Agenda packet — Oroville City Council, July 18, 2023 (part 2 of 4)

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: AMY BERGSTRAND, BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
RE: PRESENTATION TO UPDATE COUNCIL ON THE MISSION ESPERANZA

PALLET SHELTER PROJECT
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council will receive a presentation from Suzi Kochems, City consultant, regarding the status of the Mission Esperanza Project.

DISCUSSION
Suzi Kochems, from SiLK Consulting, consultant to the City of Oroville will present information regarding the Mission Esperanza Project. Mrs. Kochems will provide Council with the status of the project, timeline and budget updates, as well as project successes and challenges to date.

FISCAL IMPACT
None currently

RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation.

ATTACHMENTS
None
200
Item 12.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: AMY BERGSTRAND, BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: REQUEST OF LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDING TO SUBSIDIZE

THE MISSION ESPERANZA PROJECT
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council may consider allocating up to $750,000 in Local Fiscal Recovery funding to supplement the Mission Esperanza construction costs.

DISCUSSION
Since the time of the Encampment Resolution Grant application in December 2021 and the construction bid receipt in June 2023, the impacts of the pandemic have been realized and costs for labor, goods, materials, and supplies have significantly increased.

The current project budget is anticipated to be more than $7M. City received an Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF) grant award of $2.7M, the Oroville Rescue Mission is contributing $1.1M of in-kind funding, and the County’s American Rescue Plan funding of $500,000. The City has applied for an additional $1.7M in ERF Round 2 funding and if awarded, will leave the project budget short approximately $750K.

Staff is requesting the Council authorize the usage of up to $750K in Local Fiscal Recovery funding to help ensure that the project has adequate funding to support the required capital improvements to make the overall project viable.

FISCAL IMPACT
Reduction of available Local Fiscal Recovery funds of up to $750,000, currently at approximately $3M.

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the allocation of $750,000 of Local Fiscal Recovery funding to subsidize the Mission Esperanza Project.

ATTACHMENTS
None
201
Item 13.

Page 2 ends

202
Item 13.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: AMY BERGSTRAND, BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: CONTRACT WITH BUTTE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR MISSION

ESPERANZA PALLET SHELTER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council may consider accepting the proposal from Butte Construction Company and consider approval of a project contract for the Mission Esperanza (Low-barrier Navigation Center and Shelter) Development.

DISCUSSION
In October 2021, the California Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council released a request for application for Encampment Resolution Funding with applications due in December of 2021. This funding was established to assist local jurisdictions initiate innovative and replicable efforts to resolve encampment concerns and to support individuals in accessing safe and stable housing. In December 2021, the City partnered with the Oroville Rescue Mission to submit an application that would address the needs of a known encampment in the city.

On October 27, 2022, the City of Oroville was awarded $2,733,374.11 in Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF-2-L) Program grant funds from the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH). The project is titled “Mission Esperanza”.

On May 8, 2023, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was published and posted for the preparation of engineered drawings and construction of the site to convert the existing shop building into an intake/navigation center, office space, and congregate shelter, grade and prepare pads to erect (15) non-congregate (pallet shelters) and (5) ADA accessible pallet shelters, (15) pads for phase two pallet shelters, and the installation of utilities and infrastructure to accommodate all upgrades to the facility to accommodate up to 105 persons in non-congregate and congregate interim shelter.

A mandatory walk through of the site was held on May 19, 2023, with four contractors in attendance. The RFP closed on June 5, 2023, at 2:00 pm with two contractors submitting proposals for the requested work.
203
Item 14.

Page 2 ends

Butte Construction Company is proposing to complete the requested work for the total estimated amount of $2,180,000.00, plus a 10% contingency will be budgeted for unforeseen issue, additions, etc., bringing the total contract to $2,398,000.

There were two alternatives identified for this project; 1) rehabilitate and repair perimeter fence at $186,762.00, and 2) relocate the women’s restroom to the southeast corner of the building for $15,363.00, totaling $202,125.00 in alternatives. Both alternatives are desirable; however, funding is not sufficient to cover the costs at this time. Staff would like council to authorize the City Administrator the authority to modify the contract to include these items if we are funded under the ERF-2-R Standard Agreement.

Since the time of the grant application in December 2021 and the time of bid receipt in June 2023, the impacts of the pandemic have been realized and costs for labor, goods, materials, and supplies have significantly increased. Additionally, the availability and capacity for skilled labor and professional services has diminished, extending the timeline for the project out farther than originally anticipated. This project is an investment in the City’s crisis response system that will be able to address the needs of the unsheltered population for many years to come.

FISCAL IMPACT
The funds in the amount of $2,398,000 (for base bid of $2,180,000, and 10% contingency $218,000) will come from Account No. 5213-6360-Outside Services, Fund 152 (Planning Grants) additionally, $500,000 of ARPA funding from Butte County will supplement the budget for construction.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve Res. No. 9147 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND ACCEPT THE

PROPOSAL WITH BUTTE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, AND AUTHORIZING BUTTE

CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO COMPLETE THE PROPOSED MISSION ESPERANZA PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,180,000 AND A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $218,000 SHOULD ANY DEFICIENCIES BE DISCOVERED DURING THE PROJECT.

2. Authorize the City Administrator to modify or amend the Butte Construction Company contract to include the alternatives in the amount of $202,125 if funding becomes available at a later date.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 9147

2. Project Contract No. 3163 with Attachments

3. Bid for Pallet Shelter Construction

4. Bid Opening Summary
204
Item 14.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9147

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING

THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL WITH BUTTE CONSTRUCTION

COMPANY AUTHORIZING BUTTE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO COMPLETE THE PROPOSED MISSION ESPERANZA PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,180,000 AND A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $218,000 SHOULD ANY DEFICIENCIES BE

DISCOVERED DURING THE PROJECT FOR A TOTAL PROJECT AMOUNT OF $2,398,000.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign and accept the proposal from Butte Construction Company, authorizing Butte Construction Company to compete the proposed Mission Esperanza Project in the amount of $2,180,000 and a 10% contingency in the amount of $218,000 should any deficiencies be discovered during the project for a total amount of $2,398,000.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting on July 18, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 205
Item 14.

A-3463

PROJECT CONTRACT
THIS PROJECT CONTRACT (the “contract” or “Contract”), is made and entered into this 18th day of July, 2023, by and between City of Oroville (referred to herein as the “Owner” or the “City”) and __Butte Construction Company_(the "Contractor").

WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto have mutually covenanted and agreed, and by these presents do covenant and agree with each other as follows:
1) THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.

The complete contract is comprised of and may or may not include: Invitation for Bids; Information for Bidders; Bid Schedule; Proposal Form; Bidder’s Bond; Contract; General Conditions; Special Provisions; Technical Provisions; Payment Bond; Performance Bond; Notice of Award; Notice to Proceed; Change Orders; Supplemental Drawings Issued; Drawings; Specifications and Contract Documents; All addenda or bulletins issued during the time of bidding or forming a part of the documents loaned to the bidder for preparation of the bid; The complete plans and provisions, regulations, ordinances, codes, and laws incorporated therein or herein by reference or otherwise applicable to the Project.

All of the above documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. The documents comprising the complete contract are hereinafter referred to collectively as the Contract Documents.
2) THE WORK.

Contractor agrees to furnish all tools, apparatus, facilities, equipment, labor and materials (except that specifically mentioned as being furnished by others) necessary to perform and complete the work in a “good and workmanlike manner” as called for, and in the manner designated in, and in strict conformity with the Plans, Detail Specifications, and other Contract Documents which are identified by the signatures of the parties to this Contract and are, collectively, entitled:

MISSION ESPERANZA PALLET SHELTER

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
3) CONTRACT PRICE.

The City agrees to pay and the Contractor agrees to accept, in full payment for the work above agreed to be done, the following compensation: $2,180,000. In no event shall Contractor’s compensation exceed the amount of $2,180,000, without additional written authorization from the City. Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of defects in Consultant’s services, even if such defects were known to the City at the time of payment. 206
Item 14.

A-3463
For the purpose of fixing the amount of bonds referred to in the Instructions to Bidders, it is estimated by both Parties that the total contract price shall be based on the Contractor’s Base Bid amount.
4) DISPUTES PERTAINING TO PAYMENT FOR WORK.

Should any dispute arise respecting the true value of any work done or any work omitted, or of any extra work which the Contractor may be required to do, or respecting the size of any payment to the Contractor during the performance of this Contract, the dispute shall be informally mediated between the parties. Following such mediation, either party may file an action exclusively in the Butte County Superior Court or in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Under no condition shall there be a cessation of work by the Contractor during any such dispute. This article does not exclude recovery of damages by either party for delays.
5) PAYMENT.

Not later than the 20th day of each calendar month, the Contractor shall make a partial payment request to the City on the basis of an estimate approved by the Engineer of the work performed since the last partial payment request during the preceding month by the Contractor with five percent (5%) of the amount of each such estimate retained by the City, until completion of the Project and the recordation of a Notice of Completion of all work covered by this Contract. The City shall make any partial payments provided for in this contract to the Contractor within 30 days of the City’s receipt of an undisputed and properly executed partial payment request from the Contractor. The City shall pay the Contractor interest on the amount of any portion of a partial payment, excluding retention amounts, not made to the Contractor within 30 days of the City’s receipt of an undisputed and properly executed partial payment request from the Contractor at the legal rate set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 685.010. Upon receipt of a partial payment request from the Contractor, the City shall review the partial payment request for the purpose of determining whether or not the partial payment request is a proper partial payment request. Any partial payment request determined by the City not to be a proper partial payment request suitable for payment shall be returned to the Contractor by the City within 14 days of the City’s receipt of such partial payment request. A partial payment request returned to the Contractor by the City under the provisions of this section shall be accompanied by a written document setting forth the reason(s) why the partial payment request is not proper. The number of days for the City to make a certain partial payment provided for in this Contract, without incurring interest pursuant to this section, shall be reduced by the number of days by which the City exceeds the 14 day return period for such partial payment request, if determined to be improper, as set forth in this section. For the purposes of this section, a “partial payment” means all payments due to the Contractor under this contract, exclusive of that portion of the final payment designated as retention earnings. Also, for the purposes of this section, a partial payment request shall be considered properly executed by the City, if funds are available to pay the partial payment request and payment is not delayed due to an audit inquiry by the City’s financial officer. The City will release Contractor's retention earnings within 45 days after recordation of Notice of Completion, as defined in California Civil Code Section 3093. Recordation of a Notice of 207
Item 14.

A-3463
Completion for the Project by the City shall constitute the City’s acceptance of the Project work.
6) TIME FOR COMPLETION.

All work under this contract shall be completed within a period of 130 working days from the date of the Contractor's receipt of a Notice to Proceed from the City. 7) EXTENSION OF TIME.

If the Contractor is delayed by acts of negligence of the City, or its employees or those under it by contract or otherwise, or by changes ordered in the work, or by strikes, lockouts, fire, unavoidable casualties, documentable delays in delivery of materials, review by outside agencies, or any causes beyond the Contractor's control, or by delay authorized by the City, or by any justifiable cause which the Engineer shall authorize, then the Contractor shall make out a written claim addressed to the City setting forth the reason for the delay and the extension of the time requested and forward a copy of the claim to the Engineer for approval.

The Engineer will evaluate the claim and if the claim is justifiable, will request the City's approval. No such extension will be allowed unless written claim therefore has been made within 3 days after the delay became apparent.

If the Contractor fails or refuses to complete the work within the time specified, including authorized extensions, there shall be deducted from monies due the Contractor, not as a penalty, but as liquidated damages the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for each calendar day subsequent to the time specified for each project and the time the work is actually completed and accepted. Delays caused by adverse weather conditions or conditions for which the Owner is clearly responsible will be added to the contract time. 8) LABOR PROVISIONS.

The project is subject to both federal and state prevailing wages. The Contractor shall pay laborers the higher of either the federal or state prevailing wage rate determination for the trades to be utilized. The contractor and all subcontractors on the project shall complete electronic reporting of prevailing wage rate reports through the Department of Industrial Relations, with copies of such reports to be provided to the City. 9) CONTRACT WORK HOURS AND SAFETY STANDARDS REQUIREMENTS.

As used in the following provision, the term “laborers” and “mechanics” include watchmen and guards.
a. Overtime Requirements. Neither the Contractor nor any subcontractor contracting for any part of the Project which may require orinvolve the employment of laborers or mechanicsshall require or permit any such laborer or mechanic in any workweek in which he or she is employed on such work to work in excess of forty hours in such workweek unless such laborer or mechanic receives compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half times the basic 208
Item 14.

A-3463
rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty hours in such workweek, whichever is greater.
b. Violation; Liability for Unpaid Wages; Liquidated Damages. In the event of any violation of the clause set forth in paragraph a. above, the Contractor and any subcontractor responsible therefore shall be liable for the unpaid wages. In addition, the Contractor and subcontractor shall be liable to the City for liquidated damages. Such liquidated damages shall be computed with respect to each individual laborer or mechanic, including watchmen and guards, employed in violation of the clause set forth in paragraph a. above, in the sum of $3,000 for each calendar day on which such individual was required or permitted to work in excess of the standard workweek of forty hours without payment of the overtime wages required by the clause set forth in paragraph a. above.
c. Withholding for Unpaid Wages and Liquidated Damages. The City shall upon its own action or upon written request of an authorized representative of the Department of Labor withhold or cause to be withheld, from any monies payable on account of work performed by the Contractor or subcontractor under any such contract or any other Federal contract with the same Contractor, or any other federally-assisted contract subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, which is held by the same Contractor, such sums as may be determined to be necessary to satisfy any liabilities of such Contractor or subcontractor for unpaid wages and liquidated damages as provided in the clause set forth in paragraph b. above.
d. Working conditions. Neither the Contractor nor any subcontractor may require any laborer or mechanic employed in the performance of any contract to work in surroundings or under working conditions that are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous to his health or safety as determined under construction safety and health standards (29 CFR Part 1926) issued by the Department of Labor.
e. Subcontracts. The Contractor and any subcontractor shall insert in any subcontracts the clauses set forth in paragraphs a. through d. and also a clause requiring the subcontractor to include these clauses in any lower tier subcontracts. The Contractor shall be responsible for compliance by any subcontractor or lower tier subcontractor with the clauses set forth in paragraphs a. through d.
10) NONDISCRIMINATION.

The Contractor, with regard to the work performed by it during the contract, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The Contractor shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section

21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix B of the Regulations.
209
Item 14.

A-3463
11) DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM PROVISIONS.

The Contractor, sub recipient or subcontractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of DOTassisted contracts. Failure by the Contractor to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy as recipient deems appropriate.

The Contractor agrees to pay each subcontractor under this contract for satisfactory performance of its contract no later than 10 days from the receipt of each payment the Contractor receives from City. The Contractor agrees further to return retainage payments to each subcontractor within 30 days after the subcontractor's work is satisfactorily completed.

Any delay or postponement of payment from the above referenced time frame may occur only for good cause following written approval of the City. This clause applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors.
12) CIVIL RIGHTS.

The Contractor assures that it will comply with pertinent statutes, Executive Orders and such rules as are promulgated to assure that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age or handicap be excluded from participating in any activity conducted with or benefiting from Federal assistance. This Provision binds the Contractor from the bid solicitation period through the completion of the contract. This provision shall be inserted in all subcontracts, subleases and other agreements at all tiers. 13) SOLICITATIONS FOR SUBCONTRACTS, INCLUDING PROCUREMENTS OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT.

In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the Contractor for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the Contractor of the Contractor's obligations under this contract and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color or national origin.
14) INFORMATION AND REPORTS.

The Contractor shall provide all information and reports required by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the City to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders, and instructions. Where any information required of a Contractor is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the Contractor shall so certify to the City and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.
210
Item 14.

A-3463
15) SANCTIONS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.

In the event of the Contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the City shall impose such contract sanctions as it may determine to be appropriate, including but not limited to:
a. Withholding of payments to the Contractor under the contract until the Contractor complies, and/or
b. Cancellation, termination or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part. 16) INSPECTION OF RECORDS.

The Contractor shall maintain an acceptable cost accounting system. The City, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Comptroller General of the United States or any of their duly authorized representatives shall have access to any books, documents, paper, and records of the Contractor which are directly pertinent to this Contract or the Project for the purposes of making an audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions. The Contractor shall maintain all required records for 3 years after the City makes final payment and all other pending matters are closed.
17) RIGHTS IN INVENTIONS.

All rights to inventions and materials, if any, generated under this contract are subject to regulations issued by the City. Information regarding these rights is available from the City. 18) BREACH OF CONTRACT TERMS.

A-3463
c. If the termination is due to failure to fulfill the Contractor’s obligations, the City may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise. In such case, the Contractor shall be liable to the City for any additional cost occasioned to the City thereby. d. If, after notice of termination for failure to fulfill contract obligations, it is determined that the Contractor had not so failed, the termination shall be deemed to have been affected for the convenience of the City. In such event, adjustment in the contract price shall be made as provided in the second paragraph of this clause.
e. The rights and remedies of the City provided in this clause are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. 20) INCORPORATION OF PROVISIONS.

The Contractor shall include the provisions of this contract in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations of directives issued pursuant thereto. The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the City may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, however, that in the event the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the Contractor may request the City to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the City and, in addition, the Contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 21) CONTRACTOR CLAIMS OF $375,000 OR LESS.

Claims by the Contractor relating to the Project for (a) a time extension, (b) money or damages arising from work done by, or on behalf of, the Contractor on the Project for which payment is not expressly provided for or to which the Contractor is not otherwise entitled, or (c) an amount that is disputed by the City, with a value of $375,000 or less, are subject to the claims procedures set forth in California Public Contract Code Sections 20104, et seq., except as otherwise provided in this Contract and the incorporated documents, conditions and specifications.
22) LOBBYING AND INFLUENCING FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
a. No Federal appropriated funds shall be paid, by or on behalf of the Contractor or its subcontractors, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the making of any Federal grant or the amendment or modification of any Federal grant.
b. a. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid by the Contractor or its subcontractors to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of the City, any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or 212
Item 14.

A-3463
employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with any Federal grant, the contractor shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobby Activities,” in accordance with its instructions. 23) ASSIGNMENT OF CERTAIN RIGHTS TO THE CITY.

In entering into this Contract or a subcontract to supply goods, services, or materials pursuant to this Contract, the Contractor and/or subcontractor offers and agrees to assign to the City all rights, title, and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under Section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 15) or under the Cartwright Act (Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code), arising from purchases of goods, services, or materials pursuant to this Contract or the subcontract. This assignment shall be made and become effective at the time the City tenders final payment to the Contractor, without further acknowledgement by the parties. 24) ENERGY CONSERVATION REQUIREMENTS
The contractor agrees to comply with mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency that are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Public Law 94-163). 25) ATTACHMENTS
1) Notice Inviting Bids
2) Contractor’s Bid
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed on the day and year first herein written.

AGENCY: City of Oroville, A Municipal Corporation (First Party) By: _________________________________________________________________________ Mayor, Daivid Pittman
CONTRACTOR: Butte Construction Company (Second Party)
By: ________________________________________________________________________ (Authorized Representative) (Sign, Print Name and Official Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: _________________________________________________________________________ City Attorney, Scott Huber
213
Item 14.

A-3463
ATTEST:

By: __________________________________________________________________________ City Clerk, Brian Ring
214
Item 14.
215
Item 14.
216
Item 14.
217
Item 14.
218
Item 14.
219
Item 14.
220
Item 14.
221
Item 14.
222
Item 14.
223
Item 14.
224
Item 14.
225
Item 14.
226
Item 14.
227
Item 14.
228
Item 14.
229
Item 14.
230
Item 14.
231
Item 14.
232
Item 14.
233
Item 14.
234
Item 14.
235
Item 14.
236
Item 14.
237
Item 14.
238
Item 14.
239
Item 14.
240
Item 14.
241
Item 14.
242
Item 14.
243
Item 14.
244
Item 14.
245
Item 14.
246
Item 14.
247
Item 14.
248
Item 14.
249
Item 14.
250
Item 14.
251
Item 14.
252
Item 14.
253
Item 14.
254
Item 14.
255
Item 14.
256
Item 14.
257
Item 14.
258
Item 14.
259
Item 14.
260
Item 14.
261
Item 14.
262
Item 14.
263
Item 14.
264
Item 14.
265
Item 14.
266
Item 14.
267
Item 14.
268
Item 14.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: AMY BERGSTRAND, DIRECTOR

BUSINESS ASSISTANCE/HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
RE: 2023 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PUBLIC

SERVICE APPLICATION SELECTION
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council may receive applications submitted by local non-profits for 2023 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program application and provide direction to staff.

DISCUSSION
CDBG funds are provided as grants to non-entitlement jurisdictions. Non-entitlement jurisdictions are cities and counties that do not receive CDBG directly and must compete for funding. The objectives of the CDBG program are to develop viable communities by the provision of decent affordable housing, suitable living environment, and to expand economic opportunities, principally for the benefit of lowand moderate- income (LMI) persons, families, households and neighborhoods. LMI is defined as neighborhoods, families, households and individuals whose income does not exceed 80 percent of the county median income.

During the June 6, 2023, Oroville City Council meeting, the Housing Director was given direction to solicit public service application for the 2023 Competive application component of the 2023 CDBG application. During the Housing and Community Development (HCD) Office Hours session, State CDBG announced their intention to release the CDBG 2023 NOFA at the end of July. During this session, many changes and limitations to the NOFA were outlined.

At that meeting, City Council gave direction to staff to solicit applications from public service entities to submit public service applications for the 2023 CDBG application.

On June 7, 2023, City staff posted the Request for Application on the City’s website, Facebook page, and mailed a copy to all of the public service providers on the city’s 269
Item 15.

Page 2 ends

current mailing list. Applications were due to the City by 3 p.m. on June 29, 2023.

One June 29, 2023, staff received the following proposals for a 3-year period.

Public Service Activity Amount of
Request
Beneficiaries
to be Served
Feather River
Gymnastics Booster
Gymnastics Training $100,000 220
The Axiom The Axiom’s Training
and Exploration
Program (STEP)-
expand current
program
$232,500 75
Catalyst Domestic
Violence
Oroville Domestic and
Sexual Violence
Services-expand
current program
$232,500 150
YMCA of Superior
California
Out-of-School
Programming for
Youth Services
$232,500 300
Oroville Rescue
Mission, Inc.

Comprehensive Case
Management with
Rapid Rehousing
$232,500 1,647
Complete applications and supporting documentation are available to view in the Department of Business Assistance and Housing Development

FISCAL IMPACT
None

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to staff.

ATTACHMENTS
Public Service Applications
270
Item 15.
271
Item 15.
272
Item 15.
273
Item 15.
274
Item 15.
275
Item 15.
276
Item 15.
277
Item 15.
278
Item 15.
279
Item 15.
280
Item 15.
281
Item 15.
282
Item 15.
283
Item 15.
284
Item 15.
285
Item 15.
286
Item 15.
287
Item 15.
288
Item 15.
289
Item 15.
290
Item 15.
291
Item 15.
292
Item 15.
293
Item 15.
294
Item 15.
295
Item 15.
296
Item 15.
297
Item 15.
298
Item 15.
299
Item 15.
300
Item 15.
301
Item 15.
302
Item 15.
303
Item 15.
304
Item 15.
305
Item 15.
306
Item 15.
307
Item 15.
308
Item 15.
309
Item 15.
310
Item 15.
311
Item 15.
312
Item 15.
313
Item 15.
314
Item 15.
315
Item 15.
316
Item 15.
317
Item 15.
318
Item 15.
319
Item 15.
320
Item 15.
321
Item 15.
322
Item 15.
323
Item 15.
324
Item 15.
325
Item 15.
326
Item 15.
327
Item 15.
328
Item 15.
329
Item 15.
330
Item 15.
331
Item 15.
332
Item 15.
333
Item 15.
334
Item 15.
335
Item 15.
336
Item 15.
337
Item 15.
338
Item 15.
339
Item 15.
340
Item 15.
2023 CDBG Public Service Applications
Feather River
Gymnastics Booster
• New Request ( Gymnastics
Training)
• $100,000
• Application did not contain
enough information to determine
if it would be a competitive
application for funding, or even
eligible as low-mod. Requested
additional information, not
received.
• Included Budget did not balance.
• Plans to assist 250 youth, last
year assisted 30.

The Axiom
• Continuing Program with expansion
(LMA)-(Training and Exploration
Program)
• $232,500
• Previously funded 20-CDBG-12018,
$179,955.
• Remaining grant funds of $69,503
through 04/02/2024.
• Plan to assist 55 youth per year.
• If not funded, could not expand the
program opportunities or add staffing,
may need to reduce the number of
beneficiaries.

Catalyst Domestic Violence
• Continuing Program Domestic Violence
Services with expansion to include
Sexual Violence Services (LMC)
• $232,500
• Previously funded 20-CBDG-12017,
$360,143, also funded in 2009, 2012,
2014($578,660)
• Remaining grant funds of $148,546
through 02/22/2024
• Plan to assist 150 persons per year.
• Only Domestic Violence Service
Provider in Butte County
• If not funded, the Oroville Drop-in Center
may close. 341
Item 15.
2023 CDBG Public Service Applications
Oroville Rescue Mission YMCA of Superior
California
• Continuing Program with expansion
(Out of School Youth Services)
• $232,500
• Previously Funded 20-CDBG12046, $465,000, also fund in 2004, 2009, 2012, 2014, 2017
($1,041,160)
• Remaining grant funds of $266,910
through 04/02/2024
• Plan to assist 300 youth per year
• If not funded, the program
beneficiaries would be reduced
some program discontinued ,
namely at the Y (camp)
• New Request (Comprehensive
Case Management with Rapid
Rehousing)
• $232,500
• Application is eligible Public
Service Activity under LMC (LowMod, limited clientele) • Budget is clear
• Plan to assist 12 persons per year.
• Funding would supplement a
major component of the ERF grant
for Mission Esperanza
342
Item 15.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: SANK PARK PERIMETER FENCE AWARD OF AMENDED CONTRACT TO PISOR FENCE DIVISION, INC.

DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The City Council may review and consider awarding a contract to Pisor Fence Division, Inc. following the June 20, 2023 Council request to consider a change order to reduce the cost to fabricate and install a new fence and gates around the perimeter of Sank Park.

DISCUSSION
Following the City Council’s approval on September 7, 2021, an application for Per Capita funding was submitted for fencing to be installed around the perimeter of Sank Park and Rotary Park. Staff sought input from the Park Commission and the Historic Advisory Commission for new fencing design due to the fact that the location is a City park and falls within the Downtown Historic Overlay.

The fencing will replace the deteriorating wood and chain link fence currently surrounding Sank Park with a wrought iron fence. The fence design elements were approved on April 19, 2022 and required the following:
 5’ tall fence
 6” curb under fence
 Ornate corner posts with finials
 Pickets will be slender with pointed tips
 (2) vehicle gates and (4) man gates
 Man gate at Montgomery Street entrance will be inset for a more pronounced entrance to have a decorative elements
 Dusk to dawn hardware is desired for safety and to secure closure during the evening hours
The intent of the new fence is to prevent further vandalism of the historic home and park grounds during the evening hours and preserve the historic character of the home.

On March 21, 2023, the City Council approved up to $627,952.00 towards the project 343
Item 16.

Page 2 ends

that includes funds towards the exterior lighting around the park to further prevent vandalism. This is in progress with the Construction Management consultants.

A Request for Proposal (RFP) was published, and a mandatory job walk was held on April 25, 2023. In an attempt to save costs, the city staff will be completing the demolition of the existing fence. Staff received four proposals with the low bidder’s proposal being fully responsive and proposing prefabricated fence panels.

Bidder Name Total Bid
Amount
10%
Contingency Project Total
A. Pisor Fence Division Inc. $449,900.00 $44,990.00 $494,890.00 B. Rock Creek Construction $551,740.00 $55,174.00 $606,914.00 C. Golden Bay Fence $588,145.00 $58,814.50 $646,959.50
D. CO-T Construction $596,165.00 $59,616.50 $655,781.50 During the June 20, 2023 City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to discuss change order options with Pisor Fence Division, Inc. for the removal of the continuous concrete curb under the full length of the fence as well as cost difference for the change out of the fencing panels from fully custom to prefabricated. The cost to delete the concrete curb is a savings of $75,918.00 and the cost to change out the custom fencing panels for prefabricated would be approximately $28,000.00.

While there is cost savings to change from custom fencing to prefabricated, amount of savings is not significant enough to justify a change to the aesthetics of the fence panels that was collaboratively approved by the Parks Commission, Historic Advisory Commission, City Council and community members. The $75,918.00 change for the concrete curb, however, is a substantial saving in combination with the State Parks Per Capita allocation of $177,952.00 that will reduce the total Capital Projects Fund expenditure to $196,030.00.

FISCAL IMPACT
A California Department of Parks & Recreation Per Capita allocation of $177,952.00 will be used to cover a portion of the project. A change order to delete the concrete curb reducing the contract amount of $75,918.00 will be applied. The cost of $196,030.00 will be expended from the Capital Projects & Improvements Fund 302- 7311-6110 (as opposed to - from Fund Balance)

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve Res. No. 9144- A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL WITH PISOR FENCE DIVISION, INC. AUTHORIZING PISOR

FENCE DIVISION, INC TO COMPLETE THE PROPOSED FABRICATION

AND INSTALLATION OF A NEW PERIMETER FENCE AROUND SANK
PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $373,982.00 AND A 10% CONTINGENCY IN 344
Item 16.

Page 3 ends

THE AMOUNT OF $37,398.20 SHOULD ANY DEFICIENCIES BE
DISCOVERED DURING THE PROJECT.

2. Authorize and direct staff to sign and accept the proposal from Pisor Fence Division, Inc., authorizing the proposed fabrication and installation of a new perimeter fence around Sank Park, and a Change Order deleting the concrete curbing in the amount of $75,918.00, for a total amount of $373,982.00 (base bid) and a 10% contingency in the amount of $37,398.20 should any deficiencies be discovered during the project, for a total of $411,380.20.

ATTACHMENTS
 Resolution No. 9144
 Agreement No. 3432
 Sank Park Fence Summary of Proposals Received
 Bid A – Pisor Fence Division, Inc.
 Change Order to Delete the Concrete Curb
345
Item 16.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

Page 1 of 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 9144

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING

THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL WITH PISOR FENCE DIVISION, INC. AUTHORIZING PISOR FENCE DIVISION, INC TO COMPLETE THE PROPOSED

FABRICATION AND INSTALLION OF A NEW PERIMETER FENCE AROUND SANK PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $373,982.00 AND A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,398.20 SHOULD ANY DEFICIENCIES BE DISCOVERED DURING THE PROJECT.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign and accept the proposal from Pisor Fence Division, Inc., authorizing the proposed fabrication and installation of a new perimeter fence around Sank Park, and a change order deleting the concrete curbing in the amount of $75,918.00, for a total amount of $373,982.00 (base bid) and a 10% contingency in the amount of $37,398.20 should any deficiencies be discovered during the project, for a total of $411,380.20.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting on July 18, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 346
Item 16.

A-3432

PROJECT CONTRACT
THIS PROJECT CONTRACT (the “contract” or “Contract”), is made and entered into this 27th day of JUNE 2023, by and between City of Oroville (referred to herein as the “Owner” or the “City”) and __Pisor Fence Division, Inc._(the "Contractor").

WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto have mutually covenanted and agreed, and by these presents do covenant and agree with each other as follows:
1) THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.

SANK PARK FENCING PROJECT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
3) CONTRACT PRICE.

The City agrees to pay and the Contractor agrees to accept, in full payment for the work above agreed to be done, the following compensation: $374,705.00. In no event shall Contractor’s compensation exceed the amount of $374,705.00 without additional written authorization from the City. Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of defects in Consultant’s services, even if such defects were known to the City at the time of payment 347
Item 16.

A-3432
For the purpose of fixing the amount of bonds referred to in the Instructions to Bidders, it is estimated by both Parties that the total contract price shall be based on the Contractor’s Base Bid amount.
4) DISPUTES PERTAINING TO PAYMENT FOR WORK.

A-3432
Completion for the Project by the City shall constitute the City’s acceptance of the Project work.
6) TIME FOR COMPLETION.

All work under this contract shall be completed within a period of 180 working days from the date of the Contractor's receipt of a Notice to Proceed from the City. 7) EXTENSION OF TIME.

As used in the following provision, the term “laborers” and “mechanics” include watchmen and guards.
a. Overtime Requirements. Neither the Contractor nor any subcontractor contracting for any part of the Project which may require or involve the employment of laborers or mechanics shall require or permit any such laborer or mechanic in any workweek in which he or she is employed on such work to work in excess of forty hours in such workweek unless such laborer or mechanic receives compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty hours in such workweek, whichever is greater.
b. Violation; Liability for Unpaid Wages; Liquidated Damages. In the event of any violation of the clause 349
Item 16.

A-3432
set forth in paragraph a. above, the Contractor and any subcontractor responsible therefore shall be liable for the unpaid wages. In addition, the Contractor and subcontractor shall be liable to the City for liquidated damages. Such liquidated damages shall be computed with respect to each individual laborer or mechanic, including watchmen and guards, employed in violation of the clause set forth in paragraph a. above, in the sum of $3,000 for each calendar day on which such individual was required or permitted to work in excess of the standard workweek of forty hours without payment of the overtime wages required by the clause set forth in paragraph a. above.
c. Withholding for Unpaid Wages and Liquidated Damages. The City shall upon its own action or upon written request of an authorized representative of the Department of Labor withhold or cause to be withheld, from any monies payable on account of work performed by the Contractor or subcontractor under any such contract or any other Federal contract with the same Contractor, or any other federally-assisted contract subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, which is held by the same Contractor, such sums as may be determined to be necessary to satisfy any liabilities of such Contractor or subcontractor for unpaid wages and liquidated damages as provided in the clause set forth in paragraph b. above.
d. Working conditions. Neither the Contractor nor any subcontractor may require any laborer or mechanic employed in the performance of any contract to work in surroundings or under working conditions that are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous to his health or safety as determined under construction safety and health standards (29 CFR Part 1926) issued by the Department of Labor. e. Subcontracts. The Contractor and any subcontractor shall insert in any subcontracts the clauses set forth in paragraphs a. through d. and also a clause requiring the subcontractor to include these clauses in any lower tier subcontracts. The Contractor shall be responsible for compliance by any subcontractor or lower tier subcontractor with the clauses set forth in paragraphs a. through d. 10) NONDISCRIMINATION.

21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix B of the Regulations.
11) DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM PROVISIONS.

Any delay or postponement of payment from the above referenced time frame may occur only 350
Item 16.

A-3432
for good cause following written approval of the City. This clause applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors.
12) CIVIL RIGHTS.

A-3432
the Contractor which are directly pertinent to this Contract or the Project for the purposes of making an audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions. The Contractor shall maintain all required records for 3 years after the City makes final payment and all other pending matters are closed.
17) RIGHTS IN INVENTIONS.

Any violation or breach of terms of this Contract on the part of the Contractor or its subcontractors may result in the suspension or termination of this Contract or such other action that may be necessary to enforce the rights of the City under this Contract. The duties and obligations imposed by the Contract Documents and the rights and remedies available thereunder shall be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties, obligations, rights and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law.
19) TERMINATION OF CONTRACT BY CITY
a. The City may, by written notice, terminate this Contract in whole or in part at any time, either for the City’s convenience or because of the Contractor’s failure to fulfill its contract obligations. Upon receipt of such notice, services shall be immediately discontinued (unless the notice directs otherwise) and all materials as may have been accumulated in performing this Contract, whether completed or in process, delivered to the City. b. If the termination is for the convenience of the City, an equitable adjustment in the contract price shall be made, but no amount shall be allowed for anticipated profit on unperformed services.
c. If the termination is due to failure to fulfill the Contractor’s obligations, the City may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise. In such case, the Contractor shall be liable to the City for any additional cost occasioned to the City thereby. d. If, after notice of termination for failure to fulfill contract obligations, it is determined that the Contractor had not so failed, the termination shall be deemed to have been affected for the convenience of the City. In such event, adjustment in the contract price shall be made as provided in the second paragraph of this clause.
e. The rights and remedies of the City provided in this clause are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. 20) INCORPORATION OF PROVISIONS.

The Contractor shall include the provisions of this contract in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations of 352
Item 16.

A-3432
directives issued pursuant thereto. The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the City may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, however, that in the event the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the Contractor may request the City to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the City and, in addition, the Contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 21) CONTRACTOR CLAIMS OF $375,000 OR LESS.

A-3432
The contractor agrees to comply with mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency that are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Public Law 94-163). 25) ATTACHMENTS
1) Notice Inviting Bids
2) Contractor’s Bid
3) Bidder’s Bond
4) Addendum No. 1
5) Addendum No. 2
6) Addendum No. 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed on the day and year first herein written.

AGENCY: City of Oroville, A Municipal Corporation (First Party) By: _________________________________________________________________________ Mayor, David Pittman
CONTRACTOR: Pisor Fence Division, Inc. (Second Party)
By: ________________________________________________________________________ (Authorized Representative) (Sign, Print Name and Official Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: _________________________________________________________________________ City Attorney, Scott Huber
ATTEST:

By: __________________________________________________________________________ City Clerk, Brian Ring
354
Item 16.
355
Item 16.
356
Item 16.
357
Item 16.
358
Item 16.
359
Item 16.
360
Item 16.
361
Item 16.
362
Item 16.
363
Item 16.
364
Item 16.
365
Item 16.
366
Item 16.
367
Item 16.
368
Item 16.
369
Item 16.
370
Item 16.
371
Item 16.
372
Item 16.
373
Item 16.
374
Item 16.
375
Item 16.
376
Item 16.
377
Item 16.
378
Item 16.
379
Item 16.
380
Item 16.
381
Item 16.
382
Item 16.
383
Item 16.
384
Item 16.
385
Item 16.
386
Item 16.
387
Item 16.

Data current as of 6/12/2023 10:34:23 AM
Home | Online Services | License Details
Contractor's License Detail for License # 316128
DISCLAIMER: A license status check provides information taken from the CSLB license database. Before relying on this information, you should be aware of the following limitations.

Business Information

PISOR FENCE DIVISION INC
P O BOX 7213
CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA 95621
Business Phone Number:(916) 726-1173
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 02/17/1976
Expire Date 12/31/2023
License Status
This license is current and active.

All information below should be reviewed.

Classifications
Bonding Information
Contractor's Bond
This license filed a Contractor's Bond with WESTERN SURETY COMPANY.

Bond Number: 929539291
Bond Amount: $25,000
Effective Date: 01/01/2023
Contractor's Bond History
Bond of Qualifying Individual
The qualifying individual JAMES HENRY DALE certified that he/she owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock/membership interest of this company; therefore, the Bond of Qualifying Individual is not required.

Effective Date: 01/30/2006
BQI's Bond History
Workers' Compensation
This license has workers compensation insurance with the WCF NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Number:4032141
Effective Date: 01/01/2022
Expire Date: 01/01/2024
Workers' Compensation History
CSLB complaint disclosure is restricted by law (B&P 7124.6) If this entity is subject to public complaint disclosure click on link that will appear below for more information. Click here for a definition of disclosable actions. 
 Only construction related civil judgments reported to CSLB are disclosed (B&P 7071.17).  Arbitrations are not listed unless the contractor fails to comply with the terms.  Due to workload, there may be relevant information that has not yet been entered into the board's license database.  C13 - FENCING
 C-61 / D28 - DOORS, GATES AND ACTIVATING DEVICES
 C23 - ORNAMENTAL METALS
 C51 - STEEL, STRUCTURAL
 B - GENERAL BUILDING
388
Item 16.

Copyright © 2023 State of California
Other
 Personnel listed on this license (current or disassociated) are listed on other licenses.

Number 1
Phone: Date:

TO:

Job Name / Location:

Job Number
TBD
We hereby agree to make the change(s) specified below:

NOTE: This Change Order becomes part of and in conformance with the existing contract.

Material prices good for 45 days, thereafter subject to change at any time. —► See above
Date
Authorized Signature (Contractor) Digitally signed jja 6/24/2023 Date of acceptance
All work to be performed under same terms and conditions Signature as specified in original contract unless otherwise stipulated. (owner) 06/24/23
Dawn Nevers- City of Oroville
ANTELOPE IRON INC. CHANGE ORDER
P.O. BOX 7213
CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA 95621-7213
P-(916) 726-1173 F-(916)726-1198

SANK PARK- OROVILLE
ACCEPTED -- The above prices and specifications of this 06/24/23
WE AGREE hereby to make the change(s) specified above at this price RE:

Change Order are satisfactory and are hereby accepted.

Jeremiah Alexander
Change order to Deduct concrete curb under fence - $75,918.00 Lump sum 390
Item 16.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: KAROLYN FAIRBANKS, CITY TREASURER

RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES
RE: CITY INVESTMENTS
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council may consider opening an Account in CLASS (California Cooperative Liquid Assets Securities System) Prime and CAMP (California Asset Management Trust) in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy.

DISCUSSION
The opportunity exists to receive additional income while maintaining safety and liquidity by investing funds in California CLASS, a joint powers authority. The joint powers authority provides a managed pooled investment program which provides a safe, convenient, and daily liquid investment option for public agencies. The investment objectives of the Prime Fund are to preserve principal, provide daily liquidity, earn a competitive rate of return, and maintain a stable Net Asset Value of $1.00.

On April 5, 2022, the City Council approved staff to move forward with an agreement for investment management services in the amount of $11,000,000. Staff has never opened this account due to the turbulence the market was experiencing. Staff recommends that we abandon the investment management services and instead invest $5,000,000 each (10,000,000 total) in these two pooled funds that are very similar to our Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). Similar in the type of fund but they are surpassing our LAIF fund in their yields.

California Class has a current yield of 5.24%, and CAMP has a current yield of 5.26% while LAIF’s current yield is 2.96 %.

The City currently has approximate cash balances as follows:

Operating Account $ 6 million
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) $ 52 million
LPL Financial, CD’s $ 10 million
391
Item 17.

Page 2 ends

These investments will come from LAIF and be readily accessible for cash flow purposes anytime.

FISCAL IMPACT
$5,000,000 transfer from LAIF to California CLASS. And a $5,000,000 transfer to CAMP Trust - $10,000,000 total.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. - A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY TREASURER TO INVEST $5,000,000.00 IN CALIFORNIA CLASS PRIME FUND, AND $5,000,000 CALIFORNIA ASSET MANAGEMENT TRUST, WITH KAROLYN FAIRBANKS, CITY TREASURER; RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR – ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES; AND BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AS SIGNATORIES ON THE ACCOUNT.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 9148
392
Item 17.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

Page 1 of 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9148
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY TREASURER TO INVEST $5,000,000.00 IN CALIFORNIA CLASS PRIME FUND, AND $5,000,000 CALIFORNIA ASSET MANAGEMENT TRUST, WITH KAROLYN FAIRBANKS, CITY TREASURER; RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR – ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES; AND BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AS SIGNATORIES ON THE ACCOUNT.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The City Treasurer is hereby authorized and directed invest $5,000,000 in California Class Prime Fund and $5,000,000 in California Asset Management Trust, and the Council authorizes City Treasurer Karolyn Fairbanks, Assistant City Administrator – Administrative Services Ruth Duncan, and City Administrator Brian Ring to be signatories on the account.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting on July 18, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 393
Item 17.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: FIRST REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING IN AUGUST 2023
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
Pursuant to the City Code, the Council will meet on the first and third Tuesday of each month.

The City Code also provides that the Council may “cancel, amend or alter the date, time and/or location of f any meeting provided sufficient notice of the meeting is given to the public to comply with the Brown Act.”
The first Tuesday of the month of August (August 1, 2023) falls on National Night Out. The Council may continue to have the regularly scheduled Council meeting on this day, or move the meeting to Wednesday August 2, 2023.

DISCUSSION
The Council may consider changing the date of the first regularly scheduled Council meeting in August.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

RECOMMENDATION
Provide staff direction.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.
394
Item 18.

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITMANN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATORADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED

LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT, ZONES 2-3, 5, 7-10, 12, 14-15, 17
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council may consider initiating proceedings, preliminarily approving the Annual Assessment Report and declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

DISCUSSION
As a condition of approval for each subdivision identified below, the developer was required to establish or annex into a landscape and lighting maintenance assessment district. Each subdivision represents a Zone within the larger district. Each Zone is financially responsible for the maintenance of the landscaped areas dedicated to the City and for the cost of maintaining the City owned street lights within the subdivision. The particular Zones within the City’s Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (“CLLMAD”) are identified below:

Pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, which authorizes the formation and annual administration of such districts, an Annual Assessment Report was prepared and filed with the City Clerk prior to tonight’s meeting. The purpose of the report is to document the annual costs involved in the operation, maintenance and servicing of all improvements, adjust the annual assessments to incorporate any surplus or deficit from the previous year and to determine the actual annual assessment for each assessable parcel within the CLLMAD.

The City Council will consider the following items for all eighteen Zones within the CLLMAD:

1. Preliminarily approve the Annual Assessment Report and the proposed levy and collection of assessments for the CLLMAD for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

2. Direct Staff to make any changes or amendments to the report as necessary.

3. Approve the Resolution of Intent which sets the date for a public hearing for the August 1, 2023 City Council Meeting. At that time, the City Council will conduct a public hearing on these matters and may confirm the Annual Levy Report and Assessments.

FISCAL IMPACT
Assessments are collected for the City of Oroville by the Butte County Tax Collector to reimburse the City for the costs of operating, maintaining and servicing the landscape and lighting improvements within the CLLMAD.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

1. Adopt Resolution No. 9160 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING

PROCEEDINGS, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT

REPORT AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT

ASSESSMENTS FOR THE OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24.

2. Authorize any necessary budget adjustments to the Annual Assessment Report.

ATTACHMENT(S)
Resolution No. 9160
2023/24 Assessment Summary from the CLLMAD Annual Assessment Report.

NOTE: In order to reduce copying costs, only the Assessment Summary of the Annual Assessment Report is attached to this staff report. The full Annual Assessment Report for the CLLMAD is available for review in the City Clerk’s office. 396
Item 19.

Page 1 of 3 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9160

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING PROCEEDINGS,

PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT AND

DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE

OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24
WHEREAS, the Oroville City Council has, by previous resolutions, formed and levied annual assessments for a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972” (the 1972 Act”), being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (commencing with Section 22500).

Said special maintenance district is known and designated as “The Oroville Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District” (the “District”). The District is comprised of several Zones which are identified below:

ZONE ZONE
Zone 2 – The Buttes Zone 10 – Foothill Estates
Zone 3 – Deer Creek Estates, Phase 1 Zone 12 – Vista Del Oro Zone 5 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 1 Zone 14 – Martin Ranch Zone 7 – Grayhawk Zone 15 – Jake Richter Estates
Zone 8 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 2 Zone 17 – Feather River Bluffs Zone 9 – Linkside
WHEREAS, the City Council has retained Harris & Associates for the purpose of assisting with the annual levy of the District and to prepare and file with the City Clerk, an Annual Assessment Report (the “Report”) for the District in accordance with the 1972 Act; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby orders Harris & Associates to prepare and file with the City Clerk, the Report concerning the annual levy and collection of assessments for the District. Said levy and collection shall be for the fiscal year commencing July, 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024 in accordance with Chapter 3, Section 22622 of the 1972 Act. The Report details the improvements, any substantial changes to the improvements, the annual budgets for each Zone and the proposed assessment amounts for each parcel.

WHEREAS, there has now been presented to this City Council the Report as required by the 1972 Act; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and reviewed the Report as presented and is preliminarily satisfied with the District, each of the budget items and documents therein, and is satisfied that the assessment amounts, on a preliminary basis, have been spread to the assessable parcels in accordance with the special benefit received from the improvements and services provided.
397
Item 19.

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, the Oroville City Council does resolve as follows:

Section 1 That the above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2 Proposed Improvements: The improvements within the District may include, but are not limited to: turf, shrubs, plants and trees, landscaping, street lighting, irrigation and drainage systems, graffiti removal, pedestrian walkways, landscape lighting, masonry walls, and associated appurtenances within the public right-of-ways or specific easements. Services provided include all necessary service, operations, administration and maintenance required to keep the improvements in a healthy, vigorous and/or satisfactory operating condition. The specific improvements within each Zone are detailed in the Report.

Section 3 Intention: The City Council hereby declares its intention to seek the annual levy and collection of assessments within the District pursuant to the 1972 Act, in order to pay for the costs of maintaining and servicing the above referenced improvements.

The City Council finds that the public’s best interests will be served by such levy and collection.

Section 4 Public Hearing: The City Council hereby declares its intention to conduct a Public Hearing annually concerning the levy of assessments for the Districts in accordance with Chapter 3, Section 22626 of the 1972 Act.

Section 5 Notice: The City Council shall give notice of the time and place of the Public Hearing to all property owners within the District by causing the publishing of this Resolution once in the local newspaper not less than ten (10) days before the date of the Public Hearing and by posting a copy of this Resolution on the official bulletin board customarily used by the City for the posting of notices. Any interested person may file a written protest with the City Clerk prior to the conclusion of the Public Hearing or, having previously filed a protest, may file a written withdrawal of that protest. A written protest shall state all grounds of objection and a protest by a property owner shall contain a description sufficient to identify the property owned by such property owner. All interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard.

Section 6 Notice of Public Hearing: Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing on these matters will be held by the City Council on Tuesday August 1, 2023 at 5:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, located at 1735 Montgomery Street, Oroville.

Section 7 The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council and is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of said Public Hearing as provided by the 1972 Act.
398
Item 19.

Page 3 of 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittmann, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 399
Item 19.

CLLMAD FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Zone Name
Total
Assessable
Parcels/Units
Total
Assessment
Maximum
Assessment Rate
per Unit
Proposed
Assessment Rate
per Unit
Zone 1 – Grandview Estates 21 $2,801.40 $196.89 $133.40 Zone 2 – The Buttes 58 $7,131.68 $122.96 $122.96
Zone 3 – Deer Creek Estates, Phase 1 72 $2,168.64 $30.12 $30.12 Zone 4 – Calle Vista Estates, Phase 1 70 $5,327.00 $76.11 $76.10 Zone 5 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 1 12 $948.96 $79.08 $79.08 Zone 6 – Sherwood Estates, 1 & 2 49 $2,058.00 $42.00 $42.00 Zone 7 – Grayhawk 30 $5,928.60 $197.63 $197.62
Zone 8 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 2 20 $3,800.40 $515.71 $190.02 Zone 9 – Linkside Place, Phase 1 65 $4,225.00 $536.62 $65.00 Zone 10 – Foothill Estates 25 $2,750.00 $794.86 $110.00 Zone 11 – Mission Olive Ranch 19 $7,715.90 $596.37 $406.10 Zone 12 – Vista Del Oro 92 $2,760.00 $234.16 $30.00
Zone 13 – Calle Vista Estates, Unit 2 44 $4,847.04 $326.02 $110.16 Zone 14 – Martin Ranch 0
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Zone 15 – Jake Richter 8
$2,934.88 $348.23 $366.86
Zone 16 – Feather River Bluffs 121 $0.00 $59.40 $0.00
Zone 17 – Acacia Estates 20 $0.00 $112.33 $0.00
Zone 18 – Ruddy Creek 97 $0.00 $150.00 $0.00
TOTALS: 823 $55,397.50
400
Item 19.

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITMANN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATORADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED

LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT, ZONES 1, 4, 6, 11, 13, 16, 18
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

ZONE ZONE
Zone 1 – Grandview Estates Zone 13 – Calle Vista 2
Zone 4 – Calle Vista 1 Zone 16 – Acacia Estates
Zone 6 – Sherwood Zone 18 – Ruddy Creek
Zone 11 – Mission Olive Ranch
401
Item 20.

The City Council will consider the following items for all eighteen Zones within the CLLMAD:

1. Preliminarily approve the Annual Assessment Report and the proposed levy and collection of assessments for the CLLMAD for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

2. Direct Staff to make any changes or amendments to the report as necessary.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

1. Adopt Resolution No. 9154 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING

PROCEEDINGS, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT

REPORT AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT

ASSESSMENTS FOR THE OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24.

2. Authorize any necessary budget adjustments to the Annual Assessment Report.

ATTACHMENT(S)
Resolution No. 9154
2023/24 Assessment Summary from the CLLMAD Annual Assessment Report.

Page 1 of 3 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9154

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING PROCEEDINGS,

PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT AND

DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE

ZONE ZONE
Zone 1 – Grandview Estates Zone 13 – Calle Vista 2
Zone 4 – Calle Vista 1 Zone 16 – Acacia Estates
Zone 6 – Sherwood Zone 18 – Ruddy Creek
Zone 11 – Mission Olive Ranch
WHEREAS, the City Council has retained Harris & Associates for the purpose of assisting with the annual levy of the District and to prepare and file with the City Clerk, an Annual Assessment Report (the “Report”) for the District in accordance with the 1972 Act; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby orders Harris & Associates to prepare and file with the City Clerk, the Report concerning the annual levy and collection of assessments for the District. Said levy and collection shall be for the fiscal year commencing July, 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024 in accordance with Chapter 3, Section 22622 of the 1972 Act. The Report details the improvements, any substantial changes to the improvements, the annual budgets for each Zone and the proposed assessment amounts for each parcel.

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, the Oroville City Council does resolve as follows:

Section 1 That the above recitals are true and correct.

The City Council finds that the public’s best interests will be served by such levy and collection.

Page 3 of 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittmann, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 405
Item 20.

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATORADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED
BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, ZONES 3, 5, 9
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council may consider initiating proceedings, preliminarily approving the Annual Assessment Report and declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Benefit Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

DISCUSSION
As a condition of approval for each subdivision identified below, the developer was required to establish or annex into a Benefit Assessment District. Each subdivision represents a Zone within the larger district. Each Zone is financially responsible for the maintenance of the storm water infrastructure (manholes, drain pipes, etc.), including storm water retention facilities within the subdivision. The particular Zones within the City’s Consolidated Benefit Assessment District (“CBAD”) are identified below:

ZONE NUMBER AND NAME
Zone 3 – Mission Olive Ranch
Zone 5 – Calle Vista Estates, Unit 2
Zone 9 – Ruddy Creek
Pursuant to the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982, which authorizes the formation and annual administration of such districts, an Annual Assessment Report was prepared and filed with the City Clerk prior to tonight’s meeting. The purpose of the report is to document the annual costs involved in the operation, maintenance and servicing of all improvements, adjust the annual assessments, to incorporate any surplus or deficit from the previous year and to determine the actual annual assessment for each assessable parcel within the CBAD.

The City Council will consider the following items for all nine Zones within the CBAD:

1. Preliminarily approve the Annual Assessment Report and the proposed levy and collection of assessments for the CBAD for Fiscal Year 2023/24. 407
Item 21.

2. Direct Staff to make any changes or amendments to the Annual Assessment Report as necessary.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

1. Adopt Resolution No. 9159- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING

PROCEEDINGS, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT

REPORT AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT

ASSESSMENTS FOR THE OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24

2. Authorize any necessary budget adjustments to the Annual Assessment Report.

ATTACHMENT(S)
Resolution No. 9159
2023/24 Assessment Summary from the CBAD Annual Assessment Report.

NOTE: In order to reduce copying costs, only the Assessment Summary of the Annual Assessment Report is attached to this staff report. The complete Annual Assessment Report for the CBAD is available for review in the City Clerk’s office. 408
Item 21.

Page 1 of 3 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9159

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING PROCEEDINGS,

PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT AND

DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE

OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24
WHEREAS, the Oroville City Council has, by previous resolutions, formed and levied annual assessments for a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Benefit Assessment Act of 1982” (the “1982 Act”), Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the California Government Code (commencing with Section 54703). Said special maintenance district is known and designated as “The Oroville Consolidated Benefit Assessment District” (the “District”). The District is comprised of several Zones which are identified below:

ZONE NUMBER AND NAME
Zone 3 – Mission Olive Ranch
Zone 5 – Calle Vista
Zone 9 – Ruddy Creek
WHEREAS, the City Council has retained Harris & Associates for the purpose of assisting with the annual levy of the District and to prepare and file with the City Clerk, an Annual Assessment Report (the “Report”) for the District in accordance with the 1982 Act; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby orders Harris & Associates to prepare and file with the City Clerk, the Report concerning the annual levy and collection of assessments for the District. Said levy and collection shall be for the fiscal year commencing July, 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024 in accordance with Section 54716 of the 1982 Act. The Report details the improvements, any substantial changes to the improvements, the annual budgets for each Zone and the proposed assessment amounts for each parcel.

WHEREAS, there has now been presented to this City Council the Report as required by the 1982 Act; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and reviewed the Report as presented and is preliminarily satisfied with the District, each of the budget items and documents therein, and is satisfied that the assessment amounts, on a preliminary basis, have been spread to the assessable parcels in accordance with the special benefit received from the improvements and services provided.
409
Item 21.

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, the Oroville City Council does resolve as follows:

Section 1 That the above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2 Proposed Improvements: The improvements within the District may include, but are not limited to: drainage control, flood control and associated appurtenances within the public right-of-ways or specific easements. Services provided include all necessary service, operations, administration and maintenance required to keep the improvements in a satisfactory operating condition. The specific improvements within each Zone are detailed in the Report.

Section 3 Intention: The City Council hereby declares its intention to seek the annual levy and collection of assessments within the District pursuant to the 1982 Act, in order to pay for the costs of maintaining and servicing the above referenced improvements.

The City Council finds that the public’s best interests will be served by such levy and collection.

Section 7 The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council and is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of said Public Hearing. 410
Item 21.

Page 3 of 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSTENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 411
Item 21.

CBAD 2023/24 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Zone Name
Total
Assessable
Unit
Total
Assessable
Cost
Maximum
Assessment
Rate per Unit
Proposed
Assessment
Rate per Unit
Zone 1 – Linkside Place, Phase 1 65 $3,196.70 $428.99 $49.18 Zone 2 – Foothill Estates 25 $3,231.00 $499.01 $129.24
Zone 3 – Mission Olive Ranch 19 $5,300.24 $434.81 $278.96 Zone 4 – Vista Del Oro 92 $5,777.60 $350.21 $62.80
Zone 5 – Calle Vista Estates, Unit 2 44 $6,166.16 $259.13 $140.14 Zone 6 – Martin Ranch 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Zone 7 – Jake Richter 8 $1,500.64 $370.85 $187.58
Zone 8 – Acacia Estates 20 $0.00 $258.71 $0.00
Zone 9 – Ruddy Creek 97 $0.00 $125.31 $0.00
TOTALS: 370 $25,172.34
412
Item 21.

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY
The Council may consider initiating proceedings, preliminarily approving the Annual Assessment Report and declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Benefit Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

ZONE NUMBER AND NAME
Zone 1 – Linkside Place, Phase 1
Zone 2 – Foothill Estates
Zone 4 – Vista Del Oro
Zone 6 – Martin Ranch
Zone 7 – Jake Richter Estates
Zone 8 – Acacia Estates
Pursuant to the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982, which authorizes the formation and annual administration of such districts, an Annual Assessment Report was prepared and filed with the City Clerk prior to tonight’s meeting. The purpose of the report is to document the annual costs involved in the operation, maintenance and servicing of all improvements, adjust the annual assessments, to incorporate any surplus or deficit from the previous year and to determine the actual annual assessment for each assessable parcel within the CBAD.

The City Council will consider the following items for all nine Zones within the CBAD:
413
Item 22.

1. Preliminarily approve the Annual Assessment Report and the proposed levy and collection of assessments for the CBAD for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

2. Direct Staff to make any changes or amendments to the Annual Assessment Report as necessary.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

1. Adopt Resolution No. 9155- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING

PROCEEDINGS, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT

REPORT AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT

ASSESSMENTS FOR THE OROVILLE CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24

2. Authorize any necessary budget adjustments to the Annual Assessment Report.

ATTACHMENT(S)
Resolution No. 9155
2023/24 Assessment Summary from the CBAD Annual Assessment Report.

Page 1 of 3 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9155

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATING PROCEEDINGS,

PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT AND

DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE

ZONE NUMBER AND NAME
Zone 1 – Linkside Place
Zone 2 – Foothill Estates
Zone 4 – Vista Del Oro
Zone 6 – Martin Ranch
Zone 7 – Jake Richter Estates
Zone 8 – Acacia Estates
WHEREAS, the City Council has retained Harris & Associates for the purpose of assisting with the annual levy of the District and to prepare and file with the City Clerk, an Annual Assessment Report (the “Report”) for the District in accordance with the 1982 Act; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby orders Harris & Associates to prepare and file with the City Clerk, the Report concerning the annual levy and collection of assessments for the District. Said levy and collection shall be for the fiscal year commencing July, 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024 in accordance with Section 54716 of the 1982 Act. The Report details the improvements, any substantial changes to the improvements, the annual budgets for each Zone and the proposed assessment amounts for each parcel.

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, the Oroville City Council does resolve as follows:

Section 1 That the above recitals are true and correct.

The City Council finds that the public’s best interests will be served by such levy and collection.

Section 7 The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council and is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of said Public Hearing. 416
Item 22.

Page 3 of 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSTENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 417
Item 22.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH AMY BERGSTRAND,

DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS AND HOUSING
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council will consider an amendment to the employment contract with Amy Bergstrand, Director of Business and Housing.

DISCUSSION
Amy Bergstrand entered into a three-year employment contract with the City on March 16, 2022, at a starting salary of $118,720/year (step A), for a term of three years.

Staff recommend amending this contract with the following changes:
 Extend current contract through March 15, 2026; and include an option for a two-year contract extension if mutually agreeable; and
 A salary advancement to Step C on the Department Head salary schedule, with an annual salary of $135,486, with an effective date July 17, 2023.

FISCAL IMPACT
This will represent an annual salary increase of $13,204 and will be absorbed in the existing budget.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 9150 – A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND AMY BERGSTRAND – (Agreement No. 3407).

ATTACHMENTS:

Contract Amendment.
419
Item 23.

R-9047

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 9150

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND

DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND AMY BERGSTRAND (Amended Agreement No. 3407)
Amendment 1
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute an amendment to the employment agreement, Amendment 1 between the City of Oroville and Amy Bergstrand. A copy is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
________________________________
Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 420
Item 23.

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND AMY BERGSTRAND
This Amendment, dated July 18, 2023, is to the Employment Agreement (“Agreement”) effective March 16, 2022, between the City of Oroville (“City”) and Amy Bergstrand. (“Bergstrand”).

In consideration of the terms and conditions herein, the City and Bergstrand agree that the Agreement shall be amended as follows:

1. SECTION 2 IS REPLACED WITH THE FOLLOWING:

Section 2. Term: Termination: Severance and Compensation A. The term of this Agreement shall be effective March 16, 2022, and shall continue until March 16, 2026. Bergstrand may exercise a (2) two-year extension of this agreement if it is mutually agreeable. On or before October 16, 2025, Bergstrand shall give written notice to City if she wishes to extend the agreement on the same terms and conditions.

Thereafter the Council shall determine, within 30 days, whether or not it wishes to continue and/or extend the agreement and shall give written notice to Bergstrand of its decision. If the Council approves the continuation and/or extension, the parties shall meet in an effort to agree upon the terms of a new or extended agreement. If the Council disapproves the continuation and/or extension, or if the parties fail to agree upon the terms of a new or extended agreement, this Agreement shall terminate as outlined above, and thereafter Bergstrand shall not be entitled to any compensation except for any accrued vested benefits as listed above.

B. If Bergstrand resigns her position as Director of Business and Housing Department before the expiration date of the initial or any extended term of this Agreement; Bergstrand shall give City a sixty (60) day written notice in advance to City. In such event, Bergstrand shall not be entitled to the severance compensation provided for in Section 2.C of this Agreement. The City Administrator, in concurrence with the Council, may reduce the required notice to not less than thirty (30) days without penalty should Bergstrand make such request.

C. As an at-will employee, City may terminate this Agreement at any time with or without cause. If the City discharges Bergstrand from her position, without cause, as Director of Business and Housing, the City shall pay Bergstrand a lump-sum cash payment equal to six (6) month’s salary. In addition, Bergstrand shall also be compensated for all accumulated and unused vacation time, and any administrative time not to exceed 20 hours, unless 20 hours has already been cashed out for the current fiscal year. No other leave balances or benefits under the agreement may be cashed out upon termination of the agreement. However, in the event Bergstrand is discharged for cause or for conviction of a crime, City shall have no obligation to pay any severance compensation except for any vested benefits. In any event, if the City chooses to terminate the agreement, Bergstrand shall have the opportunity to retire from City employment through PERS, in lieu of termination.
421
Item 23.

2. SECTION 5 IS REPLACED WITH THE FOLLOWING:

City agrees to place Bergstrand at Step C of the Department Heads salary schedule, an annual base salary of $135,486, effective July 17, 2023 and payable at the same time and manner as other Council Appointed Employees of the City are paid.

3. Conflicts between this Amended Agreement and the Agreement shall be controlled by this Amendment. All other provisions within the Agreement not modified by this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above.

CITY OF OROVILLE
David Pittman, Mayor Amy Bergstrand
Director of Business and Housing
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney
422
Item 23.

A-3407

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND AMY BERGSTRAND
The employment agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into on March 15, 2022, by and between the City of Oroville ("City") and Amy Berstrand ("Bergstrand") to be effective March 16, 2022, both of whom understand as follows:

WHEREAS, City desires to employ the services of Bergstrand as its Director of Business and Housing Department; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council (“Council”) of the City to provide certain benefits, to establish certain conditions of employment and to set working conditions for Bergstrand; and WHEREAS, Bergstrand desires to be employed as the Director of Business and Housing Department of City.

NOW THISEFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties agree that the Agreement supersedes in total any prior employment agreements or Memorandum of Understandings between the parties, and further agree as follows:

Section 1. Duties:

City hereby agrees to employ Bergstrand as the Director of Business and Housing Department of City to perform the functions and duties specified for the position in the City Charter, Municipal Code of the City and such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the Council shall from time to time assign her.

Section 2. Term; Termination: Severance Compensation:

A. The term of this Agreement shall be effective March 16, 2022, and shall continue until March 16, 2025. On or before October 16, 2024, Bergstrand shall give written notice to City if she wishes to extend the agreement on the same terms and conditions. Thereafter the Council shall determine, within 30 days, whether or not it wishes to continue and/or extend the agreement and shall give written notice to Bergstrand of its decision. If the Council approves the continuation and/or extension, the parties shall meet in an effort to agree upon the terms of a new or extended agreement. If the Council disapproves the continuation and/or extension, or if the parties fail to agree upon the terms of a new or extended agreement, this Agreement shall terminate as outlined above, and thereafter Bergstrand shall not be entitled to any compensation except for any accrued vested benefits as listed above.

C. City may terminate this Agreement at any time with or without cause. If the City discharges Bergstrand from her position, without cause, as Director of Business and Housing, the City shall pay Bergstrand a lump-sum cash payment equal to six (6) month’s salary. In addition, Bergstrand shall also be compensated for all vested accrued leave time, which is currently defined as all accumulated and unused vacation. However, in the event Bergstrand is discharged for cause or for conviction of a crime, City shall have no obligation to pay any severance compensation except for any vested benefits. In any event, if the City chooses to terminate the agreement, Bergstrand shall have the opportunity to retire from City employment through PERS, in lieu of termination.

Section 3. Random Drug Testing Policy:

Bergstrand agrees to comply with the City of Oroville’s Substance Abuse Policy Statement, as outlined in the City of Oroville’s Policy and Procedures.

Section 4. Non-Industrial Injury/ Illness:

If Bergstrand becomes permanently disabled or is otherwise unable to perform her duties because of sickness, accident, injury, mental incapacity or health for a period of four successive weeks beyond any accrued leave, City shall have the option to terminate the Agreement, subject to the severance pay provisions of Section 2. C.: provided, however City shall be required to comply with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Californian Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Section 5. Salary:

City agrees to place Bergstrand at Step A of the Assistant City Administrator salary schedule, an annual base salary of $118,720, upon the effective date noted above and payable at the same time and manner as other Council Appointed Employees of the City are paid.

Section 6. Performance Evaluation:

The Council shall direct the City Administrator to complete a performance evaluation of Bergstrand by December 31
st of each year of the contract and during any extension period of the contract and upon the Council's concurrence with the satisfactory review, Bergstrand may receive a salary adjustment of up to one step of the salary schedule for her base salary, for an overall evaluation of ‘M’ or better. Such review and evaluation shall be in accordance with specific criteria developed jointly by the City Administrator and Bergstrand. Such criteria may be added to or deleted from, as the City Administrator may determine from time to time, in consultation with Bergstrand. The City Administrator's evaluation of Bergstrand will be shared with the Mayor and Council. The Mayor and Council may add additional comments to Bergstrand's final evaluation.

Section 7. Hours of Work; Administrative Leave:

Bergstrand shall be employed on a full-time basis, and for optimal customer service should perform such work, during normal business hours. However, it is recognized that Bergstrand shall be required to devote a great deal of time outside of normal office hours on business of City, and 424
Item 23.
to that end she shall be allowed to take 85 hours per calendar year of Administrative Leave, unless City and Bergstrand agree upon an alternate amount of leave (which shall be documented in writing). Such leave may be taken only upon approval of the City Administrator. Bergstrand shall have the option to cash out up to twenty (20) hours of administrative leave per calendar year.

Section 8. Bereavement Leave:

When compelled to be absent from work by reason of death of an immediate family member, or where death appears imminent, Bergstrand shall be entitled to receive up to five (5) days Bereavement Leave, which shall not be charged against her sick leave. Before taking such leave, Bergstrand shall notify, in writing, the City Administrator of the time of absence needed and the expected date of return to work.

The immediate family is defined as spouse; natural, step or legal child; parent; brother; sister; grandparent; grandchild; mother-in-law or father-in-law.

Section 9. Automobile Allowance:

City shall provide an automobile to Bergstrand suitable for her use while performing her duties as the Director of Business and Housing or compensate her if no vehicle is available at the rate of $300.00 per month in compliance with Internal Revenue Regulation Section 1.274.5T(k)(6).

Section 10. Vacation and Sick Leave:

Bergstrand shall continue to accumulate sick leave at the rate of one (1) workday for each month of employment. Bergstrand shall be permitted to accumulate an unlimited amount of sick leave.

Bergstrand shall accumulate vacation leave at the rate of twenty-one (21) working days of vacation per year. Bergstrand shall be permitted to accumulate an unlimited amount of vacation leave.

Section 11. Medical, Vision, Life, Disability and Dental Insurance:

The City shall pay one hundred percent (100%) of the premiums for Medical, Dental, Vision, Long-Term Disability and Life Insurance for Bergstrand and her eligible dependents.

Section 12. Holidays: Bergstrand is authorized to celebrate the following holidays:

1. New Year's Day

2. Martin Luther King Day

3. Lincoln's Birthday

4. President's Day

5. Memorial Day

6. Independence Day

7. Labor Day

8. Veteran's Day

9. Thanksgiving Day

10. The Day After Thanksgiving Day

11. Last Workday Before Christmas Day

12. Christmas Day
Bergstrand shall be compensated for each holiday at the straight time compensation rate. 425
Item 23.

Section 13. Technology Fee:

City shall provide a technology allowance to Bergstrand in the amount of $100/month to compensate her for the use of her private cell phone and laptop/tablet for City business.

Section 14. Retirement:

Bergstrand will pay 12% of the employee share of her CalPERS retirement contribution upon commencement of this agreement. In the event that any legislation mandates that the employee share increase above 12% during the term of this agreement or any extensions, Bergstrand and City agree to negotiate terms for the implementation of any increase.

The City will continue to provide the single highest year benefit calculation and the 1959 Survivor Benefit at the 4th level for Bergstrand.

Sick Leave Conversion at the Time of Retirement:

Upon regular retirement from the City of Oroville, Bergstrand shall have the option to convert her unused sick leave balance to CalPERS service credit. In the alternative, Bergstrand may convert her unused sick leave balance to a dollar value account at the rate of one month premium for each three (3) days of accrued but unused sick leave remaining on the books at the date of retirement to pay premiums for medical, dental and vision insurance. Bergstrand may also elect to split her unused sick leave between the CalPERS service credit and dollar value account for insurance, subject to CalPERS requirements.

If Bergstrand elects to convert her unused sick leave to a dollar value account to pay for medical, dental and vision insurance and it becomes exhausted, Bergstrand shall have the option of continuing medical, dental and vision insurance coverage at her own expense, consistent with current City policy and Federal law. If, after her retirement, Bergstrand becomes deceased before her dollar value account has been completely utilized, the remaining benefits shall be available to the surviving eligible family members.

Section 15. Deferred Compensation Plan:

The City shall provide a Deferred Compensation Plan for Bergstrand. The City shall contribute 3% of Bergstrand’s base salary to Bergstrand’s Deferred Compensation Plan. In addition, the City shall match the first 2% that Bergstrand contributes to Bergstrand’s Deferred Compensation Plan.

Section 16. Outside Employment:

During the term of the Agreement, and any extensions thereof, Bergstrand shall only accept outside employment that involves teaching or training related to her profession and any existing agreements. Any outside employment shall not interfere with Bergstrand’s duties as while employed by the City and no other outside employment of any kind or character is permitted without having first obtained the prior approval of the Council.

Section 17. Dues and Subscriptions:

City agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of Bergstrand necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state and local associations and organizations as are desirable for her continued professional participation, 426
Item 23.
growth and advancement, and for the good of the City; provided, however, the amount of such dues and subscriptions shall not exceed the amount appropriated therefore in the annual budget.

Section 19. Professional Development:

A. City agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of Bergstrand for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions to continue the professional development of Bergstrand, and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for City and such other national, regional, state and local governmental groups and committees thereof which Bergstrand serves as a member; provided, however, the amount of such travel and subsistence shall not exceed the amount appropriated therefore in the annual budget.

B. City also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of Bergstrand for short courses, institutes and seminars that are necessary for her professional development, and for the good of the City; provided, however, the amount of such travel and subsistence shall not exceed the amount appropriated therefore in the annual budget.

Section 19. General Expenses:

City recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal and generally job-affiliated nature shall be incurred by Bergstrand, and hereby agrees to reimburse or to pay such general expenses up to an amount not to exceed the amount provided for such purposes in the Business and Housing Department’s portion of the annual City budget. The Finance Department is hereby authorized to disburse such monies in accordance with adopted City expense reimbursement policies.

Section 20. Civic Club Membership:

City recognizes the desirability of representation in and before local civic and other organizations, and Bergstrand is authorized to become a member of such civic clubs or organizations. During the term of the agreement, City, at its sole discretion, may elect to pay some or all Bergstrand's civic club membership expenses.

Section 21. Indemnification:

In addition to the requirements of state and local law, City shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify Bergstrand against any tort, professional liability claim or demand, or other legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Bergstrand's duties as Business and Housing Director, except for any civil action or proceeding brought against Bergstrand for actual fraud, corruption or actual malice. City, at its sole discretion, shall compromise and settle any such claim or suit and pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon.

Section 22. Bonding:

City shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of Bergstrand under any law or ordinance.

Section 23. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment:

It is understood and agreed by City and Bergstrand that Bergstrand is an "at will" employee of the City appointed by the Council under the provisions of the City Charter. As such, Bergstrand serves at the pleasure of City and is not subject to the provisions of the City of Oroville Personnel Rules and Regulations. 427
Item 23.

Section 24. Notices:

Notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be given by deposit in the custody of the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

A. TO CITY: Mayor, City of Oroville, 1735 Montgomery Street, Oroville, CA 95965 B. TO BERGSTRAND: Amy Bergstrand at her permanent residence address on record with the City of Oroville
Alternatively, notices required pursuant to this Agreement may be personally served to the same persons as is applicable to civil judicial practice. Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal service or as of the date of deposit of such written notice in the United States Postal Service.

Section 25. General Provisions:

A. The text herein shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties.

B. Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of Bergstrand.

C. This Agreement shall not be assigned by Bergstrand or City.

D. This Agreement shall not be modified without the written consent of Bergstrand and City.

E. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this Agreement is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect.

Approved by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a meeting held March 16, 2022.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above.

CITY OF OROVILLE
Charles Reynolds, Mayor Amy Bergstrand,
Director of Business and Housing
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney
A-3407 428
Item 23.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH J. PATRICK PIATT FOR POSITION

OF DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council will consider entering an employment contract between the City of Oroville and J.

Patrick Piatt for the position of Director, Community Development.

DISCUSSION
A recruitment for the position of Director, Community Development was recently conducted and J. Patrick Piatt was selected for this position.

Staff have prepared an employment contract with Mr. Piatt with a starting salary of $135,486 (Step C of the Department Heads salary schedule) for a term of three years, from August 7, 2023 until August 7, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are sufficient appropriations in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 9156 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND J. PATRICK PIATT ATTACHMENTS:

A-3464 Employment Contract.
429
Item 24.

R-9047

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 9156

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND

DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND J. PATRICK PIATT
(Amended Agreement No. 3464)
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute an employment agreement, between the City of Oroville and J. Patrick Piatt. A copy is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
________________________________
Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 430
Item 24.
3464
431
Item 24.
3464
432
Item 24.
3464
433
Item 24.
3464
434
Item 24.
3464
435
Item 24.
3464
436
Item 24.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH FREDERICK J. MAYO FOR POSITION

OF DIRECTOR, PUBLIC WORKS
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council will consider entering an employment contract between the City of Oroville and Frederick J. Mayo for the position of Director, Public Works.

DISCUSSION
A recruitment for the position of Director, Community Development was recently conducted and J. Patrick Piatt was selected for this position.

Staff have prepared an employment contract with Mr. Mayo with a starting salary of $158,028 (Step E of the Department Heads salary schedule) for a term of three years, from July 31, 2023 until July 31, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are sufficient appropriations in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 9157- A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND FREDERICK J. MAYO.

ATTACHMENTS:

A-3465 Employment Contract.
437
Item 25.

R-9047

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 9157

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND

DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND FREDERICK J. MAYO
(Amended Agreement No. 3465)
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute an employment agreement, between the City of Oroville and Frederick J. Mayo. A copy is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on July 18, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
________________________________
Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 438
Item 25.
3465
439
Item 25.
3465
440
Item 25.
3465
441
Item 25.
442
Item 25.
3465
443
Item 25.
3465
444
Item 25.

ADMINISTRATION Page 1 07/18/2023

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: AMENDED AND RESTATED LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH COLE HUBER, LLP
DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The Council will consider an Amended and Restated Legal Services Agreement with Cole Huber, LLP for City Attorney Services.

DISCUSSION
Cole Huber, LLP, currently provides City Attorney services to the City of Oroville, and it has since 2010. The current Agreement expires on July 31, 2023. Cole Huber, LLP has proposed an Amended and Restated Agreement for City Attorney Services, which is substantially the same as the current agreement.

Currently, general legal services are billed at $200 per hour and litigation is billed at $225 per hour. The hourly fees are substantially below market rate for City Attorney and litigation services, which have been in place for two years. Cole Huber, LLP will keep the current hourly fees for another year. Cole Huber LLP is grateful for the relationship with the City and would like it to continue. The Agreement has been independently reviewed and approved by outside counsel, Mark Habib, an attorney who represents the City on some specialized matters.

If approved, the Amendment to the Agreement would be effective upon approval.

The agreement would allow for an annual review of the billing rate. The City of Oroville has the right to terminate the Agreement at any time without penalty.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Amended and Restated Legal Services Agreement is in compliance with the approved budget for 2023/24 fiscal year.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 9158 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED

AND RESTATED AGREEMENT WITH COLE HUBER, LLP FOR CITY
ATTORNEY LEGAL SERVICES – (Agreement No. 2004-6).
445
Item 26.

ADMINISTRATION Page 2 07/18/2023

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 9158
Amendment to Agreement No. 2004-6
446
Item 26.

Page 1 of 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE

MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT WITH COLE HUBER, LLP FOR CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL SERVICES – (Agreement No. 2004-6).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Mayor is authorized and directed to sign and execute an amended and restated agreement with Cole Huber, LLP for City Attorney legal services.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting on July 18, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Jackie Glover, Assistant City Clerk 447
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 1 ends

AMENDED AND RESTATED LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

CITY OF OROVILLE AND COLE HUBER LLP
THIS AGREEMENT for legal services is entered into by and between the City of Oroville (hereinafter referred to as "City") and Cole Huber LLP (hereinafter referred to as "Law Firm"), as of July 18, 2023 (the "Effective Date").

SECTION 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Law Firm shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.

1.1 Term of Services. This Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall continue unless the Agreement is otherwise terminated as provided for in Section 7.

1.2 Standard of Performance. Law Firm shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Law Firm is engaged in the geographical area in which Law Firm practices its profession. Law Firm shall prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Law Firm's profession.

1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Law Firm shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons for any reason other than a characteristic protected under state employment laws and the California Rules of Professional Conduct, Law Firm shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire, reassign such person or persons.

1.4 Time. Law Firm shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.2 above and to satisfy Law Firm's obligations hereunder.

SECTION 2. COMPENSATION. City agrees to pay Law Firm in accordance with the Compensation Schedule provided in Exhibit B for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. The rates and charges outlined in the Compensation Schedule shall be valid through at least June 30, 2024, and shall be reviewed annually. City shall pay Law Firm for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Law Firm for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Law Firm shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein.

Except as specifically authorized by the City, Law Firm shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.

Law Firm and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Law Firm under this Agreement is based upon Law Firm's invoices only, and City has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement. 448
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 2 ends

2.1 Invoices. Law Firm shall submit invoices not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement (unless requested otherwise by City), based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
 The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;  A Task Summary containing the amount of any prior billings, the total due for the period being billed for, and any outstanding sums remaining unpaid; and
 The applicable time entries showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense.

2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of an invoice to pay Law Firm.

2.3 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses are specified in Exhibit B, and expenses not listed in Exhibit B are not chargeable to City.

2.4 Payment of Taxes. Law Firm is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

2.5 Payment upon Termination. In the event that City or Law Firm terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 7 of this Agreement, the City shall compensate the Law Firm for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Law Firm shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.

2.6 Authorization to Perform Services. Law Firm is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization (written or verbal) from City.

SECTION 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Law Firm shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Law Firm only the facilities and equipment listed in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.

City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Law Firm's use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall the City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.

SECTION 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement, Law Firm, at its own cost and expense, shall procure and maintain 449
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 3 ends

professional malpractice insurance in the amount of not less than $2 million per occurrence throughout the term of this Agreement. Law Firm shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that meets the requirements of this section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City, and that such insurance is in effect prior to commencing work under this Agreement. Law Firm shall maintain the insurance policy required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement.

Verification of the required insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution.

4.1 Variation. City may approve a variation in the insurance requirements upon a determination that the coverage, scope, limit, and form of such insurance is either not commercially available, or that the City's interests are otherwise fully protected.

4.2 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required by this section is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Law Firm shall provide written notice to City at Law Firm's earliest possible opportunity, and in no case later than five (5) days after Law Firm is notified of the change in coverage.

4.3 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Law Firm fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option, exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Law Firm's breach:

4.3.1. Order Law Firm to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that becomes due to Law Firm hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Law Firm demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or

4.3.2 Terminate this Agreement.

SECTION 5. STATUS OF LAW FIRM.

5.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Law Firm shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of the City.

City shall have the right to control Law Firm only insofar as the results of Law Firm's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, City shall otherwise not have the right to control the means by which Law Firm accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

Notwithstanding any other city, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Law Firm and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of City, and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

5.2 Law Firm Not Agent. Except as City may specify in writing or as provided by law, Law Firm shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of the City 450
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 4 ends

in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Law Firm shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind the City to any obligation whatsoever.

SECTION 6. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

6.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

6.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Law Firm and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.

6.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Law Firm and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program.

6.4 Licenses and Permits. Law Firm represents and warrants to the City that Law Firm and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature legally required to practice their respective professions. Law Firm represents and warrants to City that Law Firm and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Law Firm and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement any required business licenses from City.

6.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Law Firm shall not discriminate, on the basis of a person's race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Law Firm under this Agreement. Law Firm shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement.

Law Firm shall include the provisions of this subsection in any subcontract approved by the City.

SECTION 7. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.

7.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Law Firm. Such written notification must provide an effective date of cancellation.

Law Firm may cancel this Agreement upon sixty (60) days' written notice to City and shall include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.

In the event of termination, Law Firm shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Law Firm delivering to City copies of any or all 451
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 5 ends

reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Law Firm prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder. Originals of attorney work product shall remain the property of Law Firm.

7.2 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.

7.3 Assignment. City and Law Firm recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Law Firm and is based upon a determination of Law Firm's unique personal competence, experience, and specialized personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Law Firm. Law Firm may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the City Administrator.

7.4 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Law Firm shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

7.5 Options Upon Breach by Law Firm. If Law Firm materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City's remedies shall include but not be limited to the following:

7.5.1 Immediate termination of the Agreement;

7.5.2 Retention of the plans, reports, documents, and any other work product prepared by Law Firm pursuant to this Agreement; and/or

7.5.3 Retention of a different law firm to complete any work described in Exhibit A remaining unfinished by Law Firm.

SECTION 8. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.

8.1 Records Created as Part of Law Firm's Performance. Law Firm hereby agrees to deliver copies of all reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Law Firm prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Law Firm agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.

8.2 Law Firm's Books and Records. Law Firm shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, 452
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 6 ends

or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Law Firm pursuant to this Agreement.

SECTION 9. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

9.1 Attorneys' Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees (including reasonable costs and disbursements) in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.

9.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the Superior Court for the County of Butte.

9.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

9.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.

9.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.

9.6 Conflict of Interest. Law Firm may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Law Firm in a "conflict of interest," as that term is defined in the rules of professional responsibility governing Law Firm's profession, unless such conflict may be waived by City and City chooses to waive such conflict in writing.

Law Firm shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code section 1090 et seq.

Law Firm hereby warrants that although it has previously performed, and is currently performing, legal services for the City as an independent contractor, it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Law Firm were an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous 12 months, Law Firm warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. Law Firm understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code section 1090 et seq., the entire Agreement is void and Law Firm will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Law Firm will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Law Firm. Law Firm understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code section 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.
453
Item 26.

Legal Services Agreement

Page 7 ends

9.8 Solicitation. Law Firm agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.

9.9 Notices.

Any written notice to Law Firm shall be sent to:

Cole Huber LLP
Attn: Scott Huber
2281 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 300
Roseville, CA 95661
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:

City of Oroville
Attn: City Administrator
1735 Montgomery St.

Oroville, CA 95965

9.10 Integration. This Agreement, including attachments, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Law Firm and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral.

9.11 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.

9.12 Authorized Signature. Each person and party signing this Agreement warrants that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the principal and that the party will be bound by such signature.

The parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

CITY

CITY OF OROVILLE
By: _______________________________
David Pittman, Mayor

LAW FIRM

COLE HUBER LLP
By_________________________________
Derek Cole, Managing Partner
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By_________________________________
Mark Habib, Special Counsel
454
Item 26.
4866-8010-0701.1
Exhibit A: Scope of Work

Page 1 ends

EXHIBIT A – SCOPE OF WORK
The following services shall be provided under this Agreement:

CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES
Law Firm shall provide all general counsel services customarily provided to public agencies such as the City, which include the following:

Advise the City Council, Commissions, other City officials, and staff on legal matters pertaining to municipal government, including the Brown Act and parliamentary procedures for running meetings;
Attend all City Council and other meetings as requested by the City Council and City Administrator;
Provide legal advice, consultations and opinions to the City Council, City Administrator, and staff;
Prepare and/or review all ordinances, resolutions, municipal contracts, and other contracts and agreements entered into by the City;
Alert the City in a timely manner on new State or Federal legislation or judicial decisions that may impact the City and propose appropriate action(s) to assure compliance; Inform the City Council and recommend changes to City ordinances and policies as needed;
Research and submit legal opinions on municipal or other legal matters as requested by the City Council or City Administrator;
Review memorandums of understanding and provide guidance on personnel matters, labor relations and policies and procedures affecting employees, including employee discipline or procedures to assure compliance;
Provide legal work pertaining to land use issues including, but not limited to, property acquisitions, property disposals, public improvements, easements, dedications, the California Environmental Quality Act and public utilities; Enforce City codes, zoning regulations, and building standards through administrative and judicial actions;
Initiate and prosecute any necessary criminal actions required to enforce municipal ordinances;
Review documents, policies, and forms to ensure compliance with current laws; Coordinate and monitor the work and cost of special legal counsel; Promptly respond to calls, e-mails, and correspondence from the City Council, City Officials and staff; and
455
Item 26.
4866-8010-0701.1
Exhibit A: Scope of Work

Page 2 ends

Perform other non-litigation or non-specialized legal duties as requested by the City Council or City Administrator.

LITIGATION SERVICES
Upon authorization by the City, Law Firm shall represent the City in any judicial action or any administrative proceeding. Representation of the City shall include:

Preparation for and attendance at court hearings (except for hearings relating to work performed on behalf of the City to prosecute code violations and perform enforcement code functions);
Drafting of pleadings, motions, memoranda, court forms, and other litigation documents; Research and analysis of claims, defenses, and remedies; Drafting and responding to discovery;
Coordinating, reviewing, and summarizing discovery and document productions; Preparing for, attending and summarizing depositions, including witness preparation and preparation of post-deposition summaries or reports;
Preparation of administrative records;
Meetings with client representatives, opposing counsel, and others concerning the litigation;
Trial and trial preparation; and
Other tasks as may be necessary to the successful completion of the litigation. 456
Item 26.
4866-8010-0701.1

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION SCHEDULE AND REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES: RATES
Attorneys (Blended): $200.00/hour
Paralegals/Law Clerks: $135.00/hour
Any land use, environmental, or other work that the City is being reimbursed for by a third-party shall not be subject to the retainer and will be invoiced to the City at the Firm’s market rates set by Law Firm. Such work will be tracked on a per-project basis and the City shall only be responsible for payment of funds reimbursed to the City by the third-party.

Labor and personnel issues will be billed at the City Attorney Services rates, including: reviewing memorandums of understanding, labor relations and policies and procedures affecting employees, including employee discipline or procedures to assure compliance.

Litigation Services shall be provided at the following rates:

LITIGATION SERVICES: RATES
Attorneys (Blended): $225.00/hour
Paralegals/Law Clerks: $135.00/hour
Costs shall be paid as follows:

COSTS
Duplication/reproduction fees
(50 pages or more)
Actual cost if performed by outside
service; $0.15 if performed in-house
Vehicle travel originating from Firm’s
Roseville office (Litigation Only)
Applicable IRS rate per
mile x number of miles
Extraordinary postage or overnight
delivery costs
Actual Cost
Costs incurred in the course of investigation, research, negotiation or litigation will also be invoiced monthly. The following list of charges is included by way of example:

Parking and toll fees Actual Cost
Extraordinary postage or overnight
delivery costs
Actual Cost
Court filing fees Actual Cost
Attorney services (includes service of
process fees, arbitrators, and
mediators)
Actual Cost
457
Item 26.
4866-8010-0701.1
Exhibit A: Scope of Work

Page 2 ends

Messenger services Actual Cost
Witness fees Actual Cost
Expert fees Actual Cost
Westlaw research Prorated so the City would
pay its proportionate share
Accurint or other database research fees Actual Cost
Data conversion costs and forensic IT work Actual Costs FedEx, OnTrac Overnight, or other oneday delivery servicesActual Cost Duplication/reproduction fees (50 pages or
more)
Actual cost if performed by
outside service; $.15/copy if inhouse
Any other expense not listed above that
becomes necessary for the successful
resolution of a client matter
Actual Cost
458
Item 26.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR,

WES ERVIN, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
RE: FEATHER RANCH SUBDIVISION, INCLUDING EIR CERTIFICATION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA 23-01, ZONING CHANGE ZC 23-01 WITH ORDINANCE 1873, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TSM 22-01,

AND AN OVERRIDE OF THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION’S INCONSISTENCY DETERMINATION.

DATE: JULY 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The City Council shall conduct a public hearing to consider adopting General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01, and an override of the Airport Land Use Commission inconsistency determination for a proposed 172-unit market rate single family subdivision at APN 030-230-098 off 20th Street between Feather Avenue and Biggs Avenue.

DISCUSSION
The Council may consider approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map that would create 172 new market-rate housing units. MD3 Investments has applied to subdivide a 45- acre parcel currently zoned Airport Business Park – Airport Influence Overlay (ABPAIO) into 172 single family lots to be zoned R-1 and averaging 7,450 square feet in size.

This project decision requires the City Council to balance the objectives of safety and noise, effective airport operations, and economic prosperity including the need for more market rate housing – all important considerations for Oroville’s citizenry.

Because the project is discretionary and may create significant impacts, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and circulated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Due to the significant and unavoidable environmental effects identified in the EIR, CEQA requires the City Council to approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations and certify the EIR if it ultimately approves the project.

The project’s location in the Oroville Airport B1 and B2 overflight zones also requires an override of the inconsistency determination by the Butte County Airport Land Use 459
Item 27.

Page 2 ends

Commission (ALUC) for density. The density requirements in each zone are based on safety considerations supported by national crash statistics and noise contours. An override is a significant decision, so the state-mandated process for an override is lengthy and requires two 2/3 votes of the City Council at least 45 days apart.

It should also be noted that the Butte County Planning Commission at its June 22 meeting denied subdividing a nearby 22-acre parcel at Biggs and 18th Street into 110- unit single family lots solely because some of the housing was under the B2 overflight zone.

The current General Plan and zoning designation of ABP was created long ago when the city envisioned a modern industrial and research park surrounding the Airport. That vision started in the 1980’s with the attraction of Spectra Physics1 and several government office users. Now, due to the statewide housing shortage compounded locally by the nearby wildfires and spillway peril, there is much more pressure to build housing and very little demand for industrial or research space. This project would only use 45 of the 270 acres zoned ABP and would not threaten that original vision.

The Planning Commission reviewed the project at its June 22, 2023 meeting, and voted 6-0 to recommend an override of the ALUC’s inconsistency determination and approval of the project. The Planning Commission also approved Variance VAR 23-01, subject to the Council’s approval of the project.

Pages 3-17 of the attached June 22 Planning Commission staff report discuss in detail:

1. The required approvals:
a. EIR Certification with Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
b. General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01.
c. Zone Change ZC 23-01.
d. An Override of the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission’s September 21, 2022, inconsistency determination.
e. Variance VAR23-01 (by the Planning Commission)
f. Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01

2. The project’s three significant and unavoidable environmental impacts:
a. Residential density in the Airport’s area of influence. The proposed project with a density of 3.8 homes per acre is more than the allowed 1 home per 10 acres in the B1 Zone and 1 home per 5 acres in the B2 Zone. b. Noise increase from ground activity. The project would increase ambient noise levels by more than 5 decibels -- the city’s CEQA noise significance threshold. However, ambient noise levels would still be under 48 decibels and classified as “Quiet Urban Daytime”. Ambient noise will need to exceed 65 decibels to be of concern.
c. Greenhouse gas emissions from Vehicle Miles Traveled. The project will generate 26.7 home based trips per resident, which is 140% of Oroville’s average of 19.1 trips per day per resident. State law has determined that

1 Spectra Physics was a high tech firm based in the Bay Area, which built the facility now occupied by the Northwest Lineman College.
460
Item 27.

Page 3 ends

any project exceeding 85% of the average must be considered significant under CEQA. 85% of 19.1 is 16.2 trips per day per resident.

3. The need for market rate housing. The recently certified Housing Element concludes that Oroville needs at least 375 new market rate units before 2030.

This project would supply almost half that need.

4. The Airport -- it’s importance to the city and the region, and what safety and operational effects the project may have. Staff have concluded that there will not likely be any significant effect on airport safety, operations, or its ability to expand. Nor will the public be exposed to excessive noise and safety hazards.

FISCAL IMPACT
None. The project is subject to all customary fees.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following actions:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing on the proposed project.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 9151 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY

COUNCIL MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS, REQUIRING CERTAIN

MITIGATION MEASURES, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THOSE SIGNIFICANT AND
UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FEATHER RANCH EIR.

3. Certify the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Report

4. Adopt Resolution No. 9152 - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY

COUNCIL TO NOTIFY THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE

COMMISSION AND THE STATE DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS OF THE CITY’S INTENTION TO FIND THAT THE PROPOSED FEATHER RANCH

SUBDIVISION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE

AERONAUTICS ACT AND TO OVERRULE THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION’S INCONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR
OROVILLE AIRPORT.

5. Adopt Resolution No. 9153 -- A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA 23-01 AND
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TSM 22-01 FOR THE PROPOSED

FEATHER RANCH SUBDIVISION AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS TO THAT EFFECT.

6. Waive First Reading And Approve ORDINANCE 1873 -- AN ORDINANCE

OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE APPROVING ZONING CHANGE ZC 23-01 TO REZONE ONE PARCEL OF APPROXIMATELY 45 ACRES OF LAND (APN 030-230-098) FROM AIRPORT BUSINESS PARKAIRPORT INFLUENCE OVERLAY (APB--AIO) TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ONCE TENTATIVE MAP TSM 22-01 FOR THE
461
Item 27.

Page 4 ends

PROPOSED FEATHER RANCH SUBDIVISION IS APPROVED.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Tentative Map TSM 22-01

2. Planning Commission June 22 staff report with:
a. Resolution P2023-16 for Variance approval
b. Engineers Report for TSM 22-01
c. Draft Project Approval with conditions for TSM 22-01 d. DEIR
e. FEIR
f. Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program

3. Resolution 9151 with findings, Statement of overriding considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan;

4. Resolution 9152 for ALUCP override.

5. Resolution 9153 for GPA23-01 & TSM 22-01 approvals

6. Draft Ordinance 1873 for Zoning Change ZC 23-01—First Reading 462
Item 27.
463
Item 27.
464
Item 27.
465
Item 27.
466
Item 27.
467
Item 27.
1 City of Oroville

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2430 FAX (530) 538-2426
www.cityoforoville.org
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Thursday, June 22, 2023 RE: Feather Ranch Subdivision, including a General Plan Amendment (GPA 23-01), Zoning Change (ZC 23-01), Variance VAR23-01, Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM 22-01), and an Override of the Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination.

SUMMARY: The Oroville Planning Commission will review and consider recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01, and the override of the Airport Land Use Commission inconsistency determination at a +-45 Acre parcel identified as APN 030-230-098 off 20th Street between Feather Avenue and Biggs Avenue.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following actions:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing on the proposed project.

2. Adopt Resolution No. P2023-14 recommending that the City Council certify the adequacy of the Final EIR, make certain findings regarding environmental effects and mitigation measures, adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

3. Adopt Resolution No. P2023-15 recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, approve the Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01, and make certain findings to that effect.

4. Adopt Resolution P2303-16 to approve Variance VAR23-01 to allow development at a density greater than that allowed in OMC 17.44.050 (AIA-O), subject to the relevant Council approvals, and make certain findings to that effect.

5. Adopt Resolution No. P2023-13 recommending that the City Council override the Airport Land Use Commission’s determination of “not consistent” with the ALUCP and make certain findings to that effect.

APPLICANT: MD3 Investments
LOCATION: APN 030-230-098, west of
20th Street between Feather Avenue and
Biggs Avenue
GENERAL PLAN: ABP (Airport Business Park)
ZONING: ABP (Airport Business Park)
FLOOD ZONE: Zone X
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: An Environment Impact Report was prepared pursuant to Section 15120 of Title 14, California Code of Regulations. 60 Item 4.
468
Item 27.
2 SUMMARY
The Planning Commission may consider approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map that would create 172 new market-rate housing units, a much-needed housing type for the City. MD3 Investments has applied to convert 45 acres that are currently zoned Airport Business Park (ABP) into 172 single family lots averaging 7,450 square feet in size.

This project decision requires the Planning Commission and City Council to balance the objectives of safety and noise, airport operations, and economic prosperity including the need for more housing – all important considerations for Oroville’s citizenry.

Approval requires a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Change, and a Zoning Code Variance. Because the project is discretionary and may create significant impacts, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Due to the significant and unavoidable environmental effects identified in the EIR, CEQA requires the City Council to approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations if it ultimately approves the project.

The project’s location in the B1 and B2 overflight zones also requires an override of the inconsistency determination by the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for density. The density requirements in each zone are based on safety considerations supported by national crash statistics and noise. An override is a significant event, so the state-mandated process for an override is lengthy and requires two 2/3 votes of the City Council at least 45 days apart.

1 Spectra Physics was a high tech firm based in the Bay Area, which built the facility now occupied by the Northwest Lineman College.

REPORT PREPARED BY:
___________________________
Wes Ervin, Principal Planner
Community Development Department
REVIEWED BY:
___________________________
Dawn Nevers, Assistant Director
Community Development Department
61 Item 4.
469
Item 27.
3 DETAILED DISCUSSION
MD3 Investments is proposing to subdivide and develop a 44.97-acre vacant and undeveloped parcel (APN 030-230-098) into 172 single-family detached residential lots immediately west of 20th Street with access points off Feather Avenue, Biggs Avenue, and 20th Street. The homes and streets would be developed on approximately 40.197 acres, with a 0.95-acre (41,332 s.f.) passive open space at the southwest corner of Feather Avenue and 20th Street, and a meandering multi-use path along the central roadway (Gentle Rain Lane) of the subdivision.

Required Approvals
Required approvals include a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, a Variance, a Tentative Subdivision Map, and an overrule of the Airport Land Use Commission’s determination of Inconsistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01
The current General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Airport Business Park (ABP). The purpose of this land use designation is to allow for “light manufacturing, limited industrial, food processing, wholesale trade and offices” with limited retail and public assembly users to “provide for business and commercial opportunities that will neither be detrimental to the airport’s growth, efficiency and safety nor create substantial conflict with the development of other industrial lands in the city….” To allow for single-family residential construction, the Council must amend the General Plan to change the Land Use Designation from ABP to Medium Low Density Residential (MLDR). This designation would allow between 3 to 6 units per acre. This designation is identical to the neighboring Calle Vista subdivision to the east, and the parcels to the north across Feather Avenue. The tentative subdivision map proposes 172 parcels on an approximately 45 acres parcel for a project density of 3.82 units per acre, within the allowed density for the MLDR land use designation.

Over 172 acres of ABP land within city limits remain vacant or underutilized with no foreseeable buildout of these parcels. Staff continues to support the location and development of compatible industrial and office users within the ABP. However, with low industrial land absorption, much of the ABP will likely remain vacant through the rest of the 2030 General Plan planning horizon and beyond. A General Plan Amendment and Zoning Change to facilitate residential development on this 45-acre parcel should not adversely affect future industrial or office development opportunities within the ABP. Staff does not recommend allowing housing any closer to the airport than this. 62 Item 4.
470
Item 27.
4 Zoning Change ZC 23-01
The current zoning of the site is Airport Business Park (ABP). A zoning change from ABP to single-family residential (R-1) is needed to permit single-family residential development and correspond with the underlying General Plan Amendment to MLDR. This zoning change would match the zoning of the neighboring Calle Vista subdivision and the approved Village at Ruddy Creek subdivision further to the east. The minimum lot size for R-1 zoning is 5,000 s.f. for interior lots and 6,000 s.f. for corner lots. As proposed, the average lot size of the parcels within the subdivision will be 7,450 s.f.

Zoning Code Variance for Project Density
Once the Zoning Change is approved, Oroville’s Airport Influence Overlay Code

17.44.050, including Table 17.44.050, has several density restrictions for Overflight Zones B1 and B2 2: the restrictions are identical to the ALUCP’s restrictions. Therefore, if the Council overrides the ALUC consistency determination, they should also grant a corresponding variance to the project.

Residential density: This residential project is proposed at a gross density of 3.82 units per acre, which exceeds the maximum allowable 0.1 and 0.2 units per acre in the B1 & B2 Overflight zones respectively.

Open land requirements: The 30% and 20% open land requirements in Table 17.44.050 are not met. Open land is about 3.5 acres3including Gentle Rain Lane and the 0.95-acre Lot A set-aside, or about 8% of the entire property. The other streets do not qualify for size because of their widths.

Population density: Regarding population density, the project equates to an average gross population density of 430 people4 at 9.56 persons per acre, and an average singleacre density of 10.3 persons per acre. These residential concentrations are lower than would be allowed under the current ABP Zone for non-residential uses The required findings for a variance can be found later in this staff report.

Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01
The proposed map will subdivide the existing single parcel into 172 single-family detached residential lots. Lots would range in size from 6,600 s.f. up to 8,700 s.f.. The proposed subdivision is currently planned for development in three phases, with Phase 1 consisting of 68 lots, Phase 2 with 58 lots, and Phase 3 with the remaining 46 lots.

Among the project conditions is the requirement for Parkland dedication per OMC

16.16.185. The 172-unit project, with an estimated 500 residents @ 2.3 residents per

2 The densities in the Airport Influence Area Overlay Ordinance are identical to the adopted Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
3 Average lot size in the Tentative map is 7,450 square feet, equating to 29.4 acres of residential land, or 65.3% of the total acreage. Most streets are under 75’ wide, too narrow to qualify as open land in the Overlay Zone, but Gentle Rain Lane is wide enough as long as future streetlights and street trees provide at least a 75-foot width without any obstructions over 4 feet high. Gentle Rain Lane consists of about 2.5 acres of land. 4 Oroville has an average of 2.5 persons per household in 2021, per the recently Certified Oroville 2022-2030 Housing Element, Page 172.
63 Item 4.
471
Item 27.
5 household, will be required to dedicate 2.5 acres of parkland or pay an in-lieu fee.

Discussions are ongoing between applicant, the city, and Feather River Recreation and Park District.

ALUCP Override
If the Council approves the proposed project, it must also override the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency with the ALUCP. See below for a detailed discussion of that decision.

Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
The project’s discretionary approvals triggered CEQA, which requires an EIR to be prepared if a project may have significant environmental impacts. ECORP Consulting of Chico completed the Initial Study in October 2022, which identified 15 potentially significant impacts5. The City circulated a notice of Preparation (NOP) for 30 days between November 1, 2022 and December 2, 2022, which gave agencies, citizens, and Native Tribes an opportunity to comment on the impacts which the EIR should study.

ECORP completed the DEIR, which was circulated for public review beginning on April 15, 2023 with comment ending on May 30, 2023. The DEIR concludes that all impacts would be less than significant by avoidance or mitigation measures, except:
 Hazards related to airport safety. The project could result in a safety hazard or excessive noise to people residing or working in the project area. This significant and unavoidable impact is due to the project’s location under the B1 and B2 overflight zones north of Oroville Airport. The project’s location and density exceeds those allowed by the Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, is not consistent with Safety Policy 5.1 of the General Plan, and does not comply with Oroville Municipal Code 17.44.050 (AIA-O). These impacts are discussed in detail below.
 Noise related to traffic—not aircraft. The noise generated by traffic from the project’s operations will increase ambient noise levels by more than 5 decibels in two segments of 20th Street and one of Feather Avenue6. This is a technical violation of Oroville’s CEQA significance threshold. The ambient decibel level in these locations after the project is built will remain at or below 48 decibels. In spite of the technical threshold exceedance, these locations will continue as they are, an area of “Quiet Urban Daytime”7. Noise related to aircraft is discussed below.  Traffic related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The project would generate 120

5 The potential significant effects in the Initial Study included air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise, paleontological resources, population and housing, public services, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, and mandatory findings of significance.
6 Page 3.9-21 of the DEIR
7 Page 3.9-2 of the DEIR.
64 Item 4.
472
Item 27.
6 trips distributed among 20th, 18th, Feather, and Biggs during the A.M peak hour, and 162 trips during the P.M. peak hour. This equates 26.7 home-based trips per resident, or 140 percent of the current Oroville baseline average of 19.1 trips per resident. Since this trip generation exceeds the state mandated CEQA significance threshold of 85% of baseline (or 16.2 trips per resident), the impact is significant by definition. Oroville cannot mitigate this impact with enough transit, bike and walking paths in this rural location, so it remains significant8.

One of the key Mitigation measures in the DEIR is a recommendation to add a right turn lane on southbound 20th street at SR 162 to limit stacking by the 31 or so peak A.M. vehicles which would turn left onto SR162 from 20th street. The applicant has agreed to do so.

DEIR Comments Received by May 30
As of May 30, 2023, three comments were received, including:
 Caltrans Division of Aeronautics. The letter recommends Alternative 3 in the DEIR, which is within the density limits of the ALUCP. Otherwise recommends not approving the override or the General Plan Amendment. Notes that the need for housing does not
 A phone call from Patrick Waller of the California Pilot’s Association. Mr. Waller wanted to know more about the project and stated that the Association had no position on the project, but that some local pilots may. He stated that he knew of several airports with housing closer to the runway than this proposed subdivision.  Ted Runge, a neighbor, asked if his land could also be included in the General Plan amendment. He says he owns two 5-acre parcels immediately south of the project. Staff would oppose housing any closer to the airport than the project area.

These comments have been incorporated into the Final EIR.

Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
The FEIR includes any changes to the DEIR as a result of comments received. No changes to the DEIR are considered necessary. An EIR can be certified if (1) it shows a good faith effort at full disclosure of environmental information, and (2) it provide sufficient analysis to allow decisions to be made regarding the project in contemplation of its environmental consequences.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP)
Table ES-1 of the FEIR contains a summary of proposed mitigation measures to render effects insignificant that would otherwise have been significant. All mitigation measures will be included in the final MMRRP required as conditions of approval.

Statement of Overriding Considerations
As noted above, three environmental effects are considered significant, unavoidable and potentially adverse project-specific effects that cannot be mitigated to levels of

8 Oroville is currently in the process of establishing its own CEQA VMT thresholds that is more suited to our rural/semi-rural environment.
65 Item 4.
473
Item 27.
7 insignificance by the adoption of mitigation measures. If the City Council approves the project, the Council must also find that these impacts will be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible but would remain significant and unavoidable. The Council would need to make findings and prepare a statement of overriding considerations that specific economic, social, or other benefits support the approval of the proposed project.

The Importance of the Project Towards Housing Needs
For the 6th Cycle Housing Element for the 2022-2030 Planning Period, the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for above-moderate income is 375 housing units. This proposed development will assist the city in facilitating the production of housing as our region and state experience a critical housing shortage. Assuming all homes are built at an above-moderate income level, this proposed development would provide 46% of the units needed out of the allocated 375 units. For comparison, during the 5th Cycle Housing Element for the 2014-2022 Planning Period, 250 units of above-moderate income housing were produced within the city out of an allocated 784 units, only 31.9% of the need.

The Vision Statement of the General Plan states that “Oroville residents will have a choice of housing to best suit their individual lifestyles,” with the goals, actions, and policies of the Land Use Element and Open Space, Natural Resources and Conservation Element further affirming the need to provide a jobs-to-housing balance within the City. According to the Butte County Association of Governments 6th Cycle RHNA Plan published December 2020, Oroville has a jobs-to-housing balance of 1.74. A typical target relationship between jobs and housing is between 1.3 and 1.6 jobs for every one housing unit, meaning that Oroville has an excess of jobs and not enough housing. Given the immense local need for housing, this project as designed with the number of units proposed is a desirable product for the city, which will help ensure the sustainable growth of the city and will provide a critical housing option within the community.

Lastly, Butte County and the vicinity have experienced several recent fires, which eliminated thousands of homes in Paradise and several unincorporated towns. The housing loss created an instant and urgent need for housing in Oroville and nearby.

Paradise is being rebuilt but will not recover its former housing inventory for decades.

This project should help soften some of the strong regional demand, find some permanent housing for displaced residents, and encourage some to return to the area after expatriating. Anticipated employment gains from the Oroville Hospital expansion and new industrial and commercial development will need more local housing options.

Economic Importance of the Airport to the city
Business activity, employment, sales and investment at the airport are considerable and make up a significant portion of local employment, property and sales tax revenues. It is therefore in the best interest of the city to keep the airport and its vicinity active and unimpeded. This includes the airport itself within the fence, and the industrial surroundings which employ hundreds of local workers. Many of these establishments use the airport for flights in and out during regular business operations. In addition, about 30 aircraft are permanently based there, with the attendant property tax and fuel 66 Item 4.
474
Item 27.
8 sales. A new helicopter and fixed wing repair facility (Fixed Base Operator) is an indication that the airport is getting more attention from the flying community.

Safety and Noise – Possible Override of the Airport Land Use Commission’s Determination of Inconsistency
The property falls within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) compatibility zone B1 and B2, adopted by the ALUC on November 15, 2017. The purpose of this plan is to promote compatibility with the airport and surrounding land uses. Compatibility zone B1 is generally set to encompass the airport’s projected 55 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Compatibility zone B2 encompasses the close-in, low altitude portions of traffic patterns. Much of the neighboring Calle Vista Estates subdivision also falls within these same compatibility zone classifications.

As required by the ALUCP and Section 21676(b) of the Public Utilities Code the project Figure 1 – Airport Compatibility Zone Map with Site
67 Item 4.
475
Item 27.
9 applicant submitted the project to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the ALUCP. The ALUC conducted a hearing on the matter on September 21, 2022, and voted 7-0 -1
9 to find the project inconsistent with the ALUCP based on the project density.

Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676, the City Council may choose to override the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency by following a two-step process.

The first step is to conduct a public hearing to adopt a resolution of intent to override, a copy of which would be sent to the ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics to provide formal notification of the City’s intent.

The second step in the process is that at least 45-days after notification has been sent to the ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics, the City Council may conduct a second public hearing to consider adopting a resolution to override the ALUC. At this second public hearing the City Council may also consider the project entitlement and take final action on the application.

The following points are important to consider:
 The override must be adopted by two-thirds (2/3) of the City Council.  Specific findings supported by substantial evidence must be adopted finding that the proposed project will not:
o Impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport. o Adversely affect the utility or capacity of the airport (such as by reducing instrument approach procedure minimums); or
o Expose the public to excessive noise and safety hazards.

Public Utilities Code Section 21678 and the ALUCP statutes states that if the city overrules the ALUC, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the City’s decision to overrule the ALUC’s compatibility determination or recommendation.

Airport Land use Compatibility Plan Density
Compatibility zone B1 has a maximum density of 0.1 dwelling units per acre and compatibility zone B2 has maximum density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre. The General Plan Amendment to MLDR has an allowable density range of 3 to 6 units per acre and the project is proposing 172 parcels on approximately 45 acres for a project density of

3.82 units per acre. The ALUCP Section 3.4.5 establishes criteria for determining the density of sites split by two or more compatibility zones. The portions of the property that fall within compatibility zone B1 are considered to be a separate site from the portions of the property that fall within compatibility zone B2.

According to the ALUC staff report, approximately 35.82 acres and a proposed 134 dwelling units fall within compatibility zone B1, for a density of 3.74 units per acre.

9 The vote was unanimous with one Commissioner recused himself since he lives very near the project area.
68 Item 4.
476
Item 27.
10 Approximately 9.15 acres and a proposed 38 dwelling units fall within compatibility zone B2, for a density of 4.15 units per acre. The ALUC consistency review listed five inconsistency findings for the project:

1. The MLDR General Plan Land Use Designation of up to 6 dwelling units (lots) per acre is inconsistent with the B1 maximum density of 0.1 dwelling units per acre and B2 maximum density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre.

2. The R-1 zoning allows up 6 dwelling units (lots) per acre is inconsistent with the B1 maximum density of 0.1 dwelling units per acre and B2 maximum density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre.

3. The project’s proposed density of 3.74 dwelling units per acre is inconsistent with the B1 Compatibility Zone density (0.1 or more dwelling units per acre).

4. The project’s proposed density of 4.15 dwelling units per acre is inconsistent with the B2 Compatibility Zone density (0.2 dwelling units per acre).

5. Most of the parcel (approximately 80%) is in the B1 Compatibility Zone. The B2 Compatibility Zone portion does not have 65% of the project site within B2 Compatibility Zone with equal to, or greater than, the proposed project. The project does not meet the criteria for infill.

The City’s 2030 General Plan Safety Element Goal SAF-5, Policy P5.2 states “Protect the Overflight Zone by limiting residential densities to a maximum of six units per gross acre, with proposals consisting of four units per gross acre or more subject to Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) review. Schools and other uses resulting in “large concentrations” of people shall be prohibited.” The development proposal complies with the goals and policies of the General Plan for residential densities.

The project site is adjacent to an existing residential development to the east (Calle Vista Estates), which has a General Plan Land Use Designation of MLDR and zoning designation of R-1, identical to what is being proposed for this subdivision. In addition, the Calle Vista subdivision also falls within compatibility zones B1 and B2 and is located within the extended runway centerline zone. The ALUCP states that 30% of the land within the B1 compatibility zone, and 20% of the land within the B2 compatibility zone, should remain as open land. Approximately 240 acres of open undeveloped space is provided in the B1 compatibility zone north of the airport along runways 2-20 and 13-31.

The project site has 35.82 acres within compatibility zone B1 that is proposed for development. Not counting the open space, parkland, and roads proposed for development within the subdivision, approximately 78% of the overall B1 zone would remain as undeveloped open space. Much of that land area is closest to the runways along SR 162.

Approximately 433 acres of land fall within the B2 compatibility zone north of the airport along runways 2-20 and 13-31. The project site has 9.15 acres within compatibility zone B2 that is proposed for development. Not counting open space, parkland, and roads proposed for development within the subdivision, approximately 70% of the overall B2 zone would remain as undeveloped open space.

Since the neighboring Calle Vista Estates subdivision was approved in 2005/2006, the ALUC adopted a new ALUCP in 2017 which significantly increased the footprint of the B1 69 Item 4.
477
Item 27.
11 and B2 compatibility zones to now include the Calle Vista Subdivision. However, no corresponding increases to airport operations have occurred and air traffic is still below projected figures.

Aircraft Operations10 at the Airport:

The City’s Airport Master Plan prepared in 1990 showed about 55,000 annual aircraft operations in 1988 and projected a steady increase in operations from 61,050 in 1989 to 72,200 in 2010. Many of the historic aircraft operations were a result of the Louisiana Pacific Company Fleet, which is no longer operating in Oroville. As such, an increase in operations has not occurred as projected, and recent data in fact shows significantly fewer actual operations. In January 2016, the airport reported approximately 36,500 annual operations, a decrease from historic levels. According to AirNav, aircraft operations averaged 99/day for a 12-month period ending November 30, 2021. This is the same as reported in 201611.

Oroville Airport is fortunate to have very recent 2022 Annual flight data, collected by sensors/cameras at the airport. This information does not include all flights, only those who activate their transponders. However, a 2019 study estimated that 44 percent of pilots nationwide do not yet have the mandatory transponders installed in their planes12.

10 An operation is either a takeoff or landing. For instance, if a pilot performs a “touch and go”, that counts as two operations.
11 AirNav uses data provided by airports, which in Oroville had not been updated since 2016. Since there is an expense involved in gathering actual flight data, it is common for small general aviation airports to have older data which tends to over-report actual operations. 12 https://generalaviationnews.com/2019/09/19/only-44-of-ga-aircraft-equipped-with-ads-b/ 70 Item 4.
478
Item 27.
12 Table 1
It should be noted that during emergency conditions, such as fires, evacuations, and other crises, airport operations increase significantly for selected periods of time. This was true during the fires in 2018 and after. The airport was actively used as a helicopter staging area for emergency operations.

Flight pattern on Runway 2-20: As the above data show, most flights to and from Runway 2-20 occur to the South, with only 7%, or no more than ~615 per year on Runway 2. Only some of these are straight out departures or straight in approaches over the proposed Feather Ranch Subdivision and the existing Calle Vista Subdivision. At a Cessna 172’s climb rate of 721 feet per minute, any departing small single engine plane under average temperature and wind conditions would be about 400 feet above ground by the time it reached the first house13. Furthermore, any pilot who encounters engine trouble or other adverse conditions should have ample time to veer leftward to avoid flying over either subdivision.

13 https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43394/is-it-possible-to-calculate-the-distance-to-climb-to1000-ft-in-cessna-172s Date range 1-1-22 thru 12-30/22
Number of operations counted in cy 2022 4,665 tansponder flights Aircraft type single prop 3,782 81.1%
multi prop 404 8.7%
jet 70 1.5%
helicopter 386 8.3%
UAV 2 0.0%
unknown 21 0.5%
4,665 100.0%
arrivals departures
Runway 2 going north @ 6020' 343 7.4% 239 104
20 going south @ 6020' 1,151 24.7% 553 598
13 going north@ 3540' 918 19.7% 554 364
31 going south @ 3540' 629 13.5% 385 244
subtotal 3,041 65.2%
unspecified 1,624 34.8% 563 1,061
4,665 100% 49% 51%
add 44% non-transponder flights 2,053 single engine, older planes, pioneers Estimated Total operations per year 6,718 estimated annual operations at KOVE Max annual flights
northbound over Feather
Ranch 614
Estimated flights straight out 307 50% or less
max flights per day over subdivisions 2 arrivals and departures OROVILLE AIRPORT OPERATIONS IN 2022
71 Item 4.
479
Item 27.
13 above private property north of State Route 162,” which will minimize constraints to development of the land to the north.

Prevailing winds are from the SSE, which is another reason most flights land and take off southward, into the wind.14
Aircraft Accident Occurrence:

The Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, which was created by the State of California, Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics to serve as the primary tool for use by ALUC’s for airport and use planning indicates that accidents in which aircraft are under control are bunched relatively close to the runway ends—mostly within about 3,000 feet—both for arrivals and departures. Aircraft overflight of the site for both approaching or departing the airport will likely result from air traffic coming from Runway 2-20. The project site is located more than 4,000 feet from the nearest point of the airport runway. The areas within these 3,000 feet proximity to the north of the airport are largely undeveloped lands zoned ABP closest to SR162, and to the south of the airport is perpetual open space provided by the Thermalito Afterbay and Oroville Wildlife Refuge.

The RNAV15 for the airport lists a restriction not authorizing circling northeast of Runway 13-3116. In addition, takeoff minimums and departing procedures for the airport require air traffic to turn away from the more developed areas northeast of the airport with climbing left turns from Runways 2 and 31 and climbing right turns from Runways 13 and

20. Aircraft Noise
While noise was not found to be inconsistent with the ALUCP, the city’s General Plan, zoning code, and the ALUCP establish regulations and criteria for noise within compatibility zones that is relevant to this project. As previously mentioned, within compatibility zone B1, the airport’s projected Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is 55 decibels (dBA). This CNEL system evaluates the degree to which lands around the airport are exposed to airport-related noise depicted by a set of contours. Generally, the maximum CNEL normally acceptable for residential uses in the vicinity of an airport is 60 dBA.

New structures located within compatibility zones B1 and B2 are required to incorporate sound attenuation design features sufficient to meet the interior noise level criteria of no greater than CNEL 45 dBA. As depicted in Figure 6-4 of the ALCUP, the subject property falls just outside of the 55 dBA CNEL contour based on 72,000 future annual aircraft operations. In addition, because the subject property falls within compatibility zones B1 and B2, all dwelling units constructed will be required to be designed to provide an interior ambient noise level that does not exceed 45 dBA. City Code Section 17.44.050 requires a minimum interior ambient noise level reduction of 20 dBA (ex. 65 dB exterior – 20 dB sound attenuation = 45 dB interior ambient noise level). Furthermore, OMC 17.44.050 requires a deed notice of airport proximity and the potential for aircraft overflights and

14 Oroville Airport Airport Layout Plan Sheet 3 of 9 dated April 16, 2013. 15 http://www.airnav.com/airport/kove and https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2305/SW2TO.PDF 16 To turn right (northeast) from that runway is in direct conflict with the established traffic pattern. 72 Item 4.
480
Item 27.
14 noise for each property.

ALUC Override Conclusion
The project is consistent with the ALUCP for noise and for height restrictions, but not density. Because most aircraft accidents occur on landing and takeoff and relatively few during climbing or descent17, and because pilots are advised in Oroville’s AirNav posting to veer away from housing north of the airport, staff do not consider the risk of aircraft accidents over either the existing or proposed subdivisions to be considerable enough to warrant denial of the project. Additionally, noise attenuation for homes to an internal noise level of 45dBa will be a project condition.

Given the analysis above, the project does not appear to impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport, adversely affect the utility or capacity of the airport (such as by

17 https://www.cliffordlaw.com/aviation-accidents-and-incidents/ Figure 2 – Airport CNEL dB Contour Lines
73 Item 4.
481
Item 27.
15 reducing instrument approach procedure minimums), or expose the public to excessive noise and safety hazards based on the aforementioned information and the proposed conditions of approval on the project.

General Plan Consistency
As previously mentioned, the project is inconsistent with the following General Plan policy:
 Safety Element Policy 5.1, which requires consistency with the ALUCP. This exception will be addressed if the Council approves the proposed ALUCP Override, the proposed Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Variance.

However, the project will further implement the following goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan:

From the Vision Statement:
 New residential growth, whatever the size or location, will be carefully regulated by the City and will be required to meet high standards for quality, appearance and integration with existing neighborhoods.

From the Guiding Principles:
 Ensure that future development enhances the existing character of our city as a whole, as well as its individual neighborhoods, and has a positive effect on our surroundings and quality of life.
 Enhance recreational opportunities and facilities in Oroville for local residents and visitors.

From the Community Design Element (Principles):
 Block, Street, and Building. At this scale, the details of the built environment— defined both by architectural and landscaping details—are proportioned to the scale of a pedestrian. Block dimensions and building designs place equal emphasis on pedestrian and vehicular uses. These more detailed design principles are addressed in Oroville’s Development Code and Design Guidelines.
 High-Quality Development. All types of development that follows smart growth principles can enhance the character of a neighborhood. In a smart growth neighborhood, retail buildings are located adjacent to sidewalks, framing the street’s public space and encouraging people to walk from shop to shop. They include architectural details that make the buildings more attractive and more compatible with the surrounding development. Single-family houses emphasize the front door frontage to the street rather than garages, and apartment buildings use varied building forms to give a sense of the individual dwelling units they contain. In addition, all types of development incorporate the 74 Item 4.
482
Item 27.
16 principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) by delineating private and public spaces, enhancing visibility, controlling property access, and ensuring adequate property maintenance.

From the Community Design Element (Goals, Policies, and Actions):
 Require compliance with the City of Oroville Design Guidelines as part of any project approval process.
 Encourage livable street design standards for new roadway development and for improvements or rehabilitation of existing roadways. Livable Street Design Standards for Arterials, Commercial Collectors, Residential Collectors and Local Streets are illustrated in Figure CD-2 and Figure CD-3.  New residential development shall reflect the human scale and pedestrianoriented character of existing neighborhoods in Oroville.

From the Circulation and Transportation Element (Goals, Policies, and Actions):
 New development shall ensure that safe and efficient emergency vehicle access is provided.
 Ensure the safe and convenient movement of pedestrians throughout the City and within neighborhoods.
 Design public and private facilities to aid and encourage pedestrian activity.  Require installation of sidewalks and/or walking paths along all city streets in newly developing areas.
 New development in Oroville will encourage pedestrian accessibility and facilitate the use of non-automobile forms of transportation.  New development shall meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
 Acquire and/or require dedication of an aviation easement within the Overflight and Extended Runway Centerline (ERC) zone, as a condition of subdivision approval.

From the Safety Element, Airport Operations (Goals, Policies, and Actions):
 Protect the Overflight Zone by limiting residential densities to a maximum of six units per gross acre, with proposals consisting of four units per gross acre or more subject to Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) review. Schools and other uses resulting in “large concentrations” of people shall be prohibited.

From the Noise Element (Goals, Policies, and Actions):
 Include noise considerations in land use planning, transportation planning and project design decisions.
 When considering development proposals in the environs of the Oroville Municipal Airport, enforce the noise compatibility criteria and policies set forth in the adopted Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. This includes restricting the development of residential or other noise sensitive receptor uses 75 Item 4.
483
Item 27.
17 within the 55 dB CNEL noise contour around the Oroville Municipal Airport.

From the Housing Element:
 Goal 1: Increase the availability of permanent housing for all community residents.
o Policy 1.1: Encourage home ownership.
 Goal 3: Support and encourage the construction of new housing at a range of costs, types, and tenures and in quantities to meet the needs of all income groups, including the very low-, low and moderate-income groups.

Required Findings for TSM, Variance, and ALUCP Override Required Findings for the Tentative Subdivision Map:

Pursuant to OMC Section 16.12.020(D), the City Engineer has reviewed TSM 22-01 and has deemed the map complete. The required Engineer’s Report is attached.

Per OMC Section 16.12.020(F), the Planning Commission shall disapprove a tentative map if it determines that any of the following conditions apply:

1. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the general plan or applicable specific plans.

Assuming GPA 23-01 and ZC 23-01 are approved by the City Council, the subdivision will be consistent with the General Plan. There are no applicable specific plans encompassing this parcel.

2. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density or type of development, or for the physical infrastructure required to support that development.

The site is immediately adjacent to single-family residential development. The current land use designation and zoning of ABP anticipates higher intensity and density for manufacturing, processing, office, or other industrial user.

Infrastructure is available and adequately serving the similar residential development nearby and this project will be required to expand and/or improve the existing infrastructure to adequately serve the project.

3. The design of the land division or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

Pursuant to CEQA, an EIR was prepared for the project. The EIR confirms that there are three significant and unavoidable effects, including inconsistency with the Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, added traffic noise, and greenhouse gas effects from vehicle miles traveled. These impacts primarily relate to the human environment and not the natural environment. None of the project’s other effects will cause environmental damage to fish or wildlife or their habitat, being either not significant or mitigated to insignificance.

4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement is likely to cause 76 Item 4.
484
Item 27.
18 serious public health problems.

The subdivision was designed in accordance with Oroville Municipal Code requirements and consultation of the Oroville Design Guidelines for site design to preserve view sheds and natural features, provide development with outdoor activity options, and connectivity to surrounding neighborhoods. The design of the subdivision is similar to neighboring development that has not been shown to cause public health problems. The three significant impacts in the EIR are likely to cause serious public health problems. The development in the Airport overflight zone is about 4,000 feet from Runway 2 and the development would be less dense than is allowed under the current zoning. The traffic noise impact is technically significant and still generally in the “quiet urban daytime” range below dBA. The State-mandated VMT impacts are not mitigatable in this rural environment, but denying the project on urban VMT greenhouse gas emissions thresholds is not reasonable. The project-generated emissions would not be concentrated enough to cause serious public health problems.

5. A preliminary soils report or geological hazard report indicates adverse soil or geological conditions, and the subdivider has failed to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city engineer and planning commission that the conditions can be corrected.

The site has been shown to be safe to develop in the site’s soil types, and the City Engineer is satisfied with the findings of said report.

6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. However, the planning commission may approve an application if it finds that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.

There are no conflicting public easements. The subdivision will create new public and utility easements and improve to city standards three existing roadways (20th Street, Feather Ave and Biggs Ave) along the length of the project site.

7. The proposed subdivision violates the provisions of this Chapter and no exception has been granted.

The Engineer’s Report confirms that the proposed subdivision does not violate the provisions of this chapter and no exception has been granted.

8. The proposed subdivision violates any provision of the zoning code and no variance has been granted.

Should the City Council approve GPA 23-01 and ZC 23-01 and the proposed variance, the proposed subdivision will not violate any provisions of zoning code OMC 17.44.050 for density and open land requirements.

9. The proposed subdivision would violate any other city ordinance or any city code provision.
77 Item 4.
485
Item 27.
19 The proposed subdivision will not violate any other city ordinance or city code provision. Should the City Council adopt the override of the ALUCP determination and the variance, the proposed subdivision will comply with all applicable regulations and codes.

10.The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into a community sewer system would result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000 of the Water Code).

The Thermalito Sewer and Water (TWSD) Agency, which serves water and collects sewer discharges, is not operating under any corrective action or compliance orders.

Findings for the Variance:

As noted, the variance is a corresponding action by the City Council, which would be needed only if the Council approves the ALUC override. The planning commission shall grant a variance only upon finding all of the following, based on substantial evidence:
a. The granting of the variance is not inconsistent with the general plan or any applicable specific plan.

As noted above, the granting of the variance is inconsistent with Safety Element Policy 5.1. However, if the City Council overrides the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency with the ALUCP, that inconsistency will be moot.
b. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the land, building or use referred to in the application that do not generally apply to other land, buildings or uses in the same district.

This subdivision project would be reviewed the same as other nearby uses with the exceptional circumstance of being in the B1 and B2 overflight zones, which other nearby properties were not at the time of approval. If the City Council overrides the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency with the ALUCP, the Council should also grant the corresponding variance from OMC

17.44.050, whose text is identical to the ALUCP’s with regard to allowable densities.
c. The granting of the variance will not grant a special privilege to the property.

The granting of the variance will not grant a special privilege. If granted, all subsequent development will be reviewed and conditioned exactly as all other subdivisions throughout the city of Oroville.
78 Item 4.
486
Item 27.
20 d. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zoning district, and that would otherwise be denied to the property in question.

The variance would convey the same property rights – i.e. a subdivision entitlement -- as those previously enjoyed by adjacent and nearby properties including the Calle Vista and Ruddy Creek subdivisions, and including the proposed Grand Acres subdivision immediately to the north of this project.

Without the variance, the project would not be viable, and would be denied similar property rights already enjoyed by the neighboring properties. e. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare.

If the City Council grants the ALUC override, there are no detrimental safety or public welfare issues to consider.
f. The granting of the variance will not be injurious to, or incompatible with, any nearby property or improvements.

The project area is adjacent to and nearby several existing similar subdivisions, and would thus be compatible with many land uses in the surrounding area.

Findings for the ALUCP override
For an override of an inconsistency determination by the ALUC, specific findings supported by substantial evidence must be adopted finding that the proposed project will not:
 Impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport, The one-story homes and their distance at over 4,000 feet from the end of Runway 2 will not impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport, all of which will occur on airport property and South of SR 162. The ABP zoning of the lands north of SR162 and closer to the airport than this subdivision are already anticipated for future industrial development in the General Plan, and are thus assumed to also not affect any future airport expansion plans.  Adversely affect the utility or capacity of the airport (such as by reducing instrument approach procedure minimums) or affecting flight patterns.

Regarding exposing the public to excessive noise and safety hazards, because of the distance from Runway 2, the project is outside the airport’s 55 decibel noise contour. All new residential structures will be conditioned to be constructed to limit interior noise levels to a maximum of 45 decibels. All new homeowners will be required to acknowledge they are buying property within 2 miles of an airport, and to sign an avigation easement or other appropriate instrument authorizing plane flights over their properties.

FISCAL IMPACT
None. The project is subject to all customary fees.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Several notices about this project were distributed:
 A Notice of Preparation for the DEIR was sent on November 1, 2022, to the State Clearinghouse, and to all agencies and tribes and nearby property owners that may have an interest in the project and its environmental effects. The posting included posting at City Hall and on the city’s Web Site. Comments received are detailed in Table 1-3 on Page 1-5 of the DEIR.
 A public scoping meeting about the project and DEIR was conducted on November 17, 2022, in person and by Zoom.
 The DEIR was published for 45 days on April 15, 2023 with comment period ending May 30, 2023. The posting included the State Clearinghouse, to agencies who commented on the NOP, and to local property owners within 300 feet of the property. Comments received were detailed earlier in this staff report:
 A request for comments prior to the Planning Commission meeting was prepared and circulated to local and state agencies and surrounding property owners within 300 feet of the property. Additionally, the meeting date, time, and project description were published in the Oroville Mercury Register and posted at City Hall.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Tentative Map and application materials

2. Resolution P2023-14 recommending EIR certification and Findings for Environmental effects with Statement of overriding considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan;
80 Item 4.
488
Item 27.
22 3. CEQA Findings

4. Resolution P2023-15 for GPA23-01 & ZC 23-01 & TSM 22-01 approvals

5. Resolution P2023-13 for ALUCP override recommendation.

6. Resolution P2023-16 for Variance approval

7. Engineers Report for TSM 22-01

8. Draft Conditional Project Approval for TSM 22-01

9. DEIR

10.FEIR with MMRP as Table ES-1

11.Draft Ordinance for Zoning Change ZC 23-01
81 Item 4.
489
Item 27.
82 Item 4.
490
Item 27.
83 Item 4.
491
Item 27.
84 Item 4.
492
Item 27.
85 Item 4.
493
Item 27.
86 Item 4.
494
Item 27.

W. GILBERT ENGINEERING
Civil Engineering/ Land Surveying
140 Yellowstone Drive, Suite 110 • Chico, CA 95973
Phone: (530) 809-1315 • Fax: (530) 588-9030
www.wgilbertengineering.com
July 26, 2022
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
Attn:

Subject:

Wes Irvin
Feather Ranch Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
(APN 030-230-098)
Dear Wes:

The following items are enclosed for use in determining the completeness of an application for The Feather Ranch Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map:
• Completed and signed Planning Division General Application • Completed and signed Tentative Map Application
• Completed and signed Zone Change/General Plan Amendment • Preliminary title report dated June 15, 2021
• Letter requesting waiver of preliminary soils investigation dated July 26, 2022 • Four (4) full-size copies and one (1) 11" by 17" copy of the Tentative Subdivision Map • Check made out in the amount of $16,212.37 for application fees.

Please review the attached information and return any comments to this office for processing. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Wesley 5Gilbert,P.E.

Preside, W.G. Civil Engineers, Inc.
dba W. Gilbert Engineering
Enclosures
Cc: MD3 Investments
P:\01 Project Folders\1575 -MD3 Subdivision\OEng\Correspondence\Tentative Map Application 072622.docx 87 Item 4.
495
Item 27.

LJUUOIJI EHVIU[IL. LJUJUOt J-T Tr-+IL-OLLD-LI)LHTUHIIH
City of Oroville
Planning Division - Community Development Department
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2430 FAX (530) 538-2426
www.citvoforoville.org
TRAKTT#:

PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL APPLICATION
(Please print clearly and fill in all that apply)
APPLICANT'S INFORMATION Project's: Engineer
Name: Alan Harlan Name: Wesley E. Gilbert
Address: 7614 N Fresno St. #102, Fresno CA 93720 Company: W. Gilbert Engineering Phone:
5593072148
Address: 140 Yellowstone Drive, Chico, CA 95973
Email: [email protected] Phone: (530) 809-1315
101
If applicant is Not the owner, please provide
Is the applicant the Owner? f o
s
wn
Ide
e
,
r tagent authorization on the reverse Email: [email protected] DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS & OTHER APPLICATIONS (Please check all that apply) I Annexation Landmark /Modification/Demolition Tentative Parcel Map _ Appeal Mining and Reclamation Plan ✓ Tentative Subdivision Map Development Review Pre-Application Use Permit
Final Map Residential Density Bonus Variance
✓ General Plan Amendment/Rezone Temporary Use Wireless Communication Facilities Landmark Designation Tentative Map Extension Zoning Clearance □ Other: (Please Specify) I ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS (Please check all that apply)
Adult Oriented Business Outdoor Storage Special Event
Home Occupation Outdoor Display & Sales Street Closure
Large Family Day Care Second Dwelling Unit Tree Removal □ Mobile Food Vendor Sign/Temporary Sign Permit
I Other: (Please Specify) J
*Please provide a letter addressed to the Planning Division with a detailed description for the proposed project. Please include any site plans, maps, aerials, photos, and other relevant information that will help us in processing your application. ** Anv time a set of plans is reauired, three (3) sets of drawings shall be submitted, unless otherwise directed.

PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name: Feather Ranch Subdivision Proposed Structure(s) (Sq Ft.): TBD Address: Feather Avenue Existing Structure(s) (Sq Ft.): None Nearest Cross Street: Feather Avenue and 20th Street Water Provider: Thermalito Water and Sewer Assessor Parcel Number: 030-230-098 School District: Oroville Unified School District Lot Size (Acres): 44.97 Number of Dwelling Units: 172

APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
I hereby certify that the information provided in this application is, to my knowledge, true and correct.

Signature:,2et
I Dae: [/21/2022
urrIGE USEONLY
General
I
ing / l I I •.·.
ins [
..

M I I I 1 Iini
88 Item 4.
496
Item 27.

LJUUOIJHI LIIV;IU[Jt IL, UJUOt-I Irr-+LHLUOELD-LI)Horrarr

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
To the City of Oroville, Department of Community Development NAME OF AGENT: Michael Stoltey PHONE NUMBER: (805) 710-7866 COMPANY NAME: MD3 Investments EMAIL: [email protected] ADDRESS: 893 Marsh Street CITY/ST/ZIP: San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 AGENT SIGNATURE:
•
[,7Mu 7"
daL"Shdl,
Is hereby authorized to process this application on my/our property, identified as Butte County Assessor Parcel Number (s):
030-230-098
This authorization allows representation for all applications, hearings, appeals, etc. and to sign all documents necessary for said processina, but not includina document (s) relatinq to record title interest.

Owner(s) of Record (sign and print name)
Alan Harlan
1) -----------
Print Name of Owner
7/21/2022
Date
2) ----=-----------
Print Name of Owner Signature of Owner Date
3) -----------
Print Name of Owner Signature of Owner Date
4) -----·------
Print Name of Owner
Alan Harlan
Signature of Owner
[email protected]
Owner's Mailing Address Owner's Email
Date
7-21-22
.................. , Owner's Phone #
The Community Development Department operates on a full cost recovery for processing of permits. Staff will charge their time and any expenses associated with processing the application against the initial deposit. Fees that have been captured for the reimbursement of City expenses are nonrefundable.

Technology cost recovery fees are non-refundable
89 Item 4.
497
Item 27.

LJUUUOIJI! EtIVIU[> IL. LU7UOUJ-I ITT-H+LILJOELD-LI)HUHIJrH City of Oroville
Planning Division - Community Development Department
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2430 FAX (530)
538-2426 www.cityoforoville.org
TRAKIT#:

TENTATIVE MAP APPLICATION
(Please print clearly and fill in/provide all that apply) REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION TYPE OF MAP • Please select all that apply:

DI Completed and signed Application Forms □ El Awtcanon Feet) Pata Tentative Parcel Map: $3,500.34 (Deposit) + $210.02
(6% Tech Fee) = $3,710.36
*Additional fees from the Fire Department and Public Works Division may apply for their review.

Tentative Subdivision Map: $4,041.06 (Deposit) + $242.46 (6% Tech Fee) = $4,283.52
□ Vesting Tentative Map: Same as Tentative Subdivision Map

MAP REQUIREMENTS
The tentative map shall be prepared in a manner acceptable to the city and shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor. The tentative map shall be clearly and legibly drawn and shall contain not less than the following unless requested and specifically waived by the department director:

Four (4) 24" x 36' copies, folded to 8"x11", and one (1) 8 ½" x 11" copies of the tentative map and grading plan prepared by a Registered civil engineer, drawn to scale and containing the following:
a. Name and address of property owner of record, subdivider and engineer. b. Project name, date prepared, north arrow, scale, and list of utility purveyors. c. Vicinity map.
d. Existing zoning and land use.
e. Existing topography, note contour interval of site to 100%, with 2 or 5 foot intervals for slopes greater than 10%.
f. Type, location, and drip line of existing trees over 8 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH). g. Location of existing structures, including wells and septic system, with notation "to remain" or "to be abandoned/ removed."
h. Location, width, and direction of flow of each water course and any area subject to water inundation. i. Location, width and name of existing streets, right-of-way or pavement. j. Widths, location and identity of all existing and proposed easements. k. Proposed street location, grade, centerline and radius of curves, pavement, right-of-way width and street names. Show typical sections of all streets.

I. Location and size of existing and proposed sanitary sewer mains, storm drains and fire hydrants. m. Lot layout and dimensions including parcel size.
n. Proposed lot grading, building pad elevation, top and toe of cut and fill slopes, and approximate location of street grades. Include a separate grading plan for subdivisions. o. Proposed trails, parks, school sites, and common areas for public or private use. p. Phasing sequence, if any.
q. The subdivider, or subdivider's designated agent, shall file a tentative parcel map application with the Zoning Administrator. The submitted material shall conform to the requirements of the Zoning Administrator as to form and content. Rules governing form and content shall conform to the requirements of Section 66445 of the Government Code and shall require enough information to ensure adequate consideration.
r. The subdivider shall specify any deviation from city standards and the justification for such deviation. s. The name or names of any geologist or soils engineer whose services were required in the preparation of the design of the tentative map.

Upon the written request of the subdivider, the department may waive any of the above tentative map requirements if the department determines that the type of subdivision does not justify compliance with these requirements, or if the department determines that other circumstances justify a waiver. The department may require other drawings, data, or information as deemed necessary by the department to accomplish the purposes ofthe Subdivision Map Act.

Vesting Tentative Maps are processed in the same manner as regular tentative maps with the exception that all discretionary approvals required prior to issuance of the construction permits must be obtained prior to action of the tentative map. Vesting maps must comply with City requirements and Subdivision Map Act requirements. A Vesting Map protects the right to develop and obtain building permit(s) even if land use regulations change between the time when map approvals are obtained and building permit(s) are issued. 90 Item 4.
498
Item 27.

LJUuIJHI LIVIU[; IL. LJUAUOJIJ-I Irr-+LIL-OLD-LIJZHUUHrrH

REQUIRED DATA/ REPORTS
The tentative map shall be accompanied by the following data and reports:
[i] 1. Street Names. A list of proposed street names for any unnamed street or alley for review by the city engineer. □ 2. Soils Report. A preliminary soils report prepared in accordance with the provisions of chapter 70 (Excavation and Grading) of the Uniform Building Code shall be submitted. If the preliminary soils report indicates the presence of critically expansive soils or other soil problems which, if not corrected, would lead to structural defects, the soils report accompanying the final map shall contain an investigation of each lot within the subdivision. Wt11Ve-f' E .$..

R] 3. Title Report. Current Title Report, less than 6 months old. [re/mn4rs $, l epo
□ f

4. Environmental Review. Information shall be submitted as required by the department to allow a determination on environmental review to be made in accordance with CEQA. The subdivider shall deposit and pay all fees as may be required for the preparation and processing of environmental review documents. E1R Mo be Prearel 73 J

5. Preliminary Engineering Calculations. Information shall be submitted as required by the standard engineering specifications to demonstrate the adequacy of the design of the proposed improvements. Such information shall include design parameters and engineering calculations.

El 6. Phasing. If the subdivider plans to file multiple final maps on the tentative map, he shall submit a written notice to this effect to the community development director. □ 7. Arborist Report. If oak trees exist on the property, 3 copies of an Arborist Report. j//t f a-sre }reel □ 8. Other Reports. Any other data or reports deemed necessary by the department.

An application will not be considered as complete until all of the information has been submitted to the Planning Department. Information required will vary by type of map (parcel / subdivision). Incomplete applications will not be processed.

REQUIRED DATA/ REPORTS
By initialing below, I acknowledge and agree to the following:
~

1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and each of its officers, employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, actions and proceedings, within the time period set forth in Government Code section 66499.37, to attack, set aside, void or annul any of the decisions or determinations which the City makes in connection with the approval of the tentative parcel map or with the adoption of any environmental document relating thereto under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The applicant shall reimburse the City and each of its officers, employees and agents for any costs, including but not limited to court costs, awards to plaintiff/ petitioner for costs and attorneys' fees and any other litigation expenses that the City may be required to pay to plaintiff/petitioner because of such approval or adoption. The City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense of any such litigation, which duty to cooperate shall include the following Ea a. The City shall notify the applicant promptly of any claim, action or proceeding of which it becomes aware. [t] b. The City shall have the right to retain legal counsel of its choice, at the sole cost and expense of the City, to defend the City in litigation, but such defense shall not relieve the applicant of any obligation imposed by this indemnity.
fl C. The applicant shall have the right to approve any settlement.

APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
I hereby certify that the information provided in this application is, to my knowledge, true and correct.

Signature:
l
[Oocl>Slgn•d.by:
77 Date: 7/21/2022
ONL
Approved By:

Payment:

If
The Community Development Department operates on a full cost recovery for processing of permits. Staff will charge their time and any expenses associated with processing the application against the initial deposit Fees that have been captured for the reimbursement of City expenses are nonrefundable.

Technology cost recovery fees are non-refundable
91 Item 4.
499
Item 27.

City of Oroville
PlanningDivision - Community Development Department
1735 Montgomery Street
Orovlle, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2430 FAX (530) 538-2426
www.cityoforovil e.org
TRAKIT#:

ZONE CHANGE/ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
(Please print clearly and fill in/provide all that apply)

REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION I TYPE OF PERMIT
01 Completed and signed Application Forms
[ly A»eon ree Pao
QI General Plan Amendment:

LY] $3,946.84 (Deposit) + $236.81 (6% Tech Fee) = $4,183.65 I.7l/ zone change:

L" J $3,104.02 (Deposit) + $186.24 (6% Tech Fee) = $3,290.26 provide a copy of recorded documents showing current ownership and legal description of affected parcels. If the rezone Involves more than 1 parcel, a petition must be submitted, signed by a minimum of 60% of the owners of the affected parcels.

PROJECT INFORMATION
DI
Prezone:
$3,104.02 (Deposit) + $186.24 (6% Tech Fee) = $3,290.26 Assessor Parcel Number (APN) I Zoning General Plan Land Use Designation Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
1)030-230-098 1)ABP 1)R-1 1)ABP 1)MLDR
2) 2) 2) 2) 2)
3) 3) 3) 3) 3)
4) 4) 4) 4) 4)
5) 5) 5) 5) 5)
6) 6) 6) 6) 6)
7) 7) 7) 7) 7)
8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
9) 9) 9) 9) 9)

REASONS FOR PROPOSED CHANGE
To develop a 172 lot single-family residential subdivision and neighborhood park. The average lot size is 7,450 square feet. The subdivision improvements and amenities include streets improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk, a pedestrian/bike path along the major north-south street and a neighborhood park containing walking paths and storm water detention basin.

APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
I hereby certify that the information provided in this application is, to my knowledge, true and correct. 92 Item 4.
500
Item 27.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Community Development Department operates on a full cost recovery for processing of permits. Staff will charge their time and any expenses associated with processing the application against the Initial deposit. Fees that have been captured for the reimbursement of City expenses are nonrefundable.

Technology cost recovery fees are non-refundable
93 Item 4.
501
Item 27.

W. GILBERT ENGINEERING
Civil Engineering/ Land Surveying
140 Yellowstone Drive, Suite 110 • Chico, CA 95973
Phone: (530) 809-1315 • Fax: (530) 588-9030
www. wg i I berteng i neeri ng. com
July 26, 2022
City of Oroville
Public Works Department
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
Attn:

Subject:

Matt Thompson, City Engineer
Feather Ranch Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
(APN 030-230-098)
Dear Matt:

The purpose of this letter is to request a waiver of the preliminary soils report and geologic reconnaissance report for the Feather Ranch Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map. A soils report and geologic reconnaissance will be prepared for the subdivision map before starting the subdivision improvement plans.

Thank you for your consideration. Please call this office if you have any questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,
Wesley
Presidt, W.G. Civil Engineers, Inc.
dba , Gilbert Engineering
Cc: MD3 Investments
P:\01 Project Folders\1575 - MD3 Subdivision\0Eng\Correspondence\Request for Waiver of Soils Report 072622.docx 94 Item 4.
502
Item 27.
1 RESOLUTION NO. P2023-14

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING

THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TSM 22-01 – THE PROPOSED

FEATHER RANCH SUBDIVISION -- AND MAKE CERTAIN FINDINGS, REQUIRE

CERTAIN MITIGATION MEASURES, AND ADOPT OF STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THOSE SIGNIFICANT AN UNAVOIDABLE

IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE EIR
.

WHEREAS, the application was filed by MD3 Investments for Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 to convert 45-acre APN 030-230-098 now zoned Airport Business Park (ABP) into 172 single family housing lots zoned Single Family Residential (R1); and
WHEREAS, the property is designated APB- AIO (Airport Influence Overlay) by the Oroville General Plan and Zoning Code, which limits development to a maximum density of 0.1 and 0.2 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project has a density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre, which exceeds the limits in the Butte County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUCP); and WHEREAS, an initial study was prepared, which identified several potentially significant effects, which triggered an Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and WHEREAS, while the Environmental Impact Report concluded that most effects were less than significant or less than significant with mitigation, the document nevertheless identified three significant and unavoidable effects; and WHEREAS, the EIR was circulated for the requisite 45-day comment period, three comments were received, and a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was duly prepared; and
WHEREAS, approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map first requires certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project with Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, Zoning Variance VAR 23-01, and an override by the Oroville City Council of the ALUC’s inconsistency determination; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the comments and concerns of public agencies, property owners, and members of the public who are potentially affected by the approval of Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 described herein, and also considered the City’s staff report regarding the change.
95 Item 4.
503
Item 27.
2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION as follows:

1. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
a. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report.
b. Adopt the attached Environmental findings, mitigation measures, and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
c. Approve General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01.
d. Approve Zoning Change ZC 23-01 with certain required findings. e. Conduct a two-thirds vote to Intend to Override the ALUC’s inconsistency determination.
f. Notify the Bute County ALUC and California Division of Aeronautics of the Council’s intent to override the ALUC’s inconstancy determination. g. After the required 45-day waiting period for comments from the ALUC and Division of Aeronautics, Override the ALUC’s inconsistency determination.
h. Approve Tentative Parcel Map TSM 22-01

2. Subject to approval of TSM 22-01 by the City Council, the Planning Commission approves Variance VAR 23-01 with the findings required by Section 17.44.050 of the Oroville City Code, as those findings are described in this Resolution.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced and passed at a special meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Oroville held on the 22nd of June, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVE:

_______________________________ _______________________________

JACKIE GLOVER, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK CARL DURLING, CHAIRPERSON 96 Item 4.
504
Item 27.

CEQA FINDINGS

PROPOSED PROJECT

FEATHER RANCE SUBDIVISION, INCLUDING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA 23-01, ZONE CHANGE ZC23-01, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TSM 22-01, VARIANCE VAR 23-01, AND AN OVERRIDE OF AN INCONSISTENCY

DETERMINATION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION The City of Oroville (City), serving as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has prepared a project EIR (EIR) for the proposed Feather Ranch Subdivision, which is provided as part of the project documentation.

The Tentative Subdivision Map would create 172 new market-rate housing units. MD3 Investments has applied to convert 45 acres currently zoned Airport Business Park (ABP) into 172 single family lots Zoned Single-family residential (R-1) and averaging 7,450 square feet in size.

Approval requires a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Change, and a Zoning Code Variance. Due to the significant and unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Project EIR, CEQA requires the City Council to approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations if it ultimately approves the project.

1. Findings with regard to effects not found to be significant. The EIR discussed several environmental effects that were determined to result in less than significant impacts, and certain other effects that result in less than significant effects after implementation of mitigation measures. Those specific effects are described in Section ES.4 of the FEIR, with the final Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures located in the FEIR as Table ES-1.

2. Findings with regard to effects found to be significant and unavoidable.

Section 15126.2(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR describe any significant impacts, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to a less than significant level. Where there are impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing an alternative design, their implications, and the reasons why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding their effect, should also be described.

A significant and unavoidable impact is one that would cause a substantial adverse effect on the environment and for which no mitigation is available to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Most of the impacts of the Proposed Project would be less than significant or would be mitigated to a less than significant level. The impacts summarized below are those that would remain significant and unavoidable after mitigation.
a. Impacts HAZ-1 and HAZ-2: The Project would result in a significant and unavoidable safety hazard impact and a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable safety hazard impact for people residing or working in the Project Area because the Project is located within the OMA B1 and B2 Compatibility 97 Item 4.
505
Item 27.

Zones. The only mitigation possible would be to either eliminate the use of the airport or move the Project to a location outside of the B1 and B2 Compatibility Zones. Neither of these mitigations are feasible. As such, there is no feasible mitigation possible to mitigate the potential airport safety impacts.

Finding. The City finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that the City could adopt at this time that would reduce the impacts to less than significant. Tot the extent that this adverse impact till not be substantially lessened or eliminated, the City finds that specific economic, social, and other benefits identified in the Statement of Overriding Considerations support the approval of the proposed project.

Facts and Reasoning that support the finding:

The property falls within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) compatibility zone B1 and B2, adopted by the ALUC on November 15, 2017. The purpose of this plan is to promote compatibility with the airport and surrounding land uses. Compatibility zone B1 is generally set to encompass the airport’s projected 55 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Compatibility zone B2 encompasses the close-in, low altitude portions of traffic patterns. Much of the neighboring Calle Vista Estates subdivision also falls within these same compatibility zone classifications. 98 Item 4.
506
Item 27.

As required by the ALUCP and Section 21676(b) of the Public Utilities Code the project applicant submitted the project to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the ALUCP. The ALUC conducted a hearing on the matter on September 21, 2022, and voted 7-0 -1
1 to find the project inconsistent with the ALUCP based on the project density.

Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676, the City Council may choose to override the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency by following a two-step process.

The second step in the process is that at least 45-days after notification has been sent

1 The vote was unanimous with one Commissioner recused himself since he lives very near the project area.

Figure 1 – Airport Compatibility Zone Map with Site
99 Item 4.
507
Item 27.
to the ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics, the City Council may conduct a second public hearing to consider adopting a resolution to override the ALUC. At this second public hearing the City Council may also consider the project entitlement and take final action on the application.

According to the ALUC staff report, approximately 35.82 acres and a proposed 134 dwelling units fall within compatibility zone B1, for a density of 3.74 units per acre.

Approximately 9.15 acres and a proposed 38 dwelling units fall within compatibility zone B2, for a density of 4.15 units per acre. The ALUC consistency review listed five inconsistency findings for the project:

2. The R-1 zoning allows up 6 dwelling units (lots) per acre is inconsistent with the B1 maximum density of 0.1 dwelling units per acre and B2 maximum density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre.

3. The project’s proposed density of 3.74 dwelling units per acre is inconsistent with the B1 Compatibility Zone density (0.1 or more dwelling units per acre).

4. The project’s proposed density of 4.15 dwelling units per acre is inconsistent with 100
Item 4.
508
Item 27.
the B2 Compatibility Zone density (0.2 dwelling units per acre).

Since the neighboring Calle Vista Estates subdivision was approved in 2005/2006, the ALUC adopted a new ALUCP in 2017 which significantly increased the footprint of the B1 and B2 compatibility zones to now include the Calle Vista Subdivision. However, no corresponding increases to airport operations have occurred and air traffic is still below projected figures.

Aircraft Operations2 at the Airport:

2 An operation is either a takeoff or landing. For instance, if a pilot performs a “touch and go”, that counts as two operations.
101
Item 4.
509
Item 27.
actual operations. In January 2016, the airport reported approximately 36,500 annual operations, a decrease from historic levels. According to AirNav, aircraft operations averaged 99/day for a 12-month period ending November 30, 2021. This is the same as reported in 20163.

Table 1
It should be noted that during emergency conditions, such as fires, evacuations, and other crises, airport operations increase significantly for selected periods of time. This was true during the fires in 2018 and after. The airport was actively used as a helicopter staging area for emergency operations.

3 AirNav uses data provided by airports, which in Oroville had not been updated since 2016. Since there is an expense involved in gathering actual flight data, it is common for small general aviation airports to have older data which tends to over-report actual operations. 4 https://generalaviationnews.com/2019/09/19/only-44-of-ga-aircraft-equipped-with-ads-b/ Date range 1-1-22 thru 12-30/22
Number of operations counted in cy 2022 4,665 tansponder flights Aircraft type single prop 3,782 81.1%
multi prop 404 8.7%
jet 70 1.5%
helicopter 386 8.3%
UAV 2 0.0%
unknown 21 0.5%
4,665 100.0%
arrivals departures
Runway 2 going north @ 6020' 343 7.4% 239 104
20 going south @ 6020' 1,151 24.7% 553 598
13 going north@ 3540' 918 19.7% 554 364
31 going south @ 3540' 629 13.5% 385 244
subtotal 3,041 65.2%
unspecified 1,624 34.8% 563 1,061
4,665 100% 49% 51%
add 44% non-transponder flights 2,053 single engine, older planes, pioneers Estimated Total operations per year 6,718 estimated annual operations at KOVE Max annual flights
northbound over Feather
Ranch 614
Estimated flights straight out 307 50% or less
max flights per day over subdivisions 2 arrivals and departures OROVILLE AIRPORT OPERATIONS IN 2022
102
Item 4.
510
Item 27.

Flight pattern on Runway 2-20: As the above data show, most flights to and from Runway 2-20 occur to the South, with only 7%, or no more than ~615 per year on Runway 2. Only some of these are straight out departures or straight in approaches over the proposed Feather Ranch Subdivision and the existing Calle Vista Subdivision. At a Cessna 172’s climb rate of 721 feet per minute, any departing small single engine plane under average temperature and wind conditions would be about 400 feet above ground by the time it reached the first house5. Furthermore, any pilot who encounters engine trouble or other adverse conditions should have ample time to veer leftward to avoid flying over either subdivision.

The Airport Master Plan also identified improvements – since completed -- to extend the south end of runway 2-20 to allow southerly departures to “be over City-owned property or the publicly owned Afterbay property, with aircraft approaching from the north higher above private property north of State Route 162,” which will minimize constraints to development of the land to the north.

Prevailing winds are from the SSE, which is another reason most flights land and take off southward, into the wind.6
Aircraft Accident Occurrence:

The RNAV7for the airport lists a restriction not authorizing circling northeast of Runway 13-318. In addition, takeoff minimums and departing procedures for the airport require air traffic to turn away from the more developed areas northeast of the airport with climbing left turns from Runways 2 and 31 and climbing right turns from Runways 13 and 20.

Aircraft Noise
While noise was not found to be inconsistent with the ALUCP, the city’s General Plan, zoning code, and the ALUCP establish regulations and criteria for noise within compatibility zones that is relevant to this project. As previously mentioned, within compatibility zone B1, the airport’s projected Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is 55 decibels (dBA). This CNEL system evaluates the degree to which lands around the

5 https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43394/is-it-possible-to-calculate-the-distance-to-climb-to1000-ft-in-cessna-172s 6 Oroville Airport Airport Layout Plan Sheet 3 of 9 dated April 16, 2013. 7 http://www.airnav.com/airport/kove and https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2305/SW2TO.PDF 8 To turn right (northeast) from that runway is in direct conflict with the established traffic pattern.

Commented [CM1]: These improvements have
already been completed and should be noted in the staff report as having been done
Commented [CM2]: Double check this with
someone who knows airports and planes. Just took
it from the AirNav site
103
Item 4.
511
Item 27.
airport are exposed to airport-related noise depicted by a set of contours. Generally, the maximum CNEL normally acceptable for residential uses in the vicinity of an airport is 60 dBA.

Figure 2 – Airport CNEL dB Contour Lines
104
Item 4.
512
Item 27.

ALUC Override Conclusion
The project is consistent with the ALUCP for noise and for height restrictions, but not density. Because most aircraft accidents occur on landing and takeoff and relatively few during climbing or descent9, and because pilots are advised in Oroville’s AirNav posting to veer away from housing north of the airport, staff do not consider the risk of aircraft accidents over either the existing or proposed subdivisions to be considerable enough to warrant denial of the project. Additionally, noise attenuation for homes to an internal noise level of 45dBa will be a project condition.

Given the analysis above, the project does not appear to impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport, adversely affect the utility or capacity of the airport (such as by reducing instrument approach procedure minimums), or expose the public to excessive noise and safety hazards based on the aforementioned information and the proposed conditions of approval on the project.

b. Impacts NOI-1 and NOI-4: The Project would result in a significant and unavoidable safety hazard impact and a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable traffic noise impact. The roadway segment of 20th Street between Biggs Avenue and Feather Avenue would experience an increase of more than 5.0 dBA CNEL over existing conditions, which is beyond the City of Oroville noise standard. Similarly, the segment of Feather Avenue east of 20th Street would also experience an increase of more than 5.0dBA CNEL over existing conditions. There is no feasible mitigation available to reduce these impacts toles than significant. Lead agencies have limited remedies at their disposal to effectively reduce traffic related noise. Addressing traffic noise at the receiver rather than the source usually takes the form of noise barriers (i.e., sound walls). While constructing noise barriers along streets would reduce noise, the placement of sound walls between existing residences/businesses and local roadways would not be desirable as it would conflict with the community’s aesthetic, design and character and is therefore deemed infeasible. Furthermore, such barriers would likely require property owner approval, which cannot be ensured. While measures such as encouraging ridesharing, carpooling, and alternative modes of transportation could reduce vehicle volumes, such measures can neither be mandated of residents nor have been shown to reduce vehicle trips to the extent needed to reduce vehicle noise levels below established thresholds. Therefore, no feasible mitigation measures exist to reduce the identified significant impact.

9 https://www.cliffordlaw.com/aviation-accidents-and-incidents/ 105
Item 4.
513
Item 27.

Facts and Reasoning that support the finding: The noise generated by traffic from the project’s operations will increase ambient noise levels by more than 5 decibels in two segments of 20th Street and one of Feather Avenue10. This is a technical violation of Oroville’s CEQA significance threshold. The ambient decibel level in these locations after the project is built will remain at or below 48 decibels. In spite of the technical threshold exceedance, these locations will continue as they are, an area of “Quiet Urban Daytime”
11 .
c. Impacts TR-2 and TR-3: The Project would also result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to VMT. Project would be expected to generate VMT at 140 to 145 percent of the baseline City of Oroville average. Mitigating VMT to a level which would be less than 85 percent of the baseline level would require a reduction of approximately 40 percent from pre-mitigation levels (1–[0.85÷1.45]=0.414). While the mitigation measures available to Oroville would reduce the impact of the Project on VMT, implementation of measures needed to achieve a 40 percent reduction is not considered feasible. As a result, even with implementation of mitigation measuresTR1 through TR-4, the impact of the Feather Ranch Project on VMT is considered to be significant and unavoidable.

Facts and Reasoning that support the finding: The project would generate 120 trips distributed among 20th, 18th, Feather, and Biggs during the A.M peak hour, and 162 trips during the P.M. peak hour. This equates 26.7 home-based trips per resident, or 140 percent of the current Oroville baseline average of 19.1 trips per resident. Since this trip generation exceeds the state mandated CEQA significance threshold of 85% of baseline (or 16.2 trips per resident), the impact is significant by definition.

The CEQA threshold is potentially possible in an urban setting with plenty of transit, bicycle, and walking options available as project mitigation. However, Oroville is in a rural setting. Neither the: Project proponent nor the City can mitigate this impact with enough transit, bike, and walking paths in this rural location. This is confirmed by the Butte County Association of Governments’ April 2021 study entitled “BCAG SB 743 Implementation—Mitigation Strategies—Assessing Feasibility”.

10 Page 3.9-21 of the DEIR
11 Page 3.9-2 of the DEIR.
106
Item 4.
514
Item 27.

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Oroville adopts and makes the following statement of overriding considerations regarding the remaining significant unavoidable impacts of the project, as discussed above, and the anticipated economic, social, and other benefits of the project.

The City of Ceres finds and determines that (1) the majority of the significant impacts of the project will be reduced to acceptable levels by implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in these findings; (2) The City of Ceres’s approval of the project as proposed will result in certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level even with the incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the project; and (3) there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternatives that will further mitigate, avoid, or reduce to a less-than-significant level the remaining significant environmental effects.

In light of the environmental, social, economic, and other considerations identified in the findings for the project, and the considerations set forth below related to this project, City of Oroville chooses to approve the project because, in its view, the economic, social, technological, and other benefits resulting from the project substantially outweigh the project’s significant and unavoidable adverse environmental effects.

The following statements identify the reasons why, in City of Oroville’s judgment, the benefits of the project outweigh the significant and unavoidable effects. The substantial evidence supporting the enumerated benefits of the project can be found in the preceding findings, which are herein incorporated by reference; in the project itself; and in the record of proceedings as defined above. Each of the overriding considerations set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the project outweigh its significant adverse environmental effects and is an overriding consideration warranting approval.

The City of Oroville finds that the project, as conditionally approved, will have the following economic, social, technological, and environmental benefits:
 The project would provide 172 market-rate housing units to serve the needs of households seeking housing that is of significantly limited availability in this medium low density housing category. The Oroville Housing Element, certified in April 2023, indicates the need for 450 housing units to serve moderate and above-moderate income levels. This project will provide a significant portion of that need.  The Project will create short-term construction jobs that would provide income to local residents. The additional 400 permanent residents generated by the project will 107
Item 4.
515
Item 27.
spur an increase in demand for goods and services in the surrounding area, thereby expanding the local revenue base, and expanding the local labor force.  The Project will result in additional paving of a number of designated city streets in the vicinity, including 20th, Biggs, and Feather Avenue. In addition, 20th street at SR 162 will be improved with a right turn lane, improving traffic circulation in the area.  The Project would adopt energy conservation strategies in new development that would result in new development being more efficient than existing buildings in the region.
108
Item 4.
516
Item 27.
1 RESOLUTION NO. P2023-15

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA 23-01, ZONING CHANGE ZC 23-01, AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TSM 22-01 FOR THE PROPOSED FEATHER RANCH SUBDIVISION.

WHEREAS, the City has received an application from MD3 Investments (Subdivider) to subdivide portions of a +-45-acre parcel identified as APN 030-230-098 (Property) into 172 lots for single-family homes; and
WHEREAS, the proposed map will also create a 0.95-acre Lot A for purposes of passive recreation with pedestrian pathways and wetland feature conservation and a meandering bicycle/pedestrian pathway along Gentle Rain Lane; and WHEREAS, the design of the proposed subdivision is illustrated on the tentative subdivision map received by the City on August 8, 2022, which map has been assigned the file number TSM 22-01, and a copy of which is attached to this resolution as Exhibit “A”; and
WHEREAS, the Property is designated by Oroville’s General Plan Diagram as Airport Business Park and the Zoning Map designation of this area is similarly Airport Business Park; and
WHEREAS, the Subdivider has also applied for a General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation from Airport Business Park to Medium Low Density Residential (MLDR) and a Zoning Change to change the zoning designation from Airport Business Park to Single-Family Residential (R-1) to allow residential development at a density not less than four and not more than six homes per acre; and
WHEREAS, the Subdivider is proposing 172 lots on 45 acres for a resulting density of 3.8 units per acre and an average lot size of 7,400 square feet; and WHEREAS, Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 has been reviewed by the City Engineer, who has provided a set of conditions to meet prior to final map approval ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council may, after a public hearing, proposed to override the ALUC’s determination by a two-thirds vote of the City Council if it makes specific findings that the project is consistent with California Public Utilities Code Section 20167 for the purpose of protecting public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; and 109
Item 4.
517
Item 27.
2 WHEREAS, approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map first requires certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project with Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, Zoning Variance VAR 23-01, and an override by the Oroville City Council of the ALUC’s inconsistency determination; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the comments and concerns of public agencies, property owners, and members of the public who are potentially affected by the approval of Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 described herein, and also considered the City’s staff report regarding the change.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION as follows:

1. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
a. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report.
b. Adopt appropriate Environmental findings, mitigation measures, and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
c. Approve General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01.
d. Approve Zoning Change ZC 23-01 with certain required findings and Ordinance XXXX.
e. Conduct a two-thirds vote to Intend to Override the ALUC’s inconsistency determination.
f. Notify the Bute County ALUC and California Division of Aeronautics of the Council’s intent to override the ALUC’s inconstancy determination. g. After the required 45-day waiting period for comments from the ALUC and Division of Aeronautics, Override the ALUC’s inconsistency determination.
h. Approve Tentative Parcel Map TSM 22-01

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
Required Findings for the Tentative Subdivision Map:

Pursuant to OMC Section 16.12.020(D), the City Engineer has reviewed TSM 22-01 and has deemed the map complete. The required Engineer’s Report is attached.

Per OMC Section 16.12.020(F), the Planning Commission shall disapprove a tentative map if it determines that any of the following conditions apply:
110
Item 4.
518
Item 27.
3 1. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the general plan or applicable specific plans.

Assuming GPA 23-01 and ZC 23-01 are approved by the City Council, the subdivision will be consistent with the General Plan. There are no applicable specific plans encompassing this parcel.

2. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density or type of development, or for the physical infrastructure required to support that development.

3. The design of the land division or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement is likely to cause serious public health problems.

The site has been shown to be safe to develop in the site’s soil types, and the City Engineer is satisfied with the findings of said report.

7. The proposed subdivision violates the provisions of this Chapter and no exception has been granted.

The Engineer’s Report confirms that the proposed subdivision does not violate the provisions of this chapter and no exception has been granted.

8. The proposed subdivision violates any provision of the zoning code and no variance has been granted.

9. The proposed subdivision would violate any other city ordinance or any city code provision.

The proposed subdivision will not violate any other city ordinance or city code provision. Should the City Council adopt the override of the ALUCP determination and the variance, the proposed subdivision will comply with all applicable regulations and codes.

The Thermalito Sewer and Water (TWSD) Agency, which serves water and collects sewer discharges, is not operating under any corrective action or compliance orders.
112
Item 4.
520
Item 27.
5 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced and passed at a special meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Oroville held on the 22nd of June 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVE:

_______________________________ _______________________________

JACKIE GLOVER, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK CARL DURLING, CHAIRPERSON 113
Item 4.
521
Item 27.
1 RESOLUTION NO. P2023-13

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING

THAT THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL NOTIFY THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT

LAND USE COMMISSION AND THE STATE DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS OF THE CITY’S INTENTION TO FIND THAT THE PROPOSED FEATHER RANCH

SUBDIVISION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE

AERONAUTICS ACT AND TO OVERRULE THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION’S INCONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR OROVILLE AIRPORT.

WHEREAS, the application was filed by MD3 Investments for Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 to convert 45-acre APN 030-230-098 now zoned Airport Business Park (ABP) into 172 single family housing lots zoned Single Family Residential (R1); and
WHEREAS, the property is designated APB- AIO (Airport Influence Overlay) by the Oroville General Plan and Zoning Code, which limits development to a maximum density of 0.1 and 0.2 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project has a density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre, which exceeds the limits in the Butte County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUCP); and WHEREAS, Oroville’s Zoning Code Section 17.44.050 and California Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) require the city to refer the Project to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a determination of the project’s consistency with the ALUCP; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2022, the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission determined that the proposed project would be inconsistent with the ALUCP on the basis of density; and
WHEREAS, the City Council may, after a public hearing, can propose to override the ALUC’s determination by a two-thirds vote of the City Council if it makes specific findings that the project is consistent with California Public Utilities Code Section 20167 for the purpose of protecting public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; and WHEREAS, approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map first requires certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project with Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, Zoning Variance VAR 23-01, and an override by the Oroville City Council of the ALUC’s inconsistency determination; and
114
Item 4.
522
Item 27.
2 WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the comments and concerns of public agencies, property owners, and members of the public who are potentially affected by the approval of Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 described herein, and also considered the City’s staff report regarding the change.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION as follows:

1. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
a. Conduct a two-thirds vote to Intend to Override the ALUC’s inconsistency determination.
b. Notify the Bute County ALUC and California Division of Aeronautics of the Council’s intent to override the ALUC’s inconstancy determination. c. After the required 45-day waiting period for comments from the ALUC and Division of Aeronautics, Override the ALUC’s inconsistency determination. d. After the Override decision, approve GPA 23-01, ZC 23-01, and TSM 22-01.

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
For an override of an inconsistency determination by the ALUC, specific findings supported by substantial evidence must be adopted finding that the proposed project will not:
 Impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport, The new homes and their distance at over 4,000 feet from the end of Runway 2 will not impair the orderly, planned expansion of the airport, all of which will occur on airport property and South of SR 162. The ABP zoning of the lands north of SR162 and closer to the airport than this subdivision are already anticipated for future industrial development in the General Plan, and are thus assumed to also not affect any future airport expansion plans. The remaining vacant land areas will all be developed with densities consistent with the ALUCP.  Adversely affect the utility or capacity of the airport (such as by reducing instrument approach procedure minimums) or affecting flight patterns.

Due to the distance from Runway 2, flight patterns, aircraft operational safety, or instrument approach procedures will not be affected. The subdivision is at the outer edge of the left traffic pattern for planes landing or taking off, so most of the estimated 780 flights per year will turn left before reaching any homes and will not likely fly over either subdivision. Planes taking off to the north are advised in AIRNAV to veer left away from existing development, which is not a difficult maneuver. In addition, any plane flying straight north will likely be at least 400 feet above ground level by the time it reaches either the existing Calle Vista or proposed Feather Ranch subdivisions.
 Expose the public to excessive noise and safety hazards. 115
Item 4.
523
Item 27.
3 Regarding exposing the public to excessive noise and safety hazards, first, because of the distance from Runway 2, the project is outside the airport’s 55 decibel noise contour. Second, all new residential structures will be conditioned to be constructed to limit interior noise levels to a maximum of 45 decibels. Finally, all new homeowners will be required to acknowledge they are buying property within 2 miles of an airport, and to sign an avigation easement or other appropriate instrument authorizing plane flights over their properties. The safety hazard from aircraft accidents is always present, but is not considered excessive due to the distance of the proposed project from the Airport property and Runway 2.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced and passed at a special meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Oroville held on the 22nd of June 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVE:

_______________________________ _______________________________

JACKIE GLOVER, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK CARL DURLING, CHAIRPERSON 116
Item 4.
524
Item 27.
1 RESOLUTION NO. P2023-16

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING VARIANCE VAR 23-01 FOR THE PROPOSED FEATHER RANCH SUBDIVISION, SUBJECT TO THE CITY COUNCIL’S APPROVAL OF TSM 22-01.

WHEREAS, the application was filed by MD3 Investments for Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 to convert 45-acre APN 030-230-098 now zoned Airport Business Park (ABP) into 172 single family housing lots zoned Single Family Residential (R1); and
WHEREAS, the property is designated APB- AIO (Airport Influence Overlay) by the Oroville General Plan and Zoning Code, which limits development to a maximum density of 0.1 and 0.2 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project has a density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre, which exceeds the limits in the Butte County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUCP); and WHEREAS, Oroville’s Zoning Code Section 17.44.050 and California Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) require the city to refer the Project to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a determination of the project’s consistency with the ALUCP; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2022, the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission determined that the proposed project would be inconsistent with the ALUCP on the basis of density; and
WHEREAS, the City Council may, after a public hearing, proposed to override the ALUC’s determination by a two-thirds vote of the City Council if it makes specific findings that the project is consistent with California Public Utilities Code Section 20167 for the purpose of protecting public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; and WHEREAS, approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map first requires certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project with Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, Zoning Change ZC 23-01, Zoning Variance VAR 23-01, and an override by the Oroville City Council of the ALUC’s inconsistency determination; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the comments and concerns of public agencies, property owners, and members of the public who are potentially affected by the approval of Tentative 117
Item 4.
525
Item 27.
2 Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 described herein, and also considered the City’s staff report regarding the change.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION as follows:

1. Subject to approval by the City Council of TSM 22-01, GPA 23-01, ZC 23-01 and the override, the Planning Commission approves Variance VAR 23-01 with the findings required by Section 17.44.050 of the Oroville City Code, as those findings are described in this Resolution.

FINDINGS
Findings for the Variance:

17.44.050, whose text is identical to the ALUCP’s with regard to allowable densities.
c. The granting of the variance will not grant a special privilege to the property.

The granting of the variance will not grant a special privilege. If granted, all subsequent development will be reviewed and conditioned exactly as all other subdivisions throughout the city of Oroville.
118
Item 4.
526
Item 27.
3 d. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zoning district, and that would otherwise be denied to the property in question.

The project area is adjacent to and nearby several existing similar subdivisions, and would thus be compatible with many land uses in the surrounding area.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVE:

_______________________________ _______________________________

JACKIE GLOVER, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK CARL DURLING, CHAIRPERSON 119
Item 4.
527
Item 27.

CITY OF OROVILLE

ENGINEERING
1735 MONTGOMERY STREET, OROVILLE, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2507 FAX (530) 538-2426
WWW.CITYOFOROVILLE.ORG
DATE: JUNE 7, 2023
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Matt Thompson, Acting City Engineer, 538-2507
Community Development Department
RE: Engineer’s Report
Feather Ranch Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 22-01
This office has reviewed the Feather Ranch Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 22-01 and herewith submits the following findings and recommendations.

A. TIMING AND NATURE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
The City Engineer will determine the nature, extent, timing and limits of required road/street public improvements to be constructed as part of any development (including phased development) versus payment of an in-lieu fee as well as reimbursements for construction of future Nexus/CIP facilities.

B. PUBLIC FACILITY CONSTRUCTION

1. Streets
a) The Subdivider shall construct City standard streets and appurtenant facilities at the following locations in conformance with the typical sections. Street structural sections to be determined based upon findings from the Soils Report:
1) Interior to subdivision – Full urban improvements.
2) Adjacent to subdivision– Full urban improvements.
b) All corner lots shall be subject to intersection sight distance criteria as established by the City Engineer. Appropriate easements shall be dedicated as needed on the Final Map.
c) Street names shall be approved concurrent with the improvement plans and prior to recordation of the Final Map.
120
Item 4.
528
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 2 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp

2. Storm Drainage
a) Facility Construction - The Subdivider shall design and install the following City standard storm drain facilities:
1) Interior to Subdivision - Curb, gutter, and an underground storm drain system with all appurtenances.
i. Future storm drainage needs outside of the project shall be examined to the extent that improvements to serve such areas need to be built within this subdivision. Said improvements shall be constructed by the Subdivider. ii. Any publicly owned storm drain facilities shall have full vehicle access. 2) Adjacent to Subdivision - Curb, gutter and an underground storm drain system with all appurtenances along the subdivision frontage.
i. Future storm drainage needs outside of the project shall be examined to the extent that improvements to serve such areas need to be built adjacent to this subdivision. Said improvements shall be constructed by the Subdivider. b) NPDES Requirements
1) The subdivision shall comply with all of the requirements of “State Water Resources Control Board (Board) Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No.

CAS000004, Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) (General Permit) or successor General Permits.
2) The development shall conform with section “E.12 Post Construction Water Management Program” of the General Permit.
3) Prior to construction a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be developed and implemented in accordance with the Board’s “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ NPDES No. CAS000002”
c) Storm Drainage Detention Facilities
Surface storm drainage detention facilities shall be landscaped with turf (or an approved alternate) and shall be provided with an irrigation system. Any surface water quality treatment facility shall be vegetated in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the City and shall also be suitably provided with adequate irrigation. 121
Item 4.
529
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 3 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp d) Storm Drainage Analysis
The storm drain analysis shall comply with Section B.2.b.2 of this report and shall establish tributary area, size, grade, depth, and location for all the following storm drain facilities:
 Underground pipes.
 Open, natural swales.
 Improved channels.
 Storm water runoff management facilities.
 Outfall facilities discharging to natural channels.
 Both ultimate and interim facilities serving streets exterior to the subdivision that are required to be constructed herein.
e) The Subdivider shall pay a storm drain fee calculated in accordance with the current fee schedule under the requirements of the Oroville Municipal Code, prior to filing the final map.

3. Sanitary Sewer
a) Facility Construction
The Subdivider shall design and install the following sanitary sewer facilities:
1) Interior to Subdivision - An underground sanitary sewer system, with all appurtenances, serving all lots.
2) Adjacent to Subdivision - An underground sanitary sewer system, with all appurtenances, along the subdivision frontage.

4. Street Signs and Striping
The Subdivider shall install City standard street signs, regulatory signs, pavement striping and pavement markings on all streets, and bicycle facilities that they are required herein to construct.

5. Street Lights
The Subdivider shall install City standard streetlights with shielding on steel poles with concrete bases on all streets that they are required herein to construct.

6. Street Trees
Street trees shall be planted in accordance with the recommendation of the Community Development Department. The number, type, and sizes shall be as directed by the Community Development Department.
122
Item 4.
530
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 4 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp

7. Landscaping
a) The Subdivider shall install landscaping and an irrigation system at the following locations between the back of curb and property line on the following streets:
1) Feather Avenue
2) 20th Street
3) Biggs Avenue
4) Gentle Rain Lane
C. MAINTENANCE

1. Prior to filing the Final Map, the Subdivider shall be required to make provisions to fund the maintenance of certain public improvements. The improvements to be covered shall be:
a) Landscaped areas of Section B.7 noted above,
b) The detention pond (or alternatively underground storage galleries) and the balance of Lot A,
c)
The district or alternate funding mechanism shall be complete and formed prior to recordation of the Final Map.

D. SUBDIVISION GRADING

1. Soils Report
The Subdivider shall submit a Geological and/or Soils Report, prepared by a registered engineer, that includes, but is not limited to, the following:
a) An investigation of the nature, distribution and strength of existing soils. b) A description of site geology.
c) Conclusions and recommendations covering the adequacy of the site for the proposed development, storm drainage disposal, grading procedures and corrective measures. d) Verification that the site is suited to proposed BMPs.

2. Grading Standards
All subdivision grading shall be in conformance with Chapter 15.88 “Grading, Excavation, and Sediment Control” et al, of the Oroville Municipal Code.

3. Grading Plan
The Subdivider's engineer shall submit a subdivision grading plan that includes, but is not limited to, the following:
a) The subdivision limits, contours and details of existing terrain and drainage. b) Existing structures or other topographic features that are to remain undisturbed. 123
Item 4.
531
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 5 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp c) The proposed subdivision lots and streets, together with a schematic layout of the proposed storm drain system.
d) Existing ground elevations at all corners of proposed lots. e) Proposed finished lot corner grades and finished pad grades. f) Proposed lot grades indicating lot drainage.
g) Pertinent recommendations from the above required Geological and/or Soils Report. h) Pertinent construction details to assure compliance with City of Oroville Grading Standards.
i) All lots shall be graded to drain overland from back to front as depicted on the details shown on the map.
1) Where overland flow can not be achieved, yard drains shall be provided. Yard drains shall connect directly to the storm drain, or discharge to the gutter via curbface outlets. Discharge across the sidewalk will not be allowed. 2) Cross-lot drainage easements, whether public or private, will not be permitted unless they are the only physical solution available.

4. Final Grading Report
Upon completion of the subdivision grading and prior to final inspection by the City, the Subdivider's engineer shall submit a Final Grading Report that certifies the following:
a) That final grading complies with the approved grading plan or any approved revisions.
b) That the subdivision grading complies with the recommendations included in the Geological and/or Soils Report. Any changes made during grading that affected these recommendations shall be assessed.
c) That the subdivision soils are adequately compacted for their intended use, in conformance with City of Oroville Grading Standards. The results of all field density tests and all other substantiating data shall be included in the Final Grading Report.

The subdivision grading plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to the start of any work and shall be considered as part of the construction plans.

E. PROPERTY CONVEYANCES

1. Dedications
In conjunction with recordation of the Final Map for this subdivision, the Subdivider shall:
a) Dedicate, acquire or bear the cost of acquisition of public rights of way or easements as necessary to construct the public improvements required. b) Convey to the City all abutter's rights of access from the abutting lots of the subdivision to the following streets: Feather Avenue, Biggs Avenue, and 18th Street. 124
Item 4.
532
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 6 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp c) Unless otherwise found to be unnecessary, dedicate an Avigation Easement to the City over the existing lots within the subdivision boundary as required by the Community Services Director.
d) Dedicate a 10-foot-wide public service easement adjacent to public rights of way. e) Dedicate a 3-foot-wide public utility easement adjacent to all side lot lines. f) Dedicate at least 1.2-acres for parklands including any required improvements thereon or pay an equivalent in-lieu fee.

F. LOT RESTRICTIONS
No restrictions are applicable currently. The Planning Commission has the discretion to impose restrictions.

G. OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES

1. Public Utilities
a) Underground Requirements - The Subdivider shall install the following utilities underground:
1) All new utilities serving this subdivision.
2) All existing utilities in public rights-of-way that are within or adjacent to this subdivision.
b) Easement Obstructions - All public utility and/or public service easements shall be kept free and clear of any and all obstructions, including but not limited to, structures, longitudinal fencing and/or sound walls, which may impede the construction, operation and maintenance of public utility facilities within such easements.

2. Fire Protection
The Subdivider shall pay for the installation of fire hydrants within the subdivision in conformance with the recommendations of the Fire Department, City of Oroville, or their successor.

3. United States Postal Service
The Subdivider shall install concrete pads for NDCBU delivery to the lots of this subdivision. The pads shall be depicted on the subdivision improvement plans and are subject to approval by both the local office of the United States Postal Service and the Planning Services Department.

H. PERMITS FROM OUTSIDE AGENCIES
The Subdivider shall obtain all required permits from outside agencies having pertinent jurisdiction prior to recordation of the Final Map for this subdivision. 125
Item 4.
533
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 7 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp I. Other Permits
The Subdivided shall submit a completed “Application Requesting Permission to Plant, Remove, Alter, or Disturb Public Trees” from to the Public Works Department. The Subdivider shall comply with any and all recommendations/requirements prior to commencing any construction activities on the site.

J. DESIGN CRITERIA AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
All public and joint-use private improvements shall be designed in accordance with the Oroville Municipal Code, except as modified by the conditions of approval for this subdivision.

The Subdivider shall submit improvement plans, profiles, typical sections, details and specifications to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to the start of any construction of public and joint-use private improvements.

All public and joint-use private improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the Oroville Municipal Code and in conformance with the details shown on the approved improvement plans.

When standard plans and specifications for any aspect of the project are not available, the Subdivider and the City Engineer may agree on the use of another agency’s standard plans and specifications.

K. ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE
The developer shall work with the Planning Department to obtain the appropriate environmental clearance.

L. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

1. Revised Tentative Map
The Subdivider shall prepare a Project Map, consisting of a copy of the Tentative Map modified to depict all requirements of this subdivision report or the resolution of approval that alter the street layout, the lot configuration, or any other substantive item depicted on the Tentative Map as originally submitted.

The revised tentative map shall be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the Community Development Department Director and the City Engineer prior to initial submittal of the improvement plans or Final Map for this subdivision.
126
Item 4.
534
Item 27.

City Engineer’s Subdivision Report Page 8 of 8
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser5\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpB81.tmp

2. Subdivision Improvement Agreement
Subdivider shall complete all public and joint-use private improvements prior to recordation of the Final Map. If Subdivider wishes to record prior to the completion of said improvements, Subdivider shall enter into a subdivision improvement agreement in conformance with Chapter 16.16.210 “Completion of Improvements” of the Oroville Municipal Code.

3. Subdivision Fees
a) Plan Checking Fee
The Subdivider shall pay to the City of Oroville a subdivision plan checking fee upon filing the Final Map and/or improvement plans and specifications for checking in the following amount:

An initial deposit of 1½% of the estimated cost of all public and/or joint use private improvements exclusive of private utility facilities ($162.95 minimum). A final fee equal to actual City costs.
b) Inspection Fee
The Subdivider shall pay to the City of Oroville an inspection fee prior to commencing construction in the following amount:

An initial deposit of 3% of estimated cost of all public and/or joint use private improvements exclusive of private utility facilities ($162.95 minimum). A final fee equal to actual City costs.

Matt Thompson, P.E.

Acting City Engineer
127
Item 4.
535
Item 27.
1 City of Oroville

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2430 FAX (530) 538-2426 www.cityoforoville.org Approval Date To Be determined.
*** DRAFT***LETTER OF APPROVAL
RE: The Feather Ranch Subdivision Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-01 Dear Mr. Stoltey,
On _________________, the Oroville City Council completed its last necessary action to approve Feather Ranch Subdivision Tentative Map TSM 22-01. ***DRAFT*** CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
To be refined as project review progresses. Applicant and planning commissioners please comment.

Approved project: MD3 Investments plans to subdivide and develop a 44.97-acre vacant and undeveloped parcel (APN 030-230-098) into 172 single-family detached residential lots immediately west of 20th Street with access points off Feather Avenue, Biggs Avenue, and 20th Street. The homes and streets would be developed on approximately 40.197 acres, with a 0.95-acre (41,332 s.f.) passive open space at the southwest corner of Feather Avenue and 20th Street, and a meandering multi-use path along the central roadway (Gentle Rain Lane) of the subdivision.

Improvements to 20th Street and abutting roadways include curbs, gutters and sidewalks adjacent to the project site. Sidewalks would front 20th Street, Biggs Avenue, and Feather Avenue as well as along all internal proposed roadways. Greenway space will be provided along internal sidewalks, around the proposed 0.95-acre combined storm drainage retention basin and open space at the northeastern corner of the site, and fronting 20th Street and Biggs Avenue. Storm drainage facilities are proposed throughout the project site, with connections tying in together internally, prior to tying into storm drainage facilities located within 20th street.
128
Item 4.
536
Item 27.
2 Necessary discretionary approvals prior to approval of TSM 22-01:
 General Plan Amendment GPA 23-01, to change the Land Use Designation to Medium Low Density Residential.
 Zoning Change ZC 23-01, to change the Zoning to R-1.
 A Variance VAR 23-01 to allow the project to exceed airport overlay density requirements.
 An Override of the ALUC’s inconsistency determination for density in the Airport Area of Influence.

TSM 22-01 and Engineer’s Report
The Tentative Subdivision Map of August 8, 2022, has been approved subject to the conditions in the accompanying Engineer’s Report dated June 7, 2023. All conditions must be met prior to approval of the Final Map.

The following specific conditions apply:

1. Applicant shall obtain a will-serve letter from the Thermalito Water and Sewer District prior to approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map and conduct a capacity study with SC-OR.

2. The applicant shall provide a parkland dedication of 2.5 acres either to the Feather River Recreation and Park District and/or an in-lieu fee. Details to be worked out prior to project approval by the City Council.

3. Applicant shall assist as needed the process of annexation of the subdivision into Community Facilities Districts CFO2006-1 and CFO2006-2.

4. Fencing around the perimeter of the subdivision shall be wood at a minimum of 6-feet high.

5. A deed notice is required to be included in any parcel transfer document, which puts the buyer on notice that the house is within the airport area of influence and may therefore encounter discomfort, inconvenience or annoyance from the noise generated by operations at the airport.

6. Each lot shall be developed with a detached single-family residence designed in accordance with the City’s residential development, parking, and design standards in OMC 17.28.020,

17.12.070, and the City of Oroville Design Guidelines of 2015. Additional requirements are as follows:
a. No more than 172 lots for development with single family dwellings shall be created in this subdivision.
b. All conditions of approval of Tentative Subdivision Map 22-01 including access to and street improvements for 20th Street, Feather Avenue, Biggs Street, and all interior roads to the subdivision, shall be implemented. c. Required lot development standards shall conform to the normal R-1 development standards and as follows:
1) All homes shall include a 2-car garage.
2) A minimum of 4 different floor plans shall be utilized throughout the subdivision.
129
Item 4.
537
Item 27.
3 3) All homes constructed on lots in this subdivision shall conform as practicable to the goals, site planning, building design, landscape design, accessory structure and lighting guidelines of the City’s adopted Residential Design Guidelines.
4) Home models shall vary within the subdivision with no two same floor plans being adjacent to each other unless the floor plan is “flipped” and the exterior façade treatment is different. The same floor plans shouldn’t be built directly across from each other.
5) Structures shall have the mass of the front elevation broken into a minimum of two planes (increasing setbacks from front property line). 6) Colors: Hue variations in adjacent homes shall be provided to create diversity.

No adjacent home shall have the same color scheme. The front elevation shall have a minimum of a four-color paint scheme.
7) On corner lots, roof, window, and wall finish features shall be wrapped around to the street-side wall to continue the articulation of the front elevation and provide interest from the street.
8) Fencing: Typical side yard fencing shall be solid and continuous wood fencing or equivalent, not greater than 6’ in height. Fencing along the boundaries of the property shall be solid and continuous wood fencing not more than 6’ in height, and subject to approval of the Planning Manager prior to installation. 9) All fencing shall be installed by the contractor/developer prior to issuance of occupancy permits, weather permitting. In cases where weather may delay fencing and landscaping installation, occupancy may be permitted with approval of the City and the buyer. In such cases, fencing and landscaping shall be installed at the earliest possible time.

7. All site, building and landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Development Review Committee for review and approval prior to building plan submittal, and shall comply with the conditions in the ordinance approving Zoning Code ZC 20-02.

Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Applicant shall comply with the air quality, species survey, construction staging, and other requirements of the adopted Mitigation Monitoring Matrix found in the Final Environmental Impact Report
General Conditions

1. The applicant shall hold harmless the City, its Council members, Planning Commissioners, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from liability for any award, damages, costs, and/or fees incurred by the City and/or awarded to any plaintiff in an action challenging the validity of this permit or any environmental or other documentation related to approval of this permit. Applicant further agrees to provide a defense for the City in any such action.
130
Item 4.
538
Item 27.
4 2. The project shall remain in substantial conformance with the Conditions of Approval, as adopted and described above. Any subsequent minor changes in the project (as determined by the Zoning Administrator) may only occur subject to appropriate City review and approval. Any subsequent substantive changes in the project (as determined by the Zoning Administrator) may only occur subject to discretionary review by the Oroville Planning Commission or City Council, whichever is applicable.

3. The applicants shall have a current City of Oroville business license and any other applicable permit/license that may be required as part of their business operations.

4. Applicable construction plans, calculations, specifications, applications, forms, etc. shall be submitted to the Building Division for review prior to the start of any construction activities requiring a building permit. All applicable plan review and impact fees shall be paid at time of submittal.

5. All applicable development impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.

6. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with the requirements of all City, County, State, Federal, and other local agencies as applicable to the proposed project.

7. All grading, paving, excavation and site clearance, including that which is exempt from obtaining a permit, shall be performed in conformance with the City’s Engineering Design Standards; the Municipal Code; the requirements of the State Regional Water Quality Control Board; and any other applicable local, state and federal requirements.

8. The project shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance as found in the OMC Chapter 9.20.

9. All construction projects are required to implement dust control measures to reduce particulate matter emissions due to disturbance of exposed top-soils, such as watering of active areas where disturbance occurs, covering haul loads, maintaining clean access roads, and cleaning the wheels of construction vehicles accessing disturbed areas of the site. See the Mitigation Monitoring Matrix for specific mitigation requirements.

10. All grading and paving shall be conducted in compliance with the Butte County Air Quality Management District’s Indirect Source Guidelines, in order to prevent degradation of ambient air quality. This includes using electrically powered construction equipment whenever possible.

11. Applicant hereby certifies that any and all statements and information provided as part of the application are true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief.

Any misinformation provided, whether intentional or unintentional, that was considered in the issuance of this permit may be grounds for revocation. 131
Item 4.
539
Item 27.
5 Additional Draft Subdivision Construction and Occupancy Conditions –Civil Design Standards are in the Engineer’s Report
Prior to site grading.

1. All grading, paving, excavation, and site clearance, including that which is exempt from obtaining a permit, shall be performed in conformance with the City’s Engineering Design Standards; the Municipal Code; the requirements of the State Regional Water Quality Control Board; and any other applicable local, state, and federal requirements.

2. A site grading, drainage and improvement plan shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer, in conformance with City standards, and shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department prior to any work on the site. This plan shall also show:

I. The design of the sanitary sewer service system including the type and size of the sanitary sewer line lateral, and the proposed point of connection the sewer main.

II. Existing and proposed easements.

III. Proposed elevations of finished improvements (parking area, onsite curbs, planters, etc.) within the project at an adequate level of detail to demonstrate drainage flow directions within the project boundaries.

IV. A drainage and detention/retention facility sufficient that there is no increase in preproject peak stormwater discharge from the site for a 2-year, 10-year and 100-year storm event. On-site storm drainage shall be collected and retained/detained on-site and then transported via underground conduit to an approved drainage facility.

V. Drainage calculations to support the size of the detention or retention facility, and orifice calculations to support the design size of the stormwater flow control device.

VI. Frontage improvements to include curb, gutters and sidewalk constructed to ADA standards; asphaltic concrete pave out (1-foot minimum, or wider if necessary) along new curb, gutters and sidewalk adequate to provide proper street drainage along the project frontage.

VII.Location of streetlights to be constructed to City standards.

3. All construction projects are required to implement dust control measures to reduce particulate matter emissions due to disturbances of exposed top-soils, such as watering of active areas where disturbance occurs, covering haul loads, maintaining clean access roads, and cleaning the wheels of construction vehicles accessing disturbed areas of the site.

4. All grading and paving shall be conducted in compliance with the Butte County Air Quality Management District’s Indirect Source Guidelines in order to prevent degradation of ambient air quality.

5. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation monitoring program as approved for TSM 22- 01 Prior to the issuance of building permits.

6. Applicable construction plans, calculations, specifications, applications, forms, etc. shall be submitted to the Building Division for review prior to the start of any construction activities 132
Item 4.
540
Item 27.
6 requiring a building permit. All applicable plan review and impact fees shall be paid at time of submittal.

7. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Parks and Trees Department.

I. Planting shall be provided in as much of the front setback as is practical, excluding any areas with paved driveways or pedestrian paths. In no case shall more than 75% of the front setback be paved.

II. Where a side or rear property line is adjacent to a street, the site shall include a planting area along the property line with a width of at least 5 feet. Any fence around the property shall be located behind the planting area.

III. Plantings shall be drought tolerant and MWELO standards will apply.

IV. Landscaping shall be installed around the detention basin where visible from the street and adjacent residences.

8. The building plans shall include an architecturally compatible method of screening any roof mounted HVAC system, or if the units are placed on the ground, the unit shall be screened by landscaping or a decorative fence.

9. Applicant shall annex into a Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (LLMAD) and Benefit Assessment District (BAD) prior to issuance of building permits.

Prior to construction.

10. Obtain an encroachment permit from the City for any work in the public right-of-way.

11. All utilities shall be placed underground.

12. Developer will be responsible for the cost of all water improvements (meters, boxes, valves, lines, backflow devices, etc.), which are required to meet TWSD improvement standards.

The cost of all fire lines and hydrants shall also be the developer’s responsibility.

13. A Construction Storm Water Permit will be required by the State Water Resources Control Board if the project results in a disturbance (including clearing, excavation, filling and grading) of one or more acres. Construction activities that result in a land disturbance of less than one acre, but which are part of a larger common plan of development, also require a permit. The Permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board prior to construction.

Prior to occupancy.

14. All required landscaping and irrigation improvements shall be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

15. Buildings shall be addressed per City requirements. Building numbers shall comply with City Code 17.20.050(A).

16. Curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be constructed to City standards.

Other.

17. Street lighting shall be provided in accordance with City of Oroville requirements and accepted design criteria. A street lighting plan shall be submitted to the Public Works 133
Item 4.
541
Item 27.
7 Department. Streetlight poles shall be spun aluminum or other material as approved by the Public Works Department.

18. Home models shall vary within the subdivision with no two same floor plans being adjacent to each other unless the floor plan is “flipped” and the exterior façade treatment is different. The same floor plans shouldn’t be built directly across from each other.

19. Hue variations in adjacent homes shall be provided to create diversity. No adjacent home shall have the same color scheme.

20. Minor changes may be approved administratively by the Community Development Director or designee upon receipt of a written request by the applicant or designee. Changes deemed to be major or significant in nature shall require a formal application for amendment.

21. Pursuant to Section 17.12.010, the buildings shall conform to the performance standards of the Oroville Municipal Code to minimize any potential negative effects that the buildings, structures, lighting or use could have on its surroundings, and to promote compatibility with surrounding uses and areas.

22. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with the requirements of all City, County, State, Federal, and other local agencies as applicable to the proposed project.

23. Applicant hereby certifies that any and all statements and information provided as part of the application are true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief. Any misinformation provided, whether intentional or unintentional, that was considered in the issuance of this permit may be grounds for revocation.

The applicant shall hold harmless the City, its Council members, Planning Commissioners, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from liability for any award, damages, costs, and/or fees incurred by the City and/or awarded to any plaintiff in an action challenging the validity of this permit or any environmental or other documentation related to approval of this permit. Applicant further agrees to provide defense for the City in any such acti.
--- End of Conditions ---
If you have questions about the information in this letter, please contact me by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (530) 538-2408.

Sincerely,
Wes Ervin
Planner
134
Item 4.
542
Item 27.

Draft
Environmental Impact Report

FEATHER RANCH PROJECT
City of Oroville, California
CEQA Lead Agency:

City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, California 95965
Prepared by:

ECORP Consulting, Inc.
55 Hanover Lane
Chico, California 95973
April 2023
135
Item 4.
543
Item 27.
136
Item 4.
544
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-1 April 2023
2022-009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES-1 Introduction
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR, Draft EIR) evaluates the potential environmental effects of the proposed construction and operation of the Feather Ranch Project (Proposed Project) in the City of Oroville, Butte County, California. The City of Oroville is the Lead Agency responsible for preparation of this DEIR. This DEIR was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et. seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq). CEQA requires that the Lead Agency, in this case City of Oroville, consider the information contained in the DEIR prior to taking any discretionary action on the Project. The Lead Agency is the agency with primary responsibility for approval of a project. Other public agencies may also use this EIR to inform discretionary actions related to the Proposed Project.

This Summary has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15123, which states that an EIR should contain a brief summary of the Proposed Project and its consequences, and should identify:

1. each significant effect with proposed mitigation measures and alternatives that would reduce or avoid that effect,

2. areas of public controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by the agencies and the public, and

3. issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and how to mitigate the significant effects.

ES-2 Project Location and Setting
The Project is located directly southwest of the Feather Avenue/20th Street intersection in City of Oroville, California. Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 030-230-098 (Figures 2.0-1 and 2.0-2). The Project is 44.97 acres in size. The Surrounding uses include single-family homes and vacant land to the east of the Project Site. Rural residential uses and vacant land lie to the north of the Project Site; vacant land lies to the west of the Site, with rural residential uses and vacant land to the south. The Oroville Municipal Airport (OMA) is approximately 0.75 mile to the south of the Project Site and the Thermalito Forebay is 0.5 mile to the north (Figure 2.0-3).

As shown in Figure 3, surrounding land uses include a mixture of vacant land, single-family residential neighborhoods, OMA, a school, and light industrial and commercial uses near the Project Site as described below.

North. The Project Site’s northern boundary is generally bounded by a dirt access road with vacant land and a scattering of single-family residences fronting 21st Street off Grand Avenue. 137
Item 4.
545
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-2 April 2023
2022-009
East. The Project Site’s eastern boundary is generally bounded by 20th Street off Grand Avenue with a single-family residential neighborhood beyond the northern half of the eastern boundary, with vacant land beyond 20th Street on the southern half of the eastern boundary.

South. The Project Site’s southern boundary is generally bounded by a dirt access road with vacant land and a scattering of single-family residences fronting 20th Street beyond. CA State Route (SR) 162 is located approximately 1,570 feet from the Project Site’s southern boundary where 20th Street intersects.

Beyond SR 162 (Oro Dam Boulevard West), and in the northeastern corner and abutting the OMA area, there is an industrial storage yard with commercial uses on either side and the Northwest Lineman College.

West. The Project’s western boundary is generally bounded by a dirt access road with vacant land beyond and a scattering of single-family residences fronting Gold Country Lane and Chardonnay Way.

ES-3 Description of Proposed Project
The Proposed Project is the subdivision of a 44.97-acre site into 172 single-family lots located at the southwest corner of the Feather Avenue/20th Street intersection in the City of Oroville, California.

Figure 2.0-4 shows the Project Site Plan. Lots will range in size from 6,600 to 9,410 square feet (sf), and the average lot size is 7,450 sf. The subdivision is proposed as a phased map. Phase 1 proposes 68 lots, Phase 2 proposes 58 lots, and Phase 3 proposes 46 lots (Figure 2.0-4). Section 2.0 of this DEIR contains a detailed description of the Proposed Project.

ES-4 Project Objectives
The Feather Ranch Project includes the following objectives that encompass a variety of goals that aim to provide solutions to some of the state and city’s housing needs, while also considering the needs of future residents. The Project objectives area as follows:
 Develop an economically feasible housing plan that is compatible with the surrounding community in a low fire risk zone to provide permanent housing relief for the 50,000 displaced Paradise fire survivors.
 Fulfill the housing needs of the state, City of Oroville, and County of Butte by rezoning un-used isolated airport business park land to medium density residential homes to help address the current Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The housing units will be market-rate forsale units.  Create a vibrant residential community by providing a like-kind residential project that further adds to western Oroville’s current and future neighborhoods. The Project will include lots of 6,000 sf or larger, setback and landscaping buffers.
 Provide a well-connected open space network that includes the addition of a neighborhood park, bicycle paths and pedestrian sidewalks, open space buffers, and a space for recreational activities.  Incorporate the Building Code requirements for energy efficiencies and water savings. 138
Item 4.
546
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-3 April 2023
2022-009
ES-5 Project Alternatives
The CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 specifies that an EIR must describe and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. Chapter 5 of this DEIR describes the alternatives to the Proposed Project. These alternatives include:
 Alternative 1: No Project;
 Alternative 2: Reduced Project; and
 Alternative 3: Residential Densities Consistent with the Airport land Use Plan B1 Compatibility Zone.

ES-5.1 Alternative 1: No Project
Under CEQA, an EIR must include a comparative analysis of a No Project Alternative (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)). This requirement encourages a lead agency to compare the environmental effects of approving a proposed project with the effects of not approving it. The No Project Alternative generally assumes that the land area affected by Project construction would remain in its existing state, while taking into account what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the Project were not approved. No other development is proposed in the area or the Project Site. As such, Alternative 1 assumes that the Project Site would remain vacant for the foreseeable future.

ES-5.2 Alternative 2: Reduce Project
Alternative 2 would require a General Plan amendment and rezoning approval similar to the Proposed Project as the proposed uses under Alternative 2 are not allowed under the current General Plan land use designation and zoning district. As such, Alternative 2 would be a discretionary project pursuant to CEQA and require CEQA environmental review. Alternative 2 would be the development of the Project with the same proposed uses of the Project but on a reduced scale of approximately 75 percent of the Proposed Project’s size. This reduction would result in 129 single family units on the same 44.97-acre parcel.

Assuming that the average parcel size of 7,450 sf for the Proposed Project would also be used in Alternative 2, Alternative 2 would result in 7.3 more acres of open space than the Proposed Project 1 .

ES-5.3 Alternative 3: Smaller Project
Alternative 3 would allow for residential densities consistent with the Oroville Airport B1 Compatibility Zone of 0.1 dwelling unit per acre (1 unit per 10 acres). Those portions of the Project that are within the B2 Compatibility Zone would be developed at residential densities proposed by the Project. According to information provided by the Butte County Department of Development Services, Planning Division, 1 Proposed Project = 172 lots x 7,450 sf = 1,281,400 sf (29.4 acres). Alternative 2 = 129 lots x 7,450 s . = 961,050 sf (22.1 acres). 29.4 acres - 22.1 acres = 7.3 acres.
139
Item 4.
547
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-4 April 2023
2022-009
Airport Land Use Commission (2022), approximately 35.82 acres of the Project Site is within the B1 Compatibility Zone and 9.15 acres of the Site is within the B2 Compatibility Zone. Based on this information, 41 single family dwellings would be developed in Alternative 3 at the acreage and densities shown in Table 5.0-1. Three single family homes would have an average lot size of 11.94 acres and 38 homes with an average lot size of 10,488 square feet. However, note that these average lot sizes do not account for streets or any open space and are only rough estimates used for this alternative.

ES-6 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved by Lead Agency CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)(2) requires an EIR to identify areas of controversy or public interest.

Prior to the preparation of this EIR, ECORP prepared an Initial Study (IS) and Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project (Appendix 1.0). The City of Oroville distributed the IS and NOP for review and comment to the State Clearinghouse (SCH, #2022110054) and interested parties for a 33-day comment period from November 3 to December 5, 2022. Additionally, the City held a scoping meeting which was advertised with the publication of the NOP on November 3, 2022 and scheduled for November 17, 2022 in order to allow early public/agency input and comments about the Project, the IS and future environmental review.

No members of the public and agencies attended this meeting. The City received six NOP comment letters, which are summarized in Table 1.0-3 of Section 1.0 of this DEIR.

ES-7 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Table S.7-1 presents a summary of Project-specific environmental impacts analyzed and identified in this DEIR, the mitigation measures proposed for those impacts, and the level of significance after mitigation.

The analysis in this DEIR concludes that, although certain impacts are considered significant or potentially significant, the majority of these impacts could be avoided or reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. All impacts would be less than significant after the implementation of mitigation measures, with the exception of hazards related to airport safety, noise related to traffic, and traffic related to Vehicle Mile Traveled (VMT), which would remain significant even as no feasible mitigation is possible. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and transportation. 140
Item 4.
548
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-5 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1: Project implementation could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation BIO-1: Implement Erosion Control Measures and BMPs. The Project proponent shall implement erosion control measures and
BMPs to reduce the potential for sediment or pollutants at the Project site. Examples of appropriate measures are included below.
• Avoided aquatic resources should be clearly demarcated prior to construction. Avoidance buffers should be
consistent with the City of Oroville requirements and/or requirements of regulatory permits. Erosion control
measures should be placed between avoided aquatic
resources and the outer edge of the impact limits prior to commencement of construction activities. Such
identification and erosion control measures should be
properly maintained until construction is completed and the soils have been stabilized.
• Any fueling in the Study Area should use appropriate
secondary containment techniques to prevent spills.

BIO-2: Worker Environmental Awareness Program. The Project proponent shall require a mandatory Worker Environmental Awareness Program provided by qualified biologist for all contractors, work crews, and any onsite personnel to aid workers in recognizing special status species and sensitive LTS
141
Item 4.
549
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-6 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable biological resources that may occur on-site prior to any construction or grading of the site. The program shall include identification of the special status species and their habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and mitigation measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area.

BIO-3: Special-Status Species – Plants. There is potential or low potential for 23 special-status plants to occur within the Study Area. The following mitigation measures are required to minimize potential impacts to special-status plants.
• Perform floristic plant surveys according to USFWS, CDFW, and CNPS protocols prior to construction. Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and timed according to the appropriate phenological stage for identifying target species. Known reference populations shall be visited
and/or local herbaria records shall be reviewed, if
available, prior to surveys to confirm the phenological stage of the target species. If no special-status plants are found within the Project site, no further measures
pertaining to special-status plants are necessary.
• If special-status plants are identified within 25-feet of the Project impact area, implement the following measures:
142
Item 4.
550
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-7 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable • If avoidance of special-status plants is feasible, establish and clearly demarcate avoidance zones for special-status plant occurrences prior to construction. Avoidance zones shall include the extent of the special-status plants plus a 25-foot buffer, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist, and shall be maintained until the completion of construction. A qualified biologist/biological monitor shall be present must occur within the avoidance buffer to
ensure special-status plants are not impacted by the work. • If avoidance of special-status plants is not feasible, mitigate for significant impacts to special-status plants.

Mitigation measures shall be developed in consultation
with CDFW. Mitigation measures may include permanent
preservation of onsite or offsite habitat for special-status plants and/or translocation of plants or seeds from
impacted areas to unaffected habitats.

BIO-4: Special-Status Species – Invertebrates. There is potential for three federally listed special-status invertebrates to occur within the Study Area. The following mitigation measure is required to minimize potential impacts to special-status invertebrates.
• No Project construction shall proceed in areas supporting potential habitat for federally listed vernal pool
invertebrates, or within adequate buffer areas (250 feet or 143
Item 4.
551
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-8 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable lesser distance deemed sufficiently protective by a qualified biologist with approval from USFWS), until incidental take authorization has been issued by USFWS under Section 7
(Biological Opinion) or Section 10 (HCP) of the ESA and the Project proponent has abided by conditions in the BO or HCP, including all conservation and minimization measures.

Conservation and minimization measures shall include
preparation of supporting documentation describing
methods to protect existing vernal pools during and after project construction and compensatory mitigation for loss of suitable habitat.

BIO-5: Western Spadefoot. Western spadefoot have potential to occur within the Study Area. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and the following mitigation measure would avoid and/or minimize potential adverse effects to western spadefoot.
• A qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for western spadefoot in areas of potential habitat that would be
eliminated by the Project. The surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate time of year to detect western
spadefoot, generally the breeding season, according to
methods approved by CDFW. If western spadefoot is
found in habitat that will be eliminated or made
unsuitable for western spadefoot, a plan to collect and 144
Item 4.
552
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-9 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable relocate adult and larval western spadefoot and egg
masses to suitable habitat that will be preserved in
perpetuity as required according to the BO in Mitigation Measure BIO-4.

BIO-6: Blainville’s Horned Lizard. Blainville’s horned lizard have potential to occur within the Study Area. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and the following
mitigation measure would avoid and/or minimize potential adverse effects to Blainville’s horned lizard.
• A qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction Blainville’s horned lizard survey in Project impact areas within 48 hours prior to construction activities. Any
Blainville’s horned lizard individuals discovered in the Project work area immediately prior to or during Project activities shall be allowed to move out of the work area of their own volition. If this is not feasible, consult with CDFW to develop avoidance and minimization measures, which
may include, but not limited to, fencing avoidance areas, development of a relocation plan, and/or onsite
monitoring during site construction.

BIO-7: Special-Status Species – Birds. Three special-status birds and various other protected birds have the potential to nest within 145
Item 4.
553
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-10 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable the Study Area. The following mitigation is required to minimize potential impacts to nesting birds:
• If construction is to occur during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31), conduct a
preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project within 14 days of the
commencement of construction. The survey shall be
conducted within a 500-foot radius of Project work areas for raptors and within a 100-foot radius for other nesting birds. If any active nests are observed, these nests shall be designated a sensitive area and protected by an avoidance buffer established in coordination with CDFW until the
breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged and are no
longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival.

Preconstruction nesting surveys are not required for
construction activity outside the nesting season.

BIO-8: Swainson’s Hawk and Tricolored Blackbird. The Study Area supports potential foraging habitat for two state-listed birds:

Swainson’s hawk and tricolored blackbird. The following mitigation is recommended to minimize potential impacts to foraging habitat:
• Mitigate for the loss of Swainson’s hawk according to the 1994 CDFG’s Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for
146
Item 4.
554
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-11 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the
Central Valley of California. The required measures to
address Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat impact and
mitigation measure BIO-9 will be sufficient to mitigate impacts to tricolored blackbird foraging habitat.

BIO-2: Project implementation could have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation Implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO-9.

LTS
BIO-3: Project implementation could cause a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation BIO-9: Sensitive Natural Communities. The Project site supports potential Waters of the U.S. and State. In addition to Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2, the following mitigation measures are required for the protection of aquatic resources:
• Submit an aquatic resources delineation for the Project to the USACE and obtain a verification or Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination.
• File a request for authorization to fill Waters of the U.S. under the Section 404 of the federal CWA (Section 404
Permit) prior to discharging any dredged or fill materials into any Waters of the U.S. Mitigation measures will be LTS
147
Item 4.
555
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-12 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable developed as part of the Section 404 Permit process to
ensure no net loss of wetland function and values. To
facilitate such authorization, an application for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit (0.5 acre or less of impacts for
Nationwide Permit 29-Residential Developments) or an
Individual Permit for the Project should be prepared and submitted to USACE. Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. typically consists of a minimum of a 1:1 ratio for direct impacts; however final mitigation requirements will be developed in consultation with USACE.
• If necessary, file a request for a Water Quality Certification or waiver pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA must be
obtained from the RWQCB for Section 404 permit actions. • Pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, a
permit authorization from the RWQCB is required prior to the discharge of material in an area that could affect
Waters of the State. Mitigation requirements for discharge to Waters of the State within the Project Site will be
developed in consultation with the RWQCB.
148
Item 4.
556
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-13 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable

CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1: Project implementation could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation CUL-1: Cultural or Archaeological Resource Discovery. All subdivision improvement plans and grading plans shall
include the following:
• If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during any roadway or future
construction, all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist,
meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic
archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the
significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using
professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find:
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required.
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, he or she shall immediately notify the City and landowner. If the find is determined to be eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR, the City shall consult LTS
149
Item 4.
557
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-14 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate
treatment measures. Work may not resume within the nowork radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the site either: 1) is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to its satisfaction.
• If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, he or she shall ensure reasonable
protection measures are taken to protect the discovery
from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the Butte County Coroner (in accordance with Section
7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are
Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the
project (Section 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment
of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate
(Section 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will
150
Item 4.
558
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-15 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable not be further disturbed (Section 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate information center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or
recording a reinternment document with the county in
which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not
resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their
satisfaction.

CUL-2: Project implementation could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation Implement CUL-1
LTS
CUL-3: Project implementation could disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation Implement CUL-1
LTS
151
Item 4.
559
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-16 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable

GEOLOGY, SOILS AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
GEO-1: Project implementation could directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, or landslides.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation PALEO-1: Discovery of Unknown Paleontological Resources. If paleontological or other geologically sensitive resources are identified during any phase of Project development, the construction manager shall cease operation at the site of the discovery and immediately notify the City. The Project
proponent shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the find and to prescribe mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. In considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting
paleontologist, the City shall determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, project design, costs, land use assumptions, and other considerations. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted.

Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources is carried out.

LTS

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZ-1: If the Proposed Project is located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, the Proposed Project could result No feasible mitigation possible. SU
152
Item 4.
560
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-17 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project Area.

HAZ-2: Implementation of the proposed project, along with any foreseeable development in the project vicinity, result in cumulative impacts regarding safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area.

Impact Determination: Cumulatively Considerable and Significant and Unavoidable
No feasible mitigation possible. CC and SU
NOISE
NOI-1: Project implementation could result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Impact Determination: Significant and Unavoidable
No feasible mitigation possible. SU
NOI-4: Would implementation of the Proposed Project, in combination with existing, approved, proposed, and reasonably No feasible mitigation possible. CC and SU
153
Item 4.
561
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-18 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable foreseeable development in Butte County, result in a cumulatively considerable noise impact?
Impact Determination: Cumulative Considerable and Significant and Unavoidable

PUBLIC SERVICES
PUB-1: Project implementation could result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire, police, schools, and/or other public facilities.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation PUB-1: Annexation into CFD 2006-01 and CFD 2006-02. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the Project shall annex into both CFD 2006-01 and CFD 2006-02.

LTS

TRANSPORTATION
TR-2: Project implementation could conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

Impact Determination: Significant and Unavoidable
TR-1: Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements. Providing a pedestrian access network to link areas of the Project site encourages people to walk instead of drive. This mode shift results in people driving less and thus a reduction in VMT.

SU
154
Item 4.
562
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-19 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable The Project will provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The Project will minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. Physical barriers such as walls, landscaping, and slopes that impede pedestrian circulation will be eliminated. Some aspects of this measure are already included in the Proposed Project.

Increasing the use of pedestrian improvements would further reduce Project-related VMT. The range of effectiveness of this measure as described by BCAG is from 0.5 percent to 5.7 percent.

TR-2: Provide Traffic Calming Measures. Providing traffic calming measures encourages people to walk or use bicycles instead of using a vehicle. This mode shift will result in a decrease in VMT.

Project design will include pedestrian/bicycle safety and traffic calming measures in excess of jurisdiction requirements.

Roadways will be designed to reduce motor vehicle speeds and encourage pedestrian and bicycle trips with traffic calming features. Traffic calming features may include: marked
crosswalks, curb extensions, speed tables, raised crosswalks, raised intersections, median islands, tight corner radii, roundabouts or mini-circles, on-street parking, planter strips 155
Item 4.
563
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-20 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable with street trees, chicanes/chokers, and others. Some aspects of this measure are already included in the Proposed Project.

Increasing the use of traffic calming measures would further reduce Project-related VMT. The range of effectiveness of this measure as described by BCAG is from 0 to 1.7 percent.

TR-3: Contribute to a 20th Street Bicycle Facility. Providing bicycle facilities reduces VMT by encouraging use of non-vehicular forms of transportation. Connecting to existing bicycle facilities would provide access to Project site residents to a larger network of facilities.

The Project applicant shall contribute a fair share portion of the cost toward construction of the bikeway. Because the Bicycle Transportation Plan does not specify whether the 20th Street bikeway would be a Class I or Class II facility, it is not known whether the bikeway would be on 20th Street or
separate from the roadway. For the same reason, it is not known what the cost of the bikeway would be. As such, the Project’s fair share portion shall be negotiated between the applicant and the City of Oroville.

TR-4: Would the project, when considered with existing, proposed, planned, and approved development in the region, implementation of the proposed project would contribute to cumulative traffic Implement TR-1, TR-2, and TR-3
CC and SU
156
Item 4.
564
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-21 April 2023
2022-009
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Residual
Impact (with
Mitigation)
Notes: NI = No Impact, LTS = Less than Significant, SU = Significant, Unavoidable, CC = Cumulatively Considerable, LTCC = Less than Cumulatively Considerable volumes on local roadways that result in significant impacts to level of service and operations?
Impact Determination: Cumulative Considerable and Significant and Unavoidable

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR-1: Project implementation could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in PRC Section 21074.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant with Mitigation Implement CUL-1
LTS
157
Item 4.
565
Item 27.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Executive Summary ES-22 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
158
Item 4.
566
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms i April 2023
2022-009

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................ ES-1 ES-1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES-2 Project Location and Setting ................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES-3 Description of Proposed Project ............................................................................................................ ES-2 ES-4 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ ES-2 ES-5 Project Alternatives ..................................................................................................................................... ES-3 ES-6 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved by Lead Agency ................................................... ES-4 ES-7 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... ES-4

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 Purpose of the Draft EIR .............................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.2 Known Trustee and Responsible Agencies .......................................................................................... 1-2

1.3 Type of Document ......................................................................................................................................... 1-2

1.4 Intended Use of the EIR ............................................................................................................................... 1-3

1.5 Draft EIR Organization ................................................................................................................................. 1-3

1.6 Environmental Review Process ................................................................................................................. 1-4

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1 Project Location and Setting ..................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Project Objectives .......................................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.3 Project Description ........................................................................................................................................ 2-1

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION ............................................................................ 3-1

3.1 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................................................... 3.1-1

3.2 Biological Resources .................................................................................................................................. 3.2-1

3.3 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................................... 3.3-1

3.4 Energy .............................................................................................................................................................. 3.4-1

3.5 Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources ............................................................................... 3.5-1

3.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................................................................................................... 3.6-1

3.7 Hazards And Hazardous Materials ....................................................................................................... 3.7-1

3.8 Land Use And Planning ............................................................................................................................ 3.8-1

3.9 Noise ................................................................................................................................................................ 3.9-1

3.10 Population and Housing ....................................................................................................................... 3.10-1

3.11 Public Services ........................................................................................................................................... 3.11-1

3.12 Transportation ........................................................................................................................................... 3.12-1

3.13 Tribal Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 3.13-1 159
Item 4.
567
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms ii April 2023
2022-009

3.14 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................................... 3.14-1

4.0 OTHER REQUIRED CEQA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 4-1

4.1 Growth-Inducing Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts..................................................................................................... 4-1

5.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-1

5.2 Considerations for Selection of Alternatives ....................................................................................... 5-2

5.3 Alternatives Considered and Eliminated from Further Evaluation.............................................. 5-4

5.4 Alternatives Considered for Detailed Evaluation ............................................................................... 5-5

5.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative .................................................................................................. 5-20

6.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6-1

7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ....................................................................................................................................................... 7-1

7.1 City of Oroville (Lead Agency) .................................................................................................................. 7-1

7.2 ECORP Consulting, Inc. (EIR Preparation) ............................................................................................. 7-1

APPENDICES
Appendix 1.0 – Notice of Preparation And Public/Agency Comment Letters Appendix 3.1 - Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Feather Ranch Project Appendix 3.2 – Biological Resources Assessment and Wetland Delineation Appendix 3.4 – Energy Consumption Assessment
Appendix 3.9 – Noise Impact Assessment
Appendix 3.12 – Traffic Impact Study

LIST OF TABLES
Table ES-1. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures .................................................... ES-5 Table 1.1. Anticipated Agency Approvals and Reviews .................................................................................................... 1-1 Table 1.2. Potential Trustee and Responsible Agency Approvals and Reviews ...................................................... 1-2 Table 1-3. NOP Comments .......................................................................................................................................................... 1-5 Table 3-1. 2008 General Plan EIR - Expected 2030 Development Under the 2030 General Plan.................... 3-7 Table 3-2. 2015 General Plan SEIR – Expected 2030 Development Under the 2030 General Plan ................. 3-7 Table 3.1-1. BCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds ............................................................................................. 3.1-6 Table 3.1-2. Construction-Related Emissions ................................................................................................................. 3.1-10 Table 3.1-3. Operational-Related Emissions ................................................................................................................... 3.1-11 160
Item 4.
568
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms iii April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-1. RWQCB Jurisdictional Area .............................................................................................................................. 3.2-3 Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species ........................................................................................... 3.2-6 Table 3.5-1. Residential Electricity Consumption in Butte County 2017-2021..................................................... 3.4-3 Table 3.5-2. Residential Natural Gas Consumption in Butte County 2017-2021 ................................................ 3.4-3 Table 3.5-3. Automotive Fuel Consumption in Butte County 2018-2022 .............................................................. 3.4-4 Table 3.5-4. Proposed Project Energy and Fuel Consumption ................................................................................... 3.4-7 Table 3.6-1. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................. 3.6-6 Table 3.6-2. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................... 3.6-7 Table 3.9-1. Common Acoustical Descriptors ................................................................................................................... 3.9-4 Table 3.9-2. Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3.9-8 Table 3.9-3. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements .................................................................................................... 3.9-9 Table 3.9-4. Existing Roadway Noise Levels ................................................................................................................... 3.9-10 Table 3.9-5. Significant Increase in Transportation Noise ......................................................................................... 3.9-12 Table 3.9-6. Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure to Transportation Noise Sources .................................... 3.9-13 Table 3.9-7. Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure to Non-Transportation Noise Sources ......................... 3.9-13 Table 3.9-8. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels at Nearest Receptor .................................................... 3.9-18 Table 3.9-9. Proposed Project Predicted Traffic Noise Levels ................................................................................. 3.9-21 Table 3.9-10. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ...................................... 3.9-23 Table 3.9-11. Construction Vibration Levels at 60 Feet .............................................................................................. 3.9-24 Table 3.9-12. Cumulative Traffic Scenario ....................................................................................................................... 3.9-26 Table 3.11-1. Oroville Fire Department Apparatus ...................................................................................................... 3.11-2 Table 3.12-1. Level of Service – Existing Conditions .................................................................................................... 3.12-9 Table 3.12-2. Trips Per Unit ................................................................................................................................................. 3.12-17 Trips Per Unit ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3.12-17 Table 3.12-3. Project Trip Generation Estimates ......................................................................................................... 3.12-17 Table 3.12-4. Proposed Project Trip Distribution Percentages ............................................................................. 3.12-17 Table 3.12-5. Level of Service – Existing Plus Project Conditions ......................................................................... 3.12-22 Table 3.12-6. Level of Service – Existing Plus Project Conditions With Mitigation ....................................... 3.12-24 Table 3.12-7. Level of Service – Existing Conditions .................................................................................................. 3.12-31 Table 3.12-8. Level of Service – Existing Plus Project Conditions ......................................................................... 3.12-36 Table 3.12-9. Level of Service – Cumulative Plus Project Conditions With Mitigation ................................ 3.12-38 161
Item 4.
569
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms iv April 2023
2022-009
Table 5-1. Alternative 3 Residential Development ............................................................................................................. 5-6 Table 5-2. Comparison of the Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives in Relation to the Proposed Project ............................................................................................................................................................................... 5-21 Table 5-3. Comparison of Alternatives by Project Objectives ..................................................................................... 5-22

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Regional Location..................................................................................................................................................... 2-3 Figure 2-2. Site Location ............................................................................................................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-3. Surrounding Uses ..................................................................................................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-4. Site Plan........................................................................................................................................................................ 2-7 Figure 2-5. Street Sections and Storm Drain Leach Trench Detail ............................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2-6. Storm Drain Inlets and Leach Trench Locations......................................................................................... 2-11 Figure 3.2-1. Aquatic Resources Delineation Map .......................................................................................................... 3.2-5 Figure 3.9-1. Common Noise Levels ..................................................................................................................................... 3.9-2 Figure 3.12-1. Roadway Network and Intersections .................................................................................................... 3.12-3 Figure 3.12-2. Existing Traffic Volumes and Land Configurations ......................................................................... 3.12-8 Figure 3.12-3. Project Only Traffic Volumes Existing Background Conditions ............................................... 3.12-20 Figure 3.12-4. Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations............................................... 3.12-21 Figure 3.12-5. Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations ......................................... 3.12-30 Figure 3.12-6. Project Only Traffic Volumes Cumulative Background Conditions ........................................ 3.12-34 Figure 3.12-7. Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations ....................................... 3.12-35

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term Description
°C Degrees Celsius
˚F Degrees Fahrenheit
AB Assembly Bill
ABP Airport Business Park
AF acre feet
AFY Acre-Feet Per Year
AIA-O Airport Influence Area Overlay
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
AMSL Above Mean Sea Level
APE Area of Potential Effects
162
Item 4.
570
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms v April 2023
2022-009
Term Description
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
AWSC All-Way Stop-Control
BA Biological Assessment
BCAG Butte County Association of Governments
BCAQMD Butte County Air Quality Management District
BCC Bird of Conservation Concern
BCFD Butte County Fire Department
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BO Biological Opinion
BP Before Present
BRA Biological Resources Assessment
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAISO California Independent System Operator
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CalGreen California Green Building Standards Code
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFG California Department of Fish and Game
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CH4 Methane
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System City City of Oroville
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CRHR California Register of Historic Resources
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
CWA Clean Water Act
dB Decibel
dBA A-weighted decibels
DEIR, Draft EIR Draft Environmental Impact Report
DOF Department of Finance
163
Item 4.
571
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms vi April 2023
2022-009
Term Description
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
Draft SEIR Draft Supplemental EIR
DWR Department of Water Resources
EIR Environmental Impact Report
Element Open Space, Natural Resources, and Conservation Element EO Executive Order
EPS Emissions Performance Standard
ESA Endangered Species Act
FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act (
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FY Fiscal Year
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GLO General Land Office
gpd gallons per day
Handbook California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
HCP Habitat conservation Plan
HMMH Harris, Miller, Miller & Hanson, Inc.
hp Horsepower
Hz Hertz
I-5 Interstate 5
IEPR Integrated Energy Policy Report
IS Initial Study
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
ITP Incidental Take Permit
KDA KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
kV Kilovolt
KWh Kilowatt-Hours
Ldn Day-Night Average
Leq Equivalent Noise Level
Lmax Maximum Noise Level
Lmin Minimum Noise Level
LOS Level of Service
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Mgd Million Gallons Per Day
MLD Native American Most Likely Descendant
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Mwh Megawatt hour
MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan
NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program
164
Item 4.
572
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms vii April 2023
2022-009
Term Description
NEIC Northeastern Information Center
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOC Notice of Completion
NOP Notice of Preparation
NOx Oxides of Nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPPA Native Plant Protection Act
NPS National Park Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NSVAB Northern Sacramento Valley Air Basin
NWPR National Wetlands Protection Rule
O3 Ozone
OFD Oroville Fire Department
OMA Oroville Municipal Airport
OPR Office of Planning and Research
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PM10 Particulate Matter Less than 10 Microns in Diameter, Coarse Particulate Matter PM2.5 Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Microns in Diameter ppm Parts Per Million
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
Proposed Project Feather Ranch Project
PRC Public Resources Code
PRPA Paleontological Resources Preservation Act
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment
RMS Root Mean Square
ROG Reactive Organic Gas
RPS Renewables Portfolio Standard
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAFER Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response SB Senate Bill
SC-OR Sewerage Commission – Oroville Region’s
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCH State Clearinghouse
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
sf Square Foot/Feet
SIP State Implementation Plan
SLF Sacred Lands File
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
165
Item 4.
573
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents and Acronyms viii April 2023
2022-009
Term Description
SOI Sphere of Influence
SR State Route
SSC Species of Special Concern
STC Sound Transmission Class
SVAQEEP Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TAC Toxic Air Contaminant
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
TCRs Tribal Cultural Resources
TIS Traffic Impact Study
TMDP 2007 Thermalito Master Drainage Plan
TWSD Thermalito Water and Sewer District
UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology
USACE United States Army Corp of Engineers
USC U.S. Code
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WEAL Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc.

WTF Wastewater Treatment Facility
166
Item 4.
574
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-1 April 2023
2022-009

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of the Draft EIR
This Draft EIR identifies and evaluates the potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Proposed Project. The Project entails the subdivision of a 44.97-acre site into 172 single-family lots in Oroville California.

As described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15121(a), an EIR is an informational document that informs agency decision makers and the general public of the potentially significant environmental impacts of a project, identifies ways to minimize the significant impacts, and describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the project. CEQA requires that an EIR be prepared by the agency with primary responsibility over the approval of a project (referred to as the Lead Agency). The City of Oroville (City) as the Lead Agency has prepared this DEIR in accordance with the CEQA (PRC Sections 21000 et. seq.) and the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA (CCR Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.).

This DEIR is intended to provide information to public agencies and the general public regarding the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Project.

Public agencies are charged with the duty to consider and minimize environmental impacts of proposed development, where feasible, and are obligated to balance a variety of public objectives including economic, environmental, and social factors in their decision making. The City has determined that an EIR is the appropriate CEQA documentation due to the potential for significant environmental impacts that could result from approval of the requested actions and development of the Proposed Project. This Draft EIR evaluates the existing environmental conditions in the area, analyzes potential environmental impacts due to the implementation of the Project, and identifies feasible mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce the magnitude of those impacts. CEQA requires a Lead Agency neither approve nor implement a project unless significant environmental impacts have been reduced, or, if a Lead Agency approves the project even though significant impacts identified in the DEIR cannot be fully mitigated, the Lead Agency must state in writing the reasons for its action by adopting Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091).

Table 1.1. Anticipated Agency Approvals and Reviews
Agency Permit or Approval
City of Oroville City Council • Certification of the EIR, • Approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation for the site from Airport Business Park to Residential -Single Family,
• Approval of a Rezoning from Airport Business Park
(ABP)and Airport Influence Area Overlay (AIA-O) to Single Family Residential (R-1), and
• Approval of the Tentative Subdivision map
167
Item 4.
575
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-2 April 2023
2022-009

1.2 Known Trustee and Responsible Agencies
Other public agencies may use this DEIR to issue approvals and permits related to the Proposed Project.

For the purpose of CEQA, the term trustee agency means a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of California. In CEQA, the term responsible agency includes all public agencies other than the lead agency that may have approval authority in some regard associated with the Proposed Project. A list of agency approvals that may be required to implement the Proposed Project is provided in Table 1.2. The types of actions that these agencies, as well as other agencies not included on this list, may take in connection with the Proposed Project include, but may not be limited to the following:
 Approve, adopt, or amend applicable plans, policies, or programs,  Make findings of consistency,
 Approve and issue permits,
 Approve agreements,
 Provide authorization and approval of funding, and
 Provide service.

Table 1.2. Potential Trustee and Responsible Agency Approvals and Reviews Agency Review
Butte County Air Quality Management District
(BCAQMD)
Dust control plan
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control
Board
Construction General Permit
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Review of the Feather Ranch Project for compliance with the Oroville Municipal Airport Land Use Plan

1.3 Type of Document
CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines identify several types of EIRs, each applicable to different project circumstances. This EIR is for a specific development project with defined parameters. As such, this EIR is a project EIR. Project EIRs are defined by CEQA Guidelines (Section 15161) as:
“The most common type of EIR examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR should focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project. The EIR shall examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation.”
168
Item 4.
576
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-3 April 2023
2022-009

1.4 Intended Use of the EIR
This Draft EIR is intended to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Project based on an equal level analysis of the three proposed alternatives. This EIR in its final form will be used by the City in considering approval of the Proposed Project. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126, the EIR will be used as the primary environmental document in consideration of all subsequent planning and permitting actions associated with the Project, to the extent such actions require CEQA compliance and as otherwise permitted under applicable law.

1.5 Draft EIR Organization
This DEIR is organized as follows:
 The Summary provides summary information on the Project location and setting, Project characteristics, areas of controversy and issues to be resolved, Project alternatives, and a summary of impacts and mitigation measures.
 Section 1.0 of the DEIR provides an introduction to the Proposed Project, the purpose of the DEIR, a description of the organization of the DEIR, the intended uses of the DEIR, and a description of the public review process.
 Section 2.0 provides a description of the Project location, Project objectives, and the elements of the Proposed Project.
 Section 3.0 provides the environmental analysis of the Proposed Project. This includes the description of the regulatory background, environmental setting (existing conditions), the analysis of environmental impacts, and a discussion of mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate any significant environmental impacts.
 Section 4.0 addresses other aspects of compliance with CEQA including a description of significant and unavoidable adverse impacts, effects found not to be significant, significant irreversible environmental changes, and growth-inducing impacts.  Section 5.0 discusses the alternatives considered and rejected, alternatives considered and analyzed, and potential environmental impacts of implementing alternatives to the Proposed Project, including the No Project Alternative. This chapter also identifies the Environmentally Superior Alternative in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2).  Section 6.0 provides the references used to prepare the EIR.  Section 7.0 provides a list of the DEIR preparers.
 Appendices contain information that supplements or supports the DEIR. 169
Item 4.
577
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-4 April 2023
2022-009

1.6 Environmental Review Process

1.6.1 Notice of Preparation and Initial Study
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Oroville, as Lead Agency, prepared an IS and NOP for an EIR on the Proposed Project. A copy of the IS and NOP are provided in Appendix 1.0-A1. The City of Oroville distributed the IS and NOP for review and comment to the SCH (#2022110054) and interested parties for a 33-day comment period from November 3 to December 5, 2022.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15063 (c) provides the purpose and use of an IS. Section 15063(c) is as follows:
(c) Purposes. The purposes of an Initial Study are to:
(1) Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or a Negative Declaration.
(2) Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Negative Declaration.
(3) Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by:
(A) Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, (B) Identifying the effects determined not to be significant, (C) Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant, and
(D) Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis of the project’s environmental effects. (4) Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; (5) Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; (6) Eliminate unnecessary EIRs;
(7) Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.

The IS determined that the Proposed Project would have a less than significant impact or no impacts in the following IS analysis areas:

Aesthetics, Mineral Resources,
Agriculture and Forest Resources, Public Services (except for fire protection), Geology and Soils, Recreation,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(except for airport hazards),
Wildfires
Utilities (except for wastewater services).

Hydrology and Water Quality,

1.6.2 Scoping Meeting
The scoping meeting was advertised with the publication of the NOP on November 3, 2022 and scheduled for November 17, 2022 in order to allow early public/agency input and comments about the Project, the 170
Item 4.
578
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-5 April 2023
2022-009
IS and future environmental review. No members of the public and agencies attended this meeting. The City received six NOP comment letters, summarized in Table 1-3. The comment letters are included in Appendix 1.0-A2. These comments were considered as a part of the EIR analysis.

Table 1-3. NOP Comments
Name of Commenter/
Agency Comment Summary
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
The comment letter provides CDFW’s role in the protection of fish and wildlife in the state identifying CDFW as a trustee and responsible agency under CEQA. The letter also provides guidance for the assessment of biological resources including the information that should be provided in a Biological Assessment (BA). The comment letter continues and states that the EIR should provide a thorough discussion of the Project’s potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on biological resources and provides information that should be discussed in an EIR. The letter states that the EIR should include appropriate and adequate avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures for all direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts that are expected to occur as a result of the construction and long-term operation and maintenance of the Project. The letter provides information on special-status species levels and the requirement for mitigation of impacts to these species. The letter also discusses the California Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), the Lake and Streambed Alteration Program, and required filing fees.

Native American Heritage
Commission
The comment letter provides the requirements for Native American consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 52. The letter also provides information regarding mitigation for impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) and recommendations for cultural resources assessments.

Butte County Air Quality
Management District
The comment letter provides information on air pollutant screening threshold for the air district and recommends using the latest version of California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) to perform modeling and quantification of pollutants created by construction and operational activities to estimate impacts of criteria air pollutants as well as greenhouse gases.

Washoe Tribe of Nevada
and California
The response to the NOP states “At this time we have no interest in the project.” Butte County Public Works The comment letter expresses concern about roadway improvements necessary to meet the transportation and safety demands associated with the project and that impact studies be performed, referencing the Butte County 2007 Thermalito Master Drainage Plans (updated in 2009), which provides drainage information in the area and provides a consistent area-wide analysis.

Jeanette Morton The comment letter expresses opposition to the project unless the City does something to address the lack of adequate response in regard to fire in the area.

1.6.3 Draft EIR
As a result of the IS analysis, comments received during the NOP scoping meeting and public review period, the City determined that the Proposed Project could have significant environmental impacts to certain environmental resources and that an EIR should be prepared. These environmental resources 171
Item 4.
579
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-6 April 2023
2022-009
include air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas and climate change, hazards and hazardous materials (airport hazards only), noise, paleontological resources, population and housing, public services (fire protection only) , transportation, tribal cultural resources and utilities (wastewater services only). This Draft EIR provides this analysis.

This document constitutes the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR contains a description of the Project, a description of the environmental setting, identification of Project impacts, alternatives, and feasible mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant. Upon completion of the Draft EIR, the City will file the Notice of Completion (NOC) with the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to begin the public review period (PRC Section 21161).

1.6.4 Public Notice/Public Review
Concurrent with the NOC, the City will provide public notice of the availability of the Draft EIR for public review and invite comment from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties.

The public review and comment period is 45 days. Notice of the time and location of any public meetings and hearings will be published prior to the meeting/hearing in accordance with applicable law. All comments or questions regarding the Draft EIR should be addressed to:

Wes Ervin, Principal Planner
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, California 95965
Comments may also be sent to Mr. Ervin via e-mail at: [email protected]

1.6.5 Response to Comments/Final EIR
Following the public review period, a Final EIR (FEIR) will be prepared. The FEIR will respond to all comments received during the public review period that raise significant environmental concerns and may contain any necessary revisions to the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR, as revised and combined with responses to comments, will constitute the Final EIR.

1.6.6 Certification of the EIR/Project Consideration
The City Council will review and consider the FEIR. If the City Council finds that the FEIR is adequate and complete, the City Council may certify the FEIR. Additionally, upon review and consideration of the FEIR, the Council may take action to approve, revise, or reject the Proposed Project. Any decision to approve the Project would be accompanied by written findings in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), as described below, must also be adopted for mitigation measures that have been incorporated into or imposed on the Project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment. The MMRP will be designed to ensure that these measures are enforceable and carried out during Project implementation. 172
Item 4.
580
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-7 April 2023
2022-009

1.6.7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
CEQA Section 21081.6(a) requires lead agencies to adopt an MMRP to describe measures that will be adopted and made a condition of Project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The specific reporting or monitoring program required by CEQA is not required to be included in the EIR; however, it must be presented to the City Council for adoption.

Throughout the EIR, mitigation measures for potentially-significant environmental impacts have been clearly identified and presented in language that will facilitate establishment of an MMRP. Any mitigation measures adopted by the City Council as conditions for approval of the Project will be included in an MMRP to ensure enforceability and verify compliance.
173
Item 4.
581
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Introduction 1-8 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
174
Item 4.
582
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-1 April 2023
2022-009

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 Project Location and Setting
The Project is located directly southwest of the Feather Avenue/20th Street intersection in City of Oroville, California. Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 030-230-098 (Figures 2-1 and 2-2). The Project is 44.97 acres in size. The Surrounding uses include single-family homes and vacant land to the east of the Project Site. Rural residential uses and vacant land lie to the north of the Project Site; vacant land lies to the west of the Site, with rural residential uses and vacant land to the south. The Oroville Municipal Airport (OMA) is approximately 0.75 mile to the south of the Project Site and the Thermalito Forebay is 0.5 mile to the north (Figure 2-3).

2.2 Project Objectives
Project objectives are required to be provided in an EIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b) states that:
“[a] clearly written statement of objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the Project and may discuss the Project benefits.”
The Project objectives area as follows:
 Develop an economically feasible housing plan that is compatible with the surrounding community in a low fire risk zone to provide permanent housing relief for the 50,000 displaced Paradise fire survivors.
 Fulfill the housing needs of the state, City of Oroville, and County of Butte by rezoning un-used isolated airport business park land to medium density residential homes to help address the current RHNA. The housing units will be market-rate for-sale units.  Create a vibrant residential community by providing a like-kind residential project that further adds to eastern Oroville’s current and future neighborhoods. The Project will include lots of 6,000 sf or larger, setback and landscaping buffers.
 Provide a well-connected open space network that includes the addition of a neighborhood park, bicycle paths and pedestrian sidewalks, open space buffers, and a space for recreational activities.  Incorporate the Building Code requirements for energy efficiencies and water savings.

2.3 Project Description
The Proposed Project is the subdivision of a 44.97-acre site into 172 single-family lots located at the southwest corner of the Feather Avenue/20th Street intersection in the City of Oroville, California. Figure 2-4 provides the Project Site Plan. Lots will range in size from 6,600 to 9,410 sf, average lot size is 7,450 sf. The 175
Item 4.
583
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-2 April 2023
2022-009
subdivision is proposed as a phased map. Phase 1 proposes 68 lots, Phase 2 proposes 58 lots, and Phase 3 proposes 46 lots (Figure 2-4).

Lots within the Project will be served by a grid of internal cul-de-sac streets, including curbs, gutters and sidewalks. The Project’s north/south running street (Street A) will be the connecting street for all of the culde-sac streets. The Project will also construct an extension of Feather Avenue on the north Project boundary and Biggs Avenue on the south Project boundary. These two streets, along with the existing 20th Street, will provide Project access. All streets will be built to City of Oroville roadway standards (Figure 2-5).

Improvements to 20th Street include curbs, gutters and sidewalks adjacent to the Project Site.

The Project includes amenities such as a passive park on Lot A with pedestrian pathways and a storm drainage basin. The Project also includes the development of a bicycle/pedestrian meandering pathway along the east side of Street A separated from the street by greenway space and bicycle/pedestrian pathway connections from the east end of Project streets to 20th Street.

Storm drainage improvements will include the installation of underground storm drain pipes and storm water leach trenches beneath the curb, gutter and sidewalk to detain and percolate additional runoff generated by the Project improvements. Figures 2-5 through 2-8 show storm drain trench locations and detail. The Project storm drain system will connect to the existing City of Oroville storm drain facilities in 20th Street.

The Project Site is currently within the City of Oroville General Plan land use designation of Airport Business Park (ABP) and zoning district of ABP with an Airport Influence Area Overlay (AIA-O). None of these designations allow the development of residential uses at the density of 3.82 units per acre requested for the Proposed Project. As a part of the Project, a General Plan amendment changing the Project Site to Medium Low Density Residential (3 to 6 units per acre) and a rezoning to Single Family Residential (R-1) has been requested.

The Project Site is also within the B1 and B2 Compatibility Zones for the Oroville Municipal Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan. The B1 zone allows residential development of 0.1 units per acre and the B2 zone residential development of 0.5 units per acre. As such, these Compatibility Zones do not allow residential development at the density proposed for the Project. The consequence of the Project Site being within the B1 and B2 zones is explained further in Section 3.8 of this Draft EIR.

The Project Site is currently vacant undeveloped land. Elevations range from 230 feet Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL) at the southwest corner of the Project Site to 190 feet AMSL at the northeast corner, generally sloping from west to east.

City-required approvals include a General Plan amendment, rezone, and a tentative subdivision map.

2.3.1 Construction Timing
Construction is anticipated to start in 2024 and last through 2026. The construction will be phased as follows: Phase 1 (Lots 1-68) to occur in 2024, Phase 2 (Lots 69-126) in 2025, and Phase 3 (Lots 141-172) in 2026.
176
Item 4.
584
Item 27.
32 70
70 5
Red Bluff
Feather
River
20 20
20 45
49 49
65 65
70 16
113
162
5 Lake Oroville
State
Recreation Area
South Yuba
River State Park
Auburn State
Recreation Area
Sacramento Riv
Nat'l Wildlife
Ref
Orland
Live Oak
Willows
Colusa
Paradise
Grass Valley
Chico
Yuba City
^_
Project
Location
San Francisco
Los Angeles
Map Date: 9/21/2022
Sources: ESRI
Location: N:\2022\2022-009 Oroville 20th Street Residential Development\MAPS\CEQA\Oroville 20th CEQA.aprx - Oroville20th Regional Location 20220920 (JSwager - 9/21/2022) I
0 5 10
Miles
2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Figure 2-1. Regional Location
177
Item 4.
585
Item 27.

Project
Location
Map Date: 9/21/2022
Sources: ESRI, USGS, NAIP (2020)
Location: N:\2022\2022-009 Oroville 20th Street Residential Development\MAPS\CEQA\Oroville 20th CEQA.aprx - Oroville20th Site Location 20220920 (JSwager - 9/21/2022) I
0 1
Miles
2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Figure 2.2. Site Location
178
Item 4.
586
Item 27.

Rural
Residential
Vacant Land
Vacant Land
Vacant Land
Vacant Land
Rural Residential
Single
Family
Residential
Thermalito
Forebay
Map Date: 9/21/2022
Sources: ESRI, USGS, NAIP (2020)
Location: N:\2022\2022-009 Oroville 20th Street Residential Development\MAPS\CEQA\Oroville 20th CEQA.aprx - Oroville20th Surrounding LandUse 202209201 (JSwager - 9/21/2022) I
0 1,000
Feet
2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Figure 2-3. Surrounding Uses
Map Contents
Project Site
179
Item 4.
587
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-6 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
180
Item 4.
588
Item 27.

Figure 2-4. Site Plan
2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Source: W. Gilbert Engineering
181
Item 4.
589
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-8 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
182
Item 4.
590
Item 27.

Figure 2-5. Street Sections and Storm Drain Leach Trench Detail 2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Source: W. Gilbert Engineering
183
Item 4.
591
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-10 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
184
Item 4.
592
Item 27.

Figure 2.6. Storm Drain Inlets and Leach Trench Locations 2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Source: W. Gilbert Engineering
185
Item 4.
593
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-12 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
186
Item 4.
594
Item 27.

Figure 2-6b. Storm Drain Inlets and Leach Trench Locations (continued) 2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Source: W. Gilbert Engineering
187
Item 4.
595
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-14 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
188
Item 4.
596
Item 27.

Figure 2-6c. Storm Drain Inlets and Leach Trench Locations (continued) 2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Source: W. Gilbert Engineering
189
Item 4.
597
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Description 2-16 April 2023
2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
190
Item 4.
598
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-1 April 2023 2022-009

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION

3.0.1 Introduction
Chapter 3.0 of this DEIR provides separate sections for each environmental topic. Each section describes the environmental setting (existing conditions) and regulatory setting; direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project; and mitigation measures to reduce or avoid significant impacts.

As part of the scoping process described in Section 1.6, the City of Oroville prepared an IS and NOP for an EIR on the Proposed Project and received comments on the scope of the EIR from interested agencies, organizations and individuals (Appendix 1.0). As a result of the scoping process, the City determined that the environmental issue areas to be evaluated in the DEIR are:
 3.1 Air Quality
 3.2 Biological Resources
 3.3 Cultural Resources
 3.4 Energy
 3.5 Geology, Soils and Paleontological
Resources (paleontological resources
only)
 3.6 Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change
 3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(airport hazards only)
 3.8 Land Use
 3.9 Noise
 3.10 Population and Housing
 3.11 Public Services (fire protection only)
 3.12 Transportation
 3.13 Tribal cultural Resources
 3.14 Utilities (wastewater and storm
drainage services only)
Issues Not Included for Further Review in this DEIR
In addition to the resource subjects listed in Section 3.1, the City considered other resource subject areas in determining the potential of the Project to result in significant effects. CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(d) enables the lead agency to focus the EIR on the issue areas on which the Project could have significant effect, but the lead agency must provide a brief explanation of the reasons for determining that other effects would not be significant or potentially significant.

Specifically, CEQA contemplates using an IS to identify a project’s insignificant and potentially significant effects, and then focuses the project EIR analysis on the areas where potentially significant effects have been identified:
"Effects dismissed in an Initial Study as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed further in the EIR unless the Lead Agency subsequently receives information inconsistent with the finding in the Initial Study. A copy of the Initial Study may be attached to the EIR to provide the basis for limiting the impacts discussed." (CEQA Guidelines, § 15143.)
191
Item 4.
599
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-2 April 2023 2022-009
"An EIR shall contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that various possible significant effects of a project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR. Such a statement may be contained in an attached copy of an Initial Study" [CEQA Guidelines Section 15128. See also: PRC Sections 21002.1(e), 21100(c); CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15006(d), and 15063(c)(3)].

As discussed in Section1.0, the City prepared and circulated the NOP and IS for this DEIR in November 2022. The NOP and IS are included with this DEIR as Appendix 1.0. The discussion below describes the resource subjects that were previously analyzed in the IS and determined to not require further analysis in this DEIR. For each of the issues listed, the 2022 IS found the Project to have no impact or a less-thansignificant impact. Mitigation measures to reduce the level of impact were neither recommended nor required to avoid potentially significant impacts in each of these issue areas.

The decision not to pursue further evaluation in this DEIR considered all six comment letters on the NOP/IS.

Aesthetics
The City’s General Plan identifies that views of the Feather River and Table Mountain are considered important scenic views in the City. However, as discussed in the IS, the construction of the Project would not result in any degradation of views of Table Mountain or the Feather River. Additionally, the Proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of an officially designated scenic highway. Further, the City’s 2030 General Plan policies and the Design Guidelines would be effective in reducing the visual prominence and aesthetic impact of new development. Therefore, the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. Finally, adherence to the Design Guidelines and Municipal Code would reduce the impacts of daytime glare and nighttime lighting by requiring the design to limit lighting leakage and glare.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
The Department of Conservation identifies the Project Site as Grazing Land. According to the California Important Farmland Finder, there is currently no designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the Project Site, nor within the Project vicinity. Additionally, none of the land within the Project Site or vicinity is under a Williamson Act contract. Finally, no identified forest lands exist on the Project Site or within the vicinity of the Project. As such, the Project would not have the potential to convert agricultural land or forest resources.

Geology and Soils
The Proposed Project Site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zone. The Site is not within a currently established State of California Earthquake Fault Zone for surface fault rupture hazards. No active or potentially active faults are known to pass directly beneath the Project Site. Compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements, as well as implementation of the General Plan Policies P1.2 and the California Building Code 192
Item 4.
600
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-3 April 2023 2022-009
(CBC), would ensure that soil erosion and related impacts would be less than significant. Finally, according to General Plan Figure SAF-2, the Project Site is located in an area that has a high potential for expansion.

However, standard procedures used in the construction of concrete footings as required by the CBC and adherence General Plan Policy P1.2 requiring a site-specific geotechnical report, will reduce this potential impact to less than significant despite the shrink-swell potential identified for Project Site soils.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Project construction would involve the use of hazardous materials such as diesel fuel. The transport, storage, use, and disposal of such materials would be done in compliance with local, state, and federal regulation and in compliance with fuels and materials Best Management Practices to be established in the construction SWPPP that would be prepared for the Project and implemented during construction.

Potential risks associated with the handling of fuels and other potentially hazardous materials during construction would be sufficiently addressed through such compliance and management and would not pose a substantial risk of exposure or significant environmental effects.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Oroville Municipal Code Section 15.88.060 Standards for Grading, Excavation And Site Clearance requires sedimentation and erosion control for all grading and site preparation activities. The Proposed Project would be required to prepare and comply with an approved SWPPP and Municipal Code Section 15.88.060. The Project would not use groundwater as a domestic water source. There are no creeks, streams or rivers on or near the Project Site. As such, siltation of on- or offsite waterways would not occur. Project compliance with General Plan policies and Section 16.16.130 of the Municipal Code would require stormwater facilities that would restrict stormwater flows from the Project Site. Federal Emergency Flood Management Agency flood hazard map 06007C0788E indicates that the entire Project Site is in unshaded Zone X. The Project Site is not located within a flood zone. According to Figure SAF-3 of the 2030 General Plan, the Project Site is within the inundation area of Lake Oroville and failure of the Oroville Dam could result in release of water held behind the dam, and inundation of much of the city and surrounding area. However, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is continually assessing Oroville Dam; the Oroville Dam is formally inspected multiple times each year by various entities. The dam is inspected twice a year by the California DWR’s Division of Safety of Dams and annually by the Federal Energy Relicensing Commission Dam Safety Program. Therefore, an event such as the failure of Lake Oroville Dam has a low probability of occurring and is not considered to be a reasonably foreseeable event.

Land Use and Planning
The Project Site is located in the western area of the City. The only established residential community near the Project is a small subdivision located on the eastern boundary of the Project Site. The Project would be accommodated by existing roadways and would not require construction of new roadways that would preclude access to the surrounding area. As such, the Proposed Project would not physically divide an established community,
193
Item 4.
601
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-4 April 2023 2022-009
Mineral Resources
The Project site is not within a designated Mineral Resource Zone and would not have the potential to result in the loss of availability of valuable mineral resources.

Public Services
The Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police, schools, and parks facilities.

Recreation
The Project would be subject to Conservation Element Policy P3.1 requiring the dedication of land, the payment of in-lieu fees, or both for parks and recreational facilities . Therefore, Project impacts relating to parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant.

Utilities and Service Systems
Water
The Project includes the future development of 172 single-family homes and is anticipated to have an average water demand of 402 gallons per day (gpd) per housing unit or 69,066 gpd for the Project as a whole. The 69,066 gpd for the Project calculates to approximately 25.2 million gallons per year or 77.34 Acre-Feet (AF) Per Year (AFY) of water use. According to the Reginal Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Thermalito Water and Sewer District (TWSD) had a total demand of 2,295.75 AF of water in 2021. The addition of 77.34 AF from the Proposed Project would not result in an exceedance of the TWSD surface water supply of 8,200 AF. As such, there would be sufficient water supply available to adequately offset future water demands projected for the Proposed Project.

Storm Drainage
The Project’s storm drain system is designed to control all site storm waters and not allow an increase of offsite storm water flow. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact to storm drainage facilities. However, comments received during the public review of the IS provided further information regarding storm drainage in the vicinity of the Project. As such, this impact area is further discussed in this EIR.

Electric Power
Electricity is provided to the Project Site by Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). The electricity provider’s ability to provide its services concurrently for each project is evaluated during the development review process. No new electric facilities will be required to provide electricity to the Project.

Wildfire
The Project Site is not in an area designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Furthermore, no Very High FHSZs are located nearby. Also, the 194
Item 4.
602
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-5 April 2023 2022-009
Project Site is not located in a State Responsibility Area (CAL FIRE 2022). The Project does not include any actions that would impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No construction activities would impede the use of surrounding roadways in an emergency evacuation. The Project would have no impact in this area.

3.0.2 Environmental Baseline
Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15125(a)), the environmental setting used to determine the impacts associated with the Project normally is based on the environmental conditions that existed in the Project Area at the time the NOP was published. However, the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15125(a)) also says that where existing conditions change or fluctuate over time, a lead agency may define existing conditions by referencing historic conditions, conditions expected when a project becomes operational, or projected future conditions beyond the date of initial project operations, if doing so would meet CEQA’s objective of giving the public and decisionmakers the most accurate and understandable picture practically possible of the project’s likely near-term and long-term impacts.

For purposes of this EIR, environmental baseline is generally defined as conditions that existed within the Project Study Area at the time of NOP circulation, or November 3, 2022. This provides the basis for the determination of the majority of Project impacts, i.e., the changes to those conditions brought about by Project construction and operation either directly or indirectly. When the environmental baseline is substantially different than described above, the specific conditions and assumptions relied on for the issue area are described.

3.0.3 Impact and Mitigation Measure Terminology
This DEIR analyzes the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts of the Proposed Project. The determination of whether an impact is considered significant is based on specific significance criteria. Under CEQA, these criteria (also called Thresholds of Significance) are used to make a determination of significance for each environmental impact evaluated. An adverse impact that exceeds the significance criteria is considered significant, and an impact that does not exceed the criteria is considered less than significant. The CEQA significance criteria used in this DEIR are based on CEQA’s mandatory findings of significance (as summarized in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15065); the checklist presented in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines in effect when the Draft EIR was prepared; and where appropriate, factual or scientific data and regulatory standards of federal, state, and local agencies.

For CEQA purposes, impacts in this DEIR are classified as:
 No Impact – There would not be any change to the environment as a result of the project.  Less than Significant Impact - A project impact is considered less than significant if it would not exceed the threshold of significance and therefore would not cause a substantial adverse change in the environment. No mitigation is required for a less than significant impact.  Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation - A project impact is considered significant if it results in a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions of the environment. Significant impacts are identified by the comparison of the project’s effects to the established thresholds of 195
Item 4.
603
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-6 April 2023 2022-009
significance. Mitigation measures are identified, where feasible, to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, or compensate for significant impacts of the project, in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.4). If project impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level after the implementation of mitigation, the impact is classified as less than significant with mitigation.
 Significant and Unavoidable Impact - A project impact is considered significant and unavoidable if it would result in a substantial adverse change in the environment and if that impact would remain significant even after the implementation of mitigation. A lead agency can approve a project with significant unavoidable impacts if the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects. In this case, the lead agency must adopt a statement of overriding considerations describing the specific reasons to support its action (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b)).

3.0.4 Cumulative Impact Scenario
Section 15130(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires a discussion of cumulative impacts of a project “when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.” The CEQA Guidelines, Section 15355, defines a cumulative impact as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” Cumulatively considerable impacts are defined in Section 15065(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines as the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states:
“[t]he discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided of the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other project contribute rather than the attributes of other projects which do not contribute to the cumulative impact.” To analyze the cumulative impacts of the Project in combination with other expected projects, the amount and location of development expected to occur must be predicted. Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines allows two methods of prediction:
“Either:
(A) A list of relevant past, present and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or (B) A summary of projections contained in adopted local, regional or statewide plan, or related planning document, that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect…”
196
Item 4.
604
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-7 April 2023 2022-009
Other than the Proposed Project, no other development is pending or proposed in the City or the surrounding area. Therefore, for the purpose of this DEIR, the Oroville 2030 General Plan (2015a) growth projections are the basis of the cumulative analysis.

The City of Oroville adopted the Oroville 2030 General Plan on June 2, 2009. As a part of the 2009 update process, an EIR was certified by the City (SCH #2008022024). Within this EIR were development projections to the year 2030. These projections are provided in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1. 2008 General Plan EIR - Expected 2030 Development Under the 2030 General Plan Location Residential
(dwelling units)
Industrial
(square feet)
Commercial
(square feet)
City Limit (only) 9,300 6,800,000 12,200,000
Sphere of Influence (only) 18,300 1,900,000 9,000,000
Total: 27,600 8,700,000 21,200,000
Source: City of Oroville 2015b
In 2015, the City again updated the General Plan, in part to include some land use changes within the city limits. As a part of this process, the Oroville Sustainability Update Draft Supplemental EIR (SCH# 2014052001) was written and certified by the City in 2015. The Draft Supplemental EIR (Draft SEIR) also updated the expected growth in the City using the same methodology to estimate future development as used in the 2009 EIR. The 2015 Draft SEIR included changes to the 2030 development projections which resulted in increase to residential, industrial, and commercial development within the City limits as shown in Table 3-2. The 2030 development projections provide the basis for cumulative analysis in this DEIR.

Table 3-2. 2015 General Plan SEIR – Expected 2030 Development Under the 2030 General Plan Location Residential
(dwelling units)
Industrial
(square feet)
Commercial
(square feet)
City Limit (only)
Change +385 +226,000 -32,000
New Total 9,685 7,026,000 12,168,000
Sphere of Influence (only) 18,300 1,900,000 9,000,000
Total: 27,985 8,926,000 21,168,000
Source: City of Oroville 2015b
197
Item 4.
605
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation 3-8 April 2023 2022-009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
198
Item 4.
606
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-1 April 2023
2022-009

3.1 Air Quality
This section evaluates the Project-related effects to air quality. This section is based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment prepared for the Project (ECORP 2023, Appendix 3.2). The information provided below is an abridged version of this report. This analysis was prepared using methodologies and assumptions recommended by the BCAQMD. Regional and local existing conditions are presented, along with pertinent standards and regulations. The purpose of this assessment is to estimate Project-generated criteria air pollutant emissions attributable to the Project and to determine the level of impact the Project would have on the environment and to provide feasible mitigation measures for these impacts.

3.1.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Oroville and the Project Site are within the Northern Sacramento Valley Air Basin (NSVAB). The NSVAB consists of seven counties: Sutter, Yuba, Colusa, Butte, Glenn, Tehama, and Shasta. The NSVAB is bounded on the north and west by the Coastal Mountain Range and on the east by the southern end of the Cascade Mountain Range and the northern end of the Sierra Nevada. These mountain ranges reach heights in excess of 6,000 feet AMSL, with individual peaks rising much higher. The mountains form a substantial physical barrier to locally created pollution as well as to pollution transported northward on prevailing winds from the Sacramento metropolitan area (Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals [SVAQEEP] 2021).

The environmental conditions of Butte County are conducive to potentially adverse air quality conditions.

The basin area traps pollutants between two mountain ranges to the east and west. This problem is exacerbated by a temperature inversion layer that traps air at lower levels below an overlying layer of warmer air. Prevailing winds in the area are generally from the south and southwest. Sea breezes flow over the San Francisco Bay Area and into the Sacramento Valley, transporting pollutants from the large urban areas. Growth and urbanization in Butte County have also contributed to an increase in emissions.

3.1.2 Ambient Air Quality Standards
Air quality standards are set at both the federal and state levels of government. The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to establish ambient air quality standards for six criteria air pollutants: ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead, coarse particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The California CAA also sets ambient air quality standards. The state standards are more stringent than the federal standards, and they include other pollutants in addition to those regulated by the federal standards. An area is considered to be in attainment of the standards when the concentrations of pollutants are below the maximum allowed standards in that area,. The Butte County portion of the NSVAB is designated as a nonattainment area for the federal O3 standard and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O3, PM10 and PM2.5 and (California Air Resources Board [CARB] 2018, 2020). 199
Item 4.
607
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-2 April 2023
2022-009

3.1.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed above, Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) are another group of pollutants of concern. TACs are considered either carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic based on the nature of the health effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogenic TACs are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur, and cancer risk is expressed as excess cancer cases per one million exposed individuals. Noncarcinogenic TACs differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis.

There are many types of TACs, with varying degrees of toxicity. Sources of TACs include industrial processes such as petroleum refining and chrome plating operations, commercial operations such as gasoline stations and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle exhaust. Public exposure to TACs can result from emissions from normal operations, as well as from accidental releases of hazardous materials during upset conditions. The health effects of TACs include cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, and death.

Most recently, CARB identified Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) as a TAC. DPM differs from other TACs in that it is not a single substance but rather a complex mixture of hundreds of substances. Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of particles and gases produced when an engine burns diesel fuel. DPM is a concern because it causes lung cancer; many compounds found in diesel exhaust are carcinogenic. DPM includes the particle-phase constituents in diesel exhaust. The chemical composition and particle sizes of DPM vary between different engine types (i.e., heavy-duty, light-duty), engine operating conditions (i.e., idle, accelerate, decelerate), fuel formulations (i.e., high/low sulfur fuel), and the year of the engine (USEPA 2002). Some short-term (acute) effects of diesel exhaust include eye, nose, throat, and lung irritation, and diesel exhaust can cause coughs, headaches, light-headedness, and nausea. DPM poses the greatest health risk among the TACs; due to their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung.

3.1.4 Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population who are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses.

Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project Site include residences directly adjacent to the northeast corner of the Project Site boundary, fronting 20th Street, approximately 75 feet distant.
200
Item 4.
608
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-3 April 2023
2022-009

3.1.5 Regulatory Framework

3.1.5.1 Federal
Clean Air Act
The CAA of 1970 and the CAA Amendments of 1971 required the USEPA to establish the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), with states retaining the option to adopt more stringent standards or to include other specific pollutants.

These standards are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those sensitive receptors most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed.

The USEPA has classified air basins (or portions thereof) as being in attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified for each criteria air pollutant, based on whether or not the NAAQS have been achieved. If an area is designated unclassified, it is because inadequate air quality data were available as a basis for a nonattainment or attainment designation. Table 2-3 in Appendix 3.1 lists the federal attainment status of the SVAB for the criteria pollutants.

3.1.5.2 State
California Clean Air Act
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) allows the State to adopt ambient air quality standards and other regulations provided that they are at least as stringent as federal standards. CARB, a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control programs within California, including setting the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). CARB also conducts research, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and provides oversight of local programs. CARB establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g., hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbecue lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions. CARB also has primary responsibility for the development of California’s State Implementation Plan (SIP), for which it works closely with the federal government and the local air districts.

California State Implementation Plan
The CCAA allows states to adopt ambient air quality standards and other regulations provided that they are at least as stringent as federal standards. CARB, a part of the CalEPA, is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control programs within California, including setting the CAAQS. CARB also conducts research, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and provides oversight of local programs. CARB establishes emissions 201
Item 4.
609
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-4 April 2023
2022-009
standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g., hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbecue lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions. CARB also has primary responsibility for the development of California’s SIP, for which it works closely with the federal government and the local air districts. The SIP is a living document that is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, plans, and rules and regulations of air basins as reported by the agencies with jurisdiction over them. The CAA Amendments dictate that states containing areas violating the NAAQS revise their SIPs to include extra control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP includes strategies and control measures to attain the NAAQS by deadlines established by the CAA. The USEPA has the responsibility to review all SIPs to determine if they conform to the requirements of the CAA.

State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP. Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. \CARB then forwards SIP revisions to the USEPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. The 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan constitutes the current SIP for the Butte County portion of the NSVAB. The plan is updated on a triennial basis and was last updated in 2021. It presents comprehensive strategies to reduce the O3 precursor pollutants (Reactive Organic Gas [ROG] and Oxides of Nitrogen [NOx]) from stationary, area, mobile, and indirect sources.

Tanner Air Toxics Act & Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act CARB’s statewide comprehensive air toxics program was established in 1983 with AB 1807, the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (Tanner Air Toxics Act of 1983). AB 1807 created California's program to reduce exposure to air toxics and sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an Airborne Toxics Control Measure for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology to minimize emissions.

CARB also administers the State’s mobile source emissions control program and oversees air quality programs established by state statute, such as AB 2588, the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987. Under AB 2588, TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are required to perform a Health Risk Assessment and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings. In September 1992, the "Hot Spots" Act was amended by SB 1731, which required facilities that pose a significant health risk to the community to reduce their risk through a risk management plan.

3.1.5.3 Local
Butte County Air Quality Management District
The BCAQMD is the air pollution control agency for Butte County, including the Project Site. The agency’s primary responsibility is ensuring that the federal and state ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the Butte County portion of the NSVAB. The BCAQMD, along with other air districts in the 202
Item 4.
610
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-5 April 2023
2022-009
NSVAB, has committed to jointly prepare and implement the NSVAB Air Quality Attainment Plan for the purpose of achieving and maintaining healthful air quality throughout the air basin. The BCAQMD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, and conducting public education campaigns, as well as many other activities.

The BCAQMD has adopted a number of rules and regulations to implement its air quality plans, including permitting, prohibitions and limits to emissions from a variety of stationary resources, regulation of open burning, regulation of toxic air contaminants, and implementation of CAA requirements. The following is a list of noteworthy rules that are required of construction activities associated with the Proposed Project:
 Rule 400: Permit Requirements. The purpose of this rule is to require any person constructing, altering, or operating a source that emits or may emit air contaminants to request an Authority to Construct or Permit to Operate from the Air Pollution Control Officer and to provide an orderly procedure for application, review, and authorization of new sources and of the modification and operation of existing sources of air pollution. Stationary sources that are subject to Rule 1101-Title V-Federal Operating Permits of these Rules and Regulations shall also comply with the procedures specified in this Rule.  Rule 402: Nuisance. No person shall discharge from any non-vehicular source such quantities of air contaminants or other material which causes injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.  Rule 205: Fugitive Dust. The purpose of this RULE is to reduce ambient concentrations and limit fugitive emissions of fine particulate matter (PM10) from construction activities, bulk material handling and storage, carryout and track-out, and similar activities, weed abatement activities, unpaved parking lots, unpaved staging areas, unpaved roads, inactive disturbed land, disturbed open areas, and windblown dust.
 Rule 230: Architectural Coatings. The purpose of this rule is to limit the emissions of volatile organic compounds from the use of architectural coatings supplied, sold, offered for sale, applied, solicited for application, or manufactured for use within the district.

3.1.6 Environmental Impacts

3.1.6.1 Thresholds of Significance
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G thresholds of significance. The Project would result in a significant impact to air quality if it would do any of the following:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air quality plan. 203
Item 4.
611
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-6 April 2023
2022-009
2) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). 3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. 4) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people).

Butte County Air Quality Management District Thresholds The significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district (BCAQMD) may be relied upon to make the above determinations. According to the BCAQMD, an air quality impact is considered significant if the proposed Project contributes substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation or exposes sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

The BCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality for construction and operational activities of land use development projects such as that proposed, as shown in Table 3.1-1.

Table 3.1-1. BCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds
Air Pollutant
Construction Activities Operations
Pounds per
Day Tons per Year Pounds per day
Reactive Organic Gas 137 4.5 25
Carbon Monoxide - - -
Nitrogen Oxide 137 4.5 25
Sulfur Oxide - - -
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) 80 - 80
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) - - -
Source: BCAQMD 2014
By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s individual emissions exceed its identified significance thresholds, the project would be cumulatively considerable.

Projects that do not exceed significance thresholds would not be considered cumulative considerable. 204
Item 4.
612
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-7 April 2023
2022-009

3.1.6.2 Methods of Analysis
Air quality impacts were assessed in accordance with methodologies recommended by the BCAQMD.

Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using CalEEMod, version 2022.1. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Project construction-generated air pollutant emissions were calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for Butte County. Operational air pollutant emissions were based on the Project Site Plans and traffic trip generation rates from KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. (2023).

3.1.6.3 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact AIR-1: Air pollutant emissions associated with the Proposed Project could conflict with or obstruct the applicable air quality plan.

Impact Determination No impact.

Threshold Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Impact Discussion
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a SIP that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs. Similarly, under state law, the CCAA requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment with regard to the NAAQS and CAAQS. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.

The 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan constitutes the current SIP for the Butte County portion of the NSVAB and is the most recent air quality planning document covering Butte County. Air quality attainment plans are a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs (e.g., monitoring, modeling, permitting), district rules, state regulations, and federal controls describing how the state will attain ambient air quality standards. State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the Air Quality Attainment Plan. Local air districts prepare air quality attainment plans and submit them to CARB for review and approval. The 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan includes forecast ROG and NOX emissions (O3 precursors) for the entire NSVAB through the year 2020. The plan also includes control strategies necessary to attain the California O3 standard at the earliest practicable date, as well as 205
Item 4.
613
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-8 April 2023
2022-009
developed emissions inventories and associated emissions projections for the region showing a downtrend for both ROG and NOX.

The consistency of the Project with the 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan is determined by Project-induced development’s consistency with air pollutant emission projections in the plan. However, although the 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan provides estimated ROG and NOx emissions for the entire NSVAB, they are not apportioned by local air district, county or municipality. The 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan is based on information derived from projected growth in Butte County in order to project future emissions and then determine strategies and regulatory controls for the reduction of emissions. Therefore, until such time as Butte County’s applicable air quality plan provides the locally appropriate data necessary to evaluate the consistency of a project’s potential air quality impacts (due to non-stationary sources) with the attainment plan’s emission projections, the BCAQMD recommends that lead agencies and applicants evaluate a project’s contribution to changes in population growth in relation to those projections made by the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG, BCAQMD 2014).

BCAG has prepared the Butte County population and housing forecasts using professionally accepted methodologies for long-range forecasting. Utilizing a top down approach, long-term projections prepared by the California Department of Finance (DOF) were consulted for Butte County and used by BCAG to reestablish control totals for the region. Additionally, a variety of data sources, including input from local jurisdictions, were reviewed and inserted at the local jurisdiction level, therefore incorporating a bottom up approach. Adjustments were made to compensate for the redistribution and repopulation of the Camp Fire burn area (BCAG 2018). As such, projects that propose development consistent with the growth anticipated by BCAG would be consistent with the 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan.

According to the California DOF, the City currently contains a population of 18,863 people and a housing inventory of 7,783 houses (DOF 2022). Accounting for a home vacancy rate of 7.1 percent in Oroville, the DOF (2022) estimates an average of 2.49 people living within an occupied residence. The Proposed Project would create an additional 172 single-family lots, which could be expected to accommodate 428 people (2.49 x 172 = 428), thereby increasing the City of Oroville population to 19,291 (this estimate conservatively assumes that all future residents at the Project would be new to Oroville) and housing stock to 7,955 units. BCAG projects the population of Oroville to range from 20,757 to 22,283 people in the year 2025, and the housing inventory to range from 7,841 to 8,301 units. Thus, the expected growth in population and housing as a result of the Proposed Project would not surpass BCAG’s projections and therefore would not result in a conflict with the 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan. Additionally, as shown in Tables 2-5 and 2-6 of the 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan, all Project emissions would be under the BCAQMD significance thresholds, which were established to for reducing air pollution and related health effects, a primary goal of the 2021 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan. It is further noted that according to Chapter Five of the Oroville Housing Element, Goal 3: Facilitate Development of New Housing to Meet the Needs of the Community, the City will maintain a goal to facilitate development of a range of housing that varies sufficiently in terms of cost, design, size, location, and tenure to meet the housing needs of all economic segments of the community at a level which can be supported by the utility, water, and street infrastructure. Thus, the Project complies with the anticipated housing needs in 206
Item 4.
614
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-9 April 2023
2022-009
Oroville and supports the goals of the General Plan. For these reasons, the Project would be consistent with the goals of local air quality planning.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact AIR-2: Project implementation could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria air pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient are quality standard.

Impact Determination: Less Than Significant
Threshold: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).

Impact Discussion
Project Construction-Generated Criteria Air Quality Emissions Construction-generated emissions are temporary and short-term but have the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. Three basic sources of short-term emissions will be generated through construction of the Proposed Project: operation of the construction vehicles (i.e., excavators, trenchers, dump trucks), the creation of fugitive dust during clearing and grading, and the use of asphalt or other oil-based substances during paving activities. Construction activities such as excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive PM emissions that affect local air quality at various times during construction.

Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activity taking place, and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summer months creates a high potential for dust generation.

Construction-generated emissions associated with the Proposed Project were calculated using the CARBapproved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction requirements. Attachment A provides more information regarding the construction assumptions, including construction equipment and duration, used in this analysis.

Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Proposed Project are summarized in Table 3.1-2 Construction-generated emissions are short-term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceeds the BCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. 207
Item 4.
615
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-10 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.1-2. Construction-Related Emissions
Construction Year
Pollutant
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Daily (pounds per day)
Construction Year One 3.75 36.0 34.2 0.1 9.4 5.4
Construction Year Two 5.40 19.7 30.2 0.0 1.6 0.9
Construction Year Three 5.28 18.7 29.7 0.0 1.5 0.9
Construction Year Four 5.20 17.9 29.3 0.0 1.4 0.8
BCAQMD Significance Threshold 137
pounds/day
137
pounds/day - - 80
pounds/day -
Exceed BCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
Annual (tons per year)
Construction Year One 0.2 2.3 2.1 0.0 0.3 0.2
Construction Year Two 0.7 2.6 3.8 0.0 0.2 0.1
Construction Year Three 0.7 2.4 3.7 0.0 0.2 0.1
Construction Year Four 0.6 2.1 3.2 0.0 0.2 0.1
BCAQMD Significance Threshold 4.5 4.5 - - - -
Exceed BCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs.

Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of BCAQMD Rule 205. The specific Rule 205 measures applied in CalEEMod include sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areas daily, water exposed surfaces twice daily. Emissions taken of the season, summer or winter, with the highest outputs. Building construction, paving, and painting assumed to occur simultaneously.

As shown in Table 3.1-2, emissions generated during Project construction would not exceed the BCAQMD’s daily or annual thresholds of significance.

Project Operations Criteria Air Quality Emissions
Implementation of the Project would result in long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants such as PM10 and O3 precursors such as ROG and NOX. Operational-generated emissions associated with the Proposed Project were calculated using CalEEMod. Predicted maximum annual operational-generated emissions of criteria air pollutants for the Proposed Project are summarized in Table 3.1-3. 208
Item 4.
616
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-11 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.1-3. Operational-Related Emissions
Emission Source
Pollutant (pounds per day)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Summer Emissions
Area 8.6 0.1 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Energy 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1
Mobile 6.7 1.5 10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total: 15.3 2.3 20.2 0.0 3.8 0.1
BCAQMD Significance Threshold 25
pounds/day
25 pounds/day - - 80 pounds/day -
Exceed BCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
Winter Emissions
Area 7.8 - - - - -
Energy 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1
Mobile 5.5 1.7 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total: 13.3 2.4 15.4 0.0 0.1 0.2
BCAQMD Significance Threshold 25
pounds/day
25 pounds/day - - 80 pounds/day -
Exceed BCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes: Emission projections predominately based on CalEEMod model defaults for Butte County. Average daily vehicle trips provided by KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. (2023).

Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs.

As shown in Table 3.1-3, daily emissions associated with Project operations would not exceed the BCAQMD significance thresholds.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
209
Item 4.
617
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-12 April 2023
2022-009
Impact AIR-3: Construction and/or operation of the Proposed Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant.

Threshold: Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Impact Discussion
As previously described, sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population who are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project Site include residences directly adjacent to the northeast corner of the Project Site boundary, fronting 20th Street, approximately 75 feet distant.

Construction-Generated Air Contaminants
Construction-related activities would result in temporary, short-term Proposed Project-generated emissions of DPM, ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10 from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation (e.g., clearing, grading); soil hauling truck traffic; paving; and other miscellaneous activities. The Butte County portion of the NSVAB is listed as a nonattainment area for the federal O3 standard and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O3, PM10, and PM2.5. Thus, existing O3, PM10 and PM2.5 levels in the NSVAB are at unhealthy levels during certain periods. However, as shown in Table 3.1-2 the Project would not exceed the BCAQMD significance thresholds for construction emissions.

The health effects associated with O3 are generally associated with reduced lung function. Because the Project would not involve construction activities that would result in O3 precursor emissions (ROG or NOx) in excess of the BCAQMD thresholds, the Project is not anticipated to substantially contribute to regional O3 concentrations and the associated health impacts.

CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. In terms of adverse health effects, CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, reducing the blood’s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of excess CO exposure can include dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of central nervous system functions. The Project would not involve construction activities that would result in CO emissions in excess of the BCAQMD thresholds. Thus, the Project’s CO emissions would not contribute to the health effects associated with this pollutant. 210
Item 4.
618
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-13 April 2023
2022-009
Particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) contains microscopic solids or liquid droplets that are so small that they can get deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Particulate matter exposure has been linked to a variety of problems, including premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing. For construction activity, DPM is the primary TAC of concern. PM10 exhaust is considered a surrogate for DPM as all diesel exhaust is considered to be DPM. As with O3 and NOx, the Project would not generate emissions of PM10 or PM2.5 that would exceed the BCAQMD’s thresholds. Accordingly, the Project’s PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are not expected to cause any increase in related regional health effects for these pollutants.

Operational Air Contaminants
Operation of the Proposed Project would not result in the development of any substantial sources of air toxins. There are no stationary sources associated with the operations of the Project; nor would the Project attract additional mobile sources that spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. Onsite Project emissions would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors.

The Project would not have a high carcinogenic or non-carcinogenic risk during operation Carbon Monoxide Hot Spots
It has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at intersections. Concentrations of CO are a direct function of the number of vehicles, length of delay, and traffic flow conditions. Under certain meteorological conditions, CO concentrations close to congested intersections that experience high levels of traffic and elevated background concentrations may reach unhealthy levels, affecting nearby sensitive receptors. Given the high traffic volume potential, areas of high CO concentrations, or “hot spots,” are typically associated with intersections that are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service during the peak commute hours. It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections.

However, transport of this criteria pollutant is extremely limited, and CO disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. Furthermore, vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last 20 years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a maximum of 3.1 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control technologies, CO concentration in the Sacramento County portion of the SVAB is designated as in attainment. Detailed modeling of Project-specific CO “hot spots” is not necessary and thus this potential impact is addressed qualitatively.

A CO “hot spot” would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour standard of 20 Parts Per Million (ppm) or the 8-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur. The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide in Los Angeles County and a Modeling and Attainment Demonstration prepared by the SCAQMD as part of the 2003 Air Quality Management Plan can be used to demonstrate the potential for CO exceedances of these standards. The SCAQMD is the air pollution control officer for much of Southern 211
Item 4.
619
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-14 April 2023
2022-009
California. The SCAQMD conducted a CO hot spot analysis as part of the 1992 CO Federal Attainment Plan at four busy intersections in Los Angeles County during the peak morning and afternoon time periods.

The intersections evaluated included Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Lynwood), Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood), Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue (Hollywood), and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard (Inglewood). The busiest intersection evaluated was at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day.

Despite this level of traffic, the CO analysis concluded that there was no violation of CO standards (SCAQMD 1992). In order to establish a more accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the Los Angeles, a CO “hot spot” analysis was conducted in 2003 at the same four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. This “hot spot” analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards. The highest 1-hour concentration was measured at 4.6 ppm at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue and the highest 8-hour concentration was measured at 8.4 ppm at Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway. Thus, there was no violation of CO standards.

Similar considerations are also employed by other air districts when evaluating potential CO concentration impacts. More specifically, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the air pollution control officer for the San Francisco Bay Area, concludes that under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a given project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix in order to generate a significant CO impact.

The Proposed Project is anticipated to result in 1,622 daily traffic trips (KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. 2023). Thus, the Proposed Project would not generate traffic volumes at any intersection of more than 100,000 vehicles per day (or 44,000 vehicles per day) and there is no likelihood of the Project traffic exceeding CO values.

In summary, Project construction would not result in a potentially significant contribution to regional concentrations of nonattainment pollutants and would not result in a significant contribution to the adverse health impacts associated with those pollutants.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact AIR-4: Project implementation could result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Impact Determination: Less than Significant.

Threshold Result in the release of other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people). 212
Item 4.
620
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-15 April 2023
2022-009
Impact Discussion
Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache).

With respect to odors, the human nose is the sole sensing device. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals have the ability to smell minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity but may have sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the same odor; in fact, an odor that is offensive to one person (e.g., from a fast-food restaurant) may be perfectly acceptable to another. It is also important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity.

Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of the smell experience. For instance, if a person describes an odor as flowery or sweet, then the person is describing the quality of the odor. Intensity refers to the strength of the odor. For example, a person may use the word strong to describe the intensity of an odor. Odor intensity depends on the odorant concentration in the air. When an odorous sample is progressively diluted, the odorant concentration decreases. As this occurs, the odor intensity weakens and eventually becomes so low that the detection or recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point during dilution, the concentration of the odorant reaches a detection threshold. An odorant concentration below the detection threshold means that the concentration in the air is not detectable by the average human.

During construction, the Proposed Project presents the potential for generation of objectionable odors in the form of diesel exhaust in the immediate vicinity of the site. However, these emissions are short-term in nature and will rapidly dissipate and be diluted by the atmosphere downwind of the emission sources.

Additionally, odors would be localized and generally confined to the construction area. Therefore, construction odors would not adversely affect a substantial number of people to odor emissions.

According to the BCAQMD, land uses commonly considered to be potential sources of obnoxious odorous emissions include wastewater treatment plants, sanitary landfills, composting/green waste facilities, recycling facilities, petroleum refineries, chemical manufacturing plants, painting/coating operations, rendering plants, and food packaging plants. The Proposed Project does not include any uses identified by the BCAQMD as being associated with odors.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
213
Item 4.
621
Item 27.

Draft
Feather Ranch Project
Environmental Impact Report
Air Quality 3.1-16 April 2023
2022-009

3.1.7 Cumulative Impacts
Impact AIR-5: Would implementation of the Proposed Project, in combination with existing, approved, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable development in Butte County, result in a cumulatively considerable air quality impact? Impact Determination: Less Than Cumulatively Considerable Threshold Would Implementation of the proposed project, along with any foreseeable development in the project vicinity, result in cumulative impacts to air quality?
Impact Discussion
By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s individual emissions exceed its identified significance thresholds, the project would be cumulatively considerable.

Projects that do not exceed significance thresholds would not be considered cumulatively considerable.

As identified in the analysis above, the Project would not exceed significance thresholds or otherwise result in any project-level impact. Thus, the Project is considered less than cumulatively considerable in terms of air quality-related impacts.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
214
Item 4.
622
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-1 April 2023
2022-009

3.2 Biological Resources
This section presents an evaluation of potential biological resources impacts associated with the Project.

The section assesses whether construction and operation of the Project would result in significant impacts on terrestrial and aquatic biological resources. The City received one letter concerning biological resources as a part of the NOP for this DEIR. However, this letter, from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), did not include any specific comments about the Project Site, Proposed Project, or the biological analysis provided in the IS. This letter is included in Appendix 1.0-A.2.

This section includes a description of the existing environmental conditions, regulatory setting, an overview of the methods used for assessing impact, impact significance thresholds, and the impacts associated with constructing and operating each of the three Project Alternatives. Where significant impacts are identified, feasible and effective mitigation measures are presented to reduce those impacts to levels considered less than significant.

Resource information presented herein is based on the following technical studies:
 Biological Resources Assessment for the Feather Ranch Project (BRA) (ECORP 2023, Appendix 3.2-A);
 The 20th Street Residential Development Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands Delineation (Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2021, Appendix 3.2-B).

Note the Project is located within APN 030-230-098-000. For the BRA, the Study Area was defined as the limits of this APN. The Study Area and Project Site represent the same area and are interchangeable in this section of the DEIR.

3.2.1 Environmental Setting

3.2.1.1 Site Characteristics and Land Use
The Study Area is located within gently rolling terrain situated at an elevational range of approximately 190 to 230 feet AMSL in the Sacramento Valley District of the California floristic province. The average winter low temperature in the vicinity of the Study Area is 39.4 degrees Fahrenheit (˚F) and the average summer high temperature is 92.2˚F; average annual precipitation is approximately 31.52 inches (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2022a).

The Study Area is currently undeveloped and idle rangeland. The vegetation community is a mixture of native and nonnative herbaceous plants. There are no trees or shrubs present. There are no perimeter fences, so this site is not used for livestock grazing but may have been in the past. Undeveloped dirt roads and a disced fire-break path surround the Study Area.

The surrounding lands include residential development to the east, rural residences to the north and south, and undeveloped rangeland to the west.
215
Item 4.
623
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-2 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.2 Biological Setting

3.2.2.1 Soils
According to the National Resources Conservation Soil Service Web Soil Survey (2022), one soil unit, or type, has been mapped within the Study Area, (603) Oroville-Thermalito-Fernandez-Thompsonflat complex, 0 to 9 percent slopes This soil unit is composed of Oroville, gravelly fine sandy loam, and similar soils (30 percent), Thermalito, sandy loam, and similar soils (25 percent), Fernandez, sandy loam, and similar soils (15 percent), Thompsonflat, fine sandy loam, and similar soils (15 percent), and minor components (15 percent). The Oroville series consists of moderately deep, poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from metamorphic and igneous rocks. These soils are in swales on intermediate terraces. The Thermalito series consists of moderately deep, somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from metamorphic and igneous rocks. These soils are on mounds on intermediate terraces. The Thompsonflat series consists of very deep, moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from metamorphic and igneous rocks. These soils are on intermediate and high terraces. The Fernandez series consists of very deep, moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from metamorphic and igneous rocks. These soils are on intermediate terraces. This soil unit is not derived from serpentinite or other ultramafic parent materials.

Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types
The entire Study Area is comprised of nonnative annual grassland with scattered isolated seasonal wetland/vernal pool basin. The developed-disturbed land cover type found onsite consists of dirt roads and areas of repeated off-road vehicle use. These areas are largely denuded of any vegetation.

Nonnative Annual Grassland
The majority of the Study Area is comprised of nonnative annual grassland. This community is dominated by a variety of nonnative species such as medusahead grass (Elymus caput-medusae), wild oats (Avena fatua), Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), and filaree (Erodium sp.). This vegetation community onsite is not specifically classified in A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009) but is similar to some Herbaceous Semi-Natural alliances.

Seasonal Wetland/Vernal Pool
The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools are scattered throughout the Study Area in topographic depressions in the rolling terrain. These depressions collect seasonal runoff and direct rainfall during the wet season and remain inundated or saturated long enough during the growing season to support wetland vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology. Dominant plant species found in these wetland depressions include slender popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys stipitatus), toad rush (Juncus bufonius), smooth goldfields (Lasthenia glaberrima), and water-starwort (Callitriche marginata). This vegetation community onsite is not specifically classified in A Manual of California Vegetation. These wetlands are discussed in further detail in the Aquatic Resources section.
216
Item 4.
624
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-3 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.2.2 Aquatic Resources
Rincon Consultants, Inc. prepared the Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands Delineation for the Study Area dated March 2021. As shown in Figure 3.2-1, Rincon delineated 78 depressional seasonal wetlands totaling 2.62 acres, as listed in Table 3.2-1.

Table 3.2-1. RWQCB Jurisdictional Area
Feature
RWQCB
Jurisdiction
Wetland Acres
Feature
RWQCB
Jurisdiction
Wetland Acres
Feature
RWQCB
Jurisdiction
Wetland Acres
SW1 0.371 SW 27 0.011 SW 53 0.021
SW 2 0.014 SW 28 0.017 SW 54 0.022
SW 3 0.020 SW 29 0.084 SW 55 0.035
SW 4 0.020 SW 30 0.067 SW 56 0.015
SW 5 0.033 SW 31 0.021 SW 57 0.029
SW 6 0.013 SW 32 0.012 SW 58 0.007
SW 7 0.009 SW 33 0.039 SW 59 0.018
SW 8 0.010 SW 34 0.011 SW 60 0.048
SW 9 0.015 SW 35 0.015 SW 61 0.014
SW 10 0.003 SW 36 0.015 SW 62 0.006
SW 11 0.014 SW 37 0.019 SW 63 0.017
SW 12 0.020 SW 38 0.005 SW 64 0.006
SW 13 0.020 SW 39 0.006 SW 65 0.089
SW 14 0.134 SW 40 0.019 SW 66 0.030
SW 15 0.371 SW 41 0.016 SW 67 0.011
SW 16 0.021 SW 42 0.015 SW 68 0.010
SW 17 0.013 SW 43 0.011 SW 69 0.029
SW 18 0.011 SW 44 0.031 SW 70 0.012
SW 19 0.134 SW 45 0.009 SW 71 0.015
217
Item 4.
625
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-4 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-1. RWQCB Jurisdictional Area
Feature
RWQCB
Jurisdiction
Wetland Acres
Feature
RWQCB
Jurisdiction
Wetland Acres
Feature
RWQCB
Jurisdiction
Wetland Acres
SW 20 0.090 SW 46 0.016 SW 72 0.043
SW 21 0.034 SW 47 0.015 SW 73 0.020
SW 22 0.014 SW 48 0.018 SW 74 0.029
SW 23 0.004 SW 49 0.008 SW 75 0.035
SW 24 0.030 SW 50 0.010 SW 76 0.013
SW 25 0.062 SW 51 0.013 SW 77 0.010
SW 26 0.031 SW 52 0.016 SW 78 0.002
Seasonal Wetlands Total 2.62 acres
Source: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2021
These wetlands were categorized as seasonal wetlands by Rincon but some could be considered vernal pools by other wetland delineators. The USEPA defines vernal pools as “seasonal depressional wetlands that occur under Mediterranean climate conditions of the West Coast and in glaciated areas of the northeastern and midwestern states. They are covered by shallow water for variable periods from winter to spring but may be completely dry for most of the summer and fall” (USEPA 2022).

At present, there has been no verification or jurisdictional determination of these aquatic resources conducted by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

When Rincon prepared the delineation report, the definition of Waters of the U.S. was based on the National Wetlands Protection Rule (NWPR). Under the NWPR, the wetlands onsite would probably not have been considered Waters of the U.S. as stated in the Rincon report. However, the NWPR was vacated and remanded in August 2021. In the current definition of Waters of the U.S. according to the pre-2015 regulatory regime, include the Rapanos Guidance, wetlands adjacent to nonnavigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent would require a significant nexus evaluation to establish federal jurisdiction. The wetlands onsite would require a significant nexus evaluation by the USACE in order to determine jurisdiction.

Regardless of federal jurisdiction, the wetlands delineated onsite would likely be considered Waters of the State under the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Water Resources Control Board 2019). 218
Item 4.
626
Item 27.

Figure 3.2-1. Aquatic Resources Delineation Map
2022-009/Feather Ranch Project
Source: Rincon Consultants, Inc.
219
Item 4.
627
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-6 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.2.3 Wildlife Observations
ECORP biologist Keith Kwan conducted a reconnaissance-level field survey for the Study Area on March 1, 2022. Wildlife observed within or flying over the Study Area by during the site reconnaissance includes mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), and western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta).

3.2.3 Evaluation of Special-Status Species Identified in the Literature Search The BRA competed for the Project listed all the special-status plant and wildlife species identified in the literature review as potentially occurring within the vicinity of the Study Area. Included in this table are the listing status for each species, a brief habitat description, and an evaluation on the potential for each species to occur within the Study Area. Of these special-status species, 23 plants, three invertebrates, one amphibian, one reptile, and five birds have potential habitat in the Study Area. A list of special-status species potentially affected by the Proposed Project, their general habitat requirements, and an assessment of their potential to occur within the Study Area is provided in Table 3.2-2. A complete list of special-status species known to exist in the region and the results of the database queries are included in Appendix 3.2-A.

Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
Plants
Henderson’s bent grass
(Agrostis hendersonii)
– – 3.2 Vernal pools and
mesic areas in valley
and foothill grasslands
(230’–1,000’).

April–June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Depauperate milk-vetch
(Astragalus
pauperculus)
- - 4.3 Occurs within vernally
mesic and volcanic
soils in chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill
grasslands
(195’-3,985’)
March-June Low Potential –
There is marginally
suitable habitat
onsite.

Big-scale balsamroot
(Balsamorhiza
macrolepis)
– – 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and valley
and foothill grassland,
sometimes on
serpentinite soils
(150’–5,100').

March–June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.
220
Item 4.
628
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-7 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
Valley brodiaea
(Brodiaea rosea ssp.
vallicola)
– – 4.2 Occurs in old alluvial
terraces and silt,
qsandy, or gravelly
soils in vernal pools
and swales within
valley and foothill
grassland (35’–1,100’).

April–May Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Butte County
calycadenia
Calycadenia
oppositifolia)
- - 4.2 Occurs on volcanic,
granitic, and
serpentinite areas of
chaparral, cismontane
woodland, lower
montane coniferous
forest, meadows,
seeps and valley and
foothill grassland.
(295’-3,100’)
April - July Low Potential –
There is marginally
suitable habitat
onsite.

Pink creamsacs
(Castilleja rubicundula
var. rubicundula)
– – 1B.2 Serpentinite substrates
in chaparral openings,
cismontane woodland,
meadows and seeps,
and valley and foothill
grassland (65’–2,985’).

April–June Low Potential –
There is marginally
suitable habitat
onsite.

Recurved larkspur
(Delphinium
recurvatum)
– – 1B.2 Chenopod scrub,
cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill
grasslands (10’–2,592’).

March–June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Hoover’s spurge
(Euphorbia hooveri)
FT – 1B.2 Vernal pools (80’–
820’).

July–
September
Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Hogwallow starfish
(Hesperevax caulescens)
– – 4.2 Sometimes alkaline in
mesic areas with clay
soil within valley and
foothill grassland and
shallow vernal pools
(0’–1,655’).

March–June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Ahart’s dwarf rush
(Juncus leiospermus var.
ahartii)
– – 1B.2 Mesic areas in valley
and foothill grassland.

Species has an affinity
for slight disturbance
such as farmed fields
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife
March–May Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.
221
Item 4.
629
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-8 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
Service [USFWS] 2005)
(98’–751’).

Red Bluff dwarf rush
(Juncus leiospermus var.
leiospermus)
– – 1B.1 Vernally mesic areas in
chaparral, cismontane
woodland, meadows
and seeps, valley and
foothill grassland, and
vernal pools
(115’–4,101’).

March–June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Colusa layia
(Layia septentrionalis)
– – 1B.2 Sandy or serpentinite
soils in chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
and valley and foothill
grasslands (328’–
3,593’).

April–May Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Bristly leptosiphon
(Leptosiphon acicularis)
– – 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal
prairie, valley and
foothill grassland
(180’–4,920’).

April–July Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Serpentine leptosiphon
(Leptosiphon ambiguus)
– – 4.2 Usually serpentinite
soils of Cismontane
woodland, coastal
scrub, and valley and
foothill grassland
(395’–3710’).

March–June Low Potential –
There is marginally
suitable habitat
onsite.

Butte County
meadowfoam
(Limnanthes floccosa
ssp. californica)
FE CE 1B.1 Mesic valley and
foothill grassland and
vernal pools (150’–
3,052’).

March–May Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Woolly meadowfoam
(Limnanthes floccosa
ssp. floccosa)
– – 4.2 Vernally mesic
chaparral, cismontane
woodland, valley and
foothill grassland, and
vernal pools(197’–
4,380’).

March–May Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Sylvan microseris
(Microseris sylvatica)
– – 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, Great Basin
scrub, pinyon and
juniper woodland,
valley and foothill
March-June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.
222
Item 4.
630
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-9 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
grassland; serpentinite
(rarely) (150’-4,920’)
Veiny monardella
(Monardella venosa)
– – 1B.1 Heavy clay soils in
cismontane woodland
and valley and foothill
grasslands (197’–
1,345’).

May–July Low Potential –
there is marginally
suitable habitat
onsite.

Tehama navarretia
(Navarretia heterandra)
– – 4.3 Mesic areas in valley
and foothill grassland
and vernal pools(98’–
3,314’).

April–June Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Slender Orcutt grass
(Orcuttia tenuis)
FT CE 1B.1 Vernal pools, often
gravelly (115’–5,774’).

May–
September
Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Ahart's paronychia
(Paronychia ahartii)
– – 1B.1 Well-drained rocky
outcrops, often vernal
pool edges, and
volcanic upland
(Hartman and Rabeler
2012) of cismontane
woodland, valley and
foothill grassland, and
vernal pools (98'–
1673').

February–
June
Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Butte County golden
clover
(Trifolium jokerstii)
- - 1B.2 Mesic valley and
foothill grassland and
vernal pools (164’-
1,575’)
March–May Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Greene’s tuctoria
(Tuctoria greenei)
FE CR 1B.1 Vernal pools (98’–
3,510’).

May–July Potential – there is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Invertebrates
Conservancy fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta
conservatio)
FE - - Vernal pools/wetlands. NovemberApril
Potential-Suitable
habitat present
onsite.

Vernal pool fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchi)
FT - - Vernal pools/wetlands. NovemberApril
Potential-Suitable
habitat present
onsite.
223
Item 4.
631
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-10 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
Vernal pool tadpole
shrimp
(Lepidurus packardi)
FE - - Vernal pools/wetlands. NovemberApril
Potential-Suitable
habitat present
onsite.

Amphibians
Western spadefoot
(Spea hammondii)
- - SSC California endemic
species of vernal
pools, swales, wetlands
and adjacent
grasslands throughout
the Central Valley.

March-May Potential-Suitable
habitat is present
onsite.

Reptiles
Blainville’s (“Coast”)
horned lizard
(Phrynosoma blainvillii)
- - SSC Formerly a widespread horned lizard
found in a wide variety
of habitats, often in
lower elevation areas
with sandy washes and
scattered low bushes.

Also occurs in Sierra
Nevada foothills.

Requires open areas
for basking, but with
bushes or grass
clumps for cover,
patches of loamy soil
or sand for burrowing
and an abundance of
ants (Stebbins and
McGinnis 2012).

Apr-Oct Potential-There is
suitable habitat
onsite.

Birds
Northern harrier
(Circus hudsonius)
- - BCC,
SSC
Nests on the ground in
open wetlands, marshy
meadows, wet/lightly
grazed pastures,
(rarely)
freshwater/brackish
marshes, tundra,
grasslands, prairies,
croplands, desert,
shrub-steppe, and
(rarely) riparian
AprilSeptember
Low PotentialThere is marginal
nesting habitat
onsite.
224
Item 4.
632
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-11 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
woodland
communities.

Swainson’s hawk
(Buteo swainsoni)
- CT BCC Nesting occurs in trees
in agricultural, riparian,
oak woodland, scrub,
and urban landscapes.

Forages over
grassland, agricultural
lands, particularly
during
disking/harvesting,
irrigated pastures
March-August Potential-There is
suitable foraging
habitat, but no
nesting habitat
onsite.

Burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia)
- - BCC,
SSC
Nests in burrows or
burrow surrogates in
open, treeless, areas
within grassland,
steppe, and desert
biomes. Often with
other burrowing
mammals (e.g. prairie
dogs, California
ground squirrels). May
also use human-made
habitat such as
agricultural fields, golf
courses, cemeteries,
roadside, airports,
vacant urban lots, and
fairgrounds.

FebruaryAugust
Potential-There is
suitable habitat.

Loggerhead shrike
(Lanius ludovicianus)
- - SSC Found throughout
California in open
country with short
vegetation, pastures,
old orchards,
grasslands, agricultural
areas, open
woodlands. Not found
in heavily forested
habitats.

March-July Potential-There is
suitable habitat.

Tricolored blackbird
(Agelaius tricolor)
- CT BCC,
SSC
Breeds locally west of
Cascade-Sierra Nevada
and southeastern
deserts from
Humboldt and Shasta
March-August Potential-There is
suitable foraging
habitat, but no
nesting habitat
onsite.
225
Item 4.
633
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-12 April 2023
2022-009
Table 3.2-2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat
Description
Survey
Period
Potential To
FESA Occur Onsite
CESA/
NPPA Other
counties south to San
Bernardino, Riverside
and San Diego
counties. Central
California, Sierra
Nevada foothills and
Central Valley,
Siskiyou, Modoc and
Lassen counties. Nests
colonially in
freshwater marsh,
blackberry bramble,
milk thistle, triticale
fields, weedy (mustard,
mallow) fields, giant
cane, safflower,
stinging nettles,
tamarisk, riparian
scrublands and forests,
fiddleneck, and fava
bean fields.

Source: ECORP 2022
Status Codes:

FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
FE FESA listed, Endangered.

FT FESA listed, Threatened.

FC Candidate for FESA listing as Threatened or Endangered.

BCC USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern
CR CESA- or NPPA-listed, Rare.

CE CESA or NPPA listed, Endangered.

CT CESA- or NPPA-listed, Threatened.

CFP California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species (§ 3511-birds, § 4700-mammals, §5 050- reptiles/amphibians).

CDFW WL CDFW Watch List
SSC CDFW Species of Special Concern (CDFW, updated July 2017). 1B CRPR/Rare or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. 3 CRPR/Plants About Which More Information is Needed – A Review List. 4 CRPR/Plants of Limited Distribution – A Watch List.

0.1 Threat Rank/Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat)

0.2 Threat Rank/Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat)

0.3 Threat Rank/Not very threatened in California (<20% of occurrences threatened / low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known)
Delisted Formally Delisted (delisted species are monitored for 5 years). 226
Item 4.
634
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-13 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.4 Plants
A total of 60 special-status plant species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). Of those, 37 species were determined to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat or due to the Study Area being outside of the known elevational range for the species. No further discussion of those species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining 23 species that have the potential or low potential to occur within the Study Area is presented below.

3.2.4.1 Henderson’s Bent Grass
Henderson’s bent grass (Agrostis hendersonii) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs but is designated as a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 3.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools and in mesic areas in valley and foothill grasslands. Henderson’s bent grass blooms from April through June and is known to occur at elevations between 230 to 1,000 feet AMSL. The current range of this species in California includes Butte, Calaveras, Merced, Napa, Shasta, Tehama, and Tuolumne counties; occurrence in Butte County confirmed, but possible extirpated.

There are no California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) occurrences of Henderson’s bent grass within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Henderson’s bent grass has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.2 Depauperate Milk-Vetch
Depauperate milk-vetch (Astragalus pauperculus) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs but is designated as a CRPR 4.3 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs within vernally mesic and volcanic soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands.

The blooming period for this species is from March through June and is known to occur at elevations 195 to 3,985 feet AMSL. Depauperate milk-vetch is endemic to California; its current range includes Butte, Shasta, and Tehama counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of depauperate milk-vetch. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide marginally suitable habitat for this species. Depauperate milk-vetch has low potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.3 Big-Scale Balsamroot
Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous perennial that occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodlands, valley and foothill grassland, and sometimes on serpentinite soils. Bigscale balsamroot blooms from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 150 to 5,100 feet AMSL. Big-scale balsamroot is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Amador, Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Lake, Mariposa, Napa, Placer, Santa Clara, Shasta, Solano, Sonoma, Tehama, and Tuolumne counties.
227
Item 4.
635
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-14 April 2023
2022-009
There are no CNDDB occurrences of big-scale balsamroot within 5 miles of the Study Area. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Big-scale balsamroot has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.4 Valley Brodiaea
Valley brodiaea (Brodiaea rosea ssp. vallicola) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is a bulbiferous perennial herb that occurs in old alluvial terraces and silty, sandy, or gravelly soils in vernal pools, swales, and valley and foothill grassland.

Valley brodiaea blooms from April through May (sometimes June) and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 35 to 1,100 feet AMSL. Valley brodiaea is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Calaveras, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Sutter, and Yuba counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Valley brodiaea. However, the seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Valley brodiaea has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.5 Butte County Calycadenia
Butte County calycadenia (Calycadenia oppositifolia) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs on volcanic, granitic, and serpentinite areas of chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest, meadows, seeps, and valley and foothill grassland. Butte County calycadenia blooms from April through July and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 295 to 3,100 feet AMSL. This species is endemic to California; the current range includes Butte County.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Butte County calycadenia. However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide marginally suitable habitat for this species. Butte County calycadenia has low potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.6 Pink Creamsacs
Pink creamsacs (Castilleja rubicundula var. rubicundula) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is a hemiparasitic herbaceous annual that occurs in serpentinite substrates in chaparral (openings), cismontane woodland, meadows and seeps, and valley and foothill grassland. Pink creamsacs blooms from April through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 65 to 2,985 feet AMSL. Pink creamsacs is endemic to California; its current range includes Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Lake, Napa, Santa Clara, Shasta, and Yolo counties.

There is one CNDDB occurrence of pink creamsacs within 5 miles of the Study Area. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide marginally suitable habitat for this species. Pink creamsacs has low potential to occur within the Study Area.
228
Item 4.
636
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-15 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.4.7 Recurved Larkspur
Recurved larkspur (Delphinium recurvatum) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous perennial that occurs in alkaline substrates in chenopod scrub, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands. Recurved larkspur blooms from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 10 to 2,592 feet AMSL. Recurved larkspur is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kings, Kern, Madera, Merced, Monterey, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Sutter, and Tulare counties. The species is presumed extirpated from Butte and Colusa counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of recurved larkspur within 5 miles of the Study Area. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Recurved larkspur has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.8 Hoover’s Spurge
Hoover’s spurge (Euphorbia hooveri) is listed as threatened pursuant to the federal ESA, not listed as rare pursuant to the California ESA, and is also designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools. Hoover’s spurge blooms from July through September and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 80 to 820 feet AMSL. Hoover’s spurge is endemic to California; its current range includes Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Merced, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Tulare counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Hoover’s spurge within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Hoover’s spurge has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.9 Hogwallow Starfish
Hogwallow starfish (Hesperevax caulescens) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in mesic, clay areas within valley and foothill grassland and shallow vernal pools, sometimes in alkaline areas.

Hogwallow starfish blooms from March through June and is known to occur from 0 to 1,655 feet AMSL.

Hogwallow starfish is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Mariposa, Merced, Monterey, Sacramento, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tuolumne, Yolo, and Yuba counties; however, it is presumed extirpated in San Diego County.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of hogwallow starfish within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Hogwallow starfish has potential to occur within the Study Area.
229
Item 4.
637
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-16 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.4.10 Ahart’s Dwarf Rush
Ahart’s dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. ahartii) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in mesic areas in valley and foothill grasslands. This species also appears to have an affinity for slight disturbance since it has been found on farmed fields and gopher turnings (USFWS 2005). Ahart’s dwarf rush blooms from March through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 98 to 751 feet AMSL (USFWS 2005). Ahart’s dwarf rush is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Calaveras, Placer, Sacramento, Tehama, and Yuba counties.

There are two CNDDB occurrences of Ahart’s dwarf rush within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Ahart’s dwarf rush has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.11 Red Bluff Dwarf Rush
Red Bluff dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. leiospermus) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernally mesic areas in chaparral, cismontane woodland, meadows, seeps, valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. Red Bluff dwarf rush blooms from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 115 to 4,101 feet AMSL. Red Bluff dwarf rush is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Placer, Shasta, and Tehama counties.

There is one CNDDB occurrence of Red Bluff dwarf rush within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Red Bluff dwarf rush has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.12 Colusa Layia
Colusa layia (Layia septentrionalis) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in sandy or serpentinite soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands. Colusa layia blooms from April through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 328 to 3,593 feet AMSL.

Colusa layia is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Lake, Mendocino, Napa, Sonoma, Sutter, Tehama, and Yolo counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Colusa layia within 5 miles of the Study Area. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Colusa layia has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.13 Bristly Leptosiphon
Bristly leptosiphon (Leptosiphon acicularis) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an annual herb that occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal prairie, and valley and foothill grassland. Bristly leptosiphon blooms from 230
Item 4.
638
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-17 April 2023
2022-009
April through July and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 180 to 4,920 feet AMSL. Bristly leptosiphon is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Butte, Colusa, Humboldt, Kern, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Napa, Placer, San Benito, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, and Yuba counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of bristly leptosiphon within 5 miles of the Study Area. However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Bristly leptosiphon has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.14 Serpentine Leptosiphon
Serpentine leptosiphon (Leptosiphon ambiguus) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs usually in serpentinite soil within cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Serpentine leptosiphon blooms from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 395 to 3,710 feet AMSL. Serpentine bird’s-beak is endemic to California; its current range includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Merced, San Benito, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Joaquin, San Mateo, and Stanislaus counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of serpentine leptosiphon within 5 miles of the Study Area. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide marginally suitable habitat for this species.

Serpentine leptosiphon has low potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.15 Butte County Meadowfoam
Butte County meadowfoam (Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica) is listed as endangered pursuant to both the federal and California ESAs, and is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. Butte County meadowfoam is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools and mesic areas of valley and foothill grasslands. Butte County meadowfoam blooms from March through May and is known to occur at elevations between 150 to 3,050 feet AMSL. Butte County meadowfoam is endemic to California; the current known range for this species includes Butte County.

There are two CNDDB occurrences of Butte County meadowfoam within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Butte County meadowfoam has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.16 Woolly Meadowfoam
Woolly meadowfoam (Limnanthes floccosa ssp. floccosa) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernally mesic chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Woolly meadowfoam blooms from March through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 197 to 4,380 feet AMSL. The current known range for this species in California includes Butte, Lake, Lassen, Napa, Shasta, Siskiyou, Tehama, and Trinity counties.
231
Item 4.
639
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-18 April 2023
2022-009
There are no CNDDB occurrences of woolly meadowfoam within 5 miles of the Study Area. However, the seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Woolly meadowfoam has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.17 Sylvan Microseris
Sylvan microseris (Microseris sylvatica) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an herbaceous perennial that occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, Great Basin scrub, pinyon juniper woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands; serpentinite (rarely). Sylvan microseris blooms from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 150 to 4,920 feet AMSL. Sylvan microseris is endemic to California; its current range includes Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Napa, San Benito, Tulare, and Yolo counties. Occurrence confirmed but possibly extirpated in Los Angeles County.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Sylvan microseris within 5 miles of the Study Area. However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Sylvan microseris has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.18 Veiny Monardella
Veiny monardella (Monardella venosa) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs on heavy clay soils in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grasslands. Veiny monardella blooms from May through July and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 197 to 1,345 feet AMSL. Veiny monardella is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Sutter, Tuolumne, and Yuba counties, but is believed to be extirpated from Sutter County.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of veiny monardella within 5 miles of the Study Area. However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide marginally suitable habitat for this species.

Veiny monardella has low potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.19 Tehama Navarretia
Tehama navarretia (Navarretia heterandra) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.3 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in mesic areas in valley and foothill grassland and vernal pools. Tehama navarretia blooms between April and June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 98 to 3,314 feet AMSL. The current range for Tehama navarretia in California includes Butte, Colusa, Lake, Napa, Shasta, Tehama, Trinity, and Yuba counties.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Tehama navarretia within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Tehama navarretia has potential to occur within the Study Area. 232
Item 4.
640
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-19 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.4.20 Slender Orcutt Grass
Slender Orcutt grass (Orcuttia tenuis) is listed as threatened pursuant to the federal ESA, is listed as endangered pursuant to the California ESA, and is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in often gravelly soils in vernal pools primarily on substrates of volcanic origin. This species is known to occur in the same type of vernal pool complexes as Sacramento Orcutt grass in Sacramento County; however, these species have not been observed coexisting in the same vernal pool. The median area of pools occupied by populations studied by Stone et al. (1988, as cited in USFWS 2005) was 1.6 acres and ranged from 0.2 to 111.0 acres. Slender Orcutt grass blooms from May through September and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 115 to 5,774 feet AMSL. Slender Orcutt grass is endemic to California; the current range for this species includes Butte, Lake, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Sacramento, Shasta, Siskiyou, and Tehama counties.

There are two CNDDB occurrences of slender Orcutt grass within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Slender Orcutt grass has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.21 Ahart’s Paronychia
Ahart’s Paronychia (Paronychia ahartii) is not listed as pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. Ahart’s paronychia is an annual herb that occurs in cismontane woodland, valley foothill and grassland and vernal pools. Ahart’s paronychia blooms at elevations ranging from 98 to 1,673 feet AMSL. Ahart’s paronychia is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Shasta, and Tehama counties.

There are two CNDDB occurrences of Ahart’s paronychia within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools and the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Ahart’s paronychia has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.22 Butte County Golden Clover
Butte County golden clover (Trifolium jokerstii) is not listed pursuant to the federal and California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools and mesic areas in valley and foothill grassland. Butte County golden clover blooms between March and May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 164 to 1,575 feet AMSL. Butte County golden clover is endemic to California; its current range includes Butte County.

There are five CNDDB occurrences of Butte County golden clover within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Butte County golden clover has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.4.23 Greene’s Tuctoria
Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei) is listed endangered pursuant to the ESA, is listed as rare pursuant to the California ESA, and is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that 233
Item 4.
641
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-20 April 2023
2022-009
occurs in vernal pools. Greene’s tuctoria blooms from May through July and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 98 to 3,510 feet AMSL. Greene’s tuctoria is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Fresno, Glenn, Madera, Merced, Modoc, Shasta, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Tulare counties. It is considered extirpated from Fresno, Madera, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties.

There are two CNDDB occurrences of Greene’s tuctoria within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Greene’s tuctoria has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.5 Invertebrates
A total of five special-status invertebrate species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). Of those, two species were determined to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat or due to the Study Area being outside of the known elevational range for the species. No further discussion of those species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining three special-status invertebrates that have the potential to occur within the Study Area is presented below.

3.2.5.1 Conservancy Fairy Shrimp
The conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio) is listed as endangered pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act. This fairy shrimp is endemic to California and is found in grasslands in the northern two thirds of the Central Valley (Eriksen and Belk 1999). The historic distribution of conservancy fairy shrimp is not known, but it likely occurred throughout a large portion of the Central Valley and Southern Coastal regions of California. Until recently, this species has only been known from a few disjunct populations in California, including four clustered populations in the Vina Plains area in Tehama and Butte Counties, Jepson Prairie Preserve in Solano County, the Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge in Glenn County, the Tule Ranch Unit of CDFW’s Yolo Basin Wildlife Area in Yolo County, the Grasslands Ecological Area in Merced County, one location in Stanislaus County, three locations in the Southern Sierra Foothills Vernal Pool Region, and two locations near the Santa Barbara Vernal Pool Region (USFWS 2003, 2006). In April 2007, USFWS reported that a single conservancy fairy shrimp was documented in one vernal pool within the Mariner Conservation Bank in Placer County, near the town of Lincoln, California.

The life cycle of conservancy fairy shrimp is reliant on the ephemeral conditions of its vernal habitat. It inhabits a variety of different landforms and soil types, and is often found in large, turbid pools with low conductivity, total dissolved solids, and alkalinity.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of conservancy fairy shrimp within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species.

Conservancy fairy shrimp has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.5.2 Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp
The vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) is listed as threatened pursuant to the federal ESA.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp may occur in seasonal ponds, vernal pools, and swales during the wet season, 234
Item 4.
642
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-21 April 2023
2022-009
which generally occurs from December through May. This species can be found in a variety of pool sizes, ranging from less than 0.001 acre to more than 24.5 acres. The shrimp hatch from cysts when colder water (10°Celsius [°C] [50°F] or less) fills the pool and mature in as few as 18 days, under optimal conditions (Eriksen and Belk 1999). At maturity, mating takes place and cysts are dropped. Vernal pool fairy shrimp occur in disjunct patches dispersed across California’s Central Valley from Shasta to Tulare counties, the central and southern Coast Ranges from northern Solano to Ventura counties, and three areas in Riverside County (USFWS 2003).

There are 12 CNDDB occurrences of vernal pool fairy shrimp within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Vernal pool fairy shrimp has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.5.3 Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp
The vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) is listed as endangered pursuant to the federal ESA.

This species inhabits vernal pools containing clear to highly turbid water, ranging in size from 0.001 to

89.0 acres. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp are distinguished from other vernal pool branchiopods discussed in this document by a large, shield-like carapace that covers the anterior half of their body. Cysts hatch during the wet season and the shrimp reach maturity in a few weeks. This species matures slowly and is long-lived, relative to other species. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp will continue to grow as long as the pools they occur in remain inundated, and in some instances can survive for 6 months or longer. The geographic range of vernal pool tadpole shrimp extends from Shasta County to northern Tulare County in California’s Central Valley, and in the central coast range from Solano County to Alameda County.

There are four CNDDB occurrences of vernal pool tadpole shrimp within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.6 Fish
Four special-status fish species were identified as having potential to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). However, upon further analysis and after the site visit, all four species were considered to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat and/or because the Study Area is outside of the known geographic range for these species. No further discussion of these species is provided within this assessment.

3.2.7 Amphibians
A total of three special-status amphibians were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). Of those, two species were determined to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat or due to the Study Area being outside of the known elevational range for the species. No further discussion of those species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining special-status amphibian that has the potential to occur within the Study Area is presented below. 235
Item 4.
643
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-22 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.7.1 Western Spadefoot
The western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, it is designated as a CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC). Necessary habitat components of the western spadefoot include loose friable soils in which to burrow in upland habitats and breeding ponds. Breeding sites include temporary rain pools, such as vernal pools and seasonal wetlands, or pools within portions of intermittent drainages (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Spadefoots spend most of their adult life within underground burrows or other suitable refugia, such as rodent burrows. In California, western spadefoot toads are known to occur from the Redding area, Shasta County southward to northwestern Baja California, at elevations below 4,475 feet AMSL.

There is one CNDDB occurrence of western spadefoot within 5 miles of the Study Area. The seasonal wetlands/vernal pools and nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area supports potentially suitable habitat for this species. Western spadefoots have potential to occur in the Study Area.

3.2.8 Reptiles
A total of three special-status reptiles were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). Of those, two species were determined to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat or due to the Study Area being outside of the known elevational range for the species. No further discussion of those species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining special-status reptile that has the potential to occur within the Study Area is presented below.

3.2.8.1 Blainville’s Horned Lizard
Blainville’s horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) is considered a CDFW SSC and is a relatively large (to 105 millimeters in snout-vent length), dorsoventrally flattened, rounded lizard found historically from Redding, California, to Baja, Mexico (Jennings and Hayes 1994). This diurnal species can occur within a variety of habitats including scrubland, annual grassland, valley-foothill woodlands and coniferous forests, though it is most common along lowland desert sandy washes and chaparral (Stebbins 2003). In the Central Valley, the species ranges from southern Tehama County southward. In the Sierra Nevada it occurs from Butte County south to Tulare County, and in the Coast Ranges it occurs from Sonoma County south into Baja California (California Department of fish and Game [CDFG] 1988). It occurs from sea level to 8,000 feet AMSL and an isolated population occurs in Siskiyou County.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of Blainville’s horned lizard within 5 miles of the Study Area (CDFW 2022a). However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Blainville’s horned lizard has potential to occur onsite.

3.2.9 Birds
A total of 21 special-status bird species were identified as having the potential to occur within the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). Of those, 16 species were determined to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat and/or due to the Study Area being 236
Item 4.
644
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-23 April 2023
2022-009
outside of the known geographic range of the species. No further discussion of those species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining five species that have the potential to occur within the Study Area is presented below.

3.2.9.1 Northern Harrier
The northern harrier (Circus hudsonius) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, it is considered to be a USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) and a CDFW SSC. This species is known to nest within the Central Valley, along the Pacific Coast, and in northeastern California.

The northern harrier is a ground-nesting species, and typically nests in emergent wetland/marsh, open grasslands, or savannah communities usually in areas with dense vegetation. Foraging occurs within a variety of open environments such as marshes, agricultural fields, and grasslands. Nesting occurs during April through September.

There is one CNDDB occurrence of northern harrier within 5 miles of the Study Area. The nonnative annual grassland represents marginally suitable nesting habitat for this species. Northern harrier have low potential to occur onsite.

3.2.9.2 Swainson’s Hawk
The Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) is listed as a threatened species and are protected pursuant to the California ESA. This species nests in North America (Canada, western U.S., and Mexico) and typically winters from South America north to Mexico. However, a small population has been observed wintering in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. In California, the nesting season for Swainson’s hawk ranges from mid-March to late August.

Swainson’s hawk nest within tall trees in a variety of wooded communities including riparian, oak woodland, roadside landscape corridors, urban areas, and agricultural areas, among others. Foraging habitat includes open grassland, savannah, low-cover row crop fields, and livestock pastures. In the Central Valley, Swainson’s hawks typically feed on a combination of California vole (Microtus californicus), California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi), ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), many passerine birds, and grasshoppers (Melanopulus species). Swainson’s hawks are opportunistic foragers and will readily forage in association with agricultural mowing, harvesting, discing, and irrigating (Estep 1989).

The removal of vegetative cover by such farming activities results in more readily available prey items for this species.

The nearest CNDDB occurrence of Swainson’s hawk is located between 5 and 6 miles south of the Study Area. There is no potentially suitable nesting habitat onsite. However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable foraging habitat for this species. Swainson’s hawk has potential to forage onsite.

3.2.9.3 Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, it is designated as a BCC by the USFWS and an SSC by the CDFW. Burrowing owls inhabit dry 237
Item 4.
645
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-24 April 2023
2022-009
open rolling hills, grasslands, desert floors, and open bare ground with gullies and arroyos. They can also inhabit developed areas such as golf courses, cemeteries, roadsides within cities, airports, vacant lots in residential areas, school campuses, and fairgrounds. This species typically uses burrows created by fossorial mammals, most notably the California ground squirrel, but may also use manufactured structures such as concrete culverts or pipes; concrete, asphalt, or wood debris piles; or openings beneath concrete or asphalt pavement. The breeding season typically occurs between February 1 and August 31.

There is one CNDDB occurrence of burrowing owl within 5 miles of the Study Area but none were observed during the site reconnaissance. The nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species. Burrowing owl has potential to occur within the Study Area.

3.2.9.4 Loggerhead Shrike
The loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; but is considered an SSC by the CDFW. The loggerhead shrike nests throughout California except the northwestern corner, montane forests, and high deserts (Small 1994). The loggerhead shrike nest in small trees and shrubs in open country with short vegetation such as pastures, old orchards, mowed roadsides, cemeteries, golf courses, agricultural fields, riparian areas, and open woodlands (Yosef 2020). The nesting season extends from March through July.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of loggerhead shrike within 5 miles of the Study Area. However, a small shrub along the northern boundary could provide suitable nesting habitat for this species. Loggerhead shrike have potential to occur onsite.

3.2.9.5 Tricolored Blackbird
The tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) was granted emergency listing for protection under the California ESA in December 2014 but the listing status was not renewed in June 2015. After an extensive status review, the California Fish and Game Commission listed tricolored blackbirds as a threatened species in 2018. In addition, it is currently considered a USFWS BCC and a CDFW SSC. This colonial nesting species is distributed widely throughout the Central Valley, Coast Range, and into Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Baja California. Tricolored blackbirds nest in colonies that can range from several pairs to several thousand pairs, depending on prey availability, the presence of predators, or level of human disturbance. Tricolored blackbird nesting habitat includes emergent marsh, riparian woodland/scrub, blackberry thickets, densely vegetated agricultural and idle fields (e.g., wheat, triticale, safflower, fava bean fields, thistle, mustard, cane, and fiddleneck), usually with some nearby standing water or ground saturation. They feed mainly on grasshoppers during the breeding season but may also forage upon a variety of other insects, grains, and seeds in open grasslands, wetlands, feedlots, dairies, and agricultural fields. The nesting season is generally from March through August.

There are four CNDDB occurrences of tricolored blackbird within 5 miles of the Study Area but there is no potentially suitable nesting habitat onsite. However, the nonnative annual grassland within the Study Area may provide suitable foraging habitat for this species. Tricolored blackbirds have potential to forage onsite.
238
Item 4.
646
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-25 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.9.6 Other Protected Birds
In addition to the above-listed special-status birds, all native or naturally occurring birds and their occupied nests/eggs are protected under the California Fish and Game Code and the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The Study Area supports potential nesting habitat for a variety of common birds protected under these regulations.

3.2.10 Mammals
Three special-status mammals were identified as having potential to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review (Table 1 of Appendix 3.2-A). However, upon further analysis and after the site visit, all three species are considered to be absent from the Study Area due to the lack of suitable habitat and/or because the Study Area is outside of the known geographic range for these species. No further discussion of these species is provided within this assessment.

3.2.11 Critical Habitat and Essential Fish Habitat
There are no Critical Habitats mapped within the Study Area. The Study Area is not Essential Fish Habitat.

3.2.12 Riparian Habitats and Sensitive Natural Communities There are no riparian habitats present within the Study Area. Five other sensitive natural communities were identified as having potential to occur within the vicinity of the Study Area based on the literature review. These include Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool, Northern Basalt Flow Vernal Pool, Northern Volcanic Mud Flow Vernal Pool, Great Valley Cottonwood Riparian Forest, and Great Valley Willow Scrub. Upon further analysis and site reconnaissance, the seasonal wetlands delineated by Rincon onsite could be categorized as Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool. The seasonal wetlands onsite fit the general description of Northern Hardpan Vernal Pools.

3.2.13 Wildlife Movement/Corridors and Nursery Sites
The Study Area is located in close proximity to residential development and subject to some disturbances from offroad vehicle use. The Study Area does not fall within an Essential Habitat Connectivity area mapped by the CDFW and is not identified as a critical and noncritical winter and summer range, fall holding areas, fawning grounds, or migration corridors for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus, CDFW 2022b). Therefore, the Study Area is not expected to support critical wildlife movement corridors or potential nursery sites. However, a variety of common bird species were observed within the Study Area during the site reconnaissance and other wildlife species also likely move through the Study Area.

For the purposes of this analysis, nursery sites include but are not limited to concentrations of nest or den sites such as heron rookeries or bat maternity roosts. This data is available through CDFW’s Biogeographic Information and Observation System database or as occurrence records in the CNDDB and is supplemented with the results of the site reconnaissance (CDFW 2022b). No nursery sites have been documented within the Study Area and none were observed during the site reconnaissance. 239
Item 4.
647
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-26 April 2023
2022-009

3.2.14 Regulatory Setting

3.2.14.1 Federal
Federal Endangered Species Act
The federal ESA protects plants and animals that are listed as endangered or threatened by the USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the taking of listed wildlife, where take is defined as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in such conduct” (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 17.3). For plants, this statute governs removing, possessing, maliciously damaging, or destroying any listed plant on federal land and removing, cutting, digging up, damaging, or destroying any listed plant on non-federal land in knowing violation of state law (16 U.S. Code [USC] 1538). Under Section 7 of the ESA, federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS if their actions, including permit approvals or funding, could adversely affect a listed (or proposed) species (including plants) or its critical habitat. Section 10 of the ESA provides for issuance of incidental take permits where no other federal actions are necessary provided a habitat conservation plan (HCP) is developed.

Section 7
Section 7 of the ESA mandates that all federal agencies consult with USFWS and/or NMFS to ensure that federal agencies’ actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or adversely modify Critical Habitat for listed species. If adverse effects to a species or its Critical Habitat are likely, the applicant must conduct a BA for the purpose of analyzing the potential effects of the project on listed species and critical habitat to establish and justify an effect determination. The federal agency reviews the BA; if it concludes that the project may adversely affect a listed species or its habitat, it prepares a Biological Opinion (BO). Through consultation and the issuance of a BO, the USFWS may issue an incidental take statement allowing take of the species that is incidental to an otherwise authorized activity provided the activity will not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. The BO may recommend reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project to avoid jeopardizing or adversely modifying habitat. If direct and/or indirect effects will occur to Critical Habitat that appreciably diminish the value of Critical Habitat for both the survival and recovery of a species, the adverse modifications will require formal consultation with USFWS or NMFS.

Section 10
When no discretionary action is being taken by a federal agency but a project may result in the take of listed species, an incidental take permit (ITP) under Section 10 of the ESA is necessary. The purpose of the ITP is to authorize the take of federally listed species that may result from an otherwise lawful activity, not to authorize the activities themselves. In order to obtain an ITP under Section 10, an application must be submitted that includes an HCP. In some instances, applicants, USFWS, and/or NMFS may determine that an HCP is necessary or prudent, even if a discretionary federal action will occur. The purpose of the HCP planning process associated with the permit application is to ensure that adequate minimization and mitigation for impacts to listed species and/or their habitat will occur. 240
Item 4.
648
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-27 April 2023
2022-009
Critical Habitat
Critical Habitat is defined in Section 3 of the ESA as:

1. the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the ESA, on which are found those physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection; and

2. specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.

For inclusion in a Critical Habitat designation, habitat within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed must first have features that are essential to the conservation of the species. Critical Habitat designations identify, to the extent known and using the best scientific data available, the physical or biological features needed for life processes. Physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species may require special management considerations or protection. These include but are not limited to:
 space for individual and population growth and for normal behavior;  food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements;  cover or shelter;
 sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development) of offspring; or  habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic, geographical, and ecological distributions of a species.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The MBTA implements international treaties between the U.S. and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, any of their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. As authorized by the MBTA, the USFWS issues permits to qualified applicants for the following types of activities: falconry, raptor propagation, scientific collecting, special purposes (e.g., rehabilitation, education, migratory game bird propagation, and salvage), take of depredating birds, taxidermy, and waterfowl sale and disposal. The regulations governing migratory bird permits can be found in 50 CFR part 13 General Permit Procedures and 50 CFR part 21 Migratory Bird Permits. The State of California has incorporated the protection of birds of prey in Sections 3800, 3513, and 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code.

Federal Clean Water Act
The purpose of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) is to “…restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters.” Section 404 of the CWA prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S. without a permit from the USACE. Discharges of fill material is defined as the addition of fill material into Waters of the U.S., including, but not limited to the following:
241
Item 4.
649
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-28 April 2023
2022-009
placement of fill that is necessary for the construction of any structure, or impoundment requiring rock, sand, dirt, or other material for its construction; site-development fills for recreational, industrial, commercial, residential, and other uses; causeways or road fills; and fill for intake and outfall pipes, and subaqueous utility lines [33 CFR Section 328.2(f)]. In addition, Section 401 of the CWA (33 USC 1341) requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant into Waters of the U.S. to obtain a certification that the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards.

Substantial impacts to Waters of the U.S. (more than 0.5 acre of impact) may require an individual permit.

Projects that only minimally affect Waters of the U.S. (less than 0.5 acre of impact) may meet the conditions of one of the existing Nationwide Permits. A Water Quality Certification or waiver pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA is required for Section 404 permit actions; this certification or waiver is issued by the RWQCB.

Rivers and Harbors Act
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires authorization from the Secretary of the Army, acting through the USACE, for the construction of any structure in or over any navigable Waters of the U.S. Structures or work outside the limits defined for navigable Waters of the U.S. require a Section 10 permit if the structure or work affects the course, location, or condition of the water body. The law applies to any dredging or disposal of dredged materials, excavation, filling, re-channelization, or any other modification of a navigable Water of the U.S., and applies to all structures, from the smallest floating dock to the largest commercial undertaking. It further includes, without limitation, any wharf, dolphin, weir, boom breakwater, jetty, groin, bank protection (e.g., riprap, revetment, bulkhead), mooring structures such as pilings, aerial or subaqueous power transmission lines, intake or outfall pipes, permanently moored floating vessel, tunnel, artificial canal, boat ramp, aids to navigation, and any other permanent, or semi-permanent obstacle or obstruction. The alteration of a USACE-federally authorized civil works project requires a permit pursuant to Section 14 of the Act, as amended and codified in 33 USC 408.

Projects with minimal impacts require approval by the USACE Sacramento District Construction Operations Group; however, projects with more substantial impacts may require USACE Headquarters review. Coordination with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, who serve as the Non-Federal Sponsor, is required as a part of the process of obtaining a Section 408 permit.

3.2.14.2 State
California Endangered Species Act
The California ESA (California Fish and Game Code Sections 2050-2116) protects species of fish, wildlife, and plants listed by the State as endangered or threatened. Species identified as candidates for listing may also receive protection. Section 2080 of the California ESA prohibits the taking, possession, purchase, sale, and import or export of endangered, threatened, or candidate species, unless otherwise authorized by permit. Take is defined in Section 86 of the California Fish and Game Code as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” The California ESA allows for take incidental to otherwise lawful projects under permits issued by CDFW. 242
Item 4.
650
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-29 April 2023
2022-009
Fully Protected Species
The State of California first began to designate species as fully protected prior to the creation of the federal and California ESAs. Lists of fully protected species were initially developed to provide protection to those animals that were rare or faced possible extinction and included fish, amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals. Most fully protected species have since been listed as threatened or endangered under the federal and/or California ESAs. Fully protected species are identified in the California Fish and Game Code Sections 4700 for mammals, 3511 for birds, 5050 for reptiles and amphibians, and 5515 for fish.

These sections of the California Fish and Game Code provide that fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time, including prohibition of CDFW from issuing incidental take permits for fully protected species under the California ESA. CDFW will issue licenses or permits for take of these species for necessary scientific research or live capture and relocation pursuant to the permit and may allow incidental take for lawful activities carried out under an approved Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) within which such species are covered.

Native Plant Protection Act
The NPPA of 1977 (California Fish and Game Code Sections 1900-1913) was established with the intent to “preserve, protect and enhance rare and endangered plants in this state.” The NPPA is administered by CDFW. The Fish and Game Commission has the authority to designate native plants as endangered or rare.

The NPPA prohibits the take of plants listed under the NPPA, though the NPPA contains exemptions to this prohibition that have not been clarified by regulation or judicial rule. In 1984, the California ESA brought under its protection all plants previously listed as endangered under NPPA. Plants listed as rare under NPPA are not protected under the California ESA but are still protected under the provisions of NPPA. The Fish and Game Commission no longer lists plants under NPPA, reserving all listings to the California ESA.

California Fish and Game Code Special Protections for Birds In addition to protections contained within the California ESA and California Fish and Game Code Section 3511 described above, the California Fish and Game Code includes a several sections that specifically protect certain birds:
 Section 3800 states that it is unlawful to take nongame birds, such as those occurring naturally in California that are not resident game birds, migratory game birds, or fully protected birds, except when in accordance with regulations of the California Fish and Game Commission or a mitigation plan approved by CDFW for mining operations.
 Section 3503 prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird.
 Section 3503.5 protects birds of prey (which includes eagles, hawks, falcons, kites, ospreys, and owls) and prohibits the take, possession, or destruction of any birds and their nests. 243
Item 4.
651
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-30 April 2023
2022-009
 Section 3505 makes it unlawful to take, sell, or purchase egrets, ospreys, and several exotic nonnative species, or any part of these birds.
 Section 3513 specifically prohibits the take or possession of any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act
The RWQCB implements water quality regulations under the federal CWA and the State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. These regulations require compliance with the NPDES, including compliance with the California Storm Water NPDES General Construction Permit for discharges of storm water runoff associated with construction activities. General Construction Permits for projects that disturb one or more acres of land require development and implementation of a SWPPP. Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, the RWQCB regulates actions that would involve “discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, with any region that could affect the water of the state” (Water Code 13260(a)). Waters of the State are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (Water Code 13050 (e)). The RWQCB regulates all such activities, as well as dredging, filling, or discharging materials into Waters of the State that are not regulated by the USACE due to a lack of connectivity with a navigable water body. The RWQCB may require issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements for these activities.

California Environmental Quality Act
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15380, a species or subspecies not specifically protected under the federal or California ESAs or NPPA may be considered endangered, rare, or threatened for CEQA review purposes if the species meets certain criteria specified in the Guidelines. These criteria parallel the definitions used in the ESA, California ESA, and NPPA. Section 15380 was included in the CEQA Guidelines primarily to address situations in which a project under review may have a significant effect on a species that has not been listed under the ESA, California ESA, or NPPA, but that may meet the definition of endangered, rare, or threatened. Animal species identified as SSC by CDFW, birds identified as BCC by USFWS, and plants identified by the CNPS as rare, threatened, or endangered may meet the CEQA definition of rare or endangered.

Species of Special Concern
The CDFW defines SSC as a species, subspecies, or distinct population of an animal native to California that are not legally protected under the federal ESA, California ESA, or California Fish and Game Code, but currently satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
 The species has been completely extirpated from the state or, as in the case of birds, it has been extirpated from its primary seasonal or breeding role.
 The species is listed as federally (but not state) threatened or endangered or meets the state definition of threatened or endangered but has not formally been listed. 244
Item 4.
652
Item 27.

Draft
Feather River Ranch
Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources 3.2-31 April 2023
2022-009
 The species has or is experiencing serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions (not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for state threatened or endangered status.
 The species has naturally small populations that exhibit high susceptibility to risk from any factor that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for state threatened or endangered status.
 SSC are typically associated with habitats that are threatened.

Depending on the policy of the lead agency, projects that result in substantial impacts to SSC may be considered significant under CEQA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Birds of Conservation Concern
The 1988 amendment to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act mandates USFWS “identify species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory nongame birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under ESA.” To meet this requirement, USFWS published a list of BCC for the U.S. (USFWS 2021). The list identifies the migratory and nonmigratory bird species (beyond those already designated as federally threatened or endangered) that represent USFWS’ highest conservation priorities. Depending on the policy of the lead agency, projects that result in substantial impacts to BCC may be considered significant under CEQA.

Sensitive Natural Communities
The CDFW maintains the California Natural Community List (CDFW 2021), which provides a list of vegetation alliances, associations, and special stands as defined in A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009), along with their respective state and global rarity ranks. Natural communities with a state rarity rank of S1, S2, or S3 are considered sensitive natural communities. Impacts to sensitive natural communities may be considered significant under CEQA depending on the policy of the lead agency.

California Rare Plant Ranks
The CNPS maintains the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2022), which provides a list of plant species native to California that are threatened with extinction, have limited distributions, and/or low populations. Plant species meeting one of these criteria are assigned to one of six CRPRs. The rank system was developed in collaboration with government, academia, nongovernmental organizations, and private-sector botanists, and is jointly managed by CDFW and the CNPS. The CRPRs are currently recognized in the CNDDB. The following are definitions of the CNPS CRPRs:
 Rare Plant Rank 1A – presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere.  Rare Plant Rank 1B – rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere.  Rare Plant Rank 2A – presumed extirpated in California, but more common elsewhere.  Rare Plant Rank 2B – rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. 245
Item 4.
653
Item 27.

Oroville City CouncilJuly 18, 2023

Oroville City Council
July 18, 2023