to Annex Territory to a Community Facilities District and to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Therein, The City of Livingston Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services) Annexation No. 2
7. APPROVE THE ADDITION OF A SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER
JOB DESCRJPTION AND CORRESPONDING SALARY RANGE
Resolution Approving the Addition of a Senior Administrative Services Manager Job Description and Corresponding Salary Range
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8. ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON'S 1,2,3 - TCP REMOVAL TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE# 2018091025)
Resolution Adopting the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City's 1,2,3 - TCP Removal Treatment System Project (State Clearinghouse #2018091025)
DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS
9. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON APPROVING OF FIRE SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH MERCED COUNTY, STAFFING AUGMENTATION AND CREATE PROJECT FOR
FIRE STATION REFURBISHMENT
Resolution Approving the Memorandum of Understanding Between Merced County for Fire Protection Services and Staffing Augmentation Through December 31, 2032
COUNCIL DIRECTION ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
10. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - Anticipated Litigation Significant exposure to litigation
Pursuant to Gov. Code,§ 54956.9(d)(2): One (1) case.
ADJOURNMENT
3 RESOLUTION NO. 2021~71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON CITY COUNCIL
PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY AND AUTHORIZING REMOTE
TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES OF THE CITY
OF LIVINGSTON PURSUANT TO BROWN ACT PROVISIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Livingston (the "Citt) is committed to preserving public access and participation in meetings of the City Council; and WHEREAS, all meetings of the City's legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code, §§ 54950 - 54963}, so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City's legislative bodies conduct their business; and
WHEREAS, Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e), provides provisions for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3}, subject to the existence of certain conditions; and WHEREAS, a required condition is that a state of emergency is declared by the Governor, pursuant to Government Code section 8625. proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions as described in Government Code section 8558; and WHEREAS, a proclamation is made when there ls an actual Incident, threat of disaster, or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the jurisdictions that are within the City's boundaries, caused by natural, technological, or human-- caused disasters; and
WHEREAS, it is further required that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing or the legislative body meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees; and WHEREAS, such conditions now exist In the City, specifically, on March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; despite sustained efforts, the virus continues to spread and is impacting nearly all sectors of California; and WHEREAS, there has been a significant Increase in COVID-19 cases in Merced County due primarily to the Delta variant of SARS~CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Emerging evidence indicates that the Delta variant is far more transmissible than prior variants of the virus, may cause more severe illness, and can be spread by fully vaccinated Individuals; and
WHEREAS, as a consequence of the declared emergency, the City Council does hereby find that the legislative body of the City shall conduct their meetings (CWI081SS.I}
without compliance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), as authorized by Section 54953, subdivision (e), and that such legislative bodies shall comply with the requirements to provide the public with access to the meetings as prescribed in Section 54953, subdivision {e)(2}; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 54953, subdivision {e)(3}, in order to continue to teleconference without com pflance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b}(3), the City Council shall, not 30 days after teleconferencing for the flrst time pursuant to this Resolution, and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote: The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and any of the following conditions exist: {1} The state of emergency continues to directly Impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person or (2) state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and
WHEREAS, the City reserves the option to hold in-person meetings, consistent with local health officer directives, or to continue a practice of remote meetings that still allow multiple options for public participation.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.
Section 2. Proclamation of Local Emergency. The City Council hereby proclaims that a local emergency exists throughout the City, and that the legislative body meeting In person could present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees due to the prevalence of COVI D-19 In Merced County and the state, such that the City reserves the right to continue virtual meetings or conduct in-person meetings, consistent with local health guidance or dufy issued orders.
Section 3. Remote Teleconference Meetings. The legislative body and Its General Manager and designees of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution, including conducting open and public meetings In accordance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e), and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.
Section 4. Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earner of (i) October 30, 2021, or (ii) such time the City Council of Directors makes a subsequent finding by majority vote In accordance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), to extend the time during whid'l the legislative bodies of the City may continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of section 54953.
Passed and adopted this 5th day of October, 2021, by the following vote:
(CWI081SS,l}
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Mayor Aguilar and Council Members Baptista-Soto, Kang, and Garcia None
None
Council Member Moran
LJ.liJ,lllll);'-;go1lar Jr., Mayor
e City of Livingston
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Uvingston this S"' day of October, 2021 .
a&Leticia Vasquez-Zurita, -
City > Clerk
of the City of Livingston
tCW IIU!I SJ 11
AGENDA ITEM:
MEETING DATE:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF REPORT
Warrant Register September 8, 2022
September 20, 2022
Nancy Fuentes, Accounting Technician
Vanessa Portillo, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
Ratify the warrant register dated September 8, 2022
DISCUSSION:
,ce - :mmmlK -
....,
Government Code sections 37208(b) and 37209 provide that accounts payable warrants or checks drawn in payment of demands certified or approved by the finance director as conforming to a budget approved by ordinance or resolution of the legislative body need not be audited by the legislative body prior to payment.
In addition, Government Code section 37208(a) provides that payroll warrants or checks need not be audited by the legislative body prior to payment. Payrolls shall be presented to the legislative body for ratification and approval at the first meeting after delivery of the payroll warrants or checks. The sum total of any payroll checks issued within the week prior to the date of the check register is also noted on the accompanying check register.
The following checks have been certified to be in accordance with the City's approved budget.
The checks have been issued and the check register is presented to the City Council for ratification:
August 30, 2022- September 8, 2022
GENERAL WARRANTS .......................... $
"Skipped number sequence due to voided item.
PAYROLL/WIRE WARRANTS .................. $
TOTAL WARRANTS .............................. $
ATTACHMENTS:
428,307.27
235,592.63
663,899.90
Warrant Register (summarized by date and check number)
l
7387-7482*
2277-2299
Accounts Payable
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date
User: nfuentes
Printed; 9113/2022 9:36 AM
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name
7387 681 Central Valley Umpire Association
7388 402 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
7389 612 Livingston Peace Officers Association
7390 765 White Brenner LLP
7391 39S Administrative Solution, Inc.
7392 910 American Elite Electric, Inc.
7393 396 American Fidelity Assurance
7394 l028 Martha Arroyo
7395 253 AT&T
7396 I027 Maria Avila
7397 454 Backflow Apparatus & Valve Co.
7398 136 Hector Becerra
7399 1031 Bonander Truck
7400 771 BPMS Software
7401 193 BSK Associates
7402 l0l9 Buchalter
7403 192 Cal Traffic
7404 909 Canon Financial Services, Inc.
7405 766 Central Valle} Landscape & Tree
7406 681 Central Valley Umpire Association
7407 1024 City Direct, Inc.
7408 UB*0200I CONCO WEST, INC.
7409 1000 Employment Development Dept.
7410 163 EZ Auto Supply
7411 641 Ferguson Enterprises LCC #686
7412 188 Frontier
7413 843 Maria Fuentes
7414 262 Gilton Solid Waste
7415 356 Gouveia Engineering. Inc.
7416 1029 Denise Hickman
7417 501 Hunt & Sons, Inc.
7418 165 J LAnalytical Services, Inc.
7419 1026 Julissa Juarez
7420 1021 Anne Land
7421 402 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
7422 874 Livingston Self Storage
7423 276 Livingston True Value
7424 723 Carolina Llamas
7425 1023 Rafael Macias
7426 1030 Patricia Marshall
7427 UB*02005 RAMON MENDEZ
7428 497 Merced County Sheriff
7429 389 Mid Valley IT
7430 180 Mission Linen Service
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date (9/1312022 9:36 AM) Check Date
08/31/2022
08/31/2022
08/31/2022
08/31/2022
City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
Total for 8/31/2022:
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
09/06/2022
Check Amount
84.00 4,218.00
10,791.00
45,042.80
60,135.80
75.00 13,409.00
5,801.34
300 00
236 46
200 00
128 10
3,000.00
1,943.45
300 00
738 00
1,493 50
54. 18
Bl 89
5,923 00
392 00
1,400 00
397 36
2,367 25
16 93
464 61
151.32
150.00
1,826 50
59,875.83
200 00
5,549 98
1,123 00
150.00
150.00
4,825.00
157 50
17 22
150,00
150,00
233,22
103.22
9,757.44
9,710.00
317.80
Page I
Ch~ki'lo Ven<lorNo Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
7431 507 Muniquip,LLC 09/06/2022 172.40
7432 199 Northstar Chemical 09/06/2022 12,566.57
7433 1020 Salvador Ochoa 09/06/2022 150.00
7434 302 Office Depot, Inc. 09/06/2022 328.91
7435 437 Operating Engineers Local 3 09/06/2022 288.00
7436 438 Operating Engineers Local 3 09/06/2022 469.00
7437 744 Play Power LT Farmington, Inc 09/06/2022 44,060.31 7438 405 Premier Access Insurance Company 09/06/2022 4,416.65 7439 1025 Guadalupe Pulido 09/06/2022 150.00
7440 535 Jason Roth 09/06/2022 150.00
7441 208 Saenz Pest Control, Inc. 09/06/2022 127.00
7442 499 Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. 09/06/2022 847 71
7443 579 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control D 09/06/2022 225.00 7444 407 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control D 09/06/2022 98.00 7445 739 Self• Help Enterprises 09/06/2022 35000
7446 ue•o2004 ALICIA SIGALA 09/06/2022 192.02
7447 ue•o2002 AMANDEEP SINGH 09/06/2022 57.25
7448 UB*02003 ANITA SINGH 09/06/2022 167.44
7449 671 Natalie Sobalvarro 09/06/2022 450.00
7450 598 Standard Insurance Company RB 09/06/2022 4,466.80 7451 393 State of California 09/06/2022 635 83
7452 485 Stericycle, Inc. 09/06/2022 320.38
7453 564 Texas Life Insurance 09/06/2022 84.78
7454 313 U.S. Bank Equipment Finance 09/06/2022 453 45
7455 1017 Debt Management Services U.S. Departme1 09/06/2022 69.26 7456 249 United Site Services 09/06/2022 382 55
7457 693 USA Softball of Central Cal 09/06/2022 150 00
7458 314 Valley Coffee 09/06/2022 59.60
7459 773 Leticia Vasquez 09/06/2022 30000
7460 367 Verizon Wireless 09/06/2022 319 95
7461 608 Vision Service Plan- CA 09/06/2022 360 50
7462 210 WGR Southwest, Inc. 09/06/2022 2,020 00
7463 1022 Eduardo Zurita 09/06/2022 150 00
Total for 9/612022: 208,609 46
7464 434 AFSCME District Council 57 09/08/2022 631.54
7465 747 All Star Elite Sports 09/08/2022 7,395 29
7466 288 Apostolic Assembly 09/08/2022 IOO 00
7467 282 AT&T Mobility 09/08/2022 1,466 62
7468 189 ComTech21 LLC 09/08/2022 40 35
7469 1032 Copper Spur Bar•B•Que, Inc. 09/08/2022 1,000 00 7470 548 Doras Fashion 09/08/2022 317 00
7471 356 Gouveia Engineering. Inc. 09/08/2022 304 50
7472 359 Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates 09/08/2022 994 72 7473 1033 Independent Investigations LLC 09/08/2022 3,338 75 7474 786 J.B, Anderson Land Use Planning 09/08/2022 41,354.65 7475 404 Merced County Clerk 09/08/2022 2,548 00
7476 404 Merced County Clerk 09/08/2022 50.00
7477 404 Merced County Clerk 09/08/2022 50.00
7478 576 Mid Cal Pipeline & Utilities, Inc. 09/08/2022 98, 104.84 7479 304 Pride of Livingston Parent Boosters 09/08/2022 100.00 7480 408 Sapien Family Trust 09/08/2022 1,000.00
7481 308 Sprint 09/08/2022 129 92
7482 393 State of California 09/08/2022 635.83
Total for 9/8/2022: 159,562.01
AP Checks by Date -Summary by Check Date (911312022 9 36 AM) Page 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Report Total (96 checks): 428,307 27
AP Checks by Date - Summmy by Check Date (9,'JJ/2022 9.36 AM) Page 3 AGENDA ITEM:
MEETING DATE:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF REPORT
Communtiy Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 2
September 20, 2022
Willdan Financial Services
Vanessa Portillo, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
To initiate proceedings to annex property into Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services) (the "CFD"), Annexation No. 2 to pay for the impact of new development on public services, including the maintenance of streets, drainage, parks, public landscape areas, and to maintain service levels for police and fire protection services provided by the City of Livingston (the "City").
It is recommended that the City Council adopt:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY TO A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN, THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2017-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES} ANNEXATION NO. 2 The recommended action will declare the City Council's intent to annex property into the CFD pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California as amended, for the purpose of financing the impact of new development on the maintenance of streets, drainage, parks, public landscape areas, and to maintain service levels for police and fire protection services.
BACKGROUND
By Resolution No. 2018-20, the City Council established the CFO with the intention that future development within the City would annex into this CFD. The special taxes collected from the property owners within the CFD are to be used for the funding of maintenance of streets, drainage, parks, public landscape areas, and to maintain service levels for police and fire protection services due to new development in the City.
There are multiple projects proposed for annexation. The details for each project are as follows:
1. A development owned by AMBA National Limited Liability Company consisting of a gas station, store, car wash and restaurant sitting on 2.37 acres of land. The project is located southwest of the corner of the Campbell Boulevard and Hammatt Avenue intersection adjacent to State Route 99. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel number 023-060-001 as depicted on Exhibit A.
2. A development owned by Jose Martinez consisting of two residential duplexes sitting on .27 acres of land. The project is located on the northeast corner of Prusso and F Streets.
The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel number 024- 162-011 as depicted on Exhibit A.
3. A development owned by Francisco Barboza consisting of a residential duplex sitting on .515 acres of land. The project is located on the north side of F Street between 71J1 and 8th Streets. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel number 024-184-014 as depicted on Exhibit A.
4. A development owned by Raji and Gurvinder Saini consisting of three detached residential units sitting on .324 acres of land. The project is located 835 6th Street. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel numbers 024-183- 008 and 024-183-009 as depicted on Exhibit A.
5. A development owned by Castle Assets LLC consisting of a twenty-unit apartment sitting on .89 acres of land. The project is located on the northwest corner of F Street and Hammatt Avenue. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel number 024-191-035 as depicted on Exhibit A.
6. A development owned by Nukul Bassi consisting of gas station, food mart and restaurant site sitting on .992 acres of land. The project is located on the southeast corner of Walnut Avenue and Hammatt Avenue. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel number 023-070-011 as depicted on Exhibit A.
7. A development owned by Visionary Home Builders of California Inc consisting of an 80- unit apartment site sitting on 3.98 acres of land. The project is located on the northwest corner of B Street and Prusso Street. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel numbers 022-010-026 as depicted on Exhibit A.
8. A development owned by Frank Sequeira consisting of three attached housing units sitting on .192 acres of land. The project is located on the west side of 8th Street, south of D Street at 1920 8th Street. The boundary of the annexation includes the area within assessor's parcel number 024-184-026 as depicted on Exhibit A.
Development of this property has changed the characteristics of undeveloped land. Once developed, these projects will have intensified the use of the property, creating a need for more services under this CFO.
The Resolution of Intention is the first step in the process of annexing new developments into the CFO. The resolution also establishes November 15, 2022 as the public hearing date for the final consideration of the annexation of the property into the CFD. Once the annexation is complete, the property owners of the Project will be required to pay annual special taxes for the CFO, beginning in Fiscal Year 2023/2024 as itemized on their property tax bill in accordance with the rate set forth in the Amended Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax shown in Exhibit B. The rates for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 are shown in Exhibit C.
The Amended Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax was established as part of the formation of the CFO and fixed Fiscal Year 2018/2019 as the base year for the annual special tax rate. The special tax rates are anticipated to increase each year based on the Annual Escalation Factor specified in the Amended Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.
DISCUSSION
The attached resolution will begin the proceedings for the annexation of the projects into the CFO.
The conditions of approval for the projects require them to annex into the CFO, which was established as an annexable district to provide funding to offset the increased cost for maintenance of streets, drainage, parks, public landscape areas, and to maintain service levels for police and fire protection services.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The annual revenue received by the City for the CFO will be based on the maximum special tax rates outlined in the Amended Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, inflated by the Annual Escalation Factor. The estimated revenue amount from the development projects based on Fiscal Year 2022/2023 maximum special tax rates is $94,575. The process for the annexation is funded by the developers and no general fund monies are used for this effort.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2022- --
CITY OF LIVINGSTON
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 -__
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY TO A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN, THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2017-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES) ANNEXATION NO. 2 WHEREAS, this City Council has conducted proceedings to establish Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services) (the "CFO") pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (the "Acn, Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing at Section 53311, of the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, under the Act, this Council, as the legislative body for the CFO, is empowered with the authority to annex territory to the CFO, and now desires to undertake proceedings to annex territory to the CFO.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Council hereby finds and determines that public convenience and necessity require that territory be added to the CFO.
2. The name of the existing CFO is "Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services)".
3. The territory included in the existing CFD is as shown on the map thereof filed in Book 14 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Page 40, as well as the map for Annexation No. 1 filed in Book 15 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Page 6, in the office of the County Recorder, County of Merced, State of California, to which maps reference is hereby made.
The territory now proposed to be annexed to the CFO is as shown on the Annexation Map No. 2 to the CFO, on file with the City Clerk, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof, the boundaries of which territory are hereby preliminarily approved. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause the recordation of said Annexation Map No. 2 to the CFO, showing the territory to be annexed, in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Merced within fifteen days of the date of adoption of this resolution.
4. The types of public services financed by the CFO and pursuant to the Act consist of those services (the "Services") described in Exhibit A to Resolution No. 2018-20 adopted by the Council on the 1 ?ttl day of April, 2018, (the "Resolution of Formation"). It is presently intended that the Services will be shared, without preference or priority, by the existing territory in the CFO and the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFO. It has been determined that this project will intensify the use of the property, creating a need for more services under this CFO.
RES. NO. 2022 -
September 20, 2022
Page2
5. Except to the extent that funds are otherwise available to the CFO to pay for the Services and/or the principal and interest as it becomes due on bonds of the CFO issued to finance the Services, a special tax sufficient to pay the costs thereof is intended to be levied annually within the CFO and collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes. The proposed rate and method of apportionment of the special tax among the parcels of real property within the CFO, as now in existence and following the annexation proposed herein, and in sufficient detail to allow each landowner within the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFO to estimate the maximum amount such owner will have to pay, is described in Exhibit B, which is hereby incorporated by this reference.
6. Notice is given that on November 15, 2022, at 7:00 p.m., in the regular meeting place of this Council, being the City Council Chambers, located at 1416 C Street, Livingston, California, the Council, as legislative body for the CFO, will conduct a public hearing on the annexation of territory to the CFO and consider and finally determine whether the public interest, convenience and necessity require said annexation of territory to the CFO and the levy of said special tax therein.
Section 7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause notice of said public hearing to be given by publication one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the CFO. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven days before the date herein set for said hearing. Said notice shall be substantially in the form specified in Section 53339.4 of the Act. The City Clerk shall also cause a copy of the Resolution of Annexation, or a notice thereof, to be mailed to each landowner (and to each registered voter, if any) within the territory proposed to be annexed, which resolution or notice shall be mailed at least fifteen days before the date of said hearing.
RES. NO. 2022 -
September 20, 2022
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Juan Aguilar, Mayor
of the City of Livingston
ATTEST:
I, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston, this 20th day of September, 2022.
Leticia Vasquez-Zurita, City Clerk
of the City of Livingston
EXHIBIT A
City of Livingston Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services)
112&.1
Boundary Map-Annexation No. 2
ANNEXATION MAP NO. 2 TO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2017-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
CITYO/flHN:i.$fOf
COMf'V CS MEAC(O
IJA~OFCM#'(lllt)M
ANNEXATION MAP NO. 2 TO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2017-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
Clh' Of UVNGSTON
OOUJ,ITTOf-~D
STAl!:OfCM.FORNIA.
Bo113
""U""OICT"_"' ___ U'_(_h ,.._,-,ei--• - ,..,,.,.._..c ~'"w , .. '°"' .-. ~--,., •---•-•--to~-n---11110,rf ...... _. .. _ _,gll,._ ____ ,,
1..-c• ,..,._, .. ··--"'- __ .. WIJH'"otl'•eM"-tl__.......,_ "----·-··· --- ......,
-AO-•w,----~~·~··.., ____ __ ,.,.__., ..
, ______
-~-·----· . ..__.. ___ ,""·--9'· .. ----
~-........ -
W WILLDANJ
1Hntt0PJ
r-;,
,,
I
i I
-
I
p I
f .,_, ~ ' I l o-·- i I
_J ..
11.u.2 i2a..!
oswtt
r 9 ', .. H
I l [:] w+e s
t83
□ ~ ! LA9o<MI
• c:J ........... , ........ • Sfflllt lm MAI' '9(flDQ' ..... •~1
W WILLDAN
--- --
EXHIBIT B
AMENDED RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX A Special Tax of City of Livingston Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services) ("CFO") shall be levied on all Assessor's Parcels within the CFO and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2018-19 in an amount determined by the Special Tax Administrator through the application of the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax set forth below.
All of the real property in the CFO, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
"Act" means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, as amended. "Administrative Expenses" means the following actual or reasonably estimated costs incurred by the City as administrator of the CFO, provided that such costs are directly related to administration of the CFO: costs to determine, levy and collect the Special Taxes, including an allocable share of the salaries and benefits of City employees, the fees of consultants, and legal counsel; the costs of collecting installments of the Special Taxes upon the general tax rolls, including any charges levied by County departments; and the preparation of required reports and any other costs required to administer the CFO · in accordance with the Act, as determined by the City.
"Annual Escalation Factor" means the greater of (i) two percent (2%) or (ii) the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Area as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the twelve months ending the previous December. If said index is discontinued, then an alternative index may be used as determined by the Special Tax Administrator. "Assessor's Parcel" means a Lot or parcel of land shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map with a parcel number assigned by the Assessor of the County that corresponds to a number shown on the County Assessor's roll.
"Assessor's Parcel Map" means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel number.
"Attached Residential" means an Assessor's Parcel within the CFO for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing a residential structure or structures sharing common walls and/or common spaces, qualified as Attached Residential at the City's discretion, consisting of two or more Dwelling Units, including, but not limited to duplexes, triplexes, and apartment units, as of May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
"Base Year" means Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2019.
Exhibit B
Page2
"Building Permit" means a permit issued for new construction of a residential or nonresidential structure. For purposes of this definition, "Building Permit" shall not include permits issued solely for grading, utility improvements, or other such improvements that are constructed and installed and are not intended for human occupancy. "CFD" means City of Livingston Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services).
"City" means the City of Livingston.
"City Clerk" means the City Clerk for the City or his or her designee. "City Engineer" means the City Engineer for the City or his or her designee. 11Commercial Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for any commercial use, including related parking, including hotels, motels, and Office Property, and all other property considered commercial, as coded by the County's assessor or as determined by the City, as of May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
"Council" means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of the CFO. "County" means the County of Merced, California.
"Detached Residential" means an Assessors' Parcel within the CFO for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing a residential structure consisting of one single-family detached Dwelling Unit, including Mobile Homes, as of May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. "Developed Property" means, for Detached Residential, Attached Residential, Commercial Property, or Industrial/Business Park/Agricultural Processing Property, an Assessor's Parcel within the CFO for which a Building Permit was issued on or prior to May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, based on the number of Dwelling Units or Lot Area, as applicable, per City or County records for that Assessor's Parcel. "Developed Property" means, for Farm Property, an Assessor's Parcel within the CFO for which the City has granted permission to allow farming operations or for which Land Use Class of Farm Property is designated at the City's discretion on or prior to May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, based on the Lot Area, as applicable, per City or County records for that Assessor's Parcel.
"Dwelling Unit" means each separate residential unit that comprises an independent facility capable of conveyance or rental separate from adjacent residential units, in which a person or persons may live, which comprises an independent facility and is not Exhibit B
Page3
considered to be for non-residential use only, and as defined in the City of Livingston's Municipal Code.
"Exempt Property" means for each Fiscal Year, an Assessor's Parcel within the CFO not subject to the Special Tax. Exempt Property includes: (i) Public Property, (ii) Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor's Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement such as railroad parcels, roads and landscape lots, (iv) Undeveloped Property and (v) property reasonably designated by the City or Special Tax Administrator as Exempt Property due to deed restrictions, conservation easement, or similar factors that may make development of such property impractical for human occupancy. "Farm Property" means property used to grow crops or raise animals, which county use code starts with 07 or the City designates as Farm Property. "final Map" means an Assessor's Parcel Map, a Final Subdivision Map, parcel map, condominium plan, or any other map functionally considered to be an equivalent development map that has been recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. "Fiscal Year" means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30. "Industrial/ Institutional/ Agricultural Processing Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for any allowable industrial, institutional, or agricultural use, including related parking, and all other property considered industrial or institutional, including Medical Property, private schools and daycares, or used for agricultural processing, which is not a Commercial Property or Office Property, as coded by the County's assessor or as determined by the City, as of May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
"Land Use Class" means any of the classes listed in Table 1 and defined herein. "Lot" means an individual legal lot created by an Assessor's Parcel Map or Final Map. "Lot Area" means the gross horizontal area of the Lot or Assessor's Parcel. "Maximum Special Tax" means the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Section C below, that can be levied by the CFO in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel.
"Medical Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for any medical use, including related parking, including hospitals, convalescent homes, medical property, dental property, clinics, medical offices, and dental offices, and all other property used for medical purposes, which is not a Commercial Property or Office Exhibit B
Page4
Property, as coded by the County's assessor or as determined by the City, as of May 1s1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, "Mixed-Use Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property containing or planned for containing a structure or structures that consists of one or more Dwelling Units, but also has dedicated space for Non-Residential use.
"Mobile Home" means a vehicle designed and equipped for human habitation as defined by the California Health & Safety Code § 18008.
"Non-Residential" means an Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property within the CFD for which a Building Permit has been or could be issued for a non-residential use, including Commercial Property and Industrial/ Institutional/ Agricultural Processing Property or which the City may designate as Farm Property.
"Office Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for office use other than Medical Property, including related parking, including savings and loans property, property for legal assistance, and other office buildings, as determined by the City, as of May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. "Park" means a public park, open space, trail, dog park dedicated to and/or managed by the City of Livingston.
"Park and Landscaping Maintenance" means the labor, material, administration, personnel, equipment, contract services, and utilities (i.e., water and power) necessary to maintain landscaping improvements within, and associated with, the CFO, including trees, turf, ground cover, shrubs, weed removal, irrigation systems, sidewalk, drainage facilities, lighting, signs, monuments, graffiti removal, walkways, and associated appurtenant facilities located within, or associated with, the CFD and reasonable costs of providing park maintenance, including but not limited to (i) the costs of contracting for park maintenance services, including trees, plant material, restrooms, irrigation systems, sidewalks, drainage facilities, weed control, lighting, and parking lot maintenance, (ii) the salaries and benefits of City staff, including maintenance staff, that directly provide park maintenance services, (iii) the expense related to equipment, apparatus, and supplies related to these services and authorized by the Act, (iv) utility costs such as water, sewer, lighting and power and (v) City overhead costs associated with providing such services within the CFO.
"Park and Landscaping Maintenance Requirement" means, for any Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied, the amount equal to the budgeted costs for Park and Landscaping Maintenance applicable to the CFO for such Fiscal Year. "Police, Fire, and/or Paramedic Services" means the estimated and reasonable costs of providing Police Services, Fire Suppression Services, and/or Paramedic services Exhibit B
including but not limited to (i) the costs of contracting for police, firefighters, and paramedics, (ii) the salaries and benefits of City staff, if the City directly provides Police Services, (iii) the expense related to equipment, apparatus, and supplies related to these services and authorized by the Act, and (iv) City overhead costs associated with providing such services within the CFD.
"Police, Fire, and/or Paramedic Services Requirement" means, for any Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied, the amount equal to the budgeted costs for Police, Fire, and/or Paramedic Services applicable to the CFD for such Fiscal Year. "Property Owner Association Property" means for each Fiscal Year any property within the CFD that is owned by, or irrevocably dedicated as indicated in an instrument recorded with the County Recorder, to a property owner association, including any master or subassociation, which consists of property owned in common by owners of surrounding properties and it is intended for use for community purposes. "Proportionately" means, for Taxable Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levied per Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property to the Maximum Special Tax per Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property.
"Public Property" means for each Fiscal Year any property within the CFO that is, or is expected to be, used for rights-of-way, parks, public schools or any other public purpose determined by the Special Tax Administrator or is owned by or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, the State, the County, the City or any other public agency.
"Reserve Fund" means a fund that shall be created and maintained for the CFO for each Fiscal Year to provide necessary cash flow to cover maintenance and operational cost overruns, and delinquencies in the payment of Special Taxes. "Special Tax" means the Special Tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Special Tax Requirement, and shall include Special Taxes levied or to be levied under Sections C and D, below. "Special Tax Administrator" means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
"Special Tax Requirement" means that amount required in any Fiscal Year for the CFO to pay for (i) the Park and Landscaping Maintenance Requirement, (ii) the Police, Fire, and/or Paramedic Services Requirement, (iii) the Street and Drainage Maintenance Requirement, (iv) Administrative Expenses of the CFO, and (v) and any amounts required to establish or replenish a Reserve Fund for that Fiscal Year. "State" means the State of California.
Exhibit B
Page6
"Street and Drainage Maintenance" means the labor, material, administration, personnel, equipment and utilities necessary to maintain streets, streetlights, drainage, storm systems, and associated appurtenant facilities within, and associated with, the CFO, including City overhead costs associated with providing such services within the CFO. "Street and Drainage Maintenance Requirement" means, for any Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied, the amount equal to the budgeted costs for Street and Drainage Maintenance applicable to the CFO for such Fiscal Year. "Taxable Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property within the CFO that are not Exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or as defined herein. "Undeveloped Property" means, for each Fiscal Year, an Assessor's Parcel within the CFO for which a Building Permit has not been issued, or the City has not designated as Farm Property, on or prior to May 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied and is not classified as Property Owner Association Property or Public Property, including an Assessor's Parcel that is designated as a remainder parcel by any final documents and/or maps available to the Special Tax Administrator.
B. ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CATEGORIES
For each Fiscal Year, commencing with Fiscal Year 2018-19, using the definitions above, each Assessor's Parcel within the CFO shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2018-19, Taxable Property shall be further classified as Attached Residential, Detached Residential, MixedUse Property, Commercial Property, or Industrial/ Institutional/ Agricultural Processing Property.
C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE
1. Developed Property
Table 1
Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property
Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services) Fiscal Year 2018-19
Land
Use Description Maximum Special Tax
Class
1 Detached Residential $763.00 per Dwelling Unit
2 Attached Residential $572.00 per Dwelling Unit
3 Mixed-Use Property
4 Commercial Property
5 Industrial/ Institutional/
Aaricultural Processing
6 Farm Property
7 Medical Property
8 Office Property
Exhibit B
Sum of Maximum Special Tax for
each applicable Land Use Class
$0.130 per square foot of Lot Area
$0.077 per square foot of Lot Area
$0.007 per square foot of Lot Area
$0.077 per square foot of Lot Area
$0.130 per square foot of Lot Area
For each Fiscal Year following the Base Year, the Maximum Special Tax rates in Table 1 shall be increased by the Annual Escalation Factor. A different Maximum Special Tax may be added to the CFD as a result of future annexations or if future annexations involve a new Land Use Class.
2. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section A.
For each Fiscal Year, if the use or ownership of an Assessor's Parcel of Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor's Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in Section A, therefore making such Assessor's Parcel no longer eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor's Parcel shall be deemed to be Taxable Property and shall be taxed pursuant to the provisions of Section C.1.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
Commencing with Fiscal Year 2018-19, and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the Special Tax Administrator shall calculate the Special Tax Requirement based on the definitions in Section A and levy the Special Tax as follows until the amount of the Special Tax levied equals the Special Tax Requirement:
The Special Tax shall be Proportionately levied each Fiscal Year on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax. The applicable Maximum Special Tax shall be based on the Developed Property's classification as Detached Residential, Attached Residential, Mixed-Use Property, Commercial, Industrial/ Institutional/ Agricultural Processing Property, or Farm Property.
E. APPEALS
Any landowner who pays the Special Tax and believes thatthe amount of the Special Tax levied on their Assessor's Parcel is in error shall first consult with the Special Tax Administrator regarding such error. If following such consultation, the Special Tax Administrator determines that an error has occurred, the Special Tax Administrator may amend the amount of the Special Tax levied on such Assessor's Parcel. If following such Exhibit B
consultation and action, if any, the landowner believes such error still exists, such person may file a written notice with the City Clerk of the City appealing the amount of the Special Tax levied on such Assessor's Parcel. Upon the receipt of any such written notice, the City Clerk shall forward a copy of such notice to the City Finance Director, who shall either (1) refer the matter to the City's existing hearing board for administrative appeals; or (2) establish as part of the proceedings and administration of the CFO, a special threemember Review/Appeal Committee. The Review/Appeal Committee may establish such procedures, as it deems necessary to undertake the review of any such appeal. The hearing board or Review/Appeal Committee shall interpret this Rate and Method of Apportionment and make determinations relative to the annual administration of the Special Tax and any landowner appeals, as herein specified. The decision of the hearing board or Review/Appeal Committee shall be final and binding as to all persons.
F. MANNER OF COLLECTION
Special Taxes levied pursuant to Section D above shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided however that (i) the CFO may directly bill the Special Tax, and (ii) the CFO may collect Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations of the CFO or as otherwise determined appropriate by the City Council.
G. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX
Taxable Property in the CFO shall remain subject to the Special Tax in perpetuity or until the City Council takes appropriate actions to terminate the Special Tax pursuant to the Act.
Land
Use
Class
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
EXHIBIT C
Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property
Community Facilities District No. 2017-1
Fiscal Year 2022/2023
Description Maximum Special Tax
Detached Residential $861.921 oer Dwellina Unit
Attached Residential $646.158 oer Dwelling Unit
Mixed-Use Property Sum of Maximum Special Tax for
each aoolicable Land Use Class
Commercial Property $0.146 oer Sauare Foot of Lot Area
Industrial/ Institutional/
Aaricultural Processing $0.087 oer Sauare Foot of Lot Area Farm Property $0.007 oer Sauare Foot of Lot Area
Medical Property $0.087 oer Sauare Foot of Lot Area
Office Property $0.146 oer Sauare Foot of Lot Area
On each July 1st following the Base Year, the Maximum Special Tax rates in Table 1 shall be increased in accordance with the Annual Escalation Factor as defined in the Amended Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA).
AGENDA ITEM:
MEETING DATE:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF REPORT
Resolution Approving the Addition of a Senior Administrative Services Manager Job Description and Corresponding Salary Range September 20, 2022
Jennifer Riedeman, Finance Director
Vanessa Portillo, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No1. 2022-_, approving the addition of a Senior Administrative Services Manager job description and corresponding salary range.
BACKGROUND:
Periodically, it is customary for an agency to review job classification specifications in relation to the duties and responsibilities of the positions performing the work, the tools and equipment necessary to perform the duties, and the regulatory, legislative, and educational requirements to perform successfully in the position.
As there are significant changes that affect the expectations or requirements for performing the work, the work performed, or how services are delivered, it is the responsibility of the agency to update the job classification specifications related to the position performing the work.
Classification specifications provide support for recruitment, promotion, training, evaluation performance, career path development, and compensation comparisons.
In addition, to assist in addressing retention challenges and succession planning for all levels of staffing in the organization, the salary and position structure should be reviewed to establish differentials between classifications to compensate for differences between classifications such as span of control, supervision, and specialized education and certification requirements.
DISCUSSION:
During the budget process, a series of positions and job descriptions were reviewed to better align the tasks with the position, provide flexibility in the reporting structure, ensure that duties are segregated and minimize any inherent risks, and to establish clear paths for succession within key positions.
Through the years, legislature from California Department of Justice titled California Incident Based Reporting System (CIBRS), as well as the subsequent transition of California to the Federal Bureau of Investigations National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) have reshaped the administrative structure of the Police Department. These new and permanent requirements have significantly increased the tasks and responsibilities to the administrative staff. In addition, new reporting tasks are essential for the Police Department to integrate with Federal reporting agencies as we11 as qualify for funding when available. Although, new legislative requirements have been absorbed through the years by existing staff due to staffing changes and/or shortages, this model is not sustainable long term. 1 As a succession planning strategy, Staff recommends to add one (1) Senior Administrative Services Manager to assist with transferring of institutional knowledge, promote retention of existing talent, provide a career path for the Administrative Services staffing, train staff on new mandates, as well as create Operating Procedures for future training and development. The proposed salary range is in line with the Senior Officer positions within the Management and Confidential Unit, as follows:
Position - A B C D E
Senior Administrative Services Hourly 43.86 46.06 48.36 50.78 53.32 Manaaer
Additional salaries for the Senior Administrative Services Manager will be offset by existing salary savings in the Police Department from existing vacancies through the 1st quarter of the fiscal year for one (1) vacant Lieutenant; and one (1) vacant Code Compliance Officer. The Lieutenant and Code Compliance Officer positions have been posted with a closing date of October 5th, and are expected to be filled in the 2nd quarter.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The addition of the Senior Administrative Services Manager will be offset by current year salary savings from vacant positions in the Police Department.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2022-_ to approve the Job Description and Salary Range for the Senior Administrative Services Manager Position
2. Exhibit "A" Senior Administrative Services Manager Job Description 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON
APPROVING THE ADDITION OF A SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER JOB DESCRIPTION AND CORRESPONDING SALARY RANGE.
WHEREAS, the City Manager requests the addition of a Senior Administrative Services Manager job description and corresponding salary range; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to create the job description for the Senior Administrative Services Manager position to properly reflect the job duties and salary range for this position; and, WHEREAS, staff is recommending the adoption of the Senior Administrative Services Manager job description revisions as a result of an internal periodical review; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be in the City's best interest to adopt the Senior Administrative Services Manager job description and salary range; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the City Council of the City of Livingston hereby adopt Senior Administrative Services Manager job description and corresponding salary range, EXHIBIT "A" attached hereto and made apart herein.
Passed and adopted this 20th day of September 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Juan Aguilar Jr., Mayor
of the City of Livingston
I, hereby certify, that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston this 20th day of September 2022.
Monica Cisneros, Deputy City Clerk
of the City of Livingston
Title: Senior Administrative
Services Manager/Police
FLSA Status: Exempt
Job Description
Created: August 2022
Supervisor: Chief of Police Supervises: Assigned Staff Revised:
Job Family: Police Services Bargaining Unit: Management/Conf Approved:
JOB SUMMARY:
Under the direction of the Chief of Police, perfonn a wide variety of complex and analytical duties involving Police communications, personnel, Information Technology, security and events to assure smooth and efficient department .activities; serve as a confidential administrative support to the Chief of Police and is responsible for department administrative duties including personnel records management and general office management; train, supervise and evaluate the performance of assigned personnel.
ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:
Coordinate and oversee all computers software and hardware within the Police Department. Work with infonnation technology staff to ensure all systems are up to date and operational. Trouble shoot all computer and hardware issues that arise.
Oversee and supervise the operations, staff and activities of the property/evidence room according to established policies laws, and procedures.
Train, supervise and evaluate the performance of the Property/Evidence Technician; assist in background and hiring processes; interview and select employees; assign employee duties and review work to assure accuracy, completeness and compliance with established standards, requirements and procedures.
Oversee and coordinate all building security within the City relating to radio frequency identification (RFID) door access. Issue access cards and key fobs to all City employees. Ensure door access is proper and current for all City employees.
Coordinate with the Human Resources Department Police recruitment processes involving advertising vacant positions, gathering applications testing, interviewing, and selecting new employees; Work directly with background investigators throughout the background process. Oversee the live scan transactions and returns for all City employees and volunteers.
Participate in the selection of police staff; provide or coordinate staff onboarding, training and development; work with employees to correct deficiencies; and implement discipline procedures.
Oversee all Police department contracts and Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), including but not limited to Range MOU, MAPS program contracts, and Victim Witness MOU.
Coordinate communications between the Police Chief, City personnel, governmental agencies, outside organizations and the public to assure smooth and efficient office activities; receive visitors, law enforcement staff and the public.
Mange all mutual aid assistance. Process necessary documents for mutual aid reimbursement and handle required reporting.
Perfonn a wide variety of complex administrative duties to relieve the Chief of Police of administrative support and clerical detail; oversee the preparation and distribution of correspondence for the Chief of Police; screen and maintain appointment and meeting schedules.
Oversee reporting and billing for MAGNET/HIDTA program.
Senior Administrative Services Analyst/Police Page 1 of 4 Coordinate, schedule and oversee building maintenance and any work being done at the Police Department including preventive maintenance.
• Provide administrative support to various staff members as directed by the Chief of Police. • Oversee and maintain Police related capital projects from inception through installation and beyond. Once project implemented manage all associated operations and maintenance needs.
Oversee and participate in the preparation and maintenance of a of a variety of narrative and statistical reports, logs, records and confidential files related to personnel and physical records system of the Police Department in compliance with P.O.S.T.; accounting and reporting of designated funds and budgets as assigned.
Receive and answer telephone calls and emails; provide information or direct to appropriate personnel; exercise independent judgment in resolving a variety of issues; refer difficult issues to the Chief of Police as needed; provide technical information and assistance related to Police Services operations and related laws, rules, regulations, policies and procedures.
Oversee Police personnel time keeping and payroll functions. Work with Human Resources as needed for any payroll adjustments.
Research and compile data, statistics and information related to Police Service operations, activities and reports for submittal to DOJ, FBI, and other agencies.
Manage all documents, reporting and personnel records for the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program.
Maintain and track Department related grants; assure proper review and approval of grant applications by the Police Services administration.
• Perfonn a variety of technical duties in the area of Risk Management for the Police Department and the entire City when directed; work with Human Resources to monitor, investigate and coordinate Workers' Compensation Disability and other claims; develop and maintain accurate case history detennination and documentation Oversee the planning, tracking and implementation of mandated training programs for Police Service personnel; process training requests; schedule training classes and any travel associated with trainings.
Provide technical information and assistance to the Chief of Police regarding assigned functions; assist in the formulation and development of policies, procedures and programs.
Assist in the preparation and maintenance of assigned budgets for the Police Services Department; review budgetary and financial data; monitor expenditures in accordance with established limitations; balance and reconcile assigned accounts and budgets as required; make bank deposits; manage petty cash fund for the department for routine reimbursements.
Oversee, order, receive and maintain inventory of all office supplies and Police equipment; work with vendors to ensure all needed supplies and equipment stocked and available, prepare, process and code purchase orders and invoices as assigned; monitor budget availability, arrange for billings and payments.
Input data into an assigned computer system; maintain automated databases; generate queries, spreadsheets, computerized lists and reports as requested; review input and output data for accuracy.
Maintain Department vehicle registrations and required permits.
Plan, organize, implement, and evaluate a variety of special events programs for the Police Department, including but not limited to Kops for Kids and National Night Out.
Receive, sort and distribute mail; prepare and distribute mailings as directed.
Communicate with City personnel, vendors, law enforcement agencies and outside organizations to coordinate activities and programs, resolve issues and conflicts and exchange information; serve as a liaison to the Gustine Police department regarding staffing levels, CAD/RMS systems.
Operate a variety of office equipment, a computer and assigned software; operate a two-way radio.
Attend meetings, Council sessions and conferences; prepare agenda and/or minutes as required.
OTHER DUTIES:
Troubleshoot and resolve minor computer, two-way radio, peripheral, and related office equipment issues; perform minor repairs and arrange for more complex office equipment, radio or computer malfunction repairs.
Perform related duties as assigned.
Senior Administrative Services Analyst/Police Page 2 of4 QUALIFICATIONS:
To perfonn this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill and/or ability required. The work environment characteristics and physical demands described here are representative of those an employee encounters while perfonning the essential functions of this job.
Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
Knowledge of:
Modem office principles, practices and techniques involved in police administration services.
Applicable laws, codes, regulations, policies and procedures including law enforcement codes and government reporting regulations.
Principles and practices of supervision and training.
Organizational operations, policies and objectives.
Business letter and report writing, editing and proofreading.
Principles of grant preparation and monitoring.
Financial and statistical record-keeping techniques
Record-keeping and report preparation techniques.
Technical preparation of financial accounting reports.
• Preparation, review and control of assigned accounts.
Budgeting practices regarding monitoring and control.
Payroll methods, procedures and terminology.
Financial analysis and projection techniques.
Research and statistical evaluation techniques.
Oral and written communication skills.
Interpersonal skills using tact, patience and courtesy.
Operation of a computer and assigned software.
Record retrieval and storage systems.
Basic public relations techniques.
Ability to:
Provide administrative support in the review, analysis and development of designated budgets and accounts.
Prepare and audit a variety of financial, statistical and budgetary reports, statements and records.
Compare numbers and detect errors efficiently.
Prepare and analyze comprehensive accounting reports.
Reconcile, balance and audit assigned accounts and budgets.
Provide consultation concerning assigned accounting and budgetary activities and related functions.
Supervise and evaluate the performance of assigned staff.
Perform a variety of complex administrative duties to relieve the Chief of Police of administrative support and clerical detail.
Plan, coordinate and organize office activities and coordinate flow of communications and information for the Chief of Police.
Prepare and maintain comprehensive narrative and statistical reports.
Oversee and participate in the maintenance of a records, logs and files related to assigned Police Services activities.
Compose effective correspondence independently.
Perfonn a variety of clerical accounting duties.
Communicate effectively both orally and in writing.
Interpret, apply and explain rules, regulations, policies and procedures related to Police Services operations.
Establish and maintain cooperative and effective working relationships with others.
Analyze situations accurately and adopt an effective course of action.
Maintain accurate financial and statistical records.
Analyze financial data and prepare reports, forecasts and recommendations.
Meet schedules and time lines.
Operate standard office equipment including a computer and assigned accounting software.
Senior Administrative Services Analyst/Police Page3 of 4 Determine appropriate course of action within clearly defined guidelines.
Work independently with little direction.
• Plan and organize work.
Add, subtract, multiply and divide with speed and accuracy.
Education and Experience:
Any combination of experience and training that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knowledge and abilities is:
Bachelor's degree in in criminal justice, communication, business administration or related field.
Four years of increasingly responsible administrative experience in a public agency involving frequent public contact.
Experience in law enforcement agency is desirable but not required.
Licenses, Certifications and other Requirements:
• Formal application, rating of education and experience, test, oral interview, pass a background polygraph, psychological, and medical examination.
• Valid California Law Enforcement Telecommunication System (CLETS) certificate.
WORKING CONDITIONS:
Work Environment:
Indoor/Office environment.
Fast-paced environment with changing priorities.
Evening or variable hours.
Physical Demands:
Dexterity of hands and fingers to operate a computer keyboard.
Hearing and speaking to exchange information in person and on the telephone.
Sitting or standing for extended periods of time.
Lifting and carrying moderately heavy objects or supplies.
Seeing to read a variety of materials.
Bending at the waist, kneeling or crouching to file materials.
Hazards:
Contact with dissatisfied or abusive individuals.
Potential exposure to hazardous chemicals, fumes, odors or gases.
Contact with blood and other body fluids.
Exposure to controlled substances.
Exposure to firearms and other weapons.
The information contained in this job description is for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (A.D.A.) and is not an exhaustive list of the duties performed.
Senior Administrative Services Analyst/Police Page4 of 4 AGENDA ITEM:
MEETING DATE:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF REPORT
Resolution to adopt the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Livingston's 1, 2, 3 - TCP Removal Treatment System Project (State Clearinghouse #2018091025).
September 20, 2022
Mario Gouveia, City Engineer
Vanessa Portillo, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Livingston City Council conduct a public hearing for this item, and through Resolution, adopt the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City's 1,2,3 - TCP Removal Treatment System Project (State Clearinghouse #2018091025).
BACKGROUND:
The proposed document recommended for approval is an Addendum to the City of Livingston's 1, 2, 3 - TCP Removal Treatment System Project (Approved Project) Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), adopted on October 16, 2018 (State Clearinghouse #2018091025), by the Livingston City Council. After filing the Notice of Determination in October 2018 for the Approved Project, minor changes were made to the Project, which consist of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities, and additional connecting pipelines. These additional components of the Project were not included in the original IS/MND and thus were evaluated in the Addendum.
DISCUSSION:
Because no new significant impacts will result from the modifications to the Project, as described below, it was determined that an Addendum to the previous IS/MND is the appropriate level of CEQA documentation (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164). An Addendum may be prepared if only minor changes are necessary and the environmental and regulatory setting is substantially the same.
An Addendum shall be included in or attached to the previous IS/MND.
The City shall conduct a public hearing, and consider the Addendum along with the previous IS/MND prior to making a decision on the Project. Once adopted, the Addendum, along with the previous IS/MND is placed in the Administrative Record, a Notice of Determination is filed with the Merced County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse, and the CEQA process is complete.
The following is the Project Description that was included in the original 2018 IS/MND:
640.20-2
"The City plans to make several improvements to increase the City's water system capacity and improve centralized proposed trichloropropane (TCP) treatment. Specifically, the Project will consist of installing new pipeline between existing Wells 8, 9, 13, and 17 and the proposed centralized treatment facilities; new treatment trains to the existing TCP centralized treatment facility; and a new treated water storage tank and booster pump station. Specifically, the Project will include:
• Installation of approximately 2,400 linear feet of 10-inch pipeline between Well 13 and the proposed centralized treatment facility; • Installation of approximately 2,300 linear feet of 12-inch pipeline between Well 17 and the proposed centralized treatment facility;
• Installation of approximately 1,600 linear feet of 12-inch pipeline between Well 9 and the proposed centralized treatment facility;
• Improvements at the centralized treatment facility to include several treatment trains to the existing TCP treatment system, including two trains to Well 8, which is at the proposed centralized treatment site; and
• Construction of a 1.5-million-gallon storage tank and a 6,000-gallons-per-minute booster pump station at Well 8 to increase the City's water system capacity to meet peak hour demand."
The following are the additional Project components that were subject to evaluation in the Addendum:
• Installation of a new water well (Well 19) and a centralized TCP treatment site on approximately
7.8 acres located 330 feet west of Davis Street and 100 feet north of Campbell Boulevard, adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad and Foster Farms. • Installation of a new TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park (approximately 1.3 acres); a new pipeline installation (approximately one mile of pipeline) from existing Well 12 and existing Well 17 to the new TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park; and a new pipeline (approximately 2,400 linear feet of pipeline) along Mont Cliff Avenue between existing Well 13 at Joseph Gallo Park and the proposed TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park. Arakelian Park is located south of Monte Cliff Way and northeast of the Arena Canal.
• Installation of a new water well (Well 18) on approximately 0.33 acres northwest of the intersection of Davis Street and White Avenue.
• Existing TCP treatment facility at existing Well 8 will be expanded by approximately 1.5 acres and a new pipeline will be installed from Wells 9 and 18 to the TCP treatment site at Well 8.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
As demonstrated in the Addendum, there are no additional significant impacts that result from these additional Project components and the IS/MND continues to serve as the appropriate document addressing the environmental impacts of these changes, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, the Addendum was sent to the State Clearinghouse on July 28, 2022 for a 15 day public review period which ended on August 12, 2022 and a public hearing will occur on September 20, 2022.
The Addendum was prepared by Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. under the direction and supervision of the City's Project Engineer. The Addendum outlined the current Project description and included a comparison of impacts analyzed in the 2018 MND and whether or not there were changes in impacts and/or new impacts resulting from the changes to the Project description. The Addendum did not identify any new significant environmental impacts.
Once the public hearing occurs and the Addendum is adopted, the City's consultants will submit an Environmental Package to the State Water Board which contains all of the documents needed to satisfy the Boards environmental requirements.
640.20-2
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total estimated project cost is $25.4M. The City is pursuing grant and loan funding from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund for this project. The grant will cover seventy-five percent of the project costs and the remaining twenty-five percent will be through a loan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution No. 2022-
CEQA Addendum and Attachments
640.20-2 Page 3 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON TO ADOPT THE ADDENDUM TO THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CITY'S 1,2,3 - TCP REMOVAL TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2018091025) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Livingston (the "City Council" and "City", respectively) has received and reviewed the proposed Addendum to the 2018 Mitigated Negative Declaration, including the draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration with appendices, and supporting information sources (collectively, the "draft MND"), together with the staff report and any comments received and responded to during the public review and hearing process (collectively, the "Environmental Record") for the proposed construction and operation of the City's 1,2,3 - TCP Removal Treatment System Project (the "Project"), as described in the Addendum; and WHEREAS, the City is the lead agency for purposes of environmental review of the Project under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), pursuant to Public Resources Code§ 21000 et seq., and the State "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act"; and WHEREAS, the Project could, without mitigation, have resulted in a potential impact to certain areas of environmental concern, including Biological Resources and Cultural Resources; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared mitigation measures to address and mitigate all potential environmental impacts to a "less than significant" level, which is a part of the Environmental Record reviewed and considered by the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has incorporated the mitigation measures described in the Addendum for the Project as conditions of approval by the City; and
WHEREAS, with the exception of the potential impacts stated above, there are no other potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and WHEREAS, the City prepared the Addendum in accord with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164;and
WHEREAS, the City sent the Addendum to the California State Clearinghouse for a 15-day public review from July 28, 2022 through August 12, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City did not receive written comments in response to the Addendum; and WHEREAS, the City conducted a public hearing on said Addendum at its City Council meeting on September 20, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City has considered the Addendum along with the previously adopted 2018 Mitigated Negative Declaration, technical studies, and other information in the Environmental Record; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the conclusions of the analysis in the Addendum remain consistent with those made in the 2018 Mitigated Negative Declaration and that no new significant impacts will result and there will be no substantial increase in severity of impacts that result from those previously identified in the 2018 Mitigated Negative Declaration.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council finds, detennines and resolves as follows:
1. The City Council adopts the foregoing recitals as true and correct.
2. The City Council finds that the Addendum reflects the independent judgment of the City as the lead agency for the Project.
3. The City Council finds that it has independently reviewed and considered the Environmental Record, including the Addendum, prior to adopting the Addendum.
4. On the basis of the Environmental Record as the whole record before the City Council, including the Addendum and any comments received, the City Council finds, in its independent judgment and analysis, that there is no substantial evidence the Project will have a significant effect on the environment.
5. The City Council confirms that the mitigation measures described in the Addendum, have been incorporated into the Project and adopts the Addendum, which documents are a part of the Environmental Record before the City Council for the Project.
6. The City Council approves and adopts the findings set forth herein, and the Addendum, based on the Environmental Record.
7. City staff is authorized and directed to cause a Notice of Determination concerning the adoption of the Addendum for the Project to be filed in the office of the Merced County Clerk and with the Office of Planning and Research in accordance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines.
This foregoing resolution is hereby approved and adopted at a regular meeting the City Council of the City of Livingston held on the 20th day of September 2022 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Juan Aguilar, Mayor
of the City of Livingston
ATTEST:
I, hereby certify that the forgoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston this 20th day of September 2022.
Leticia Vasquez-Zurita, City Clerk
of the City of Livingston
Notice of Determination
To:
gJ Office of Planning and Research
U.S. Mail: Street Address:
From:
Public Agency: City of Livingston
Address: 1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
Appendix D
P.O. Box 3044 1400 Tenth St., Rm 113
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact:Vanessa Portillo, City Manager Phone:209-394-5550
gJ County Clerk
County of: Merced
Address: 2·"' 22 ... 2"'M.-.-..S"'"1ree = 1---------- Lead Agency (if different from above): (Same) City of Livingston Merced, CA 95340 Address: 1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
Contact:Vanessa Portillo, City Manager
Phone:209-394-5550
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination In compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse):20__1_a_o91__0_2s ________ _ Project Title: Livingston 1, 2, 3 • TCP Removal Treatmenl System Projecl Addendum Project Applicant: _C..,. ity._o_f_L_iv_in_,,g __ st_on ________________________ _ Project Location (include county):,.;;L....; iv.;;. in;.-: g.;;. st.;;. on..;.,•....;C;.;.A.,_; _M'""e'"' rce..:.d.;...... C-=- ou'-'n-'.;<ty'---------------- Project Description:
THIS PROJECT WAS PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED IN A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND) IN 2018 FOR SCH#2018091025. THE PREVIOUS NOD WAS FILED AND FISH & WILDLIFE FEES PAID. THIS NOD IS FOR AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUS MND. Minor changes were made to the Project which included adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines.
This Is to advise that the C_i .... ty_o_f-.:L=iv,-in=gs_t_on _ _ __ =-~-------- has approved the above (181 Lead Agency or D Responsible Agency)
described project on August 16, 2022
(date)
and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project.
1. The project □ will 181 will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. D An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
I&] A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEOA.
3. Mitigation measures (l&l were D were not) made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [181 was O was not] adopted for this project.
5. A statement of Overriding Considerations [0 was 18] was not] adopted tor this project.
6. Findings [181 were D were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEOA.
This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval, or the negative Declaration, is available to the General Public at:
City of Livingston, 1416 C Streel, Livingston, CA 95334 Signature (Public Agency): ____________ Title: City Manager Date: September 20, 2022 Date Received for filing at OPA: _______ _ Authority cited: Sections 21083, Public Resources Code.
Reference Section 21000-21174, Public Resources Code. Revised 2011 Print Form
ADDENDUMMITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal
Treatment System Project
SCH #2018091025
July 2022
PREPARED FOR:
City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
PREPARED BY:
Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.
113 N. Church Street, Suite 302
Visalia, CA 93291
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION ONE: - ~ODUCTION ............................................ ··············· .................................................. 2
1.1 Addendum Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 2
1.2 Environmental Analysis and Conclusions ........................................................................................... 3
1.3 Incorporation by Reference .................................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Addendum Process ................................................................................................................................. 3 SEC110N 11'1/0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 4 SECTION TliREE - CEQA OiECKLIST ..................................................................................................... 12
3.1 Checklist Evaluation Categories .......................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Environmental Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 13 Appendix A- Updated Biological Resources Report
Appendix B - Updated Cultural Resources Report
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
SECTION ONE - INTRODUCTION
2 This environmental document is an Addendum to the City of Livingston's 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System Project (Approved Project) Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), adopted on October 16, 2018 (State Clearinghouse #2018091025), by the City of Livingston. After filing the Notice of Determination, minor changes were made to the Project which included adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines.
See Section Two - Project Description for the full description of the additional Project components. These additional components of the Project were not included in the original IS/MND and are being evaluated herein. As demonstrated in this Addendum, there are no additional impacts and the IS/MND continues to serve as the appropriate document addressing the environmental impacts of these changes, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
1. l Addendum Purpose
When a proposed project is changed or there are changes in environmental setting, a determination must be made by the Lead Agency as to whether an Addendum or Subsequent EIR or MND is prepared. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 sets forth criteria to assess which environmental document is appropriate. The criteria for determining whether an Addendum or Subsequent MND is prepared are outlined below. If the criteria below are true, then an Addendum is the appropriate document:
• No new significant impacts will result from the project or from new mitigation measures. • No substantial increase in the severity of environment impact will occur. • No new feasible alternatives or mitigation measures that would reduce impacts previously found not to be feasible have, in fact been found to be feasible.
Based upon the information provided in Section Three of this document, inclusion of the pipeline will not result in new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of impacts previously identified in the IS/MND, and there are no previously infeasible alternatives that are now feasible. None of the other factors set forth in Section 15162(a)(3) are present.
As such, an Addendum is appropriate, and this Addendum has been prepared to address the environmental effects of the Project modifications.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
1 .2 Environmental Analysis and Conclusions
3 This Addendum addresses the environmental effects associated only with modifications to the Approved Project that have occurred since adoption of the original IS/MND. The conclusions of the analysis in this Addendum remain consistent with those made in the original IS/MND. No new significant impacts will result, and no substantial increase in severity of impacts will result from those previously identified in the IS/MND.
1 .3 Incorporation by Reference
In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, this Addendum has incorporated by reference the Livingston 1, 2, 3, TCP Removal Treatment System Project 15/MND, adopted by the City of Livingston on October 16, 2018 (State Clearinghouse #2018091025). Information from this document incorporated by reference into this Addendum have been briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s) which follow, and the relationship between the incorporated part of the referenced document and this Addendum has been described.
1.4 Addendum Process
As described in Section 1.1, an addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. 1 An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration.2 The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.3 Once adopted, the Addendum, along with the original EIR or Negative Declaration, is placed in the Administrative Record, and the CEQA process is complete.
A copy of the Addendum will be transmitted to the State Clearinghouse. 1 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15164(a)
2 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15164(c)
3 CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(d)
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Rernoval Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
SECTION TWO - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2. l Location and Setting
4 The City of Livingston (City) is located in Merced County in the San Joaquin Valley. Merced County is bordered by Mariposa County to the east, portions of Madera, Fresno and San Benito Counties to the south, portions of San Benito and Santa Clara counties to the west, and Stanislaus County and portions of Santa Clara and Tuolumne counties to the North.
The original Project Description contained the following location information:
The Project occurs in two separate areas of the City. A centralized treatment site, new storage tank and booster pump station, and Wells 8 and Well 9 are north of State Route 99 in the northern portion of the City. This Project area extends along North Main Street from Swan Street in the north to Crowell Street at the south in Sections 24 and 25 of Township 6 South, Range 11 East as shown on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1961 Cressey 7.5-minute quadrangle. Well 13, Well 17, and the proposed centralized treatment facility are south of State Route 99. This Project area extends generally west to east and then south from Joseph Gallo Park, east to Arakelian Park, and south along the Arena Canal to Sun Valley Avenue in Sections 26 and 35 of Township 6 South, Range 11 East as shown on the USGS 1961 Cressey and Arena 7.5-minute quadrangles (Figure 1).
City of Livingston
Livingsto11 l, 2. 3 TCP Rernoval Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Figure 1 - Original/ Approved Project Footprint
, Legend
c::I Area of Potential Effects
0 City of Livingston
SCALE 1:12,000
OE::3250c=:::::J500===:73'.50==1.000:E=1,250:C::===========2,500E:==:===:===:===:===:==33,7~0 t 0 00 100 150 200 250 750
E:c:JE3:=J:3:========:E===:===:===:=3M1t1,. 500
~ ....
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Rernoval Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Description of Additional Project Areas
6 Minor changes were made to the original Approved Project which consist of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines. The additional Project components are as follows:
• New water well (Well 19) and a centralized TCP treatment site on approximately 7.8 acres located 330 feet west of Davis Street and 100 feet north of Campbell Boulevard, adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad and Foster Farms (Figure 2).
• New TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park (approximately 1.3 acres); a new pipeline installation (approximately one mile of pipeline) from existing Well 12 and existing Well 17 to the new TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park; and a new pipeline (approximately 2,400 linear feet of pipeline) along Mont Cliff Avenue between existing Well 13 at Joseph Gallo Park and the proposed TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park. Arakelian Park is located south of Mont Cliff Way and northeast of the Arena Canal (Figure 3).
• New water well (Well 18) on approximately 0.33 acres northwest of the intersection of Davis Street and White Avenue (Figure 4).
• Existing TCP treatment facility at existing Well 8 will be expanded by approximately 1.5 acres and a new pipeline will be installed from Wells 9 and 18 to the TCP treatment site at Well 8 (Figure 4).
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Figure 2 - New Well 19 and TCP Treatment Site
Legend i CJ Project Site
City of Livingston
7 Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
..:.
N
N
~
"ii
,.
!'
Figure 3 - New TCP Treatment Stte at Arakelfan Park and Associated Pipelines j._,. __ ~-·-"
i legend
~
I
i
• Exlstlna Well
CJ Project Site
- New Pipeline
City of Livingston
8 Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treotment System
CEQA Addendum
Figure 4- New Well 18 and Expanded TCP Treatment Site at Well 8 Legend
• bl$UnaWdl
c:::J PIO!~« Site
City of Livingston
9 Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
2.2 Project Description
Original ISIMND Project Description
The following is the Project Description that was included in the ori~inal IS/MND:
10 "The City plans to make several improvements to increase the City's water system capacity and improve centralized proposed trichloropropane (TCP) treatment. Specifically, the Project will consist of installing new pipeline between existing Wells 8, 9, 13, and 17 and the proposed centralized treatment facilities; new treatment trains to the existing TCP centralized treatment facility; and a new treated water storage tank and booster pump station. Specifically, the Project will include:
• Installation of approximately 2,400 linear feet of 10-inch pipeline between Well 13 and the proposed centralized treatment facility;
• Installation of approximately 2,300 linear feet of 12-inch pipeline between Well 17 and the proposed centralized treatment facility;
• Installation of approximately 1,600 linear feet of 12-inch pipeline between Well 9 and the proposed centralized treatment facility;
• Improvements at the centralized treatment facility to include several treatment trains to the existing TCP treatment system, including two trains to Well 8, which is at the proposed centralized treatment site; and
• Construction of a 1.5-million-gallon storage tank and a 6,000-gallons-per-minute booster pump station at Well 8 to increase the City's water system capacity to meet peak hour demand."
Updates to the Original ISIMND Project Description
As described earlier, minor changes were made to the original Approved Project which consist of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines. The City proposes to install a treatment system to remove the pesticide impurity 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP) from its water supply. TCP is a chlorinated hydrocarbon with high chemical stability. It has been used as a cleaning and degreasing solvent and also is associated with pesticide products. TCP causes cancer in laboratory animals (US EPA, 2009). It is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen (NTP, 2014), and probably carcinogenic to humans, based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals (IARC, 1995). In 1992, TCP was added to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer, pursuant to California's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Proposition 65).
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
In 2017, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Division of Drinking Water (DOW) established a drinking water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for TCP of 0.005µg/l. The MCL is at the same concentration as the analytical reporting limit.
The City will obtain financing from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF). The DWSRF is administered by the State Water Resources Control Board and partially funded by a capitalization grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The additional Project components subject to evaluation in this Addendum are as follows:
• New water well (Well 19) and a centralized TCP treatment site on approximately 7.8 acres located 330 feet west of Davis Street and 100 feet north of Campbell Boulevard, adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad and Foster Farms (Figure 2).
• New TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park (approximately 1.3 acres); a new pipeline installation (approximately one mile of pipeline) from existing Well 12 and existing Well 17 to the new TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park; and a new pipeline (approximately 2,400 linear feet of pipeline) along Mont Cliff Avenue between existing Well 13 at Joseph Gallo Park and the proposed TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park. Arakelian Park is located south of Monte Cliff Way and northeast of the Arena Canal (Figure 3).
• New water well (Well 18) on approximately 0.33 acres northwest of the intersection of Davis Street and White Avenue (Figure 4).
• Existing TCP treatment facility at existing Well 8 will be expanded by approximately 1.5 acres and a new pipeline will be installed from Wells 9 and 18 to the TCP treatment site at Well 8 (Figure 4).
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treotment System
CEQA Addendum
SECTION THREE - CEQA CHECKLIST
12 The purpose of the checklist is to evaluate the categories in terms of any changed condition (e.g., changed circumstances, project changes, or new information of substantial importance) that may result in a changed environment result (e.g., a new significant impact or substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect)4•
The questions posed in the checklist come from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. A "no" answer does not necessarily mean that there are no potential impacts relative to the environmental category, but that there is no change in the condition or status of the impact since it was analyzed and addressed with mitigation measures in the IS/MND prepared for the project. These environmental categories might be answered with a "no" in the checklist, since the proposed project does not introduce changes that would result in modification to the conclusion of the adopted IS/MND.
3. 1 Checklist Evaluation Categories
Conclusion in Prior IS/MND - This column provides a cross reference to the section of the IS/MND where the conclusion may be found relative to the environmental issue listed under each topic.
Do Proposed Changes Involve New Impacts?- Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(l), this column indicates whether the changes represented by the revised project will result in new significant environmental impacts not previously identified or mitigated by the IS/MND, or whether the changes will result in a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact.
New Circumstances Involving New Impacts? - Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(2), this column indicates where there have been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that will require major revisions to the IS/MND, due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
New Information Requiring Analysis or Verification? - Pursuant to CEAQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3)(a-d), this column indicates whether new information of substantial importance, which was 'CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment Sys tern
CEQA Addendum
1.3 not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous MND was certified as complete.
Adopted 1S/MND Mitigation Measures - Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), this column indicates whether the IS/MND provides mitigation measures to address effects in the related impact category.
3.2 Environmental Analysis
As explained in Section One, this comparative analysis has been undertaken pursuant to the provisions of CEQA Sections 15162 and 15164 to provide the City with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the IS/MND was adopted require additional environmental review or preparation of a Subsequent MND or EIR to the IS/MND previously prepared.
As described in Section Two, changes were made to the Approved Project description. Because of this, new analysis for impacts within the Project area is provided in this Section of the Addendum and are listed below:
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
I. AESTHETICS
Adopted Do Proposed
Environmental Issue Changes
Area IS/MND Involve New Conclusion Impacts?
Would the vroject:
a. Have a substantial No impact. No. There are
ad verse effect on a no identified
scenic vista? scenic vistas in
the area.
b. Substantially No impact. No. There are
damage scenic no scenic
resources, resources in the
including, but not project area.
limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings,
and historic
buildings within a
state scenic
~ ghway?
C. Substantially Less Than No. The project
degrade the Significant would not
existing visual Impact. substantially
character or degrade site
quality of the site existing visual
and its character.
surroundings?
a. Create a new Less Than No. The project
source of Significant would not
substantial light or Impact. create a source
glare which would of substantial
adversely affect light or glare.
day or nighttime
views in the area?
DISCUSSION
14 New New Information Adopted
Circumstances Requiring IS/MND
Involving New Analysis or Mitigation
Impacts? Verification? Measures
No. There are No. There are None.
no identified no identified
scenic vistas in scenic vistas in
the area. the area.
No. There are No. There are None.
no scenic no scenic
resources in the resources in the
project area. project area.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
substantially substantially
degrade site degrade site
existing visual existing visual
character. character.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
create a source create a source
of substantial of substantial
light or glare. light or glare.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts or less than significant impacts associated with impact areas I (a), (b), (c) or (d). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two- Project Description.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
15 The additional pipelines will be installed underground and will not be visible once constructed. The main visual impacts will occur from the new water wells (Wells 18 and 19), the new TCP treatment facility at Arakelian Park, and from the expanded TCP treatment facility at Well 8. These above ground structures will be noticeable from adjacent roadways and from some residents in the Project vicinity.
These structures will be similar to other wells and treatment facilities in the City and will not impose structures that are out of scale or out of character with the urbanized areas. In addition, the above-ground structures will be surrounded by fencing or wall structures to shield the facilities from surrounding viewsheds.
The City of Livingston and Merced County General Plans do not identify any scenic vistas within the Project area; however, the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east could be considered scenic. A scenic vista is generally considered a view of an area that has remarkable scenery or a resource that is indigenous to the area. The Project will not impede any views of the mountains, as the Project components aren't tall enough to impede views from existing residential developments.
Currently the sources of light in the project area are from streetlights, the vehicles traveling along surrounding roads, and security lights at the existing Wells # 8, 9, 13 and 17. No lighting will be associated with pipeline installation. The proposed new wells and TCP treatment facilities may include a minimal amount of additional security lighting; however, any additional lighting would not be expected to appreciably change any existing glare or lighting conditions because the visibility of the site from residential areas and public spaces and roadways is limited. This lighting will be directed downward and will not result in light "spillage" onto adjacent properties. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not create substantial new sources of light or glare.
Construction activities will occur as necessary for approximately 12 months and will be visible from the adjacent roadsides; however, the construction activities will be temporary in nature and will not affect a scenic vista, as none exist in the Project area. Therefore, the Project will continue to have less than significant impacts on aesthetics.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Do Proposed New Adopted Changes Circumstances Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Involving New Conclusion Impacts? Impacts?
Would the p_roject:
a. Convert Prime No No. The No. The
Farmland, Unique Impact. project will project will
Farmland, or Farmland not remove continue to
of Statewide any land not remove
Importance (Farmland), from any land from
as shown on the maps agricultural agricultural
prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping
production. production.
and Monitoring
Program of the
California Resources
Agency to non-
~ gricultural use?
No No. The No. The
Impact. project will project will
b. Conflict with existing not remove not remove
zoning for agricultural any land any land from
use, or a Williamson from agricultural
Act contract? agricultural production.
production.
C. Conflict with existing No No. The No. The
zoning for, or cause Impact. project will project will
rezoning of, forest land not remove not remove
(as defined in Public any land any land from
Resources Code section from agricultural 12220(g)), timberland agricultural production. (as defined by Public production.
Resources Code section
4526), or timberland
zoned Timberland
Production (as defined
by Government Code
section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of No No. There is No. There is
forest land or Impact. no forest no forest land
conversion of forest land on site. on site.
land to non-forest use?
City of Livingston
16 New
Adopted Information
IS/MND Requiring Mitigation Analysis or
Measures Verification?
No. The None.
proposed
project
remains the
same
concerning
agricultural
resources.
No. The None.
proposed
project
remains the
same
concerning
agricultural
resources.
No. The None.
proposed
project
remains the
same
concerning
agricultural
resources.
No. The None.
proposed
project
remains the
same
concerning
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed Adopted
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes
Involve New Conclusion Impacts?
e. Involve other changes No No. The
in the existing Impact. project will
environment which, not remove
due to their location or any land
nature, could result in from
conversion of agricultural
Farmland, to non- production
agricultural use or
conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
DISCUSSION
17 New
New
Adopted Information Circumstances
Requiring
IS/MND
Involving New Mitigation
Impacts? Analysis or
Measures Verification?
agricultural
resources.
No. The No. The None.
project will proposed
not remove project
any land from remains the
agricultural same
production concerning
agricultural
resources.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact to agricultural or forest resources. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The proposed Project additions will not cause the removal of any land from agricultural production, as the land is urbanized and not designated or used for agricultural or forestry purposes. Therefore, the Project will continue to have no impacts to agricultural or forest lands.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Ill. AIR QUALITY
I Environmental Issue
Area
}Yould the protect:
a. Conflict with or
obstruct
implementation of
the applicable air
quality plan?
~ b. Violate any air
quality standard or
contribute
substantially to an
existing or projected
air quality violation?
C. Result in a
cumulatively
considerable net
increase of any
criteria pollutant for
which the project
region is nonattainment under an
applicable federal or
state ambient air
quality standard
(including releasing
emissions which
exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
City of Livingston
Adopted
IS/MND
Concluslon
Less Than
Significant
Impact.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact.
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
No. The project
would not
create new
significant
increases in air
emissions that
would conflict
or obstruct
implementation
I of an available
r- New
J Circumstances
Involving New
Im acts?
No. The project
would not
create new
significant
increases in air
emissions that
would conflict ! or obstruct
implementation
of an available
air ualit plan. a!_r q_uality plan.
No. The project 1 No. The project
would not would not
introduce any introduce any
new impacts new impacts
related to air related to air
quality quality
standards or I standards or
violations not violations not
previously previously
disclosed. disclosed.
1 No. The project No. The project I would not would not I result in a result in a
cumulatively cumulatively
considerable considerable
net increase of net increase of
any criteria any criteria
pollutant for pollutant for
which the which the
project region project region
is is
nonattainment nona ttainmen t
under an under an
applicable applicable
federal or state federal or state
ambient air ambient air
quality quality
standard. standard.
!8
New Information I Adopted '
Requiring IS/MND
Analysls or Mitigation
Verification? Measures
No. The project None.
would not
create new
significant
increases in air
emissions that
would conflict
or obstruct
implementation
of an available
air quality Ian.
No. The project None.
would not
introduce any
· new impacts ! related to air
1 quality
standards or
violations not
previously
disclosed.
No. The project None.
would not
result in a
j cumulatively
considerable
net increase of
any criteria
pollutant for
which the
project region is
nonattainment
l under an
applicable
federal or state
ambient air
quality
standard.
Livingston l. 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed -r ---- i Adopted New
Environmental Issue IS/MND Changes I Circumstances
Area Conclusion Involve New Involving New
Impacts? Impacts?
d. Expose sensitive Less Than No. The project I No. The project receptors to Significant would not would not
substantial pollutant Impact. expose expose
concentrations? sensitive sensitive
receptors to receptors to
substantial substantial
pollutant pollutant
concentrations. concentrations. ·I---
e. Create objectionable Less Than No. The project No. The project odors affecting a Significant does not does not
substantial number Impact. involve any involve any
of people? land uses that land uses that
would create would create
additional additional
objectionable objectionable
odors. odors.
DISCUSSION
19 New Information Adopted
Requiring IS/MND
Analysis or Mitigation
Verification? Measures
No. The project None.
would not
expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial I
pollutant
concentrations.
,---
No. The project None.
does not
involve any
land uses that
would create
additional
l objectionable
odors.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on air quality. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components will not increase the severity of air quality impacts or result in an increase in emissions, as the pipeline itself does not emit emissions and operation of the additional water wells and TCP treatment facilities will not result in air emissions that exceed any Air District thresholds.
The Air District rules and regulations identified in the IS/MND pertaining the original project description also apply to the additional areas.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the 15/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System 20
CEQA Addendum
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Adopted r Do Proposed New New Information r Adopted
Changes Circumstances Requiring IS/MND Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Involving New Analysis or Mitigation Concluslon Im acts? Im acts? Verification? Measures Would the 'J!'!!i_ect:
No. An updated IT;· An updated l BIO - J a. Have a substantial Less Than f No.An adverse effect, either Significant l updated Biological Biological 1 directly or through Impact With Biological survey/report survey/report habitat modifications, Mitigation. , survey/report was prepared i was prepared on any species was prepared for the ; for the
identified as a for the additional additional
candidate, sensitive, or additional project , project
special status species in project components. components. local or regional plans, components. The results The results policies, or regulations, The results indicated that indicated that or by the California indicated that there would be there would be Department of Fish and j there would be no additional no additional Game or U.S. Fish and I no additional impacts to impacts to Wildlife Service? ; impacts to protected protected
protected species but 1 species but
species but mitigation r mitigation
mitigation measures from measures from
measures from the original the original
the original CEQA CEQA
CEQA document shall document shall
I
document shall also be also be
also be applicable to the applicable to the
applicable to new project new project
J the new project components. components.
comeonents.
b. Have a substantial No Impact. No. The sites No. The sites do No. The sites do None. adverse effect on any do not contain not contain any 1 not contain any riparian habitat or any biologically biologically
other sensitive natural biologically unique or unique or community identified unique or riparian habitat. riparian habitat. in local or regional riparian
plans, policies, habitat.
regulations, or by the
California Department
of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial No Impact. No. The sites No. The sites do No. The sites do None. adverse effect on do not contain not contain any not contain any federally protected any wetlands j wetlands or wetlands or wetlands as defined by or federally federally __ federally City of Livingston
Livingston 1 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System 21
CEQA Addendum
I Do Proposed New New Information Adopted Adopted Changes Circumstances Requiring IS/MND Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Involving New Analysis or I Mitigation Conclusion lmoacts? Impacts? Verlflcatlon? Measures
Section 404 of the Clean protected protected protected I Water Act (including, waters. waters. waters.
but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling,
hydrological
interruption, or other
means?
d. Interfere substantially Less Than No. The project No. The project No. The project . B10 - 2 with the movement of Significant will not will not will not any native resident or Impact With interfere with interfere with interfere with migratory fish or Mitigation. any fish or any fish or any fish or wildlife species or with wildlife wildlife wildlife
established native I movement or movement or movement or resident or migratory corridors. corridors. corridors.
wildlife corridors, or However, However, However,
impede the use of mitigation mitigation mitigation
native wildlife nursery measures that measures that measures that sites? protect nesting protect nesting protect nesting
birds will be birds will be birds will be
implement~d. 1- imelemented. implemented.
e. Conflict with any local No Impact. No. There are No. There are No. There are None. policies or ordinances no applicable no applicable no applicable protecting biological ! ordinances that ordinances that ordinances that resources, such as a tree impact the impact the impact the preservation policy or
Project. _ 1 Prnjed. _ Project.
ordinance? I.--
' No. The City r f. Conflict with the No Impact. No. The City No. The 1 None. provisions of an has not additional area has not adopted adopted Habitat adopted any was within the any biological Conservation Plan, biological original survey conservation Natural Community conservation area of the pans.
Conservation Plan, or plans. Project.
other approved local,
regional, or state
habitat conservation
L Rian?
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Rernova! Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
DISCUSSION
22 The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact associated with impact areas IV (b), (c), (e), or (f) and a less than significant impact, with mitigation, associated with impact areas IV (a) and (d). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
Because of the additional Project components, an updated Biological Survey and Report (Appendix A of this Addendum) was prepared to address potential biological impacts associated with these additional sites.
The new Project sites support developed and ruderal land covers. The Well 19 TCP treatment site consisted of two percolation basins linked with a floodgate. The percolation basins were densely vegetated with nonnative grasses and forbs. Satellite imagery suggests the percolation basins have been periodically disked (Google 2022). The percolation basins were bounded by dirt access roads atop earthen berms. Industrial development was present north and east of the Well 19 TCP treatment site.
Railroad tracks and ruderal grassland were present to the south and west.
The Arakelian Park TCP treatment site is bordered by Arena Canal to the south and west and surrounded by residential and urban development. Well 13 is on a paved lot at Joseph Gallo Park. The pipeline connecting Well 13 and the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site runs through a residential area along paved Mont Cliff Way. Well 17 is also on a paved lot. A ruderal field is immediately east of Well 17; residential development was present to the north, south, and west. Well 12 is on a paved lot adjacent to a school and a baseball field. Ruderal, disturbed land cover was present to the south and west. The pipelines connecting Well 12 and Well 17 to the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site run through paved streets surrounded by residential development.
The Well 8 TCP treatment site consists of a gravel lot and an undeveloped field with ruderal vegetation.
Surrounding land cover included a grain field to the north, an evaporation pond to the west, and commercial development to the south and east. The new Well 18 site consists of a ruderal parcel surrounded by residential neighborhoods. Well 9 is on a paved lot surrounded by commercial development. The pipeline between Well 9, Well 18, and the Well 8 TCP treatment site runs along paved roads and is surrounded by commercial and residential development.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
23 Colibri conducted additional biological surveys in June 2022. Based on the updated survey and report, there would be no additional impacts to biological resources. However, the mitigation measures included in the original IS/MND are also applicable to the additional area.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
BI0-1 Protect nesting Swainson's hawks
1. If work will occur during the Swainson's hawk nesting season (15 March-15 August), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for active Swainson's hawk nests within 0.5 miles of the Project site no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction. If an active nest is found within 0.5 miles and the activity would disrupt nesting, a buffer or limited operating period should be implemented in consultation with the CDFW.
BIO - 2 Protect Nesting Birds
1. To the extent practicable, construction shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season, which extends from February through August. If it is not possible to schedule construction between September and January, preconstruction surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that no active nests will be disturbed during Project implementation. A pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities. During this survey, the qualified biologist shall inspect all potential nest substrates in and immediately adjacent to the impact areas for nests. If an active nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed by these activities, the qualified biologist shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer to be established around the nest. If work cannot proceed without disturbing the nesting birds, work may need to be halted or redirected to other areas until nesting and fledging are completed or the nest has otherwise failed for nonconstruction related reasons.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treotrnent System
CEQA Addendum
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Environmental Issue Area
Would the l?I!!i_ect:
a. Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a
historical resource as
defined in §15064.5?
Adopted
IS/MND
Conclusion
Less Than
Significant
Impact I With
1 Mitigation.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With b. Cause a substantial
adverse change in the t Mitigation.
significance of an
pursuant to §15064.5?
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
No.An
updated
Cultural
Resources
Report was
j prepared to
evaluate
I potential
cultural
resources that
maybe
impacted by
the additional
Project
components.
As described
in the Report,
the additional
area will not
create any new
impacts. No
known
historic,
archaeological,
or
paleontological
, resources exist
• on site.
No.An
updated
Cultural
Resources
Report was
prepared to
evaluate
potential
cultural
resources that
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
No.An
updated
Cultural
Resources
Report was
prepared to
evaluate
potential
cultural
resources that
maybe
impacted by
the additional
Project
components.
As described
in the Report,
the additional
1 area will not
create any new
impacts. No
known
historic,
archaeological,
or
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
V erlflcatlon?
No.An
updated
Cultural
Resources
Report was
prepared to
evaluate
potential
cultural
resources that
maybe
impacted by the I
additional
Project
components. As
described in the
Report, the
additional area
will not create
1 any new
impacts. No
known historic,
archaeological,
or
paleontological
paleontological I resources exist
resources exist on site.
, on site.
No.An No.An
updated updated
Cultural Cultural
Resources Resources
Report was Report was
prepared to prepared to
evaluate evaluate
potential potential
cultural cultural
resources that resources that
archaeological resource j
may be may be may be
ii:neacted by_Jjmpacted by____._ im_pacted by the .
City of Livingston
24 Adopted
IS/MND
MIHgaHon
Measures
CUL-1
CUL-1
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Rernoval Treatment System 2:>
CEQA Addendum
Adopted Do Proposed New New Information Adopted
Changes Circumstances Requiring IS/MND Environmental Issue Area IS/ MND Involve New Involving New Analysis or Mitigation Conclusion Im acts? Impacts? Verification? Measures
the additional the additional additional
Project Project Project
components. components. components. As I As described As described described in the in the Report, in the Report, Report, the
the additional the additional additional area
area will not area will not will not create
create any new create any new any new
impacts. No impacts. No impacts. No
known known known historic,
historic, historic, archaeological,
archaeological, archaeological, or
or or paleontological
paleontological paleontological resources exist
resources exist resources exist on site.
on site. on site.
c. Directly .or indirectly l " Than No. The No. The No. The CUL-1 destroy a unique Significant additional area additional area additional area paleontological Impact will not create was within the was within the resource or site or With any new original original records unique geologic I Mitigation. impacts. No records search search area of feature? known area of the the Project and
historic, Project and the the area is
archaeological, area is highly highly
or disturbed with disturbed with
paleontological no visible no visible
resources exist
cultural cultural
on site. resources.
resources. - d. Disturb any human Less Than No. The No. The No. The CUL-1 remains, including Significant additional area additional area additional area those interred outside I Impact. will not create will not create will not create of formal cemeteries? l any new any new any new
' impacts. No impacts. No impacts. No
, known human known human known human
remains exist remains exist remains exist
on site. on site. on site. ----
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
DISCUSSION
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact (with mitigation) on cultural resources. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
A Cultural Resources Survey and Report (Appendix C of the original IS/MND) was conducted by Applied Earthworks (AE). AE conducted background research, completed a records search, reviewed the findings of the Native American Heritage Commission's Sacred Lands File search and reached out to local Native American tribal representatives, conducted a cultural resource survey within the Project Area of Potential Effects (APE), documented cultural resources present, evaluated two resources that would be directly impacted by the Project for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and prepared the technical inventory and evaluation reports. Based on the results of these efforts, it was determined that there were no cultural resources at the Project site.
Because of the additional Project components, an updated Cultural Resources Survey and Report (Appendix B of this Addendum) was prepared to address potential cultural impacts associated with these additional sites. Based on the updated survey and report, there would be no additional impacts to cultural resources. However, the mitigation measure included in the original IS/MND is also applicable to the additional areas.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
CUL-1 In the event that archaeological remains are encountered at any time during development or ground-moving activities within the entire Project area, all work in the vicinity of the find should be halted until a qualified archaeologist can assess the discovery and take appropriate actions as necessary.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
VI. Energy
Do Proposed Adopted
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes
Conclusion Involve New
Impacts?
Would the P!_oject:
a. Result in potentially Not No. The project
significant evaluated. would not
environmental impact result in
due to wasteful, potentially
inefficient, or significant
unnecessary environmental
consumption of energy impact due to
resources, during wasteful,
project construction or inefficient, or
operation? unnecessary
consumption of
energy
resources,
during project
construction or
operation.
b. Conflict with or Not No. The project
obstruct a state or local evaluated. would not
plan for renewable conflict with or
energy or energy obstruct a state
efficiency? or local plan for
renewable
energy or
energy
efficien9:.
DISCUSSION
27 New New
Adopted Information
Circumstances Requiring IS/MND
Involving New
Analysls or
Mlffgatlon
Impacts? Verification? Measures
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
result in result in
potentially potentially
significant significant
environmental environmental
impact due to impact due to
wasteful, wasteful,
inefficient, or inefficient, or
unnecessary unnecessary
consumption of consumption of
energy energy
resources, resources,
during project during project
construction or construction or
operation. operation.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
conflict with or conflict with or
obstruct a state obstruct a state
or local plan for or local plan for
renewable renewable
energy or energy or
energy energy
efficiency. efficien9:.
This topic was not included in the original IS/MND, as the 2018 version of the CEQA Guidelines did not require this evaluation. Therefore, the entire Project is being evaluated herein under this category.
The proposed Project involves the construction and operation of a TCP removal system as described in Chapter Two - Project Description. During construction, the Project would consume energy in two general forms: (1) the fuel energy consumed by construction vehicles and equipment; and (2) bound energy in construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
materials such as lumber and glass. Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards would provide guidance on construction techniques for the wastewater pond to maximize energy conservation and it is expected that contractors and the City have a strong financial incentive to use recycled materials and products originating from nearby sources in order to reduce materials costs. As such, it is anticipated that materials used in construction and construction vehicle fuel energy would not involve the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy.
There would be minimal operational energy consumed by the water wells and TCP treatment facilities as these are passive activites. Operational energy will primarily be consumed during each vehicle trip associated with the proposed use; however, the Project site requires very little operator oversight and few trips are expected.
As discussed in Impact XVII - Transportation/fraffic, the proposed Project would not generate significant on-going additional vehicle trips. However, during construction there will be a temporary increase in vehicular trips to the Project site. The length of these trips and the individual vehicle fuel efficiencies are not known; therefore, the resulting energy consumption cannot be accurately calculated.
Adopted federal vehicle fuel standards have continually improved since their original adoption in 1975 and assists in avoiding the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary use of energy by vehicles.
As discussed previously, the proposed Project would be required to implement and be consistent with existing energy design standards at the local and state level, such as Title 24. The Project would also be subject to energy conservation requirements in the California Energy Code and CALGreen for the new plant house. Adherence to state code requirements would ensure that the Project would not result in wasteful and inefficient use of non-renewable resources due to building operation. Therefore, any impacts are less than sig11ifica11t.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
Any impacts resulting from energy use are less than significant.
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Do Proposed Adopted Changes Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Conclusion Impacts? Would the p_roject:
a. Expose people or
structures to potential
I substantial adverse
effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known Less Than No. The
earthquake fault, as Significant project would
delineated on the Impact. not be
most recent Alquist- exposed to
Priolo Earthquake fault rupture.
Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State
Geologist for the
area or based on
other substantial
evidence of a known
fault? Refer to
Division of Mines
and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic Less Than No. The
ground shaking? Significant project would
Impact. not increase
exposure to
risks
associated
with strong
seismic
ground
... shaking.
iii. Seismic-related Less Than No. The
ground failure, Significant project would
including Impact. not increase
liquefaction? exposure to
seismicrelated ground
City of Livingston
29 New New Adopted
Circumstances Information IS/MND
Involving New Requiring Mitigation Analysis or Impacts? Verification? Measures No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not be not be
exposed to exposed to
fault rupture. fault rupture.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not increase not increase
exposure to exposure to
risks risks
associated associated
with strong with strong
seismic seismic
ground ground
shaking . shaking.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not increase not increase
exposure to exposure to
seismic- seismicrelated ground related
!
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed Adopted
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes
Involve New Conclusion
Impacts?
failure
including
liguefaction.
iv. Landslides? Less Than No. The
Significant project would
Impact. not increase
exposure to
landslides.
b. Result in substantial Less Than No. The
soil erosion or the Significant project would
loss of topsoil? Impact. not result in
soil erosion or
the loss of
topsoil.
C. Be located on a Less Than No. The
geologic unit or soil Significant project would
that is unstable, or Impact. not increase
that would become exposure to
unstable as a result risks
of the project, and associated
potentially result in with unstable
on- or off-site geologic units
landslide, lateral or soils.
spreading,
subsidence,
liquefaction or
collaf)se?
d. Be located on Less Than No. The
expansive soil, as Significant project would
defined in Table 18- Impact. not increase
1-B of the most exposure to
recently adopted risks
Uniform Building associated
Code creating with
substantial risks to expansive soil.
life or eroeert)'.?
e. Have soils incapable No No. The
of adequately Impact. project would
supporting the use not implement
of septic tanks or septic tanks or
alternative waste alternative
water disposal wastewater
systems where disposal
sewers are not S)'.stems.
City of Livingston
30 New New
Adopted Information Circumstances
Requiring IS/MND
Involving New MIHgaHon
Impacts? Analysis or
Measures Verification?
failure ground failure
including including
liguefaction. liguefaction.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not increase not increase
exposure to exposure to
landslides. landslides.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not result in not result in
soil erosion or soil erosion or
the loss of the loss of
toesoil. topsoil.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not increase not increase
exposure to exposure to
risks risks
associated associated
with unstable with unstable
geologic units geologic units
or soils. or soils.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not increase not increase
exposure to exposure to
risks risks
associated associated
with with
expansive soil. expansive
soil.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not implement not
septic tanks or implement
alternative septic tanks or
wastewater alternative
disposal wastewater
S)'.Stems.
Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treotment Systern
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed Adopted Changes Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Conclusion
Impacts?
available for the
disposal of waste
water?
f. Directly or indirectly Less Than No. The
destroy a unique Significant project would
paleontological Impact. not impact
resource or site or paleontologica
unique geologic l resources.
feature?
DISCUSSION
31 New New
Adopted
Circumstances Information
IS/MND
Involving New Requiring Mitigation
Impacts? Analysis or
Measures Verification?
disposal
systems.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not impact not impact
paleontologica paleontologic
I resources. al resources.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact associated with impact areas VII (a), (b), (c), (d) and (f), and no impact on impact area VII (e). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The original IS/MND identified that no active faults underlay the Project site and no substantial erosion or loss of topsoil will occur. Since no known surface expression of active faults is believed to cross the sites, fault rupture is not anticipated. The site is also not located on unstable soil. The same conclusions would apply to the proposed additional wells, TCP treatment facilities, and pipelines. The project does not include the use of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. No new impacts would occur.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treotment System
CEQA Addendum
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Do Proposed New Adopted
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes Circumstances
Conclusion Involve New Involving New
Impacts? Impacts?
Would the 1?_roject:
a. Generate greenhouse Less Than No. The project No. The project gas emissions, either Significant would not would not
directly or indirectly, Impact. generate a generate a
that may have a significant significant
significant impact on amount of amount of
the environment? greenhouse gas greenhouse gas
emissions. emissions.
b. Conflict with an Less Than No. The project No. The project applicable plan, policy Significant would not would not or regulation adopted Impact. conflict with an conflict with an for the purpose of applicable applicable
reducing the emissions CHG reduction CHG reduction
of greenhouse gases? J)lan. plan.
DISCUSSION
32 New
Adopted Information
Requiring
IS/MND
Analysis or Mitigation
Verification? Measures
No. The project None.
would not
generate a
significant
amount of
greenhouse gas
emissions.
No. The project None.
would not
conflict with an
applicable
GHG reduction
J)lan.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact associated with impact areas VIII (a) and (b). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two-"- Project Description.
The additional Project components will not substantially increase the severity of greenhouse gas emissions or conflict with any applicable plans or policies pertaining to greenhouse gases, as these Project components would not result in the Project exceeding established greenhouse gas emission thresholds.
The Air District rules and regulations identified in the IS/MND pertaining the original project description also apply to the additional areas.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
Any impacts resulting from greenhouse gas emissions remain less than significant.
City of Livingston
Livingston l , 2, 3 TCP Rern ovol Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Adopted Do Proposed
New New lnformaHon
Circumstances Requiring Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes Involve Involving New Analysis or Conclusion New Impacts? Impacts? Verification? Would the l!_roiect:
a. Create a significant Less Than No. The project No. The project No. The project hazard to the public or Significant would not create would not create would not create the environment Impact. new or increased new or increased new or increased through the routine impact involving impact impact
transport, use, or hazardous involving involving
disposal of hazardous materials. hazardous hazardous
materials? materials. materials.
b. Create a significant Less Than No. The project No. The project No. The project hazard to the public or Significant would not create would not create would not create the environment Impact. additional additional additional through reasonably significant significant significant
foreseeable upset and hazard to the hazard to the hazard to the accident conditions public or public or public or
involving the release of environmental environmental environmental hazardous materials through through through into the environment? reasonably reasonably reasonably foreseeable upset and foreseeable foreseeable
accident upset and upset and
conditions. accident accident
conditions. conditions.
C. Emit hazardous Less Than No. There No. There No. There emissions or handle Significant continues to be continues to be continues to be hazardous or acutely Impact. no school within no school within no school within hazardous materials, one-quarter mile one-quarter mile one-quarter mile substances, or waste of the site. of the site. of the site. within one-quarter mile
of an existing or
L_E_roEosed school?
d. Be located on a site No No. The project No. The project No. The project which is included on a Impact. is not designated is not designated is not designated list of hazardous as a site which is as a site which is as a site which is materials sites included on a included on a included on a compiled pursuant to list of hazardous list of hazardous list of hazardous Government Code materials sites materials sites materials sites Section 65962.5 and, as compiled compiled compiled
a result, would it create pursuant to pursuant to pursuant to a significant hazard to Government Government Government the public or the Code Section Code Section Code Section environment? ~
65962.5. 65962.5. 65962.5.
e. For a project located No No. The project No. The project No. The project within an airport land lmEact. site is not within site is not within site is not within City of Livingston
33 Adopted
IS/MND
Mlffgatlon
Measures
None.
None.
None.
None.
None.
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Trec:tment Systern
CEQA Addendum
Adopted Do Proposed
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes Involve
Conclusion New Impacts?
use plan or, where such two miles of a
a plan has not been public or private
adopted, within two airport.
miles of a public airport
or public use airport,
would the project result
in a safety hazard for
people residing or
working in the project
area?
f. Impair implementation Less Than No. The project
of or physically Significant would not
interfere with an Impact. impair
adopted emergency emergency
response plan or evacuation or
emergency evacuation response.
....__elan?
No No. The project
g. Expose people or Impact. would not
structures either expose people or
directly or indirectly to structures either
a significant risk of loss, directly or
injury or death indirectly to a
involving wildland significant risk
fires. of loss, injury or
death involving
wildland fires.
DISCUSSION
34 New New Information Adopted
Circumstances Requiring IS/MND
Involving New Analysis or Mitigation
Impacts? Verlllcatlon? Measures
two miles of a two miles of a
public or private public or private
airport. airport.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
impair impair
emergency emergency
evacuation or evacuation or
response . response.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
expose people or expose people or
structures either structures either
directly or directly or
indirectly to a indirectly to a
significant risk significant risk
of loss, injury or of loss, injury or
death involving death involving
wildland fires. wildland fires.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact associated with impact areas IX (d), (e), or (g), and a less than significant impact associated with impact areas IX (a), (b), (c) and (f). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components will not increase any impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials, as the additional components are related to the original Project and will not substantially increase the severity of hazard/hazardous materials impacts. The applicable rules and regulations identified in the original IS/MND regarding hazardous materials also apply to the additional areas.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment Sys tern
CEQA Addendum
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the 15/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
I ivingsb n 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatrnent System
CEQA Addendum
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Do Proposed New Adopted Changes Circumstances Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Involving New Conclusion Impacts? Impacts?
Would the T!_roject:
a. Violate any water quality Less than No. The project No. The project standards or waste Significant would not would not
discharge requirements or Impact. violate waler violate water otherwise substantially quality quality
degrade surface or ground standards or standards or
water quality? waste discharge waste discharge
requirements. r~uirements.
b. Substantially decrease Less than No. The project No. The project Significant would not would not groundwater supplies or Impact. substantially substantially interfere substantially with deplete deplete groundwater recharge such groundwater groundwater that the project may resources or resources or impede sustainable impair impair groundwater management groundwater groundwater of the basin? recharge. recharge.
C. Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including
through the alteration of
the course of a stream or
river or through the
addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner
which would:
i. Result in substantial Less than No. The project No. The project erosion or siltation on or Significant would not would not off site; Impact. result in result in
substantial substantial
erosion or erosion or
siltation on or siltation on or
off site. off site.
ii. Substantially increase Less than No. The Project No. The Project the rate or amount of Significant would not would not
surface runoff in a Impact. substantially subs tan tiall y manner which would increase the increase the
result in flooding on or rate or amount rate or amount
offsite; of surface of surface
runoff in a runoff in a
manner which manner which
City of Livingston
New
Adopted Information IS/MND Requiring Mitigation Analysis or Verification? Measures
No. The project None.
would not
violate water
quality
standards or
waste discharge
regu ire men ts.
No. The project None.
would not
substantially
deplete
groundwater
resources or
impair
groundwater
recharge.
No. The project None.
would not
result in
substantial
erosion or
siltation on or
off site.
No. The Project
would not
substantially
increase the
rate or amount
of surface
runoff in a
manner which
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed Adopted Changes Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Conclusion
Impacts?
would result in
flooding on or
offsite.
iii. Create or contribute Less than No. The Project
runoff water which would Significant would not
exceed the capacity of Impact. create or
existing or planned contribute
stormwater drainage runoff water
systems or provide which would
substantial additional exceed the
sources of polluted runoff; capacity of
or existing or
planned
storm water
drainage
systems or
provide
substantial
additional
sources of
eolluted runoff.
iv. Impede or redirect Less than No. The Project
flood flows? Significant would not
Impact. impede or
redirect flood
flows.
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, No No. The project
or seiche zones, risk release Impact. would not risk
of pollutants due to project release of
inundation? pollutants due
to project
inundation.
No No. The project
Impact. would not
conflict with or
Conflict with or obstruct obstruct e. implementation implementation of a water of a water quality control plan or quality control sustainable groundwater plan or management plan? sustainable groundwater
management
elan?
City of Livingston
37 New
New
Adopted Information Circumstances IS/MND
Involving New Requiring Mitigation Analysis or Impacts? Verification? Measures would result in would result in
flooding on or flooding on or
offsite. offsite.
No. The Project No. The Project None.
would not would not
create or create or
contribute contribute
runoff water runoff water
which would which would
exceed the exceed the
capacity of capacity of
existing or existing or
planned planned
storm water storm water
drainage drainage
systems or systems or
provide provide
substantial substantial
additional additional
sources of sources of
eolluted runoff. eolluted runoff.
No. The Project No. The Project None.
would not would not
impede or impede or
redirect flood redirect flood
flows. flows.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not risk would not risk
release of release of
pollutants due pollutants due
to project to project
inundation. inundation.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
conflict with or conflict with or
obstruct obstruct
implementation implementation
of a water of a water
quality control quality control
plan or plan or
sustainable sustainable
groundwater groundwater
management management
elan? elan?
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treotment System
CEQA Addendum
DISCUSSION
38 The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact associated with impact areas X (d) or (e) and a less than significant impact associated with impact areas X (a), (b), and (c). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components are intended to reduce the City's TCP levels and otherwise do not significantly increase impacts to hydrology and water quality beyond what was previously analyzed in the original IS/MND. The applicable rules and regulations identified in the original IS/MND regarding hydrology and water quality also apply to the additional areas. Therefore the impact remains less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingsfon
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Environmental Issue Area
Would the 1?_roj~ct:
a. Physically divide an
established
community?
..
b. 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?
DISCUSSION
'
Adopted
IS/MND
Conclusion
No
Impact.
No
Impact.
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
No. The
project would
not divide an
established
communit
No. The
project is
consistent
with the
allowable
land use.
Ne;-7
Circumstance j
s lnvolvlng
New
Im acts?
No. The
project would
not divide an
established
community.
39 New -rAdopted l
Information IS/MND 1
Requiring Mltl H • ga on
Analysis or M
easures Verification?
No. The None.
project would
not divide an
established
communit.
No. The ' No. The None.
project is f project is
consistent I consistent
with the with the
allowable allowable
land use. land use.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact on land use and planning. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components do not result in any changes to land use designations, divide an established community, or otherwise conflict with any plans or policies.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Do Proposed Adopted
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes
Conclusion Involve New
Impacts?
Would the T!_roject:
a. Result in the loss of No No. The
availability of a known Impact. project would
mineral resource that not result in
would be of value to the loss of
the region and the known
residents of the state? mineral
resources.
b. Result in the loss of No No. The
availability of a locally Impact. project would
important mineral not result in
resource recovery site the loss of
delineated on a local known
general plan, specific mineral
plan or other land use resources.
_ Rian?
DISCUSSION
40 New New
Adopted Circumstance Information
s Involving Requiring IS/MND
New Analysis or Mttfgatton
Impacts? Verification? Measures
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not result in not result in
the loss of the loss of
known known
mineral mineral
resources. resources.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not result in not result in
the loss of the loss of
known known
mineral mineral
resources. resources.
-
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact on mineral resources. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
There are no known mineral resources of importance to the region and the project site is not designated under the City's General Plan as an important mineral resource recovery site. The additional Project components do not result in any additional impacts to mineral resources.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treotrnent System
CEQA Addendum
XIII. NOISE
Environmental Issue Area
Adopted
IS/ MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes Involve
New Impacts?
Would the pro ·ect: ---~-----.- a. Generation of a
substantial temporary
or permanent increase
in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the
project in excess of
standards established
in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of
other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise
levels?
c. For a project located
within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an
airport land use plan
or, where such a plan
has not been adopted,
within two miles of a
public airport or public
use airport, would the
project expose people
residing or working in
the project area to
excessive noise levels?
City of Livingston
1 Less Than No. The project
Significant would not
Impact. generate a
substantial
temporary or
permanent
increase in
ambient noise
levels in the
vicinity of the
l project in excess
of standards
established in
the local general
plan or noise
ordinance, or
applicable
standards of
__, other ag~ cies.
1 Less Than No. The project
Significant would not
Impact. generate
excessive
groundborne
vibration or
~ groundbome
n.9ise levels.
No No. There are no
Impact. public or private
airports or
airstrips in the
area.
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Im acts?
No. The project
would not
! generate a
substantial
temporary or
permanent
increase in
ambient noise
levels in the
vicinity of the
project in excess
of standards
established in
the local general
plan or noise
1 ordinance, or
applicable
standards of
other agencies.
No. The project
would not
generate
excessive
ground borne
vibration or
ground borne
noise levels.
No. There are no
public or private
airports or
airstrips in the
. area.
I
I
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verlffcallon?
No. The project
would not
generate a
substantial
temporary or
permanent
increase in
ambient noise
levels in the
vicinity of the
project in excess
of standards
established in
the local general
plan or noise
ordinance, or
applicable
standards of
other agencies.
No. The project
would not
generate
excessive
ground borne
vibration or
ground borne
noise levels.
No. There are no
public or private
airports or
airstrips in the
area .
Adopted
IS/ MND
Mitigation
Measures
None.
None.
None.
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
DISCUSSION
42 The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact associated with impact area XIII (c) and a less than significant impact associated with impact areas XIII (a) and (b). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The proposed Project components will be installed in some areas where there is residential development and other sensitive receptors in the area (such as Arakelian Park). The electric motors for the TCP treatment vessels and for the water wells will be enclosed. Once these facilities are constructed, noise levels generated during normal operation would not exceed applicable noise standards established in the City of Livingston or Merced County Municipal Code. The proposed pipelines themselves to not emit on-going noise once constructed.
Neither the City of Livingston Municipal Code nor the Merced County Municipal Code identifies a shortterm, construction-noise-level threshold. The distinction between short-term construction noise impacts and long-term operational noise impacts is a typical one in both CEQA documents and local noise ordinances, which generally recognize the reality that short-term noise from construction is inevitable and cannot be mitigated beyond a certain level. Thus, local agencies frequently tolerate short-term noise at levels that they would not accept for permanent noise sources. A more severe approach would be impractical and might preclude the kind of construction activities that are to be expected from time to time in urban environments. Most residents of urban areas recognize this reality and expect to hear construction activities on occasion. As the construction period will be brief and periodic, and construction hours would be limited to those established in the City's Municipal Code, any impacts would be less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- - -
Adopted Do Proposed
New
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes Involve Circumstances I Conclusion New Impacts? Involving New Impacts?
~ Woul.!!_ the ro ·ect:
a. Induce substantial No No. The project No. The project population growth in Impact. would not would not
an area, either directly induce induce
(for example, by substantial substantial
proposing new homes growth in the growth in the
and businesses) or
indirectly (for example,
project area. project area.
through extension of I No. The prnject No. The prnject
roads or other
infrastructure ?
b. Displace substantial : No I numbers of existing Impact. will not displace will not displace housing, necessitating existing housing. 1 existing housing. the construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere? l
DISCUSSION
43 New Information Adopted
Requiring IS/MND
Analysis or Mlttgatlon
Verification? Measures
No. The project None.
r would not
induce
substantial
growth in the
project area.
No. The project None.
will not displace
existing housing.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact associated with impact area XIV (a) and (b). This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components do not increase any impacts to population and housing as there is no housing or commercial components to the Project.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Uvings;on l 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
I
r
Environmental Issue Area
Would the project:
a. Would the project
result in substantial
adverse physical
impacts associated with
the provision of new or
physically altered
governmental facilities,
need for new or
physically altered
governmental facilities,
the construction of
which could cause
significant
environmental impacts,
in order to maintain
acceptable service
ratios, response times
or other performance
objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
City of Livingston
Adopted
IS/MND
Conclusion
No Impact.
No Impact.
Do Proposed
Changes Involve
New Impacts?
No. The project
would not result
ina need for
new or
expanded fire
protection
facilities.
No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded police
protection
facilities.
No. The project
would not result
ina need for
new or
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded fire
protection
facilities.
No. The project
would not result
ina need for
new or
expanded police
protection
facilities.
No. The project
would not result
ina need for
new or
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
No. The project
would not
result in a need
for new or
expanded fire
protection
facilities.
No. The project
would not
result in a need
for new or
expanded
police
protection
facilities.
No. The project
would not
result in a need
for new or
44 Adopted
IS/MND
Mitigation
Measures
None.
None.
None.
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
expanded school
facilities.
No Impact. No. The project
would not result
Parks? in a need for
new or
expanded park
facilities.
No Impact. No. The project
would not result
Other public ina need for
facilities? new or
expanded other
facilities.
DISCUSSION
45 expanded school expanded
facilities. school facilities.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not result would not
in a need for result in a need
new or for new or
expanded park expanded park
facilities. facilities.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not result would not
in a need for result in a need
new or for new or
expanded other expanded other
facilities. facilities.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on public services. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components do not increase the need for public services, as there is no additional residential or commercial component of the Project and the Project is not considered growth inducing.
Therefore, the proposed Project will not require additional public services. Therefore the impact remains less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the 15/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2 3 TCP Removal Treatmen! System
CEQA Addendum
XVI. RECREATION
Do Proposed Adopted Changes Environmental Issue Area iS/MND Involve New Conclusion Impacts?
Would the p_roject:
a. Would the project No No. The
increase the use of Impact. project
existing neighborhood would not
and regional parks or result in the
other recreational increased
facilities such that use of an
substantial physical existing
deterioration of the park.
facility would occur or
be accelerated?
b. Does the project No No. The
include recreational Impact. project
facilities or require the would not
construction or result in a
expansion of need for
recreational facilities new or
which might have an expanded
adverse physical effect park
on the environment? facilities. ~ - -
DISCUSSION
46 New New
Adopted
Circumstances Information
IS/MND
Involving New Requiring Mitigation
Impacts? Analysis or
Measures Verification?
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not result in not result in
the increased the increased
use of an use of an
existing park. existing park.
No. The No. The None.
project would project would
not result in a not result in a
need for new need for new
or expanded or expanded
park facilities. park facilities.
--
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have no impact on recreation. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components will not result in increased use of recreational facilities and the Project does not include recreational facilities. Therefore, the impact remains less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP R_,movol Treotment System
CEQA Addendum
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
4/
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Rernovol Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
XVII. TRANSPORT A Tl ON/TRAFFIC
Adopted Do Proposed New
Changes Circumstances Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Involving New Conclusion Impacts? Impacts? Would the 1'_roject:
a. Conflict with a No Impact. No. The project No. The project program plan, would not would not
ordinance or policy conflict with a conflict with a
addressing the program plan, program plan,
circulation system, ordinance or ordinance or
including transit, policy policy
roadway, bicycle and addressing the addressing the
pedestrian facilities? circulation circulation
system, system,
including including
transit, transit,
roadway, roadway,
bicycle and bicycle and
pedestrian pedestrian
facilities. facilities.
No Impact. No. The project No. The project
b. Would the project would not would not
conflict or be conflict with or conflict with or
inconsistent with be inconsistent be inconsistent
CEQA Guidelines withCEQA withCEQA
section 15064.3, Guidelines Guidelines
subdivision (b)? section 15064.3, section 15064.3,
subdivision ~). subdivision~).
C. Substantially increase No Impact. No. The project No. The project hazards due to a would not would not
geometric design substantially substantially
feature (e.g., sharp increase increase
curves or dangerous hazards due to hazards due to
intersections) or a geometric a geometric
incompatible uses design feature design feature
(e.g., farm (e.g., sharp (e.g., sharp
equipment)? curves or curves or
dangerous dangerous
intersections) intersections)
or incompatible or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm uses (e.g., farm
eg!:!!ement). eg!:!!ement).
. d. Result in inadequate No Impact. No. The project No. The project I emergency access? would not would not result in result in
City of Livingston
New Adopted Information IS/MND Requiring Mitigation Analysis or Verlflc atlon? Measures
No. The project None.
would not
conflict with a
program plan,
ordinance or
policy
addressing the
circulation
system,
including
transit,
roadway,
bicycle and
pedestrian
facilities.
No. The project None
would not
conflict with or
be inconsistent
withCEQA
Guidelines
section 15064.3,
subdivision ~).
No. The project None.
would not
substantially
increase
hazards due to
a geometric
design feature
(e.g., sharp
curves or
dangerous
intersections)
or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm
eciui~ment).
No. The project None.
would not
result in
Livingston l. 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed Adopted Changes Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Conclusion Impacts?
inadequate
emergency
access.
DISCUSSION
49 New New
Adopted
Circumstances Information IS/MND
Involving New Requiring MIHgatlon
Impacts? Analysis or
Measures Verification?
inadequate inadequate
emergency emergency
access. access.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on transportation. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components would not cause a substantial increase in traffic, reduce the existing level of service, or create any additional congestion at any intersections. The proposed Project would require periodic maintenance, approximately two trips per day. As such, level of service standards would not be exceeded and the proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Therefore, the impact remains less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the 15/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment Systern
CEQA Addendum
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Do Proposed New Adopted
Envlronmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes Circumstances
Involve New Involving New Concluslon
Impacts? Impacts?
Would the roject:
a. Would the project
cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance
of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in
Public Resources Code
section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in
terms of the size and
scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object
with cultural value to a
California Native
American tribe, and that is:
h. Listed or eligible for Not No. The No. The
listing in the evaluated. project is not project is not California Register of listed or listed or
Historical Resources, eligible for eligible for
or in a local register of listing in the listing in the historical resources as California California
defined in Public Register of Register of
Resources Code Historical Historical
section 5020.1 (k), or Resources, Resources, or
or in a local in a local
register of register of
historical historical
resources as resources as
defined in defined in
Public Public
Resources Resources
Code section Code section
5020.1(~). 5020.1(~).
ii. A resource determined Not No.The No. The
by the lead agency, in evaluated. project is not project is not a I
its discretion and a resource resource
supported by determined determined by
substantial evidence, b}' the lead the lead
City of Livingston
so
New
Adopted Information
Requiring IS/MND
Mitigation Analysis or
Measures Verification?
No. The None.
project is not
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(~).
No. The None.
project is not a
resource
determined by
the lead
Livingston l. 2, 3 TCP Rernoval Treotment Systern
CEQA Addendum
to be significant agency, in
pursuant to criteria its
set forth in discretion
subdivision (c) of and
Public Resources Code supported
Section 5024.1. In by
applying the criteria substantial
set forth in evidence, to
subdivision (c) of be
Public Resource Code significant
Section 5024.1, the pursuant to
lead agency shall criteria set
consider the forth in
significance of the subdivision
resource to a (c) of Public
California Native Resources
American tribe. 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.
DISCUSSION
51 agency, in its agency, in its
discretion and discretion and
supported by supported by
substantial substantial
evidence, to evidence, to
be significant be significant
pursuant to pursuant to
criteria set criteria set
forth in forth in
subdivision subdivision
(c) of Public (c) of Public
Resources Resources
Code Section Code Section
5024.1. In 5024.1. In
applying the applying the
criteria set criteria set
forth in forth in
subdivision subdivision
(c) of Public (c) of Public
Resource Resource
Code Section Code Section
5024.1, the 5024.1, the
lead agency lead agency
shall consider shall consider
the the
significance of significance of
the resource the resource
to a California to a California
Native Native
American American
tribe. tribe.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on Tribal Cultural Resources. This Addendum evaluates the impact of adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treatment System
CEQA Addendum
52 The City of Livingston conducted the required tribal consultations for the Approved Project's CEQA document in 2018. However, because of the additional Project components being evaluated, the City conducted additional tribal consultation outreach in April of 2022. The City's cultural consultant (Applied Earthworks) contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) who responded with a letter stating that the Sacred Lands File search for the Project did not indicate the presence of resources in the immediate vicinity of the APE. The NAHC also supplied a list of individuals to be contacted for information regarding locations of sacred or special sites of cultural and spiritual significance in the Project area. Consultation request letters were sent out to the tribes on April 11, 2022.
As of July 2022, there have been no formal requests by any tribe for further consultation regarding the Project (See Appendix B of this Addendum for more information pertaining to tribal outreach efforts).
Therefore, the City has complied with the provisions of Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.2. Any impacts to tribal resources would be less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Remo val Treotment Systern 53
CEQA Addendum
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS r r _ ......................
Adopted Do Proposed New
New Information Adopted
Envlronmental Issue Circumstances IS/MND
Area
IS/MND Changes Involve
Involving New Requiring Analysls Mitigation Concluslon New Impacts? or Verification? : Impacts? Measures Would the project: ---... --- a. Require or result Less Than No. The project I No. The project No. The project None. in the relocation Significant itself is a water itself is a water itself is a water or construction of Impact. facility and would facility and would facility and new or expanded not require or not require or I would not water, result in the result in the require or result
wastewater relocation or relocation or in the relocation treatment or construction of construction of or construction of storm water new or expanded new or expanded new or expanded drainage, electric wastewater wastewater wastewater
power, natural treatment or storm treatment or storm treatment or gas, or water drainage, water drainage, storm water
telecommunicatio I electric power, electric power, drainage, electric ns facilities, the I natural gas, or natural gas, or power, natural construction or
1 telecommunication telecommunication gas, or
relocation of s facilities, the s facilities, the telecommunicatio which could construction or construction or ns facilities, the cause significant relocation of which relocation of which construction or environmental could cause could cause relocation of
effects? significant significant which could
environmental environmental cause significant
j effects. effects. environmental
effects.
I Less Than No. The Project No. The Project No. The Project None. b. Have sufficient Significant will have sufficient will have sufficient will have water supplies Impact. water supplies water supplies j sufficient water available to serve
available to serve available to serve 1 supplies available the project and the project and the project and to serve the reasonably reasonably reasonably project and I foreseeable future foreseeable future reasonably foreseeable future ! development development foreseeable development J during normal, dry during normal, dry future during normal, · and multiple dry and multiple dry dry dry
and
years?
multiple
years. years.
development
during normal, ~
l dry and multiple
dry years. __
C. Result in a Less Than No. The project No. The project No. The project None. determination by Significant would not result in would not result in would not result the wastewater Impact. a determination by a determination by in a treatment the wastewater the wastewater determination by provider which ! treatment provider treatment provider I the wastewater serves or may which serves or which serves or _lreatment serve_the proj~ct l I
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2, 3 TCP Rernovol Treotment Systen1 54
CEQA Addendum
Adopted Do Proposed New New Information Adopted
Environmental Issue Circumstances IS/MND
Area IS/MND Changes Involve lnvolvlng New Requiring Analysis Mitigation Concluslon New Impacts? Im cts? or Verification? Measures that it has may serve the may serve the provider which
adequate capacity project that it does project that it does serves or may to serve the not has adequate not has adequate serve the project project's capacity to serve capacity to serve that it does not projected the project's the project's has adequate
demand in projected demand projected demand capacity to serve addition to the in addition to the ' in addition to the I the project's provider's provider's existing provider's existing I projected existing commitments. commitments. I demand in
commitments? addition to the
provider's
existing
commitments.
d. Generate solid Less Than No. The project No. The project No. The project None. waste in excess of Significant would not generate would not generate would not State or local Impact. solid waste in solid waste in generate solid standards, or in excess of State or excess of State or waste in excess of excess of the local standards, or local standards, or State or local capacity of local in excess of the in excess of the standards, or in infrastructure, or ' capacity of local capacity of local excess of the otherwise impair infrastructure, or infrastructure, or capacity of local the attainment of otherwise impair otherwise impair infrastructure, or solid waste the attainment of , the attainment of otherwise impair reduction goals? solid waste solid waste the attainment of reduction goals. reduction goals. solid waste
' l reduction goals.
e. Comply with ~ Less Than No. The Project No. The Project No. The Project None. federal, state, and Significant will comply with will comply with will comply with local Impact. federal, state, and federal, state, and federal, state, and management and l local management local management local reduction statutes 1 and reduction and reduction
and regulations statutes and I statutes and I management reduction statutes and l
related to solid regulations related regulations related I and regulations waste? to solid waste. to solid waste. related to solid waste.
DISCUSSION
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact associated with this topic. This Addendum evaluates the impact of City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Ren,oval Treotment System
CEQA Addendum
55 adding additional water wells, additional TCP treatment facilities and additional connecting pipelines as described in Section Two - Project Description.
The additional Project components are intended to reduce the City's TCP levels and otherwise do not increase impacts to utilities or service systems. Therefore the impact remains less than significant.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1. 2. 3 TCP Removal Treatment System 56
CEQA Addendum
xx. WILDFIRE ~
-I Do Proposed New Adopted I New
Adopted Changes Circumstances Information IS/MND Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Involving New Requiring Mitigation Conclusion Impacts? Impacts? Analysis or Measures I Verification?
, Would the p_ro ·ect ----- a. Substantially impair Not evaluated. No. The project No. The project No. The project None. an adopted would not would not ' would not
emergency response substantially substantially 1 substantially plan or emergency impair an impair an l • • 11npa1r an
evacuation plan? adopted adopted adopted
emergency emergency emergency
response plan response plan response plan
or emergency or emergency or emergency
evacuation evacuation evacuation
lan. _ plan. p lan. _ - - b. Due to slope, Not evaluated. No. The project No. The project No. The project None prevailing winds, and would not, due would not, due would not, due other factors, to slope, to slope, to slope,
exacerbate wildfire prevailing prevailing prevailing
risks, and thereby winds, and winds, and winds, and
expose project other factors, other factors, other factors, occupants to, pollutant 1 exacerbate exacerbate exacerbate concentrations from a I wildfire risks, wildfire risks, wildfire risks, wildfire or the and thereby and thereby and thereby
uncontrolled spread of expose p roject expose project expose project a wildfire? occupants to, occupants to, occupants to,
pollutant pollutant pollutant
concentrations concentrations concentrations
1 from a wildfire from a wildfire from a wildfire
or the or the or the
uncontrolled uncontrolled I uncontrolled l spread of a spread of a spread of a ~ wildfire. wildfire. wildfire. ---- C. Require the Not evaluated. No. The project , No. The project No. The project None. installation or would not j would not would not maintenance of require the j require the require the
associated installation or installation or installation or infrastructure (such as maintenance of maintenance of maintenance of roads, fuel breaks, associated ' associated associated
emergency water
1 infrastructure infrastructure infrastructure
sources, power lines or I (such as roads, (such as roads, (such as roads, other utilities) that ! fuel breaks, fuel breaks, fuel breaks, may exacerbate fire emergency emergency emergency
risk or that may result water sources, water sources, water sources, in temporar~ - p ower lines or power lines or po~ er !!_nes or City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treotmenf System
CEQA Addendum
Do Proposed Adopted Changes Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Involve New Conclusion
Impacts?
ongoing impacts to the other utilities)
environment? that may
exacerbate fire
risk or that
may result in
temporary or
ongoing
impacts to the
environment.
d. Expose people or Not evaluated. No. The project
structures to would not
significant risks, expose people
including downslope or structures to
or downstream significant
flooding or landslides, risks, including
as a result of runoff, downslope or
post-fire slope downstream
instability, or drainage flooding or
changes? landslides, as a
result of runoff,
post-fire slope
instability, or
drainage
changes.
DISCUSSION
57 New New
Adopted
Circumstances Information
IS/MND
Involving New Requiring Mitigation
Impacts? Analysis or
Measures Verification?
other utilities) other utilities)
that may that may
exacerbate fire exacerbate fire
risk or that risk or that
may result in may result in
temporary or temporary or
ongoing ongoing
impacts to the impacts to the
environment. environment.
No. The project No. The project None.
would not would not
expose people expose people
or structures to or structures to
significant significant
risks, including risks, including
downslope or downslope or
downstream downstream
flooding or flooding or
landslides, as a landslides, as a
result of runoff, result of runoff,
post-fire slope post-tire slope
instability, or instability, or
drainage drainage
changes. changes.
This topic was not included in the original IS/MND, as the 2018 version of the CEQA Guidelines did not require this evaluation. Therefore, the entire Project is being evaluated herein under this category.
The proposed Project involves the construction and operation of a TCP removal system as described in Chapter Two - Project Description. The proposed Project is located in areas that have been developed with intense urban uses and there are no areas within or adjacent to the Project Area that have a significant wildfire risk. The Project will include underground pipelines and minor above-ground improvements associated with the new wells and TCP treatment facilities. There is no increased risk or on-going risk of wildfire beyond existing conditions associated with the Project. As such, any wildfire risk to the project structures or people would be less than significant.
City of Livingston
Livingston 1, 2, 3 TCP Removal Treotment Systen,
CEQA Addendum
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
City of Livingston
Livingston l, 2. 3 TCP Removal Treotment Sys•eq1 59
CEQA Addendum
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Adopted Do Proposed New New Information J Adopted
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes Clrc umstances Requiring 1 IS/MND Conclusion Involve New Involving New Analysis or , Mitigation lmeacts? Impacts? Verification? Measures
Would the protect: -- 1 a. Does the project have Less Than No. The project l No. The project No. The project B10-1 the potential to Significant would not would not would not B10-2 I degrade the quality of Impact With degrade the degrade the degrade the CUL-1 the environment, Mitigation. quality of the quality of the quality of the substantially reduce environment, environment, environment, the habitat of a fish or substantially substantially substantially wildlife species, cause reduce the reduce the reduce the a fish or wildlife habitat of a fish habitat of a fish habitat of a fish population to drop or wildlife or wildlife or wildlife
below self-sustaining species, cause a species, cause a 1 species, cause a
levels, threaten to fish or wildlife fish or wildlife fish or wildlife eliminate a plant or population to population to 1 population to animal community, drop below drop below self- drop below selfreduce the number or self-sustaining sustaining sustaining restrict the range of a levels, threaten levels, threaten levels, threaten rare or endangered to eliminate a to eliminate a to eliminate a plant or animal or plant or animal plant or animal plant or animal eliminate important community, community, community,
examples of the major reduce the reduce the reduce the
periods of California I numberor number or number or
history or prehistory? restrict the restrict the range restrict the range range of a rare of a rare or of a rare or
or endangered endangered I
endangered
plant or animal, plant or animal, plant or animal,
or eliminate or eliminate or eliminate
important important important
J examples f the examples f the examples f the
major periods majo, pe,;od,J majo, pel"iods of
j of California California California
history or history or history or
-1-P...!:eh!~tory. prehistory. JJrehistory.
b. Does the project have Less Than No. The project No. The project I No. The project None. impacts that are Significant would not have would not have would not have individually limited, Impact. cumulatively cumulatively cumulatively but cumulatively considerable considerable considerable considerable? impacts.
("Cumulatively
impacts. impacts.
considerable" means
that the incremental
effects of a project are
considerable when
viewed in connection 1
City of Livingston
Livingston I, 2. 3 TCP Removal Tieatrnent System
CEQA Addendum
Adopted Do Proposed
Environmental Issue Area IS/MND Changes
Conclusion Involve New
Impacts?
with the effects of past
projects, the effects of
other current projects,
and the effects of
probable future
_ Rroj~~tsj?
c. Does the project have Less Than No. The project
environmental effects Significant would not have
which will cause Impact With environmental
substantial adverse Mitigation. effects which
effects on human will cause
beings, either directly substantial
or indirectly? adverse effects
on human
beings, either
directly or
indirectly.
DISCUSSION
60 New New Information Adopted
Circumstances Requiring IS/MND
lnvolvlng New Analysis or Mitigation
Impacts? Verification? Measures
No. The project No. The project B10-1
would not have would not have B10-2
environmental environmental CUL-I
effects which effects which
will cause will cause
substantial substantial
adverse effects adverse effects
on human on human
beings, either beings, either
directly or directly or
.J!ldirectl}'.. indirectly.
The previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact regarding mandatory findings of significance. The additional Project components do not increase any impacts regarding mandatory findings of significance, as no additional impacts were identified.
FINAL IS/MND MITIGATION MEASURES
None.
CONCLUSION
The conclusions from the IS/MND remain unchanged.
City of Livingston
Appendices
Appendix A
Updated Biological Resources
Report
I
colibri
Ecologlcalc-llllng.uc
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE
EVALUATION
JUNE 2022
1,2,3-TCP REMOVAL TREATMENT SYSTEMS PROJECT
LIVINGSTON, MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED BY:
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
9493 N Fort Washington Road, Suite 108
Fresno, CA 93730
www.colibrl-ecology.com
Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ iv
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Project location _ .... +••······ · .. ~ ~. _ •• · . . . . .. ...... . . . . . . . ............ . ...... .... ...... . ............. ~ •• ►►• .. . . __ ••• ►••·· ►►•• ◄ .. . . •• 2
1.4 Purpose and Need of Proposed Project .............................................................................. 7
1.5 Consultation History .. .. ........................................................................................................ 7
1.6 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................................ 7
1.6.1 Federal Requirements .................................................................................................. 7
1.6.2 State Requirement s ...................................................................................................... 9
2.0 2.1
Methods ............................................................................................................................... 12 Desktop Review ................................................................................................................. 12
2.2 Reconnaissance Survey ..................................................................................................... 12
2.3 Effects Analysis and Significance Criteria ......................................... ................................ 14
2.3.1 Effects Analysis .......................................................................................................... 14
2.3.2 Significance Criteria ................................................................................................... 14
3.0 3.1
Results ....................................... ,. .......................................................................................... 16 Desktop Review ................................................................................................................. 16
3.2 Reconnaissance Survey ..................................................................................................... 24
3.2.1 l and Use and Habitats .............................................................................................. 24
3.2.2 Plant and Animal Species Observed ................................ .......................................... 28
3.2.3 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle ..................................................................................... 30
3.2.4 Nesting Birds and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act ........................................... ........... 30
3.2.S Regulated Habitats .................................................................................................... 30
3.3 SpecialTStatus Species .. ..................................................................................................... 31
3.3.1 Swainson's Hawk ....................................................................................................... 31
4.0 Environmental Effects ......................................................................................................... 32
4.1 Effects Determinations ..................................................................................................... 32
4.1.1 Critical Habitat ........................................................................................................... 32 Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3· TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project Colibri Ecolo1ical Consulting, LLC
June 2022
4.1.2 Special-Status Species ............................................................................................... 32
4.1.3 Migratory Birds .......................................................................................................... 32
4.1.4 Regulated Habitats .................................................................................................... 32
4.2 Signtficance Determinations ............................................................................................. 32
4.2.1 Direct and Indirect Effects ......................................................................................... 33
4. 2 .2 CtJ mu lative Effects ..................................................................................................... 34
4.2.3 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Effects ................................................................... 35 Figures
figure 1. Project site vicinity map ...................................................................................................... 3 figure 2. Northwest Livingston Project site map . .............................................................................. 4 Figure 3. Southwest Livingston Project site map . .............................................................................. 5 Hgure 4. North central LMngston Project site map . ......................................................................... 6 Figure 5. Reconnaissance survey area map ............................. ....................................................... 13 Figure 6. CNDOB occurrence map .......................................................................................... ......... 23 Figure 7. Photograph of the WeH #19 TCP Ttreatment site, looking northwest, showing a percolation basin ............................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 8. Photograph of the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site, looking northwest, showing Arakelian Park and Arena Canal ..................... ...................................... ., .......................................... 25 Figure 9. Photograph of the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site, looking west. ............................. 26 Figure 10. Photograph of the pipeline pathway through Joseph Gallo Park, looking west with WeH #13 in the bac.kground ..................................................................................................................... 26 flgure 11. Photograph of the Well #8 TCP treatment srte, looking north with the existing Well #8 In the background ............................................................................................................................ 27 figure 12. Photograph of the new Well #18 site, facing west. ....................................................... 27 Tables
Table 1. Special-status species., their listing status, habitats, and potentiat to occur on or near the Project site . ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 2. Plant and animal species observed during the reconnaissance survey ............................ 28 Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston l,2,3·TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Ii Colibri Ecoloaical Consulting. LLC
June 2022
Appendices
Append be A USFWS list of threatened and endangered species . ................................. ... ................... 38 App,endix B. CNDDB occurrence records ................................................................................................. 47 Appendix C. CNPS plallt list ..................................................... ................................................................. 54 Appendix D. Recommended timing and methodology for Swainson's hawk nesting surveys in Bioloaical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
m Colibri Ecoloaical Consulting, LLC
June 2022
Executive Summary
The City of Livingston proposes to construct centralized 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP) treatment systems at three locations in Livingston in Merced County, California (Project). The Project will involve installing 10-inch and 12-inch water pipeline, constructing two new centralized TCP treatment systems and associated well sites, and expanding one existing TCP treatment system.
The purpose of this project is to remove TCP from the water supply. TCP, an impurity in certain pesticides, is present in the groundwater.
The City will obtain financing for the project from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF). The DWSRF is a state and federal partnership that helps ensure safe drinking water. It is administered by the State of California and partially funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Therefore, the project must not only meet environmental documentation and review requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) but must meet federal cross-cutting requirements as well.
To evaluate whether the project may affect biological resources under CEQA and federal crosscutting purview, we (1) obtained official lists from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife of special-status species and designated and proposed critical habitat, (2) reviewed other relevant background information such as satellite imagery and topographic maps, and (3) conducted a field reconnaissance survey of the Project site.
This biological resource evaluation summarizes existing biological conditions on the Project site, the potential for special-status species and regulated habitats to occur on or near the Project site, the potential impacts of the proposed project on biological resources and regulated habitats, and measures to reduce those potential impacts to a less-than-significant level under CEQA.
We concluded the project will not affect regulated habitats but could affect one special-status species, the state-listed as threatened Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), and nesting migratory birds, but effects can be reduced to less-than-significant levels with mitigation.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
~ Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
Abbreviations
CCR
COFG
CDFW
CESA
CEQA
CFGC
CFR
CNDDB
CNPS
CRPR
DWSRF
EPA
EFH
FE
FEMA
FESA
FP
FT
MBTA
NEPA
NMFS
NOAA
NRCS
SE
sssc
ST
SWRCB
USACE
USC
USFWS
USGS
Biological Resource Evaluation
California Code of Regulations
California Department of Fish and Game
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Endangered Species Act
California Environmental Quality Act
California Fish and Game Code
Code of Federal Regulations
California Natural Diversity Data Base
California Native Plant Society
California Rare Plant Rank
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Environmental Protection Agency
Essential Fish Habitat
Federally listed as Endangered
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Endangered Species Act
State Fully Protected
Federally listed as Threatened
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
National Environmental Policy Act
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association
Natural Resources Conservation Science
State listed as Endangered
State Species of Special Concern
State listed as Threatened
State Water Resources Control Board
United States Army Corps of Engineers
United States Code
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey
V
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
The City of Livingston (City) proposes to install pipeline and treatment systems to remove the pesticide impurity 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP) from its water supply. The City will obtain financing for this water system improvement project (Project) from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF). The DWSRF is administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and partially funded by a capitalization grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Due to this federal nexus, issuing funds from the OWSRF constitutes a federal action, one that requires that the EPA determine whether the proposed action may affect federally protected resources. The Project must therefore comply with requirements of both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and certain federal environmental laws and regulations.
The purpose of this biological resource evaluation is to assess whether the Project will affect state- or federally protected resources pursuant to CEQA and federal cross-cutting regulatory guidelines. Such resources include species of plants or animals listed or proposed for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), as well as those covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), the California Native Plant Protection Act, and various other sections of the California Fish and Game Code.
Biological resources considered here also include designated or proposed critical habitat recognized under the FESA. This biological resource evaluation also addresses Project-related impacts to regulated habitats, which are those under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), SWRCB, or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW}, as well as those addressed under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), and Executive Order 11988 pertaining to floodplain management.
1.2 Project Description
The Project will involve {1} constructing a new Well #19 and centralized TCP treatment system on an approximately 7.8-acre site west of Foster Farms; (2) constructing a new centralized 1.3- acre TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park; (3) installing approximately 1.3 miles of pipeline connecting the new TCP treatment system at Arakelian Park to existing Well #12, Well #13, and Well #17; (4) constructing a new Well #18 on an approximately 0.33-acre site in north-central Livingston; (S) expanding the existing Well #8 TCP treatment system to approximately 1.5 acres; and (6) installing approximately 0.37 miles of pipeline to connect Well #9 and Well #18 with the expanded Well #8 TCP treatment system.
Biolo&ical Resource Evaluation
Uvingston 1,2,3· TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
1 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
1.3 Project Location
The Project will include work at three locations in Livingston, Merced County, California (Figures 1-4). In northwest Livingston, the new Well #19 and TCP treatment site will be 330 feet west of Davis Street and 100 feet north of Campbell Boulevard adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad and Foster Farms (Figure 2).
In southwest Livingston, the new TCP treatment system will be constructed in the western quadrant of Arakelian Park south of Mont Cliff Way and northeast of Arena Canal. About 2400 linear feet of pipeline will be installed along Mont Cliff Way between Well #13 at Joseph Gallo Park and the proposed TCP treatment site at Arakelian Park. An additional 4600 linear feet of pipeline will be installed along Sun Valley Avenue, Lincoln Avenue, Peach Avenue, and Emerald Avenue connecting Well #12 and Well #17 with the proposed TCP treatment system at Arakelian Park (Figure 3).
In north central Livingston, a new Well #18 will be constructed on a 0.33-acre parcel northwest of the intersection of Davis Street and White Avenue. The existing Well #8 TCP treatment site, located west of Main Street and approximately 500 feet north of Swan Street, will be expanded to the south and west. About 1900 linear feet of pipeline will be installed along White Avenue, Swan Street, and North Main Street connecting Well #9 and Well #18 with the expanded Well #8 TCP treatment site (Figure 4).
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
2 Calibri Ecological Consulting, UC
June 2022
:!!
i
-g
II
~
~------
~ i legend
~ i ~ ___ - ____ Project Sile _
Figure 1. Project site vicinity map.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
3 Colibri Ecoloeical Consulting, llC
June2022
:!! j Legend
~ (=i Project Site
.l!
Figure 2. Northwest Livingston Project site map.
Biological Resource Evaluation 4
Livingston 1,2,3· TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project Colibri Ecological Consultin&, LLC
June2022
;::;
N
Cl
N
ii
ai
·5
~ ,. a.
..
E
~
.z
~ Legend ~
f • Existing Well :l:!
i c::J Project Site
~ - New Pipeline ::,
~
Figure 3. Southwest Livingston Project site map.
Biological Resource Evaluation s
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
• Existing Well ~
~ CJ Project Site
~ ;; - New Pipeline
~--------
Figure 4. North-central Livingston Project site map.
Biological Resource Evaluation 6
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
1.4 Purpose and Need of Proposed Project
The purpose of the Project is to upgrade the City's water treatment systems. The Project is needed to remove TCP from the groundwater and meet increasing drinking water demands.
1.5 Consultation History
lists of all species listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered and all designated or proposed critical habitat under the FESA that could occur near the Project site were obtained by Calibri Senior Scientist Ryan Slezak from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) website (https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/) on 17 June 2022 {Appendix A).
1.6 Regulatory Framework
The relevant regulatory requirements and policies that guide the impact analysis of the Project are summarized below.
1.6.1 Federal Requirements
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC§ 668- 668d), originally the Bald Eagle Protection Act, was enacted in 1940 to protect bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocepha/us), the species selected as a national emblem of the United States. The act was amended in 1962 to include the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). As amended, the Act prohibits take, possession, and commerce of bald and golden eagles and their parts, products, nests, or eggs, except by valid permit. Take is defined as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest, or disturb." Disturb means agitating or bothering to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, injury, a decrease in productivity, or nest abandonment. This law also prohibits human-induced alterations near previously used nest sites when eagles are not present if upon the eagle's return it is disturbed as defined above. Take permits may be issued for conducting certain types of lawful activities such as scientific research, propagation, and Indian religious purposes. The USFWS is responsible for enforcing this act.
Executive Order 11988: Floodplain Management. Executive Order 11988 (42 Federal Register 26951, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 117) requires federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long-term and short-term adverse effects associated with occupying and modifying flood plains and to avoid direct and indirect support of developing floodplains wherever there is a practicable alternative.
Federal Endangered Species Act. The USFWS and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) enforce the provisions stipulated in the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA, 16 United States Code [USC) § Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
7 Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
1531 et seq.). Threatened and endangered species on the federal list (SO Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 17.11 and 17.12) are protected from take unless a Section 10 permit is granted to an entity other than a federal agency or a Biological Opinion with incidental take provisions is rendered to a federal lead agency via a Section 7 consultation. Take is defined as harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct. Pursuant to the requirements of the FESA, an agency reviewing a proposed action within its jurisdiction must determine whether any federally listed species may be present in the project site and determine whether the proposed action may affect such species. Under the FESA, habitat loss is considered an effect to a species. In addition, the agency is required to determine whether the proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species that is listed or proposed for listing under the FESA (16 USC § 1536(3], [4]). Therefore, proposed action-related effects to these species or their habitats would be considered significant and would require mitigation.
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (Public law 94-265; Statutes at Large 90 Stat. 331; 16 U.S.C. ch. 38 § 1801 et seq.) establishes a management system for national marine and estuarine fishery resources. This legislation requires that all federal agencies consult the NMFS regarding all actions or proposed actions permitted, funded, or undertaken that may adversely affect "essential fish habitat (EFH)." EFH is defined as "waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." The Magnuson-Stevens Act states that migratory routes to and from anadromous fish spawning grounds are considered EFH.
The phrase "adversely affect" refers to any effect that reduces the quality or quantity of EFH.
Federal activities that occur outside of EFH, but which may affect EFH must also be considered.
The Act applies to salmon species, groundfish species, highly migratory species such as tuna, and coastal pelagic species such as anchovies.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC§ 703, Supp. I, 1989) prohibits killing, possessing, trading, or other forms of take of migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. ''Take" is defined as the pursuing, hunting, shooting, capturing, collecting, or killing of birds, their nests, eggs, or young (16 USC § 703 and § 715n). This act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs. The MBTA specifically protects migratory bird nests from possession, sale, purchase, barter transport, import, and export, and take. For nests, the definition of take per SO CFR 10.12 is to collect. The MBTA does not include a definition of an "active nest." However, the "Migratory Bird Permit Memorandum" issued by the USFWS in 2003 and updated in 2018 clarifies the MBTA in that regard and states that the removal of nests, without eggs or birds, is legal under the MBTA, provided no possession (which is interpreted as holding the nest with the intent of retaining it) occurs during the destruction (USFWS 2018).
National Environmental Policy Act. The purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347), including all relevant subsequent guidelines and regulations, include encouraging "harmony between [humans] and their environment and promoting efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment. ..
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
8 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
and stimulate the health and welfare of [humanity]". The purposes of NEPA are accomplished by evaluating the effects of federal actions. The results of these evaluations are presented to the public, federal agencies, and public officials in document format (e.g., Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements) for consideration prior to taking official action or making official decisions. Environmental documents prepared pursuant to NEPA must be completed before federal actions can be implemented. The NEPA process requires careful evaluation of the need for action, and that federal actions be considered alongside all reasonable alternatives, including the No Action alternative. NEPA also requires that the potential impacts on the human environment be considered for each alternative. Detailed implementing regulations for NEPA are contained in 40 C.F.R. 1500 et seq.
United States Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdiction. Areas meeting the regulatory definition of "waters of the United States" Ourisdictional waters) are subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE under provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (1972) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (1899). These waters may include all waters used, or potentially used, for interstate commerce, including all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, all interstate waters, all other waters (intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, mudflats, sandflats, playa lakes, natural ponds, etc.), all impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States, tributaries of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States, the territorial seas, and wetlands adjacent to waters of the United States (33 CFR part 328.3}. Wetlands on non-agricultural lands are identified using the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and related Regional Supplement (USACE 1987 and 2008). Construction activities, including direct removal, filling, hydrologic disruption, or other means in jurisdictional waters are regulated by the USACE. The placement of dredged or fill material into such waters must comply with permit requirements of the USACE. No USACE permit will be effective in the absence of state water quality certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The SWRCB is the state agency (together with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards) charged with implementing water quality certification in California.
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System was created by Congress in 1968 (Public Law 90-542; 16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.} to preserve certain rivers with significant natural, cultural, and recreational values in a free-flowing condition. The Act safeguards the special character of these rivers, while also recognizing the potential for their appropriate use and development.
1.6.2 State Requirements
California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdiction. The CDFW has regulatory jurisdiction over lakes and streams in California. Activities that divert or obstruct the natural flow of a stream; substantially change its bed, channel, or bank; or use any materials (including vegetation) from the streambed, may require that the project applicant enter into a Streambed Alteration Agreement with the CDFW in accordance with California Fish and Game Code Section 1602.
Biolo&ical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
9 Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
I
California Endangered Species Act. The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) of 1970 (Fish and Game Code § 2050 et seq., and California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 14, Subsection 670.2, 670.51) prohibits the take of species listed under CESA (14 CCR Subsection 670.2, 670.5).
Take is defined as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill. Under CESA, state agencies are required to consult with the COFW when preparing CEQA documents. Consultation ensures that proposed projects or actions do not have a negative effect on state-listed species. During consultation, CDFW determines whether take would occur and identifies "reasonable and prudent alternatives" for the project and conservation of specialstatus species. CDFW can authorize take of state-listed species under Sections 2080.1 and 2081(b) of the California Fish and Game Code in those cases where it is demonstrated that the impacts are minimized and mitigated. Take authorized under section 2081(b) must be minimized and fully mitigated. A CESA permit must be obtained if a project will result in take of listed species, either during construction or over the life of the project. Under CESA, CDFW is responsible for maintaining a list of threatened and endangered species designated under state law (Fish and Game Code§ 2070). CDFW also maintains lists of species of special concern, which serve as "watch lists." Pursuant to the requirements of CESA, a state or local agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether the proposed Project will have a potentially significant impact upon such species. Project-related impacts to species on the CESA list would be considered significant and would require mitigation. Impacts to species of concern or fully protected species would be considered significant under certain circumstances.
California Environmental Quality Act. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (Subsections 21000-21178) requires that CDFW be consulted during the CEQA review process regarding impacts of proposed projects on special-status species. Special-status species are defined under CEQA Guidelines subsection 15380(b) and (d) as those listed under FESA and CESA and species that are not currently protected by statute or regulation but would be considered rare, threatened, or endangered under these criteria or by the scientific community. Therefore, species considered rare or endangered are addressed in this biological resource evaluation regardless of whether they are afforded protection through any other statute or regulation. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) inventories the native flora of California and ranks species according to rarity (CNPS 2020). Plants with Rare Plant Ranks lA, 1B, 2A, or 28 are considered special-status species under CEQA.
Although threatened and endangered species are protected by specific federal and state statutes, CEQA Guidelines Section 15380(d) provides that a species not listed on the federal or state list of protected species may be considered rare or endangered if it can be shown to meet certain specified criteria. These criteria have been modeled after the definition in the FESA and the section of the California Fish and Game Code dealing with rare and endangered plants and animals. Section 15380(d) allows a public agency to undertake a review to determine if a significant effect on species that have not yet been listed by either the USFWS or CDFW (i.e., candidate species) would occur. Thus, CEQA provides an agency with the ability to protect a species from the potential impacts of a project until the respective government agency has an opportunity to designate the species as protected, if warranted.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3·TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
10 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
California Native Plant Protection Ad. The California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (California Fish and Game Code §§ 1900-1913) requires all state agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve endangered and otherwise rare species of native plants.
Provisions of the act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require the project proponent to notify CDFW at least 10 days in advance of any change in land use, which allows CDFW to salvage listed plants that would otherwise be destroyed.
Nesting birds. California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3513, and 3800 prohibit the possession, incidental take, or needless destruction of birds, their nests, and eggs. California Fish and Game Code Section 3511 lists birds that are "Fully Protected" as those that may not be taken or possessed except under specific permit.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (CWC § 13000 et. sec.) was established in 1969 and entrusts the SWRCB and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (collectively Water Boards) with the responsibility to preserve and enhance all beneficial uses of California's diverse waters. The Act grants the Water Boards authority to establish water quality objectives and regulate point- and nonpoint-source pollution discharge to the state's surface and ground waters. Under the auspices of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the Water Boards are responsible for certifying, under Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act, that activities affecting waters of the United States comply California water quality standards. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act addresses all "waters of the State," which are more broadly defined than waters of the Unites States. Waters of the State include any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state. They include artificial as well as natural water bodies and federally jurisdictional and federally non-jurisdictional waters. The Water Boards may issue a Waste Discharge Requirement permit for projects that will affect only federally non-jurisdictional waters of the State.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
11 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
2.0 Methods
2.1 Desktop Review
We obtained a USFWS species list for the Project site as a framework for the evaluation and reconnaissance survey (USFWS 2022a, Appendix A). In addition, we searched the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFW 2022, Appendix B) and the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2022, Appendix C) for records of special-status plant and animal species from the vicinity of the Project site. Regional lists of special-status species were compiled using USFWS, CNDDB, and CNPS database searches confined to the Cressey 7.5-minute United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle, which encompasses the Project site, and the eight surrounding quadrangles (Arena, Atwater, Denair, Montpelier, Stevinson, Turlock, Turlock Lake, and Winton). A local list of special-status species was compiled using CNDDB records from within 5 miles of the Project site. Species that lack a CEQA-recognized special-status designation by federal or state regulatory agencies or public interest groups were omitted from the final list.
Species for which the Project site does not provide habitat were eliminated from further consideration. We also reviewed satellite imagery from Google Earth (Google 2022) and other sources, USGS topographic maps, the Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2022), the National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2022b), the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (USFWS 2022c), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA 2022) flood maps, and relevant literature.
2.2 Reconnaissance Survey
Colibri Senior Scientist Ryan Slezak conducted a field reconnaissance survey of the Project site on 20 June 2022. The Project site and a SO-foot buffer surrounding the Project site were walked and thoroughly inspected to evaluate and document the potential for the area to support federally protected resources. The survey area also included a 0.5-mile buffer around the Project site to evaluate the potential occurrence of nesting special-status raptors (Figure S). The 0.5-mile buffer was surveyed by driving public roads and identifying the presence of large trees or other potentially suitable substrates for nesting raptors as well as open areas that could provide foraging habitat. The main survey area, including the Project site and surrounding SO-foot buffer, was evaluated for the presence of regulated habitats, including lakes, streams, and other waters using methods described in the Wetlands Delineation Manual and regional supplement (USACE 1987, 2008) and as defined by the CDFW (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/lsa) and under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. All plants except those planted for cultivation or landscaping and all animals (vertebrate wildlife species) observed in the survey area were identified and documented.
Bioloaical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
1l Colibri Ecoloaical Consultin&, LLC
June 2022
f Legend .,
i
i
§
~
~
• Existing Well
CJ Project Site
- New Pipeline
SO-foot Buffer
~ ~: j 0.5-mlle Buffer j
Figure 5. Reconnaissance survey area map.
Biol01ical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
13 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
2.3 Effects Analysis and Significance Criteria
2.3.1 Effects Analysis
Factors considered in evaluating the effects of the Project on special-status species included the (1) presence of designated or proposed critical habitat in the survey area, (2) potential for the survey area to support special-status species, (3) dependence of any such species on specific habitat components that would be removed or modified, (4) the degree of effects to the habitat, (5) abundance and distribution of the habitat in the region, (6) distribution and population levels of the species, (7) cumulative effects of the Project and any future activities in the area, and (8) the potential to mitigate any adverse effects.
Factors considered in evaluating the effects of the Project on bald eagle, golden eagle, and migratory birds included the potential for the Project to result in (1) mortality of eagles or migratory birds or (2) loss of their nests containing viable eggs or nestlings.
Factors considered in evaluating the effects of the Project on regulated habitats included the (1) presence of features comprising or potentially comprising waters of the United States, Wild and Scenic Rivers, essential fish habitat (EFH), floodplains, and lakes or streams within the survey area, and (2) potential for the Project to affect such habitats.
2.3.2 Significance Criteria
CEQA defines "significant effect on the environment" as 11a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment" (Pub. Res. Code§ 21068). Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, a Project's effects on biological resources are deemed significant where the Project would do the following:
a) Substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, b) Cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, c) Threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or d) Substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal.
In addition to the Section 15065 criteria, Appendix G within the CEQA Guidelines includes six additional impacts to consider when analyzing the effects of a project. Under Appendix G, a project's effects on biological resources are deemed significant where the project would do any of the following:
e) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS; Bioloaical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
14 Colibri Ecological Consultin1, LLC
June 2022
f) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS;
g) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;
h) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites;
i) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or
j) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
These criteria were used to determine whether the potential effects of the Project on biological resources qualify as significant.
Bioloeical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
15 Colibri Ecolo1ical Consulting, LLC
June2022
3.0 Results
3.1 Desktop Review
The USFWS species list for the Project site included 13 species listed as threatened or endangered under the FESA (USFWS 2022a, Table 1, Appendix A). None of those species could occur on or near the Project site due to either (1) the lack of habitat, (2) the Project site being outside the current range of the species, or (3) the presence of development that would otherwise preclude occurrence (Table 1). As identified in the species list, the Project site does not occur in USFWSdesignated or proposed critical habitat for any species (USFWS 2022a, Appendix A).
Searching the CNDDB for records of special-status species from the Cressey 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangle and the eight surrounding quadrangles produced 225 records of 57 species (Table 1, Appendix B). Of those 57 species, nine were not considered further because they are not CEQA-recognized as special-status species by state or federal regulatory agencies or public interest groups (Appendix B). Of the remaining 48 species, nine are known from within 5 miles of the Project site (Table 1, Figure 6). Of those species only one, Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni - ST), could occur on or near the Project site (Table 1).
Searching the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California yielded 28 taxa (CNPS 2021, Appendix C), 23 of which have a CRPR of 1 or 2 (Table 1). None of those species are expected to occur on or near the Project site due to the lack of habitat (Table 1).
The Project site is underlain by Delhi loamy fine sand, Oto 3% percent slopes (68.7%), Delhi sand, Oto 3% slopes (30. 7%), Delhi sand, silty substratum, Oto 3% percent slopes (0.4%), Delio sand, poorly drained, Oto 1% slopes (0.2%), and Dello sand Oto 1% slopes (0.1%). The Project site is at an elevation of 126-139 feet above mean sea level (Google 2022).
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
16 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
Table 1. Special-status species, their listing status, habitats, and potential to occur on or near the Project site.
-- "
~_!l'l.'1[~1 L"<.;;~ i: F;1"';-·fo,f1
Federally and State-Usted Endangered or Threatened Species Colusa grass FT, SE, Vernal pools and
(Neostapfia colusana) 1B.1 depressions.
Delta button-celery SE, Seasonally flooded
(Eryngium racemosum) 1B.1 depressions in clay soils.
Greene's tuctoria FE, SR, Vernal pools in open
(Tuctoria greenei) 1B.1 grasslands.
Hairy Orcutt grass FE, SE, Vernal pools and
( Orcuttia pilosa) 1B.1 depressions.
Hoover's spurge FT, Vernal pools and
(Euphorbia hooveri) 1B.2 depressions.
San Joaquin Valley Orcutt FT, SE, Vernal pools and
grass ( Orcuttia inaequalis) 1B.1 depressions.
Succulent owl's clover FT, SE, Vernal pools and
{Castilleja campestris var. 1B.2 depressions.
succulenta)
Conservancy fairy shrimp FE Vernal pools and
(Branchinecta conservatio) depressions.
Crotch bumble bee SC Grassland and scrub.
(Bombus crotchii)
Longhorn fairy shrimp3 FE Vernal pools and
(Branchinecta depressions.
longiantenna)
Monarch California FC Groves of trees within
overwintering population 1.5 miles of the ocean
(Danaus plexippus) that produce suitable
micro-climates for
overwintering such as
Biological Resource Evaluation 17
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
- ... I• • H ~ 11 o-: 1 ft hI t Til'ilTr--" .. I
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within S
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; the
survey area no longer
supports habitat for this
species due to intensive
agricultural and urban
development.
None. Habitat lacking; the
Project site is not within
1.5 miles of the ocean.
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
Valley elderberry longhorn
beetle3 (Desmocerus
californicus dimorphus}
Vernal pool fairy shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchi)
Vernal pool tadpole shrimp
(Lepidurus packardi)
Delta smelt
(Hypomesus transpacificus)
Green sturgeon - Southern
Distinct Population
Segment
(Acipenser medirostris)
Steel head trout - Central
Valley Distinct Population
Segment3
(Oncorhynchus mykiss
irideus)
Blunt-nosed leopard lizard
(Gambelia silo)
California red-legged frog
(Rana draytonii)
California tiger salamander
(Ambystoma californiense)
Biological Resource Evaluation
FT
FT
FE
FT, SE
FT
FT
FE, SE,
FP
FT,
sssc
FT,ST
high humidity, dappled
sunlight, access to
water and nectar, and
protection from wind.
Elderberry (Sambucus
sp.} plants with stems >
1-inch diameter at
ground level.
Vernal pools; some
artificial depressions,
stock ponds, vernal
swales, ephemeral
drainages, and seasonal
wetlands.
Vernal pools, clay flats,
alkaline pools,
ephemeral stock tanks.
River channels, tidally
influenced sloughs.
Bays and estuaries;
larger coastal rivers with
cool, deep, swift flowing
reaches with gravel and
cobble substrate for
spawning.
Streams with adequate
flows in coastal
watersheds from Shasta
to Fresno counties in
California.
Burrows for upland
refuge, grasslands
Creeks, ponds, and
marshes for breeding;
burrows for upland
refuge.
Vernal pools or other
seasonal sources for
breeding; underground
18 Livingston l,2,3~TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project - ---- --- ... L: • H O I • l 0-; UH iW. t r.r.llr'-"
None. Habitat lacking. No
elderberry plants found in
the survey area.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
connectivity with such
habitats.
None. Habitat lacking; no
connectivity with such
habitats.
None. Habitat lacking; no
connectivity with such
habitats.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
- - ~_!l:.lo!("':°1 i.,"\t,\H(-1"" "" l!F.'1~"Tir.ll
refuges for nonbreeding.
Giant gartersnake FT,ST Marshes, sloughs, ponds,
(Thamnophis gigas) or other permanent
sources of water with
emergent vegetation, and
grassy banks or open
areas during active
season; uplands with
underground refuges or
crevices during inactive
season.
Bald eagle SE,FP Lakes, rivers, or other
(Haliaeetus leucocepha/us) large water bodies for
foraging. Large trees
with open branches for
nesting.
Least Bell's vireo3 FE, SE Riparian forest with
(Vireo bellii pusillus) dense understory.
Swainson's hawk3 ST Large trees for nesting
(Buteo swainsoni) with adjacent
grasslands, alfalfa fields,
or grain fields for
foraging.
Tricolored blackbird3 SE Freshwater marsh,
(Agelaius tricolor) grassland.
San Joaquin kit fox FE, ST Grassland and upland
(Vulpes macrotis mutica) scrub.
State Species of Special Concern
Hardhead sssc Undisturbed areas of
(Mylopharodon larger streams with high
conocephalus) quality water.
Western spadefoot sssc Open areas with sandy
(Spea hammondii) gravelly soils; rain pools
for breeding.
Coast horned lizard sssc Open, generally sandy
(Phrynosama blainvillii) areas, washes, and
flood plains in a variety
of habitats.
Biological Resource Evaluation 19
Uvingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
..,_ 11!"1 L!.i • l ' :.J t\ • "' IJI. {eI I l"il'i"JT"' r" None. Habitat lacking;
Arena Canal lacked
emergent vegetation; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking.
Present. A pair of
Swainson's hawks were
observed near Well #8 and
again near Well #12.
Many potential nest trees
within 0.5 miles.
None. Habitat lacking.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles. Project location
outside of current known
range of this species.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Calibri Ecoloaical Consulting, LLC
June 2022
Northern California legless
lizard3
(Annie/la pulchra)
Northwestern pond turtle3
(Emys marmorata)
Burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia)
Mountain plover
(Charadrius montanus)
American badger
(Taxidea taxus)
Pallid bat
(Antrozous pal/idus)
Western mastiff bat
(Eumops perotis
californicus)
Western red bat
(Lasiurus b/ossevilli)
caUfornla Rare Plants
Alkali milk-vetch
(Astragalus tener var.
tener)
Biological Resource Evaluation
SSSC Natural area_s with
sandy loam soils and
sparse vegetation.
SSSC Ponds, rivers, marshes,
streams, and irrigation
ditches, usually with
aquatic vegetation.
Need basking sites and
upland habitat for egg
laying.
SSSC Grassland and upland
scrub with friable soil;
some agricultural or
other developed and
disturbed areas with
ground squirrel
burrows.
SSSC Open, flat, and arid
habitats with low,
sparse vegetation.
SSSC Grassland and upland
scrub.
SSSC Rocky outcrops, cliffs,
and crevices near open
habitat.
SSSC Open, arid areas with
high cliffs; open forests,
woodlands, and
grasslands for foraging.
SSSC Trees for roosting
within forested canyons
and riparian zones;
open areas for foraging.
1B.2 Alkali playas, valley and
foothill grassland, and
vernal pools.
20 Livingston 1,2,3· TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project - - - - r"I L:.. • 1 , '"' , 1, r. ~
None. Habitat lacking;
percolation basins near
Well #19 contained sandy
soils, but soils were
disturbed and densely
vegetated.
None. Evaporation pond
near Well #8 lacked
aquatic vegetation; Arena
Canal lacked aquatic
vegetation and upland
habitat for egg laying.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles. No ground squirrel
burrows or burrow
surrogates found in the
survey area.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Colibri Ecological Consultin11, LLC
June 2022
- -
Alkali-sink goldfields3
(Lasthenia chrysantha)
Brittlescale
(Atriplex depressa)
California alkali grass
(Puccinellia simplex)
Coulter's goldfields
(Lasthenia glabrata ssp.
coulteri)
Heartscale
(A triplex cordulata var.
cordu/ata)
Heckard's pepper-grass
(Lepidium latipes var.
heckardii)
Hoover's calycadenia
( Ca/ycadenia hooveri)
Lesser saltscale
(Atriplex minuscu/a}
Merced monardella3
(Monardella leucocephala)
Prostrate vernal pool
navarretia (Navarretia
prostrata)
San Joaquin spearscale
(Extriplex joaquinana}
Sanford's arrowhead
(Sagittaria sanfordii)
Biol0&ical Resource Evaluation
1B.1
1B.2
1B.2
1B.1
1B.2
1B.2
1B.3
1B.1
lA
1B.1
1B.2
18.2 Vernal pools and wet
saline flats below 320
feet elevation.
Vernal pools,
grasslands, or upland
scrub with alkaline or
clay soils.
Scrub, meadows, seeps,
grassland, and vernal
pools.
Grassland, vernal pools,
playas, and sinks with
alkaline soils.
Grasslands, meadows
and seeps, and
chenopod scrub
communities with saline
or alkaline soils.
Grassland and vernal
pools with alkaline soils.
Rocky, exposed places;
grasslands.
Chenopod scrub, playa,
and grassland
communities with
sandy, alkaline soil.
Grassland with sandy
soils.
Grassland, vernal pools,
meadows, and seeps
with alkaline soils.
Alkali sink scrub,
meadows, playas, or
grassland.
Freshwater marshwetlands.
21 Livingston 1,2,3· TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project - - II!'! I !i l l:J 1\ 1 f':j l[{,](tr.r,r 11,_. - ~~
None. Habitat lacking.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking;
nearby CNDDB occurrence
record is presumed
extirpated.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Calibri Ecolo1ical Consulting, LLC
June2022
Subtle orache
(Atrip/ex subtilis)
Vernal pool smallscale
(Atriplex persistens)
Wright's trichocoronis
(Trichocoronis wrightii var.
wrightii)
1B.2
1B.2
2B.1
CDFW (2021), CNPS (2021), USFWS (2021a}.
Status'
FC = Federal Candidate for Listing
FE = Federally listed Endangered
FT = Federally listed Threatened
FP = State Fully Protected
SC = State Candidate for Listing
SE= State listed Endangered
ST= State listed Threatened
SSSC = State Species of Special Concern
Saline depressions. None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Alkaline vernal pools. None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Vernal pools, riparian
forest, marshes,
swamps, meadows,
seeps with alkaline soils.
None. Habitat lacking; no
records from within 5
miles.
Potential to Occur!
None:
Low:
Moderate:
High:
Present:
Species or sign not observed; conditions unsuitable for occurrence.
Neither species nor sign observed; conditions marglnal
for occurrence.
Neither species nor sign observed; conditions
suitable for occurrence.
Neither species nor sign observed; conditions
highly suitable for occurrence.
Species or sign observed; conditions suitable for
occurrence.
CNPS Callfornla Rare Plant Rank•: Threat Ranks':
1A - plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or 0.1- seriously threatened in California (> 80" of occurrences). extinct elsewhere.
18 - plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and 0.2 - moderately threatened in California (20-80" of occurrences). elsewhere.
28 - plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more 0.3 - not very threatened in California (<20" of occurrences). common elsewhere.
3-plants about which more Information is needed.
-4 - plants have limited distribution In California.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3·TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
22 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
3Record from within 5 miles of the Project site.
..
. .,
Legend
l
,. - Project Site
Ir
~
'ii
&
c:::::J 5-mile Buffer
CNDDB
i ~: :_. Plant
~ . -.. " '- _ ,! Animal
51 .... -._, ' ., ... , '
I \
, tricolo,w~- '
~ ' ....:_i, ..... 111ry111r1,.. I \ , ',, __ ,,
Figure 6. CNDDB occurrence map.
Biological Resource Evaluation
I
I
•
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
0 13
,
' N !
.A l
.. p
z.s 5
- MPH
Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
3.2 Reconnaissance Survey
3.2.1 Land Use and Habitats
The Project site supported developed and ruderal land covers. The Well #19 TCP treatment site consisted of two percolation basins linked with a floodgate (Figure 7). The percolation basins were densely vegetated with nonnative grasses and forbs. Satellite imagery suggests the percolation basins have been periodically disked (Google 2022). The percolation basins were bounded by dirt access roads atop earthen berms. Industrial development was present north and east of the Well #19 TCP treatment site. Railroad tracks and ruderal grassland were present to the south and west.
The Arakelian Park TCP treatment site was bordered by Arena Canal to the south and west and surrounded by residential and urban development (Figures 8 and 9). Well #13 was on a paved lot at Joseph Gallo Park (Figure 10). The pipeline connecting Well #13 and the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site runs through a residential area along paved Mont Cliff Way. Well #17 was also on a paved lot. A ruderal field was immediately east of Well #17; residential development was present to the north, south, and west. Well #12 was on a paved lot adjacent to a school and a baseball field. Ruderal, disturbed land cover was present to the south and west. The pipelines connecting Well #12 and Well #17 to the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site run through paved streets surrounded by residential development.
The Well #8 TCP treatment site consisted of a gravel lot and an undeveloped field with ruderal vegetation (Figure 11). Surrounding land cover included a grain field to the north, an evaporation pond to the west, and commercial development to the south and east. The new Well #18 site consisted of a ruderal parcel surrounded by residential neighborhoods (Figure 12). Well #9 is on a paved lot surrounded by commercial development. The pipeline between Well #9, Well #18, and the Well #8 TCP treatment site runs along paved roads and is surrounded by commercial and residential development.
Bioloaical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3• TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project 24 Colibri Ecoloaical Consulting, LLC
June2022
Figure 7. Photograph of the Well #19 TCP Ttreatment site, looking northwest, showing a percolation basin.
Figure 8. Photograph of the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site, looking northwest, showing Arakelian Park and Arena Canal.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
25 Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
Figure 9. Photograph of the Arakelian Park TCP treatment site, looking west.
Figure 10. Photograph of the pipeline pathway through Joseph Gallo Park, looking west with Well #13 in the background.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Uvingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
26 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
Figure 11. Photograph of the Well #8 TCP treatment site, looking north with the existing Well #8 in the background.
Figure 12. Photograph of the new Well #18 site, facing west.
Biological Resource Evaluation 27
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Colibrl Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
3.2.2 Plant and Animal Species Observed
Nonnative grasses such as Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis) and Bermuda grass (Cynodon dacty/on) and nonnative forbs such as cheeseweed (Malva parviflora) and redstem stork's bill {Erodium cicutarium) dominated open areas on the Project site. In all, 44 plant species (11 native and 33 nonnative) were found during the survey (Table 2). Fourteen bird species and one mammal species were also detected (Table 2).
Table 2. Plant and animal species observed during the reconnaissance survey. .;,1111111•1 ul 1'f:l1 ,r~ ,.:; -1 r~, HHt ;i~
Plants :,· e
... .
Family Amaranthaceae
Palmer's amaranth Amaranthus palmeri
Pigweed Amaranthus a/bus
Family Asteraceae
Annual bursage Ambrosia acanthicarpa
Common dandelion Taraxacum officinale
Common sow thistle Sonchus oleraceus
Common sunflower Helianthus annuus
Golden aster Heterotheca sessiliflora
Flax-leaved horseweed Erigeron bonariensis
Prickly lettuce Lactuca serrio/a
Telegraph weed Heterotheca grandif/ora
Wire lettuce Stephanomeria pauciflora
Yellow star thistle Centaurea solstitialis
Family Boraginaceae
Common fiddleneck Amsinckia intermedia
Family Brassicaceae
Shortpod mustard Hirschfe/dia incana
Wild radish Raphanus raphanistrum
Family Caryophyllaceae
Red sandspurry Spergularia rubra
Family Chenopodiaceae
Russian thistle Sa/sofa tragus
Family Cyperaceae
Tall flatsedge Cyperus eragrostis
Family Fabaceae
Bird's foot trefoil Lotus corniculatus
California burclover Medicago polymorpha
Indian sweetclover Melilotus indicus
White clover Trifolium repens
Biolo&ical Resource Evaluation 28
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
- J. ;,. '"
l,,"H-:lH~"i
Native
Nonnative
Native
Nonnative
Nonnative
Native
Native
Nonnative
Nonnative
Native
Native
Nonnative
Native
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Native
Native
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
{;tl 11111 ltl I P!il'~l 1-11:JI ~l '-11 I ,fl mjrR:T:':rn Family Fagaceae
Valley oak Quercus lobata
Family Geraniaceae
Redstem stork's bill Erodium cicutarium
Family Malvaceae
Cheeseweed Malva parviflora
Family Molluginaceae
Green carpetweed Mol/ugo verticillata
Family Onagraceae
Cutleaf evening primrose Oenothera laciniata
Family Plantaginaceae
Bird's eye speedwell Veronica persica
Narrow leaved plantain Plantago lanceoloto
Family Poaceae
Annual bluegrass Poaannua
Annual rabbitsfoot grass Po/ypogon monspeliensis
Barnyard grass Echinochloo crus-golli
Bermuda grass Cynodon dactylon
Italian ryegrass Festuca perennis
Rattail sixweeks grass Festuca myuros
Ripgut brome Bromus diandrus
Soft brome Bromus hordeaceus
Wild oat Avenafatua
Family Polygonaceae
Prostrate knotweed Polygonum aviculore
Spotted ladysthumb Persicaria macu/osa
Family Portulacaceae
Common purslane Portulaca oleracea
Family Salicaceae
Narrow-leaf willow Salix exigua
Family Slmaroubaceae
Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima
Family Zygophyllaceae
Puncture vine Tribulus terrestris
Birds '
Family Accipitridae
Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis
Swainson's hawk Buteo swainsoni
Family Charadrlidae
Killdeer Charadrius vociferus
Family Columbldae
Biological Resource Evaluation 29
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
,l,."\.t:IUl.."l a
Native
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Nonnative
Native
Nonnative
Nonnative
MBTA, CFGC
ST, MBTA, CFGC
MBTA, CFGC
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
j';',11 IIJl(III ■\' f-:l 1 !Tai -- -
,-111t~aHl H .. ;'F.Ti,T:l !."! ~tt•~'ll
Rock pigeon Columbia livia Nonnative
Eurasian collared-dove Streptopelia orientalis Nonnative Family Corvidae
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos MBTA, CFGC
Family Fringillidae
House finch Haemorhous mexicanus MBTA, CFGC
Family Hirundinidae
Barn swallow Hirundo rustica MBTA, CFGC
Cliff swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota MBTA, CFGC
Family lcteridae
Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus MBTA, CFGC
Family Passerldae
House sparrow Passer domesticus Nonnative
Family Parulidae
Yellow-rumped warbler Setophaga coronata MBTA, CFGC
Family Sturnidae
European starling Sturnus vulgaris Nonnative
Family Tyrannidae
Western kingbird Tyrannus verticalis MBTA, CFGC
Mammals ' _-,
Geomyidae
Botta's pocket gopher Thomomys bottae -- MBTA = Protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 use § 703 et seq.); CFGC = Protected under the California Fish and Game Code (FGC §§ 3S03 and 3513), ST= State-listed as Threatened.
3.2.3 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle
The Project site and surrounding 0.5-mile buffer (Figure S) lacked foraging and nesting habitat for bald eagle and golden eagle.
3.2.4 Nesting Birds and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Migratory birds could nest on or near the Project site. Bird species that may nest on or near the property include, but are not limited to, house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos). Numerous large trees within
0.5 miles of the Project site could provide nesting substrates for raptors.
3.2.5 Regulated Habitats
Arena Canal was within SO feet of the Arakelian treatment site and associated pipeline pathways.
As a stream and surface water in California, it would fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the CDFW and SWRCB, respectively. However, no impacts to this feature are anticipated. The Bioloeical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
30 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
nearest river, the Merced River, is about 1 mile north of the Project site. According to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the designated wild and scenic reach of the river begins at its origin in Yosemite National Park and ends at Lake McClure, which is approximately 30 miles northeast of the Project site. Therefore, the portion of the Merced River north of the Project site is not included in the wild and scenic classification (USFWS 2022a).
No marine or estuarine fishery resources or migratory routes to and from anadromous fish spawning grounds are present in the survey area. In addition, no EFH, defined by the MagnusonStevens Act as those resources necessary for fish spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity, are present in the survey area.
The Project site is not within a flood plain (FEMA 2022). The nearest flood plain limit is along the Merced River, approximately 1 mile north of the Project site.
3.3 Special-Status Species
3.3.1 Swainson's Hawk
One special-status species, Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), could occur on or near the Project site based on the presence of habitat. Swainson's hawk is a state listed as threatened raptor in the family Accipitridae. It is a migratory breeding resident of Central California. It uses open areas including grassland, sparse shrubland, pasture, open woodland, and annual agricultural fields such as grain and alfalfa to forage on small mammals, birds, and reptiles. After breeding, it eats mainly insects, especially grasshoppers (Bechard et al. 2020). Swainson's hawks build small to medium-sized nests in medium to large trees near foraging habitat. The nesting season begins in March or April in Central California when this species returns to its breeding grounds from wintering areas in Mexico and Central and South America. Nest building commences within one to two weeks of arrival to the breeding area and lasts about one week (Bechard et al. 2020). One to four eggs are laid and incubated for about 35 days. Young typically fledge in about 38-46 days and tend to leave the nest territory within 10 days of fledging (Bechard et al. 2020). Swainson's hawks depart for the non-breeding grounds between August and September.
There is one species occurrence record of Swainson's hawk from within 5 miles of the Project site: a 2007 CNDDB occurrence along the Merced River, approximately 1.6 miles north. A pair of Swainson's hawks were observed soaring over the Well #8 TCP treatment site and again near Well #12 during the 20 June 2022 reconnaissance survey. Potential nest trees were within 0.5 miles of all Project areas. Therefore, the species is present and could nest near the Project site.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
31 Calibri Ecological Consultin&, LLC
June 2022
4.0 Environmental Effects
4.1 Effects Determinations
4.1.1 Critical Habitat
We conclude the Project will have no effect on critical habitat as no critical habitat has been designated or proposed in the survey area.
4.1.2 Special-Status Species
We conclude the Project may affect but Is not likely to adversely affect the state species of special concern Swainson's hawk. The Project is not expected to affect any other special-status species due to the lack of habitat or known occurrence records for those species near the Project site.
4.1.3 Migratory Birds
We conclude the Project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect nesting migratory birds.
4.1.4 Regulated Habitats
We conclude the Project will have no effect on regulated habitats as not impacts to regulated habitats are expected.
4.2 Significance Determinations
This Project, which will result in temporary impacts to urban and disturbed land, will not: (1) substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species (criterion a) as no such habitat is present on the Project site; (2) cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels (criterion b) as no such potentially vulnerable population is known from the area; (3) threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community (criterion c) as no such potentially vulnerable communities are known from the area; (4) substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal (criterion d) as no such potentially vulnerable species are known from the area; (5) have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the COFW or USFWS (criterion f) as no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community was present in the survey area; (6) have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means (criterion g) as no impacts to wetlands will occur; (7) conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
32 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
preservation policy or ordinance (criterion i) as no trees or biologically sensitive areas will be impacted; or (8) conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan (criterion j) as no such plan has been adopted. Thus, these significance criteria are not analyzed further.
The remaining statutorily defined criteria provided the framework for Criteria 8101 and BI02 below. These criteria were used to assess the impacts to biological resources stemming from the Project and provide the basis for determinations of significance:
• Criterion BI01: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS (significance criterion e).
• Criterion BI02: Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites (significance criterion h).
4.2.1 Direct and Indirect Effects
4.2.1.1 Potential Effect #1: Have a Substantial Effect on Any Special-Status Species (Criterion BI01)
The Project has the potential to substantially impact the state-listed as threatened Swainson's hawk, which could nest near the Project site. Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or any activities resulting in nest abandonment, would constitute a significant impact. We recommend that Mitigation Measure BI01 (below) be included in the conditions of approval to reduce the potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure BI01. Protect nesting Swainson's hawks.
1. To the extent practicable, construction shall be scheduled to avoid the Swainson's hawk nesting season, which extends from March through August.
2. If it is not possible to schedule construction between September and February, a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for Swainson's hawk in accordance with the Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee's Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley (SWTAC 2000, Appendix D). These methods require six surveys, three in each of the two survey periods, prior to project initiation. Surveys shall be conducted within a minimum 0.5-mile radius around the Project site.
Bioloaical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
l3 Colibri Ecolo&ical Consultin1, LLC
June 2022
3. If an active Swainson's hawk nest is found within 0.5 miles of the Project site, and the qualified biologist determines that Project activities would disrupt the nesting birds, a construction-free buffer or limited operating period shall be implemented in consultation with the CDFW.
4.2.1.2 Potential Effect #2: Interfere Substantially with Native Wildlife Movements, Corridors, or Nursery Sites (Criterion 8102)
The Project has the potential to impede the use of nursery sites for native birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Migratory birds are expected to nest on and near the Project site. Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandonment.
Disturbance that causes nest abandonment or loss of reproductive effort can be considered take under the MBTA. Loss of fertile eggs or nesting birds, or any activities resulting in nest abandonment, could constitute a significant effect if the species is particularly rare in the region. Construction activities such as excavating, trenching, and grading that disturb a nesting bird in the Project site or immediately adjacent to the construction zone could constitute a significant effect. We recommend that the mitigation measure B102 (below) be included in the conditions of approval to reduce the potential effect to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 8102. Protect nesting birds.
1. To the extent practicable, construction shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season, which extends from February through August.
2. If it is not possible to schedule construction between September and January, preconstruction surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that no active nests will be disturbed during the implementation of the Project. A pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities. During this survey, the qualified biologist shall inspect all potential nest substrates in and immediately adjacent to the impact areas. If an active nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed by these activities, the qualified biologist shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer to be established around the nest. If work cannot proceed without disturbing the nesting birds, work may need to be halted or redirected to other areas until nesting and fledging are completed or the nest has otherwise failed for non-construction related reasons.
4.2.2 Cumulative Effects
The Project will involve installing pipeline and treatment systems to remove the pesticide impurity 1,2,3-trichloropropane from its water supply. The Project site provides potential nesting habitat for migratory birds including Swainson's hawk. However, implementing Mitigation Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
34 Colibri Ecological Consulting. LLC
June2022
Measures 8101 and BI02 would reduce any contribution to cumulative impacts on biological resources to a less-than-significant level.
4.2.3 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Effects
No unavoidable significant adverse effects on biological resources would occur from implementing the Project.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Colibri Ecoloaical Consulting, LLC
June 2022
5.0 Literature Cited
Bechard, M. J., C. S. Houston, J. H. Saransola, and A. S. England. 2020. Swainson's Hawk {Buteo swainsoni), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.swahaw.0l.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 5. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov. Accessed 17 June 2022.
California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program (CNPS). 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (on1ine edition, v8-03 0.39). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed 17 June 2022.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2022. Map Number 06107C0665E, Tuolumne County, California. National Flood Insurance Program. Map revised June 16, 2009. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/. Accessed 17 June 2022.
Google. 2021. Google Earth Pro. Version 7.3.2.5776 (https://www.google.com/earth/ download/gep/agree.html). Accessed 17 June 2022.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2022. Web Soil Survey, National Cooperative Soil Survey: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed 21 June 2022.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetland Research Program Technical Report V-87-1. ___ . 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:
Arid West Region (Version 2.0). ERDC/EL TR-08-28. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/ lnternet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1046489.pdf. Accessed 17 June 2022.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Migratory Bird Permit Memorandum:
Destruction and Relocation of Migratory Bird Nest Contents. FWS/DMBM/AMB/068029, 4 pages.
___ ..2022a. IPaC: Information for Planning and Conservation. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.
Accessed 17 June 2022.
___ . 2022b. National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Accessed 17 June 2022.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
36 Calibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June2022
____ . 2022c. National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. https://www.rivers.gov/ california.php. Accessed 17 June 2022.
Biolo1ical Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
37 Colibri Ecolo1ical Consulting. LLC
June 2022
Appendix A. USFWS list of threatened and endangered species.
Biological Resource Evaluation
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
38 Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
In Reply Refer To:
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
Phone: (916) 414-6600 Fax: (916) 414-6713
Project Code: 2022-0055605
Project Name: Livingston TCP Treatment System
June 17, 2022
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(l) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects ( or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) 06/17/2022
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. 2 If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/IOC-GLOS.PDF Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BG EPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-tobirds.php.
In addition to MBTA and BG EPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/ executive-orders/e0-13186.php.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.
06/17/2022 3
Attachment( s ):
• Official Species List
06/17/2022
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".
This species list is provided by:
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
(916) 414-6600
1 06/17/2022
Project Summary
Project Code: 2022-0055605
Event Code: None
Project Name: Livingston TCP Treatment System
Project Type: Water Supply Facility- New Constr
Project Description: The City of Livingston proposes to construct centralized 1,2,3- trichloropropane (TCP) treatment systems in north-central and southwestern Livingston in Merced County, California.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:/1 www.google.com/maps/@37.3906l0249999995,-120.7298615S169S.14z L -
LMflgSIOO
~
Counties: Merced County, California
2 06/17/2022 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 13 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheriesl , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.
L NOAA Fisher:ie_s. also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
Mammals
\.-\1\lr
San Joaquin Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis mutica
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: bups:llgcrn, fws.aovJecplspecj.ey2813
Reptiles
'\ .\!\ll
Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard Gambelia silus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: lmp:;:(/erosJ:ws,goy/ecp/speci1$1'62S
Giant Garter Snake Thamnophis gigas
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: hHps:lleros,fws&ovler,:pJs121:ries/4481 Amphibians
SIA] US
Endangered
SI \!L:-.
Endangered
Threatened
i\ A \ IL S IA I L',
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense Threatened Population: U.S.A. (Central CA DPS)
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: hU,ps:l/ecos,fws,gov/ecotsptdt!S/'2076 06/17/2022
Fishes
N,<li \lf
Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacificus
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: Jmrn;ltern;, Cws,goytecp/spedes.1321
Insects
S 1-\·1 US
Threatened
N>\ML. S1Al US
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: hups;/(ec;os,fws,goyLe.cplsgm,e-${9243 Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Threatened There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: huos;ttecos,fws,&9y/gcp/spectfs/785Q
Crustaceans
\\Ml
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: b• tps;llecos,, (ws,goytecp{.sJ)eciest8246 Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: lm~:lfe:cwws,i9y/gq2t5pgtjes/498
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepidurus packardi
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: hltps;l/ecos,fws.&9v/eq>tspedesl2246
Flowering Plants
,\iA \.ll.:
Colusa Grass Neostapfia colusana
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. species profile: https;l/ecos,fws.aovt~plwecjes/569-0
Fleshy Owl's-clover Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https;{/ecqs fws,gov/ec p/species/8095 STATUS
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
S \lllS
Threatened
Threatened
San Joaquin Orcutt Grass Orcuttia inaequalis Threatened There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https:!leros,fws,goy«:cp!wecies(SSOfi.
Critical habitats
THERE ARC NO CRITICAL HAIJITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJ[Cl ,\RLA UN DLR l HI.'> OI FIC..l:.'S JURISDICIION.
4 06/17/2022
IPaC User Contact Information
Agency:
Name:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Email
Phone:
Colibri Ecological Services
Ryan Slezak
9493 N Ft Washington Rd
Fresno
CA
93730
[email protected]
5592426178
5 Appendix B. CNDDB occurrence records.
Biological Resource Evaluation 47
Livingston 1,2,3-TCP Removal Treatment Systems Project
Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC
June 2022
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Query Crttarla: Quad<span style..,color:Red'> IS </span>(Cressey (3712046)<span California
style='color:Red'>
Natural Diversity
OR </span>Arena
Database
(3712036)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Atwater (3712035)<span ~ style='color.Red'> OR <lspan>Denair (3712057)<span styte='color:Red'> OR </span>Montpelier (3712056)<span styte2'color:Red'> OR </span>Stevinson (3712037)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Turtock (3712047)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Turtock Lake (3712055)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Wnton (3712045)) CNDDB Listing Status
Name (Scientific/Common) Ranks (Fed/State}
Aclpenser medlrostrls PoP• 1 G2T1 Threatened
green sturgeon - southern DPS S1 None
Agelalus tricolor G1G2 None
tricolored blackbird S1S2 Threatened
Ambystoma callfom/ense PoP· 1 G2G3T3 Threatened
California tiger salamander - central
California DPS
S3 Threatened
Annie/la pulchra G3 None
Northern California legless lizard S3 None
Antrozous pallldus G4 None
pallid bat S3 None
Anleaalba G5 None
great egret 54 None
Ardea hemdlas G5 None
great blue heron 54 None
Astngalus tener var. tener G2T1 None
alkali milk-vetch S1 None
Commercial Version - Dated June, 3 2022 - Biogeographlc Data Branch Report Printed on Friday, June 17, 2022
Elev.
Range Total
Other Lists (fl.) EO's
AFS_ VU-Vulnerable 57 13
IUCN NT-Near 57 S:1
Threatened
BLM_S-5ensftive 69 955
CDFW_SSC-Species 250 S728
of Special Concern
IUCN_EN-Endangered
NABCI_R\IVL-Red
Watch List
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
CDFW IIVL.-Watch List 70 1265
IUCN_ VU-Vulnerable 300 S:14
CDFW_SSC-Species 90 383
of Special Concern 126 S:5
USFS_S-Sensitive
BLM_S-Sensltive 200 420
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern 200 S.:2
IUCN LC-Least
Concern
USFS_S-Sensitive
VI/BWG_H-High
Priority
CDF _s-sensitive 75 43
IUCN_LC-Least 75 S:1
Concern
CDF _S-Sensitive 75 156
IUCN LC-Least
Concern 75 S:1
Rare Plant Rank - 18.2 90 65
175 S:4
Element 0cc. Ranks
A B C D X u
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 8 20
0 4 1 2 1 6
0 1 1 1 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 2 0 0 0 2
Population Status Presence
Historic
>2Dyr
0 21
9 3
2 1
1 3
Recent Poss.
<= 2Dyr Extant Extlrp. Extlrp.
1 1 0 0
7 20 8 0
5 13 1 0
2 5 0 0
0 2 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 1 0 0
1 4 0 0