AGENDA
NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 2023
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:00 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET
NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
1. Call To Order.
2. Pledge Of Allegiance.
3. Invocation.
4. Roll Call.
5. Declaration Of Conflicts Of Interest.
6. Ceremonial Matters.
7. Items from the Public - Non-Agenda Items.
8. Consent Calendar
a. Waive All Readings Of Ordinances And Resolutions Except By Title. b. Approval Of Warrants. (View Warrant/Check Register)
c. Approval Of Minutes Of The August 22, 2023 Meetings. (View Minutes) d. Approval Of A Contract Extension With CSG Consultants For Building Inspection And Plan Check Services Through Calendar Year 2026. (View Report)
9. Public Hearings.
10. Regular Business
a. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- , A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Newman Adopting The Addendum To The Newman Community Conservation Area (NCCA) Master Plan Initial Study. (View Report)
b. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- , A Resolution Adopting Of Concurrence And Support Of The Consolidated Annual Performance And Evaluation Report (CAPER) For Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-2023 Prepared For The Stanislaus Urban County. (View Report)
11. Items From District Five Stanislaus County Supervisor.
12. Items From The City Manager And Staff.
13. Items From City Council Members.
14. Adjournment.
Calendar of Events
September 9 – Youth Soccer Season Begins At Sherman Park.
September 12 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.
September 21 – Planning Commission – Cancelled.
September 26 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.
AP Check Register
August 16, 2023 through September 6, 2023
1 of 6
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Aramark 63-56-6200 $ 179.37 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ July 2023 Aramark 10-44-6200 $ 179.37 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ July2023
Aramark 10-33-6200 $ 269.06 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/MatRental/Shop Towels/ July2023 Aramark 60-50-6200 $ 269.06 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/MatRental/Shop Towels/ July2023 Aramark 10-07-6200 $ 123.04 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/MatRental/Shop Towels/ July2023 Aramark 10-22-6200 $ 89.03 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/MatRental/Shop Towels/ July2023 Aramark 10-21-6200 $ 160.62 123049 8/25/2023 Uniform Cleaning/MatRental/Shop Towels/ July2023 $ 1,269.55 123049 Total
AT&T 60-50-6200 $ 8.67 123051 8/25/2023 Alarm 7-13-23 to 8-12-23 AT&T 10-07-6420 $ 24.51 123051 8/25/2023 Landlines 7-13-23 -to 8-12-23 AT&T 10-14-6200 $ 8.68 123051 8/25/2023 Alarm 7-13-23 to 8-12-23 AT&T 63-56-6200 $ 8.67 123051 8/25/2023 Alarm 7-13-23 to 8-12-23 AT&T 63-56-6420 $ 75.50 123051 8/25/2023 Landlines 7-13-23 -to 8-12-23 AT&T 10-21-6420 $ 362.21 123051 8/25/2023 Circuit Line Between Fresno Stto Ceres 7-13-23 to 8-12-23 AT&T 10-14-6420 $ 75.30 123051 8/25/2023 Landlines 7-13-23 -to 8-12-23 AT&T 10-21-6420 $ 26.59 123051 8/25/2023 Landlines 7-13-23 -to 8-12-23 $ 590.13 123051 Total
AT&T MOBILITY 10-03-6420 $ 76.86 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 69-47-6420 $ 84.35 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 63-56-6420 $ 421.43 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-33-6420 $ 102.76 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-21-6420 $ 639.90 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-02-6420 $ 20.27 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 22-20-6420 $ 9.43 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-06-6420 $ 62.45 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-07-6420 $ 23.57 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-22-6420 $ 207.53 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 73-70-6420 $ 11.54 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-44-6420 $ 98.04 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 10-45-6420 $ 32.99 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 AT&T MOBILITY 60-50-6420 $ 393.82 123050 8/25/2023 Cell Phone Use 7-03-23 to8-02-23 $ 2,184.94 123050 Total
Borrelli Travis 69-47-6200 $ 185.74 123079 8/25/2023 Portable Restroom RentalService $ 185.74 123079 Total
Canon Financial Services, Inc. 63-56-6200 $ 121.15 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July2023/CopyCharges August 2023 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 63-56-6200 $ 123.79 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July2023/CopyCharges August 2023 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 60-50-6200 $ 123.79 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July2023/CopyCharges August 2023
AP Check Register
August 16, 2023 through September 6, 2023
2 of 6
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Canon Financial Services, Inc. 10-14-6200 $ 121.16 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July 2023/CopyCharges August 2023
Canon Financial Services, Inc. 10-22-6200 $ 312.14 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July2023/CopyCharges August 2023 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 10-21-6200 $ 252.33 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July2023/CopyCharges August 2023 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 60-50-6200 $ 121.16 123052 8/25/2023 Contract Charges July2023/CopyCharges August 2023 $ 1,175.52 123052 Total
Cascade Fire Equipment 10-22-7105 $ 495.15 123039 8/24/2023 Fire Equipment Cascade Fire Equipment 10-22-7105 $ 4,877.72 123039 8/24/2023 Fire Equipment Cascade Fire Equipment 10-22-7105 $ 2,712.56 123039 8/24/2023 Fire Equipment Cascade Fire Equipment 10-22-7105 $ 15,911.56 123039 8/24/2023 Fire Equipment $ 23,996.99 123039 Total
COMCAST CABLE 63-56-6200 $ 68.82 123053 8/25/2023 High speed internet/water COMCAST CABLE 60-50-6200 $ 68.80 123053 8/25/2023 High speed internet/sewer COMCAST CABLE 10-21-6420 $ 158.42 123053 8/25/2023 High Speed Internet 8-6-23 lo9-5-23 /PD COMCAST CABLE 10-21-6200 $ 68.80 123053 8/25/2023 High speed internet/PD $ 364.84 123053 Total
CSFEWBC-VLSA 10-22-6200 $ 4,550.00 123054 8/25/2023 2022-2023 Annual Contributions $ 4,550.00 123054 Total
Davey Resource Group, Inc 17-44-7756 $ 18,385.63 123055 8/25/2023 Professional Services RenderedThrough 7-29-23 $ 18,385.63 123055 Total
Davey Resource Group, Inc 17-44-7756 $ 11,057.50 123040 8/24/2023 Professional Services RenderedThrough 6-30-23 $ 11,057.50 123040 Total
Derotic Emergency Equipment 71-21-7010 $ 3,772.02 123056 8/25/2023 Upfitting of 2023 Chevy 1500 $ 3,772.02 123056 Total
Dittos 10-21-6300 $ 42.79 123057 8/25/2023 Business Card/ Short, Ornelas, Thompson $ 42.79 123057 Total
DYER BEVERLEY E 63-00-2010 $ 211.05 123095 8/29/2023 Refund Check 013936-000, 2130 HIDDEN CANYON WAY $ 211.05 123095 Total
Garcia Miguel 10-00-5510 $ 375.00 123058 8/25/2023 Memorial Building Rental DepositRefund/ Garcia Garcia Miguel 10-00-2840 $ 300.00 123058 8/25/2023 Memorial Building Rental DepositRefund/ Garcia $ 675.00 123058 Total
Gouveia Engineering, Inc 24-32-7781 $ 116.92 123059 8/25/2023 Project 545.18 Main St Stanislaus Gouveia Engineering, Inc 10-31-6200 $ 81.38 123059 8/25/2023 Project 520.01 Planning General Gouveia Engineering, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 15,346.25 123059 8/25/2023 Project 555.05 Newman Wetlands Gouveia Engineering, Inc 17-50-7782 $ 1,351.88 123059 8/25/2023 Project 580.07 McPike Sewer LineObservation Gouveia Engineering, Inc 10-31-6200 $ 154.88 123059 8/25/2023 Project 585. 11 Arco Site Plan Gouveia Engineering, Inc 18-32-7768 $ 12,975.80 123059 8/25/2023 Project 545.070 STPL-5172 (026}Inyo Canal School Gouveia Engineering, Inc 10-31-6200 $ 1,086.75 123059 8/25/2023 Project 525.0'1 Public .worksGeneral Gouveia Engineering, Inc 17-36-7780 $ 353.75 123059 8/25/2023 Project 555.04-3.2 NEWSConstruction Implement
AP Check Register
August 16, 2023 through September 6, 2023
3 of 6
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Gouveia Engineering, Inc 18-56-7771 $ 1,890.00 123059 8/25/2023 Project 525. 12 Jensen Rd Utilities Gouveia Engineering, Inc 18-32-7739 $ 19,290.00 123059 8/25/2023 Project 525.02 STPl-5172 {024}Highway 33/ Inyo $ 52,647.61 123059 Total
Guerrero's Tire and Auto Repair, LLC 10-21-6530 $ 30.00 123060 8/25/2023 Repair of Flat Tire on FordInterceptor/PD Guerrero's Tire and Auto Repair, LLC 10-21-6530 $ 54.00 123060 8/25/2023 Repair of Flat Tire on Mower/ PW Guerrero's Tire and Auto Repair, LLC 10-21-6530 $ 100.00 123060 8/25/2023 2 Used Tires on Trailer/ PD $ 184.00 123060 Total
IDEXX LABORATORIES, INC. 63-56-6300 $ 529.48 123061 8/25/2023 Water Testing Supplies $ 529.48 123061 Total
Industrial Electrical Company 60-50-6225 $ 4,173.49 123041 8/24/2023 Generator Repairs $ 4,173.49 123041 Total
Lagrutta Jim 10-22-6690 $ 84.88 123064 8/25/2023 Reimbursement for Training Lunch/Lagrutta $ 84.88 123064 Total
Magdaleno John 10-00-2841 $ 20.00 123065 8/25/2023 Pioneer Park Rental DepositRefund/ Magdaleno $ 20.00 123065 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 63-56-6200 $ 1,519.00 123066 8/25/2023 IT CONTRACT/WATR MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-21-6200 $ 3,038.00 123066 8/25/2023 IT CONTRACT/PD MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-14-6200 $ 1,519.00 123066 8/25/2023 IT CONTRACT/FIN MID VALLEY IT, INC 60-50-6200 $ 1,519.00 123066 8/25/2023 IT CONTRACT/SEWR $ 7,595.00 123066 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-21-7105 $ 33,589.75 123048 8/25/2023 Toughbooks/ PD $ 33,589.75 123048 Total
Moreno Miguel 63-56-6690 $ 68.64 123067 8/25/2023 Mileage Reimbursement/Moreno Moreno Miguel 63-56-6675 $ 120.00 123067 8/25/2023 Reimbursement for Postage/Moreno $ 188.64 123067 Total
Newman City Tow Service, Inc 10-21-6530 $ 200.00 123043 8/24/2023 Towing of Ford Interceptor/ PD Newman City Tow Service, Inc 10-21-6530 $ 200.00 123043 8/24/2023 Towing of Ford Interceptor/ PD $ 400.00 123043 Total
NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 71.84 123042 8/24/2023 Oil Change 2015 Ford Explorer/PD $ 71.84 123042 Total
NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 105.88 123068 8/25/2023 Oil Change 2018 FordInterceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 3,438.15 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2015 Ford Explorer/PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 95.00 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2018 FordInterceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 110.94 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2017 FordInterceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 65.34 123068 8/25/2023 Oil Change 2017 FordInterceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 255.00 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2016 Ford Explorer/PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 760.13 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2020 FordInterceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 71.84 123068 8/25/2023 Oil Change 2021 FordInterceptor/ PD
AP Check Register
August 16, 2023 through September 6, 2023
4 of 6
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 241.09 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2018 Ford Interceptor/ PD
NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 421.71 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2015 Ford Explorer/PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 1,052.24 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2015 Ford Explorer/PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 187.20 123068 8/25/2023 Repair 2017 FordInterceptor/ PD $ 6,804.52 123068 Total
One Step GPS LLC 10-21-6200 $ 153.45 123069 8/25/2023 GPS Fleet Tracking Software One Step GPS LLC 63-56-6200 $ 153.45 123069 8/25/2023 GPS Fleet Tracking Software One Step GPS LLC 10-22-6200 $ 69.75 123069 8/25/2023 GPS Fleet Tracking Software One Step GPS LLC 60-50-6200 $ 153.45 123069 8/25/2023 GPS Fleet Tracking Software One Step GPS LLC 10-21-6200 $ 191.60 123069 8/25/2023 GPS Fleet Tracking Software $ 721.70 123069 Total
P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 986.31 123070 8/25/2023 NaturalGas Pumped @ CNGFueling Station 7-6-23 to8-4-23 P G & E 63-56-6510 $ 45.30 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-12-23 to 8-9-23 P G & E 10-07-6410 $ 986.31 123070 8/25/2023 NaturalGas Pumped @ CNGFueling Station 7-6-23 to8-4-23 P G & E 63-56-6410 $ 986.31 123070 8/25/2023 NaturalGas Pumped @ CNGFueling Station 7-6-23 to8-4-23 P G & E 10-33-6510 $ 362.41 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-12-23 to 8-9-23 P G & E 10-21-6510 $ 45.30 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-12-23 to 8-9-23 P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 33.82 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-11-23 to 8-8-23 P G & E 10-44-6510 $ 181.20 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-12-23 to 8-9-23 P G & E 60-50-6510 $ 45.30 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-12-23 to 8-9-23 P G & E 69-47-6510 $ 226.51 123070 8/25/2023 Electrical Charges for Solar Meter@WWTP 7-12-23 to 8-9-23 $ 3,898.77 123070 Total
PROPERTIES 152, LLC. 63-00-2010 $ 53.43 123096 8/29/2023 Refund Check 016356-000, 1341 P STREET $ 53.43 123096 Total
Public Agency Coalition Enterprise 10-00-2260 $ 23,526.62 123062 8/25/2023 Health Insurance Premium/September2023 $ 23,526.62 123062 Total
Public Agency Coalition Enterprise 10-00-2260 $ 19,624.62 123063 8/25/2023 Health Insurance Premium/September2023 $ 19,624.62 123063 Total
Purchase Power 10-14-6330 $ 336.17 123071 8/25/2023 Postage Meter Refill Purchase Power 63-56-6330 $ 336.16 123071 8/25/2023 Postage Meter Refill Purchase Power 60-50-6330 $ 336.17 123071 8/25/2023 Postage Meter Refill $ 1,008.50 123071 Total
ROBIC REFRIGERATION 10-22-6300 $ 660.10 123072 8/25/2023 Repair on Ice Machine at FD $ 660.10 123072 Total
Rocha John 10-00-5830 $ 875.00 123044 8/24/2023 Reimbursement for Rental of 25 Acres @ WWTP $ 875.00 123044 Total
Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 15.00 123098 8/30/2023 Reimbursement for Training Lunch/Rocha Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 7.85 123098 8/30/2023 Reimbursement for Training Lunch/Rocha
AP Check Register
August 16, 2023 through September 6, 2023
5 of 6
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 161.65 123098 8/30/2023 Mileage Reimbursement/ Rocha
Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 700.19 123098 8/30/2023 Mileage Reimbursement/Rocha Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 15.00 123098 8/30/2023 Reimbursement for Training Lunch/Rocha Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 12.54 123098 8/30/2023 Reimbursement for Training Lunch/Rocha Rocha Rory 63-56-6690 $ 15.00 123098 8/30/2023 Reimbursement for Training Lunch/Rocha $ 927.23 123098 Total
Rolfe Construction, Inc 17-36-7780 $ 204,127.45 123073 8/25/2023 NEWS Project Rolfe Construction, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 104,034.60 123073 8/25/2023 Wetlands Project $ 308,162.05 123073 Total
RRM DESIGN GROUP, INC. 17-36-7780 $ 360.00 123074 8/25/2023 NEWS Educational SignageDevelopment $ 360.00 123074 Total
RRM DESIGN GROUP, INC. 17-36-7780 $ 2,360.00 123093 8/29/2023 NEWS Educational SignageDevelopment $ 2,360.00 123093 Total
San Joaquin Valley Drainage Authority 60-50-6635 $ 414.82 123099 8/30/2023 Irrigated Lands RegulatoryProgram/ Second Installment $ 414.82 123099 Total
SHAPE INCORPORATED 60-50-6225 $ 28,052.73 123045 8/24/2023 Flygt Pump $ 28,052.73 123045 Total
STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-22-6300 $ 53.93 123076 8/25/2023 Picture Frame STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-22-6300 $ 54.03 123076 8/25/2023 HDMI Cable $ 107.96 123076 Total
State of Calif Dept of Justice 10-00-2014 $ 912.00 123075 8/25/2023 Fingerprint Apps/FBl/Child AbuseIndex $ 912.00 123075 Total
Steve P. Rados, Inc 17-50-7782 $ 1,180,124.83 123077 8/25/2023 McPike 1 Improvements & Influent Trunk SewerProgress Payment 2 Steve P. Rados, Inc 61-55-7550 $ 42,275.00 123077 8/25/2023 McPike 1 Improvements & Influent Trunk SewerProgress Payment 2 $ 1,222,399.83 123077 Total
Steve P. Rados, Inc 17-50-7782 $ 761,151.08 123046 8/24/2023 McPike 1 Improvements & Influent Trunk SewerProgress Payment 1 Steve P. Rados, Inc 61-55-7550 $ 127,300.00 123046 8/24/2023 McPike 1 Improvements & Influent Trunk SewerProgress Payment 1 $ 888,451.08 123046 Total
STILES TRUCK BODY, INC. 71-21-7010 $ 5,523.58 123078 8/25/2023 Installation of Tomy Gate andBack Up Camera/ PD $ 5,523.58 123078 Total
TBS Contractors 18-32-7739 $ 143,790.15 123094 8/29/2023 Highway 33 & Inyo ImprovementsProgress Payment 3 $ 143,790.15 123094 Total
True Blue Veterinary Group 10-21-6208 $ 269.61 123080 8/25/2023 Shelter Animals $ 269.61 123080 Total
UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 1,734.25 123081 8/25/2023 315 Gallons of SodiumHypoclorlteDel lvered to Well#B UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 916.02 123081 8/25/2023 170 Gallons of SodiumHypoclorlteDel lvered to Well#B UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 579.60 123081 8/25/2023 130 Gallons of SodiumHypoclorlteDel lvered to Well#B $ 3,229.87 123081 Total
AP Check Register
August 16, 2023 through September 6, 2023
6 of 6
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 1,596.61 123100 8/30/2023 290 Gallons of Sodium HypoclorlteDel lvered to Well#B
$ 1,596.61 123100 Total
Valley Tire Sales-Patterson 10-21-6530 $ 1,708.81 123082 8/25/2023 8 Tires/ PD $ 1,708.81 123082 Total
West Coast Pet Memorial Services 10-21-6208 $ 33.60 123084 8/25/2023 Disposal Clinic $ 33.60 123084 Total
Westside Connect 10-44-6600 $ 1,008.00 123083 8/25/2023 Display Ad Plan Your Parks Westside Connect 63-56-6600 $ 50.00 123083 8/25/2023 Single Box Ad Westside Connect 60-50-6600 $ 50.00 123083 8/25/2023 Single Box Ad Westside Connect 10-06-6600 $ 195.00 123083 8/25/2023 Public Notice Adoption ofOrdinance 2023-01 Westside Connect 10-45-6724 $ 161.00 123083 8/25/2023 Display Ad Movie Night Westside Connect 10-01-6600 $ 50.00 123083 8/25/2023 Single Box Ad $ 1,514.00 123083 Total
Wex Bank 10-21-6500 $ 5,393.84 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 69-47-6500 $ 358.44 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 10-44-6500 $ 62.20 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 10-07-6500 $ 131.35 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 60-50-6500 $ 646.89 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 10-33-6500 $ 493.44 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 63-56-6500 $ 1,205.18 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 Wex Bank 10-22-6500 $ 1,725.45 123085 8/25/2023 Gas and Diesel Purchases7-16-23 to 8-15-23 $ 10,016.79 123085 Total
White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 7,442.90 123047 8/24/2023 Through June 2023 GeneralMunicipal White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 401.10 123047 8/24/2023 Professional Srvcs RenderedThrough June 2023 PRA White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 1,005.40 123047 8/24/2023 Professional Srvcs RenderedThrough June 2023 HR White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 15.40 123047 8/24/2023 Professional Srvcs RenderedThrough June 2023 Martinez White Brenner, LLP 63-56-6200 $ 1,255.50 123047 8/24/2023 Professional Srvcs RenderedThrough June 2023 Cal Sport vDe $ 10,120.30 123047 Total
YBA Shirts, Inc 10-45-6735 $ 971.10 123097 8/29/2023 Soccer Balls, Cones YBA Shirts, Inc 10-45-6735 $ 3,225.47 123097 8/29/2023 Soccer Balls $ 4,196.57 123097 Total
$ 2,859,267.24 Grand Total
MINUTES
NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 22, 2023
CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM, 6:30 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
1. Call To Order - Mayor Graham 6:30 P.M.
2. Roll Call - PRESENT: McDonald, Mayor Pro Tem Ball, Tomlinson, Pimentel, And Mayor Graham.
ABSENT: None.
3. Items From The Public – None.
4. Adjourn To Closed Session - 6:31 P.M.
a. Conference With Legal Counsel, Initiation Of Litigation Pursuant To California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4), (One Case).
b. Return To Open Session - 6:39 P.M.
Mayor Graham Reported That Staff Was Given Direction To Continue With Litigation Related To Item 4.a.
5. Adjournment.
ACTION: On A Motion By Pimentel Seconded By Tomlinson, The Meeting Was Adjourned At 6:41 P.M. By The Following Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, Pimentel, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
MINUTES
NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 22, 2023
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:00 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET
NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
1. Call To Order - Mayor Graham 7:00 P.M.
2. Pledge Of Allegiance.
3. Invocation – Council Member McDonald.
4. Roll Call - PRESENT: McDonald, Mayor Pro Tem Ball, Tomlinson, Pimentel, And Mayor Graham.
ABSENT: None.
5. Declaration Of Conflicts Of Interest – None.
6. Ceremonial Matters – None.
7. Items from the Public - Non-Agenda Items.
Julio Valenzuela, 1316 Green Teal Way, Requested A Proclamation In Honor Of Ray Caseri A World War II Veteran. Valenzuela Noted That Caseri Was A Chief Maintenance Instructor For B-24 Bombers In The Aleutian Islands.
Mayor Graham Asked Mr. Valenzuela To Share Some Of The Information He Had And Noted That It Would Be Helpful.
Russell Ramos, 620 Orestimba Peak Drive, Asked For A Proclamation To Be Presented To The Ray Caseri Family In His Memory And Was Willing To Help Provide Information If It Was Needed.
Mayor Graham Asked If They Would Be Able To Provide Staff With Information About Mr. Caseri Including His Military History.
Gavin Cline, Field Representative For Congressman John Duarte, Reported That Congressman Duarte Participated In A Gathering That Addressed Forest And Wildlife Mismanagement. Cline Explained That Congressman Duarte Would Be Hosting A Military Academy Nomination Event At 6:30 P.M. On Thursday, August 31st At Atwater High School.
8. Consent Calendar
a. Waive All Readings Of Ordinances And Resolutions Except By Title. b. Approval Of Warrants.
c. Approval Of Minutes Of The July 25, 2023 Meetings.
d. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-44, A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Newman Adopting Class Specifications For City Of Newman Police Officer, Corporal, And Sergeant Positions.
ACTION: On A Motion By McDonald Seconded By Tomlinson, The Consent Calendar Was Approved By The Following Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, Pimentel, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
9. Public Hearings – None.
10. Regular Business
a. Report On 6th Cycle Housing Element Update Housing Element.
Ande Flower, EMC Planning Group, Presented The Initial Public Draft For The 6th Cycle Housing Element. Flower Explained That The Housing Element Report Would Cover The Housing Element Overview, Regional Housing Needs Allocation, Demographics, Needs Analysis, Sites Overview, Website Introduction And Public Draft, And Next Steps/Timeline. He Stated That The Thirty-Day Public Review Period For The Draft Housing Element Would Begin Immediately.
Council Member McDonald Asked When The Housing Element Presentation Would Be Available For The Public To View.
Ande Flower Stated That The Presentation Would Be Available By Noon The Following Day.
Mayor Graham Thanked Mr. Flower For His Presentation.
ACTION: No Action Was Taken.
b. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-45, A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Newman Accepting Proposals From Redtail Consulting, Rick Engineering, Gouveia Engineering, Darla Thomas, And RRM Design Group For The Newman Nature Park LWCF Grant, And Authorizing The City Manager To Execute The Agreements On Behalf Of The City Of Newman.
Mayor Graham Asked When The Said Project Would Be Completed.
Public Works Director Reyes Stated That Construction Was Scheduled To Begin In 2024 And Indicated That The Project Was Estimated To Be Completed In 2025.
ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By McDonald, Resolution No. 2023-45, A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Newman Accepting Proposals From Redtail Consulting, Rick Engineering, Gouveia Engineering, Darla Thomas, And RRM Design Group For The Newman Nature Park LWCF Grant, And Authorizing The City Manager To Execute The Agreements On Behalf Of The City Of Newman, Was Adopted By The Following Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, Pimentel, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None. c. Report On The Trunk Or Treat Halloween Event At The Downtown Plaza.
Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Provided An Overview Of The Trunk Or Treat Event And Stated That She Was Working In Conjunction With The Newman Partnership And The Newman Crows Landing School District, Beyond The Bell Program For The Said Event.
Analyssa Gudino, Orestimba High School Student, Requested Use Of The Downtown Plaza And The Thirteen Hundred Block Of Main Street For The Trunk Or Treat Event.
Jazlene Diaz, Orestimba High School Student, Asked For The Downtown Standard Clean Up Fees To Be Waived For The Said Event.
Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Reviewed A Map Of The Event’s Proposed Layout.
Council Member Ball Thanked The Students For Their Presentation.
Council Member Tomlinson Asked If There Would Be Any Weekend Halloween Events For Those That Could Not Attend The Weekday Event.
Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Stated That There Was Currently Nothing Planned For Halloween Weekend.
ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By Pimentel, The Council Approved The Trunk Or Treat Halloween Event At The Downtown Plaza As Submitted In The Staff Report, By The Following Roll Call Vote: AYES: McDonald, Ball, Tomlinson, Pimentel, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
11. Items From District Five Stanislaus County Supervisor – None.
12. Items From The City Manager And Staff.
City Manager Holland Expressed His Condolences To The Ray Caseri Family And Noted That The City Would Work To Gather The Information Necessary To Create A Proclamation That Could Be Presented To The Family. Holland Pointed Out That There Was Already A Link On The City’s Website Encouraging Public Participation In The Housing Element Process. He Wished Everyone A Safe And Fun Fall Festival. Holland Urged Everyone To Sign Up For The Tunnel To Towers Run/Walk Event. He Noted That There Was A Hwy 33 Dedication For Corporal Singh In The Downtown Plaza Following The Tunnel To Towers Event. Holland Stated That The Two-On-Two Meetings With The Newman Crows Landing School District Would Resume In September. He Explained That The Upcoming Veterans Memorial Circle Project Would Give The Public The Opportunity To Purchase Bricks Honoring Service Members But Not Necessarily Provide A Full List Of Local Veterans.
Holland Concluded By Stating That He Wished Former Council Member Candea Well Following A Successful Surgery.
Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Reported That The Youth Soccer Season Would Begin On Saturday, September 9th. Mendoza Stated That The Recreation Department Would Be Hosting The Kid’s Zone Again At The Newman Fall Festival.
Council Member McDonald Asked If There Was Anything New For The Fall Festival This Year.
Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Pointed Out That The Tunnel To Towers Run/Walk Was New To The Event And There Would Also Be Some New Food Booths.
Council Member Pimentel Asked How The Parade Float Was Progressing.
Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Noted That The Recreation Department Runs The Kid’s Zone And Wasn’t Involved In The Organizing Of The Rest Of The Fall Festival But She Would Find Out About The Float And Report Back.
Chief Richardson Reported That On Saturday, July 22nd Officer Murillo Held A Stuff A Cruiser Event That Collected School Supplies To Be Distributed To Local Families In Need. Richardson Explained That The Police Department Was Hosting A Clear The Shelter Event And Offering Adoptions At A Discounted Rate. He Encouraged People To Attend Or Donate To The Tunnel To Towers Organization/Event.
Finance Director Humphries Reported That Staff Was Continuing To Work With The Auditors.
Public Works Director Reyes Reported That Signs Had Been Posted Regarding The Upcoming Road Closures For The Canal School Road And Inyo Avenue Project. Reyes Mentioned That They Would Soon Start Hauling Dirt Out Of The Wetlands/NEWS Project Areas. She Noted That The Public Works Department Was Preparing For The Fall Festival. Reyes Thanked Both The Orestimba And Gustine High Schools For Providing The Bleachers For The Fall Festival. She Pointed Out That The Public Works Department Would Have A Booth At The Festival To Educate The Public On Water Conservation, Recycling, And Flood Zones.
Council Member McDonald Asked About The Impact The Hwy 33/Inyo Avenue Would Have On The Businesses.
Public Works Director Reyes Stated That Unfortunately, The Road Closures Would Affect Them But That The Contractors Would Work With Said Businesses To Minimize The Impacts.
13. Items From City Council Members.
Council Member McDonald Stated That He Was Excited For The Fall Festival.
Council Member Ball Thanked Staff For Their Efforts And Thanked The Citizens That Participated In The Council Meeting.
Mayor Graham Asked That Everyone Have A Fun And Safe Fall Festival And Thanked Everyone For Their Participation During The Meeting.
14. Adjournment.
ACTION: On A Motion By Pimentel Seconded By McDonald And Unanimously Carried, The Meeting Was Adjourned At 7:58 P.M.
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Newman City Council
Agenda Item: 8.d.
City Council Meeting
of September 12, 2023
APPROVE A CONTRACT EXTENSION WITH CSG CONSULTANTS FOR BUILDING INSPECTION AND PLAN CHECK SERVICES THROUGH CALENDAR YEAR 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a contract extension with CSG Consultants for building inspection and plan check services through calendar year 2026.
BACKGROUND:
The City had a contract with Precision Inspection Company for building permit and inspection services since the early 1990's. In April 2012, Precision Inspection Company merged with CSG Consulting, Inc. ("CSG"), who assumed Precision's contract with the City. In 2018, the City entered into a new three (3) year agreement with CSG to provide building permit services to the City with another extension in 2022.
ANALYSIS:
Following contract revision in 2020 that change how CSG was compensated for inspection and plan check services, the City had some apprehension about entering into a long-term agreement. However, after collecting data over the past few years, analysis indicates that permit fees were sufficient to cover the cost of processing the permits and pay CSG for plan check and inspection services. Therefore, staff is comfortable extending the contract through calendar year 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Minimal. Staff will continue to monitor the building permit fee structure to ensure the proper amount is being collected. It is anticipated a rate increase will be necessary since they have not be adjusted in several years.
CONCLUSION:
After a couple of years under the new compensation schedule with CSG Consulting for inspection and plan check services, building permit fees have been sufficient to cover the new compensation schedule. Therefore, staff recommends Council approve an extension for CSG Consulting for inspection and plan check services through calendar year 2026.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Agreement
Respectfully Submitted,
~ ~-<Q<f;!:CJ Michael E. Holland
City Manager
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWMAN AND
CSG CONSULT ANTS FOR PLAN CHECK AND BUILDING INSPECTION
SERVICES
This Agreement is made and entered into effective on 13TH Day of September, 2023, by and between the City of Newman, a California municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and CGS Consulting (hereinafter referred to as "CONSUL TANT").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY desires to obtain consultant services from a qualified consultant to provide plan check and inspection services.
WHEREAS, CONSULT ANT warrants that it is specially trained, experienced, expert, and competent to perform such services and hereby represents that it desires to and is professionally and legally capable of performing the services called for by this Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals which are part of this Agreement and the terms and conditions hereinafter contained, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. Scope of Services. CONSULT ANT shall perform to the satisfaction of CITY, services as requested by CITY as specifically set forth in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and hereafter referred as "Scope of Services."
2. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective from September 13, 2023, to December 31, 2026, subject to any earlier termination in accordance with this Agreement. Thereafter, this agreement may be extended annually by mutual agreement of CITY and CONSULT ANT pursuant to annual program budget as approved by City Council.
3. Compensation. CONSULT ANT'S sole compensation for satisfactory performance of all services required or rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be as follows:
shall be at the rate and schedules attached hereto as Exhibit "B", which are on a time and material basis.
4. Termination.
(a) This Agreement and all obligations hereunder may be terminated at any time, with or without cause, by the CITY upon written notice to the CONSULTANT upon thirty (30) day's written notice. CONSULT ANT may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days' written notice.
(b) If Consultant fails to perform any of its material obligations under this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice.
(c) Upon termination with or without cause, all finished and unfinished documents, project data and reports shall, at the option of the City, become its sole property and shall, at Consultant's expense, be delivered to the City or to any party it may so designate.
(d) In the event termination is without cause, Consultant shall be entitled to any compensation owing it hereunder up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for services rendered prior to the time of payment; provided, however, that Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for work in progress at the time of termination. Notice of termination shall be mailed as follows:
To the City:
City of Newman
Attn: City Manager
P.O. Box 787
938 Fresno Street
Newman, CA 93630
To the Consultant:
CGS Consulting, Inc.
Attn: Cyrus Kianpour, President
550 Pilgrim Drive
Foster City, CA 94404
Email: [email protected]
cc:
CGS Consulting, Inc.
Attn: :XXX
550 Pilgrim Drive
Foster City, CA 94404
5. Indemnification. To the furthest extent allowed by law, CONSUL TANT agrees to indemnify, including the cost to defend, City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against all claims, demands, costs, or liability, and expenses including attorney's fees arising out of the performance of the work describedin this Agreement, caused in whole or in part by the sole negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULT ANT, its principals, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable excluding, however, such claims, demands, loss, damages, or arising from City's sole negligence or willful acts.
6. Insurance.
(a) Throughout the life of this Agreement, CONSULT ANT shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all insurance as required in Exhibit "C" or as may be authorized, and any additional insurance as may be required, in writing by City Manager or his or her designee at any time and in her sole discretion. (b) If at any time during the life of the Agreement or any extension, CONSULT ANT or any of its subcontractors fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all services and work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or that become due to CONSULT ANT shall be withheld until notice is received by CITY that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to CITY. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for CITY to terminate this Agreement.
No action taken by CITY pursuant to this section shall in any way relieve CONSULT ANT of its responsibilities under this Agreement. This phrase "fail to maintain any required insurance" shall include, without limitation, notification received by CITY that an insurer has commenced proceedings, or has had proceedings commenced against it, indicating that the insurer is insolvent.
7. Nondiscrimination. To the extent required by controlling federal, state, and local law, CONSULT ANT shall not employ discriminatory practices in the provision of services, employment of personnel, or in any other respect on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran, or veteran of the Vietnam era.
8. Independent Contractor. In the furnishing of the services provided for herein, CONSULTANT is acting solely as an independent contractor. Neither CONSULTANT, nor any of its officers, agents, or employees shall be deemed an officer, agent, employee, joint venture, partner, or associate of CITY for any purpose. CITY shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which CONSULT ANT shall perform its work and functions. However, CITY shall retain the right to administer this Agreement so as to verify that CONSULT ANT is performing its obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof.
9. Notices. Any notice required or intended to be given to either party under the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be duly given if delivered personally, transmitted by facsimile followed by telephone confirmation of receipt, or sent by United States registered or certified mail, with postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the party which notice is to be given at the party's address set forth on the signature page of this Agreement or at such other address as the parties may from time to time designate by written notice. Notices served by United States mail in the manner above described shall be deemed sufficiently served or given at the time of mailing thereof.
10. Assignment. This agreement is personal to CONSULT ANT and there shall be no assignment by CONSULT ANT of its rights of obligations under this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City Manager or her designee.
11. Compliance with Law. In providing the services required under this Agreement, CONSULT ANT shall at all times comply with all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California, and CITY, and with all applicable regulations promulgated by federal state, regional, or local administrative and regulatory agencies, now in force and as they may be enacted, issued, or amended during the term of this Agreement.
12. Waiver. The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. No provisions of this Agreement may be waived unless in writing and signed by all parties to this Agreement.
Waiver of any one provision herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision herein.
13. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California, excluding, however, any conflict oflaws rule which would apply the law of another jurisdiction. Venue for purposes of the filing of any action regarding enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement and any rights and duties hereunder shall be Fresno County, California.
14. Headings. The section headings in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not be construed or held in anyway to explain, modify, or add to the interpretation or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement.
15. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. The invalidity or unenforceability of any one provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other prov1s1ons.
16. Interpretation. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement in its final form is the result of the combined efforts of the parties and that, should any provision of this Agreement be found to be ambiguous in any way, such ambiguity shall not be resolved by construing this Agreement in favor of or against either party, but rather by construing the terms in accordance with their generally accepted meaning.
17. Attorneys' Fees. If either party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such proceeding or action shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorneys' fees and legal expenses.
18. Exhibits. Each exhibit and attachment referenced in this Agreement is, by the reference, incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement.
19. Precedence of Documents. In the event of any conflict between the body of this Agreement and any Exhibit or Attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this Agreement shall control and take precedence over the terms and conditions expressed within the Exhibit or Attachment. Furthermore, any terms or conditions contained within any Exhibit or Attachment hereto which purport to modify the allocation of risk between the parties, provided for within the body of this Agreement, shall be null and void.
20. Cumulative Remedies. No remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity.
21. No Third Party Beneficiaries. The rights, interests, duties and obligations defined within this Agreement are intended for the specific parties hereto as identified in the preamble of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary n this Agreement, it is not intended that any rights or interests in this Agreement benefit or flow to the interest of any third parties.
CITY OF NEWMAN
A municipal corporation
Michael E. Holland
City Manager
Date: , 2023
ATTEST:
Mike Maier, City Clerk
Date: , 2023
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Nubia Goldstein
City Attorney
Date: , 2023
CSG, CONSULTING
Cyrus Kianpour,
President
Date: ____ , 2023
Exhibit 'A'
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY CONSULTANT
1.1. As requested by and on behalf of the City and as needed to accomplish Building Permit/Inspections, Consultant shall maintain, at its sole cost and expense, an office staffed with sufficient Building Permit Inspection, Plan Checking and Permit issuance services in a timely manner. Said office to be located within City.
1.2. Consultant shall submit for approval by City the forms for use for Building Permit application and Building Permit. Consultant shall provide approved forms for use during the Agreement.
1.3. Consultant shall prepare all Building Permits and related paper work to be submitted to the City for collection of the Permit Fees.
1.4. Consultant shall perform all plan checks for compliance to all applicable local codes, and state and federal building codes.
1.5. All inspections required shall be completed by the Consultant within One (1) working day of a request therefore by any permit holder for any work which requires a Building Permit.
1.6. Consultant further agrees to perform all applicable inspections so that the structures inspected will conform to the local, state and federal building codes and regulations governing such properties.
1. 7. Consultant shall certify in writing that each inspection performed and authorized as complete conforms with all applicable local, state and federal building codes, ordinances, regulations and requirements, and that the work is in conformity with applicable approved plans and specifications.
1.8. Consultant shall, at the time of completing each inspection, record upon the appropriate building permit card, the results of the inspection. All building permit cards shall be returned to the City at the completion of the final inspection.
1.9. Consultant shall procure all permits and licenses, as necessary, required to perform services under this Agreement and to conduct business.
1.10. In the event a STOP ORDER is determined by the Consultant to be appropriate and necessary, Consultant shall immediately notify the City Manager or a designee of the circumstances and conditions and upon verification to the Building Official's satisfaction that such an order is necessary, the order shall be carried out by the Consultant.
1.11. The employees shall dress in a professional manner at all times while conducting business as the City Building Department. Employee's dress shall be kept in a clean and appropriate manner.
1.12. The Consultant shall perform any additional Building Permit/Inspection work as may be required from time to time as would normally be expected as a standard function of a Building Department. Authorization to proceed from the Chief Building Official or designee must be secured by the prior to performing any such additional work Exhibit 'B'
FEE SCHEDULE
Exhibit 'C'
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSULT ANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, its agents, representatives, or employees.
MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an "occurrence" basis for bodily injury and property damage, includingproductscompleted operations, personal injury and advertising injury, with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if CONSULTANT has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and 9 (non-owned), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
(Not required if CONSULTANT provides written verification it has no employees) 4 Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance appropriates to the CONSULTANT's profession, with limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate.
If the CONSULT ANT maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the Entity requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the Entity.
Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
Additional Insured Status The CITY, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the auto policy with respect to liability arising out of automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the CONSULT ANT; and on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the CONSULT ANT including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the CONSULTANT's insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10, 11 85 or both CG 20 10 and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used).
Primary Coverage For any claims related to this contract, the CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
Notice of Cancellation Each insurance policy required above shall state that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the Entity.
Waiver of Subrogation CONSULT ANT hereby grants to CITY a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said CONSULT ANT may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. CONSULT ANT agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the CITY has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the CITY. The CITY may require the CONSULTANT to provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention.
Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the CITY.
Claims Made Policies If any of the required policies provide coverage on a claims-made basis:
1. The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the CONSULT ANT must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
Verification of Coverage CONSULT ANT shall furnish the CITY with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the CONSULT ANT' s obligation to provide them. The CITY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.
Subcontractors CONSULT ANT shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and CONSULT ANT shall ensure that CITY is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors.
Special Risks or Circumstances CITY reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Newman City Council
Agenda Item: 1 O.a.
City Council Meeting
of September 12, 2023
ADOPT THE CEQA ADDENDUM ADDRESSING CHANGES TO THE NCCA WETLAND PROJECT FOLLOWING CIRCULATION OF THE MARCH 2021 NCCA MASTER PLAN INITIAL STUDY RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution 2023-, adopting the Addendum to the Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan Initial Study analyzing impacts of changes to the design of the Newman Community Conservation Area (NCCA) wetland project.
BACKGROUND:
Newman Community Conservation Area and NCCA Wetland Project Located on two City-owned parcels southeast oflnyo Avenue and Canal School Road and totaling just over 100 acres, the NCCA will offer a community and environmental amenity for improved water and air quality, habitat resources, and greenhouse gas (GHG) sequestration, and will provide recreational and educational opportunities not currently available in the Newman area. Three of the four projects planned for the NCCA have been funded by external grants; of these, two are currently under construction, and the third is entering the design phase. Funding is being sought for the fourth project.
In 2020 - early 2021, as part of an extensive multi-year planning process, the Public Works Department developed a Master Plan to guide the evolution of the NCCA. The Master Plan envisions four separate but complementary projects at the NCCA.
• The NCCA wetland project, funded by a grant from the California Department offish and Wildlife, will restore approximately 11 acres of seasonal wetland, riparian, and native grassland habitat, with an emphasis on natural sequestration of greenhouse gases (GHGs). It will substantially improve wildlife opportunities at the NCCA site, and will offer visual benefits for users of trails at the NCCA, constructed under other projects. This project is under construction as of summer 2023 and will be substantially complete by fall of this year • The Newman Environmental Wetland System (NEWS) project will create an approximately 21-acre constructed wetland complex to treat the City's stormwater and dry season runoff, which is currently discharged without treatment into the Newman Wasteway and, ultimately, the San Joaquin River. O&M access roads at the NEWS project will be opened to the public for walking, jogging, bicycling, and nature watching.
Funded by a grant from the State Water Resources Control Board, the NEWS project is also under construction as of summer 2023, with completion anticipated in 2024
• The Newman Nature Park will focus on community-oriented amenities such as a gathering plaza, outdoor classrooms, and nature-themed play areas, as well as demonstration gardens and bilingual English/Spanish interpretive signage. It will also offer a multi-use trail system linking the NCCA projects together. Design of the Newman Nature Park is beginning in 2023, funded by a grant from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund and informed by input from extensive outreach to the Newman community • The Miller Ditch Treatment Wetland project will provide an additional 16 acres of constructed wetlands to treat water from the Miller Ditch with a focus on removing agricultural pollutants. O&M access roads at this project are also expected to double as a public trail system, connecting with the NEWS and Nature Park trails. The Miller Ditch Treatment Wetland is being developed in collaboration with the Environmental Systems Graduate Group at the UC Merced Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, with substantial student involvement. Funding to further development and implementation of this project is being sought.
Circulation of Prior CEQA Document
In March - April 2021, consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City circulated an Initial Study (State Clearinghouse #2021030323) analyzing the impacts of adopting the NCCA Master Plan and proceeding with the four projects planned for the NCCA. This was a combined program/project level document since the NCCA projects were at varying levels of design. 1 The two projects that were farthest along-the wetland project and the NEWS project- were analyzed to the project level. The Newman Nature Park 1 Project-level analysis is specific and detailed, enabling prompt implementation. Program-level analysis is less detailed and may not be adequate to support project approval. The intent in bringing all four NCCA projects before the public in a single CEQA document was to provide the most comprehensive possible picture of the NCCA vision and projects, their impacts, and their benefits.
Agenda Item: 1 O.a.
and Miller Ditch Treatment Wetland projects were analyzed to the program level since less information on them was available. In May 2021, following consideration of public comments, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (Attachment 3) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) (Attachment 4) for the NCCA Master Plan and projects, as well as formally adopting the Master Plan itself.
Changes to Design of Wetland Project
Analysis of wetland project impacts in the March 2021 IS was based on the then-current 30% design. As design moved forward, studies conducted in summer 2021 for the 60% design milestone brought new information that resulted in several important improvements to the design.
Attachment 1 compares the 30% and 60% designs. As the figures in the attachment show, both designs focus on the "Central Swale", a disconnected remnant tributary feature that crosses the 78-acre NCCA parcel and extends east across intervening privately owned lands to the north end of the 24-acre NCCA parcel. Under both designs, water diverted from the Miller Ditch would be used to support enhanced and restored wetland habitat within the Central Swale and establishment ofriparian vegetation south of the Central Swale on the 78-acre parcel. Both designs also include enhancement of wetlands on the central and south portion of the 24-acre parcel.
Key changes between the 30% and 60% milestones include
• more extensive recontouring in the Central Swale area to improve wetland enhancement and reestablishment
• addition of an outlet allowing return flow from the Central Swale on the 78-acre parcel to the Miller Ditch • more extensive work at the Central Swale inlet/outlet on the 24-acre parcel to improve hydrologic communication with the Miller Ditch
These changes combined to result in a substantial increase in grading yardages under the 60% design. In addition, the 60% design refined the concepts for the inlet to the Central Swale on the 78-acre parcel and fill of existing gaps in the berm along the 24-acre parcel to block tailwater spillover and restore natural, seasonally appropriate ponding durations in wetland on the central/south portion of the parcel. Minor changes to the planting palette were also introduced at the 60% milestone, based on studies of reference wetlands at Great Valley Grasslands State Park.
Changes in the project are discussed in more detail beginning on page 5 of the Addendum, provided as Attachment
2. Relevant CEQA Requirements
When a project is modified following certification of an Environmental Impact Report or adoption of an MND, the State of California's CEQA Guidelines require follow-up analysis. The key questions are whether the project changes would result in new Significant impacts or would substantially increase the severity of the originally identified impacts, and if new "information of substantial importance" shows one or more new or substantially increased Significant effects not discussed in the original document (Guidelines Section 15162). If any of these conditions is met, a Subsequent or Supplemental environmental document is required, depending on the level of revision required to bring the original document current. Both Subsequent and Supplemental documents are subject to the same noticing and public review process as the original environmental document. If the project is modified, but the changes do not rise to a level triggering Subsequent or Supplemental analysis, an Addendum to the prior document is prepared. The Addendum is not circulated for public review, but must be considered by the lead agency prior to making a decision on the project (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, 15164).
ANALYSIS:
In late fall 2021, the Public Works Department requested that their environmental consultant evaluate the environmental effects of the changes in the wetland project design to assess whether circulation of a Subsequent or Supplemental environmental document was warranted.
This evaluation considered all CEQA resource topics, including those for which the original NCCA Master Plan Initial Study had determined that the wetland project would have No Impact. Since no circumstances surrounding the project had changed, analysis prioritized (1) identifying any new Significant environmental impacts not disclosed in the March 2021 Initial Study, and (2) assessing the potential for a substantial increase in the severity of any of the originally identified impacts. As in the March 2021 Initial Study, analysis was guided by the sample Initial Study checklist provided in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, but also considered specifics not included in the sample checklist where they were relevant. Analysis was conducted consistent with the requirements of the CEQA statute, the CEQA Guidelines, and prevailing standards of practice for each resource topic.
Agenda Item: 1 O.a.
Analysis determined that
• none of the proposed project changes would result in new or substantially increased Significant environmental impacts
• no new information of substantial importance was available that would change the conclusions of the March 2021 Initial Study
Analysis therefore concluded that no further CEQA analysis was warranted, and that no new mitigation was needed. Public Works accordingly elected to finalize the analysis in the form of an Addendum to the March 2021 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment 2).
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact to the General Fund at this time. Adopting this Addendum to the NCCA Master Plan Initial Study would not alter the cost of constructing or operating the wetland project in any way from the costs already approved by City Council in April 2023.
CONCLUSION:
Public Works considered the 2022 Addendum along with the 2021 Initial Study in deciding whether to recommend the wetland project to City Council for approval in April 2023, and now respectfully requests that City Council formally adopt the Addendum.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibit comparing wetland project 30% and 60% designs
2. NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design -Addendum to May 2021 MND (February 2022)
3. Mitigated Negative Declaration, Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan (May 12, 2021)
4. Resolution 2023-, adopting the Addendum to the NCCA Master Plan Initial Study INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:
Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration inclusive of technical appendices (March 2021), available at: https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2021030323 .
Respectfully Submitted,
Director of
yes Public ~ Works
REVIEWED/CONCUR:
Michael E. Holland
City Manager
Figure 1a. Wetland Project 30% Design Analyzed in March 2021 IS Figure 1 b. Wetland Project 60% Design Analyzed in February 2022 Addendum Legend
Existing Features D Approximate parcel boundary
0 Existing jurisdictional features
30% Design Habitat Zones
• Marsh enhancement (1.41 acres)
Seasonal wetland reestablishment (0.14 acre)
Legend
D Marsh reestablishment (1.8 acres)
Seasonal wetland reestablishment (5.7 acres)
D Ephemeral wetland enhancement (3.4 acres)
~ Limits of grading (8.2 acres)
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
This document is an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) adopted by the City of Newman (City) for the Newman Community Conservation Area (NCCA) Master Plan and projects in May 2021. It addresses changes in the design of the NCCA wetland project-one of four separate and independent but complementary projects planned for the NCCA-subsequent to adoption of the MND. Approval of this Addendum signifies that the City has concluded that
• changes to the wetland project since adoption of the May 2021 MND would not result in new Significant environmental impacts
• changes to the wetland project since adoption of the May 2021 MND would not substantially increase the severity of the originally identified Significant impacts • there have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the wetland project since adoption of the May 2021 MND that would result in new or substantially increased Significant impacts • no new information of substantial importance that indicates new or substantially increased Significant impacts as a result of the wetland project has become available since adoption of the May 2021 MND This Addendum has been slightly updated from the version prepared in December 2021 to reflect minor changes in the project as it moves toward 100% design.
Contents of this Addendum
This document contains the following information; please note that this PDF file is bookmarked for easier navigation.
• Background on the NCCA, including
- an overview of the City's vision for the NCCA and the need for the NCCA - a brief history of the NCCA planning and project development process - a summary of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for the NCCA projects • A description of the wetland project as currently envisioned, highlighting changes since the previously analyzed 30% design
• A review of impacts under each CEQA resource topic, with updated analysis and findings for the wetland project 60% design; see bookmarks for individual resource topics • A list of references cited in this Addendum
~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
1 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
• A list of acronyms and abbreviations used in this Addendum The Attachment to this Addendum provides the full text of all environmental measures adopted for the wetland project. This includes Avoidance and Minimization Measures (AMMs) laid out in the NCCA Master Plan (City of Newman 2021 a) and additional measures to mitigate Significant impacts identified during the first round of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review in March -April 2021 (City of Newman 2021 b, 2021c).
Appendix A provides updated air quality modeling for construction of the 60% design.
Background
NCCA Overview
Figure 1 shows the location of the NCCA site, which comprises two parcels just outside City limits in unincorporated Merced County: a 78-acre parcel at the southeast corner of Canal School Road and Inyo Avenue (APNs 054-050-019, 054-050-020) and a nearby 24-acre parcel northeast of Brazo Road (APN 054-05- 010). Four projects are planned at the NCCA (Figure 2) (City of Newman 2021 a). This Addendum focuses on the wetland project; information on the other projects is provided here to put the wetland project in context within the NCCA.
• The wetland project emphasizes natural sequestration of greenhouse gases (GHGs). It is planned to extend from the central portion of the 78-acre parcel to the 24-acre parcel, enhancing and reestablishing approximately 11 acres of emergent marshland, seasonal wetland, riparian habitat, and native grassland
• The NEWS project would create an approximately 21-acre constructed wetland complex located in the northwest portion of the 78-acre parcel, to treat currently untreated stormwater and dry season runoff from the City and surrounding agricultural lands prior to discharge to the Newman Wasteway and San Joaquin River. Operations and maintenance (O&M) access at NEWS would be opened to the public for walking, jogging, and bicycling
• The Newman Nature Park project, focused in the southeast portion of the 78-acre parcel, is being planned with community input and may include a wide range of facilities such as a community gathering plaza, outdoor classroom areas, a nature-themed play area, and native plant, rainwise garden, and lowimpact development demonstration areas, as well as an unpaved trail network and interpretive signage to enable non-motorized public recreational access
• The Miller Ditch Treatment Wetland (MDTW) project, located in the southwest portion of the 78-acre parcel, is an additional approximately 16-acre constructed wetland project being planned in collaboration with the Environmental Systems Graduate Group at the University of California, Merced (UC Merced) Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. It focuses on treating water from the Miller Ditch to remove agricultural pollutants
Need for NCCA
Parklands and open spaces are a critical aspect of community livability, and the ability to connect with nature is increasingly understood as vital to mental and physical health. The City's General Plan begins with a Vision Statement that includes the following language (City of Newman 2007). 2 Redtail Consulting tJ;i
Environment & Community •
---
~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
c::::J City limit
Primary Sphere of Influence
Sphere of Influence -
. • --. • General Plan Planning Area
-. Waterway
NCCA parcels
0 0.25 0.5
MILE
Figure 1. Location of NCCA Site
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design -Addendum to May 2021 Adopted MND City of Newman
~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
Figure 2. Conceptual NCCA Site Layout
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design -Addendum to May 2021 Adopted MND City of Newman
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
There will be a range of activities available in Newman for all residents, including youth and seniors. Parks scattered throughout the city will provide ... facilities that promote community gatherings. A network of pedestrian trails and bike paths will connect residents to parks ...
Reflecting this commitment, a number of community and neighborhood parks are already available throughout the City, providing various types of conventional recreational and gathering facilities, including playgrounds, barbecue areas, dining areas, baseball and soccer fields, and basketball courts, as well as a community center, teen center, wading pool, and skateboard park. The City also has a number of mini-parks that serve their immediately surrounding neighborhoods with green space, picnic tables, and play structures.
However, city parks offer a different user experience and serve different functions than accessible areas of more natural open space. The closest parklands offering any type of natural open space experience range from about 4 to 17 miles away as the crow flies (farther by road), and none of them is specifically dedicated to natureoriented recreation or education. In addition, although the City has adopted a Non-Motorized Transportation Plan (City of Newman 2013) and has been working to expand and improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the Newman area still lacks regional trail systems that offer extended walking and bicycling opportunities. This need would be addressed in part by the network of trails at the NCCA, as well as by the NCCA's location adjacent to a Class I multi-use trail planned along Canal School Road from the City center, which the City considers a top priority.
Additionally, with the use of natural processes for stormwater and wastewater treatment becoming increasingly visible in recent decades, City staff have long held the vision that such applications would one day serve the Newman community, which currently discharges its stormwater and agricultural tailwater untreated into the Newman Wasteway and ultimately the San Joaquin River.
In this context, the NCCA is intended to meet three needs:
• providing treatment for the City's previously untreated stormwater and agricultural tailwater runoff prior to discharge into the Newman Wasteway and San Joaquin River • improving overall air, water, and habitat quality in the Newman area, as a benefit to the community, area wildlife, and the environment as a whole
• providing opportunities for nature-oriented open space recreation and nature education that are not currently available in the Newman area
Thus, in addition to providing long-term environmental benefit, the NCCA will fill an important gap in the recreational resources available to residents of the City and surrounding vicinity, along with opportunities for nature education that currently do not exist in the area. When completed, the NCCA will be a unique community and environmental resource-the first of its kind in the western San Joaquin Valley region.
CEQA Environmental Review - NCCA Master Plan & Projects To facilitate prompt and efficient implementation of each NCCA project as funding becomes available, a CEQA document analyzing the effects of all four projects was circulated in March -April 2021 (City of Newman 2021 b). This was a combined program/project-level Initial Study and Proposed Mitigation Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (State Clearinghouse #2021030323). The wetland and NEWS projects, the farthest along in the planning process, were analyzed to the project level. To the extent feasible with community dialogue still ~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
3 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
ongoing, the Newman Nature Park was also analyzed to the project level. The MDTW project was analyzed to a more general, programmatic level, with as much information as possible provided.
The MND for the NCCA Master Plan and projects was adopted by City Council on May 25, 2021, along with a Monitoring and Reporting Program including both the AMMs built into all of the NCCA projects and the CEQA mitigation measures identified through IS analysis (City of Newman 2021c). Notices of Determination were filed in both Merced County, where the NCCA site is located, and Stanislaus County, where the City itself is situated.
Analysis of wetland project impacts in the March 2021 IS (City of Newman 2021b)1 was based on the thencurrent 30% design. This Addendum addresses subsequent changes in the wetland project, which reached the 60% design milestone in late September 2021. As planning proceeds and more detail on the MDTW project becomes available, the City will likely need to conduct a second round of project-level CEQA review for the MDTW project. Additional CEQA review may also be needed for the Nature Park project.
CEQA Requirements & Decision to Prepare Addendum
It is not uncommon for projects to evolve following circulation of the project CEQA document. In many cases, CEQA analysis is conducted in parallel with project design, and later design stages may change details of a project such that additional environmental review is warranted.
Section 15162 of the state's CEQA Guidelines requires preparation and circulation of a Subsequent environmental document if major revisions to the original document are needed due to • changes to the project that would result in new Significant environmental impacts • changes to the project that would substantially increase the severity of the originally identified Significant impacts
• changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would result in new or substantially increased Significant impacts
• new "information of substantial importance" that was not incorporated in the original document and shows one or more new or substantially increased Significant effects not discussed in the original document
A Supplemental document is appropriate if any of the above conditions are met, but the revisions needed to the original document would be limited to "minor additions or changes" (CEQA Guidelines 15163[a][2]). Both Subsequent and Supplemental documents are subject to the same noticing and public review process as the original environmental document (Guidelines 15162[d], 15163[c]).
If revisions to an original document are needed as a result of changes in the project or surrounding conditions, but none of the conditions that trigger a Subsequent or Supplemental document apply, then the lead agency is required to prepare an Addendum if the original document was an Environmental Impact Report (Guidelines 15164[a]). An Addendum is also appropriate if the revisions needed to an adopted MND would be limited to "minor technical changes or additions" or if none of the conditions triggering a Subsequent document apply ( CEQA Guidelines 15164[b]). An Addendum is an internal document that does not undergo public circulation, 1 For brevity, the City of Newman (2021b) citation is omitted in subsequent references to the March 2021 IS. All references to the March 2021 IS are to City of Newman (2021 b). The NCCA Master Plan (City of Newman 2021 a) is also referenced without repeating the source citation in text that follows.
4 Redtail Consulting frii
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
but it can be included with or attached to the original document (Guidelines 15164[c]) and must be considered along with the original document in making a decision on the project (Guidelines 15164[d]).
Based on the analysis presented here, City staff have concluded that none of the conditions that would trigger a Subsequent or Supplemental document pertain to the wetland project, and the City has elected to finalize the analysis in the form of this Addendum. The Addendum will be attached to the original March 2021 IS and the May 2021-adopted MND and considered by City Council in deciding whether to approve construction of the wetland project. It will also be provided to state agencies that have permitting authority over the wetland project.
Changes in Project
Goals & Objectives
The goal and objectives of the wetland project remain unchanged. As identified in the NCCA Master Plan and the March 2021 IS, the goal of the wetland project is to restore a mosaic of wetland, riparian woodland, and native perennial grassland habitat, in order to sequester GHGs and other pollutants, restore and preserve rare habitat types for the benefit of plants and wildlife, contribute to public nature viewing and educational amenities for the City and surrounding area.
Specific objectives are to
• reestablish, rehabilitate, or enhance at least 10 acres of wetland habitat • plant and establish at least 50 trees of native species suitable to the site • restore at least 1 acre of native perennial grassland habitat Project Elements
As described in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project would involve the the majority of the central swale2 on the 78-acre parcel and extend to the 24-acre parcel. This is still true, although the project footprint and the relative extent of some of the restoration elements have changed somewhat. Figures 3 and 4 show the wetland project as envisioned in the 30% design and 60% design respectively. Table 1 summarizes restoration elements under the 30% and 60% designs.
Table 1. Changes in Wetland Project Restoration Elements Element 30% Design (March 2021 IS) 60% Design (Current) Emergent marsh enhancement and
reestablishment in central swale, both parcels
Seasonal wetland reestablishment
Native riparian tree plantings along central
swale, 78-acre parcel
Ephemeral wetland restoration/ reestablishment,
24-acre parcel
Native perennial grassland reestablishment, 78-
enhance: 0.993 acre
reestablish: 6 acres
0.14 acre
adjacent to central swale, 78-acre
parcel
50 trees
3.8 acres
at least 1 acre
1.8 acres total
5.7 acres
within central swale, both parcels
50 trees
3.4 acres
at least 1 acre
2 The central swale is a conspicuous remnant tributary of the San Joaquin River system, visible in the air photo base on Figure 2. It has been modified by grading and is now bermed at both ends and disconnected from the River by intervening cultivated lands. l'J"':.i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
5 I I ~~µ
PotE
30% Design H
Mar
DMar
Sea
DEph
Source: modified from Vollm
0 c
Enhance epheme,ral wetlands
3.8 acres
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
acre parcel
There have also been minor changes to the proposed plant palette based on further consideration of the reference wetlands at Great Valley Grasslands State Park. These are itemized in Table 2 on the next page, with additions to the plant palette shown in boldface.
Table 2. Changes in Wetland Project Plant Palette
Location 30% Design (March 2021 IS) 60% Design (Current) Emergent marsh and
seasonal wetlands in
central swale
Central swale riparian
areas
Ephemeral wetlands
Mexican rush (Juncus mexicanus)
common tule ( Schoenoplectus acutus)
broadleaf cattail ( T ypha latifolia)
western redbud ( Cercis occidenta/is)
black walnut (Jug/ans hindsil)
California sycamore (Platanus racemosa)
valley oak (Quercus lobata)
blue elderberry ( Sambucus nigra)
suitable inoculum from donor sites in project region
Perennial grasslands beardless wild rye (Elymus [Leymus] triticoides) meadow barley (Hordeum brachyantherum)
Parry's rough tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. rudis)* Disturbed upland soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus)
Mexican rush
water smartweed (Persicaria amphibia)
common tule
broadleaf cattail
western redbud
black walnut
California sycamore
Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontiij
valley oak
blue elderberry
saltgrass (Distichlis spicata)
alkali heath (Frankenia salina)
alkali sacaton ( Sporobolus airoides)
if available, suitable inoculum from donor sites in
project region
beardless wild rye
meadow barley
Parry's rough tarplant*
soft brome
areas Mediterranean barley (H. marinum) Mediterranean barley * Inclusion of Parry's rough tarplant is per adopted Mitigation Measure 810-1 (Protection and Recovery of Parry's Rough Tarp/ant at NCCA Site); see Table A-1 in Attachment for details
There have been no substantial changes to the methods proposed to obtain propagules/planting stock, although it is likely that there would be greater reliance on suitable nursery stock than was originally assumed.
Additionally, the March 2021 IS assumed that restoration of an appropriate native plant assemblage in enhanced ephemeral wetlands would rely entirely on inoculum from local donor wetlands, and use of at least some nursery stock is now assumed in these areas, for plantings of saltgrass, alkali heath, and alkali sacaton.
The City team has been in contact with land managers at Great Valley Grasslands State Park and San Luis National Wildlife Refuge as well as a private landowner in the vicinity of the community of Ingamar, and to date, no agreement about inoculum harvesting has been reached. If inoculum is used, it would likely be in smaller quantities than originally anticipated-on the order of 3 - 4 cubic yards maximum, rather than the 5 - 10 cubic yards assumed in the March 2021 IS.
Other key changes to the project since the 30% design include:
•
•
6 addition of an outlet allowing return flow from emergent marsh in the central swale on the 78-acre parcel to the Miller Ditch (see Figure 4 for location at northeast corner of parcel) an increase in total excavation volume from 550 cubic yards to 9,200 cubic yards, primarily reflecting Redtail Consulting l'!;i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
increased recontouring of the central swale on the 78-acre parcel, in addition to creation of the new outlet. Excess cut materials (those not reused onsite for reconfiguration of the central swale banks) are still planned for placement in the Newman Nature Park footprint, where they would be contoured to integrate them into the landscape and revegetated with a native seed mix for stabilization and aesthetic appearance as described in the March 2021 IS. No offhaul is planned, unless it is required to dispose of cut materials with mercury content in excess of 0.1 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) per adopted CEQA mitigation (see Measure C-1 in Attachment Table A-1 ). This is also consistent with the project as analyzed in the March 2021 IS
• slight adjustments to the overall project footprint due to the new outlet and changes in central swale grading
More detail on changes in key aspects of the wetland project is provided in the paragraphs that follow. Changes from the previously analyzed 30% design are called out, and where the project has not changed, this is also indicated.
Marsh Enhancement & Reestablishment
Excavation for marsh enhancement and reestablishment would be more extensive than the 30% design envisioned. It was originally thought that very little topographic modification would be needed and that emergent marsh enhancement and reestablishment could depend primarily on addition of water from the Miller Ditch.
Additional studies conducted for the 60% design have determined that recontouring of the central swale would also be needed.
Under the current 60% design, the central swale would be graded/excavated to broaden low areas and improve the configuration of the banks where they have previously been modified. About 1, 146 cubic yards of soil would be removed from the central swale for marsh enhancement and reestablishment. The maximum cut depth for swale improvements would be approximately 6 feet; average cut depth would be less than 0.5 foot. Finished side slopes following restoration would range from 40:1 to 9:1 (horizontal:vertical). Cut depths and finished slopes differ slightly, but not materially, from assumptions in the March 2021 IS.
To support the expanded area of emergent marsh, water supply from surface sources-the same as those identified in the March 2021 IS-would be used. In the next few years, water would be diverted directly into the west end of the central swale from the Miller Ditch, but when the MDTW project is completed, its outflow (treated Miller Ditch water) would serve the central swale as a long-term source for marshland supply. The direct inlet from the Miller Ditch to the central swale would likely be left in place to provide operational flexibility.
The new permanent inlets to the central swale have not changed in concept from the 30% design, but more detail is now available. The inlet to the west end of the central swale on the 78-acre parcel is planned as a v-shaped earthen weir. If armoring is required to prevent erosion (currently being assessed as the project moves from 60% design toward 100%), a pre-cast structure is preferred, to avoid the need to pour concrete in place. The trash rack would be located within the 78-acre parcel, inboard of the berm bordering the Ditch. On the 24-acre parcel, Miller Ditch water would be added to the central swale from the east end, out of the Miller Ditch via the existing ditch and weir, which would be expanded and reconfigured.
A key change since the 30% design is that flow is now planned to return to the Miller Ditch from the central swale on the 78-acre parcel; as analyzed in the March 2021 IS, no return flow was contemplated. The outlet from the 78-acre parcel would consist of a riser pipe with multiple orifices connected to an HOPE pipe that runs through the berm into the Miller Ditch. Additionally, to allow flow to reenter the Ditch in the event the riser pipe ~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
7 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
becomes obstructed between O&M visits, and to accommodate excess flows if necessary, an emergency spillway would be graded into the berm.
On the 24-acre parcel, Miller Ditch water would be added to the central swale from the east end, out of the Miller Ditch. A new inlet/outlet may be constructed; this is shown in Figure 4. Alternately, the existing ditch and weir may be expanded and reconfigured; the decision will be made as the project moves from 60% design to 100% design. The central swale would not be equipped with a separate outlet from the 24-acre parcel at this time; water diverted into this area of emergent marsh would primarily be taken up through evapotranspiration and infiltration, as previously planned.
During construction involving the banks of the Miller Ditch, the immediate work areas would be cofferdammed and dewatered, but cofferdams would be configured to allow flow in the Ditch to continue outside the work area.
The existing flow control structure along Canal School Road south of the proposed new inlet location and the Waterman valve at Canal School Road and Inyo Avenue would be used to regulate flow to an appropriate level.
Work within the Ditch would be limited to inlet/outlet construction and as such would be very short-term-no more than about 2 weeks total, shorter than originally assumed.
Over the long term, as described in the March 2021 IS, it is still the City's hope to reconnect the central swale between the 78-acre and 24-acre parcels, enabling throughgoing west-to-east flow similar to the historic condition of this disconnected tributary channel. In this long-term vision, water would be diverted from the Miller Ditch at the south end of the 78-acre parcel, move through the MDTW treatment wetlands, enter the west end of the central swale, and flow across both parcels, returning to the Miller Ditch at the north end of the 24-acre parcel, via the existing ditch and weir system to be reconfigured. This is outside the scope of the project as currently proposed and funded, and is not possible at the present time as the intervening parcel is privately owned and is under active cultivation. However, the City has had discussions with the landowner about the potential to purchase all or part of the parcel at some point in the future and will continue to explore a possible reconnection of the central swale if a purchase becomes feasible. Such a project would be subject to separate future CEQA review and resource agency permitting.
Riparian Plantings
The plan for riparian plantings has not changed materially since the 30% design. At least 50 riparian trees from the project planting list would be planted in suitable locations along the south side of the central swale, both inside and outside the wetland area. The intent is to create a broad vegetated marsh lined with riparian trees in a quasi-riparian corridor. Riparian plantings would provide habitat benefit even if it never becomes possible to reconnect the central swale, and would become part of the reestablished tributary reach if and when the swale can be reconnected.
Perennial Grassland Reestablishment
The plan for native perennial grassland reestablishment is also materially unchanged from the 30% design.
Native grassland would be reestablished in disturbed upland areas surrounding the reestablished wetlands on the 78-acre parcel. Selected portions of these disturbed areas totaling at least 1 acre would be broadcastseeded with a native grass seed mix composed primarily of beardless wild rye and meadow barley, and also including Parry's rough tarplant, per adopted Mitigation Measure 810-1 (see Attachment Table A-1).
Ephemeral Wetland Enhancement
The 24-acre parcel currently supports approximately 3.8 acres of former ephemeral wetland habitat that has been degraded by physical disturbance, addition of unseasonable summer irrigation water to improve grazing, 8 Redtail Consulting l'!:i
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
and irrigation tailwater runoff from the privately owned parcel to the west. The overall vision for restoration in these areas remains the same as the 30% design. Restoration would consist primarily of discontinuing unseasonable irrigation by repairing the berm between the 24-acre parcel and neighboring irrigated fields, to block irrigation runoff.3 Several existing pipes through the berm may also need to be capped.
To speed up recolonization by native species, portions of the restored ephemeral wetland pools would be scraped to remove competing non-native vegetation, seeded with inoculum collected from extant ephemeral wetlands in the region (if available), and planted with container stock of the species added to the 60% plant palette. Grading in this area is still expected to be very limited; no more than about 50 cubic yards of soil would be removed, with a focus on removing invasive species such as Bermuda grass ( Cynodon dactylon), which is pervasively present and highly competitive with native species. Side slopes and pool depths would remain at approximately their current elevations. No on- or off-site water flow is expected in this area; all precipitation onto this area should remain in place and infiltrate or evaporate over the course of weeks to months, as in natural ephemeral wetland systems.
As noted above, it has been difficult to finalize a source for inoculum, and no more than 3 - 4 cubic yards would be used if it can be obtained, as discussed above. lnoculum harvesting is still assumed to rely on mowing and vacuuming to minimize disturbance to donor wetlands, rather than using a bulldozer or other heavy equipment to scrape the soil surface. If available, inoculum would be spread in the restored pools at the beginning of the wet season, ideally just before a heavy rain, which would help to prevent inoculum blowing away before germination.
Project Construction
General requirements for project construction remain unchanged from the 30% design. Like all City Public Works undertakings, construction of the wetland project will be required to conform with applicable portions of the City's current Improvement Standards and Standard Details and with the City's adopted building code, which is the 2019 version of the California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24 ).
Construction hours will be limited by General Plan Policy HS-6.9 to the hours between 7 AM and 7 PM on weekdays and 8 AM to 7 PM on Saturdays (City of Newman 2007). Night and weekend work is not anticipated, but if it becomes necessary, the City expects to provide advance written notice to neighboring landowners and residents, and additional traffic control provisions from the Improvement Standards will be in effect for roadway safety where appropriate.
Additionally, as described in the March 2021 IS, all contractor activity will be required to conform to the AMMs adopted by the City for the NCCA projects, and to the City's adopted CEQA mitigation measures (see Table A-1 in the Attachment to this Addendum).
Construction Process
The overall construction process, construction equipment use, and construction staffing would be very similar to what is described in the March 2021 IS. Table 3 provides an overview, and identifies changes from the project as previously analyzed.
3 The March 2021 IS assumed restoration of all 3.8 acres of ephemeral wetland habitat since square footages for berm fill were not yet available. The restoration acreage given in Table 1 for the 60% design (3.4 acres) takes into account minor reduction in acreage due to filling the gaps in the berm.
IP!.:i Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
9 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Table 3. Wetland Project Construction
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
Construction Phase Equipment Staffing
1: Grading and Civil Construction
[Grading and Civil Construction were
previously two separate phases]
• Recontour central swale to broaden
low areas
• Excavate seasonal wetland area to
create wetland swales
• Scrape ephemeral wetland area to
remove invasive nonnative
vegetation and seed bank
• Redistribute and contour spoils
within Newman Nature Park
footprint
• On 78-acre parcel, construct new
inlet from Miller Ditch at west end of
central swale and new outlet to
Miller Ditch at east end of central
swale
• On 24-acre parcel, construct new
inlet weir connecting east end of
central swale to existing Miller Ditch
connection
2: Live Plant Material Collection
Collect up to 100 propagules (stakes)
from locally native live plant materials at
nearby donor site
(All aspects of this phase unchanged)
3: Planting
Install cuttings and/or container stock
onsite per project plans; revegetate
upland areas via seeding
(All aspects of this phase unchanged)
4: lnoculum Collection
Collect vernal pool inoculum from donor
site by surface vacuuming
(All aspects of this phase unchanged)
5: lnoculum Spreading
Spread inoculum in vernal pool areas
(All aspects of this phase unchanged)
Contractor Staging
Grading
4 - 6 pieces of heavy equipment
anticipated onsite (increased from 3 - 5
pieces of equipment; types of
equipment unchanged):
• Self-loading scraper(s)
• Dozer(s) (small, likely Caterpillar
D8 or equivalent)
• Small excavator or backhoe
• Water truck
• Survey gear (traditional groundbased and drone)
Civil Construction
1 - 2 small loaders (Cat 930)
1 - 2 medium excavators (Cat 326)
Hand tools
Pickup truck
Trailer
Pickup truck
Skid-steer
Skid-steer mounted trencher
ATV-mounted rakes and seeders
Hand tools
Ride-on vacuum
Tractor with mower attachment
Pickup truck
Trailer
Pickup truck
Hand tools
Grading
Contractor staff (equipment operators,
laborers): 3 - 8
Qualified biologists, design staff: 1 - 2
Construction management staff: 1 - 2,
intermittent
Civil Construction
Equipment operators: 2 - 4
Laborers/carpenters: 4 - 6
(Staffing unchanged)
Qualified biologists: 2 - 4
Contractor staff (laborers): 1 - 3
Qualified biologists: 1 - 4
Qualified biologist permitted to handle
special-status fairy shrimp: 1
Laborers: 1 - 2
Qualified biologists: 1 - 2
Laborers: 1 - 2
Due to modifications in the restoration plan for emergent marsh in the central swale, staging locations have changed from those described in the March 2021 IS. Originally, staging for construction activities on the 78-acre parcel was expected to occur in the southeast corner of the parcel (future footprint of the Newman Nature Park community center and/or parking area), with access from Brazo Road. Limited staging for work on the 24-acre parcel was planned either for north portion of the parcel (north of the central swale) or the south portion of the 10 Redtail Consulting l'r.i
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
parcel, with access to the north staging area along the Miller Ditch levee and/or access to the south staging area along the Newman Wasteway service road.
Staging for wetland project construction activities is still planned to occur in two locations to minimize the need for access across the interior of the NCCA parcels. One staging area would now be located at the southwest corner of the 78-acre parcel, within the future footprint of the MDTW project. This location offers good access from Canal School Road and Brazo Road, and is convenient to the location of the new inlet from the Miller Ditch as well as the western portion of the central swale, where grading would be needed to enhance emergent marsh and seasonal wetland habitat. The second staging area would be located on the Miller Ditch berm adjacent to the northwest corner of the 24-acre parcel, with access by permission of the private property owner.
This location is convenient to the wetland project outlet from the 78-acre parcel and to the east 78-acre parcel and 24-acre parcel portions of the central swale.
At both staging areas, AMMs (see Attachment Table A-1) would be in place to exclude entry into neighboring wetlands and the Miller Ditch, except for permitted construction activity. Protection would also be put in place for existing populations of Parry's rough tarplant (see Measure 810-1 in Table A-1 ). These commitments are consistent with assumptions made in the March 2021 IS.
Construction Schedule
Table 4 lays out the anticipated schedule for wetland project construction by phase; note that if inoculum cannot be obtained, phases (4) and (5) would be omitted. The overall schedule is very similar to that assumed in the March 2021 IS, although by agreement with DFW construction is now planned to start in June 2022 rather than the September 2021 start date assumed in the March 2021 IS.
Table 4. Anticipated Wetland Project Construction Schedule Construction Phase Timing
1: Grading and Civil Construction
2: Live Plant Material Collection
3: Planting
4: lnoculum Collection
5: lnoculum Spreading
June 1 - July 15, 2022
Grading -4 weeks, civil construction -2 weeks (note that civil construction was presumed to last 1 month in March 2021 IS)
July 19 - October 15, 2022
Planting will be timed to coincide with forecast of upcoming rainy weather, and will take place following plant material collection, between October 15 and December 31, 2022.
Duration of planting activities is expected to be 3 - 10 days During dry season following planting (March 15 - October 15, 2023). Duration of collection activities is expected to be 1 - 3 days
Following inoculum collection, during dry season 2023; duration of inoculum spreading activities is expected to be 1 - 2 days
Project Operations & Maintenance
Overview
Assumptions regarding project O&M have changed very little from the March 2021 IS. The primary difference is that the new outlet from the central swale on the 78-acre parcel (not previously included in the project) would require periodic inspection and maintenance. The trash rack at the inlet to the 78-acre parcel, not previously discussed, would also require periodic cleaning and could require maintenance over the long term. However, these activities would be incorporated into the overall schedule of O&M inspections and maintenance, and ~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
11 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
would not materially change the level of effort. More information is also available on activities previously analyzed, although their nature and frequency has not changed.
As the March 2021 IS describes, because of the project's proximity to roadways and (over the longer term) recreational uses, the trash rack serving the west inlet from the Miller Ditch would require inspection and cleaning, and routine trash removal would probably be required elsewhere on the site as well. This is expected to be carried out by City staff in conjunction with NEWS project and/or Newman Nature Park inspections and trash removal, and could occur as often as daily, depending on need. Each visit would involve a maximum of 2 - 3 staff and 1 - 2 vehicles.
Over the long term, grazing or other vegetation management is expected to be important for the health of the restored vernal pools and ephemeral wetlands, as discussed in more detail below. In the short and mid-term immediately following restoration, grazing animals would need to be excluded from portions of the restoration area to protect the perennial grasslands and tree plantings as they become established. Depending on the final project design, either barbed-wire fencing or movable electric fencing may be installed to protect these habitats during establishment.
Once the wetland project has become fully established, it is expected to require very little O&M activity since it is being designed to restore functional habitat appropriate to the site's regional and local watershed context as well as soil and hydrologic conditions onsite. However, the inlets/outlets would need to be inspected, operated, and maintained. Overall visual inspection of project condition would be performed at the same time. Inspections and operational visits would occur seasonally, and would typically involve 1 - 2 City vehicles and a maximum of 2 - 3 staff. Maintenance would be more infrequent. All visits could be combined with other O&M activity at the site for greater efficiency.
As foreseen in the March 2021 IS, irrigation has been discontinued on the NCCA parcels, and no new irrigation is planned, with the exception of landscape irrigation in the NEWS project gateway area and in the Newman Nature Park community area, and temporary watering of wetland project restoration plantings to ensure establishment. With wetland hydrology restored to a more natural condition and the marsh area fed by Miller Ditch/MDTW project flows as well as rainfall and direct inflow, irrigation per se should not be necessary in the restored wetlands over the long term.4
Seasonal Diversions into Central Swale
As noted in the March 2021 IS, seasonal diversions into the central swale would be necessary to sustain the expanded area of emergent marsh. To provide input to the 78-acre parcel before the MDTW project comes online, the existing Waterman valve on the Miller Ditch just upstream of Inyo Avenue would be used to backwater the Ditch until the new inlet weir spills into the swale. Backwatering would be temporary and would be timed to provide input in the wet season to mimic natural hydrology. As a result, it should not pose a problem for downstream agricultural users, who primarily use Miller Ditch ftow during the warm dry months of the year.
Details of the inlet from the MDTW project will be developed as the UC Merced team moves ahead with project design in coming years, and are not available at this time, but will be covered in a separate future review if warranted. As noted above, the Miller Ditch diversion could be removed when MDTW project supply becomes available, but would likely remain in service to provide operational flexibility; if so, it would continue to be inspected and maintained on a routine basis.
4 Diversions from the Miller Ditch and, later, the MDTW project to support expansion of emergent marsh in the central swale are discussed above.
12 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
The inlet/outlet to the central swale on the 24-acre would be entirely passive and would not require active operation. It would, however, be inspected routinely, and would be maintained as needed. Seasonal high flows in the Miller Ditch would result in spillover into the central swale; the marsh habitat on the 24-acre parcel would therefore receive the majority of its input during the summer months and larger winter storm events.
Grazing Management
Concurrent with CEQA analysis, the City has been developing a Grazing Management Plan for review and approval by DFW, under the terms of the grant funding the wetland project. The details are consistent with assumptions made in the March 2021 IS, as follows.
• Over the long term, grazing is expected to continue within at least parts of the wetland project footprint, although it would likely be discontinued on the remainder of the NCCA site • The Grazing Management Plan will limit grazing use to a level that can be sustained without irrigation, to avoid overgrazing while still providing for invasive species control and fuel load reduction to decrease fire risk
• With unseasonable irrigation on the NCCA parcels discontinued in 2020, both the overall duration and the extent of grazing would both be reduced following restoration, although the number of animals per unit area may be increased at times
• Grazing would be excluded from the riparian tree planting areas until the newly planted trees are sufficiently established to withstand the presence of grazing animals, with most foliage above browse height and trunks strong enough to withstand animal rubbing • Grazing may be completely excluded from the perennial grassland area, or may be allowed under a schedule that maximizes the competitiveness of native perennial grasses • Grazing of the restored vernal pools, ephemeral wetlands, and surrounding uplands would likely be limited to winter months when cool-season grasses are actively growing under the site's natural rainfall regime. Summer grazing would likely be discontinued as the lack of forage on unirrigated grassland could drive animals to damage restoration plantings and infrastructure • Corrals for grazing animals may be provided in the vicinity of the Newman Nature Park parking area, with an access route into the wetland project defined by fencing or another appropriate medium • The Grazing Management Plan will provide for ongoing monitoring and adaptive management to maximize the efficacy of the new regime
Preservation of Habitat
There has been no change to the City's commitment to long-term preservation of all habitat restored and created at the NCCA. In particular, as noted in the March 2021 IS, the conditions of the DFW grant funding the wetland project require that habitat be protected for a minimum of 50 years. This has not changed.
Adopted Environmental Measures
Like all of the NCCA projects, the wetland project would incorporate a suite of AM Ms to reduce the potential for adverse effects on sensitive habitats, water bodies, and the special-status plants and wildlife that may be present on the NCCA parcels. It would also be subject to CEQA mitigation requirements identified in the March 2021 IS. Both the AMMs and the CEQA mitigation measures were formally adopted by the City in May 2021. ~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
13 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
There has been no change to either the AMMs or the CEQA mitigation measures since their adoption, and no change from the versions incorporated into March 2021 IS analysis.
AMMs and CEQA mitigation measures are presented in full in the Attachment to this Addendum. Analysis presented below assumed incorporation of the AM Ms and adopted CEQA mitigation measures into the wetland project as updated by the 60% design.
Review of CEQA Resource Topics
The sections that follow assess the impacts of the wetland project as currently planned (60% design level) and compare impacts to those disclosed for the 30% design in the March 2021 IS. The goal of this assessment was to determine whether any of the factors necessitating a Subsequent or Supplemental CEQA document pertain.
There have been no material changes to the "circumstances surrounding the project" ( CEQA Guidelines 15162[a][2]); consequently, per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162[a][1] and 15162[a][3], assessment focused primarily on changes to the project itself and new information from studies conducted since the preparation of the March 2021 IS, although background conditions are noted where relevant.
Analysis specifically sought to identify
• any new Significant environmental impacts not disclosed in the March 2021 IS • the potential for a substantial increase in the severity of any of the originally identified impacts Consistent with the March 2021 IS and standard CEQA practice, this Addendum uses the following terminology to describe impact severity.
• Potentially Significant Impact - It is reasonably foreseeable (that is, substantial evidence suggests) that the proposed project would alter conditions from the existing pre-project baseline condition, and the change would be substantial or important enough to exceed a threshold of significance representing the level at which an impact becomes a concern • Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated - The proposed project's impact would be significant, but mitigation measures will be adopted to lessen the effect, reducing it below the threshold of significance, and therefore below the level of concern. Where this finding is made, the specific mitigation measures from the March 2021 IS are referenced; no new mitigation is identified in this Addendum
• Less than Significant Impact - It is reasonably foreseeable that the proposed project would alter conditions from the pre-project baseline condition, but the change would be small enough to fall below the threshold of significance
• No Impact - The proposed project would not materially change conditions from the existing pre-project baseline condition
• Beneficial Impact or Benefit - The proposed project would improve conditions by comparison with the pre-project baseline
As in the March 2021 IS, analysis was guided by the sample Initial Study checklist provided in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, and considered all resource topics and questions in the sample checklist. Specifics not included in the Appendix G sample checklist were also considered where relevant. Analysis was conducted consistent with 14 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
the requirements of CEQA, the state's CEQA Guidelines, and prevailing standards of practice for each resource topic. Analysis and findings represent the City's independent judgment as lead agency under CEQA.
Aesthetics
Review of Impacts
Based on analysis in the March 2021 IS, the City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impacts related to aesthetics. With mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, as explained below.
• Potential for adverse effects on a scenic vista, construction period. Neither the City nor the County of Merced has officially designated scenic vistas, although the County General Plan (County of Merced 2013) recognizes the importance of scenic resources and includes a goal and policies for their protection. Because of their open, agricultural character, lands at and surrounding the NCCA site are considered among the scenic resources protected under County General Plan Goal NR-4 (Protect Scenic Resources) and Policy NR-4.1, which explicitly identifies agricultural and ranch lands as meriting protection on aesthetic grounds.
As detailed in the March 2021 IS, project construction would temporarily disrupt visual intactness and unity due to the disturbance associated with vegetation removal and grading, along with the presence and activity of heavy equipment and construction crews and the need for materials and equipment staging. Disruption would be broadly similar to, but much more intensive than, the disruption caused by routine agricultural grading, and would be perceptually exacerbated by being "out of place" in the visual landscape, unlike agricultural grading and cultivation activities. The City has adopted two mitigation measures to address this: Mitigation Measure AES-1 (Construction Site Housekeeping and Visual Screening) and Mitigation Measure AES-2 (Visual Disturbance Coordinator) (see Attachment Table A1). With these measures incorporated, and in light of their temporary duration, impacts associated with the 30% design were evaluated as Less than Significant.
Visual disruption associated with the 60% design would increase by comparison with the 30% design because substantially more grading would be required. The nature of the disruption would remain the same, however, and equipment usage would increase only very slightly (see Table 3), and neither the overall duration of construction nor the duration of the grading phase would increase (see Table 4).
Impacts under the 60% design are therefore not considered substantially increased, and with Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AES-2 incorporated, impacts are still expected to be Less than Significant, particularly since they would be temporary and fairly short-term. • Potential to degrade visual character or quality of public views, construction period. As discussed above, there would be some potential for visual disruption during project construction. The City will address this by implementing Mitigation Measure AES-1 (Construction Site Housekeeping and Visual Screening) and Mitigation Measure AES-2 (Visual Disturbance Coordinator). With these measures in place, construction-period impacts related to degradation of the character or quality of public views were evaluated as Less than Significant for the 30% design. As noted above, construction period visual disruption associated with the 60% design would increase as compared to the 30% design, but would still be effectively addressed by Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AES-2 and would remain temporary and fairly short-term. With these measures in place, degradation of the visual character and quality of public views during construction is still expected to be Less than Significant. ~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
15 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
The following impacts were identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. These findings also apply to the 60% design, with some differences as identified below. 16 • Potential for adverse effects on a scenic vista, post-construction visual recovery period and long term.
•
•
- Post-construction visual recovery period. The wetland project would require months to years for the new plantings to become fully established and achieve their long-term appearance. As a result, there would be a visual recovery period representing an aesthetic transition from the level of disturbance associated with construction to the finished, mature site appearance.
However, the March 2021 IS evaluated wetland project impacts on scenic vistas during the recovery period as Less than Significant: with grading complete and equipment and materials removed from the site, visual disturbance would be substantially reduced by comparison with the construction period and the site would present a neat, orderly appearance generally consistent with the cultivated character of surrounding agricultural lands. All of this would continue to be true under the 60% design. Visual recovery period effects on scenic vistas are therefore still considered Less than Significant.
- Long term. Once the wetland project has attained its mature appearance, with all plantings fully established, it would add green elements to the viewshed, all of which would be generally consistent with the character of surrounding agricultural lands and are not expected to substantially affect the visual intactness or unity of views in the vicinity of the site. Some viewers may also experience the addition of water in emergent marsh habitat and tree plantings along the central swale as Benefits to the vividness of area views. The March 2021 IS accordingly evaluated the wetland project's long-term impacts on scenic resources as Less than Significant.
There would be no substantive difference between the visual maturation of the 30% and 60% designs for the wetland project; the overall project concept remains the same and the planting list has not changed in ways that would markedly alter its finished appearance. As a result, long-term impacts on scenic vistas are still considered Less than Significant, and some viewers are still expected to experience the expanded extent of restored emergent marshland under the 60% design as an added long-term Benefit to the vividness of scenic views.
Potential to degrade visual character or quality of public views, post-construction visual recovery period and long term. Impacts on visual character and quality during the visual recovery period and over the long term were evaluated as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS, for the same reasons that apply to adverse effects on a scenic vista, post-construction visual recovery period and long term, discussed above. These conclusions are still appropriate for the 60% design, since there would be no substantive difference between the visual recovery period and mature appearance of the 60% and 30% designs.
Potential to create new sources of glare, construction period. During construction, there would be some potential for new or increased glare, primarily associated with reflections from the glass and painted metal surfaces of construction equipment. However, construction would be temporary and comparatively short-term, and would be visible to a limited number of viewers: nearby residents and agricultural workers, as well as drivers on adjacent roadways, who would experience only fleeting views. Because of the short duration and limited visibility of construction-related glare, potential construction-period impacts related to new sources of glare were evaluated as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. This finding is still appropriate for the 60% design: despite the increase in earthwork Redtail Consulting l'!':i
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
required, the number of pieces of equipment onsite would only increase slightly, and overall construction duration would not change.
• Potential to create new sources of glare, long term. Once construction is complete, the wetland project could slightly increase glare generation due to the increased extent and duration of ponding in enhanced and restored wetland areas. The nature of glare generation would be similar to that generated by flood irrigation at the site, however, and many viewers would likely also view the water features as a positive addition to the viewshed, potentially offsetting reactions to a slight increase in glare. Potential impacts associated with increased water-surface glare were therefore evaluated as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design, since the overall project concept remains very similar to the 30% design previously analyzed. It is also noted that increased glare generation related to expanded areas of emergent marsh and seasonal wetland could be offset by reduction in glare due to discontinuation of flood irrigation on both parcels and restoration of ephemeral wetland hydrology (shorter ponding durations) on central and south portions of the 24-acre parcel.
The March 2021 IS did not specifically address civil construction elements associated with the wetland project; designs for the new inlets and outlet have progressed substantially since the 30% milestone and warrant additional consideration. In particular, a concrete liner is now contemplated for the new inlet to the 78-acre parcel, a trash rack would be installed inboard of the inlet on the 78-acre parcel, and the project would now include a riser pipe outlet to return flow from the 78-acre parcel to the Miller Ditch. These are all small and highly localized elements that would not generate substantial glare.
Additionally, the City has adopted mitigation requiring the use of non-glare finishes for all built elements at the NCCA site (Mitigation Measure AES-3; see Attachment Table A-1). This would ensure that any increase in glare associated with these project elements is reduced to a Less than Significant level.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following. • Potential for damage to state scenic highway resources. As identified in the March 2021 IS, the only state-designated scenic highways in the NCCA vicinity include Interstate (I) 5 from the Stanislaus County/Merced County line north to I 580, and State Route (SR) 140 from SR 152 north through Merced County. At their closest approach, both I 5 and SR 140 are several miles from the NCCA. Thus, when it is visible at all, drivers on these routes would experience the wetland project site as a small part of the larger mosaic of middle-ground or background views, and both during and after construction, the project would be generally consistent with the visual character and quality of surrounding agricultural lands. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design. Although excavation would be more extensive than under the 30% design, it would still be a small disturbance in the larger context of regional views from I 5 and SR 140, and the duration of construction would be the same as that assumed in the March 2021 IS. Over the longer term, there would be no material difference in the appearance of the project, and in particular no changes that would render it more conspicuous from highways several miles away. The project would still be generally consistent with the visual character and quality of surrounding agricultural lands and would not result in long-term degradation of visual character or quality. As a result, under the 60% design, the project would still have No Impact related to damage to state scenic highway resources over the short, middle, or long term. • Potential to create new sources of light. As analyzed in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project was not expected to require night work during construction, and would not include new sources of long-term lighting. Neither of these aspects of the project has changed under the 60% design. The project is still expected to have No Impact related to new sources of light during construction. r.:. Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
17 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Conclusion: Aesthetics
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact related to aesthetics is identified. As noted above, elements added to the project since the 30% design could result in a small incremental increase in long-term glare generation, but Significant impacts would be avoided by implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-3 (Use of Non-Glare Finishes), which explicitly applies to all built elements at the NCCA and was formally adopted by the City in May 2021 following circulation of the March 2021 IS.
Agriculture & Forestry Resources
Review of Impacts
As discussed in more detail in the March 2021 IS, extensive tracts of Prime Farmland surround the City to the north, west, and south, with a mosaic of Prime Farmland and Unique Farmland, and small areas of Farmland of Local Importance, to the northeast, east, and southeast. At the NCCA site, the 78-acre parcel is designated as Farmland of Local Importance and the 24-acre parcel as "nonagricultural or natural vegetation" by the FMMP (California Department of Conservation 2016). Both parcels are zoned A-1 (General Agriculture) by the County; permissible uses on A-1 zoned lands include public parks and recreation areas and wildlife management areas.
Neither of the parcels is under a Williamson Act contract (City of Newman 2021a). There is no forest land in proximity to the NCCA site, and no forest or timberland zoning in the vicinity. Moreover, approval of the wetland project would not alter agricultural zoning on surrounding parcels, nor would it extend urban development or reduce the importance of agriculture to the local or regional economy. The March 2021 IS accordingly concluded that there would be No Impact with regard to any aspect of agriculture or forestry resources, because • the wetland project would not result in direct conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and would not create pressure that could indirectly result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use over the long term • the wetland project would be consistent with existing agricultural zoning at the site • the wetland project would not conflict with existing Williamson Act contracts • the wetland project would have no potential to conflict with forest or timberland zoning, no potential to result in direct loss or conversion of forest land, and no potential to indirectly contribute to conversion forest land to non-forest use
None of the background conditions related to agriculture or forestry resources has changed since the circulation of the March 2021 IS, and while project details have changed, the overall project concept remains the same.
There would still be No Impact on agriculture or forestry resources.
Conclusion: Agriculture & Forestry Resources
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to agriculture or forestry resources is identified.
Air Quality
Review of Impacts
The March 2021 IS identified no Significant impacts with regard to air quality, and no Significant impacts were identified during review of the 60% design.
18 Redtail Consulting r:.i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
The following impacts were identified as Less than Significant or Less than Cumulatively Considerable in the March 2021 IS. These findings also apply to the 60% design, with key differences as identified below. • Potential for cumulatively considerable increase in criteria pollutant(s) in nonattainment. As detailed in the March 2021 IS, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJV APCD) (2015) notes that "[i]f a project is significant based on the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants, then it is also cumulatively significant." Consistent with prevailing CEQA practice, the SJV APCD also recognizes that even if a project's impacts are found to be Less than Significant at the project-specific level "[t]his does not imply that ... it cannot be cumulatively significant" (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2015).
The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is currently in Nonattainment for state ozone (1-hour and 8-hour), PM10, and PM2.5 standards, and for federal ozone (8-hour) and PM2.5 standards (see Table 3-2 in the March 2021 IS). Analysis of the NCCA projects' individual and collective contributions to cumulative air emissions impacts therefore focused on the ozone precursor NOx and particulate matter. Projectspecific impacts were considered in the context of the SJV APCD's project-specific thresholds of significance, since these also function as a first-level test to identify the level at which emissions become Cumulatively Considerable.
Construction emissions. Modeling conducted for the March 2021 IS (Tamura Environmental 2021a; see March 202f IS Appendix C) showed that total construction emissions from all four NCCA projects would be well below the SJV APCD's adopted annual significance thresholds for construction emissions: total emissions of 1.58 tons for NOx, versus a threshold of 10 tons/year, and total emissions of 0.49 tons and 0.14 tons for PM10 and PM2.5 respectively, versus thresholds of 15 tons/year.
Maximum annual emissions would be even lower by comparison since construction of each project would take 2 - 3 years, with each project's contribution representing a fraction of the annual total. With both total and annual construction emissions 1 - 2 orders of magnitude below the level of projectspecific significance under the worst-case construction scenario, the individual and collective (cumulative) contributions of the NCCA projects to cumulative nonattainment of ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards were evaluated as Less than Cumulatively Considerable.
Additional, updated emissions calculations were conducted for this Addendum (Tamura Environmental 2021 b) to assess whether changes in the project-in particular, the substantial increase in earthworkwould alter this finding. Results are detailed in Appendix A. Following the same methodology used in the March 2021 IS, total emissions of NOx and particulate matter associated with construction of all four NCCA projects are summarized and compared to the SJV APCD annual significance thresholds in Table 5.
Table 5. Total NOx and Particulate Matter Emissions, NCCA Project Construction Pollutant Total Construction Emissions SJV APCD Significance (tons) Threshold (tons/year)
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
Abbreviations:
7.7 0.32
0.30 PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns 10 15
15 Total construction emissions refers to emissions from simultaneous construction of all four NCCA projects.
Source: Tamura Environmental 2021b
~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
19 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
20 Note that Table 5 reflects an extremely conservative approach; it now appears very unlikely that all four projects would be constructed in the same year, since only the wetland and NEWS projects are currently funded. Nonetheless, it shows that even under an unlikely worst case scenario, total (multiyear) emissions of the pollutants for which the SJV Air Basin is currently in exceedance would still be well below the SJV APCD's annual significance thresholds. Emissions associated with the wetland project alone, even taking into account the increase in grading under the 60% design, would be even farther below the SJV thresholds, as shown in Table 6.
Table 6. NOx and Particulate Matter Emissions from Wetland Project Construction Wetland Project SJV APCD Significance W ti d p . t E . . . . . e an ro1ec m1ss1ons Pollutant Construction Em1ss1ons Threshold s· ·t· Th h Id (t ) (t I ) vs. 1gni 1cance res o ons ons year
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
Abbreviations:
1.24 0.063
0.046
10 15
15 PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns Source: Tamura Environmental 2021b
10%
0.3%
0.3%
In this context, the wetland project's contributions of the NCCA projects to cumulative nonattainment of ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards are still evaluated as Less than Cumulatively Considerable.
Operational emissions. As the March 2021 IS discusses, onsite emissions from routine O&M would be substantially lower than those generated by construction, since activities would be short-term and intermittent, would use less heavy equipment, and would involve substantially less ground disturbance.
The majority of operational emissions would be from trips to the site by visitors from outside the immediate Newman area. Modeling conducted for the March 2021 IS (Tamura Environmental 2021 a) showed that even at buildout, with all four of the NCCA projects in operation, their combined emissions would be 1 - 3 orders of magnitude below the SJV APCD's significance thresholds (Table 7).
Table 7. Operational Emissions Compared to Thresholds
Total NCCA General SJV APCD
P 11 t t Operational Conformity Significance 1 t 0 u an Emissions Threshold Threshold mpac (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year)
ROG 0.76 10 10 Conforms/Less than Significant
NOx 1.58 10 10 Conforms/Less than Significant
PM10 0.48 100 15 Conforms/Less than Significant
PM2.5 0.14 100* 15 Conforms/Less than Significant
Sulfur dioxide 0.01 100 27 Conforms/Less than Significant Carbon monoxide 5.72 100 100 Conforms/Less than Significant Note:
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 (see Attachment Table A-1) requires disposal of forebay sediment in a Class I landfill if testing shows that it qualifies as hazardous under State of California standards. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 could also entail haulage and disposal at a Class I landfill. The closest such facilities (the Kettleman Hills and Buttonwillow landfills) are 150- 200 miles from the NCCA site. Such conditional emissions are not included above. However, the pollutants emitted in the greatest quantities from haul truck trips would be NOx (0.003 tons per trip) and CO (0.0006 tons per trip) and emission volumes would be Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Total NCCA General SJV APCD
P 11 t t Operational Conformity Significance 1 t 0 u an Emissions Threshold Threshold mpac (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year)
insignificant compared to the emissions identified above. Moreover, the wetland project would have less potential to result in haulage-related operational emissions, since it does not include a sediment settling forebay (this feature is included only at the two constructed water treatment wetland projects, NEWS and MDTW).
Source: City of Newman 2021b
Emissions for each project would be a fraction of the total combined emissions from all four projects. Of the four, the wetland project would likely be the smallest contributor since it would not include visitor access or visitor-oriented facilities (and therefore would not independently generate visitor trips), would not include a sediment forebay and thus would not generate emissions associated with forebay sediment removal and disposal, and overall would require the least O&M. Operational emissions could increase very slightly under the 60% design due to the addition of an outlet from the 78-acre parcel, but this would represent fractional increases in quantities that are 1 - 3 orders of magnitude below the applicable significance thresholds. The wetland project's operational emissions are therefore still considered Less than Cumulatively Considerable.
• Potential to expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the key concern with regard to exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutants focuses on nearby residences and potential exposure to diesel exhaust. The closest sensitive receptors are residences along Canal School Road, Inyo Avenue, and slightly farther away at the south edge of the City proper. Other sensitive receptors such as schools, care facilities, and hospitals are more than 0.5 mile away to the north and west from the nearest corner of the site.
Health concerns associated with the toxic impacts of diesel exhaust are associated with chronic, longterm exposure rather than temporary or short-term exposure. Even assuming all four of the NCCA projects were to be constructed in the same year, which now appears unrealistic, modeling conducted for the March ~021 IS (Tamura Environmental 2021a) showed that overall construction emissions would well below applicable standards. Moreover, construction activity would take place across a relatively large area; much of the work would be at a substantial distance from any sensitive receptors, and work in proximity to the closest residences would be short-term and temporary. O&M activities involving diesel heavy equipment would be even more limited in duration, and would use fewer pieces of equipment, reducing emission levels. As a result, the March 2021 IS concluded that both construction and operational impacts related to potential exposure of sensitive receptors to air pollutants would be Less than Significant.
This reasoning continues to apply to the 60% design. Even with the increase in project earthwork, the construction grading phase (which would entail the most intensive use of diesel heavy equipment) would last only 1 month, and overall construction duration also has not increased. O&M use of heavy equipment is not expected to increase materially by comparison with the 30% design, and individual O&M would still be short-term and intermittent, since the overall nature of the project remains the same.
Consequently, wetland project impacts related to potential exposure of sensitive receptors to air pollutants are still expected to be Less than Significant. • Potential for other emissions. "Other emissions" include emissions from particularly odorous sources that may not impact attainment of air quality standards or pose risks due to toxicity, but which can nonetheless be a nuisance and a concern for the community. Potential odor sources identified by the SJV APCD include facilities such as wastewater treatment facilities, landfills, transfer stations, r:.i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
21 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
composting facilities, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical or fiberglass manufacturing, painting/coating operations such as auto body shops, food processing facilities, feed lots, dairies, and rendering plants. As the March 2021 IS identifies, the wetland project would not involve any such sources. Any odors related to construction or operations, such as diesel exhaust, which may be intermittently perceptible at the nearest residences, would be temporary, intermittent, and short term.
The March 2021 IS accordingly concluded that the potential for the wetland project to create objectionable odors would be Less than Significant. Since the project's overall nature and concept remain the same, this conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following. 22 • Potential to conflict with or obstruct air quality plan implementation. As detailed in the March 2021 IS, the SJV APCD considers that projects with emissions below the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are not in conflict with and would not obstruct implementation of its air quality plan (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2015). In general, because the air quality plans consist of enforceable regulations, compliance with these regulations ensures that a project is not conflicting with or obstructing plan implementation. One potential exception to this pertains to projects that would have relatively high criteria pollutant emissions and that are not subject to stationary source permitting for onsite sources of emissions; if emissions are sufficiently high, and the project would be located in an area classified as a Nonattainment or Maintenance area, such projects can be required to demonstrate conformity with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) (referred to as General Conformity) before they can receive federal approvals. Additionally, the SJV APCD (2018) recommends that a full ambient air quality analysis be conducted for projects that would generate more than 100 pounds per day (lb/day) of any criteria pollutant. This would typically include an analysis of pollutant dispersion.
In November 2020, the SJV APCD issued Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL) guidance which identifies that city parks 256 acres in size or smaller that generate no more than 1, 100 average daily one-way trips (for non heavy-heavy duty trucks) and no more than 20 one-way trips (for heavy-heavy duty trucks) are not required to quantify criteria pollutant emissions for CEQA purposes (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2020). This guidance could be argued to apply to the wetland project. However, to confirm General Conformity, and since the NCCA as a whole would host more than "just" park-related activities, modeling for the March 2021 IS (Tamura Environmental 2021 a) included calculating these emissions, which showed, as noted above, that total (multi-year) emissions from all four projects would be well below both the annual thresholds for General Conformity and the annual thresholds for CEQA significance. Estimates also show that all projects, considered individually, would be below the 100 lbs/day threshold for criteria pollutant emissions. All of the projects would also comply with applicable SJV APCD rules, including the Regulation VIII rules (8011 - 8071) that limit fugitive dust (including dust generated by construction) and the Indirect Source Rule (Rule 9510), which requires restrictions on construction equipment emissions from certain discretionary projects before they can be approved. Contractor(s) selected for work at the NCCA would also be required to comply with applicable CARB standards and regulations (e.g. the diesel fuel regulations in California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Section 2281 and standards and limitations for heavy duty diesel vehicles in California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2025, 2449, and 2485). In this context, the March 2021 IS concluded that there would be No Impact related to conflict with or obstruction of any of the applicable air quality plans.
This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design. Updated pollutant emissions modeling taking into account the increase in earthwork by comparison with the 30% design (Tamura Environmental Redtail Consulting l'rii
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
2021b) shows that construction emissions would still be below applicable SJV APCD thresholds, as itemized in Table 8.
Table 8. Wetland Project Construction Emissions vs. SJV APCD Thresholds (TonsNear) Pollutant
ROG co NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5
Significance threshold 10 100 10
Project emissions 0.11 0.78 1.24
Abbreviations:
ROG = reactive organic gases
CO = carbon monoxide
NOx = oxides of nitrogen
S02 = sulfur dioxide
PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns Source: Tamura Environmental 2021b
27 0.002
15 0.06
15 0.05
Updated modeling {Tamura Environmental 2021 b) for the revised grading and civil construction phase also showed that worst-case daily onsite emissions of all criteria pollutants during construction would still be below the 100 lbs/day threshold, as summarized in Table 9.
Table 9. Wetland Project - Worst-Case Daily Onsite Pollutant Emissions Construction Phase ROG CO NOx S02 PM10 PM2.5
Grading and civil construction 8.03 56.5
Abbreviations:
ROG = reactive organic gases
CO = carbon monoxide
NOx = oxides of nitrogen
S02 = sulfur dioxide
PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns
93.4 0.14 3.59 3.30
Finally, the same requirements for compliance with SJV APCD rules and CARB regulations would remain in place. In this context, the wetland project is still expected to have No Impact related to conflict with or obstruction of any of the applicable air quality plans. 5 Conclusion: Air Quality
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to air quality is identified.
5 If wetland project grading were to overlap with any phase of the NEWS project, updated emissions estimates indicate that combined emissions of NOx could exceed 100 lbs/day, which SJV APCD has identified as a policy threshold for conducting dispersion modeling. Although cumulative emissions would still be Less than Significant with regard to emissions thresholds, if the City were to apply SJV APCD's policy to cumulative impacts, such modeling would need to be conducted and results compared to impacts thresholds (i.e., thresholds for modeled concentrations at the nearest receptors). However, this overlap is not expected to occur. With wetland project construction now planned to begin as early as June 1, 2022, and the NEWS project not expected to break ground until August 1, there should be ample time to complete wetland project grading and civil construction-expected to last a maximum of 6 weeks-before NEWS project construction begins. This issue is therefore not discussed further.
~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
23 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
Biological Resources
Review of Impacts
The City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impacts with regard to biological resources. With mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, with minor differences as noted below.
24 • Potential for adverse effects on special-status plants during construction. As discussed in detail in the March 2021 IS, Parry's rough tarplant ( Centromadia parryi ssp. rudis) is known to occur on both of the NCCA parcels, and several other special-status plant species also have some potential to be present: heartscale (Atriplex cordulata var. cordulata), crownscale (A coronata var. coronata), lesser saltscale (A minuscula), vernal pool smallscale (A persistens), and San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquiniana). Several occurrences of Parry's rough tarplant are located within and adjacent to the wetland project footprint on the 24-acre parcel, with larger concentrations near the north end of the parcel, where construction access may occur. Some or all of these occurrences could be disturbed or removed by wetland project construction and/or staging. Additionally, wetlands on both parcels offer suitable habitat for heartscale, crownscale, and vernal pool smallscale; wetlands and mesic uplands offer suitable habitat for lesser saltscale and San Joaquin spearscale. None of these additional species were observed during the 2020 protocol surveys, but if they are present in future years, they could also be affected by construction of the wetland project, depending on their location and distribution. •
To address impacts on Parry's rough tarplant, the City will implement a mitigation measure (BI0-1; see Attachment Table A-1) that requires establishment of no-entry Avoidance Zones around existing populations of Parry's tarplant that are planned to remain. If occurrences of Parry's rough tarplant would be removed for project construction, seed must be collected from populations onsite for inclusion in the seed mix for the wetland project native grassland area, and the wetland project Monitoring Plan must include monitoring protocols and interim and final success criteria for recovery of Parry's rough tarplant, as well as corrective actions in the event Parry's rough tarplant fails to meet interim success criteria. With Mitigation Measure 810-1 in place, the March 2021 IS concluded that construction-related impacts on Parry's rough tarplant would be Less than Significant. This finding remains appropriate for the 60% project design since the overall project concept, including the types of habitat restored, the approximate project footprint, and the requirement for follow-up monitoring and close oversight by DFW have not changed.
The March 2021 IS concluded that impacts on heartscale, crownscale, lesser saltscale, vernal pool smallscale, and/or San Joaquin spearscale, in the event they are present at the site in the future, would be Less than Significant with AMM-5 (Special-Status Plant Protection) and AMM-1 (Routine Reassessment and AMM Updates) (see Attachment Table A-1) in place. This finding also remains appropriate for the 60% design, because the overall project concept remains the same, and the project would still incorporate AMM-5 and AMM-1.
Potential for adverse effects on sensitive natural communities at the NCCA site, O&M period/long term. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the NCCA parcels support a combined total of
0.142 acre of Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh, which is considered a sensitive natural community by DFW. This existing habitat is located in the northeast corner of the 78-acre parcel, where the berm blocking the "downstream" (east) end of the central swale creates conditions of perennial or nearperennial ponding. The extent of this habitat would be expanded and enhanced as a specific objective of the wetland project. The site does not support any other sensitive natural communities.
Redtail Consulting E
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
The March 2021 IS concluded that impacts on central swale Coastal Valley and Freshwater Marsh as a result of O&M would be Less than Significant since (1) inspection, operations, and maintenance would be carried out on foot by City staff who have received worker awareness training regarding sensitive habitats per the City's adopted AMM-3 (Worker Awareness Training; see Attachment Table A-1), (2) AMM-4 (Wetland and Water Quality Protection; again, see Attachment Table A-1) would remain in force, and (3) the new wetland project Grazing Management Plan, which will be subject to DFW review and approval, is also expected to include best practices for the continued protection of sensitive habitats.
The March 2021 IS also acknowledged that opening the trails at the NEWS, MDTW, and Newman Nature Park projects would progressively increase public presence at the NCCA, with the potential for incursions into Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh within the central swale, including both accidental incursions and deliberate trespass or vandalism. The wetland project would increase the area of this sensitive natural community at risk. Trail design and informational signage would be used to discourage accidental incursions, but it likely would not be possible prevent to prevent deliberate trespass without draconian measures that are considered counter to the spirit of the NCCA as a community amenity.
Thus, although Significant impacts were not anticipated, they were identified as a possibility in the March 2021 IS. The City has adopted mitigation to address this (Mitigation Measure 810-2, Long-Term Protection and Restoration of Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh and Other Sensitive Habitats; see Attachment Table A-1). With this measure in place, the City would be required to restore any damage to Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh, and the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts over the long term would be Less than Significant.
This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design, for the same reasons laid out in the March 2021 IS. Additionally, it should be noted that because the wetland project would not provide for public access, it would have substantially less potential to lead to direct impacts on Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh by comparison with the other three NCCA projects.
The following impacts were identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. These findings also apply to the 60% design, with some minor differences, as discussed below. • Potential for adverse effects on special-status plants due to O&M. As acknowledged in the March 2021 IS, O&M activities that require ground disturbance, vegetation removal, or vegetation trimming could disturb or remove special-status plants that may occur at the site. However, with AMM-5 and AMM-1 in place (Special-Status Plant Protection and Routine Reassessment and AMM Updates, respectively; see Attachment Table A-1 ), along with the new wetland project Grazing Management Plan, impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. This finding remains appropriate for the 60% design, since there has been no change in the overall project concept or in the AMMs since they were adopted, and since the Grazing Management Plan will still be subject to DFW review and approval.
• Potential for adverse effects on special-status wildlife, construction period and long term. As the March 2021 IS describes, the only special-status wildlife species observed on the NCCA site to date are Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsom) and Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), neither of which is expected to breed there since the site does not offer suitable habitat. A number of other species have at least some potential to be present, based on known distribution and habitat on the site:
- northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) (state Species of Special Concern) (low potential)
~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
25 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
26 - western spadefoot ( Spea hammondit) (state Species of Special Concern) (low potential) - giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) (state- and federally listed as Threatened, state Species of Special Concern) (low potential)
- Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) (state Species of Special Concern, candidate for state listing) (low potential)
- Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) (state Species of Special Concern) (potential) - Northern Harrier (Circus hudsonius) (state Species of Special Concern) (low potential) - Yellow-billed Magpie (Pica nutta/11) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation Concern) (potential)
- Other bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act - American badger (Taxidea taxus) (state Species of Special Concern) (very low potential) - San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) (low potential) The March 2021 IS analyzed impacts on special-status wildlife due to construction activities, O&M activities, and long-term habitat change on the site resulting from the wetland project, NEWS project, and MDTW project. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project would incorporate multiple AMMs for special-status wildlife protection, listed below and presented in full in Attachment Table A-1:
- AMM-6. Special-Status Wildlife Protection (General)
- AMM-7. Western Spadefoot Protection
- AMM-8. Giant Garter Snake Protection
- AMM-9. Northwestern Pond Turtle Protection
- AMM-10. Nesting Bird Protection (all species)
- AMM-11. Western Burrowing Owl Protection
With these AMMs in place, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts on northwestern pond turtle, western spadefoot, giant garter snake, and special-status birds during construction and O&M would be Less than Significant. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design. The 60% design would entail more extensive grading than the 30% design analyzed in the March 2021 IS; however, the overall project concept remains the same, and the types of construction activities and equipment required have not changed. The type and frequency of O&M activities anticipated are also essentially unchanged. Consequently, the AMMs are still expected to provide adequate protection during both construction and O&M despite revisions in some project details.
The March 2021 IS concluded that although their presence cannot be entirely ruled out, neither American badger nor San Joaquin kit fox is likely to use the NCCA site, although San Joaquin kit fox may pass through or hunt there. No dens or other signs or either species were observed during the 2019 - 2020 biological surveys, and neither species is expected to breed there. If present during construction or O&M, casual visitors of either species could be disturbed, but would be expected to relocate to other better habitat available in the area if this occurs. Impacts on American badger and San Joaquin kit fox were accordingly evaluated as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. This Redtail Consulting t'!':.i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design since there have been no substantive changes in habitat conditions at the NCCA site since that document was prepared, neither species has been documented on the site in the interim since circulation of the March 2021 IS, and the overall wetland project concept (and therefore its potential to disturb special-status wildlife) remains the same.
The March 2001 IS also concluded that impacts on northwestern pond turtle, western spadefoot, giant garter snake, special-status birds, American badger, and San Joaquin kit fox due to habitat change on the site over time would be Less than Significant, with a potential long-term Benefit to some species. This is summarized in Table 10, which also identifies and explains updated Findings for the 60% design.s
Table 10. Impacts of Habitat Change over Time
Species Outcomes
Northwestern pond
turtle
Western spadefoot
Giant garter snake
Swainson's Hawk
The March 2021 IS concluded that increased extent and quality of ponded (emergent) marsh would improve habitat for northwestern pond turtle, offering better opportunities for northwestern pond turtle, and the species would continue to be protected from O&M disturbance by implementation of AMM-9. Impacts were evaluated as Less than Significant overall, with a potential for long-term Benefit
No change in finding: This reasoning continues to apply to the 60% design; the potential for Benefit could be slightly decreased under the 60% design since the proposed expansion of emergent marsh habitat would be smaller by comparison with the 30% design As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project would reduce the extent of upland habitat for western spadefoot at the NCCA site. However, upland habitat would remain, and the wetland project would increase the extent and quality of potentially suitable native grassland habitat. At the same time, the wetland project would increase the extent of potentially suitable breeding habitat in ephemeral wetland areas. On balance, impacts of longterm habitat change on western spadefoot were evaluated as Less than Significant, with a potential for long-term Benefit to the species' breeding opportunities No change in finding: The wetland project would result in a slightly greater loss of upland habitat under the 60% design but the site would continue to offer suitable uplands, and improvements in breeding habitat would be very similar (3.4 acres of ephemeral wetland enhancement vs. the previously analyzed 3.8 acres)
The March 2021 IS concluded that (1) the increased extent and quality of emergent marsh habitat as a result of the wetland project would improve opportunities for giant garter snake, and (2) if the species becomes more likely to use the NCCA as habitat conditions improve, there would be increased potential for exposure to risk from future construction and O&M, but ongoing implementation of AMM-8 would continue to protect the species. Impacts were evaluated as Less than Significant overall, with potential for a long-term Benefit to the availability of suitable habitat for the species
No change in finding: This reasoning continues to apply to the 60% design; the potential for Benefit could be slightly decreased under the 60% design since the proposed expansion of emergent marsh habitat would be smaller by comparison with the 30% design The March 2021 IS concluded that upland foraging habitat for Swainson's Hawk at the site would be reduced over the long term as the NCCA projects are implemented and the extent of wetland habitats increases. A portion of this reduction would be due to the wetland project.
However, Swainson's Hawk forages widely in agricultural fields, and extensive agricultural 6 Note that, in some cases, long-term impacts on the species discussed in Table 10 are identified as resulting from the combined effect of two or more of the NCCA projects. Technically, these are cumulative impacts, which are usually presented under Mandatory Findings of Significance at the end of the IS checklist. The March 2021 IS presented these "combined outcome" impacts in the incremental impact analysis, under Biological Resources/Potential for Adverse Effects on Special-Status Species, to keep all discussion of impacts on each special-status species in one place; the goal was to present the clearest and most comprehensive picture possible of outcomes by species.
That organization is preseNed here.
~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
27 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
Species Outcomes
Loggerhead Shrike
Burrowing Owl
lands would continue to be available adjacent to and surrounding the NCCA, while some improved foraging would remain available onsite in the wetland project native grasslands and adjacent upland areas. In this context, impacts related to localized decrease in the availability of Swainson's Hawk foraging opportunities were evaluated as Less than Significant.
Additionally, the March 2021 IS identified that by creating a quasi-riparian corridor along the central swale, the wetland project has the potential to improve Swainson's Hawk nesting opportunities at the site, since the species prefers to nest in large trees in proximity to riparian areas; the large trees adjacent to the east boundary of the 78-acre parcel are generally suitable for Swainson's Hawk nesting but do not currently offer adjacent riparian habitat. There is thus the potential for a long-term Benefit to Swainson's Hawk breeding as a result of longterm habitat change due to the wetland project No change in finding: The 60% design would slightly increase the area of uplands converted to wetlands due to added work in the central swale, but would also continue to provide for expanded native grasslands and addition of native trees in a quasi-riparian corridor. Impacts on Swainson's Hawk over time are therefore still evaluated as Less than Significant overall, with a potential long-term Benefit to Swainson's Hawk breeding The March 2021 IS identified a potential Benefit to Loggerhead Shrike breeding, due to shrub plantings associated with the NEWS project. The wetland project was not called out as a substantial contributor to this Benefit, since the 30% design did not include extensive planting of shrubby vegetation.
The March 2021 IS also acknowledged that the NEWS project would create a potential for disturbance and disruption of Loggerhead Shrike nesting that does not currently exist at the site-due to O&M over the longer term and/or construction of later-phase projects-but concluded that implementation of AMM-10 would avoid Significant impacts on Loggerhead Shrike breeding. Impacts were accordingly evaluated as Less than Significant overall.7 This finding also applies to the wetland project, which would require some long-term O&M in the vicinity of the NEWS project
No change in finding: The 60% design has not altered the wetland project plant palette substantially, and the project would continue to implement AMM-10 during construction and O&M. Thus, if Loggerhead Shrike breeding occurs at the NCCA site in the future, any disturbance associated with the wetland project would continue to be controlled to a Less than Significant level
As discussed above for Swainson's Hawk, the March 2021 IS found that opportunities for Burrowing Owl at the NCCA could decrease somewhat over the long term, as the extent of wetlands at the site increases and the extent of uplands decreases. A portion of this decrease would be due to the wetland project. However, opportunities for both foraging and breeding would continue to be available onsite, in the levees along the Miller Ditch and in the wetland project grasslands. In addition, abundant suitable habitat would remain available in the vicinity, along the margins of agricultural lands and the levees of agricultural ditches and the Newman Wasteway. As a result, impacts on Burrowing Owl due to long-term change in the habitat mosaic on the NCCA parcels were evaluated as Less than Significant No change in finding: The reasoning presented in the March 2021 IS for the 30% design still applies to the 60% design; long-term impacts on Burrowing Owl as a result of habitat change due to the wetland project are still expected to be Less than Significant 7 As the March 2021 IS points out, the same would be true for all bird species whose nesting opportunities are improved by habitat changes at the NCCA site: improving breeding habitat could be considered to create an "attractive nuisance" since breeding for these species is not currently occurring onsite, but habitat changes would make breeding possible, and could place nests at risk from future construction and O&M activities. However, AMM-10 for the protection of nesting birds of all species would continue to be required for the lifespan of the NCCA, and would reduce impacts to a level considered Less than Signmcant, with no mitigation required. The March 2021 IS accordingly evaluated improved breeding opportunities for special-status birds of all species as an overall Benefit. This conclusion continues to apply under the 60% wetland design, since the overall project concept remains unchanged, and impacts and Benefits would remain very similar, as itemized in the text of this analysis. To avoid redundancy, this issue is not discussed further. 28 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Species Outcomes
Tricolored Blackbird
Northern Harrier
Yellow-billed Magpie
Other (MST Aprotected) specialstatus birds
American badger
~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
The March 2021 IS found that the wetland project would help to improve opportunities for Tricolored Blackbird at the NCCA site, by expanding and improving the quality of emergent marsh in the central swale. Together with shrubby plantings provided by the NEWS project, and additional perennial or near-perennial open water and emergent vegetation in the NEWS project micropool and MDTW wetlands, this could offer nesting opportunities that are not currently available at the site. At the same time, foraging opportunities would continue to be available in the wetland project grassland area and in nearby agricultural fields. Impacts on Tricolored Blackbird as a result of long-term habitat change at the NCCA were therefore evaluated as Less than Significant, with a long-term potential for benefit to Tricolored Blackbird breeding
No change in finding: The area of emergent marsh provided by the wetland project would be less under the increased under the 60% design than under the previously analyzed 30% design, so the wetland project's Benefit to Tricolored Blackbird breeding could decrease by comparison with the 30% design, but effects on foraging opportunities remain essentially unchanged, and the wetland project would still offer some long-term Benefit to breeding The March 2021 IS identified that the quasi-riparian corridor created by the wetland project would somewhat decrease opportunities for Northern Harrier at the NCCA, since Northern Harrier is rarely observed in wooded areas. At the same time, however, the increase in shrubby growth under the NEWS project, combined with the expanded extent and quality of emergent marshland habitat resulting from the wetland project, NEWS micropool, and MDTW project, was evaluated as likely to improve nesting opportunities for the species, and potential foraging habitat would remain available in nearby areas. As a result, impacts on Northern Harrier as a result of long-term habitat change at the NCCA were evaluated as Less than Significant, with a potential for Benefit to Northern Harrier breeding No change in finding: The extent of the quasi-riparian corridor created by the wetland project remains unchanged in the 60% design; the project would still decrease foraging opportunities for Northern Harrier at the NCCA site, but ample foraging habitat would continue to remain available at and around the site, including improved opportunities in native grassland expanded by the wetland project. Additionally, although the increase in emergent marsh habitat is decreased under the 60% design, the wetland project would still offer some longterm Benefit to Northern Harrier breeding The March 2021 IS found that establishment of the wetland project quasi-riparian corridor would likely improve opportunities for Yellow-billed Magpie at the NCCA, since the species typically prefers open riparian and oak woodland settings in the vicinity of open grasslands, pasture, and croplands. This would include opportunities for nesting as the tree plantings become increasingly mature. Impacts on Yellow-billed Magpie as a result of long-term habitat change at the NCCA were accordingly considered Less than Significant, with a potential for overall Benefit to the species
No change in finding: As identified above, the extent of the wetland project quasi-riparian corridor remains unchanged in the 60% design, and the project would continue to improve opportunities for Yellow-billed Magpie on the NCCA site as described in the March 2021 IS The NCCA site does not currently support trees, and the March 2021 IS concluded that over the longer term, as trees planted by the wetland project mature, new nesting opportunities would become available on the site, representing an overall Benefit to nesting by Migratory Bird Treaty Act-protected species
No change in finding: As noted above, the extent of the quasi-riparian corridor planned for the wetland project has not changed under the 60% design; the project would continue to offer long-term benefits to nesting by Migratory Bird Treaty Act-protected species as described in the March 2021 IS
As the March 2021 IS identifies, American badger prefers open areas and brushlands. Over the longer term, wetland project riparian plantings along the central swale would reduce the extent of open habitat, but the project would not create brush lands. As a result, the NCCA site is expected to become even less appealing to American badger as the project becomes 29 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
30 Species Outcomes
San Joaquin kit fox
become increasingly established; the potential for disturbance or other impacts on individuals or local populations of the species was therefore evaluated as likely to remain Less than Significant over the longer term, likely decreasing with time. The decrease in habitat suitability at the site was also evaluated as a Less than Significant impact, because the site does not offer important habitat resources for the species at present and is not thought to be used by the species currently
No change in finding: The extent of the wetland project quasi-riparian corridor remains unchanged under the 60% design, and there have been no substantive changes to site conditions or potential usage by American badger since the circulation of the March 2021 IS As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project would reduce the suitability of the NCCA site for sustained usage by San Joaquin kit fox, due to the increased extent of wetland and riparian habitat. However, opportunities for passage and hunting would remain available.
The March 2021 IS therefore concluded that the potential for impacts on individuals or local populations of San Joaquin kit fox would remain Less than Significant over the longer term, potentially undergoing a slight decrease with time. Since the site does not currently offer important habitat resources and is not thought to be extensively used by San Joaquin kit fox at present, the slight long-term decrease in habitat suitability at the site was also evaluated as a Less than Significant impact
No change in finding: As noted above, the extent of the wetland project quasi-riparian corridor remains unchanged under the 60% design. The overall project concept also remains essentially the same, and there have been no substantive changes to site conditions or potential usage by San Joaquin kit fox since the circulation of the March 2021 IS • Potential for adverse effects on sensitive natural communities at NCCA site, construction period. Although the wetland project has been designed to avoid impacts on existing wetlands to the extent this is feasible while still accomplishing the project's habitat objectives, the March 2021 IS acknowledged that there would be some potential for direct impacts on existing Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh as a result of recontouring to expand and improve emergent marsh habitat in the central swale. There would also be potential for indirect impacts on the quality of this habitat as a result of soil disturbance, construction runoff, and siltation. However, construction activity would be subject to AMM-4 (Wetland and Water Quality Protection; see Attachment Table A-1) as well as requirements of a project-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which will be necessary due to the extent of grading required. The project was also expected to require regulatory permitting, which could provide for additional protective measures and/or compensatory habitat mitigation, if appropriate. With AMM-4, the SWPPP, and resource agency permit oversight, the March 2021 IS concluded that construction impacts on Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh during construction would be Less than Significant, and that the project would result in a long-term Benefit to Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh by expanding emergent marsh habitat in the central swale.
These conclusions continue to apply to the 60% design. The extent of grading in the central swale would increase by comparison with the 30% design analyzed in the March 2021 IS, and additional work (not previously analyzed) would be required for the new outlet from the 78-acre parcel to the Miller Ditch, which would be located at the east end of the central swale, near existing Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh. The potential for adverse effects on this existing habitat is therefore likely to increase somewhat under the 60% design. However, AMM-4 and the project SWPPP (which would now be tailored to the 60% design) would continue to afford protection, and the project has applied for permit authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and DFW, providing additional oversight with the potential to include further protective measures. With AMM-4, the project SWPPP, and substantive regulatory oversight in place, Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
construction impacts on Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh are still expected to be Less than Significant. Moreover, the 60% design, like the 30% design previously analyzed, includes expansion and enhancement of emergent marsh habitat as a project objective, and with DFW oversight during the first portion of the establishment period, the project is still expected to result in a long-term Benefit to the extent and quality of Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh at the NCCA site. • Potential for adverse effects on sensitive natural communities at inoculum donor sites, construction period. As the March 2021 IS detailed, the wetland project would use inoculum to foster growth of suitable vegetation within the ephemeral wetlands planned for restoration/enhancement on the 24-acre parcel. lnoculum was planned for collection from suitable donor sites in the western San Joaquin Valley region. Propagules such as cuttings and stakes may also be collected for plant propagation in other habitats enhanced or created by the wetland project. Like inoculum, propagules were planned for collection from local donor sites.
The March 2021 IS identifies that improperly designed or implemented collection of inoculum and propagules would have the potential to result in adverse effects on habitat at the donor sites, some of which may quality as sensitive natural communities under DFW criteria. However, the wetland project design, including inoculum and propagule collection, will be subject to DFW review and approval under the terms of the grant that is funding the project. Additionally, planning for collection of these planting materials will incorporate measures to reduce impacts on the donor sites, which are expected to include inoculum collection by mowing and vacuuming rather than scraping (limiting the volume/amount of planting material collected at any one site and reducing the disturbance associated with collection), as well as methods for collecting cuttings, stakes, and other propagules. These measures will be developed with input and guidance from DFW. With DFW oversight of inoculum and propagule collection, including approval of impact-reduction measures, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts of collecting inoculum and propagules on donor sites would be Less than Significant.
This conclusion also applies to the 60% design. As noted in Changes in Project above, the wetland project planting palette has changed somewhat since the 30% design; additional species have been added to the ephemeral wetland palette based on further study of reference habitat at Great Valley Grasslands State Park, there is more emphasis on use of container stock, and use of inoculum may be deemphasized or eliminated since it has been more difficult to source than was originally anticipated.
However, there has been no change in the propagule or inoculum collection methods planned, and if anything the use of inoculum would decrease by comparison with the 30% design vision, reducing the potential for corollary impacts on sensitive natural communities. • Potential for adverse effects on protected wetlands at NCCA site, construction period. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, construction of the wetland project would directly affect existing jurisdictional wetlands on the site. Wetlands not directly involved in the project would be protected under AMM-4 (see Attachment Table A-1) and the project SWPPP, and thus would not be adversely affected, but there would be at least some disturbance to wetlands within the project footprint in order to accomplish the project objectives and achieve the desired long-term Benefit to wetland function and quality at the NCCA. The March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be Less than Significant with resource agency oversight in place.
This conclusion still applies to the 60% design, since AMM-4 and a project SWPPP would still be in place and the project is still expected to be self-mitigating (in effect, if not officially, since it would result in a net increase in aquatic resources on the site) and would need to satisfy regulatory requirements under federal and state law, as verified by resource agency staff.
P':.i Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
31 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
32 There would also be some potential for indirect construction-period impacts on existing wetlands, due to construction runoff delivering sediment and pollutants. As discussed above for prior checklist items, the March 2021 IS found that indirect impacts on existing wetlands would be Less than Significant with AMM-4 and the project SWPPP in place, and permit terms and conditions enforced by the City under resource agency oversight. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design since there has been no change in AMM-4, the project acreage remains substantially over the threshold that triggers the SWPPP requirement, and resource agency permits would still be required, ensuring regulatory oversight.
• Potential for adverse effects on protected wetlands at NCCA site, long term. The March 2021 IS identified that the potential for both direct and indirect impacts on existing wetlands as a result of ground-disturbing O&M would be similar to, but more areally restricted than, impacts during the construction period, and concluded that with AMM-4 (see Attachment Table A-1) remaining in force, such impacts would be controlled to a Less than Significant level. This conclusion is still appropriate for the 60% design, since the change in anticipated O&M is very limited and there has been no change in the protections afforded by AMM-4. Additionally, as noted in the March 2021 IS for the 30% design, the wetland project is still expected to result in a long-term Benefit to wetlands and other jurisdictional waters at the NCCA site.
• Potential for adverse effects on protected wetlands at inoculum and propagule donor sites, construction period. As discussed above, the wetland project hopes to use inoculum to foster growth of suitable vegetation within the ephemeral wetlands planned for enhancement on the 24-acre parcel, and propagules such as cuttings and stakes would be used for plant propagation in other habitats enhanced or created by the wetland project. The March 2021 IS identified the potential for improperly designed or implemented inoculum and propagule collection to result in adverse effects on the donor wetland sites, but concluded that impacts would be Less than Significant due to the need for resource agency oversight and approval via inclusion of the donor site impacts in project permitting. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design since there has been no change to overall planning for inoculum and propagule collection and resource agency permits will still be required for the project.
Note that the potential for impacts on donor sites is likely somewhat decreased under the 60% design, since there is greater emphasis on use of container stock, and use of donor inoculum may be eliminated due to sourcing difficulty.
• Potential to interfere with wildlife movement or nursery sites. As the March 2021 IS describes, the NCCA site is surrounded by actively cultivated agricultural lands, with developed areas present immediately adjacent to the northwest. It has not been identified as hosting a wildlife nursery site per se, and is not considered a wildlife movement corridor. A number of protected bird species may breed on or adjacent to the site, but with AMM-10 (Nesting Bird Protection; see Attachment Table A-1) onsite, the March 2021 IS concluded that both construction-period and long-term impacts would on nesting birds, their eggs, and their young would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. Although more earthwork would be required under the 60% design than under the previously analyzed 30% design, this conclusion is still appropriate for the 60% design since the overall construction process (e.g., types of activities and equipment required, and therefore the overall level of disturbance) remains the same, total construction duration has not changed, there have been no substantial changes in the O&M activities anticipated, and there have been no changes in AMM-10.
The March 2021 IS also identified that San Joaquin kit fox may use the NCCA site for passage and hunting, and American badger may also pass through the site casually. However, wetland project construction would be temporary and fairly short-term, and because the species is mobile and highly Redtail Consulting l'!':.i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
alert, San Joaquin kit fox is expected to be able to avoid active work areas and hunt in adjacent areas where small mammal prey is also abundant. The same would be true for American badger. During both construction and O&M, passage through the site would also remain available outside active work areas, particularly during nighttime hours when the kit fox is most active. The March 2021 IS accordingly found that construction period and long-term impacts on San Joaquin kit fox and American badger passage would be Less than Significant, and this conclusion remains appropriate for the 60% design since there have been no changes in the project that would affect the reasoning laid out in the March 2021 IS.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following.
These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, since the changes in the project have not altered the project concept and there have been no changes in biological conditions at the site, except for the 2020 discontinuation of flood irrigation.
• Potential for adverse effects on special-status plants due to habitat change over time. As discussed for other impacts above, the wetland project would increase the extent, quality, and diversity of wetland habitat on the NCCA parcels. It would also increase the extent of native grasslands and add quasi-riparian habitat to the site. However, as the March 2021 IS describes in more detail, the site is expected to continue to offer habitat suitable for Parry's rough tarplant and the other five special-status plants that currently have the potential to be present: wetland habitat would be expanded and improved, vernal pool habitat would be restored, and mesic upland habitat would continue to be available on both the 78- and 24-acre parcels. As a result, the March 2021 IS concluded that there would be No Impact on special-status plants as as a result of long-term habitat change on the NCCA site, including that due to the wetland project. It also concluded that there would likely be a Benefit to these and other rare plant species due to implementation of AMM-1 and AMM-5, overall improvement in habitat function and value, and long-term preservation of habitat at the site. Changes in the wetland project since the 30% design do not alter these findings since the overall wetland project concept remains the same.
• Potential to conflict with local policies/ordinances protecting biological resources. As the March 2021 IS identifies, the wetland project would be subject to both City and County policies and ordinances protecting biological resources-City policies and ordinances because it would be a City undertaking, and County policies and ordinances because the project site is outside City limits, in the unincorporated County. The City and County General Plans (City of Newman 2007, County of Merced 2013) both recognize the importance of protecting natural resources and include goals and policies to that end. The City also has an ordinance (City Code Chapter 11.04) that protects trees, but it applies only to street trees within City limits and thus is not applicable to the NCCA site, which in any case does not support trees at this time. The County does not have a tree ordinance or other ordinances specifically protecting biological resources.
Consistency with City and County General Plan goals and policies was evaluated in detail in the March 2021 IS, which deemed the NCCA projects, including the wetland project, consistent. Goals and policies have not changed since the circulation of the March 2021 IS, and the wetland project remains the same in essence as the 30% design previously analyzed. As a result, the finding that there would be No Impact related to inconsistency with local jurisdiction policies or ordinances protecting biological resources is still appropriate to the 60% design.
• Potential to conflict with an adopted conservation plan. As noted in the March 2021 IS, the NCCA site is not within an area coverd by an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The March ~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
33 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
2021 IS accordingly concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact related to conflict with any adopted conservation plan, and this conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design since no applicable conservation plan(s) has been adopted in the interim.
Conclusion: Biological Resources
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to biological resources is identified.
Cultural Resources
Review of Impacts
As detailed in the March 2021 IS, the NCCA parcels have been evaluated as having low archaeological sensitivity. No prehistoric, combined prehistoric/historic, or historic era archaeological sites have been recorded or reported on or within 0.25 mile of either parcel. No known prehistoric, ethnographic, or contemporary Native American resources have been identified on, adjacent to, or near either parcel. No historic era or architecturally significant sites, structures, landmarks, or points of interest have been identified on the parcels, and no national or state historical landmarks or points of interest are located on or adjacent to either parcel. However, a segment of the historic Santa Fe Grade, which is presumed to qualify as a historical resource for CEQA purposes, runs adjacent to and immediately outside the east boundary of the 24-acre parcel; to the south, of the parcels, the Newman Wasteway is also presumed to qualify as a historical resource (Basin Research Associates 2020).
Based on analysis in the March 2021 IS, the City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impacts with regard to cultural resources. With mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, as explained below.
34 • Potential for adverse change in significance of historical resources (context and integrity), Santa Fe Grade. The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project could adversely affect the integrity of the Santa Fe Grade if work on the 24-acre parcel were to extend. The City has adopted mitigation to prevent this (see Mitigation Measure CUL-1, Protection of Old Santa Fe Grade, Attachment Table A-1). With this mitigation in place-note that it is reflected in the 60% design as a No Disturbance area encompassing the footprint of the Grade-impacts under the 60% design would continue to be Less than Significant.
•
The March 2021 IS also identified that enhancement of wetland conditions on the 24-acre parcel could represent a Benefit to the context of the Santa Fe Grade, which was originally constructed to enable rail transport through wetlands historically present in the western San Joaquin Valley. This conclusion also applies to the 60% design.
Potential for adverse change in significance of archaeological resources. The March 2021 IS concluded that, although it was not likely, excavation and grading during both construction and grounddisturbing O&M would have some potential for unanticipated discovery of previously unknown archaeological resources buried in the subsurface. At worst, impacts could rise to a Significant level, and the City has adopted mitigation to address this: Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (Retention of On-Call Archaeologist), Mitigation Measure CUL-3 (Worker Awareness Training for Cultural Resources), and Mitigation Measure CUL-4 (Evaluation and Treatment of Unanticipated Archaeological Discoveries) (see Attachment Table A-1).
Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Because of the increase in excavation required by the 60% design, the potential for unanticipated discoveries could be somewhat greater than under the 30% design analyzed in the March 2021 IS.
However, Mitigation Measures CUL-2, CUL-3, and CUL-4 represent the current prevailing approach to avoid or reduce impacts related to unexpected archaeological discoveries, regardless of the extent of grading; with this mitigation in place, impacts would still be effectively avoided or reduced to a Less than Significant level under the 60% design.
• Potential for disturbance of human remains. Because the NCCA site is not sensitive for archaeological resources, inadvertent discovery of human remains during construction or grounddisturbing O&M was identified as unlikely in the March 2021 IS. However, it is not impossible, and the March 2021 IS acknowledges that disturbance of human remains could constitute a Significant impact.
The City has adopted mitigation to address this: Mitigation Measure CUL-5 (Procedures for Discovery of Human Remains) (see Attachment Table A-1 ).
Although the increase in excavation under the 60% design could increase the potential for inadvertent discovery of remains, Mitigation Measure CUL-5 would ensure that such discoveries, if any, are treated respectfully and in accordance with applicable state law. Impacts would therefore still be reduced to a Less than Significant level.
The following impact was identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. This finding continues to apply to the 60% design, as discussed below.
• Potential for adverse change in significance of historical resources (context), Newman Wasteway. The March 2021 IS concluded that impacts, if any, on the context of the Newman Wasteway would be Less than Significant, since the "green" character of the NCCA site would remain generally consistent with cultivated parcels in the vicinity and the wetland project would not detract from or impinge on the Wasteway's setting in a dominantly agricultural area. This would continue to be the case under the 60% design, which modifies the details of the wetland project but not its objectives or overall concept.
The March 2021 concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact related to the following. This finding continues to apply to the 60% design, as discussed below. • Potential for adverse change in significance of historical resources (integrity), Newman Wasteway. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project would have no direct physical impact on the Newman Wasteway and thus would not affect its integrity. This would continue to be the case under the 60% design, which modifies some of the details of the wetland project but not its general footprint, location, objectives, or overall concept.
Conclusion: Cultural Resources
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to cultural resources, including human remains, is identified.
Energy
Review of Impacts
The March 2021 IS acknowledges that both construction and ongoing O&M at the wetland project would entail direct and indirect consumption of energy but concludes that such consumption would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary due to City policies that recognize the importance of conserving energy resources ~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
35 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
and avoiding wasteful use of energy; General Plan Goal NR-5 and Policy RCR-1.11 are particularly relevant to the wetland project. Although the 60% design would increase the use of energy-due to the increased extent of grading for construction and the potential slight increase in O&M due to the addition of an outlet to the Miller Ditch from the 78-acre parcel-these policies, and the City's commitment to efficient energy use, would continue to apply. There would still be No Impact related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy.
The March 2021 IS also concluded that there was no potential for the project to conflict with or obstruct an adopted energy conservation plan; neither the City nor the County of Merced had such a plan in place at the time the IS was circulated, and this continues to be true. Thus, there would still be No Impact related to conflict with adopted energy conservation plans.
Conclusion: Energy
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to energy use or conflict with energy-related plans is identified.
Geology & Soils
Review of Impacts
The City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impacts with regard to geology and soils. With mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, with minor differences as noted below.
36 • Potential for topsoil loss, construction and long term. As the March 2021 IS identified, ground disturbance and earthwork during construction would have the potential to result in loss of topsoil resources. This potential would increase under the 60% design, due to the increased extent of earthwork required. However, Mitigation Measure GE0-1 (Topsoil Protection; see Attachment Table A1) provides for salvage and onsite reuse of topsoil removed for excavation, assuming a qualified biologist or ecologist with local native plant expertise evaluates it as suitable for use in restoration. If site topsoil is unsuitable (for instance, due to the presence of excessive invasive species seed bank) clean import topsoil consistent with site soils is to be substituted. Even with an expanded earthwork footprint this should prevent deleterious loss of topsoil and ensure that suitable topsoil resources are maintained onsite to support restoration plantings. The same requirements will apply to grounddisturbing O&M activities. With Mitigation Measure GE0-1 in place, impacts related to topsoil loss are still considered Less than Significant.
• Potential for destruction of paleontological resources, construction and long term. As detailed in the March 2021 IS, the NCCA parcels are situated on several geologic units identified as sensitive for paleontological resources, including vertebrate fossils. The potential to encounter-and damage or destroy-such resources would increase under the 60% design, again due to the increased extent and depth of earthwork by comparison with the 30% design. However, Mitigation Measures GE0-2 and GE0-3 (see Attachment Table A-1) require
- review of the final project design by qualified paleontological staff to assess the potential for earthwork to involve paleontological sensitive geologic units, followed by development of a Paleontological Resources Mitigation Plan (PRMP) if so
- implementation of the PRMP by qualified staff
Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Mitigation Measure GE0-4 further requires worker awareness training so the construction team can recognize fossil finds; this will support effective PRMP implementation as well as enabling recognition of unanticipated finds in the event a PRMP is not identified as necessary. With these measures in place, impacts on paleontological resources during construction would be addressed consistent with the current standard of care and residual impacts, if any, are accordingly still considered Less than Significant despite the increase in excavation required by the 60% design.
As noted in the March 2021 IS, most ground-disturbing O&M would affect substrate materials already disturbed by construction and thus, with Mitigation Measures GE0-2, GE0-3, and GE0-4 in place for construction, would have little potential to affect significant paleontological resources. In the event ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas is needed-unlikely, but not impossible-Mitigation Measure GE0-5 provides for qualified staff to evaluate the risk to paleontological resources and advise the City on appropriate measures to avoid damage/destruction of resources, up to and including implementation of Measures GE0-2 through GE0-4. With Mitigation Measure GE0-5 in place, O&Mrelated impacts on paleontological resources would be addressed consistent with the current standard of care and are still considered Less than Significant under the 60% design.
The following impacts were identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. These findings also apply to the 60% design, with some differences as identified below. • Exposure to seismic groundshaking, exposure to seismic-related ground failure, potential for location on expansive soils, and potential for location on unstable substrate materials (potential for excavation to result in unstable cuts). Adherence to the City's adopted Building Code (the 2019 California Building Standards Code) should ensure that risks of damage due to all of these hazards are minimized consistent with good engineering practices and the current prevailing standard of care, and residual impacts, if any, were accordingly evaluated as Less than Significant. The changes in the 60% design do not alter the prior findings for seismic groundshaking, seismic-related ground failure, and potential for location on expansive soils. With more extensive earthwork under the 60% design, there would in theory be increased potential to create unstable cut or fill slopes, but as the March 2021 IS concluded for the 30% design, adherence to building code standards should still effectively address this concern, and impacts are still expected to be Less than Significant. • Potential for soil erosion, construction and long term. Soil erosion during construction would be controlled by measures in the project SWPPP; although earthwork would increase under the 60% design, the SWPPP would be tailored to the final form of the project and therefore is confidently expected to provide adequate controls for the expanded grading/excavation now identified as necessary. AMM-4 (see Attachment Table A-1) would continue to address the potential for soil erosion during ongoing O&M, with no material differences from the 30% project concept analyzed in the March 2021 IS.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following .
These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, since the changes in the project would not alter the project concept and there have been no changes in the project's geologic context. • Exposure to surface fault rupture. The NCCA site is not within or in close proximity to any Earthquake Fault Zone defined by the State of California (State Geologist 1986, California Geological Survey 2019).
fJ'.:i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
37 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
• Exposure to landslide hazards. The State of California has not issued regulatory maps delineating Seismically Induced Landslide Zones for the vicinity of the project site (California Geological Survey 2019), but the site is located on nearly flat topography at a substantial distance from the rangefronts potentially prone to slope failure.
• Impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The project would not include any such facilities.
• Impacts on unique geological features. There are no such features at or in close proximity to the site.
Conclusion: Geology & Soils
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to geology, soils, geologic hazards, or paleontological resources is identified.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Review of Impacts
The March 2021 IS identified no Significant impacts with regard to GHG emissions, and no Significant impacts were identified during review of the 60% design.
The following impact was identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. This finding also applies to the 60% design, as explained below.
38 • Potential to generate GHG emissions. As the March 2021 IS identifies, the wetland project is specifically proposed to reduce GHG levels through wetland reestablishment and enhancement, planting of native riparian trees, and restoration of native perennial grassland. GHG sequestration due to the land use change associated with the wetland project has been estimated at approximately 154 MT C02e over 50 years (Pinnell pers. comm.). This represents a direct project Benefit that should remain essentially unchanged under the 60% design, since the overall project concept is the same as the 30% design previously analyzed.
As identified in Appendix C to the March 2021 IS, CAPCOA's CalEEMod® software (CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2) was used to quantify the short-term, temporary GHG emissions associated with construction of the NCCA projects ( 1,529 metric tonnes [MT] C02e) and CARB's EMF AC calculator was used to quantify the annual GHG emissions associated with NCCA O&M and visitors (1,475 MT C02e/year).
As discussed in more detail in the March 2021 IS, the SJV APCD has not identified a quantitative significance threshold for GHGs. The primary method that SJV APCD has used to evaluate the significance of project GHG emissions involves a comparison to a Business-as-Usual (BAU) baseline; projects that reduce GHGs by 29% by comparison with BAU are considered consistent with California's 2020 GHG goal. However, SJV APCD's relevant policies were focused largely on the design of residential and commercial developments, not wetlands or parks projects, and they have not been updated for 2030 - 2040 GHG goals. In this context, the March 2021 IS evaluated the GHG emissions impacts of the NCCA projects based on the principles identified by several other air districts referenced on SJV A~CD's web page-the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Sacramento Redtail Consulting E
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)-summarized below.
- The BAAQMD has elected not to recommend a threshold for construction GHG emissions because "there is not sufficient evidence to determine a level at which construction emissions are significant" (Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2009). The BAAQMD's operational emissions threshold of 1, 100 MT C02e/year is based on ( 1) an estimate of the emissions reductions that the Bay Area was targeting to achieve by 2020, (2) an estimate of what percentage of housing, commercial, and industrial projects exceed that threshold, and (3) an estimate of the extent of mitigation applied by projects triggering that threshold-that is, showing that the (2) and (3) above were sufficient to achieve the desired target (1 ). Neither parks nor wetland restoration projects were included in the BAAQMD's evaluation; they are not considered a significant contributor to regional GHG emissions and there are no impactful GHG mitigation approaches that apply to them (Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2009).
- SMAQMD opted to use the BAAQMD's operational emissions threshold. To maintain a consistent threshold for GHG emissions, it also applies this threshold to construction emissions, but acknowledges the difficulty of mitigating emissions onsite other than through BMPs already in practice to reduce criteria pollutant emissions, such as limiting idling times. As a result, SMAQMD allows construction emissions to be amortized over the project lifespan (Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District 2014, 2020). - SCAQMD identifies an operational emissions threshold of 10,000 MT C02e/year for stationary air pollution sources such as industrial equipment, but gives lead agencies discretion for land use projects (South Coast Air Quality Management District 2019).
The March 2021 IS identified total (four-project) NCCA GHG emissions (1 ,528 MT C02e total for construction and 1,4 75 MT C02e/year for ongoing operations8) as relatively low numbers considered in the context of these thresholds. Moreover, consistent with the SJV APCD's approach, the NEWS, MDTW, and Newman Nature Park projects would incorporate feasible GHG reduction strategies, such as the use of solar lighting, limited parking availability tailored to anticipated usership, and bicycle racks and end-of-trip facilities to support non-motorized access to the site. 9 Additional GHG reductions would be associated with implementation of Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-2 (see Attachment Table A-1), which would limit travel to the site once a threshold is reached. The NCCA projects' individual and collective construction-period and operational GHG emissions were accordingly evaluated as Less than Significant.
These conclusions remain valid for the 60% design, for the following reasons. - The increase in construction GHG emissions due to changes in the wetland project is only 58 MT C02e (Tamura Environmental 2021b). To put this in context, even with the increase, total NCCA-wide construction emissions would still be substantially below SMAQMD's 1, 100 MT C02e/year threshold for amortized construction emissions, and the wetland project would 8 Operational emissions were calculated assuming 170 visitor trips to the NCCA per day (45 local and 125 from outside the Newman area), based on estimates of visitor usage at build-out detailed in the March 2021 IS. This is a conservative estimate since in practice visitor trips to the site would be capped and/or local users would be prioritized under Mitigation Measures TR-1 (NCCA Usage Monitoring) and TR-2 (Reservations System and Usage Management).
9 Such measures of course do not apply to the wetland project, as a "pure" restoration undertaking. ~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
39 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
contribute only a portion of the NCCA-wide total. For additional context, average emissions from a single semi-tractor trailer truck are approximately 100 MT C02e/year (Tamura Environmental 2021 a).
- Operational GHG emissions would be essentially unchanged10, and the wetland project's contribution would continue to represent a small fraction of total operational emissions since the wetland project would not provide visitor facilities and is expected to require the least O&M of any of the NCCA projects
The wetland project's construction period and operational GHG emissions are therefore still evaluated as Less than Significant.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project (and NCCA projects in general) would have No Impact with regard to the following. This finding continues to apply to the 60% design, as explained below. • Potential to conflict with an applicable GHG plan, policy, or regulation. As discussed in detail in the March 2021 IS, multiple GHG plans, policies, and regulations are in place at the federal, state, and regional/local levels. The NCCA projects were evaluated as consistent with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations, and no conflicts were identified for any of the projects, including the wetland project. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design, because the project's overall nature, features, function, and purpose remain unchanged. The project would still have No Impact with regard to conflict with applicable GHG plans, policies, or regulations.
Conclusion: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to greenhouse gas emissions is identified.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Review of Impacts
The City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impacts with regard to hazards and hazardous materials. With mitigation incorporated, impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, with minor differences as noted below. • Potential to create hazards related to location on a listed hazardous materials site. As identified in the March 2021 IS, the project would not be located on a site listed for hazardous materials contamination, and is unlikely to be affected by known contamination. However, the March 2021 IS acknowledged that there was some potential for Significant impacts related to unanticipated discoveries of hazardous materials, discussed further in the following paragraphs.
Because of the project site's location in an area with a long history of agricultural use, the March 2021 IS acknowledged that there may be some potential for unanticipated discoveries of hazardous substances-such as pesticides, herbicides, fuels, and lubricants-during construction or grounddisturbing O&M. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 (Hazardous Materials Response; see Attachment Table A1) requires a stop-work in the area of the find, followed by evaluation by qualified staff, and implementation of appropriate follow-up and protective measures. Although the potential for such 10 There could be a minor increase in O&M emissions associated with inspection and maintenance of the new outlet from the 78-acre parcel.
However, for efficiency, O&M at the new outlet would be combined with other visits to the site, effectively minimizing the potential for increase.
The increase was considered likely to be so small (and so difficult to predict with specificity) that it was not calculated. 40 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
discoveries could increase under the 60% design due to the increase in grading required, Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would still provide for appropriate evaluation and follow-up, and would ensure protection for construction workers, the public, and the environment, consistent with applicable regulations and standards. Impacts related to unanticipated hazardous materials discoveries are therefore still expected to be Less than Significant with Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 in place.
Additionally, as discussed in the March 2021 IS, preliminary soil and sediment testing conducted at the NCCA site indicated that localized areas with elevated mercury concentrations were present (Beutel pers. comm.). 11 The highest mercury content measured in the prelimiary round of testing was substantially below both the state Department of Toxic Substances Control's screening level for mercury in soils at residential uses (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2020) and the San Francisco Bay RWQCB's Tier 1 Environmental Screening Level, which is a conservative value intended to be protective at sites with unrestricted land and water use, shallow soil contamination, shallow groundwater, and permeable soils (San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board 2019, 2020). The March 2021 IS concluded that Significant impacts were not likely, but the City has adopted mitigation to address the NCCA projects' potential to contribute to Significant existing cumulative impacts with regard to mercury methylation in aquatic environments and mercury bioaccumulation:
Mitigation Measure C-1, Pre- and Post-Construction Soil Testing for Mercury (see Attachment Table A1 ). Under this measure, soils with mercury content exceeding 0.1 milligram per kilogram by dry weight-the typical background level in parts of California where mercury content is not naturally elevated due to geologic sources-must either be removed from the site for appropriate disposal or capped so they are not surface-exposed, and precautions to prevent worker and public exposure to such soils during handling are required. With this conservative measure in place, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts related to the potential for soils with elevated mercury at the site would be Less than Significant.
This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design. The potential for worker and public exposure could increase during construction, due to the increase extent of earthwork, but Measure C-1 would provide protection consistent with prevailing best practices and applicable regulations, and impacts are still expected to be Less than Significant.
The following impact was identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. This findings also applies to the 60% design, as discussed below.
• Potential to create hazards related to transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; potential to create hazardous materials releases. Construction and O&M would involve the use of substances that qualify as hazardous per state law, such as vehicle and equipment fuels and lubricants. However, it is standard City procedure to require that all such substances be handled and disposed in strict accordance with good construction practices, label warnings, and applicable federal and state regulations. During construction, the project SWPPP would provide additional protection related to spill prevention and response, and during O&M AMM-4 (see Attachment Table A-1) would continue to require measures to avoid and respond to spills. None of this would change under the 60% design, and impacts related to use of hazardous substances are still expected to be Less than Significant
11 This has since been borne out by additional soil testing conducted for the NEWS project under adopted Mitigation Measure C-1 (Pre- and Post-Construction Soil Testing for Mercury, see Attachment Table A-1) (Redtail Consulting and RICK Engineering 2021 ). f!':.i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
41 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following.
These findings continue to apply to the 60% design since there have been no changes to the project's setting and the project would still be subject to the Citis Improvement Standards and Standard Details during construction and O&M.
• Potential for handling or emission of hazardous substances or waste within 0.25 mile of a school. No public or private schools are located within 0.25 mile of the project site. • Location on a listed hazardous materials site. Neither of the NCCA parcels is listed for hazardous materials contamination (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2021, State Water Resources Control Board 2021).
• Hazards related to location in proximity to public and public-use airports. The project site is not within any Airport Influence Area (Merced County Airport Land Use Commission 2012, Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission 2016), nor is it within 2 miles of any public or public-use airport. • Potential to interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan. The Improvement Standards and Standard Details prohibit roadway closures, require public rights-of-way to be maintained in an accessible condition, and require any barricades, pylons, or other traffic control measures to be configured in a manner than enables emergency vehicle passage. • Potential for exposure to wildland fire hazards. Although the project would restore and preserve habitat, it would not be located in a wildland area, which are locations "in which development is essentially nonexistent, except for roads, railroads, powerlines, and similar transportation facilities" and where structures, if any, are widely scattered National Wildfire Coordinating Group (n.d.).
Conclusion: Hazards & Hazardous Materials
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to hazards or hazardous materials is identified.
Hydrology & Water Quality
Review of Impacts
The March 2021 IS identified no Significant impacts with regard to hydrology or water quality, and no Significant impacts were identified during review of the 60% design.
The following impacts were identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. These findings also apply to the 60% design, with minor differences as discussed below. 42 • Potential to interfere with sustainable groundwater management through impedance of groundwater recharge, long term. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the NCCA site's current contribution to groundwater recharge in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin is not quantified. However, the NCCA parcels were assumed to be making some contribution to recharge due to seasonal flood irrigation-which was still occurring until late 2020-and the permeability of soils at the site. Overall, the March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would increase infiltration at the site, largely due to the expansion and improvement of emergent marsh within the central swale. On the 24-acre parcel, where ephemeral hydrology would be restored to wetlands that currently receive agricultural tailwater and until very recently were flood-irrigated in the dry season, ponding extent and duration would decrease substantially, decreasing infiltration. However, the March 2021 IS concluded that the Redtail Consulting l'!;i
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
decrease in infiltration due to these changes should be offset by increased infiltration via the enhanced central swale area.
Although the area of emergent marsh planned under the 60% design has decreased from the 30% design, the extent of seasonal wetland has increased substantially, and the overall footprint of emergent and seasonal wetland remains about the same (see Table 1). Consequently impacts on groundwater recharge are still expected to be Less than Significant on balance, with potential for a slight Benefit.
• Potential to alter existing drainage patterns and result in increased erosion or siltation, construction period. The March 2021 IS identified that ground disturbance during construction of the wetland project would have some potential to accelerate soil erosion and offsite delivery of sediment, but concluded that impacts would be Less than Significant in view of the protections afforded by AMM-4 (Wetland and Water Quality Protection; see Attachment Table A-1) and the Project SWPPP.
This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design. With more grading required, the potential for alteration in existing drainage patterns would be greater, as would the potential for temporary increases in erosion and/or offsite delivery of sediment, but AMM-4 and the project SWPPP (which would be tailored to the final project design) should continue to prevent adverse outcomes. Construction-period impacts related to increases in erosion and siltation are accordingly still expected to be Less than Significant.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following. Most of the same conclusions continue to apply to the 60% design, with some differences as explained below. • Potential for violation of water quality standards, construction period. The March 2021 IS acknowledged the potential for wetland project construction to result in accelerated erosion and delivery of elevated sediment loading to downstream waters, and for spills of substances used during construction (such as vehicle fuels and lubricants) to result in delivery of other pollutants to offsite waters. However, with AMM-4 (Wetland and Water Quality Protection; see Attachment Table A-1) and the project SWPPP in place, the March 2021 IS concluded that the project would have No Impact related to violation of water quality standards during construction. More extensive grading under the 60% design could increase the potential for delivery of sediment and construction-related pollutants and the corollary potential for violation of water quality standards, but AMM-4 and the SWPPP (which would be tailored to the final project design) are still expected to provide effective protection for water quality, and the project is still expected to have No Impact related to violation of water quality standards during construction.
• Potential for violation of water quality standards, long term. The March 2021 IS identified that, like construction, ground-disturbing O&M would have the potential to result in accelerated erosion and delivery of sediment to downstream waters. Some O&M activities would also have the potential to result in spills and downstream delivery of other pollutants such as fuels and lubricants offsite. With AMM-4 in place, however, the March 2021 IS concluded that offsite delivery of sediment and other pollutants would be effectively controlled, and that the project would therefore have No Impact related to violation of water quality standards during O&M. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design, since the overall nature and general scale of O&M activity remains the same, and AMM-4 would continue to be required during O&M. The project is still expected to have No Impact related to violation of water quality standards over the long term.
~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
43 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
• Potential for violation of existing Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), construction and long term. As identified in the March 2021 IS, no WDRs specific to the NCCA parcels were in place as of the circulation of that document. This remains the case, and the project would still have No Impact related to violation of existing WDRs over either the short or long term. • Potential for violation of future WDRs. The 30% wetland project design analyzed in the March 2021 IS was not planned to discharge offsite. As a result, WDRs were not expected to be necessary to authorize the project, and the March 2021 IS concluded that the project would have No Impact related to the potential for violation of future WDRs. As described in more detail in Project Elements above, under the 60% design, the project would now include an outfall returning central swale flow to the Miller Ditch. However, all waters on and adjacent to the site are now presumed to be federally jurisdictional12, and because the project will require permitting from the Corps under Clean Water Act Section 404, the Central Valley RWQCB is expected to regulate offsite discharges under the Clean Water Act Section 401 water quality certification process. The project is therefore still expected to have No Impact related to the potential for violation of future WDRs, but for slightly different reasons. The project is also expected to have No Impact with regard to violation of standards required by the water quality certification process for the following reasons: (1) residence in central swale emergent marsh habitat is expected to improve water quality by comparison with influent Miller Ditch conditions, due to the natural processes discussed in the March 2021 IS for water treatment in the NEWS and MDTW project constructed wetlands, and (2) the RWQCB will continue to have regulatory oversight over the project to the extent agency staff consider it warranted.
• Other substantial degradation of water quality, construction period and long term. The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have a long-term Benefit on the quality of water infiltrating into the subsurface at the NCCA site because (1) it would increase the extent and improve the quality and function of wetlands, expanding the natural filtration function of wetland habitat at the site, and (2) it would institute more stringent management of grazing at the site, which should reduce fecal input to infiltrating waters. This finding also applies to the 60% design, since neither of these project features has altered.
As identified above, the 30% design analyzed in the March 2021 IS was not planned to discharge offsite, so (1) Benefits to water quality as a result of the wetland project were expected to be limited to the immediate site and local shallow groundwater, and (2) the project would have no potential for offsite impacts on water quality. With the central swale on the 78-acre parcel now planned to discharge back to the Miller Ditch, this has changed somewhat: Benefits to water quality as a result of the wetland project would now accrue to the Miller Ditch and downstream receiving waters as well as local groundwater.
Additionally, the potential for a slight increase in salinity as a result of evapotranspiration in expanded and improved wetlands on the site would now have the potential to impact downstream receiving waters. This was not addressed in the March 2021 IS, since the 30% design did not include offsite 12 The March 2021 IS was prepared and circulated while the 2020 Waters of the United States Rule (also referred to as the Navigable Waters Protection Rule) was in effect. Under the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, some wetlands/waters on the site were arguably outside Corps jurisdiction. However, in early September 2021, responding to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona's decision in the Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency case, the EPA announced that it was halting implementation of the 2020 Rule and would be interpreting "Waters of the United States" consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime while further evaluation and rulemaking moves ahead (see https://www .epa.gov/wotus/current-implementation-waters-united-states). Corps jurisdiction is more expansive under the pre-2015 working definition of Waters of the United States, and it now seems reasonable to presume that all waters on and adjacent to the site are subject to Corps jurisdiction; this is the approach taken in the permit applications the City recently submitted for the project. 44 Redtail Consulting f!':.i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
discharge. However, the March 2021 IS did consider the potential for evapotranspiration-related salinity increases at both the NEWS and MDTW projects and concluded that output salinities would still meet applicable Basin Plan water quality objectives and SWRCB standards for potable water. This was based on modeling conducted by the UC Merced team for the MDTW project which showed a 10% increase in salinity in output waters, assuming a 15.8-acre treatment wetland (Rodal Morales and Beutel 2021 ).
Rodal Morales' and Beutel's (2021) modeling used input salinities from water quality sampling in the Miller Ditch. Consequently, during the period when the wetland project receives input directly from the Miller Ditch, salinity increases at the wetland project, and salinity values in wetland project discharge, should be similar to those for the MDTW and NEWS projects, or slightly less, since the extent of wetlands at the project would be smaller. Salinity in wetland project output during the initial period using Miller Ditch supply should therefore be consistent with Basin Plan objectives, as laid out in the March 2021for the NEWS and MDTW projects.
Once the MDTW project comes online, input salinity to the wetland project would increase slightly by comparison with Miller Ditch values due to interim residence in the MDTW project wetland cells; MDTW · project output salinity is estimated at 726 microSiemenslcentimeter (µSiem) on annual average (Rodal Morales and Beutel 2021 ). Assuming an additional salinity increase of 10% within the wetland project, wetland project output salinities would be on the order of 799 µSiem on annual average. This is well below the applicable Basin Plan limits-900 µSiem (recommended) and 1,600 µSiem (upper limit) based on annual average of sample results. Consequently, impacts with regard to increased salinity in wetland project discharge are expected to be Less than Significant, and no mitigation is required. • Potential to impede sustainable groundwater management through groundwater consumption, construction and vegetation establishment periods. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, construction of the wetland project would require some use of water to control fugitive dust during grading. Temporary irrigation or hand watering may also be necessary during the vegetation establishment period, especially if planting occurs during a particularly dry or hot period. Water is expected to come from the City's municipal supply, which relies exclusively on groundwater. Both construction water use and water use for vegetation establishment would be limited, temporary, and short-term, similar to the demand for other land development projects of commensurate extent, and the demand projections used in the City's water supply planning factor in typical construction use in addition to domestic, municipal, agricultural, and industrial consumption. In this context, the March 2021 IS concluded that there would be No Impact on sustainable groundwater management.
With more extensive grading required, the need for water during the construction period would likely increase under the 60% design but would still be well within the envelope accounted for by City water supply planning. Water needs for vegetation establishment are not expected to change materially under the 60% design. As a result, the project is still expected to have No Impact on sustainable groundwater management.
• Potential to impede sustainable groundwater management through groundwater consumption, long term. As noted above, the City's water supply is 100% dependent on local groundwater. Analysis of long-term water use in the March 2021 IS identified that the NEWS and Newman Nature Park projects would both require a small ongoing commitment of water supply for uses such as gateway irrigation and trash capture device cleaning at NEWS, and restroom cleaning and occasional washdown of common spaces at the Newman Nature Park. These uses were expected to be well within City supply capacity, as City water supply planning takes municipal O&M use into account. The March 2021 ~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
45 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
46 IS therefore concluded that O&M use of City groundwater supply would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or otherwise impede sustainable groundwater management, and that there would be No Impact in this regard.
The March 2021 IS did not specifically identify the wetland project as using City water supply over the long term, since the 30% design was envisioned as requiring very little ongoing O&M. This would still be true under the 60% design, although the trash rack added to the 60% design (not included in the 30% project) would require periodic cleaning, and the addition of an outlet from the 78-acre parcel could also slightly increase O&M needs over the long term, conceivably involving the use of City water at times. Nonetheless, these uses would be very limited, and are expected to be well within the envelope of City planning for municipal O&M use-particularly as the NCCA facility has been on the City's planning radar for a number of years. The slight increase in O&M needs for the wetland project as currently envisioned is therefore not expected to substantially decrease groundwater supplies or otherwise impede sustainable groundwater management. The project would have No Impact related to impedance of sustainable groundwater management, and no mitigation is required. • Potential to alter existing drainage patterns and result in increased erosion or siltation, long term. AMM-4 (Wetland and Water Quality Protection; see Attachment Table A-1) would continue to be required for any ground-disturbing O&M at the wetland project, and the March 2021 IS found that this would reduce the potential for long-term increases in offsite erosion or siltation to a Less than Significant level. This would continue to be true for the 60% design, since the overall project concept, the general nature and scope of O&M activities, and AMM-4 all remain unchanged. •
The March 2021 IS also acknowledged that the wetland project was specifically intended to modify surface water flow and drainage at the NCCA site. It concluded that because the project would not discharge offsite, it would have No Impact related to increases in offsite siltation, and that although minor sediment mobility could occur onsite, this (again, by design) would be analogous to sediment mobility in a natural wetland and therefore represented a Less than Significant impact. Under the 60% design, the central swale would now discharge from the 78-acre parcel back to the Miller Ditch.
However, this is not expected to increase the potential for offsite siltation; if anything, residence in the central swale marsh should foster sediment settling and decrease the sediment load in waters returned to the Ditch. The project is therefore still expected to have No Impact with regard to offsite increases in sediment delivery/siltation. Impacts related to onsite sediment mobility are still expected to be Less than Significant, for the same reasons identified in the March 2021 IS, all of which still apply under the 60% design.
Potential to alter existing drainage patterns and result in increased offsite runoff leading to flooding, long term. The March 2021 IS found that because the wetland project would be configured to retain flows onsite, where they would contribute to wetland development, it would not deliver flows offsite, and would therefore have No Impact related to increases in offsite flood hazards. As discussed above, under the 60% design, the central swale on the 78-acre parcel would now discharge to the Miller Ditch. However, the flows returned to the Miller Ditch would represent supply originally diverted into the central swale (or, later, into the central swale via the MDTW treatment wetlands) minus a small percentage "lost" to infiltration and evapotranspiration; outflow would thus be less than inflow, and since the project would not alter the geometry or capacity of the Ditch up- or downstream of the project, the new discharge should have no potential to result in increased flood hazard. The project is still expected to have No Impact related to increased offsite runoff leading to flooding.
Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
• Potential to alter existing drainage patterns and result in exceedance of stormwater drainage capacity, long term. As described in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project would not add hardscape to the project site, and under the 30% design the project was evaluated as resulting in more efficient and beneficial management of storm runoff within the site, potentially reducing overland runoff to the Miller Ditch. As a result, the March 2021 IS found that the project would have No Impact with regard to exceedance of stormwater drainage capacity, and that it could result in a Benefit to stormwater management.
Under the 60% design, the wetland project would now include an outfall from the central swale on the 78-acre parcel to the Miller Ditch, and the inleUoutlet connecting the central swale on the 24-acre parcel with the Ditch would be improved or replaced. All of these changes would have the potential to deliver stormwater runoff offsite, to the Miller Ditch. Accordingly, new modeling was conducted for this Addendum, to verify that Miller Ditch capacity is adequate and that the new/improved connections would not cause the Ditch to overtop under storm conditions. Modeling assessed peak runoff from the 78-acre parcel and the 24-acre parcel plus the intervening privately owned parcel separately, and then evaluated the combined effect of runoff from all three parcels on Miller Ditch stage (Caspers pers. comm.[a]).
Modeling relied on HEC-HMS13 and used National Weather Service Precipitation Frequency Data Server (https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/) rainfall data for the Newman area. Effects of the 5-, 10-, 25-, and 50-year storm events were assessed. 14 Modeling incorporated the following additional assumptions, which were selected for a realistic approach while still projecting conservatively high flows appropriate for assessing potential capacity impacts (Caspers pers. comm.[a], pers. comm.[b]). (1) The NEWS project would be graded immediately following wetland project grading (see discussion in Changes in Project above), and the NEWS footprint would therefore not contribute runoff to the central swale once the wetland project is completed. Modeling for the 78-acre parcel thus considered runoff from the remainder of the parcel-the UC Merced project and Newman Nature Park footprints and the central swale itself (2) Stage in the central swale would be at its maximum inundation level at the time of the storm, which is conservative but reasonably realistic since diversions into the central swale from the Miller Ditch would occur during the winter months when storms are most likely (3) Baseflow flow in the Miller Ditch would be at its typical yearly maximum at the time runoff reaches the Ditch; this represents an unlikely worst case, since peak irrigation flows in the Ditch occur in the dry season when CCID supply is diverted for agricultural use, whereas peak storm runoff would typically occur during the wet season. Maximum flow levels in the Ditch were inferred at 77 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) based on field observations of the high water mark in 2021
13 Developed at the Corps' Hydrologic Engineering Center, HEC-HMS is a widely used modeling tool that simulates hydrologic processes in dendritic watersheds (see https://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-hms/). 14 Because the site is within the 100-year floodplain, it was assumed that under 100-year storm conditions, there would be substantial impairment of Miller Ditch conveyance, such that runoff would be backwatered within the NCCA parcels and/or would move overland toward the San Joaquin River via the path of least resistance. The 100-year storm was therefore not included in the modeling discussed here.
However, a preliminary round of calculations did consider the 100-year storm and showed that-absent interference from areally expansive floodwaters within the broader floodplain-the Miller Ditch likely has adequate capacity to convey runoff from rainfall associated with a storm of this magnitude, even making very conservative modeling assumptions (Caspers pers. comm.[c]). ~ Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
47 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
48 (4) All runoff would reach the Ditch, with no storage or infiltration on the parcels or in the central swale; this is conservative, since even at maximum design water level the active storage provided by the central swale's outlet works would provide additional time for water to infiltrate into the soil column
(5) As a corollary to (3), both parcels have a free outfall to the Ditch. This is also a conservative assumption: in actuality, flows exiting the two NCCA parcels via the wetland project outlets would begin to backwater once the water surface elevation in the Ditch reaches each outlet elevation. On the 24-acre parcel, this would occur when stage in the Ditch reaches 7 4.8 feet (the elevation of the 24-acre parcel's inlet/outlet), and on the 78-acre parcel, it would occur when Ditch stage reaches 78.1 feet (the elevation of the outlet from the 78-acre parcel). As a result, outflow from the wetland project would decrease stepwise as the water surface elevation rises in the Ditch, with progressively more runoff stored onsite until stage in the Ditch decreases below the outlet elevations. Additional backwater effects could occur as a result of flow constrictions at downstream culverts and could contribute to elevation of Ditch stage; this would become increasingly likely in larger storm events (6) No storm runoff from the NCCA parcels currently reaches the Ditch-that is, high water levels in the Ditch are not presently reflecting stormwater input, and all runoff would therefore be in addition to existing flow levels; this is also conservative, since some runoff from at least the 24- acre parcel likely reaches the Ditch via the existing connection Modeling for the central swale on the 78-acre parcel assumed a 6-minute lag time for runoff to reach the Ditch and used an HMS Curve Number of 98 to reflect the assumption that the central swale is at maximum design inundation level and no infiltration occurs via the swale invert or banks. Modeling for the intervening parcel and 24-acre parcel assumed a lag time of 33.3 minutes for flow to reach the Ditch; this was calculated using average velocities for cultivated row crops on a slope of 0.01, and is also conservative as the slope on these parcels is closer to 0.001 based on available topographic data.
An HMS Curve Number of 89 was chosen as the best fit for these parcels since it is recommended for straight row crops on hydrologic soil group D (Caspers pers. comm.[a]).
Table 11 summarizes modeling results; not surprisingly, the maximum increase in Miller Ditch stage as a result of runoff transmitted via the wetland project outlets is projected for the 50-year storm event.
Table 11. Stormwater Runoff Effects on Miller Ditch Stage Resulting Runoff
St E t Incident Via Central From Private . Increase in Miller orm ven R . f 11 Combined o· h am a Swale 78-Acre and 24-Acre 1tc 5 tage ' Total Parcel Parcels I 5-year 1.8 in 7.7 cfs 22.2 cfs 29.6 cfs 0.3 ft
10-year 2.0 in 11 .9 cfs 29.4 cfs 39.9 cfs 0.4 ft
24-year 2.5 in 17.0 cfs 40.3 cfs 45.7 cfs 0.5 ft
50-year 2.8 in 21.1 cfs 49.4 cfs 67.9 cfs 0.7 ft
Abbreviations:
in = inches
cfs = cubic feet per second
ft = foot
Source: Caspers pers. comm.[d]
Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
The height of the Miller Ditch berms varies, but is at least 79 feet AMSL where the Ditch borders the project site and appears to be similar downstream. Under 50-year storm conditions, the projected water level rise of 0.7 foot added to a maximum water surface elevation of 77 feet AMSL (inferred based on field observations of the high water mark) would give a stage of 77. 7 feet AMSL, well below the berm crest. Consequently, even under conservatively modeled worst case conditions, runoff delivered via the wetland project outlets is evaluated as unlikely to result in the Ditch overtopping.
Additionally, as noted above, backwater effects impeding outflow from the wetland project would become increasingly likely in larger and more intense storm events. At the same time, the project would increase the capacity of the central swale on both the 78-acre and 24-acre parcels, improving its ability to store runoff onsite, and in effect providing increased offline detention for stormwater flows.
Consequently, under some scenarios, there could actually be a Benefit to stormwater management as a result of the 60% design.
Finally, as part of routine O&M, the City will be inspecting the site following storm events. Thus, if problems arise, they would be detected promptly, and the City will be responsible for working with CCID to ensure that they are corrected.
Impacts associated with the potential for exceedance of stormwater drainage capacity under the 60% design are accordingly evaluated as Less than Significant, with a potential for Benefit to stormwater management. No mitigation is required.
• Potential to alter existing drainage patterns and result in new sources of polluted runoff, long term. The March 2021 IS found that O&M at the wetland project would have the potential to generate silt as a result of ground disturbance, and could use potential pollutants such as fuels and lubricants, but determined that the potential for release and offsite delivery of these substances would be effectively addressed by the requirement for continued implementation of AMM-4 (Wetland and Water Quality Protection; see Attachment Table A-1) throughout the lifespan of the NCCA. Although the outfall from the 78-acre parcel to the Miller Ditch would represent a pathway for pollutant conveyance that was not contemplated in the March 2021 IS, the wetland project still would not create new areas of impervious surface, and AMM-4 is still expected to provide robust protection during O&M; as a result, the project is still expected to have No Impact related to new sources of polluted runoff.
Potential to alter existing drainage patterns and result in impedance or redirection of floodflows, long term. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, flood hazard mapping issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (2020) shows the NCCA site within Zone A, which is defined as the area subject to inundation by the 1 %-annual-chance flood event, commonly referred to as the 100-year floodplain. The site is also within the dam failure inundation zone for San Luis Dam (County of Stanislaus 2015), located about 17 miles to the south-southwest of the NCCA site. Analyzing the 30% design, the March 2021 IS stated that the wetland project would modify topography and hydrology to increase the extent and quality of wetlands but would not install new above-grade structures of any kind, and that if fencing were used to protect the new wetland areas from grazing damage during establishment, it would be barb-wire or similar and would not substantially impede or redirect floodflows. From the perspective of floodflow management, the most substantial change as a result of the wetland project was therefore expected to be expansion of the marsh area in the central swale, and reestablishmenUexpansion of the surface hydraulic connection between the central swale and the southwest portion of the 78-acre parcel, which if anything would increase the 78-acre parcel's ability to accommodate floodflows. As a result, the March 2021 IS concluded that the project would have No Impact, and could result in a Benefit, related to impedance and redirection of floodflows. r..i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
49 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
Under the 60% design, it is not strictly correct that the project would not install above-grade structures; there would be a new inlet and outlet serving the central swale on the 78-acre parcel, the new inlet would be equipped with a trash rack, and the inlet to the central swale on the 24-acre parcel would be expanded and improved. All of these features, however, would be very low-profile, small in extent, and close to if not at-grade. As a result, they would not have potential to result in substantial impedance or redirection of floodflows; the project is still expected to have No Impact in this regard. At the same time, the increased expansion and deepening of the central swale, and improvement in overall hydrologic function at the site, restoring it to a hydraulic function closer to natural floodplain wetlands, is still expected to result in greater Benefits to the site's ability to store and convey floodwaters. • Potential for release of pollutants due to flood, tsunami, or seiche inundation. As the March 2021 IS identifies, the NCCA site-located in an inland valley and at some distance from the nearest large enclosed body of water, San Luis Reservoir-is not subject to tsunami hazards and is not considered to be at substantial risk of seiche inundation. Clearly, neither of these conditions has changed, and there is still expected to be No Impact with regard to either tsunami or seiche inundation. The site is within the 100-year floodplain as well as the dam failure inundation zone for San Luis Dam, but since the City does not intend to store potential pollutants on the NCCA site, the March 2021 IS concluded that there would be No Impact related to release of pollutants in the event of a flood. This conclusion remains unchanged since there is still no intent to store pollutants on the site, and in any case, the wetland project would offer no facilities that could accommodate such storage. • Potential to conflict with or obstruct a Water Quality Control Plan. As identified in the March 2021 IS, the relevant Plan is the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, Fifth Edition (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2018). As discussed for previous items above, construction ground disturbance would have some potential to degrade water quality through accelerated erosion and offsite sediment delivery, and through accidental releases of pollutants such as vehicle and equipment fuels. With AMM4 (see Attachment Table A-1) and the project SWPPP in place, however, the March 2021 IS concluded that the potential for adverse impacts on water quality during construction would be controlled consistent with applicable regulatory requirements and construction best practices, and that there would therefore be No Impact related to conflict with or obstruction of the Basin Plan as a result of construction. This conclusion remains unchanged for the 60% design.
The March 2021 IS also acknowledged that O&M would have some potential to result in delivery of sediment and/or pollutants to downstream waters, similar to construction but more limited due to the restricted extent of O&M activities, but concluded that with AMM-4 in place, the potential for adverse effects on water quality would be controlled in accordance with construction best practices and that there would therefore be No Impact related to conflict with or obstruction of the Basin Plan as a result of O&M. This conclusion also remains unchanged for the 60% design.
Finally, the March 2021 IS found that the wetland project has the potential for long-term direct Benefits to water quality, which would be supportive of Basin Plan goals and policies and was thus evaluated as a Benefit to Basin Plan implementation. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design, which would offer similar or greater Benefits to water quality. • Potential to conflict with or obstruct a Groundwater Management Plan. As identified in the March 2021 IS, the applicable Plan is the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group (San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group 2019a), inclusive of Appendix Q (San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group 2019b), which is 50 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
specific to the City. The City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) (City of Newman 2021d) is also relevant, since the City is 100% reliant on groundwater supply and the UWMP includes demand management measures.15
As discussed above, the March 2021 IS acknowledged that the wetland project would make minor use of City water to control dust during grading, and would probably continue to use small amounts of water-either Miller Ditch diversions or City supply-for hand watering during the vegetation establishment period. Demand during construction was expected to be comparatively small and restricted to the short period (approximately 1 month) when active earthwork is occuring. Hand watering would be restricted to the dry season and was not expected to continue for more than 3 - 5 years. As such, both construction and establishment period use of City ground water supply were evaluated as within the scope of the City's groundwater management planning and therefore considered consistent with such planning. The March 2021 IS accordingly concluded that there would be No Impact with regard to conflict with or impedance of a groundwater management plan during the construction and vegetation establishment periods. This finding continues to apply to the 60% design; construction water use would likely increase by comparison with the 30% design, due to the increase in grading, but would still be well within the scope of City forward planning.
As described in the March 2021 IS, once the new plantings become established they would be selfsustaining under the natural rainfall regime, with first direct Miller Ditch and then MDTW (treated Miller Ditch) flows supporting the expanded marsh area; no further use of City groundwater supply was expected to be necessary for the wetland project. The March 2021 IS therefore found that there would be No Impact with regard to conflict with or impedance of a groundwater management plan over the long term. This conclusion remains unchanged for the 60% design. As noted above, very limited use of City supply could be needed during O&M activities such as trash rack cleaning, but the project's overall hydrologic function and its reliance on a site-appropriate native plant palette have not been altered.
Moreover, as discussed above, the wetland project would improve the quality water infiltrated into the shallow subsurface, which is consistent with the regional Groundwater Sustainability Plan's sustainable management criterion addressing degraded groundwater quality, and would continue to represent a long-term Benefit for implementation of regional and local groundwater management plans.
Conclusion: Hydrology & Water Quality
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to hydrology or water quality is identified.
Land Use & Planning
Review of Impacts
Evaluation of impacts related to land use and land use planning focused on the project's potential to physically divide an established community, and its potential to conflict with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted to reduce environmental impacts.
The March 2021 IS concluded that although the wetland project would add new elements to the project landscape, it would have No Impact related to physical division of an existing community because (1) the project 15 Note that the March 2021 IS cites the City's 2015 UWMP (City of Newman 2016) as current because the 2020 UWMP was in the final stages of development at the time the March 2021 IS was prepared. In November 2021, the City adopted the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (City of Newman 2021 d).
fJ":.i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
51 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
is surrounded by agricultural uses, with only a few scattered semi-rural residences present immediately across Canal School Road from the 78-acre parcel, and (2) it is outside the City's Sphere of Influence (i.e., the area the City envisions may be annexed and developed under the current General Plan). This reasoning continues to apply to the 60% design, which further develops, but does not fundamentally alter, the project concept.
The guiding land use document at the project site is the current County General Plan (County of Merced 2013), which designates the NCCA parcels for agricultural use. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, the minimum allowable parcel size in areas designated by the County for agricultural use is 20 acres, residential development is stringently limited, and non-residential floor area ratios (FARs)16 are capped at 0.1 (County of Merced 2013).
However, the wetland project would not divide either of the parcels-quite the reverse, in fact, since restored and created habitat must be preserved for a minimum of 50 years, which would almost certainly preclude subdivision of either parcel. Also, as a "pure" restoration undertaking, the project has never included residential development, or structures of any kind. None of this has changed under the 60% design, and the March 2021 IS's conclusion that there would be No Impact related to adopted land use plans, policies, or regulations continues to apply to the 60% design.
Conclusion: Land Use & Planning
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to land use or land use planning is identified.
Mineral Resources
Review of Impacts
Analysis of impacts related to mineral resources addressed the project's potential to result in loss of availability of mineral resources of statewide, regional, or local importance.
The project site is located in an area zoned by the State of California as MRZ-3a SG-3, reflecting the potential for the presence of economically valuable sand and gravel resources. MRZ-3 zoning indicates areas that are known to support mineral resources, but where the significance of those resources cannot be evaluated from available data. The most current Merced County mineral land classification report cautions that further exploration in MRZ-3a zoned areas could result in reclassification as either MRZ-2 (significant mineral deposits present) or MRZ-1 (significant mineral deposits not present or unlikely to be present) (Clinkenbeard 1999).
The March 2021 IS concluded that the project is unlikely to result in loss of availability of important mineral resources, and that there would be No Impact related to mineral resources. This was because the project site is located in an area zoned for agricultural use by the County, is surrounded by extensive acreage designated for agricultural use in the County General Plan (County of Merced 2013), and is immediately adjacent to Newman City limits and the City's Sphere of Influence, which as noted above represents the City's anticipated development footprint in coming years (City of Newman 2007). Although the County may allow extractive uses such as quarries and gravel pits in A-1 zoned areas under a Conditional Use Permit (County of Merced Unified Development Ordinance Title 2 Chapter 18.10), sand and gravel extraction would be incompatible both with surrounding agricultural uses-which are central to the economic health of the western San Joaquin Valleyand with existing and future City development. In this context, the March 2021 IS concluded that even if 16 Floor area ratio refers to the ratio between the gross square footage of a building (irrespective of number of stories) and the square footage of the parcel it is built on. For example, on an 8,000-square foot parcel with an allowable FAR of 1.00, either a building with a single 8,000- square foot story or a building with two 4,000-square foot stories would be allowable. 52 Redtail Consulting l'r.ii
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
resources are present, the County would be unlikely to approve their extraction, and that the project would therefore have No Impact on mineral resource availability.
None of the conditions cited above has changed since circulation of the March 2021 IS, and they would not be affected by changes in the project since the 30% design. The project would still have No Impact with regard to availability of mineral resources.
Conclusion: Mineral Resources
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to mineral resources is identified.
Noise
Review of Impacts
The City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impacts with regard to noise.
With mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, with minor differences as noted below. • Potential to generate substantially increased ambient noise levels during construction. As discussed in the March 2021 IS, construction of the wetland project would generate noise as a result of heavy equipment operation, hand tool use, worker vehicles, materials deliveries, and general human presence and activity. Although the types of noise generated would be similar to existing noise sources associated with ongoing agricultural activities in the area, construction would represent a new noise source and could be disturbing to project neighbors. Although the City does not specifically regulate construction noise, it does have a "quiet City" policy that establishes a commitment to prohibiting excessive and annoying sound levels. Accordingly, Mitigation Measure NOl-1 (see Attachment Table A-1) would prohibit construction activity within 1,500 feet of residences on any weekend days or before 8 AM or after 5 PM on weekdays. Mitigation Measure NOl-2 (again, see Attachment Table A-1) would further require the City to designate a Noise Disturbance Coordinator who will be responsible for monitoring concerns and responding to noise disturbance complaints by determining the cause of the complaint and ensuring that reasonable measures are implemented to correct the problem Noise associated with project construction could increase slightly under the 60% design due to the potential for use of a slightly increased number of pieces of equipment, although the duration of heavy equipment usage would not change by comparison with the construction schedule projected for the 30% design (see Table 4). Noise generation is not arithmetically additive-that is, sound levels do not double if two pieces of equipment are used instead of one, but instead increases by logarithmic addition (Federal Transit Administration 2006). 17 Nonetheless, noise levels could increase perceptibly.
However, limits on construction hours in proximity to residences under Mitigation Measure NOl-1 should continue to reduce disturbance effectively, and providing a Noise Disturbance Coordinator who is both responsible for, and empowered to, require further measures in the event of a complaint should address any special cases where concerns are not mediated by limiting construction hours. As a result, 16 For this reason, modeling of maximum construction noise levels typically looks at the combined noise output of the two loudest noise sources operating on the work site, except in specialized cases (Federal Transit Administration 2006). This was the approach taken behind the scenes to assess the potential for noise disturbance in the March 2021 IS. The 1 ,500-foot setback was based on the distance at which construction noise levels would be consistent with long-term permissible noise levels for residential uses in the City, and is thus quite conservative.
l'!:.i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
53 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
with Mitigation Measures NOl-1 and NOl-2 in place, impacts are still expected to be Less than Significant under the 60% design.
• Potential to generate excessive groundborne vibration/groundborne noise during construction.
Construction of the wetland project would also have the potential to generate ground borne vibration/groundborne noise as a result of heavy equipment use. Vibration generated by heavy construction equipment is typically below the level of perception at distances greater than about 100 feet from the active work site, and no residences are located this close to the wetland project footprint where earthwork would be occurring; the nearest residence is more than 300 feet away. The potential for disturbance would be further reduced by the limits on construction hours established in Mitigation Measure NOl-1, and Mitigation Measure NOl-2 provides an avenue to resolve concerns should they arise. None of this has changed as a result of the 60% design, and impacts related to work within the NCCA parcels are still expected to be Less than Significant.
However, to address the potential for Significant vibration disturbance in the event water service to the Newman Nature Park were to be extended along Canal School Road and Brazo Road, the City has adopted mitigation limiting the use of impact and vibratory equipment near residences (Mitigation Measure NOl-3; see Attachment Table A-1). Although it was developed to address a specific concern, this measure is in effect a blanket prohibition on use of the equipment most likely to result in vibration disturbance within 100 feet of homes, and as such provides additional assurance that disturbance will be avoided.
The following impacts were identified as Less than Significant in the March 2021 IS. These findings also apply to the 60% design, since the nature and frequency of O&M activity and the anticipated nature of facilities "use" have not changed materially from the 30% design. Reasoning is presented below. •
•
•
54 Potential to generate substantially increased ambient noise levels during O&M. Routine O&M activities required for the wetland project, such as inspections, trash removal, trash rack cleaning, etc., would require only a small number of vehicles and personnel and typically would not use heavy equipment. They would also be intermittent and of short duration, and the types and levels of noise generated would be generally consistent with ambient noise in an active agricultural area.
Potential to generate substantially increased ambient noise levels as a result of facilities use. As mentioned above, there would be no direct "use" of the wetland project by NCCA visitors, since it would not provide trails or other visitor facilities. Rather, it would offer a visual and educational amenity to visitors using trails at the NEWS and Newman Nature Park facilities. This is unchanged from the 30% project concept. Usage at NEWS and the Newman Nature Park-which arguably could be increased by attendance of visitors specifically interested in viewing the wetland project, and thus may in part represent an indirect impact of the wetland project-would be restricted to non-motorized recreation such as walking, bicycling, and nature viewing. Although the presence of visitors on NCCA trails would generate some noise, such as conversations and laughter, the noise would be consistent with that with small groups of agricultural workers and likely would not represent a substantial change from current conditions, nor would it be out of place in the context of the neighboring residential uses, and thus is not expected to disturb project neighbors or to violate the City's "quiet City" policy. None of this differs from conditions anticipated for the 30% project design.
Potential to generate excessive groundborne vibration/groundborne noise during O&M. The majority of routine O&M activities would not use heavy equipment or other sources of substantial Redtail Consulting l'!':.i
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
vibration, and all O&M activities would be temporary and short term; analysis therefore evaluated impacts, if any, as Less than Significant.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following.
These findings continue to apply to the 60% design since there have been no changes to the project's setting, and while the 60% design has revised and amplified the 30% project concept, it has not fundamentally changed the nature of the project or the features it would develop. • Potential to generate excessive groundborne vibration/groundborne noise as a result of facilities use. Visitor use of the NCCA would not entail any activities producing substantial groundborne vibration or noise. This would be particularly true of the wetland project, which would be visible from trails constructed by the NEWS and Newman Nature Park projects, but would not itself provide direct visitor access or visitor facilities of any kind. • Potential for exposure to excessive airport noise. As noted in Hazards & Hazardous Materials above, the project site is not within any public or public use airport land use plan area, is not within 2 miles of any public or public use airport, and is not in proximity to any private airport or airstrip, and would thus have no potential to expose construction workers, City O&M staff, or members of the general public to airport noise.
Conclusion: Noise
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to noise or vibration is identified.
Population & Housing
Review of Impacts
Analysis of impacts related to population and housing addressed the project's potential to induce substantial unplanned population growth, and its potential to displace existing populations or housing. The March 2021 IS concluded that the project would have No Impact in either of these areas, since the NCCA projects (including the wetland project)
• would not construct new housing or commercial uses
• would not modify City land use planning
• would not extend roadways or services and thus would not remove obstacles to growth or otherwise indirectly induce population growth
• are expected to employ a workforce drawn largely if not entirely from the existing local population and thus would not relocate substantial numbers of workers to the Newman area None of these factors has changed as a result of the 60% design. The wetland project is still expected to have No Impact with regard to population and housing.
Conclusion: Population & Housing
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to population or housing is identified.
IP!.:i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
55 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Public Services
Review of Impacts
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
Analysis of public services impacts focused on the project's potential to result in adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or upgraded fire and police facilities, schools, parks, or other public/gorernmental facilities. Because the wetland project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth, the March 2021 IS found that it would have No Impact related to public services. This remains unchanged under the 60% design; the wetland project is still expected to have No Impact with regard to public services. Moreover, by contributing to the visual and educational resources available at the NCCA, the project would also indirectly result in a Benefit to park and recreational opportunities in the City and region.
Conclusion: Public Services
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to public services is identified.
Recreation
Review of Impacts
Analysis of impacts related to recreation addressed the project's potential to increase the use of existing parks resulting in new or accelerated physical degradation of facilities, and its potential to "include or require" construction or expansion of new parks or recreational facilities, potentially resulting in corollary impacts on the environment. Since the wetland project would not directly or indirectly foster population growth, the March 2021 IS concluded that it would have No Impact related to overuse and deterioration of existing parks and recreational facilities. This conclusion remains the same for the 60% design, which also would have No Impact on population levels in the Newman area.
The wetland project would not include recreational facilities per se, although it would provide a visual and educational amenity for users of the NEWS, MDTW, and Newman Nature Park facilities. It would therefore provide an indirect Benefit to recreation in the City and surrounding region, as noted above.
Conclusion: Recreation
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to recreation or recreational facilities is identified.
Transportation
Review of Impacts
The City has adopted mitigation to address the following potentially Significant impact related to transportation.
With mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that the impact would be reduced to a Less than Significant level. These findings continue to apply to the 60% design, as discussed below. • Potential for conflict or inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3[b). As discussed in more detail in the March 2021 IS, Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines, adopted in 2018, defines a new process for evaluating and determining the significance of transportation impacts, with an emphasis on vehicular (roadway) traffic. For many years, the prevailing approach to analysis of traffic impacts under CEQA focused on roadway and intersection level of service (LOS)-that is, on the experience of the driver in traffic. In recent years, however, the focus of concern has shifted from 56 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
roadway/intersection function and the driver experience to the potential for projects to increase overall vehicular travel, expressed as vehicle miles traveled or VMT. In part, this responds to the increasing visibility of climate change issues; vehicle exhaust is a source of GHG emissions. It also reflects growing concern about the other environmental impacts of development "sprawl" and an increased will to capitalize on opportunities for infill and redevelopment of more compact urban centers. Guidelines Section15064.3[b], which became mandatory statewide as of July 1, 2020, explicitly recognizes VMTdefined as "the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project"-as the most appropriate metric for transportation impacts and lead agencies are directed that a potential "effect on automobile delay" should not be regarded as a Significant environmental impact for most projects.
Lead agencies have discretion in choosing the method used to identify a project's VMT ( CEQA Guidelines 15064.3 [b][4]) and, implicitly, the responsibility to identify an appropriate, substantiated threshold of significance (the level at which project VMT is considered a significant impact and requires mitigation). Guidelines issued by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) (2018) indicate that projects with a long-term trip generation rate of less than 110 one-way trips per day can be assumed to have a Less than Significant transportation impact.
Modeling detailed in the March 2021 IS determined that at buildout the NCCA as a whole could generate some 170 trips per day, representing a Significant impact per current OPR guidance.
Mitigation Measure TR-1 (see Attachment Table A-1) commits the City to monitoring vehicle access to the NCCA. If or when usership is found to exceed 110 trips per day (or an alternate screening criterion adopted by the City of Newman through a process consistent with CEQA Guidelines and OPR requirements), or is projected to exceed this threshold in the coming year, the City must implement Mitigation Measure TR-2. This measure requires installation of an automatic gate on NCCA parking lot access and implementation of an online reservations system to limit site visitation, which may be used to maintain overall usership at a trip generation level that represents a Less than Significant transportation impact and/or to prioritize local over regional users such that projected VMT generation is maintained below applicable significance thresholds.
As noted above, it is impossible to project the wetland project's contribution to NCCA usage, and therefore to NCCA operational traffic, but it is probably safe to assume that it would be less than that of the projects that specifically include visitor amenities-and in any case it should be essentially the same under the 60% design as under the 30% design since the overall project concept remains unchanged. Moreover, implementation of Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-2 would effectively maintain combined VMT generation from all four NCCA projects at a Less than Significant level over the long term, also rendering the wetland project's contribution Less than Significant since it would be a fraction of the whole.
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to the following. • Conflict with programs, plans, ordinances, or policies addressing the circulation system. The circulation plans most relevant to projects at the NCCA are the City's Non-Motorized Transportation Plan (City of Newman 2013), the County's Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan (County of Merced 2008), and the Merced County Association of Governments' (MCAG's) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Merced County Association of Governments 2018). General Countywide guidance is provided in the Transportation and Circulation Element of the County General Plan (County of Merced 2013), and the City also regulates aspects of the circulation system under the City Code (Title 10, Traffic Regulations and Title 11, Public Ways and Property). ~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
57 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
The NCCA as a whole was found to be consistent with all of these plans and ordinances based on factors such as
- location adjacent to the alignment for the City's high-priority project to construct a Class I multiuse trail along Canal School Road - easy accessibility from the City center
- provision of an internal network of multi-use non-motorized trails - inclusion of end-of-trip facilities for bicyclists, and - consistency with County and City transportation design standards Of these factors, only location applies specifically to the wetland project, since it would not provide trails or other visitor facilities. However, the wetland project is consistent with the County's overall goal to protect and enhance the natural environment (articulated in the Sustainable Communities Strategy), and by providing a visual and educational amenity for users of the NCCA trail system, the wetland project is supportive of the other projects and of the NCCA as a whole, and is thus considered consistent with all of the plans and regulations listed above. This has not changed under the 60% design, which retains the overall vision of the 30% design previously analyzed. • Potential to increase hazards due to design geometry; potential to result in inadequate emergency access. The wetland project has never been planned to incorporate direct access from County or City roadways, and also would not provide internal access or circulation facilities of any kind; this has not changed under the 60% design. 18
• Potential to conflict with Congestion Management Program and/or Level of Service (LOS) standards. The applicable Congestion Management Plan is MCAG's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, discussed above. The minimum LOS standard in both the City and the County of Merced is LOS C (light congestion with occasional backups at critical approaches).
As detailed in the March 2021 IS, traffic volumes on arterial roadways in the vicinity of the NCCA site indicate that they are functioning at LOS A (uncongested operation), and would continue to do so with the addition of the maximum traffic volume visitor access to the NCCA is projected to generate.19 It is impossible to parse out the wetland project's contribution to NCCA operational traffic, but as identified above is probably safe to assume that it would be less than that of the projects that specifically include visitor amenities-and in any case should be essentially the same under the 60% design and the previously analyzed 30% design since the overall project concept remains unchanged. 18 Note that under the heading Potential to Increase Hazards Due to Design Geometry or Incompatible Uses, the March 2021 IS determined that there would be potential for a Significant impact with regard to intermittent insufficiency of parl<ing at peak use times, and the City has adopted mitigation (see Measure TR-3 in Attachment Table A-1) to address this. As the March 2021 IS identifies, the wetland project, considered as a stand-alone undertaking, would not include provisions for public access or parking and therefore would not directly generate parking demand; this remains true under the 60% design, and overflow parl<ing is therefore not discussed further in this Addendum. Note however that to the extent the wetland project acts as a "draw" increasing overall usage at the site, this would be accounted for in the monitoring and usage limitation precautions required by Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-2. 19 As discussed in more detail in the March 2021 IS, construction-related traffic generation would be an order of magnitude less than operational traffic and would therefore also be well within the capacity of local arterials to absorb without falling below LOS A. 58 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community •
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Conclusion: Transportation
No additional mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to transportation is identified.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Review of Impacts
The March 2021 IS found that there would be No Impact on tribal cultural resources as a result of any of the NCCA projects. A search of the Native American Heritage Commission's Sacred Lands database and outreach to local Native American authorities identified no tribal cultural resources associated with the NCCA site, and no known prehistoric, ethnographic, or contemporary tribal cultural resources have been identified in, adjacent to, or near either of the NCCA parcels (Basin Research Associates 2020). To the City's knowledge, this condition remains unchanged since the circulation of the March 2021 IS. The wetland project is therefore still expected to have No Impact with regard to tribal cultural resources.
Conclusion: Tribal Cultural Resources
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to tribal cultural resources is identified.
Utilities & Service Systems
Review of Impacts
The March 2021 IS concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact with regard to utilities or service systems. These conclusions continue to apply to the 60% design, as itemized below. • Potential need for new or relocated utilities. As the March 2021 IS identifies, the wetland project would not require water or wastewater service, additional offsite stormwater drainage infrastructure, electricity, natural gas service, or telecommunications service. With the project concept unchanged despite the evolution of details, this has not changed under the 60% design; the wetland project would still have No Impact with regard to provision of these services. • Potential for insufficient water supplies. As detailed in the March 2021 IS and summarized in Population & Housing above, the wetland project would not involve housing construction and would neither increase nor relocate populations, and thus would not increase regional water demand. Project construction would entail limited, short-term, and temporary use of City water supply. Limited use of Miller Ditch and/or City water could continue, to support hand watering of plantings in the vegetation establishment period immediately following construction, particularly if construction occurs during unusually dry or hot years; however, if Miller Ditch water is used, consumption would likely be less than under the recent flood irrigation regime. Over the long term, some O&M activities could also make intermittent use of City water. However, usage both during and after construction would be limited, and, as discussed in the Hydrology & Water Quality section of the March 2021 IS, City water planning takes both construction and municipal usage into account; the project is therefore not expected to result in water supply insufficiency in normal, dry, or even multiple dry years. All of this continues to apply to the 60% design, which has not fundamentally altered the project concept and would only slightly increase construction water usage, well within the scope of City water supply planning.
The wetland project would continue to make use of limited, seasonal diversions from the Miller Ditch (first directly, and then via the MDTW project) to sustain expanded emergent marsh in the central ~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
59 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
swale. This is similar to conditions in recent years, when Miller Ditch supply was used for flood irrigation on the 78-acre parcel. Under the 60% design-different from the 30% design and from prior irrigation use-flow would return to the Miller Ditch from the 78-acre parcel, reducing overall consumption.
Additionally, the water budget for the 60% design and the timing of diversions have been developed for consistency with the needs of existing downstream users. The wetland project would therefore continue to have No Impact with regard to the potential for insufficient water supply. • Potential for determination of inadequate capacity by wastewater treatment provider. The wetland project would not generate wastewater. This was true for the 30% design and continues to apply to the current 60% design. The wetland project would therefore continue to have No Impact related to potential for determination of inadequate wastewater treatment capacity. • Potential to generate excessive solid waste or impair waste reduction goals. As the March 2021 IS describes in more detail, project construction would generate some waste, including excavated soils, vegetation slash suitable for greenwasting, and trash and food refuse from construction staff meals onsite. Although excavation volumes have increased substantially from those assumed under the 30% design, spoils would be placed within the Newman Nature Park footprint to support development of amenities at that project, as originally planned. There would thus be no need for offsite spoils disposal, except possibly for soils with mercury content in excess of 0.1 mg/kg; under Mitigation Measure C-1, these can either be appropriately disposed offsite, or reused onsite in lower fill lifts where they are capped and will not be surface-exposed (see Attachment Table A-1 and discussion in Mandatory Findings of Significance below). Other types of construction waste would continue to be small volumes, well within the capacity of local infrastructure. Once operational, the project could generate small volumes of waste associated with O&M activities, as described in the March 2021 IS, but the 60% design is similar enough to the 30% project concept that these volumes are not expected to change materially. The wetland project would therefore continue to have No Impact with regard to excessive solid waste generation or impairment of waste reduction goals. • Compliance with federal, state, and local solid waste management and reduction statutes. The March 2021 IS concluded that with the City's waste management and waste reduction policies in place, both construction and O&M for the wetland project would be maintained in compliance with all applicable local and state statutes and regulations governing solid waste management. The state statutes are complementary to and consistent with federal requirements; compliance with state statutes would therefore also maintain the City and NCCA projects in compliance with applicable federal requirements. None of this has changed under the 60% design, and the wetland project would continue to have No Impact related to conflict with federal, state, or local waste management and reduction statutes.
Conclusion: Utilities & Service Systems
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to utilities or service systems is identified.
Wildfire
Review of Impacts
As the March 2021 IS identifies, the NCCA site, including the wetland project footprint, is surrounded by actively cultivated croplands immediately outside City limits. It is not within a wildland area nor is it on the urban-wildland interface, and it is outside zones of High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity identified by CAL FIRE for the 60 Redtail Consulting l'r.i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
western San Joaquin Valley and the adjacent rangefront (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2020). The March 2021 IS accordingly concluded that the wetland project would have No Impact related to wildfire, since it
• would have no potential to impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan for a wildland area
• would not involve or modify the management of wildlands and thus would have no potential to increase the overall risk of wildfire in the area
• would not result in development in or adjacent to wildlands, potentially increasing exposure to wildfire or wildfire-related pollutants
• would not require installation or maintenance of infrastructure in wildlands, potentially increasing wildfire risks
• would not construct housing or relocate populations and therefore would not expose people or structures to risks associated with wildland fire, including fire and smoke damage, accelerated postfire runoff, post-fire slope instability, and drainage changes These conclusions continue to apply to the 60% design, since neither the project's location nor its fundamental nature has changed.
Conclusion: Wildfire
No mitigation is required, and no new, previously undisclosed, or substantially increased Significant impact with regard to wildfire is identified.
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Review of Impacts
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, lead agencies must find that a project would have a Significant effect on the environment if it has the potential to
• substantially degrade the quality of the environment
• substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species • cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels • threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community
• substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species • eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. • cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly The March 2001 IS concluded that with all AMMs and mitigation incorporated, the wetland project (and the NCCA projects in general) would not result in any of the types of impacts identified above. As detailed by resource topic in the previous sections of this analysis, this conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design.
The 60% design for the wetland project also would not benefit short-term environmental goals to the l'!:.i Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
61 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals ( CEQA Guidelines 15065[a][2])-rather, like the previously analyzed 30% design, it is specifically proposed for long-term environmental benefit and would entail long-term preservation of enhanced and reestablished habitat at the project site.
A finding of Significance is also mandatory if the project has possible environmental impacts that are individually limited but would be cumulatively considerable, meaning that the project's incremental effects are Significant when considered in connection with the effects of other past, current, and probably future projects ( CEQA Guidelines 15065[a][4]). The March 2021 IS found that the wetland project had the potential to • result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the existing Significant impact related to impairment of downstream waters for mercury
• contribute to existing regional levels of mercury bioaccumulation, and/or • over time, collectively result in a new Significant cumulative impact related to mercury bioaccumulation at the NCCA site
The City has adopted mitigation measures to address this: Mitigation Measure C-1 (Pre- and Post-Construction Soil Testing for Mercury) and Mitigation Measure C-2 (Aqueous Mercury Monitoring and Management) (see Attachment Table A-1 ). Mitigation Measures C-1 and C-2 were developed in consultation with staff of the Central Valley RWQCB's Mercury and Metals TMDL Unit and were approved by staff prior to circulation of the IS. With these measures incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than SignificanULess than Cumulatively Considerable level. This conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design since the overall project concept and function remain the same.
The March 2021 IS also found that there would be some potential for use of pesticides and herbicides at the NCCA to contribute to existing identified impairments for these substances in the Newman Wasteway and San Joaquin River, which represent existing Significant cumulative impacts. The potential for the wetland project to contribute to these cumulative impacts is probably limited, since the project is not expected to make extensive of of either pesticides or herbicides, but some level of contribution is possible. The project will accordingly incorporate the mitigation adopted sitewide at the NCCA: Mitigation Measure C-3, which requires an emphasis on Integrated Pest Management, prohibits the use of all banned substances, and further prohibits use of any pesticide or herbicide for which a downstream impairment is identified, either currently or in the future (see Attachment Table A-1 ). With this mitigation incorporated, the March 2021 IS concluded that impacts would be reduced to a Less than Significant/Less than Cumulatively Considerable level. As identified above for impacts related to mercury methylation and bioaccumulation, this conclusion continues to apply to the 60% design since the overall project concept and function remain the same.
Conclusion: Mandatory Findings of Significance
Changes in the project since the 30% design do not alter the conclusions presented in the March 2021 IS regarding Mandatory Findings of Significance for the wetland project. No Mandatory Findings of Significance that would trigger the need for further analysis have been identified as applicable to the project, and an MND remains the appropriate CEQA document for the project, supported by the March 2021 IS and this Addendum. No additional mitigation is required, and no further analysis is warranted.
62 Redtail Consulting f!:i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
References Cited
Balance Hydrologies. 2021. Memo: Hydrologic Addendum for the Newman Wetlands Project, County of Merced.
Prepared for City of Newman. Berkeley, CA. On file with Redtail Consulting.
Basin Research Associates. 2020. Historic Property Survey Report/Finding of Effect: City of Newman Community Conservation Area, 78- and 24-Acre Parcels, Merced County, California. San Leandro, CA.
Prepared for Redtail Consulting, Fremont, CA. (Appendix D to this Initial Study.) Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2009. Revised Draft Options and Justification Report: California Environmental Quality Act Thresholds of Significance (October.) Available: https://www.baaqmd.gov/ -/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf. pdf?la=en. Downloaded:
December 2017.
Beutel, M. (UC Merced Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering). Pers. comm. Email to Anna Buising (Redtail Consulting). January 20, 2021.
California Department of Conservation. 2016. California Important Farmland Finder. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed: August 2020.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2020. FHSZ Viewer. Available: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/ FHSZ/. Accessed: August 2020.
California Geological Survey. 2019. Information Warehouse: Regulatory Maps. Available:
https ://maps.conservation .ca .gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/reg ulatorymaps/. Accessed: August 2020.
Caspers, J. (Balance Hydrologies). Pers. comm.[a]. Email to Anna Buising (Redtail Consulting), December 3, 2021.
Caspers, J. (Balance Hydrologies). Pers. comm.[b]. Telephone conversations with Anna Buising (Redtail Consulting), December 1, 2021 and December 2, 2021.
Caspers, J. (Balance Hydrologies). Pers. comm.[c]. Email to Anna Buising (Redtail Consulting), December 1, 2021.
Caspers, J. (Balance Hydrologies). Pers. comm.[d]. Email to Anna Buising (Redtail Consulting), Decembe 6, 2021.
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2018. The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region - the Sacramento River Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin. Available: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/ water_issues/basin_plans/#basinplans. Downloaded: July 2020.
City of Newman. 2007. Newman 2030 General Plan. Available: http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/ community-development-department/36-general-plan-final-version/file.html. Downloaded: November 2019.
City of Newman. 2013. Newman Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. Prepared for the City of Newman by The Planning Center/DC&E, Berkeley and Costa Mesa, CA.
~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
63 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
City of Newman. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared for City of Newman by Gouveia Engineering, Inc., Gustine, CA.
City of Newman. 2021a. Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan. (Final.) (May.) Prepared for City of Newman by Redtail Consulting, Fremont, CA.
City of Newman. 2021 b. Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. Prepared for City of Newman by Redtail Consulting, Fremont, CA. MND Adopted May 25, 2021. Available: https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/Project/2021030323.
City of Newman. 2021c. Newman Community Conservation Area IS/MND AMM and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Prepared for City of Newman by Redtail Consulting, Fremont, CA. Adopted May 25, 2021. On file with Redtail Consulting; available for review at: http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/citycouncil-elected-officials-elections/city-council-agendas/2021-city-council-agendas/1158-05-25-2021-citycou ncil-agenda/fi le. htm I.
City of Newman. 2021d. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared for City of Newman by AM Consulting Engineers, Inc., Fresno, CA.
Clinkenbeard, J.P. 1999. Mineral Land Classification of Merced County, California. Available: https://maps. conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/mlc/. Downloaded: August 2020.
County of Merced. 2008. Merced County Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan. Available: https://www.cailg.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/finalregbp.pdf. Downloaded: December 2020.
County of Merced. 2013. 2030 Merced County General Plan. Available: https://www.co.merced.ca.us/ 100/General-Plan. Downloaded: May 2020.
Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2020. Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3, DTSC-Modified Screening Levels {DTSC-SLs). Available: https://dtsc.ca.gov/human-health-risk-hero/.
Downloaded: March 2020.
Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2021. EnvirStor Online Database. Available:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed: October 2021.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2020. National Flood Hazard Layer ArcGIS Viewer. Available:
https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/tools-resources/flood-map-products/national-ftood-hazard-layer.
Accessed: September 2020.
Federal Transit Administration. 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Available:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/FTA_Noise_and_ Vibration_Manual.pdf.
Downloaded: August 2018.
Merced County Airport Land Use Commission. 2012. Merced County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Available: https://www.co.merced.ca.us/406/Airport-Land-Use-Commission. Downloaded: August 2020.
Merced County Association of Governments. 2018. Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy for Merced County. Available: https://www.mcagov.org/307/2018-RTP. Downloaded: December 2020.
64 Redtail Consulting l'!':.i
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
National Wildfire Coordinating Group. n.d. NWCG Glossary of Wildland Fire. Available: https://www.nwcg.gov/ glossary/a-z/sort/w?combine=. Accessed: August 2020.
Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December). Available: https://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/technical-advisories.html. Downloaded: December 2020.
Pinnell, C. (Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting). Pers. comm. Emails to Todd Tamura (Tamura Environmental), November 25, 2020.
Redtail Consulting and RICK Engineering. 2021. Memorandum: Newman Environmental Wetland System (NEWS) Project- Mercury Testing and Abatement per Adopted CEQA Mitigation. (August 25.) Prepared for City of Newman. Fremont, CA and San Luis Obispo, CA.
Rodal Morales, N.D. and Beutel, M. 2021. Miller Ditch Treatment Wetland (MDTW) Hydrology Mass Balance and Pollutant Removal Modeling. Prepared for City of Newman. Merced, CA. On file with Redtail Consulting.
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2014. Justification for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thresholds of Significance. (September.) Available: http://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/ Documents/GHGThresholdsJ ustificationSept2014. pdf. Accessed: November 2020.
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2020. SMAQMD Thresholds of Significance Table.
Available: http://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/CH2ThresholdsTable4-2020.pdf.
Accessed: November 2020.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2019. User's Guide: Derivation and Application of Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs), Interim Final 2019 (Revision 1 ). Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/esl.html. Downloaded: March 2021.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2020. Environmental Screening Levels. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/esl.html. Accessed: March 2020.
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group. 2019a. Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (5-022.07). (December.) Available: http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-works-departmenU1026-groundwatersustainability-plan-for-the-san-joaq uin-river-exchange-contractors-g roup/file. html. Downloaded: March 2020.
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group. 2019b. Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (5-022.07), Appendix Q:
Update on Groundwater Conditions in the Newman Sub-Area of the SJ REC GSP. (December.) Prepared by Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates, Fresno, CA, for San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group and City of Newman. Available: http://www.cityofnewman.com/docman/public-worksdepartmenU1026-groundwater-sustainability-plan-for-the-san-joaquin-river-exchange-contractorsgroup/file.html. Downloaded: March 2020. ~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
65 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. (March 19.) Available: Air Quality Thresholds of Significance - Criteria Pollutants. Available:
https://www.valleyair.org/ transportation/GAMAQl_ 12-26-19.pdf. Accessed: November 2020.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2018. Project Ambient Air Quality Analysis Applicability Determination under CEQA, Policy APR- 2030 (June 12, 2018). Available:
http://www.valleyair.org/policies_per/Policies/APR-2030.pdf. Accessed: November 2020.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2020. Small Project Analysis Levels (SPAL). (November 13.) Available: http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CEQA%20Rules/GAMAQl-SPAL.PDF. Accessed:
November 27, 2020.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2019. South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.
Available: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significancethresholds.pdf. Accessed: November 2020.
Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission. 2016. Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Available: http://www.stancounty.com/planning/agenda-aluc/. Downloaded: August 2020.
State Geologist. 1986. State of California Special Studies Zones, Crevison Peak Quadrangle (Official Map, Effective July 1, 1986. Map scale 1 :24,000. Available: https://filerequest.conservation.ca.gov/ ?q=CRVSONPK.PDF. Downloaded: August 2020.
State Water Resources Control Board. 2021. Geotracker Online Database. Available: https://geotracker. waterboards.ca.gov. Accessed: October 2021.
Tamura Environmental. 2021a. Air Emissions Estimates for Newman Community Conservation Area (NCCA) Master Plan Projects. Santa Rosa, CA. Prepared for Redtail Consulting and City of Newman. Appendix C to March 2021 IS (City of Newman 2021 b). On file with Redtail Consulting.
Tamura Environmental. 2021b. Impacts of Changes to NCCA Wetland Project on AQ/GHG Analysis . (November.) Santa Rosa, CA. Prepared for Redtail Consulting and City of Newman. On file with Redtail Consulting.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Method 1669: Sampling Ambient Water for Trace Metals at EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels. Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-1 O/documents/ method_ 1669_ 1996.pdf. Accessed: May 2021.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. EPA Method 7473 (SW-846): Mercury in Solids and Solutions by Thermal Decomposition, Amalgamation, and Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry. Available:
https://www.epa.gov/esam/epa-method-7473-sw-846-mercury-solids-and-solutions-thermal-decompositionamalgamation-and. Accessed: May 2021.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Method 1631, Revision E: Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry. Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/ production/files/2015-08/documents/method_ 1631 e_2002.pdf. Accessed: May 2021.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2014 and Various. Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste (SW-846 Compendium). Available: https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/sw-846-compendium. Accessed: October 2021. 66 Redtail Consulting E
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
UPDATED February 2022
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting. 2021. 60% Basis of Design Report, Newman Wetlands Project, CDFW Grant Number: 01996046, Merced County, California. Prepared for California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, CA and City of Newman. Sacramento, CA.
~ Redtail Consulting .. Environment & Community
67 AMM
AMSL
APN
BAU
BAAQMD
BMP
CAL FIRE
GARB
CEQA
cfs
City
C02
C02e
Corps
County
FAR
GHG
I
IS
IS/MND
lbs/day
LOS
mg/kg
µSiem
Master Plan
MBTA
MCAG
MDTW project
MND
MRZ
MT
NCCA
NCCA parcels
NCCA projects
n.d.
NEWS project
N02
NOx
O&M
OPR
PM2.5
PM10
PRMP
RWQCB
SMAQMD
SCAQMD
SIP
SJV APCD
SPAL
SR
SWPPP
TMDL
UC Merced
UCMP
USFWS
VMT
WDR
Williamson Act
Avoidance and Minimization Measure
above mean sea level
Assessor's Parcel Number
Business-as-Usual
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
best management practice
Acronyms & Abbreviations
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
California Air Resources Board
California Environmental Quality Act
cubic feet per second
City of Newman
carbon dioxide
carbon dioxide equivalents
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
County of Merced
floor area ratio
greenhouse gas
Interstate
Initial Study
Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration pounds per day
level of service
milligrams per kilogram
microSiemens per centimeter
Newman Community Conservation Area Master Plan
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Merced County Association of Governments
Miller Ditch Treatment Wetland project
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mineral Resource Zone
metric tonnes
Newman Community Conservation Area
78-acre and 24-acre parcels comprising the NCCA site
projects described in the NCCA Master Plan, implementing the Master Plan vision no date
Newman Environmental Wetland System Project
nitrous oxide
oxides of nitrogen
operations and maintenance
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
airborne particulate matter smaller than 2.5 µm in diameter airborne particulate matter smaller than 10 µm in diameter Paleontological Resources Mitigation Plan
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District South Coast Air Quality Management District
State Implementation Plan
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
SJV APCD Small Project Analysis Level
State Route
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
total maximum daily load
University of California, Merced
University of California Museum of Paleontology
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
vehicle miles traveled
Waste Discharge Requirement
California Land Conservation Act of 1965
Attachment
Adopted Environmental Measures: AMMs &
CEQA Mitigation
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design: Addendum to May 2021 MND Attachment: Adopted Environmental Measures
As noted in the main text of this Addendum, the wetland project would incorporate two types of environmental measures:
• Avoidance and Minimization Measures (AMMs) laid out in the NCCA Master Plan, which will apply to all four NCCA projects during construction and will continue in effect for operations and maintenance (O&M) throughout the lifespan of each project
• additional measures identified as mitigation to avoid, reduce, or compensate for impacts identified during the 2020 - 2021 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process for the NCCA Master Plan and projects
Both the AMMs and the CEQA mitigation measures were included in the Monitoring and Reporting Plan formally adopted by the City in May 2021. This reflects a binding commitment by the City to proper implementation of all environmental measures identified for the NCCA projects, including the wetland project.
Adopted environmental measures are presented in full in Table A-1. CEQA mitigation measures that do not apply to the wetland project are flagged with asterisks (**), and an explanation is provided in [bracketed italics] following the measure. Environmental analysis presented in this Addendum assumes that all AMMs, and all CEQA mitigation measures that apply to the wetland project, will be in force.
Table A-1. Adopted Environmental Measures
Measure Requirements
Avoidance and Minimization Measures
AMM-1. Routine
Reassessment & AMM
Updates
At the completion of each NCCA project, GIS-based habitat mapping for the Plan Area parcels 1 will be updated to document changes in habitat distribution as a result of the project.
Over the long term, the Plan Area parcels will be reevaluated for habitat conditions and potential specialstatus species use every other year. Reevaluation will also include updating maps delineating populations of rare plant species (i.e., plants assigned a California Rare Plant Rank by the California Native Plant Society and plants state- or federally listed as Threatened or Endangered). The evaluation will be conducted by a qualified biologist/ecologist who has experience with wetland and upland habitats in the west-central San Joaquin Valley, will cover both Plan Area parcels in their entirety, and will include, at a minimum, the following activities.
• Assessment of habitat distribution to determine whether the most recent habitat and rare plant mapping is still accurately representative of conditions on the Plan Area parcels • California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM) assessment of wetland health and performance Results will be documented in an NCCA Habitat Assessment Report for City records. The Habitat 1 Throughout Table A-1 , Plan Area parcels refers to the 78-acre and 24-acre parcels that together make up the NCCA site f?J Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
A-1
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
AMM-2. Appropriate
Long-Term Public
Access
AMM-3. Worker
Awareness Training
AMM-4. Wetland &
Water Quality
Protection
A-2
Assessment Report will also identify the date of the next routine re-survey, enabling survey frequency to be adjusted (increased or decreased) if appropriate based on the rate and nature of change in conditions on the Plan Area parcels. In addition, depending on the extent and nature of changes in Plan Area conditions and the City's planned activities during the next few years, the Survey Report may recommend more detailed reassessment, potentially including re-mapping of habitat, updated delineation of state and federally jurisdictional habitat (wetlands and waters of the United States and State of California), and/or focused surveys for special-status plant and/or wildlife species.
In addition to documenting current Plan Area Conditions, the Habitat Assessment Report will include an evaluation of the AMMs in place at the time of the reassessment, and will identify any needed changes to the AM Ms, potentially including modification or discontinuation of existing AMMs and/or establishment of new AMMs. Changes to AMMs will only be instituted in the interests of better preserving and protecting habitat values on the Plan Area parcels, in balance with appropriate O&M and recreational/educational access. If adverse changes in habitat conditions or the status of rare plant populations are identified, the Habitat Assessment Report will also include recommendations for corrective action(s).
The City will maintain Habitat Assessment Reports and other relevant documentation such as habitat and jurisdictional delineation mapping and special-status species sighting reports (see AMM-6) on file for ongoing reference in managing the NCCA. If corrective actions are identified as necessary, the City will be responsible for ensuring that they are promptly implemented by qualified personnel.
All public access, including access roadways opened for public trail use, will incorporate appropriate measures to prevent accidental incursions-and discourage intentional access-into sensitive habitat.
Measures will be designed for aesthetic consistency with their natural surroundings, such that they foster a positive and welcoming user experience while protecting sensitive resources to the extent possible.
Measures may include carefully selected trail routing as well as split-rail or other suitable fencing, strategically located plantings, and the use of elevated boardwalks. Signage will also be used to inform the public of sensitive resources and foster appreciation for the need to protect them. All signage will be bilingual in English and Spanish to reflect the City's diverse population. Wildlife-proof trash and recycling receptacles will be provided at regular intervals along all trails to discourage littering.
All construction personnel will be required to attend environmental awareness training before beginning work. All O&M staff and any future interns, student employees, and volunteers will also receive environmental awareness training as part of their routine City training. Training will be provided bilingually in English and Spanish if appropriate.
Training will be delivered by a qualified biologist/ecologist and will provide information on the sensitive habitats within the Plan Area (based on the most recent surveys of the Plan Area per AMM-1 ), the special-status species that are known or potentially present, and measures required to protect water quality and sensitive habitats under AMM-4.
For each special-status species, training will include information on listing status, habitat preferences, distinguishing physical characteristics, causes of decline, and measures required to protect the species within the Plan Area. Training will include a hard copy handout that summarizes information presented in the training and includes photographs of habitat resources and species to facilitate identification in the field by construction and O&M personnel.
Best management practices will be implemented for all ground-disturbing activities to prevent siltation and contaminated runoff to wetlands and water bodies within and adjacent to the Plan Area. During construction, this may take the form of a SWPPP prepared and implemented by appropriately qualified/certified personnel. For O&M activities that involve ground disturbance, similar measures will be implemented by City staff. BMPs will also be implemented for all O&M activities that require handling of fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, and other substances with the potential to degrade water quality.
BMPs will include, but will not necessarily be limited to, the following. • Before work begins, a qualified biologist/ecologist will delineate sensitive areas to be avoided, using pin flags, temporary construction fencing, or another appropriate low-impact medium. No entry (personnel, equipment, or materials) will be permitted into delineated avoidance areas Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
AMM-5. Special-Status
Plant Protection
• If excavation or ground disturbance is necessary, runoff control measures such as straw wattles, filter rolls, filter fences, or silt fences will be installed to contain disturbed soil materials. Runoff control will be in place prior to groundbreaking. If straw wattles are used, they will consist of certified sterile, weed-free rice straw or similar, suitable for use in sensitive habitat. If filter fences or mesh are used, they will consist of materials, and employ a design, approved by DFW and USFWS as safe for amphibians and reptiles
• If ground disturbance occurs in a vegetated area, the disturbed area will be reseeded immediately following the completion of repairs, using a certified weed-free native species seed mix appropriate to the location and approved by a qualified biologist/ecologist • Excavated materials will be stockpiled away from sensitive habitat, in areas that are relatively level, and relatively free of vegetation. Stockpiles will be located as far as reasonably feasible from the limits of sensitive habitat, and runoff control measures as described above will be used to prevent delivery of sediment to wetlands and ditches. If wattles are used, they will consist of certified sterile, weed-free materials, as identified above. Any excavated materials not reused on site will be promptly removed to appropriate permanent disposal locations following the completion of work • All diesel- and gasoline-powered construction equipment and tools, including generator units, will be inspected for leaks and damage prior to mobilization • Fueling, lubrication, and maintenance of vehicles and equipment will be conducted as far as reasonably feasible from wetlands and waterbodies, and will take place offsite if possible.
Equipment staging will also be located as far as reasonably feasible from wetlands and water bodies. If onsite fueling, maintenance, or repairs are required, containment measures such as drip pans will be required
• To the maximum extent possible, materials staging will also be restricted to paved, surfaced, or upland areas away from wetlands and watercourses
• During all work, appropriate types and quantities of materials will be maintained onsite to contain any spills or releases of materials and prevent them from entering sensitive habitat and jurisdictional waters
• In the event of a spill, appropriate spill response procedures will be initiated as soon as the incident is discovered. If contractor staff are involved, the contractor will be required to notify City staff as soon as feasible, and in no case more than 24 hours after the occurrence; a designated City contact will be specified in the project construction documents for this purpose. If there is any potential for the spill to enter jurisdictional waters, the City will notify the RWQCB • Food waste will be appropriately contained and disposed, and trash generated during construction and O&M activities will be promptly and properly removed from the site Before any work begins at the NCCA site, existing occurrences of rare plant taxa (as defined in AMM-1) will be delineated on GIS-based maps for future reference, based on the results of protocol-level peak blooming period surveys.2 Mapping will be regularly updated as part of the routine resurveys required under AMM-1.
Work will be planned to avoid delineated rare plant occurrences to the extent feasible. Prior to the start of construction and O&M work in the vicinity of delineated occurrences of rare plants, a qualified biologist/ecologist will define the current extent of the occurrence in the field using pin flags, temporary construction fencing, or another appropriate low-impact medium. The delineated avoidance area will include a setback buffer appropriate to the species involved and the nature of the work planned. No entry, staging, or other activity within delineated avoidance areas will be permitted.
If an occurrence of rare plants cannot be entirely avoided, the following additional measures will apply. ( 1) Plants that can be avoided will be demarcated by an exclusion area as described above (2) If possible, work will be scheduled for timeframes when the special-status taxa occurring in 2 Initial mapping was completed in 2020.
~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
3 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
AMM-6. Special-Status
Wildlife Protection
(General)
A-4
the work area are senescent and/or after seed has set
(3) If an individual or group of individuals must be removed, one of two options may be employed, followed by monitoring, and, if needed, further corrective action to ensure that over the long term no net loss of the species occurs
i. Seeds from the affected species may be collected from existing onsite populations or from another population within the Bennett Valley - San Joaquin River watershed and distributed in the work area following completion of work, or, if the work area cannot be reseeded, in another appropriate location within the Plan Area.
Appropriate locations will be identified based on currently prevailing soil characteristics, site hydrology, and overall habitat conditions at the time of the restoration
ii. A nursery with experience growing special-status plants of the western San Joaquin Valley region may be contracted to grow seedlings of the species from locally native seeds (collected from the work area or from another population in the Bennett Valley - San Joaquin River watershed). Seedlings may be planted in the work area following completion of work, or, if this is not possible, may be planted in another appropriate location within the Plan Area. As identified in (i) above, appropriate locations will be identified based on currently prevailing soil characteristics, site hydrology, and overall habitat conditions at the time of the restoration Note that seeds derived from plants in the Bennett Valley- San Joaquin River watershed may be available from local nurseries, and local nurseries may also be able to propagate seeds from adults grown from locally native collected seeds. In this case, seeds do not need to be collected from the work area.
Prior to impacts and reseeding or replanting, a qualified biologisUecologist will develop a monitoring and corrective action plan for the revegetated area. The plan will include at least the following components. • Interim and final success criteria for the revegetated area. The goal will be to match or exceed predisturbance population levels in the Plan Area over the long term. Due to normal variations in population from year to year, average population data for annual taxa can be calculated from several years of data collected
• Procedures for annual monitoring for a minimum of 3 years or until final success criteria are met • Low-disturbance methods for as-needed invasive species control within the replanted area, suitable to site conditions and the rare plant species involved
• Corrective actions (additional seeding or planting) in the event interim success criteria are not met The City will be responsible for ensuring that the monitoring plan is implemented by qualified personnel, and that any corrective action identified as necessary is properly carried out.
In the event of a known or potential sighting of special-status wildlife in or near any construction or O&M work area, the following requirements will apply.
• Personnel will avoid the animal and will immediately notify designated City staff and the City's oncall biologist, who will advise them on how to proceed; if warranted (depending on the species involved), the biologist will consult with resource agency (DFW and/or USFWS) staff for guidance • The biologist will respond onsite to relocate the animal or assist in implementing other protective measures, guided by agency input
• If the sighting is confirmed by the biologist, the species and location will be reported to DFW for inclusion in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The biologist will be responsible for making the report
The biologist will also provide a brief memorandum documenting the sighting and any follow-up actions, including CNDDB documentation, for City records.
Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
AMM-7. Western
Spadefoot Protection
AMM-8. Giant Garter
Snake Protection
AMM-9. Northwestern
Pond Turtle Protection
AMM-10. Nesting Bird
Protection
To the extent feasible, construction and O&M activities will be conducted during the dry season (May - October), or will avoid entry into and disturbance of ponded features.
If work within or in proximity to ponded features occurs during the rainy season, a qualified biologist will delineate areas to be avoided to prevent impacts on breeding special-status amphibians, using pin flags, temporary construction fencing, or another appropriate low-impact medium. No entry (personnel, equipment, or materials) will be permitted into delineated avoidance areas.
If work would impact areas with burrows, a qualified biologist will evaluate the burrows to determine whether they are suitable for use by western spadefoot, and will scope any suitable burrows. If any western spadefoot individuals are found within burrows to be impacted, they will be safely excavated from the burrow by hand or small excavator, either by the biologist or under biologist oversight, and will be relocated to a suitable burrow location outside the disturbance area and far enough away that they would not be expected to return.
To the extent feasible, all construction and O&M activities will avoid impacting or working within 200 feet of the drainage ditches in the Study Area. Once the NEWS and MDTW projects become operational, the same precautions will apply to created water bodies. Appropriate silt fencing, flagging, and/or other measures will be employed to protect the drainage ditches and other aquatic habitat from direct and indirect impacts, as described in AMM-4.
If work within 200 feet of suitable habitat for giant garter snake is necessary (e.g., for NEWS and MDTW project O&M), the following additional measures will be required. (1) If possible, work within 200 feet of suitable habitat will be conducted between May 1 and October 1, when the species is more active and mortality is less likely (2) At all times of year, prior to work within 200 feet of suitable habitat, before work begins, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey of the work area (including access and staging) for giant garter snake. If the species is present, the biologist will notify the City and work will be delayed until the biologist can consult USFWS regarding next steps. Work will not proceed until USFWS has recommended appropriate next steps and these have been implemented. Once work has begun, if activity is suspended for 2 weeks or more, the surveyand, if needed, follow-up-will be repeated Prior to the start of construction or O&M activities, a qualified biologist will conduct a pedestrian preconstruction survey for northwestern pond turtle. The survey will be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to start of work, and will include walking the work area limits and interior and investigating all areas that could be used by the species. If northwestern pond turtle individuals are found, the biologist will relocate them to suitable habitat outside the disturbance area and far enough away that they would not be expected to return.
To the extent feasible, construction will be scheduled outside the February 1 - September 15 nesting season. O&M activities reasonably expected to generate substantial sustained disturbance above Plan Area baseline levels and O&M activities that would involve ground disturbance or vegetation removal or trimming will also be scheduled outside the nesting period if possible.
If the types of activities identified above would commence during the nesting season, a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey for nesting birds. The survey will be conducted within 2 weeks of the start of work, and will cover the entire work footprint, including access and staging, plus a 500-footwide buffer. If active nests are found within the survey area, a no-disturbance zone will be established around the nest for the duration of the nesting season, or until the biologist determines that the young have fledged and left the nest, or that the nest has been abandoned. No entry into the no-disturbance zone will be permitted. The no-disturbance zone will be delineated in the field by or under the supervision of the biologist, using temporary construction fencing or another suitable low-impact medium. The width of the no-disturbance zone will be determined by the biologist, based on • the location of the nest and the amount of vegetative and other screening between the nest and areas where work will take place
f!'J Redtail Consulting ,. Environment & Community
5 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
AMM-11. Western
Burrowing Owl
Protection
• noise and human disturbance levels at the site at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the work
• the sensitivity of the species involved and behaviors of the nesting birds, and, if appropriate, • other site- or species-specific factors
If special-status species are involved, the biologist will consult with the appropriate resource agency(ies) (DFW and/or USFWS) in determining the width of the no-disturbance zone.
If work during the nesting season is suspended for more than 1 week and then recommences, an additional survey will be conducted before work is reinitiated, and the same no-disturbance zone requirements will apply in the event active nests are found.
If construction will take place during the western burrowing owl breeding season (February 1 - August 31 ), protocol-level preconstruction surveys will be conducted for this species. O&M activities reasonably expected to generate substantial sustained disturbance above Plan Area baseline levels and O&M activities that would involve ground disturbance will also be subject to this requirement.
Surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist and will follow the methodology described in DFW's current Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 2012, or future reports that supersede the 2012 version). Four surveys will be conducted within 2 hours of sunrise or sunset, with the final survey occurring 24 hours prior to the start of construction activities. If active nest burrows are found, the no-disturbance zone requirements described in AMM-10 will apply. If work during the burrowing owl nesting season is suspended for more than 1 week and then recommences, an additional survey will be conducted before work is reinitiated, and the same no-disturbance zone requirements will apply in the event active nests are found.
CEQA Mitigation Measures
** Denotes measures that will not apply to the wetland project; explanation follows measure.
Aesthetics
AES-1. Construction
Site Housekeeping and
Visual Screening
AES-2. Visual
Disturbance
Coordinator
AES-3. Use of NonGlare Finishes
A-6
In order to reduce adverse effects related to vegetation removal, earthwork, civil construction, construction staging, and other project-related activities, all NCCA project construction documents will require "good construction site housekeeping" measures such that visual disruption is minimized and the appearance of the active work site is as orderly as possible. At a minimum, this will include the following requirements.
• Work and staging areas will be maintained in a clean, orderly condition at all times • When not in use, equipment and materials will be stored in construction staging areas • To the extent feasible, staging areas will be located away from public view; visual/aesthetic factors will be considered in locating staging areas
• Staging areas will be visually screened, using 8-foot-high chainlink fencing covered with a fabric or other non-reflective material of a neutral color
Debris such as excavation spoils and vegetation slash not slated for onsite reuse will be removed promptly at regular intervals and properly disposed of
During construction of each of the NCCA projects, informational signage posted at the work site will include the name and contact information for a City staff person to serve as the designated Visual Disturbance Coordinator. The Visual Disturbance Coordinator will be available during regular business hours to monitor concerns and will be responsible for responding to public complaints regarding construction visual disturbance. In the event a visual disturbance complaint is received, they will be responsible for determining the cause of the complaint and ensuring that reasonable measures are implemented to correct the problem.
In order to minimize glare generated by new built elements at the NCCA site, all NCCA project construction documents will stipulate the use of low-sheen, non-glare, and non-reflective surface materials. Unpainted metal surfaces will not be permitted unless they have been treated for a low-glare weathered or rusted appearance, and gloss paints will not be used. Wall surfaces and hardscape will be matte and roughened; smooth trowelled surfaces will not be permitted.
Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
**AES-4. Standards for
Nighttime Security
Lighting
Biological Resources
810-1. Protection and
Recovery of Parry's
Rough T arplant at
NCCA Site
810-2. Long-Term
Protection and
Restoration of Coastal
and Valley Freshwater
Marsh and Other
Sensitive Habitats
The operations and maintenance plan for each of the NCCA projects will also be written to require periodic assessments of the appearance of hard surfaces, with touch-up or replacement of the finish when necessary. The City will be responsible for long-term assessment and maintenance to ensure that the new built elements at the NCCA do not generate excess glare.
To minimize effects of nighttime security lighting on the community and on wildlife, all NCCA project construction documents will require that any exterior lighting installed at the NCCA meet the following standards.
• Use of nighttime lighting limited to the minimum needed to provide for public and facility safety • Lighting equipped with photosensor or timer switches, such that lighting is on only when needed (dark hours)
• Full cut-off, shielded luminaires to reduce light spill • Downward-directing lighting only; no use of uplights
• Lighting sources restricted to those that provide good color rendering such as light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and metal halide lamps; no use of high- or low-pressure sodium lamps or mercury vapor lamps
[No lighting is planned at the wetland project.]
Design of the wetland project will be configured to avoid removal of existing Parry's tarplant populations to the extent feasible while still accomplishing the project's habitat objectives, based on the mapping developed during the 2020 protocol-level surveys, or the most current updated mapping.
Prior to construction of the NEWS and wetland projects, the City will retain a qualified biologist, botanist, or ecologist with experience in western San Joaquin Valley special-status plants to demarcate avoidance zones around the existing populations of Parry's tarplant that are planned to remain in place, using temporary construction fencing or another appropriate low-impact medium. The avoidance zone around each occurrence will include a 20-foot-wide buffer to reduce the potential for inadvertent and indirect impacts. Entry into Parry's rough tarplant avoidance zones will be prohibited and all construction and staging activity will be excluded.
Additionally, prior to construction of the NEWS project, which is expected to remove occurrences of Parry's rough tarplant, seed will be collected from existing onsite populations of the species and will be included in the seed mix used for the wetland project's native grassland restoration. This requirement will also apply if the wetland project would remove Parry's rough tarplant occurrences. Monitoring protocols and interim and final success criteria for recovery of Parry's rough tarplant in the wetland project native grassland area will be included in the Monitoring Plan developed for the wetland project and will thus be subject to DFW review and approval. Corrective actions in the event Parry's rough tarplant within the native grassland area fails to meet interim success criteria will also be stipulated in the Monitoring Plan, potentially including, but not necessarily restricted to, reseeding in place with seed from onsite sources, and reseeding with onsite seed in other portions of the NCCA site that offer suitable habitat and can be protected over the long term. If corrective action includes reseeding outside the wetland project footprint, the additional reseeded area will be added to the area protected under the wetland project grant contract with DFW and will be monitored and maintained under the wetland project Monitoring Plan.
The City will be responsible for ensuring proper implementation of avoidance, protection, and recovery measures for Parry's rough tarplant.
If areas of Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh or another sensitive habitat at the NCCA site are disturbed or damaged by human incursion or other causes, the City will contract with a qualified biologist or ecologist to develop and implement a restoration plan appropriate to the extent and nature of the damage. Restoration measures may include, but will not necessarily be limited to, trash and debris removal, reseeding, replanting from onsite or container stock, and if appropriate, localized recontouring.
Exclusion fencing and/or hand watering may also be included, if the biologist/ecologist considers it appropriate to support vegetation reestablishment.
If the damage involves habitat recognized as a sensitive natural community by DFW, the restoration plan will be developed in consultation with DFW and will be required to meet with DFW approval. For all habitats, the restoration plan will be consistent with current best practices for restoration ecology, and will FJ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
7 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure
CUL-1. Protection of
Old Santa Fe Grade
CUL-2. Retention of
On-Call Archaeologist
CUL-3. Worker
Awareness Training for
Cultural Resources
CUL-4. Evaluation and
Treatment of
Unanticipated
Archaeological
Discoveries
A-8
include provisions for follow-up monitoring, interim and final success criteria, and corrective action such as additional replanting to ensure that damage is successfully restored and habitat function and value are maintained over the long term. The City will be responsible for proper development and implementation of the restoration plan and any follow-up monitoring and corrective action(s) it requires.
The footprint of the wetland project will be developed to ensure that all physical impacts on the historic Santa Fe Grade are avoided. The project construction documents will define the extent of the Santa Fe Grade in the vicinity of the wetland project and will show the footprint of the Grade as a "No Disturbance" exclusion area where earthwork and equipment staging will be prohibited. The City's construction management staff will be responsible for enforcing this measure during construction. Similar avoidance will be required during O&M activities, and will be enforced by Public Works staff overseeing O&M at the NCCA site.
Prior to construction of each of the NCCA projects, the City will retain a qualified professional archaeologist (City's Archaeologist) who meets Secretary of the Interior standards and has experience in San Joaquin Valley archaeology on an on-call basis for the duration of all ground-disturbing activities.
The City's Archaeologist will be responsible for reviewing, identifying, and evaluating cultural resources (if any) exposed during construction, for determining whether they qualify as historic resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) under CEQA, and, if needed, recommending and implementing appropriate follow-up treatment.
Prior to groundbreaking for each of the NCCA projects, the City's Archaeologist (defined in Mitigation Measure Cul-2) will develop and present in-person, hands-on worker awareness training for historical resources. Training will include information on the possibility of encountering resources during construction; the types of resources that could be seen and how to recognize them; and proper procedures in the event resources are encountered. All field management and supervisory personnel and construction workers involved with ground-disturbing activities will be required to take this training prior to beginning work on the project. Upon completion of the training, workers will be required to sign a form stating that they attended the training, understand, and will comply with the information presented.
The same type of worker awareness training will be required for all City and contract staff engaged in O&M activities that would entail ground disturbance in areas not already disturbed by construction. It will be provided by the City's Archaeologist, or another on-call specialist meeting the same qualifications.
The City's Public Works Department will be responsible for ensuring that training is provided for both construction and O&M staff.
If known or suspected cultural resources are discovered during construction or O&M, work in the immediate area of the find will cease and the contractor or O&M staff will be required to notify the City before the end of the work day. The find will be protected in place until the City's Archaeologist (or another specialist meeting the same qualifications) and a trained and qualified Native American monitor who can prove genealogical relationship to at least one of the tribes of the western San Joaquin Valley region have evaluated it and identified appropriate follow-up measures, if any. If the City's Archaeologist determines that the resource qualifies as a historical resource and/or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, they will notify the City and other appropriate parties and recommend follow-up measures to reduce impacts, in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the Cf QA Guidelines. Depending on the nature of the find, follow-up measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, recordation, monitoring during ongoing work, additional archaeological testing, and data recovery, among other options. The City's Archaeologist may recommend completion of a formal Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) and/or Archaeological Treatment Plan (ATP), potentially including data recovery, if significant archaeological deposits are exposed during ground- disturbing activities. The City will be responsible for proper implementation of the AMP and ATP. If an AMP or ATP is implemented for a project that requires federal permit authorization (for example, Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting), the City will consult with the federal lead agency and, if appropriate, other regulatory agencies, in developing and implementing the AMP and ATP.
If archaeological evaluation, monitoring, or treatment is required, the City's Archaeologist will prepare and file a Monitoring Closure Report with the City, documenting the nature of the find(s), evaluation methods, and outcomes.
Redtail Consulting l'!'..:i
Environment & Community.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
CUL-5. Procedures for
Discovery of Human
Remains
Geology & Soils
GE0-1. Topsoil
Protection
GE0-2. Final Design
Evaluation and PRMP
Development
The treatment of human remains and funerary objects discovered during ground-disturbing construction and O&M activity will comply with all applicable state laws. If known or potential human remains are encountered during activities at the NCCA site, work within 50 feet of the discovery and in any nearby areas reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains will cease, the find will be protected in place, and the contractor/O&M staff will be required to notify the City before the end of the work day. The City will promptly notify the Merced County Coroner, who will be responsible for determining whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are Native American and are not subject to Coroner authority, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which is responsible for identifying and notifying descendant(s) of the deceased so they can make recommendations regarding the treatment of the remains. The City will be responsible for facilitating the disposition of remains recommended by the Most Likely Descendant(s). If no satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the disposition of the remains pursuant to state law, the City will respectfully reinter the human remains and items associated with the burial on City property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. A final report detailing the find, follow-up activities, and disposition of remains will be prepared by the City's Archaeologist or other qualified staff, and will be submitted to the City Manager promptly following disposition of the remains. The report will be subject to review and approval by the City Manager.
To minimize impacts on topsoil resources. construction documents for all NCCA projects will require the following measures for work in vegetated areas.
• The area of disturbance will be limited to the minimum needed to accomplish the necessary grad ing/recontou ring
• Revegetation will reuse onsite topsoil to the extent feasible. In areas where topsoil is present, topsoil will be removed and sidecast separate from other excavation spoils, and will be assessed for reuse in habitat restoration/creation by a qualified biologist or ecologist with local native plant expertise. If the topsoil is determined to be suitable for onsite reuse in habitat restoration/creation, it will be maintained in a separate stockpile and will be replaced during revegetation. If site topsoil is determined to be unsuitable-for example, due to the presence of excessive invasive species seed bank-clean imported topsoil will be used. If possible, import topsoil will be obtained from a local source or sources within the project watershed, with soil properties generally consistent with those of the NCCA site. Import topsoil will also be assessed and approved by the qualified biologisUecologist prior to use on the site
If operational or maintenance activities require topsoil disturbance or removal, the same measures will apply.
For each of the NCCA projects, the City will retain qualified staff to review the 90% or 100% design submittal and supporting geotechnical report(s). As used here, qualified staff refers to an individual meeting the qualified professional paleontologist criteria defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010).
The purpose of the design review will be to determine the potential for ground disturbance to involve paleontologically sensitive geologic units (San Luis Ranch alluvium, Los Banos alluvium, and/or Tulare Formation), based on final design, anticipated depth of disturbance, and construction techniques. As such, the design review may include field reconnaissance, if warranted in the opinion of qualified staff. If there is reasonably foreseeable potential for any of these units to be affected by project-related ground disturbance, the City will require qualified staff (as defined above) to develop a Paleontological Resources Mitigation Plan (PRMP). The PRMP will be consistent with the SVP's Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources (SVP Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010) and Conditions of Receivership for Paleontologic Salvage Collections (SVP Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee 1996). As such, it will provide for at least the following.
• Implementation by qualified personnel, including a supervising paleontologist who meets the requirements for a qualified professional paleontologist as defined by the SVP and monitor(s) who ~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
9 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
GE0-3. PRMP
Implementation
GE0-4. Worker
Awareness Training for
Paleontological
Resources
A-10
satisfy the SVP's requirements for paleontological resource monitors (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010) • Pre-construction survey with salvage or protection in place, in any areas where there would be surface disturbance of the geologic units identified as highly sensitive for paleontological resources (San Luis Ranch alluvium, Los Banos alluvium, Tulare Formation) ("highly sensitive units") • Pre-construction and construction-period coordination procedures and communications protocols • Monitoring of ground-disturbing activities known to involve, or potentially involving, the highly sensitive units. In all areas subject to monitoring, monitoring will initially be conducted full-time for grading and excavation, but the PRMP may provide for monitoring frequency in any given location to be reduced once 50% of the ground-disturbing activity has been completed, based on the professional judgment of the supervising paleontologist • Provisions for a "stop work, evaluate, and treat appropriately" response in the event of a paleontological discovery, with appropriate treatment identified by the supervising paleontologist (see Mitigation Measure GE0-3) based on the nature of the find and prevailing standards for paleontological resources protection
• Sampling and data recovery procedures consistent with SVP protocols (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee 1996) • A repository agreement providing for appropriate curation of any recovered materials, consistent with SVP requirements (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee 1996)
• Procedures for the preparation, identification, and analysis of fossil specimens and data recovered, consistent with SVP Requirements (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee 1996) and any additional requirements of the designated repository institution
Reporting procedures consistent with SVP requirements (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010)
Prior to groundbreaking for any of the NCCA projects that are determined to warrant a PRMP (see Mitigation Measure GE0-2), the City will retain a supervising paleontologist meeting SVP standards for a qualified professional paleontologist (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010) to implement the requirements of the PRMP. This person may, but will not necessarily, be the same individual who prepared the PRMP. The City will be responsible for ensuring proper implementation of the PRMP.
To support effective PRMP implementation and address the potential for unanticipated discoveries where a PRMP is not required, the City will retain qualified staff to present in-person, hands-on worker awareness training for paleontological resources to ensure that construction staff can recognize fossils in the field. Training will be delivered prior to groundbreaking for each of the NCCA projects. As used here, qualified staff refers to an individual who satisfies one or both of the following criteria. • A qualified professional paleontologist as defined by the SVP (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010) who is experienced in delivering training to nonspecialists
• A California-licensed professional geologist (PG) who has expertise in San Joaquin Valley stratigraphy and paleontology and is experienced in delivering training to nonspecialists Training will be concise and substantive. It will include information on the possibility of encountering fossils during construction; the types of fossils that may be seen and how to recognize them; and proper procedures in the event fossils are encountered. All field management and supervisory personnel and construction workers involved with ground-disturbing activities will be required to take this training prior to beginning work on the project. Upon completion of the training, workers will be required to sign a form stating that they attended the training, understand, and will comply with the information presented.
Redtail Consulting ~
Environment & Community ,.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
GE0-5. Paleontological
Consultation for
Ground-Disturbing
O&M Activities
Prior to ground-disturbing O&M activities in areas not previously disturbed by construction, the City will retain a qualified professional paleontologist as defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010) to review the proposed O&M activities. The purpose of the review will be to determine the level of risk to paleontological resources as a result of the intended ground disturbance and provide advice regarding appropriate risk reduction measures. If the paleontologist considers it warranted, Mitigation Measures GE0-2, GE0-3, and GE0-4 will be implemented. Alternately, the professional paleontologist may identify a reduced approach consistent with the SVP's Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources (SVP Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee 2010) and Conditions of Receivership for Paleontologic Salvage Collections (SVP Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee 1996). The City will be responsible for ensuring that the paleontologist's recommendations are properly implemented.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
**HAZ-1. Testing and Prior to removal of sediment from the NEWS project and MDTW project forebays, the City will sample the Appropriate Disposal of sediment and test it for hazardous constituents. Sampling and testing will follow current applicable best Forebay Sediment practices consistent with the federal Environmental Protection Agency's Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste (SW-846) [U .S. Environmental Protection Agency 2014 and various], or current alternate approved under California law. If the sediment is found to qualify as hazardous per State of California standards, it will be handled and treated as a hazardous material, in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements. Reuse of sediment that qualifies as hazardous will not be permitted; it will be transported by an appropriately qualified and licensed hauler and will be disposed appropriately at either a Class II ("designated" wastes that are non-hazardous but may pose a risk to the environment) or Class I (hazardous wastes) landfill, depending on the nature and level of contamination.
HAZ-2. Hazardous
Materials Response
Noise
NOl-1. Reduced
Construction Hours in
Vicinity of Residences
NOl-2. Noise
Disturbance
Coordinator
Once sediment from each project's forebay has been tested in at least 3 normal water years, 3 wet years, and 3 dry years, testing may be discontinued if sediment has consistently been shown not to qualify as hazardous per State of California standards. [This measure only applies to the constructed water treatment wetlands (NEWS and MOTW), which include sediment settling forebays.]
In the event known or suspected hazardous materials are encountered during construction or O&M, work in the vicinity of the find will be suspended until qualified staff (i.e., staff meeting the Environmental Professional qualifications in ASTM E1527-13 [ASTM International 2013]) retained by the City can assess the nature of the find and stipulate appropriate follow-up and protective measures. Work may proceed elsewhere on the site, assuming the discovery appears to be localized. If qualified staff consider it warranted, the City will conduct a Phase II hazardous materials investigation or appropriate equivalent procedure to determine the nature and extent of contamination, evaluate potential risks, and, if appropriate, stipulate additional precautions and/or response measures. Work in areas of known and potential contamination will not resume until the measures stipulated by qualified staff are implemented.
If waste disposal is necessary, materials will be handled and disposed of by a licensed waste-disposal contractor and transported by a licensed hauler to an appropriately licensed and permitted disposal or recycling facility, in accordance with local, state, and federal requirements. Project contract documents for all NCCA projects will stipulate contractor responsibilities in accommodating and assisting with the implementation of these commitments, and these requirements will remain in force for all O&M activities at the NCCA.
To reduce the potential for disturbance, no construction activity at or adjacent to the NCCA site will be permitted within 1,500 feet of residences on any weekend days or before 8 AM or after 5 PM on weekdays.
During construction of each of the NCCA projects, informational sign age posted at the work site will include the name and contact information for a City staff person to serve as the designated Noise Disturbance Coordinator. This person may, but will not necessarily, be the same person designated as the Visual Disturbance Coordinator under Mitigation Measure AES-2. The Noise Disturbance Coordinator will be available during regular business hours to monitor concerns and will be responsible for FJ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
11 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
NOl-3. Limits on Use of
Impact and Vibratory
Equipment Near
Residences
Transportation
TR-1. NCCA Usage
Monitoring
**TR-2. Reservations
System and Usage
Management
A-12
responding to public complaints regarding construction noise and vibration disturbance. In the event a noise/vibration disturbance complaint is received, they will be responsible for determining the cause of the complaint and ensuring that reasonable measures are implemented to correct the problem.
No construction equipment or activities reasonably anticipated to generate vibration levels in excess of 94 vibration decibels (VdB) or a peak particle velocity of 0.2 inches per second at a distance of 25 feet from the source will be permitted within 100 feet of existing residences. Prohibited equipment will include vibratory rollers.
Prior to construction of the Newman Nature Park, the City will take the following actions to monitor NCCA usage.
• At least monthly, the City will conduct one weekday and one weekend user poll at peak use hours to determine the number of visitors onsite, identify whether they are local or from outside the area, and if they are from outside the City's Sphere of Influence, how far they travelled to visit the NCCA.
Information on number of visitors per car will also be collected to calibrate understanding of visitors/car trips ratio, supporting more accurate projections of future VMT generation • Data will be maintained by the Public Works Department and will be summarized, reviewed, and evaluated annually to determine whether NCCA usage is generating in excess of 110 trips per day.
Data analysis will include projections of coming-year usership and trip generation When the Newman Nature Park is constructed, the City will ensure that the entrance to the parking area is equipped with a vehicle detection loop or similar technology such that vehicles entering the parking area are counted. The City will also continue to conduct user surveys as described above, and all data will continue to be maintained, and evaluated annually, by the Public Works Department, also as described above.
If or when usership is found to exceed 110 trips per day or alternate screening criteria adopted by the City of Newman through a process consistent with Cf QA Guidelines requirements and applicable recommendations of the Office of Planning and Research, or is projected to exceed this threshold in the coming year, the City will implement Mitigation Measure TR-2. Alternately, if at some time in the future a regional VMT reduction program meeting Office of Planning and Research (2018 or future-current) standards is developed and offers other opportunities to address VMT generation (such as in-lieu fees to support mitigation actions that can reasonably be expected to occur), the City may elect to participate in this program rather than implementing Mitigation Measure TR-2, assuming an appropriate offset for NCCA-generated VMT can be demonstrated.
The Public Works Department will also monitor and track VMT associated with O&M at the NCCA site and will seek to minimize VMT where this is feasible without compromising the function, value, or community benefits of the NCCA facilities.
The City will install an automatic gate on NCCA parking lot access and will develop and implement an online reservations system to limit site visitation. This may be used to maintain overall usership at a trip generation level that represents a Less than Significant transportation impact per current guidance from the Office of Planning and Research or other relevant entity, and/or to prioritize local over regional users such that projected VMT generation is maintained at a level below current applicable significance thresholds. If VMT generation is selected as the metric to guide usership management, it will be projected using current prevailing methods as of the time the relevant analysis is prepared. Management of regional usership may use any of several methods to control trip and/or VMT generation, potentially including but not necessarily limited to
• prioritizing group visits that access the NCCA by bus or van, such as school field trips and senior excursions
• promoting and facilitating carpools and ridesharing for NCCA visitors • prioritizing local usage over regional usage
• other methods developed by the City based on usership surveys and community priorities and needs
[Note that this measure will not apply directly to the wetland project, which would not provide visitor Redtail Consulting IP!':.i
Environment & Community,.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
**TR-3. Overflow
Parking Improvements
on Inyo Avenue and
Brazo Road
Cumulative Impacts
C-1 . Pre- and PostConstruction Soil
Testing for Mercury
parking; visitor parking is planned at the NEWS and Newman Nature Park projects only.] If the NEWS project is constructed before the Newman Nature Park, as part of the NEWS project the City will provide improvements to the north shoulder (only) of Inyo Avenue to provide for safe accommodation of overflow parking. The shoulder will be graded if necessary and will be graveled and/or paved for parking. Existing utilities will be protected in place. Improvements will initially be equal to 20 parking spaces (500 feet), but the City will continue to monitor usage at the NCCA per Mitigation Measure TR-1, and will extend the graveled and/or paved shoulder if necessary, taking into account the anticipated timing of Newman Nature Park construction and increased availability of onsite parking. No Parking signage meeting City standards will be installed along the south side of Inyo Avenue to prevent overflow parking from encroaching on residential frontages and access.
In conjunction with improvements to the shoulders of Inyo Avenue, the City will also coordinate with the County Public Works Department to install No Parking signs along both sides of Canal School Road adjacent to the NCCA, to prevent overflow parking from encroaching on travel and residential frontages and access along Canal School Road. Installation of signage will be the City's responsibility.
If the NEWS project is constructed after the Newman Nature Park, the City may reevaluate the need for overflow parking along Inyo Avenue based on usage monitoring conducted per Mitigation Measure TR-1.
Improvements as described above will be provided if warranted.
As part of the Newman Nature Park project, the City will provide improvements to the shoulders of Brazo Road to provide for safe accommodation of overflow parking. Shoulders on both sides of the road will be graded if necessary, and graveled and/or paved for parking. The length of the improvements will initially be equal to 30 parking spaces (750 feet), but the City will continue to monitor usage at the NCCA per Mitigation Measure TR-1, and will expand the graveled and/or paved shoulder length as needed. If the Newman Nature Park is constructed before the NEWS project, No Parking signage along both sides of Canal School Road adjacent to the NCCA will be installed at the time the Nature Park is constructed.
All improvements along Inyo Avenue and Brazo Road will be the City's responsibility but Brazo Road improvements will be coordinated with the County Public Works Department and will meet County roadway standards as laid out in the current version of the Merced County Department of Public Works Improvement Standards and Specifications.
[This measure coordinates overflow parking improvements with the two projects that would provide public parking: NEWS and the Newman Nature Park.]
Prior to construction of the NEWS, wetland, and MDTW projects, the City will conduct further testing to characterize mercury levels in soils involved in project earthwork. Samples will be collected from at least 3 locations within each proposed habitat type within each project footprint. Soil testing will also be conducted in the footprint of the Newman Nature Park, with samples collected from at least 3 locations within each area planned for earthwork and/or future public use. At each location within each project, samples from surface, mid-depth, and maximum anticipated depths of excavation will be collected.
Sample locations will be areally distributed to maximize coverage, and sample locations at the NEWS, wetland, and MDTW projects will be coordinated with RWQCB staff and subject to RWQCB approval.
Sample collection will conform to Chapter 3 (Inorganic Analytes) of EPA's SW-846 Compendium [U .S.
Environmental Protection Agency 2014]. Testing will conform to EPA Method 7473 [U .S. Environmental Protection Agency 1998].
Site soils found to exceed the 0.1 mg/kg total mercury (dry weight) threshold will be removed from the site and disposed of appropriately, consistent with all applicable state and federal protocols. Alternately, they may be separately stockpiled for onsite reuse in lower fill lifts that will not be exposed at the surface and will not be subject to surface water flow or ponding when the project is complete. If soils are stockpiled for reuse, stockpiles will be covered and soils will be watered during placement, to prevent the generation of fugitive dust with elevated mercury levels, and runoff control will be in place to prevent offsite transport. Appropriate personal protective equipment will be required for all construction-site personnel working with or potentially exposed to these soils, consistent with any applicable California state requirements.
At the NEWS, wetland, and MDTW projects, once construction is complete, and before new water flows are introduced to the project, at least one soil sample will be collected and analyzed from each habitat rJ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
13 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
Measure Requirements
C-2. Aqueous Mercury
Monitoring and
Management
A-14
type/land use within the project footprint (including wetland habitat, uplands, and-if any-access roadways and parking area). At the Newman Nature Park, at least one sample will be collected within each public use area that has exposed soils (i.e., is not paved or surfaced); multiple samples will be collected from each trail, covering and characterizing the length of the trail. Sample locations at the NEWS, wetland, and MDTW projects will be coordinated with RWQCB staff and will be subject to RWQCB approval, and sampling and analysis protocols will be the same as those identified above. The purpose of this second round of analysis will be to verify that all surface-exposed soils and soils exposed to surface water flow or ponding are below the 0.1 mg/kg total mercury (dry weight) threshold. If this is confirmed, no further action with regard to soils will be required. If any soils are found to exceed the 0.1 mg/kg total mercury (dry weight) threshold, remedial action will be taken. Remedial action at the NEWS, wetland, and MDTW projects will be coordinated with RWQCB staff and a remedial action plan will be submitted to the RWQCB and must be approved by the RWQCB before action is taken. At all of the projects, remedial actions may include, but will not necessarily be limited to, the following: capping with clean imported fill verified to contain levels below the 0.1 mg/kg total mercury (dry weight) limit, removal, appropriate disposal, and replacement with clean imported fill verified to contain levels below the 0.1 mg/kg total mercury (dry weight) limit, or-where feasible without impeding the function of the projectcapping with rock or permeable paving media.
At all four NCCA projects, unless preconstruction soil testing has shown that soils within the project footprint are consistently below the 0.1 mg/kg total mercury threshold throughout the site, future modifications requiring earthwork in areas not previously disturbed by construction will be subject to the same testing and remedial action requirements laid out for construction.
Following construction completion at the NEWS, wetland, and MDTW projects, the City will conduct testing for aqueous methylmercury levels in input, onsite, and effluent waters. Testing will be initiated once vegetation is established and each project is determined by the design team or other appropriately qualified personnel to be functioning at a mature level. Samples will be collected from the following locations.
• NEWS project: Miller Ditch input to project, at least one location within each wetland cell within project, micropool, discharge to Miller Ditch
• Wetland project: Miller Ditch input to project, at least one location within each wetland habitat type on 78-acre parcel, at least one location within each wetland habitat type on 24-acre parcel • MDTW project: Miller Ditch input to project, at least one location in each wetland cell within project, discharge from project
Sample collection will follow EPA Method 1669 [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1996] or updated EPA equivalent. Samples will be analyzed consistent with EPA Method 1631 [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2002] or updated EPA equivalent. Sample locations will be coordinated with RWQCB staff and will be subject to RWQCB approval.
The goal of sampling and analysis will be to show that wetlands on the NCCA site are not increasing methyl mercury above input levels. Testing and analysis will be conducted each year for a minimum of 3 consecutive years. If the methylmercury level in any of the tested samples is found to substantially exceed the level in input waters to the project (as determined by the City in consultation with RWQCB staff), corrective action will be taken. A corrective action plan will be submitted to RWQCB staff for review and feedback, and may include, but will not necessarily be limited to, the following: managing wetland inputs seasonally, managing wetland throughput to modify residence times, and capping of bottom sediment in the location producing exceedance. If/when sampling has shown that NCCA wetlands are not increasing methlymercury above input levels over 3 consecutive years of testing, no further action with regard to aqueous methylmercury will be required .
To enable the NCCA projects to contribute to long-term increased understanding of mercury cycling in enhanced and restored wetlands, the City will provide the RWQCB with annual reports describing that year's (1) sampling and analysis activities, (2) results, and (3) corrective actions implemented, if any.
Activities and results will be detailed on a project-specific basis, but monitoring reports for all three projects may be combined for efficiency.
Redtail Consulting E
Environment & Community,.
City of Newman
November 2021
NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
Measure Requirements
C-3. Integrated Pest
Management and
Limited Use of
Chemical Pesticides
Pest and invasive species control at the NCCA-whether conducted by City staff or by contractor(s) retained by the City-will emphasize Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices consistent with prevailing best practices and current guidance of the Integrated Pest Management Institute of North America. The City's Public Works Department will be responsible for ensuring that IPM is the go-to standard operating procedure for the NCCA.
Use of chemical pesticides and herbicides will be avoided to the extent practicable at the NCCA while maintaining habitat function and quality and appropriate public recreation values. Pesticides and herbicides for which impairments have been identified in immediate downstream receiving waters (the Newman Wasteway and San Joaquin River) will not be used under any circumstances. As of 2021, prohibited substances are Group A pesticides, chlorpyrifos, diazinon, diuron, and simazine, in addition to all substances banned in the United States. The City's Public Works Department will be responsible for reviewing the State Water Resources Control Board's Clean Water Act Section 303[d] list [State Water Resources Control Board 2016 or current] as it is updated and ensuring that if additional pesticide or herbicide impairments are identified in the Newman Wasteway or San Joaquin River downstream of Mud Slough, these substances are added to the list of substances prohibited at the NCCA.
Sources & Standards Cited in this Attachment
ASTM International (ASTM). 2013. Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (ASTM E1527-13). Available: https://www.astm.org/Standards/ E1527.htm.
California Department of Fish and Game. 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. Available:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentlD=83843&inline=true. Accessed: May 2020.
California Rapid Assessment Method for Wetlands. 2013. Depressional Wetlands Field Book, Version 6.1. (February.). Available: https://www.cramwetlands.org/documents. Accessed: September 2021.
Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December). Available: https://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/technical-advisories.html. Downloaded: December 2020.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee. 1996. Conditions of Receivership for Paleontologic Salvage Collections. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology News Bulletin 166:31-32.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources.
Available: http://vertpaleo.org/Membership/Member-Resources/SVP _lmpact_Mitigation_Guidelines.aspx.
Downloaded: July 2018.
State Water Resources Control Board. 2016. Final 2014 and 2016 303(d) List and Report. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water _issues/programs/tmdl/integrated2014_2016.shtml. Downloaded:
May 2020.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Method 1669: Sampling Ambient Water for Trace Metals at EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels. Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-1 O/documents/ method_ 1669_ 1996.pdf. Accessed: May 2021.
~ Redtail Consulting • Environment & Community
15 NCCA Wetland Project 60% Design
Addendum to May 2021 MND
City of Newman
November 2021
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. EPA Method 7473 (SW-846): Mercury in Solids and Solutions by Thermal Decomposition, Amalgamation, and Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry. Available:
https://www.epa.gov/esam/epa-method-7 4 73-sw-846-mercury-solids-and-solutions-thermal-decompositionamalgamation-and. Accessed: May 2021.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Method 1631, Revision E: Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry. Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/ production/files/2015-08/documents/method_ 1631 e_2002.pdf. Accessed: May 2021.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2014 and Various. Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste (SW-846 Compendium). Available: https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/sw-846-compendium. Accessed: October 2021.
A-16 Redtail Consulting~
Environment & Community.
Appendix
Updated Air Emissions Estimates
TAMURA ENVIRONMENTAL
TO: Anna Buising, PhD, PG, ~~tail Consulting
FROM: Todd Tamura, QEP {(j[J
RE: Air Emissions Estimates for Newman Community Conservation Area (NCCA) Master Plan projects-updated for changes in wetland project (60% design) DATE: December 1, 2021
This memorandum presents updated emissions for the NCCA wetland project, reflecting changes in project grading and grading equipment usage based on the now-current 60% design. It is intended as a supplement/update to our March 10, 2021 memorandum and accompanying calculations, which provided the basis for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis in the City of Newman's (City's) March 2021 Initial Study (March 2021 IS) evaluating the impacts of the NCCA Master Plan projects.
This memo includes the following:
1. An overview of changes in the wetland project since the previously analyzed 30% design that are pertinent to air emissions;
2. Updated emissions for the wetland project;
3. Discussion of projects' cumulative impacts results/comparisons to applicable emissions thresholds.
1. Changes in Wetland Project Since 30% Design
From the perspective of air emissions, the changes in the wetland project since the previously analyzed 30% design are those associated with nonroad equipment during the grading and civil construction phases. The volume of earthwork anticipated has increased from about 550 cubic yards to about 9,200 cubic yards, with concomitant changes in equipment usage; however, there are not expected to be any increased truck trips, as the additional earthwork will be redistributed on-site with off-road equipment rather than being hauled off-site.
The civil construction phase has shortened from one month to two weeks, but there is potential overlap with the grading work. In addition, project team members identified that the self-loading scrapers that are likely to be used are considerably larger than the 367 hp default scraper assumption in the CalEEMod® model that we used previously, and we are also making a more conservative assumption regarding the bulldozer sizes (CAT D8 instead of CAT D6). Pictures of these revised equipment are shown in Attachment A and the changes in our analysis are summarized in Table 1 below. With regard to the potential overlap between phases, project team members identified that the worst-case day could potentially include all of the equipment listed for the grading phase plus half of the equipment listed for the civil construction phase (i.e., one loader and one excavator).
19 / :)r:::et ~tt: 20fJ. Petalwno. CA fJ 1951 - le!: 707. 773.J 7 3; Table 1. Wetland Project Construction Grading and Civil Construction - Changes from 30% Design
Previous Assumptions Revised Assumptions
One-month grading phase using the following equipment:
• Two scrapers, 367 hp each (CalEEMod® default
size assumption)
• Two bulldozers, 215 hp each (CAT 06 or
equivalent)
• One 201 hp excavator
Non-overlapping one-month civil construction phase
using the following equipment:
• Two 97 hp loaders
• Two 15 8 hp excavators
2. Updated Emissions Estimation
One month of grading using the following equipment:
• Two scrapers, 1, 118 hp ( 63 7 hp tractor engine
+ 481 hp scraper engine) each (CAT 657 or
equivalent)
• Two bulldozers, 324 hp each (CAT 08 or
equivalent)
• One 201 hp excavator
Potentially overlapping two-week civil construction
phase (same equipment as identified previously;
however, to the extent that there might be overlapping
grading and civil construction, the worst-case day
would only have one loader and one excavator
operating at the same time as the grading equipment
mentioned above.
The nonroad equipment emissions were updated using the spreadsheet calculator that was described in our original writeup; revised pages are shown in Attachment B to this memo. The table below shows the original total emissions for the wetlands project, the original and revised grading/civil construction emissions, and the revised total emissions for the wetlands project, which are still well below significance thresholds:
PM10 PM2.5
ROG NOx co 502 Total Total Total C02 CH4 N20 C02e
Wetland (tot original)
Wetland grad/civ (orig)
Wetland grad/civ (rev)
Wetland (rev total)
0.07 0.04
0.08 0.11
0.75 0.50
0.98 1.23
tons/yr
0.51 l.32E-03
0.32 8.37E-04
0.59 1.44E-03
0.78 1.93E-03
MT/yr
0.042 0.029 117 0.0345 0
0.019 0.018 79 0.0256 0
0.038 0.035 136 0.0442 0
0.061 0.046 174 0.0531 0
Worst-case daily emissions from the construction equipment-for the case of overlapping the grading phase with half of the equipment in the civil construction phases-are now as shown below:
117
80 138
175
Daily emissions from offroad equipment exhaust (lb/day) ROG co NOx 502 PM10 PM2.5
Wetland Grading 7.56 51.6 88.8 0.126 3.41
Wetland Civil Construction (1/2 of equip) 0.46 4.9 4.6 0.012 0.18 Total 8.03 56.5 93.4 0.138 3.59
As shown in the CalEEMod® runs attached to our previous memo, the only other on-site emissions are nominal (fugitive dust - 0.5 lb/day of PM-10, of which 0.05 lb/day are PM-2.5) 2 3.13
0.17 3.30
and therefore total on-site emissions are still below the District's 100 lb/day threshold for triggering dispersion modeling analyses.
3. Discussion of Results/Comparisons to Applicable Emissions Thresholds The District's CEQA Significance Thresholds and the less-stringent Federal General Conformity thresholds are based on an annual timeframe (tons per year). Although four projects will be approved independently, the analysis conservatively considered them in combination, taking into account the scheduling of the various construction activities. Although construction schedules can be subject to some changes, the overall expectation is as follows:
(1) As discussed in the accompanying Addendum to the City's May 2021-adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the NCCA Master Plan projects, the wetland project is now planned to begin construction around June 2022 and complete earthwork that same summer. If a source of inoculum can be obtained, inoculum collection/spreading would occur during the dry season of 2023.
(2) The NEWS project is now expected to break ground in early August 2022, with clearing/grubbing and grading occurring in late summer through early fall 2022. (3) If it is funded in 2021, the NNP project would likely break ground in 2023 and would be completed in 2024, with earthwork possible in both years. If funding is not obtained in 2021, as now seems likely, the NNP project would likely be delayed by a year or more. ( 4) The MDTW project is not expected to begin until 2024 or later, since a funding source has not been identified and it is still in the conceptual stages.
Based on this scheduling, the following were considered to be the worst-case scenarios with regard to emissions occurring within a single year:
• Wetlands and NEWS projects (and water extension) occurring entirely within the same year; note however, that wetland project grading should be complete by the time NEWS breaks ground, so the two worst-case phases of these projects should not overlap. • NNP and MDTW projects (and water extension) occurring entirely within the same year Tables of annual emissions from the 2022 and combined 2023-2024 construction scenarios and operational emissions are provided below, along with comparisons to the relevant SJV CEQA Significance Thresholds and General Conformity thresholds - it can be seen that even the sums of a worst-case construction year's emissions (or even the total of all the construction emissions) with the operational emissions are well below the relevant thresholds. 3 Mfgated 11 Constr u cfon I (total ·I ncl u d1 ·n g on-s1 t e a d n 0 ff -s·I te all Y. e ars ,.2022
Wetland
NEWS
Inyo Ave . parking
Water Service Ext .
Total tons/yr, 2021:
2023 and 2024 combined
NNP
Brazo Rd. parking
Water Service Ext.
MDTW
Total tons/yr, 2023:
ROG NOx
0.11 1.24
0.22 2.44
0.00 0.02
0.02 0.21
0.4 3.9
0.24 2.44
0.001 0.01
0.02 0. 21
0.17 1.83
0.4 4.5
0.76 8.2
co S02 fugPMlO
tons/yr
0.78 1.94E-03 0.014
1.12 5.27E-03 0.163
0.02 3.91E-05 0.001
0.21 4. 70E-04 0.003
2.1 0.01 0.2
2.32 5.00E-03 0.034
0.01 2.09E-05 0.000
0.21 4. 70E-04 0.003
0.84 0.003951 0.122
3.4 0.01 0.2
5.3 0.02 0.34
I
PMlO PM2.5
exh PMlO Total Total Total C02 CH4
MT/yr
0.049 0.063 0.046 175 0.053123
0.070 0.233 0.109 524 0.0897
0.001 0.002 0.001 3 0.000809
0.010 0.013 0.010 41 7.94E-03
0.1 0.3 0.2
0.135 0.168 0.101 441 0.1382
0.000 0.001 0.001 2 0.000431
0.010 0.013 0.010 41 0.00794
0.052 0.175 0.081 393 0.067275
0.2 0.4 0.2
0.32 0.65 0.35 1578.2 0.4
Ail-phases co nstruct ion C02e, amortized ove r (divided by) minimum project lifetime of 10 years: I PMlO
ROG NOx co S02 fug PMlO exh PMlO Total
012erational 0.76 1.58 5.72 0.01 0.5 0.0 0.48
SJV Significance Thresholds 10 10 100 27 15
General Conformity Thresholds 10 10 100 100 100
Attachment A: Additional Listed Off-road Construction Equipment Attachment B: Spreadsheet calculations of off-road emissions 4 PM2.5
Total Total C02 CH4
0.14 1,472 0.09
15 100
C02e
177
526
3 41
444
2 41
394
1587.1
159
C02e
1,475
Attachment A.
Additional Listed Off-road Construction E m ment
Model
CAT 657
(Picture from https://www.cat.com/en _US/news/machine-pressreleases/new-cat-65 7-wheel-tractor-scraper-increasesprod ucti vity-enhances-operator-comfort-and-del ivers-low-costearthmovin .html CATD8T
(Picture from
https://www.cat.com/en _ ZA/products/new/equipment/dozers/larg e-dozers.html
Type
Scrapers (637
hp tractor
engine+ 481
hp scraper
engine)
Crawler
Tractors
Actual
HP
1,118
324
(242 kW)
JY t ~·Lrt!et ';te 200. fetmu.1w. C1 9./952 -- fr!. 7f)? 7.73.3737 (Default
CalEEMod®
T eHP
367
158
Daily emissions from offroad equipment exhaust (lb/day) Annual emissions from offroad equipment exhaust (tons/yr) Work
Construction Phase Days ROG co NOx S02 PMlO PM2.S ROG co NOx S02 PMlO PM2.5 C02 CH4 NEWS Clearing and grubbing 10 1.67 18.5 17.9 0.0467 0.68 0.62 0.0083 0.093 0.090 2.3E-04 0.0034 0.0031 22 0.0071 NEWS Grading - Berm construction 10 3.57 21.4 41.9 0.0607 1.61 1.48 0.0179 0.107 0.210 3.0E-04 0.0080 0.0074 29 0.0093 NEWS Grading - Pond and berm finishing 30 5.51 24.6 51.4 0.0889 1.90 1.79 0.0827 0.369 0.772 l.3E-03 0.0285 0.0269 137 0.0261 NEWS Access/trail finishing 10 5.09 24.8 32.4 0.0879 1.19 1.18 0.0255 0.124 0.162 4.4E-04 0.0060 0.0059 49 0.0037 NEWS Construction of concrete pad in forebay 60 0.06 0.3 0.4 0.0007 O.Dl O.Ql 0.0018 0.009 0.011 2.lE-05 0.0004 0.0004 2 0.0002 NEWS Culvert installation 30 0.92 9.7 9.1 0.0244 0.37 0.34 0.0139 0.146 0.137 3.7E-04 0.0055 0.0051 34 0.0111 NEWS Finishing/stabilization 20 0.68 4.5 5.9 0.0149 0.22 0.21 0.0068 0.045 0.059 l.5E-04 0.0022 0.0021 14 0.0046 Wetland Grading 21 7.56 51.6 88.8 0.1260 3.41 3.13 0.0794 0.542 0.932 l.3E-03 0.0358 0.0329 125 0.0405 Wetland Civil Construction 10 0.92 9.7 9.1 0.0244 0.37 0.34 0.0046 0.049 0.046 l.2E-04 0.0018 0.0017 11 0.0037 Wetland Live Plant Material Collection 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wetland Planting 10 0.09 1.6 1.1 0.0024 0.05 0.04 0.0004 0.008 0.006 1.2E-05 0.0002 0.0002 1 0.0004 Wetland lnoculum Collection 3 0.22 3.1 2.1 0.0051 0.11 0.10 0.0003 0.005 0.003 7.6E-06 0.0002 0.0001 1 0.0002 Wetland lnoculum Spreading 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NNP Clearing and grubbing 30 0.62 7.8 6.7 0.0166 0.27 0.25 0.0138 0.175 0.150 3.7E-04 0.0060 0.0056 35 0.0114 NNP Grading 90 2.89 27.8 32.6 0.0588 1.31 1.21 0.1300 1.251 1.468 2.6E-03 0.0590 0.0543 250 0.0810 NNP Access/circulation and util. 60 1.37 15.7 14.4 0.0287 0.73 0.68 0.0410 0.470 0.433 8.6E-04 0.0220 0.0203 81 0.0264 NNP Site improvements and furn. 90 1.88 15.0 19.S 0.0292 0.99 0.92 0.1125 0.902 1.168 l .8E-03 0.0597 0.0549 166 0.0536 NNP Planting 45 0.41 4.7 3.6 0.0063 0.18 0.16 0.0123 0.141 0.107 l .9E-04 0.0053 0.0049 18 0.0059 Water Service Extension Excavation, pipe laying, backfill 39 1.63 12.2 14.9 0.0337 0.62 0.60 0.0318 0.238 0.290 6.6E-04 0.0121 0.0117 62 0.0145 Water Service Extension Paving 39 0.97 10.4 8.3 0.0178 0.45 0.44 0.0190 0.203 0.162 3.5E-04 0.0087 0.0086 33 0.0045 Max 7.6 51.6 88.8 0.13 3.4 3.1 Tota I 0.76 5.8 7.6 O.Ql 0.32 0.30 1,356 0.37 Off-road Equipment Emissions
OFFROAD Equipment Type
Scrapers
Crawler Tractors
Excavators
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
CalEEMod®
Default
Avg Hp
367
212
158
97 AvgHp
1118
324
201
150
Wetland Grading
Emissions calculated in accordance with the methodology used in CalEEMod® [1] :
Emission0 ;eselEx = L; (EF; x Pop; x AvgHp; x Load; x Activity;) where for a given equipment type/size of i,
EF =the emission factor
Pop =the number of pieces of equipment,
AvgHp =the size (or average size) of the equipment
Load = the load factor
Activity = hours of operation
Construction Phase Name: Wetland Grading
CalEEMod®
Tier Default
Pop Hrs/Day (if known) Load ROG
2 8 0.48 0.299
2 8 0.43 0.343
1 8 0.38 0.163
0 8 0.37 0.221
CalEEMod ® EF (g/bhp-hr)
co NOx S02 PMlO
2.25454 3.4448 0.005 0.134
1.51456 4.3339 0.005 0.163
1.10324 1.7057 0.005 0.052
3.09070 2.0622 0.005 0.104
Workdays:
PM2.5 C02
0.123 472.4636
0.150 472.9246
0.048 471.7931
0.096 467.5285
[1] BREEZE Software, "Off-road Equipment", Section 4.2 of Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod", prepared for CAPCOA by BREEZE Software, October 2017, CalEEMod2016.3.2. Available from http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/caleemod/02_appendi x-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6.