Redding City Council
February 15, 2022

8. STATE will withhold the greater of either two (2) percent of the total of all STATE FUNDS encumbered for each PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or $40,000 until ADMINISTERING AGENCY submits the Final Report of Expenditures for each completed PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT PROJECT.

9. The estimated total cost of PROJECT, the amount of STATE FUNDS obligated, and the required matching funds may be adjusted by mutual consent of the PARTIES with a finance letter, and an allocation notification letter when applicable. STATE FUNDING may be increased to cover PROJECT cost increases only if such additional funds are available and the CTC and/or STATE concurs with that increase in the form of an allocation and finance letter.

10. When such additional STATE FUNDS are not available, ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that any increases in PROJECT costs must be defrayed with ADMINISTERING AGENCY's own funds.

11. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall use its own non-STATE FUNDS to finance the local share of eligible costs and all PROJECT expenditures or contract items ruled ineligible for financing with STATE FUNDS. STATE shall make the final determination of ADMINISTERING AGENCY's cost eligibility for STATE FUNDED financing with respect to claimed PROJECT costs.

12. ADMINISTERING AGENCY will reimburse STATE for STATE's share of costs for work performed by STATE at the request of ADMINISTERING AGENCY. STATE's costs shall include overhead assessments in accordance with section 8755.1 of the State Administrative Manual.

13. STATE FUNDS allocated by the CTC and/or STATE are subject to the timely use of funds provisions approved in CTC Guidelines and State procedures approved by the CTC and STATE.

14. STATE FUNDS encumbered for PROJECT are available for liquidation only for a limited period from the beginning of the State fiscal year when those funds were appropriated in the State Budget. STATE FUNDS not liquidated within these periods will be reverted unless a Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) is submitted by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and approved by the California Department of Finance in accordance with Section 16304 of the Government Code. The exact date of fund reversion will be reflected in the STATE signed PROJECT finance letter.

15. Payments to ADMINISTERING AGENCY for PROJECT-related travel and subsistence (per diem) expenses of ADMINISTERING AGENCY forces and its contractors and subcontractors claimed for reimbursement or as local match credit shall not exceed rates authorized to be paid to rank and file STATE employees under current California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) rules unless a Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) is submitted by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and approved by the California Department of Finance in accordance with Government Code section 16304. If the rates invoiced by ADMINISTERING AGENCY are in excess

of CalHR rates, ADMINISTERING AGENCY is responsible for the cost difference, and any overpayments inadvertently paid by STATE shall be reimbursed to STATE by ADMINISTERING AGENCY on demand.

16. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to comply with California Government Code 4525- 4529.14. Administering Agency shall undertake the procedures described in California Government Code 4527(a) and 4528(a). Administering Agency shall also comply with 2 CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirement for Federal Awards, excluding 2 CFR Part 200.318-200.326.

17. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors will be obligated to agree that Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine the allowability of individual PROJECT cost items. Every recipient and sub-recipient receiving PROJECT funds under this AGREEMENT shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirement for Federal Awards, excluding 2 CFR Part 200.318-200.326Governments.

ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to comply with the provisions set forth in 23 CFR Parts 140, 645 and 646 when contracting with railroad and utility companies.

18. Every recipient and sub-recipient receiving PROJECT funds under this AGREEMENT shall comply with 2 CFR 200 excluding 2 CFR Part 200.318-200.326, 48 CFR Chapter 1, Part 31, LAPM, Public Contract Code (PCC) 10300- 10334 (procurement of goods), PCC 10335-10381 (non-A&E services), California Government Code 4525-4529.5 including 4527(a) and 4528(a), and other applicable STATE regulations.

19. Any PROJECT costs for which ADMINISTERING AGENCY has received payment or credit that are determined by subsequent audit to be questioned, disallowed, or unallowable under 2 CFR, Part 200, 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31, 23 CFR Parts 140, 645 and 646, LAPM, Public Contract Code (PCC) 10300-10334 (procurement of goods), PCC 10335-10381 (non-A&E services), California Government Code 4525-4529.5 including 4527(a) and 4528(a), and other applicable STATE regulations are subject to repayment by ADMINISTERING AGENCY to STATE and may result in STATE imposing sanctions on ADMINISTERING AGENCY as described in Chapter 20 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual.

20. Should ADMINISTERING AGENCY fail to refund any moneys due upon written demand by STATE as provided herein or should ADMINISTERING AGENCY breach this AGREEMENT by failing to complete PROJECT without adequate justification and approval by STATE, then, within thirty (30) days of demand, or within such other period as may be agreed to in writing between the PARTIES hereto, STATE, acting through the State Controller, the State Treasurer, the CTC or any other public entity or agency, may intercept, withhold and demand the transfer of an amount equal to the amount paid by or owed to STATE for each PROJECT, from future apportionments, or any other funds due ADMINISTERING AGENCY from the Highway Users Tax Fund or any other sources of funds, and/or may also withhold approval of future STATE FUNDED projects proposed by ADMINISTERING AGENCY.

21. Should ADMINISTERING AGENCY be declared to be in breach of this AGREEMENT or otherwise in default thereof by STATE, and if ADMINISTERING AGENCY is

constituted as a joint powers authority, special district, or any other public entity not directly receiving funds through the State Controller, STATE is authorized to obtain reimbursement from whatever sources of funding are available, including the withholding or transfer of funds, from those constituent entities comprising a joint powers authority or by bringing of an action against ADMINISTERING AGENCY or its constituent member entities, to recover all funds provided by STATE hereunder.

22. ADMINISTERING AGENCY acknowledges that the signatory party represents the ADMINISTERING AGENCY and further warrants that there is nothing within a Joint Powers Agreement, by which ADMINISTERING AGENCY was created, if any exists, that would restrict or otherwise limit STATE's ability to recover STATE FUNDS improperly spent by ADMINISTERING AGENCY in contravention of the terms of this AGREEMENT.

ARTICLE V

AUDITS, THIRD PARTY CONTRACTING, RECORDS RETENTION AND REPORTS

1. STATE reserves the right to conduct technical and financial audits of PROJECT work and records and ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees, and shall require its contractors and subcontractors to agree, to cooperate with STATE by making all appropriate and relevant PROJECT records available for audit and copying as required by paragraph three (3) of Article V.

2. ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its contractors and subcontractors shall establish and maintain a financial management system and records that properly accumulate and segregate reasonable, allowable, and allocable incurred PROJECT costs and matching funds by line item for the PROJECT. The financial management system of ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its contractors and all subcontractors shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices sent to or paid by STATE.

3. ADMINISTERING AGENCY, ADMINISTERING AGENCY's contractors and subcontractors, and STATE shall each maintain and make available for inspection and audit by STATE, the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of STATE or the United States, all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such contracts, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering those various contracts, and ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall furnish copies thereof if requested. All of the above-referenced parties shall make such AGREEMENT and PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the entire PROJECT period and for three (3) years, or 35 years for Prop 1B funds, from the date of final payment to ADMINISTERING AGENCY.

4. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall not award a construction contract over $25,000 on the basis of a noncompetitive negotiation for work to be performed under this AGREEMENT without the prior written approval of STATE. All contracts awarded by ADMINISTERING AGENCY intended or used as local match credit must meet the requirements set forth in this AGREEMENT regarding local match funds.

5. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall comply with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 4525) Division 5 of Title 1 of the Government Code and shall undertake the procedures described in California Government Code 4527(a) and 4528(a). Administering Agency shall comply with Chapter 10 of the LAPM for A&E Consultant Contracts.

6. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall comply with Government Code Division 5 Title 1 sections 4525-4529.5 and shall undertake the procedures described in California Government Code 4527(a) and 4528(a) for procurement of professional service contracts. Administering Agency shall follow Public Contract Code Section 10335-10381 for other professional service contracts.

7. Any subcontract entered into by ADMINISTERING AGENCY as a result of this AGREEMENT shall contain all of the provisions of Article IV, FISCAL PROVISIONS, and this ARTICLE V, AUDITS, THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTING, RECORDS RETENTION AND REPORTS and shall mandate that travel and per diem reimbursements and third- party contract reimbursements to subcontractors will be allowable as PROJECT costs only after those costs are incurred and paid for by the subcontractors.

8. To be eligible for local match credit, ADMINISTERING AGENCY must ensure that local match funds used for a PROJECT meet the fiscal provisions requirements outlined in ARTICLE IV in the same manner that is required of all other PROJECT expenditures.

9. Except as provided in this Article, this AGREEMENT is solely between and for the benefit of the PARTIES and there are no third-party beneficiaries.

ARTICLE VI - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

1. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to use all PROJECT funds reimbursed hereunder only for transportation purposes that are in conformance with Article XIX of the California State Constitution and other California laws.

2. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall conform to all applicable State and Federal statutes and regulations, and the Local Assistance Program Guidelines and Local Assistance Procedures Manual as published by STATE and incorporated herein, including all subsequent approved revisions thereto applicable to PROJECT unless otherwise designated in the project-specific executed PROJECT SUPPLEMENT.

3. This AGREEMENT is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, conditions, or any statute enacted by the State Legislature or adopted by the CTC that may affect the provisions, terms, or funding of this AGREEMENT in any manner.

4. ADMINISTERING AGENCY and the officers and employees of ADMINISTERING AGENCY, when engaged in the performance of this AGREEMENT, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers, employees or agents of STATE.

5. Each project-specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT shall separately establish the terms and funding limits for each described PROJECT funded under this AGREEMENT and that PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. No STATE FUNDS are obligated against this AGREEMENT.

6. ADMINISTERING AGENCY certifies that neither ADMINISTERING AGENCY nor its principals are suspended or debarred at the time of the execution of this AGREEMENT, and ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that it will notify STATE immediately in the event a suspension or a debarment occurs after the execution of this AGREEMENT.

7. ADMINISTERING AGENCY certifies, by execution of this AGREEMENT, that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this AGREEMENT upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by ADMINISTERING AGENCY for the purpose of securing business. For breach or violation of this warranty, STATE has the right to annul this AGREEMENT without liability, pay only for the value of the PROJECT work actually performed, or in STATE's discretion, to deduct from the price of PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee.

8. In accordance with Public Contract Code section 10296, ADMINISTERING AGENCY hereby certifies under penalty of perjury that no more than one final unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal court has been issued against ADMINISTERING AGENCY within the immediate preceding two (2) year period because of ADMINISTERING AGENCY's failure to comply with an order of a federal court that orders ADMINISTERING AGENCY to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board.

9. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall disclose any financial, business, or other relationship with STATE that may have an impact upon the outcome of this AGREEMENT or any individual PROJECT encompassed within a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall also list current contractors who may have a financial interest in the outcome of a PROJECT undertaken pursuant to this AGREEMENT. These disclosures shall be delivered to STATE in a form deemed acceptable by the STATE prior to execution of this AGREEMENT.

10. ADMINISTERING AGENCY hereby certifies that it does not have, nor shall it acquire, any financial or business interest that would conflict with the performance of any PROJECT initiated under this AGREEMENT.

11. ADMINISTERING AGENCY certifies that this AGREEMENT was not obtained or secured through rebates, kickbacks or other unlawful consideration either promised or paid to any STATE employee. For breach or violation of this warranty, STATE shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate this AGREEMENT without liability, to pay only for PROJECT work actually performed, or to deduct from a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT price or otherwise recover the full amount of such rebate, kickback, or other unlawful consideration.

12. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the STATE's Contract Manager, who shall be identified to ADMINISTERING AGENCY at the time of execution of this AGREEMENT and, as applicable , any time that Contract Manager changes during the duration of this AGREEMENT who may consider any written or verbal evidence submitted by ADMINISTERING AGENCY.

The decision of the Contract Manager, issued in writing, shall be conclusive and binding on the PARTIES on all questions of fact considered and determined by the Contract Manager.

13. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by the Contract Manager will excuse the ADMINISTERING AGENCY from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT and each PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT.

14. Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction of ADMINISTERING AGENCY arising under this AGREEMENT. It is understood and agreed that ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless STATE and all of its officers and employees from all claims and suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought forth under, including but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this AGREEMENT.

15. Neither ADMINISTERING AGENCY nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE, under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction arising under this AGREEMENT. It is understood and agreed that STATE shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the ADMINISTERING AGENCY and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought forth under, including but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation and other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under this AGREEMENT.

16. In the event of (a) ADMINISTERING AGENCY failing to timely proceed with effective PROJECT work in accordance with the project-specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT; (b) failing to maintain any applicable bonding requirements; and (c) otherwise materially violating the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT and/or any PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, STATE reserves the right to terminate funding for that PROJECT upon thirty (30) days' written notice to ADMINISTERING AGENCY.

17. No termination notice shall become effective if, within thirty (30) days after receipt of a Notice of Termination, ADMINISTERING AGENCY either cures the default involved or, if the default is not reasonably susceptible of cure within said thirty (30) day period the ADMINISTERING AGENCY proceeds thereafter to complete that cure in a manner and time line acceptable to STATE.

18. Any such termination shall be accomplished by delivery to ADMINISTERING AGENCY of a Notice of Termination, which notice shall become effective not less than thirty (30) days after receipt, specifying the reason for the termination, the

extent to which funding of work under this AGREEMENT and the applicable PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT is terminated and the date upon which such termination becomes effective, if beyond thirty (30) days after receipt. During the period before the effective termination date, ADMINISTERING AGENCY and STATE shall meet to attempt to resolve any dispute. In the event of such termination, STATE may proceed with the PROJECT work in a manner deemed proper by STATE. If STATE terminates funding for PROJECT with ADMINISTERING AGENCY for the reasons stated in paragraph sixteen (16) of ARTICLE VI, STATE shall pay ADMINISTERING AGENCY the sum due ADMINISTERING AGENCY under the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and/or STATE-approved finance letter prior to termination, provided, however, ADMINISTERING AGENCY is not in default of the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT or the project-specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and that the cost of any PROJECT completion to STATE shall first be deducted from any sum due ADMINISTERING AGENCY.

19. In the case of inconsistency or conflicts with the terms of this AGREEMENT and that of a project-specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and/or Cooperative Agreement, the terms stated in that PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and/or Cooperative Agreement shall prevail over those in this AGREEMENT.

20. Without the written consent of STATE, this AGREEMENT is not assignable by ADMINISTERING AGENCY either in whole or in part.

21. No alteration or variation of the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the PARTIES, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the PARTIES.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this AGREEMENT by their duly authorized officer.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA City of Redding

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By______________________________ By_______________________________ ________________________________ _______________________________ Chief, Office of Project Implementation City of Redding Division of Local Assistance Representative Name & Title (Authorized Governing Body Representative)
Date __________________________ Date __________________________

EXHIBIT A - FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES ADDENDUM

1. In the performance of this Agreement, ADMINISTERING AGENCY will not discriminate against any employee for employment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. ADMINISTERING AGENCY will take affirmative action to ensure that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
employment; upgrading; demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall post in conspicuous places, available to employees for employment, notices to be provided by STATE setting forth the provisions of this Fair Employment section.

2. ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its contractor(s) and all subcontractors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code, 12900 et seq.), and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (Cal. Code Regs., Title 2, 11000, et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code section 12900(a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations are incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Each of the ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S contractors and all subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreements, as appropriate.

3. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and subcontracts to perform work under this AGREEMENT.

4. ADMINISTERING AGENCY will permit access to the records of employment, employment advertisements, application forms, and other pertinent data and records by STATE, the State Fair Employment and Housing Commission, or any other agency of the State of California designated by STATE, for the purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with the Fair Employment section of this Agreement.

5. Remedies for Willful Violation:
(a) STATE may determine a willful violation of the Fair Employment provision to have occurred upon receipt of a final judgment to that effect from a court in an action to which ADMINISTERING AGENCY was a party, or upon receipt of a written notice from the Fair Employment and Housing Commission that it has investigated and determined that ADMINISTERING AGENCY has violated the Fair Employment Practices Act.

(b) For willful violation of this Fair Employment Provision, STATE shall have the right to terminate this Agreement either in whole or in part, and any loss or damage sustained by STATE in securing the goods or services thereunder shall be borne and paid for by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and by the surety under the performance bond, if any, and STATE may deduct from any moneys due or thereafter may become due to ADMINISTERING AGENCY, the difference between the price named in the Agreement and the actual cost thereof to STATE to cure ADMINISTERING AGENCY's breach of this Agreement.

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Authorize the following actions relative to the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project:
(1) Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program; (2) Approve Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project as described, thereby satisfying the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines §15074); and
(3) Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination with the Shasta County Clerk’s Office and the State Clearinghouse.

Fiscal Impact
Approval of the project along with adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) allows the project to move forward to the final design and construction phases. There is no fiscal impact as a direct result of adopting the MND, MMP, and approving the project.

The Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project is estimated to cost $3,200,000. The project is grant funded through the Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) (90 percent) and the Streets Division (10 percent).

Alternative Action
The City Council (Council) could choose to not adopt the MND and the MMP, and not approve the project as described. Without approval, the project would not proceed as a City of Redding (City) project, as it would not be in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.

MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
ITEM NO. 4.11(e)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.11(e)--Adoption of the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project, Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation and Monitoring Program Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 733
Report to Redding City Council February 7, 2022
Re: 4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 2 Background/Analysis
The project area lies in northeast Redding along Old Oregon Trail. Construction will begin approximately 100-feet west of Paso Robles Avenue and extend east to Bear Mountain Road.

The purpose of the project is to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. The project is needed as this section of roadway has little to no roadway shoulder, and non-motorized access is limited. This section of roadway also has an accident rate that is higher than the statewide average for similar roadways. The project includes earthwork, vegetation removal, drainage modification, utility relocation, fencing and guardrail installation, paving, striping, sign installation, and right of way (ROW) acquisition.

The existing road alignment would be widened to create one standard 12-foot wide lane in each direction with 6-foot wide paved shoulders. A section of roadway would also be realigned to improve a compound curve. Tree removal would be necessary to allow for road widening, and existing culverts beneath the road would be replaced, extended, or abandoned in place as needed.

Utility poles, fire hydrants, and waterlines would be relocated if they conflict with the new roadway improvements. New guardrail would be installed where needed for public safety. Most work would occur within the existing ROW, but some permanent ROW would be needed from adjacent private lands to realign the roadway and improve the curve. A temporary construction easement (TCE) may be needed in one location to allow for culvert extension. Contractor staging areas would be located in existing graveled pullouts along the Old Oregon Trail existing ROW:
one is approximately 0.2 mile south of the southern end of the project’s construction area boundary, and one is approximately 0.1 mile north of the northern-most end of the project area.

Construction would require one-way traffic control, resulting in travel delays of up to 20 minutes. Some portions of the work may require partial roadway closures and traffic detours. It is anticipated that construction would take one season and is planned for 2023.

An Initial Study (IS) was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It describes why the project is being proposed and the potential impacts to the existing environment. The IS shows that the proposed project could have a significant effect on biological resources, but with implementation of mitigation measures, those impacts will be reduced to a level considered less than significant. The mitigation measures and conservation measures to be implemented are common practices and include, but are not limited to, biological pre-construction surveys, impact minimization, and erosion control.

Based on the conclusions made in the IS, an MND was prepared. The MND describes the project, including mitigation measures, and makes the determination that there will be no significant effect on the environment provided that the defined mitigation measures are implemented as part of the project. In addition, a Mitigation and Monitoring Program has been written and incorporated into the MND (CEQA Section 21081.6). The MMP will be used by City staff, contractors, agencies, and monitoring personnel during and after the project to ensure effective implementation of the adopted mitigation measures outlined in the MND.

The IS/MND/MMP documents were sent to the State Clearinghouse for a 30-day public review period and distribution to pertinent state agencies. They were sent to local resource agencies, the Shasta County Clerk, and posted on the Public Works Department website. A public notice was also sent to landowners in the vicinity of the project and posted in the local newspaper. One comment letter was received during the public comment period. A response to the comment letter has been prepared and is attached to the final MND.

Packet Pg. 734
Report to Redding City Council February 7, 2022
Re: 4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 3 The City of Redding is the lead agency for the project pursuant to CEQA. As the lead CEQA agency, the City Council is authorized to adopt the MND per Redding Municipal Code Section §18.24.070.E and state law. Upon adoption of the MND and approval of the project by the City Council, a Notice of Determination will be filed with the Shasta County Clerk’s Office and the State Clearinghouse, completing the environmental review process. The IS/MND is available in the City Clerk’s office for review and is currently available online at https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/public-works/environmental-management.

Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• This agenda item is a routine operational item.

Attachments
Location Map
Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online)
Response to Public Comments (available online)
Packet Pg. 735

ALICIA PKWY

PASO ROBLES AVE

GLIDE WAY

SUNBEAM CIR

PEAR LN

YANOT DR

MOODY CREEK DR

VERNITA DR MITCHELLINDA DR

PALA MESA CIR

MIDLAND DR

COVEY RD

PALERMO CT

RAINTREE LN

SAN VINCENTE DR

LA CRESCENTA DR

RHONDA LN

BELLETERRE DR

FIVE G'S LN

MELONBANK DR
HIDEAWAY DR BOX 3 RANCH RD

LOWRY LN

ESCADA CT

AUTUMN OAKS LN

MORNING DOVE LN

CANPOM CT

OASIS BLVD

FRONTIER RD

AKRICH ST

OLD OREGON TRL PASO ROBLES AVE
MTG. DATE:

ITEM:

ATTACHMENT:

LOCATION MAP GIS DIVISION

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT
DATE PRODUCED: - 0 200 400 Feet
DECEMBER 15, 2021 OLD OREGON TRAIL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT

CITY OF REDDING

CITY LIMIT
P:\Environmental Management\ProProjects\OldOregonTrailSafetyProject.aprx Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Location Map (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 1
January 2022

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

OLD OREGON TRAIL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2021120354)

SUBJECT
Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Redding (City) proposes to construct a safety improvement project on Old Oregon Trail. The purpose of the project is to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. The project is needed as this section of roadway has little to no roadway shoulder and non-motorized access is limited. This section of roadway also has an accident rate that is higher than the statewide average for similar roadways. The existing road alignment would be widened to create one standard 12-foot wide lane in each direction with 6-foot wide paved shoulders. A section of roadway would also be realigned to improve a compound curve. The project includes earthwork, vegetation removal, drainage modification, utility relocation, fencing and guardrail installation, paving, striping, sign installation, and right of way (ROW) acquisition.

Tree removal would be necessary to allow for road widening, and existing culverts beneath the road would be replaced, extended, or abandoned in place as needed. Utility poles, fire hydrants, and waterlines would be relocated if they conflict with the new roadway improvements. New guardrail would be installed where needed for public safety. Most work would occur within the existing ROW, but some permanent ROW would be needed from adjacent private lands to realign the roadway and improve the curve. A temporary construction easement (TCE) may be needed in one location to allow for culvert extension. Contractor staging areas would be located in existing graveled pullouts along the Old Oregon Trail existing ROW: one is approximately 0.2 mile south of the southern end of the project’s construction area boundary and one is approximately 0.1 mile north of the northern-most end of the project area.

Construction would require one-way traffic control, resulting in travel delays of up to 20 minutes. Some portions of the work may require partial roadway closures and traffic detours. It is anticipated that construction would take one season and is planned for 2023.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project area lies in northeast Redding along Old Oregon Trail. Construction will begin approximately 100-feet west of Paso Robles Avenue and extend east to Bear Mountain Road. The roadway is bordered by rural residential properties and open space areas. West Fork Stillwater Creek parallels much of the north side of Old Oregon Trail in the western half of the project, while Tierra Oaks Golf Course is located immediately north of the roadway at the eastern end of the project.

Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Mitigated Negative Declaration

January 2022

FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION
The City of Redding conducted an Initial Study (attached) that determined that the proposed project could have significant environmental effects on biological resources. Use of specific mitigation measures identified below will avoid or mitigate the potentially significant environmental effects identified, and the preparation of an environmental impact report will not be required. If there are substantial changes that alter the character or impacts of the proposed project, another environmental impact determination will be necessary.

Prior to approval of the project, the lead agency may conclude, at a public hearing, that certain mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration are infeasible or undesirable. In accordance with CEQA Section 15074.1, the lead agency may delete those mitigation measures and substitute other measures that it determines are equivalent or more effective. The lead agency would adopt written findings that the new measure(s) is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it would not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment.

1. Based on the whole record (including the Initial Study and any supporting documentation) and the mitigation measures incorporated into the project, the City of Redding has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.

2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration, with its supporting documentation, reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the lead agency, which is the City of Redding.

DOCUMENTATION
The attached Initial Study documents the reasons to support the above determination.

MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project to minimize potential effects on biological resources:

MM-1. If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey seven (7) days before construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will be notified and consulted. An appropriate buffer, as determined by CDFW and the qualified biologist, will be placed around the nest until the young have fledged. If construction activities cease for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required.

MM-2. If an active raptor nest is found, no construction activities will occur within 300-feet of the nest for raptors and 450-feet of the nest for special-status raptors unless a smaller buffer zone is approved by the CDFW. Construction may resume once the young have left the nest or as approved by a qualified biologist.

MM-3. If construction, including the removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags, occurs during the bats’ non-volant period (March 1 through August 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a prePacket Pg. 738 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Works Department, Engineering Division Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 3
January 2022
construction survey of the project area biological study area (BSA) (Figure 2) to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The pre-construction survey will be performed no more than seven (7) days prior to the implementation of construction activities (including staging and equipment access). If a lapse in construction activities occurs for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the BSA, a disturbance-free buffer will be established by a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFW) to adequately protect the colony from project activities.

PUBLIC REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
Draft copies or notice of this Mitigated Negative Declaration were distributed to:
 State Clearinghouse
 Shasta County Clerk
 California Department of Transportation District 2
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife District 1  Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
 California Native Plant Society
 California Highway Patrol
 Native American Heritage Commission
 State Office of Historic Preservation
 All property owners within 300 feet of the property boundary

PUBLIC REVIEW
(X) Draft document referred for comments 12/16/2021–1/14/2022 Date
( ) No comments were received during the public review period. ( ) Comments were received but did not address the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration findings or the accuracy/completeness of the Initial Study. No response is necessary. The letters are attached. (X) Comments addressing the findings of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and/or accuracy or completeness of the Initial Study were received during the public review period. The letters and responses follow (see Attachment D, Response to Comments).

Copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Initial Study, documentation materials, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program may be obtained at the Public Works Department, Engineering Division, City of Redding, 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001. Contact: Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager, (530) 225-4046 or [email protected].

Date of
Draft Report: December 14, 2021 By:

Name/ Title: Amber Kelley
Environmental Compliance Manager
Amber Kelley
Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Mitigated Negative Declaration

January 2022
Date of
Final Report January 18, 2022
Attachments:

A. Project Location Map
B. Initial Study
C. Mitigation Monitoring and Environmental Commitment Program D. Comments and Response to Comments (if any)
Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

ATTACHMENT A

Project Location Map

Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

ALICIA PKWY

PASO ROBLES AVE

GLIDE WAY

SUNBEAM CIR

PEAR LN

YANOT DR

MOODY CREEK DR

VERNITA DR MITCHELLINDA DR

PALA MESA CIR

MIDLAND DR

COVEY RD

PALERMO CT

RAINTREE LN

SAN VINCENTE DR

LA CRESCENTA DR

RHONDA LN

BELLETERRE DR

FIVE G'S LN

MELONBANK DR
HIDEAWAY DR BOX 3 RANCH RD

LOWRY LN

ESCADA CT

AUTUMN OAKS LN

MORNING DOVE LN

CANPOM CT

OASIS BLVD

FRONTIER RD

AKRICH ST

OLD OREGON TRL PASO ROBLES AVE
MTG. DATE:

ITEM:

ATTACHMENT:

LOCATION MAP GIS DIVISION

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT
DATE PRODUCED: - 0 400200 Feet
DECEMBER 15, 2021 OLD OREGON TRAIL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT

CITY OF REDDING

CITY LIMIT
P:\Environmental Management\ProProjects\OldOregonTrailSafetyProject.aprx Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

ATTACHMENT
B

Initial Study

Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

INITIAL STUDY
Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project
State Clearinghouse No. 2021120354
Prepared by:

CITY OF REDDING
Public Works Department
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, California 96001
January 2022
Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

January 2022

CITY OF REDDING

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

1. Project Title: Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project

2. Lead agency name and address:

CITY OF REDDING
Public Works Department
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager, (530) 225-4046

4. Project Location:

The proposed project is in northeast Redding, Shasta County, California. The proposed project area includes the 1.2-mile segment of the Old Oregon Trail roadway beginning about 100 feet west of Paso Robles Avenue and extends east to Bear Mountain Road. The area is shown on the Project City, California 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle in Township 32N, Range 4W, Section 4 and Township 33N, Range 4W, Section 33. The approximate center of the proposed project area is located at latitude 40.664007°N, longitude -122.327882°W (Attachment A, Figure 1).

5. Applicant’s Name and Address: Representative’s Name and Address:

CITY OF REDDING Amber Kelley
Public Works Department CITY OF REDDING
777 Cypress Avenue Public Works Department
Redding, CA 96001 777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001

6. General Plan Designation:
• Residential, 1 dwelling unit per 1 to 5 acres (1 to 5) • Greenway (GWY)
• Rural Residential (RA) (Shasta County)

7. Zoning:
• Open Space District (OS)
• Residential Estate 1 Unit Per Acre (RE-1-PD)

8. Description of Project:

The project would consist of safety improvements along an approximately 1.2-mile segment of Old Oregon Trail. The purpose of the project is to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.

Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
The project is needed as this section of roadway has little to no roadway shoulder and non-motorized access is limited. This section of roadway also has an accident rate that is higher than the statewide average for similar roadways. The existing road alignment would be widened to create one standard 12-foot wide lane in each direction with 6-foot wide paved shoulders. A section of roadway would also be realigned to improve a compound curves. The project includes earthwork, vegetation removal, drainage modification, utility relocation, fencing and guardrail installation, paving, striping, and sign installation.

Tree removal would be necessary to allow for road widening, and existing culverts beneath the road would be replaced, extended, or abandoned in place as needed. Utility poles, fire hydrants, and waterlines would be relocated if they conflict with the new roadway improvements. New guardrail would be installed where needed for public safety. Most work would occur within the existing ROW, but some permanent ROW would be needed from adjacent private lands to realign the roadway and improve the curve. A temporary construction easement (TCE) may be needed in one location to allow for culvert extension. Contractor staging areas would be located in existing graveled pullouts along the Old Oregon Trail existing ROW: one is approximately 0.2 mile south of the southern end of the project’s construction area boundary and one is approximately 0.1 mile north of the northern-most end of the project area. The approximately 12.13 acre project area and proposed project layout are shown in Figure 2 (Attachment A).

Construction would require one-way traffic control, resulting in travel delays of up to 20 minutes.

Some portions of the work may require partial roadway closures and traffic detours. It is anticipated that construction would take one season and is planned for 2023.

In addition to the project design alternative assessed in this Initial Study (IS), the City of Redding (City) considered and dismissed three other alternatives as follows:
• Original scope. This alternative started at Midland Drive (several hundred feet south of the currently proposed project boundary near Paso Robles Avenue) and included a staging area on the north side of the road west of Midland Drive. This alternative was dismissed as it had a high potential to impact environmental resources.
• New Offsite Alignments. Realign Old Oregon Trail to the west or the east, completely outside of the existing alignment. Neither of these alignments was explored further due to the substantial environmental impacts that would result of the project, as well as funding considerations for the ROW (i.e., acquisition of substantial acreage and residential properties and displacement of homeowners).
• No-build. This alternative would not meet the purpose and need for the project, which is to improve safety along this section of roadway.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The project area lies in northeast Redding and is bordered by rural residential properties and open space areas. West Fork Stillwater Creek parallels much of the north side of Old Oregon Trail in the western half of the project, while Tierra Oaks Golf Course is located immediately north of the Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 3
January 2022
roadway in the eastern portion of the project. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):
• Federal Highway Administration
• California Department of Transportation (District 2)

10. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
The City consulted with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and local Native American groups and individuals pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1. In 2016, on behalf of the City, North State Resources Inc. (NSR) (now Stantec) requested that NAHC review its Sacred Lands database for culturally significant properties that could be affected by the proposed project. NAHC responded that the file search did not yield any records of Native American cultural resources in the immediate area of the project’s area of potential effect (APE). The response also included a list of Native American groups and individuals that might be able to provide additional information related to culturally sensitive resources in the APE and vicinity. Accordingly, NSR mailed project notification letters to the following Native American contacts on July 21, 2016:
• Honorable Mr. Jack Potter, Jr., Chairperson of Redding Rancheria • Mr. James Hayward, Sr., Redding Rancheria Cultural Resources Program • Ms. Kelli Hayward, Wintu Tribe of Northern California • Honorable Ms. Caleen Sisk-Franco, Tribal Chair of Winnemem Wintu Tribe • Mr. Wade McMaster, Chairman of Wintu Tribe of Northern California • Mr. Greg Burgin, Jr., Cultural Resources Manager of Wintu Tribe of Northern California This initial outreach effort was followed up with phone calls and emails to the above-named individuals. Subsequent tribal outreach has been robust, including multiple telephone and email conversations, and several onsite visits with tribal members representing the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Redding Rancheria.

Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” or “Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agricultural and
Forestry Resources Air Quality
X Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water
Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural
Resources
Utilities/Service
Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION
Based on the initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

X
Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 5
January 2022
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Copies of the Initial Study and related materials and documentation may be obtained at the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department, 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001.

Contact Amber Kelley at (530) 225-4046 or [email protected].

Amber Kelley
Environmental Compliance Manager
Public Works – Engineering
Date
Amber Kelley
December 14, 2021
Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study

January 2022

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The issue areas evaluated in this Initial Study include:
• Aesthetics
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards & Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation/Traffic
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities/Service Systems
• Wildfire
• Mandatory Findings of Significance
The environmental analysis in this section is patterned after the Initial Study Checklist recommended by the State CEQA Guidelines and used by the City of Redding in its environmental review process.

For the preliminary environmental assessment undertaken as part of this Initial Study's preparation, a determination that there is a potential for significant effects indicates the need to more fully analyze the development’s impacts and to identify mitigation.

For the evaluation of potential impacts, the questions in the Initial Study Checklist are stated and an answer is provided according to the analysis undertaken. The analysis considers the long-term, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the development. To each question, there are four possible responses:
• No Impact. The development would not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment.
• Less-Than-Significant Impact. The development would have the potential for impacting the environment, although this impact would be below established thresholds that are significant. • Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The development would have the potential to generate impacts which may be considered as a significant effect on the environment, although mitigation measures or changes to the development’s physical or operational characteristics can reduce these impacts to levels that are less than significant. • Potentially Significant Impact. The development would have impacts which are considered significant, and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels.

Where potential impacts are anticipated to be significant, mitigation measures will be required, so that impacts may be avoided or reduced to insignificant levels.

Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 7
January 2022
Prior environmental evaluations applicable to all or part of the project site:
• City of Redding General Plan, 2000
• City of Redding General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH #1998072103 List of Attachments/References
Appendix A:

Figure 1 – Project Location and Vicinity
Figure 2 –Project Design Features
Appendix B: Natural Environment Study, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. March 2020* Appendix C: Aquatic Resource Delineation Report, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. February 2020* Appendix D: Cultural Resource Studies, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. December 2020* *Appendices are on file in the Public Works, Engineering Division.

Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
I. AESTHETICS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views
of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion
a) There are no scenic areas or resources within the project area. The project consists of safety improvements along the existing roadway of Old Oregon Trail within the City’s ROW. The project would be constructed in a manner consistent with the roadway’s existing aesthetic; therefore, there would be no impact.
b) No roads in the project area are designated as scenic. Some tree removal would be needed to accommodate the roadway improvements; however, this activity would be limited to the City’s existing ROW and two short segments of proposed new permanent ROW that contain few trees. Tree removal would not substantially alter the visual aesthetics of the project alignment.

No buildings, rock outcroppings, or other resources would be altered or removed. The impact on visual resources and aesthetics would be less than significant. c) The project components would be consistent with the surrounding visual environment, which includes existing ROW, and adjacent open space and rural residential development. The visual aesthetic of proposed roadway improvements would be consistent with existing conditions with the exception of the short segment of roadway realignment through pasture about midway through the proposed project alignment. However, there are no visually sensitive receptors (e.g., homes) that would be adversely affected by the new roadway alignment. The project Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 9
January 2022
would have a less-than-significant impact on the existing visual character and quality of existing views.
d) No new lighting is proposed as part of the project. Construction activities would likely be limited to daylight hours and would not require the use of construction lights. If nighttime construction is necessary, the lighting would be temporary and placed in such a manner that it would not create substantial light or glare. The proposed roadway components would be consistent with existing components and would not contrast sharply with the surrounding environment or be a source of glare. The potential for headlight glare from traffic passing through the project area would remain consistent with existing conditions. The new realigned road segment would not create a source of light or glare on any nearby visually sensitive receptors. The project would have a less than significant impact on light and glare.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 • City of Redding Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18.40.090
• City of Redding GIS Parcel and Zoning Map Viewer
• California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, 2021 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural, Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Mode (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided bin Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act Contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Discussion
a) The project area does not include any designated farmland or timberlands. According to the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, no lands within the project area are under Williamson Act contracts or are mapped as Important Farmlands. The project would not convert any farmland to non-agricultural use or any forestland to non-forest use; therefore, there would be no impact. b) The project area and surrounding area are not designated under Williamson Act lands or agricultural uses. The project would have no impact on zoning for agricultural land uses. c) The project is not zoned, nor would it cause rezoning of forestland, timberland, or timberland zoned for timber production; therefore, there would be no impact. d) The project area does not include any designated forestland. The project would not convert any forestland to non-forest uses and would not result in the loss of forestlands in the city of Redding; therefore, there would be no impact.
e) The project would have no direct or indirect impact on farmland.

Documentation
• California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, Soil Survey of Shasta County Area, 2016
• City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 • City of Redding GIS Parcel and Zoning Map Viewer
Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 11
January 2022
• County of Shasta GIS, Shasta County Interactive Map
III. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established
by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make
the following determinations. Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Discussion
a, b, c) Air pollution controls would conform to Caltrans Standard Specifications, which state that the contractor shall comply with all applicable air pollution control rules, regulations, ordinances, and statutes. City standards (implemented through the Grading Ordinance and Uniform Building Code) require implementation of conservation measures, including best management practices (BMPs), that contribute to achieving the City’s goal of at least a 20 percent reduction in emissions or the best reduction otherwise feasible. The following standard conservation measures would be used during construction to limit dust and respirable particulate matter 10 micrometers or less (PM10) emissions:

AQ-1. Nontoxic soil stabilizers will be applied according to manufacturer’s specification to all inactive construction areas.

AQ-2. All grading operations will be suspended when winds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 miles per hour.

AQ-3. Water all stockpiles, access roads, and disturbed or exposed areas, as necessary, to prevent airborne dust.

AQ-4. Pursuant to the California Vehicle Code (Section 23114(e)(4)) (), all trucks hauling soil and other loose material to and from the construction site will be covered or will maintain at least 6 inches of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between the top of the load and the trailer).

Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
AQ-5. All public roadways used by the project contractor will be maintained free from dust, dirt, and debris caused by construction activities. Streets will be swept at the end of the day if visible soil materials are carried onto adjacent public paved roads.

The proposed project consists of road widening and other safety improvements along Old Oregon Trail between Midland Drive and Bear Mountain Road in the northeast portion of Redding. The primary purpose of the project is to improve roadway safety along this stretch of road, not to increase the capacity. Project operation would not result in the increased use of motor vehicles.

Shasta County, including the far northern Sacramento Valley, currently exceeds the state's ambient standards for ozone (i.e., smog) and particulates (i.e., fine, airborne particles).

Consequently, these pollutants are the focus of local air quality policy, especially when related to land use and transportation planning. Even with application of measures to reduce emissions for individual projects, cumulative impacts are unavoidable when ozone or particulate emissions are involved. For example, the primary source of emissions contributing to ozone is from vehicles. Any project that generates vehicle trips has the potential to incrementally contribute to the problem. The Environmental Impact Report for the City’s General Plan acknowledged this dilemma and as a result, the City Council has adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts on air quality resulting from growth supported under the General Plan.

The operation of project construction equipment would result in limited temporary emissions of Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which are ozone precursors, and inhalable PM10. The widened roadway and other project features would involve one season of construction (typically May 1 to October 31) in 2022. Adherence to standard measures and BMPs set forth by Caltrans and the City further illustrate the size and scope of construction activities that would result in unmitigated emissions of less than the 25 pounds per day of NOx, 25 pounds per day of ROG, and 80 pounds per day of PM10 Level "A" mitigation thresholds identified as part of the City’s General Plan. The project would be consistent with the City’s emission-reduction goals of 20 to 25 percent established in the Air Quality Element of the General Plan.

Fugitive dusts and other construction-related project impacts on air quality would be temporary, localized, and minor. Project impacts on nearby sensitive receptors (e.g., homes) would be less than significant with the use of conservation measures AQ-1 through AQ-6. Project operation would have no impact on existing air quality since it would not generate additional vehicle trips. The project’s cumulative contribution to criteria pollutants in a non-attainment area would be less than significant. Impacts resulting from project implementation would be less than significant.
d) The project would not involve land use that could generate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people; therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• California Legislative Information 2021
Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 13
January 2022
• City of Redding General Plan, Air Quality Element, 2000 • City of Redding General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH #1998072103, Chapter 8.6, Air Quality,
• CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the City of Redding General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, as adopted by the Redding City Council on October 3, 2000, by Resolution 2000-166
• California Air Resources Board. 2017. Area designations maps/state and national. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm (accessed June 15, 2021). • Shasta County Air Quality Management District Air Quality Maintenance Plan and Implementing Measures
Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local of regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community,
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
Discussion
a) A Natural Environment Study (NES) report, including a summary of findings of the single visit protocol-level botanical and invasive species survey, a biological reconnaissance survey, and a delineation of waters of the United States were prepared to assess the effects of the proposed project on biological resources in the project area and vicinity. The following standard conservation measure and BMPs will be used during project construction to minimize the potential for impacts on biological resources:

BIO-1. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), as required by the City of Redding Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, will be prepared to address BMPs that will be used to prevent erosion and sediment loss within the project site.

BMPs such as silt fence, mulching and seeding, and straw wattles will be placed where needed to prevent sediment from leaving the site during and after construction.

Special-status Plant Species
Desktop analysis revealed that the following federally and state-listed plant species have the potential to occur in or adjacent to the project area:
− Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis) – California Native Plant Society (CNPS) list 1B.2 (moderately threatened in California)
− Red Bluff dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. leiospermus) – CNPS list 1B.1 (seriously threatened in California)
− Ahart’s paronychia (Paronychia ahartii) – CNPS list 1B.1 (seriously threatened in California)
Based on the botanical survey conducted on May 4, 2016, no special-status plants were found to occur within the project area. The botanical survey was conducted during the correct identification period for the special-status plant species with potential to occur in the project area (i.e., March through June). An additional botanical survey was performed on August 23, 2018, to assess the expanded areas of the project area, and although it was performed outside of the correct identification period for the special-status plant species, the area assessed was found Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 15
January 2022
to be heavily disturbed by land uses (i.e., grazing) and does not constitute rare plant habitat.

Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have no impact on special-status plant species.

Special-status Fish Species
The project area does not provide habitat for any federal and state listed fish species, therefore the project would have no impact on fish. While the area does not provide fish habitat, standard conservation measure BIO-1 will be used to protect nearby waterways.

Special-status Wildlife Species
The following federal and state listed wildlife species have the potential to occur in or adjacent to the project area:
− White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), state listed as fully protected − Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), state species of special concern Migratory Birds and Raptors. Construction activities would occur during the avian breeding season (generally February through August, depending on the species) and could disturb nesting birds in or adjacent to the project area. Construction-related disturbance could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or nest abandonment. Impacts could result from tree removal, noise from construction activities, or ground disturbance such as grubbing and grading.

The curve realignment and widening to provide shoulders would result in a loss of approximately twenty-five (25) trees 6” diameter at breast height or greater. Trees to be removed include blue oak, black oak, and foothill pine. The majority of these trees are along the existing roadway and within the existing right of way. The short segment of new roadway realignment outside of the existing ROW would impact annual grassland that is used as pasture.

None of the areas that would be affected by the project constitute habitat for sensitive biological resources.

Foraging birds and birds present in or adjacent to the project area would not be adversely impacted by construction activities due to their high mobility and available nesting and foraging habitat outside of the project area. However, due to the proximity to potential nesting habitat and potential for special-status migratory birds to occur in the project area, mitigation measures (MM) MM-1 and MM-2, described below, would be used to avoid or minimize impacts on migratory birds and raptors. Therefore, impacts on migratory birds and raptors would be less than significant with the implementation of these mitigation measures.

Pallid Bat. Pallid bats may roost individually or in small groups in buildings, cavities in large oak or pine trees that are present in the project area. Due to the ability of individual bats to move away from disturbance, direct impacts on bats are not expected when the bats are not in a maternity colony. If a tree is removed that contains a maternity colony, the removal could result in mortality or injury of individuals. Indirect impacts could occur from construction disturbance if a maternity colony is present in or adjacent to the project area. Significant noise disturbance Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
could cause adults to leave a maternity colony temporarily or permanently. Minor tree removal is proposed as part of the proposed project. Implementation of MM-3 will reduce projectrelated impacts on bats, including adults, maternity colonies, and pre-volant young. Impacts on bats would be less than significant with the use of mitigation. b) There are no sensitive natural communities or riparian areas in the project area. Although West Fork Stillwater Creek is parallel to much of the west side of the Old Oregon Trail alignment, the distance from the creek is 150 feet and greater. Project construction and operation would have no impact on any sensitive natural communities or riparian habitats. While the project would have no impact to sensitive natural communities or jurisdictional waters, temporary fencing has been incorporated into the project design and will be used to restrict access to environmentally sensitive areas.
c) A wetland delineation conducted in the project area in 2018 identified no potentially jurisdictional waters of the United States or waters of the State. Project construction and operation would have no impact on West Fork Stillwater Creek. The project would have no impacts on any federally protected waters or wetlands.
d) Project activities would be limited to the existing City’s ROW and a short segment of roadway that would be realigned through an adjacent pasture, less than 100 feet from the east side of the current Old Oregon Trail ROW. These activities would not impede movement of wildlife or fragment migration corridors. The project area does not encompass any wildlife nursery sites.

During project construction wildlife would be able to move around the project area similar to existing conditions. The project would have no impact on fish or wildlife movement or nursery sites.
e-f) There is no Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan covering the proposed project area.

The City’s Tree Management Ordinance that promotes the conservation of mature, healthy trees in the design of new development, but allows for an exemption if the removal is within utility corridors and rights of way. Trees may also be removed for permitted discretionary projects. The minor amount of tree removal needed for the proposed project would comply with the City’s tree ordinance through exemption or via authorization of a discretionary project permit and would not result in a conflict. The Project would have no impact on the approved local tree ordinance.

Documentation
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife: California Natural Diversity Database, 2020 • City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 • City of Redding Municipal Code, Chapter 18.45, Tree Management Ordinance • Stantec Consulting Services Inc., Natural Environment Study Minimal Impacts for Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project, 2020
• Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Delineation of the Waters of the United States, 2020.

Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 17
January 2022
Mitigation
MM-1. If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey seven (7) days before construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will be notified and consulted. An appropriate buffer, as determined by CDFW and the qualified biologist, will be placed around the nest until the young have fledged. If construction activities cease for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required.

MM-2. . If an active raptor nest is found, no construction activities will occur within 300-feet of the nest for raptors and 450-feet of the nest for special-status raptors unless a smaller buffer zone is approved by the CDFW.

MM-3. If construction, including the removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags, occurs during the bats’ non-volant period (March 1 through August 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey of the project area biological study area (BSA) (Figure 2) to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The pre-construction survey will be performed no more than seven (7) days prior to the implementation of construction activities (including staging and equipment access). If a lapse in construction activities occurs for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the BSA, a disturbance-free buffer will be established by a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFW) to adequately protect the colony from project activities.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a, b) Archival research, consultation with the Native American community, and an intensive archaeological survey are summarized in the confidential Archaeological Survey and Extended Phase 1 Report and Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR) prepared for the proposed project. There is one recorded archaeological resource identified within the project vicinity, Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
CA-SHA-39/553. Although the project involves ground disturbance in the existing Old Oregon Trail ROW and in the proposed realigned segment near the north end of the project area, no project-related impacts on cultural resources are anticipated. Caltrans and the City have determined that the project would not alter any of the characteristics that qualify the resource for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Caltrans has applied the Criteria of Adverse Effect to this site and considered potential project effects identified by consulting parties and the public per 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 800.5(a). Caltrans has determined that a Finding of No Adverse Effect (with Non-Standard Conditions) is appropriate pursuant to Section 106 Programmatic Agreement (PA) Stipulation X.B.2, as well as 36 CFR 800.5. On December 8, 2021, SHPO issued a concurrence letter stating that it agrees with Caltrans’ finding of no adverse effect pursuant to the Section 106 PA. Conservation measures based on recent Caltrans-issued standard conditions and BMP guidance for projects in the North Region and conclusions made in the various technical documents prepared for the project include
− CR-1. Caltrans will coordinate with tribal representatives from the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Redding Rancheria and incorporate measures to protect tribal resources, including potential work windows associated with tribal ceremonies.
− CR-2. An archaeological monitor and tribal monitors from the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Redding Rancheria will be used during ground-disturbing activities.
- CR-3. Prior to the start of construction, all field personnel shall receive workers’ environmental awareness training on cultural, paleontological, and tribal cultural resources. The training will provide a description of cultural, paleontological, and tribal cultural resources that may be encountered in the project area, review steps to follow if an inadvertent discovery is made, and provide contact information for the project Archaeologist, project Paleontologist, on-site cultural resources monitor(s), and tribal cultural monitor(s).
− CR-4. Construction contract documents will include provisions to respond to archaeological resources discovered during the project. If cultural materials are discovered during construction, work activity within a 60-foot radius of the discovery will be stopped and the area secured until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).
− CR-5. If human remains and related items are discovered on private or State land, they will be treated in accordance with State Health and Safety Code § 7050.5. Further disturbances and activities will cease in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains, and the Shasta County Coroner contacted. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) § 5097.98, if the remains are thought to be Native American, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) who will then notify the Most Likely Descendent (MLD).

Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 19
January 2022
There would be no impact on known historic resources (e.g., buildings, structures) and the project would have no adverse effect on archaeological resources. The project will have a less than significant effect on cultural resources.
c) Human remains were not identified during the cultural study; however, the potential for encountering human remains during project construction can never be entirely ruled out. State law prescribes protective measures that must be taken if any subsurface human remains are discovered. To address any inadvertent discovery of human remains during project excavation, conservations measures CR-4 and CR-5 are included in the project. Because project construction would be confined to the existing road corridor and a previously disturbed pasture in close proximity to the City’s ROW, no impacts on human remains are anticipated. The project’s impact would be less than significant.

Documentation
• State of California, Natural Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation, Continuing Consultation on a Finding of No Adverse Effect for the Proposed Old Oregon Trail Shoulder Widening Project, City of Redding, Shasta County, California (5068[052]) (FHWA 2021 0315 001), December 2021 • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) North Region Standard Measures and Best Management Practices, June 2021
• Pacific Legacy, Inc., Archaeological and Ethnographic Evaluation Report: CA-SHA-39/553 2020
• Pacific Legacy, Inc., Finding of No Adverse Effect (with Non-Standard Conditions) for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Project Shasta County, California, March 2021 (draft) • Pacific Legacy, Inc., Historic Properties Survey Report 2021 • Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. and Pacific Legacy, Inc., Old Oregon Trail Safety Project Archaeological Survey and Extended Phase I Report, October 2019 • Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. and Pacific Legacy, Inc., Phase II Work Plan for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Project (Federal Project No. HSIPL-5068[052]), October 2019 Mitigation
None necessary.

VI. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Discussion
a,b) It would be necessary to use diesel-powered equipment during project construction. This would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. The roadway safety improvement project would comply with California and City plans for energy efficiency; therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 Mitigation
None required.

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 21
January 2022
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
Discussion
a, i-iv) There are no Alquist-Priolo earthquake faults designated in the Redding area of Shasta County and there are no other documented earthquake faults in the immediate vicinity that pose a significant risk of rupture, ground shaking or otherwise unstable ground conditions. The closest active fault is over 30 miles away from Redding; however, the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan states that the Redding area has experienced numerous earthquake events with the strongest reported magnitude being 3.5 on the Richter scale.

Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the potential for ground shaking to occur. Ground shaking activities such as earthquakes would have a negligible effect on the new paved pathways and associated project features. According to the General Plan, landslides could occur in the westernmost portion of the City of Redding; however, this is outside of the proposed project area and would not pose a significant hazard.

Other types of ground failure such as expansive soils and subsidence (i.e., the gradual settling or sinking of an area with little or no horizontal motion) are not considered to pose a significant hazard within the proposed project area. The Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria would be incorporated into the project design to help ensure that the new portions of roadway and associated project features are built to withstand any potential seismic activity that could occur in the project area.

Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Soil liquefaction occurs when ground shaking from an earthquake causes a sediment layer saturated with groundwater to lose strength and take on the characteristics of a fluid, thus becoming similar to quicksand. Factors determining the liquefaction potential are soil type, the level and duration of seismic ground motions, the type and consistency of soils, and the depth to groundwater. Loose sands and peat deposits, along with recent Holocene age deposits, are more susceptible to liquefaction, while older deposits of clayey silts, silty clays, and clays deposited in freshwater environments are generally stable under the influence of seismic ground shaking. The project site consists of well-drained, gravely-loam soils which have a low potential for liquefaction or ground failure to occur. The proposed project would not be expected to substantially result in adverse effects from liquefaction, and key design features would help ensure the pathways and associated project features are constructed to provide structural stability.

No impact is anticipated on the proposed project due to ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, unstable soils, or expansive soils.
b) The majority of the proposed project alignment is an existing roadway with a small portion in vegetated areas adjacent to the roadway. The project is subject to certain erosion-control requirements and BMPs, mandated by existing City regulations which includes:
− City of Redding Grading Ordinance. This ordinance requires preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan for projects affecting more than one acre. The erosion and sediment control plan requires preparation and description of any BMPs that will be used during construction and post-construction, if needed.
− City of Redding Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.

This ordinance requires preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for projects affecting areas greater than 1 acre. The objectives of the SWPPP are to identify the sources of sediment and other pollutants that may affect water quality associated with stormwater discharges and to describe and implement the BMPs to reduce those sources of sediment and other pollutants in stormwater discharges.

The potential for project implementation to result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than significant with the standard BMPs described in the City’s grading and stormwater ordinances.
c) The project area is underlain by very stony loam, very rocky sandy loam, gravelly clay loam, gravelly loam, and clay loam. Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water; values of K range between 0.02 to 0.69. Most of the project area has a K Erosion Factor rating of 0.17 which lies within the low potential range of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. The project area does not have a significant potential for landslides according to the General Plan. The potential for site instability would be less than significant. d) Expansive soils are defined as those soils with a plasticity index of 15 percent or greater; soil types within the project area range between a plasticity index of 2.5 to 20.3 percent. Project design would backfill trenches with excavated soils. When installing under existing pavement, Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 23
January 2022
the project would use granular backfill to prevent settlement and erosion. As such, there is no potential for expansive soils that would be substantial risks to life or property. e) The proposed project does not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal; therefore, there would be no impact.
f) There are no unique paleontological or geologic features in the project area; therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• Caltrans, 2019. Seismic design criteria, version 2.0. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/engineering/documents/seismicdesigncriteria-sdc/sdc20april2019final.pdf. • City of Redding.2000-2020 General Plan. Health and Safety Element figures 4-1 (Ground Shaking Potential) and 4.2 (Liquefaction Potential)
• City of Redding Grading Ordinance, RMC Chapter 16.12
• City of Redding Standard Specifications, Grading Practices • Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021. Web soil survey. Shasta County Area, California. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ cited June 15, 2021. • State Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, Regulations related to Construction Activity Storm Water Permits and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact
on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
Discussion
a) The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies the following four primary constituents that are most representative of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions:

Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
− Carbon Dioxide (CO2): Emitted primarily through the burning of fossil fuels. Other sources include the burning of solid waste, wood and/or wood products, and cement manufacturing.
− Methane (CH4): Emissions occur during the production and transportation of fuels, such as coal and natural gas. Additional emissions are generated by livestock and agricultural land uses, as well as the decomposition of solid waste. − Nitrous Oxide (N2O): The principal emitters include agricultural and industrial land uses and fossil fuel and waste combustion.
− Fluorinated Gases: These can be emitted during some industrial activities. Also, many of these gases are substitutes for ozone-depleting substances, such as chlorofluorocarbons, which have been used historically as refrigerants. Collectively, these gases are often referred to as “high global-warming potential” gases.

The primary generators of GHG emissions in the United States are caused by burning fossil fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, and petroleum) and industrial processes. The EPA estimates that approximately 65 percent of the nation’s GHG emissions are made of CO2.

The predominant associated GHG for the proposed project is CO2 generated by motor-vehicle travel to and from the site. California Air Resources Board (CARB) has recommended the use of 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (mtCO2-e/yr) as the de minimus gas emission threshold in its Climate Change Scoping Plan (approved January 2009, updated May 2014, and subsequently in November 2017). According to California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, the 10,000 mtCO2-e/yr is equivalent to 550 dwelling units, 400,000 square feet of office use, 120,000 square feet of retail, or 70,000 square feet of supermarket use.

The proposed project emissions from construction activities would be substantially under the equivalent levels required for construction of these types of projects. Given the scope and nature of the proposed project compared to that of similar projects, emissions from the project would be significantly below the thresholds put forth by CARB and the City’s air-quality thresholds. Therefore, the project would not contribute significantly to GHG emissions in the air basin. Additionally, the City and State’s construction standards and BMPs were incorporated into the project as conservation measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 (described in Section III, Air Quality), would be used during construction to further limit any potential contribution to negative impacts from GHG emissions. With implementation of conservation measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 (see Section III, Air Quality), the project would have a less-thansignificant impact on measurable GHGs in the Redding area. b) The project would not conflict with any applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted to reduce GHG emissions. As noted in “a” above, and in Section III, the project would conform with the City’s air quality policies and thresholds, state guidelines and regulations, conservation measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 (see Section III, Air Quality). The proposed project would have no impact on any applicable plans, policies, or regulations related to GHG emissions.

Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 25
January 2022
Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, 2000
• City of Redding General Plan Air Quality Element, 2000 • California Air Pollution Control Officers Association website (www.capcoa.org), 2021 • California Office of the Attorney General, The California Environmental Quality Act Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Local Agency Level, updated January 6, 2010 • Shasta Air Quality Management District,
https://www.co.shasta.ca.us/index/drm_index/aq_index.aspx. Accessed July 20, 2018. • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, (available at www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data) accessed July 2, 2021 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas, or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
a) Construction activities pose a slight risk for solvent or fuel spills or leaks using diesel- or gasoline-powered construction equipment (e.g., trucks, excavators, graders) and lubricants such as oil and hydraulic fluids. The potential for such hazards would be temporary since equipment would be routinely maintained and inspected to avoid leaks, and this is similar to the impacts associated with the vehicles operating daily on nearby roads. The following standard conservation measures are used to avoid or minimize the potential for accidental release of hazardous materials from spills or fuel leaks during project construction:
− HAZ-1. Hazardous materials, including fuels, oils, cement, and solvents will be stored and contained in an area protected from direct runoff and away from areas where they could enter waters of the United States.
− HAZ-2. Construction equipment will be inspected daily for leaks. Leaking fluids will be contained upon detection and equipment repairs will be made as soon as practicable or the leaking equipment will be moved off site.
− HAZ-3. Secondary containment such as drip pans or absorbent materials shall be used to catch spills or leaks when removing or changing fluids. Secondary containment will be used for storage of all hazardous materials.
− HAZ-4. Spill containment and clean-up materials shall be kept on site at all times for use in the event of an accidental spills.
− HAZ-5. Absorbent materials shall be used on small spills rather than hosing down or burying the spill. The absorbent material shall be promptly removed and properly disposed.

The potential for project construction to create a hazard to the public or the environment through the accidental spill or pollutants would be less than significant. Project operation would be consistent with existing conditions, and thus would have no impact.

Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 27
January 2022
c) There are no existing or currently proposed schools within 1 mile of the project area. The closest schools, Shasta Meadows School and Shasta County Independent Study, are located at approximately 2.08 miles and 1.99 miles, respectively, and would not be exposed to conditions that would be inconsistent with existing conditions (e.g., vehicle emissions and pollutants).

There would be no impact on schools.
d) A review of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database and the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database found no record of any known contaminated sites, regulated landfill sites, underground tank sites, or hazardous-waste generators in the project vicinity. The project area is not included on the list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No potential hazardous materials or waste sites are listed in the project vicinity.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan and there are no public use airports within 2 miles of the project area. A small, private, airstrip, TEWS Field Airport is located approximately 0.9 mile west of the proposed project area. Construction activities and project operation would be consistent with existing uses along Old Oregon Trail. The limited airport use at this airstrip would not result in a significant safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. There would be no impact on air traffic. f) Although temporary, short duration disruptions to normal traffic operations would occur during construction, the impact would be less than significant. Temporary traffic control and lane reduction may be used during construction. Temporary signage would be used to alert motorists and non-motorized travelers to any project detour, decreased speeds, uneven pavement, etc. throughout the project alignment in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. Controlled through-traffic would be allowed to pass during construction. Operation of the completed project would benefit traffic operations by reducing safety hazards associated with the current inadequate road width. The project would have a less-than-significant impact on emergency response and evacuation plans during project construction.
g) The project area consists primarily of an existing road corridor and is adjacent to rural residential development surrounded by open grasslands and blue oak-gray pine forest. A short segment of Old Oregon Trail would be realigned through pasture. Based on current mapping, the fire hazard potential of lands in the project area is mapped as “moderate” and “elevated” fire risk according to the California Public Utilities Commission Fire-Threat Map (California Public Utilities Commission 2021). The use of construction equipment in and around vegetated areas increases the potential for wildfire ignition. However, conservation measure HAZ-6 will reduce the risk of wildfire associated with project construction.

HAZ-6. All construction equipment with internal combustion engines will be equipped with an operational spark arrester, or the engine must be equipped for the prevention of fire.

Operation of the project would be consistent with existing conditions. The potential for wildfire ignition would be less than significant.

Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Health and Safety Element, 2000 • California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List, 2018 • California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Envirostor, (Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=45100001), accessed June 15, 2021
• California Public Utilities Commission, CPUC Fire Map (Available at https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/firemap/), accessed July 1, 2021 • California State Water Resources Control Board, Geotracker (Available at https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/), accessed July 1, 2021 • Caltrans, California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Standards, 2017 • Shasta County Airport Land Use Commission, Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map, 1981. • U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2020. Wildfire Hazard Potential. Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Available at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/rmrs/keywords/wildfire-hazard-potential. Accessed January 14, 2021.

Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site;
Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 29
January 2022
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;
or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Discussion
a) The proposed project would largely be aligned in an existing road corridor with minimal additions of impervious surface area associated with a segment where roadway widening would occur. The project would involve ground disturbance and other activities that could discharge pollutants in storm water runoff. Project construction would not alter the existing topography or existing drainage patterns in a way that would result in increased erosion, surface runoff, flooding on- or offsite, or otherwise degrade water quality.

Construction and operation of the project would involve the minor use of hazardous materials (i.e., petroleum-based fuels and lubricants) for fueling and maintenance of equipment in uplands (i.e., urban ROW) away from any waterways. The City’s construction standards require that all projects prepare a plan to address water pollution control. It is the City’s standard practice to incorporate required construction standards into the project design. The construction standards and specifications for the project would require that an SWPPP be prepared by the contractor prior to construction. Implementation of conservation measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-6 (described in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) will avoid or minimize potential impacts on water quality; therefore, project-related impacts on water quality would remain less than significant.
b) The project would largely be confined to the existing road corridor, with the minor addition of a short segment of realigned road through an adjacent pasture. Paving of the newly widened shoulders and realigned road segment would not substantially affect groundwater recharge.

Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
c i-iv) The layout for the project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. Roadway expansion and improvements associated with the project would slightly increase the amount of impervious surface; but there would be no significant alterations to the existing topography or existing drainage patterns that would result in increased erosion, surface runoff, flooding on- or offsite, or degraded water quality. There are no stormwater drainage systems in the project area.

Topography throughout the project area is nearly level to slightly sloped, and work would be largely within an existing road corridor with the exception of a short segment of realigned road through an adjacent pasture. The project would not substantially increase the rate or quantity of surface runoff that could contribute to flooding of nearby West Fork Stillwater Creek.

Therefore, there would be no impact
d) The project area is not in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone; therefore, there would be no impact.
e) Construction and operation of the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements established by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board in its Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins.

Construction and operation of the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan; therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• City of Redding 2000-2020 General Plan. Health and Safety Element 2000. • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Floodplain regulations, FIRM Map 06089C1237G, March 17, 2011
• Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, 5th edition, Revised May 2018.

Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

Packet Pg. 777 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 31
January 2022
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Discussion
a) The project would not divide an established community. Construction would be temporary, and roads would remain passable using traffic controls; therefore, there would be no impact. b) The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable policies and regulations of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Community Development Element, 2000 • City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 • City of Redding GIS Parcel and Zoning Map Viewer
Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XII. MINERAL RESOURCES:

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State
Geologist that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local General Plan, specific plan or
other land use plan?
Packet Pg. 778 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
Discussion
a, b) The project area is not identified in the General Plan as having any known mineral-resource value or as being located within any critical mineral resource overlay area. No impacts would occur.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 • California Geological Survey, Aggregate Sustainability in California prepared by J.

Clinkenbeard, 2018
Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XIII. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Discussion
a) The project area would be located largely within the existing City’s ROW and on City-owned property. Sources of ambient noise in the project area come from existing vehicle traffic on Old Oregon Trail and adjacent residential land uses. The proposed project is not capacity increasing. Construction activities would temporarily increase localized ambient noise levels.

Heavy construction equipment that may be used for this project can generate noise levels as high as 88 decibels at a distance of 50 feet. The City’s General Plan Noise Element specifies goals to protect residents from exposure to excessive transportation-related noise (greater than Packet Pg. 779 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 33
January 2022
65 decibels), including considerations of the significance of noise level increases associated with roadway improvement projects needed to accommodate buildout of the General Plan (Goal N2D). Noise from construction between equipment and receptors generally reduces more quickly over longer distances. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime working hours. Noise would also be generated during the construction phase by increased truck traffic on area roadways. A project‐generated noise source would be truck traffic associated with transport of heavy materials and equipment to and from the construction site. This noise increase would be of short duration.

The City of Redding Noise Ordinance (RMC Chapter 18.40.100.A) limits the acceptable hours of construction and demolition activity.
• Operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration or demolition work in or within five hundred feet of a residential district such that the sound creates a noise disturbance across a property line during the following times:
o May 15 through September 15: Between the weekday hours of seven p.m. and six a.m. and weekends and holidays between eight p.m. and nine a.m. o September 16 through May 14: Between the weekday hours of seven p.m. and seven a.m. and weekends and holidays between eight p.m. and nine a.m.

However, the Ordinance also includes exemptions for specific activities, including Public Works Construction Projects. Construction of the proposed project would be under contract to the City of Redding Public Works Department; therefore, the Exterior Noise Standards are not applicable. Temporary construction noise impacts would be less than significant. Ambient noise associated with project operation would be consistent with existing conditions.

While the impact has been determined to be less than significant, nighttime work is not anticipated. This type of project is typically constructed between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. The following BMPs have also been incorporated into the project:

NOI-1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and equipped with noise‐ reduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.

NOI-2. When not in use, motorized construction equipment shall not be left idling for more than 5 minutes.

NOI-3. Stationary equipment (power generators, compressors, etc.) shall be located at the furthest practical distance from nearby noise‐sensitive land uses or sufficiently shielded to reduce noise‐related impacts.

Packet Pg. 780 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
b) During excavation and construction activities for the project, localized groundborne vibration would be produced by heavy-duty construction equipment such as jackhammers, backhoes, and loaded trucks. The project would occur in an existing road corridor used by a variety of vehicle types and would not create significant groundborne vibration. Project impacts related to groundborne vibration would be less than significant.
c) TEWS Field Airport, a small, private, airstrip, is located approximately 0.9 mile west of the proposed project. Residents and businesses are not exposed to noise generated by airport operations because of topography, vegetation, and distance; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have no cumulative noise impact on residents or businesses near the project area or on crew members during construction of the project.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Noise Element, 2000
• City of Redding General Plan, Transportation Element, 2000 • City of Redding Zoning Ordinance Redding Municipal Code, Section 18.40.100 • City of Redding GIS Parcel and Zoning Map Viewer
• Federal Transit Administration 2006
• Federal Highway Administration 2006
• Shasta County Airport Land Use Commission, Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map, 1981 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a,b) The proposed project is intended to improve safety conditions along an existing roadway; it would not induce population growth in the city of Redding or vicinity or increase vehicle capacity. Because the proposed project would occur largely within the City’s right of way, there Packet Pg. 781 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 35
January 2022
would be no displacement of persons or housing because of project construction. Therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Housing Element 2014
• City of Redding General Plan, Transportation Element
Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire Protection?
b) Police Protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
Discussion
a-e) The project would not cause substantial adverse physical impacts on government facilities or negatively affect fire and police protection, schools, parks, or public facilities. The project would have no impact on any public recreational facilities in the project area and vicinity.

Although short duration disruptions to normal traffic operations would occur during construction, temporary traffic control and lane reduction may be used to maintain through traffic. Controlled through-traffic, including emergency vehicles, would be allowed to pass during construction. No significant adverse impacts on service ratios, response times, or service Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
objectives for any of the public services are anticipated. The proposed project would have a less-than-significant temporary impact on public services.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities and Services Element, 2000 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XVI. RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion
a,b) The proposed project would straighten, widen, and add road shoulders along Old Oregon Trail.

The project would not increase the usage of neighborhood or regional parks and would not construct or expand recreational facilities. Therefore, there would be no impact Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Recreation Element, 2000 • City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Element, 2000 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

Packet Pg. 783 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 37
January 2022
XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Discussion
a) The project is not anticipated to increase either the number of vehicle trips, volume-to-capacity ratio, or congestion at intersections in the project area or vicinity. The project does not conflict with any alternative transportation plan or policy. The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Redding General Plan Transportation Element. Therefore, there would be no impact.
b) In December 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) published a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) to assist lead agencies in implementing SB 743. Vehicle Miles Traveled, or VMT, measures the amount and distance people drive by personal vehicle to a destination. Per Section 21099 of the Public Resources Code, the criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must promote the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, develop multimodal transportation networks, and create a greater diversity land uses.

VMT evaluation is applicable to both land development projects and transportation projects, as many transportation projects change travel patterns. As provided in the Technical Advisory, A transportation project which leads to additional vehicle travel on the roadway network, commonly referred to as “induced vehicle travel” would need to quantify the amount of additional vehicle travel in order to assess the potential environmental impacts. Should a project induce travel, potential impacts must be considered including induced growth, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption, and noise impacts. To determine whether a project requires a detailed traffic impact analysis, projects are first evaluated or screened. The Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project has been evaluated (City of Redding, 2021) to determine if it is likely to lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel and if further traffic analysis is required.

Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
The primary purpose of the project is to improve the safety of this stretch of roadway along Old Oregon Trail for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. The project proposes to straighten, widen, and add road shoulders to Old Oregon Trail. Work would involve widening and re-striping the pavement to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, installing guardrail where necessary, and relocating or replacing utilities and drainage infrastructure. The project is needed as this section of roadway has little to no roadway shoulder, which limits refuge and breakdown space for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.

The OPR Technical Advisory includes examples of the types of projects that generally would and would not lead to a measurable or substantial increase in VMT. Transportation projects typically fall into two categories: capacity increasing and non-capacity increasing. After a review and evaluation of the project, it was determined that the project is consistent with the Technical Advisory’s list of non-capacity increasing projects. Following are the non-capacity increasing project types that apply to the Old Oregon Trail Project:
• Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts; Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, or signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity. • Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such as median barriers and guardrails. • Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes.

Given that the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project will not increase roadway capacity, has no potential to increase in VMT, and has no potential to induce growth in the project area, the project can be screened out and further traffic impact analysis is not required.

The project would not conflict with Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). No impact would occur. c) The project would not result in the creation of sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or incompatible uses. The project purpose is to improve public safety. No impact would occur. d) Construction would primarily occur within the existing public ROW along Old Oregon Trail and some private lands along one portion of the project. Controlled through-traffic, including emergency vehicles, would be allowed to pass during construction. Emergency vehicles responding to an incident would be expedited through the project area. The project would not result in inadequate emergency access and the project’s impact would be less than significant.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Transportation Element, 2000 • City of Redding Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, 2009 Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 39
January 2022
• Federal Aviation Administration, Land Use Compatibility and Airports, ND • Traffic Impact Evaluation for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project, 2021 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project: cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope
of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that
is:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

Discussion
a, b) In accordance with Assembly Bill 52, the City, under the purview of Caltrans District 2, consulted with NAHC and local Native American groups and individuals pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Section 21080.3 of CEQA. Although NAHC’s review of its Sacred Lands database for culturally significant properties was negative, several recorded cultural resources in and near the project area were identified through database searches conducted during preparation of the project’s cultural studies. NAHC also provided a list of Native American groups and individuals that might be able to provide additional information related to culturally sensitive resources in the project vicinity. Subsequent tribal outreach has been robust, including multiple telephone and email conversations and several onsite visits with tribal members representing the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Redding Rancheria. A consultation log documenting the City’s, Caltrans’, and archaeological consultants’ pertinent communications with representatives of the three tribes is included in the project’s confidential Historic Property Survey Report.

Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
The project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts on cultural resources in the vicinity of the project to the greatest extent possible by increasing the amount of fill, reducing cuts, abandoning one culvert in place, and re-contouring the ground to minimize erosion.

Project implementation would have minimal effect on cultural resources and would not diminish the characteristics of known or inadvertently discovered cultural resources. The project’s impact on known tribal cultural resources is less than significant. Despite this determination, conservation measures CR-1 through CR-5 (described in Section III, Cultural Resources) have been incorporated into the project. Project operation would have no impact on tribal cultural resources.

Documentation
• Historic Properties Survey Report prepared by Pacific Legacy, Inc., 2021 • Archeological and Ethnographic Evaluation Report: CA-SHA-39/553 prepared by Pacific Legacy, Inc., 2020
Mitigation
None necessary.

XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 41
January 2022
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
Discussion
a) The project consists of improvements to roadway safety along an existing corridor. The project does not involve any actions that would require or result in new wastewater treatment facilities.

Therefore, there would be no impact.
b) The proposed project is a roadway safety improvements project, and construction of the proposed project would not generate the need for any new or expanded water entitlements.

Therefore, there would be no impact.
c) The project does not involve any actions that would generate wastewater. Therefore, there would be no impact.
d) The project construction activities would generate minor amounts of debris requiring disposal at a suitable facility, such as the City’s West Central Landfill located 20 miles west of the project area near Igo, California. Standard construction specifications would require recycling of some materials such as concrete to reduce landfill waste. Hazardous materials would be disposed of at an approved landfill. The project would not generate solid waste in amounts that would adversely affect the existing capacity of the local landfill or would violate regulations related to solid waste. The contractor would be responsible for removing solid waste from the site. Project impacts on landfills would be less than significant. e) Any solid waste generated by the project would be disposed of at an approved landfill in compliance with local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to solid waste disposal.

Therefore, there would be no impact.

Documentation
• City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Elements, 2000 • Shasta County Department of Public Works, Engineering, Solid Waste – West Central Landfill, 2021
Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
XX. WILDFIRE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
Discussion
a) During the majority of construction, Old Oregon Trail and adjacent roads in the project area would remain open to controlled through-traffic. Short duration detours may be needed for some components of the work; however, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

There are no designated emergency evacuation routes in the project area. The project operation would be consistent with existing conditions; therefore, there would be no impact. b,c) Based on current mapping, the lands in the project area are mapped as having “very high” fire hazard potential by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and “elevated” fire risk according to the California Public Utilities Commission Fire-Threat Map. Construction activities could exacerbate fire risks; however, existing state and federal law requires construction equipment to have spark arrestors and other apparatus to minimize and prevent wildfire risk. Project operation would be consistent with existing conditions. The project’s wildfire risk potential would be less than significant. In addition, conservation measure HAZ-6 (described in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) has been incorporated. d) The proposed project would be largely within the existing Old Oregon Trail road corridor alignment. The project profile would provide sufficient gradient for drainage of roadway surfaces, and as such, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risks as a result in drainage changes, runoff, or slope instability. Therefore, there would be no impact.

Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 43
January 2022
Documentation
• California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, dated May 21, 2008. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5992/redding.pdf. Accessed June 15, 2021.
• California Public Utilities Commission Fire Map 2021, https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/firemap/.

Accessed: June 15, 2021.
• City of Redding General Plan, Health and Safety Element, 2000 Mitigation
No mitigation is necessary.

XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact No Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below the selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have potential environmental
effects which may cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Discussion
a) The proposed project would have minimal potential to degrade the quality of the environment, affect wildlife populations or their habitats, or reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plant and animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Mitigation measures will be used to avoid or reduce potential project-related impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Initial Study Public Works Department, Engineering Division

January 2022
b) The project consists of safety improvements to an existing roadway. Impacts associated with the project would be primarily limited to the construction phase, with no operational impacts on the environment. All impacts resulting from project construction can be fully mitigated at the project level. As a result, cumulative impacts would be less than significant with mitigation and conservation measures incorporated.
c) As discussed in this document, the proposed project does not include any activities that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level or that could otherwise cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

Documentation
See all sections above.

Mitigation
MM-1. If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey seven (7) days before construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will be notified and consulted. An appropriate buffer, as determined by CDFW and the qualified biologist, will be placed around the nest until the young have fledged. If construction activities cease for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required.

MM-2. . If an active raptor nest is found, no construction activities will occur within 300-feet of the nest for raptors and 450-feet of the nest for special-status raptors unless a smaller buffer zone is approved by the CDFW. Construction may resume once the young have left the nest or as approved by a qualified biologist.

MM-3. If construction, including the removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags, occurs during the bats’ non-volant period (March 1 through August 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey of the project area biological study area (BSA) (Figure 2) to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The pre-construction survey will be performed no more than seven (7) days prior to the implementation of construction activities (including staging and equipment access). If a lapse in construction activities occurs for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the BSA, a disturbance-free buffer will be established by a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFW) to adequately protect the colony from project activities.

Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

ATTACHMENT A
Figure 1 – Project Location and Vicinity
Figure 2 – Project Design Features
Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Figure No.

Title
Project Location
Client/Project
!(
!(

40.675266
-122.321652

40.653175
-122.335383
Notes
U:\Temporary\185704614\185704614_Figure_1_ESL_Phipps.mxd Revised: 2019-10-16 By: jphipps Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data. 1 Project Location and Vicinity
185704614
City of Redding
Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvements Project
Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14
Reviewed by ST on 2019-08-27

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet

2. Base map: ESRI USA Topo Maps web mapping service, 2018-01-19

3. Public Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 33

4. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City
NV UT
CA
AZ
OR WY
0 2,000
Feet
1 inch = 2,000 feet (At page size of 8.5"x11")
T 31N
R 04W
/
!( Map Reference Point
3URMHFW Area (12.13 acres)
Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Project Location
Client/ProjectFigure No.Title
1 4
3 2
5 6
Old Oregon Trail
Old Oregon Trail
Midland Dr
6469803
6469803
2122699
2122699
2 0
Notes
City of ReddingOld Oregon Trail Widening Project
100 200
Feet
V:\1857\active\185704614\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\185704614_NES_Figure2.1_20191016.mxd Revised: 2020-02-11 By: stona 1:2,400 (At original document size of 11x17)
Old Oregon Trail Widening Project
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data.

Redding, Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14 Reviewed by ST on 2019-10-16

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet2. Base map: ESRI World Imagery Map web mapping servicePublic Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 334. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City Project Design Features

Biological Study Area (12.13 acres)Staging AreaExisting Edge of PavementNew Edge of PavementExisting Storm DrainNew Storm Drain ($ $¯
Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Project Location
Client/ProjectFigure No.Title
1 4
3 2
5 6
Old Oregon Trail
Paso Robles Ave
Midla
nd
Dr
6469803
6469803
2122699
2122699
2 0
Notes
City of ReddingOld Oregon Trail Widening Project
100 200
Feet
V:\1857\active\185704614\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\185704614_NES_Figure2.1_20191016.mxd Revised: 2020-02-11 By: stona 1:2,400 (At original document size of 11x17)
Old Oregon Trail Widening Project
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data.

Redding, Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14 Reviewed by ST on 2019-10-16

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet2. Base map: ESRI World Imagery Map web mapping servicePublic Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 334. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City Project Design Features

Biological Study Area (12.13 acres)Staging AreaExisting Edge of PavementNew Edge of PavementExisting Storm DrainNew Storm Drain ($ $¯
Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Project Location
Client/ProjectFigure No.Title
1 4
3 2
5 6
Robles Ave
Old Oregon Trail
6469803
6469803
2 0
Notes
City of ReddingOld Oregon Trail Widening Project
100 200
Feet
V:\1857\active\185704614\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\185704614_NES_Figure2.1_20191016.mxd Revised: 2020-02-11 By: stona 1:2,400 (At original document size of 11x17)
Old Oregon Trail Widening Project
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data.

Redding, Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14 Reviewed by ST on 2019-10-16

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet2. Base map: ESRI World Imagery Map web mapping servicePublic Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 334. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City Project Design Features

Biological Study Area (12.13 acres)Staging AreaExisting Edge of PavementNew Edge of PavementExisting Storm DrainNew Storm Drain ($ $¯
Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Project Location
Client/ProjectFigure No.Title
1 4
3 2
5 6
Old Oregon Trail
2125980
2125980
2 0
Notes
City of ReddingOld Oregon Trail Widening Project
100 200
Feet
V:\1857\active\185704614\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\185704614_NES_Figure2.1_20191016.mxd Revised: 2020-02-11 By: stona 1:2,400 (At original document size of 11x17)
Old Oregon Trail Widening Project
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data.

Redding, Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14 Reviewed by ST on 2019-10-16

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet2. Base map: ESRI World Imagery Map web mapping servicePublic Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 334. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City Project Design Features

Biological Study Area (12.13 acres)Staging AreaExisting Edge of PavementNew Edge of PavementExisting Storm DrainNew Storm Drain ($ $¯
Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Project Location
Client/ProjectFigure No.Title
1 4
3 2
5 6
Old Oregon Trail
Crescenta La Dr
6473084 6473084
2125980
2125980
2 0
Notes
City of ReddingOld Oregon Trail Widening Project
100 200
Feet
V:\1857\active\185704614\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\185704614_NES_Figure2.1_20191016.mxd Revised: 2020-02-11 By: stona 1:2,400 (At original document size of 11x17)
Old Oregon Trail Widening Project
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data.

Redding, Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14 Reviewed by ST on 2019-10-16

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet2. Base map: ESRI World Imagery Map web mapping servicePublic Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 334. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City Project Design Features

Biological Study Area (12.13 acres)Staging AreaExisting Edge of PavementNew Edge of PavementExisting Storm DrainNew Storm Drain ($ $¯
Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Project Location
Client/ProjectFigure No.Title
1 4
3 2
5 6
Bear Mountain Road
Old Oregon Trail
6473084
6473084
2129261
2129261
2 0
Notes
City of ReddingOld Oregon Trail Widening Project
100 200
Feet
V:\1857\active\185704614\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\185704614_NES_Figure2.1_20191016.mxd Revised: 2020-02-11 By: stona 1:2,400 (At original document size of 11x17)
Old Oregon Trail Widening Project
Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data.

Redding, Shasta County, California Prepared by JP on 2019-10-14 Reviewed by ST on 2019-10-16

1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet2. Base map: ESRI World Imagery Map web mapping servicePublic Land Survey: T 32N, R 04W, Sec. 4; T 33N, R 04W, Sec. 334. USGS 7.5 Quad: Project City Project Design Features

Biological Study Area (12.13 acres)Staging AreaExisting Edge of PavementNew Edge of PavementExisting Storm DrainNew Storm Drain ($ $¯
Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

ATTACHMENT C

Mitigation Monitoring and Environmental Commitment Program

Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 1
January 2022

MITIGATION MONITORING AND

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT PROGRAM

OLD OREGON TRAIL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2021120354)

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CONTENTS
This document is the Mitigation Monitoring and Environmental Commitment Program (MMP/ECP) for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project (project). The MMP/ECP includes a brief discussion of the legal basis for, and the purpose of, the program, discussion, and direction regarding complaints about noncompliance, a key to understanding the monitoring matrix, and the monitoring matrix itself.

LEGAL BASIS OF AND PURPOSE FOR THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring or reporting programs whenever certifying an environmental impact report (EIR) or a mitigated negative declaration (MND). This requirement facilitates implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.

The MMP contained herein is intended to satisfy the requirements of CEQA as they relate to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. It is intended to be used by City of Redding (City) staff, participating agencies, project contractors, and mitigation monitoring personnel during implementation of the project.
 Mitigation is defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15370 as a measure that does any of the following:
 Avoids impacts altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.  Minimizes impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.  Rectifies impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment.  Reduces or eliminates impacts over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the project.
 Compensates for impacts by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

The intent of the MMP is to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of adopted mitigation measures and permit conditions. The MMP will provide for monitoring of construction activities as necessary, on-site identification and resolution of environmental problems, and proper reporting to City staff.

In addition to meeting the CEQA MMP requirements, this document incorporates environmental commitments, standard practices, conservation measures, and best management practices (BMPs). The Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study

January 2022
environmental commitments may be part of the project design, standard contract specifications, City of Redding requirements, or conservation measures. These commitments are part of the project, but do not constitute mitigation under CEQA as they have not been incorporated to reduce a potentially significant impact.

MITIGATION MONITORING/ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT TABLE
The MMP/ECP Table identifies the mitigation measures and commitments proposed for the project. The tables have the following columns:
 Mitigation Measure: Lists the mitigation measures identified within the Initial Study for a specific potentially significant impact, along with the number for each measure as enumerated in the Initial Study.
 Environmental Commitment: Lists the commitments identified within the project that are not related to a potentially significant CEQA impact, but further ensure environmental resource protection.
 Timing: Identifies at what point in time, review process, or phase the mitigation measure will be completed.
 Agency/Department Consultation: References the City department or any other public agency with which coordination is required to satisfy the identified mitigation measure.  Verification: Spaces to be initialed and dated by the individual designated to verify adherence to a specific mitigation measures.

NONCOMPLIANCE COMPLAINTS
Any person or agency may file a complaint asserting noncompliance with the mitigation measures and commitments associated with the project. The complaint shall be directed to the City in written form, providing specific information on the asserted violation. The City shall investigate and determine the validity of the complaint. If noncompliance with a mitigation measure has occurred, the City shall take appropriate action to remedy any violation. The compliant shall receive written confirmation indicating the results of the investigation or the final action corresponding to the particular noncompliance issue.

Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 3
January 2022

MITIGATION MONITORING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT TABLE

FOR THE OLD OREGON TRAIL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2021120354)

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
The following environmental commitments will be incorporated into the project to further protect environmental resources:

Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) Timing/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Verification
(Date and
Initials
Air Quality (AQ)
AQ-1. Nontoxic soil stabilizers shall be applied according to manufacturer’s specification to all inactive construction areas.

Construction Construction
Management
AQ-2. All grading operations shall be suspended when winds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 miles per hour.

Construction Construction
Management
AQ-3. Water all stockpiles, access roads, and disturbed or exposed areas, as necessary, to prevent airborne dust.

Construction Construction
Management
AQ-4. Pursuant to the California Vehicle Code (Section 23114(e)(4)), all trucks hauling soil and other loose material to and from the construction site shall be covered or shall maintain at least 6 inches of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between top of load and the trailer).

Construction Construction
Management
AQ-5. All public roadways used by the project contractor shall be maintained free from dust, dirt, and debris caused by construction activities. Streets shall be swept at the end of the day if visible soil materials are carried onto adjacent public paved roads.

Construction Construction
Management
Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 4
January 2022
Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) Timing/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Verification
(Date and
Initials
Biological Resources (BIO)
BIO-1. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), as required by the City of Redding Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, will be prepared to address BMPs that will be used to prevent erosion and sediment loss within the project site. BMPs such as silt fence, mulching and seeding, and straw wattles will be placed where needed to prevent sediment from leaving the site during and after construction.

Preconstruction City/
Construction
Management
HAZ-1 through HAZ-5 (described in below in Hazards and Hazardous Materials) will be used to reduce potential project-related impacts on riparian areas and nearby waterways.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
Cultural Resources (CR)
CR-1. Caltrans will coordinate with tribal representatives from the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Redding Rancheria and incorporate measures to protect tribal resources, including potential work windows associated with tribal ceremonies.

Design Caltrans/ City
Environmental
Management
CR-2. An archaeological monitor and tribal monitors from the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Redding Rancheria will be used during grounddisturbing activities.

Construction Caltrans/City/
Construction
Management
CR-3. Prior to the start of construction, all field personnel shall receive workers’ environmental awareness training on cultural, paleontological, and tribal cultural resources. The training will provide a description of cultural, paleontological, and tribal cultural resources that may be encountered in the project area, review steps to follow if an inadvertent discovery is made, and provide contact information for the project Archaeologist, project Paleontologist, on-site cultural resources monitor(s), and tribal cultural monitor(s).

Preconstruction Caltrans/City/
Construction
Management
CR-4. Construction contract documents will include provisions to respond to archaeological resources discovered during the project. If cultural materials are discovered during construction, work activity within a 60-foot radius of the discovery will be stopped and the area secured until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).

Design Caltrans/City
Construction &
Environmental
Management/
SHPO
Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 5
January 2022
Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) Timing/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Verification
(Date and
Initials
CR-5. If human remains and related items are discovered on private or State land, they will be treated in accordance with State Health and Safety Code § 7050.5. Further disturbances and activities will cease in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains, and the Shasta County Coroner contacted. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) § 5097.98, if the remains are thought to be Native American, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) who will then notify the Most Likely Descendent (MLD).

Construction Caltrans/City/
NAHC/ County
Coroner
Hazards And Hazardous Materials (HAZ)
HAZ-1. Hazardous materials, including fuels, oils, cement, and solvents will be stored and contained in an area protected from direct runoff and away from areas where they could enter waters of the United States.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
HAZ-2. Construction equipment will be inspected daily for leaks. Leaking fluids will be contained upon detection and equipment repairs will be made as soon as practicable or the leaking equipment will be moved off site.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
HAZ-3. Secondary containment such as drip pans or absorbent materials shall be used to catch spills or leaks when removing or changing fluids. Secondary containment will be used for storage of all hazardous materials.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
HAZ-4. Spill containment and clean-up materials shall be kept on site at all times for use in the event of an accidental spills.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
HAZ-5. Absorbent materials shall be used on small spills rather than hosing down or burying the spill. The absorbent material shall be promptly removed and properly disposed.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
HAZ-6. All construction equipment with internal combustion engines will be equipped with an operational spark arrester, or the engine must be equipped for the prevention of fire.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 6
January 2022
Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) Timing/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Verification
(Date and
Initials
Noise (NOI)
NOI-1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and equipped with noise reduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
NOI-2. When not in use, motorized construction equipment will not be left idling for more than 5 minutes.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
NOI-3. Stationary equipment (power generators, compressors, etc.) shall be located at the furthest practical distance from nearby noise‐sensitive land uses or sufficiently shielded to reduce noise‐related impacts.

Construction City/
Construction
Management
Tribal Cultural Resources
CR-1 through CR-5 (described above in Cultural Resources) Preconstruction/ Construction
Caltrans/ City/
Construction
Management
Wildfire
HAZ-6 (described above in Hazards and Hazardous Materials) Construction City/ Construction
Management
Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety City of Redding
Public Works Department, Engineering Division Initial Study Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project Page 7
January 2022

CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES
Resource-specific mitigation measures used during project implementation include:

Mitigation Measure (MM)
Timing/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Verification
(Date and
Initials
Biological Resources (MM BIO)
MM-1. If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey seven (7) days before construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will be notified and consulted. An appropriate buffer, as determined by CDFW and the qualified biologist, will be placed around the nest until the young have fledged. If construction activities cease for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required.

Preconstruction/
Construction
City/
Construction
Management
MM-2. If an active raptor nest is found, no construction activities will occur within 300-feet of the nest for raptors and 450-feet of the nest for special-status raptors unless a smaller buffer zone is approved by the CDFW. Construction may resume once the young have left the nest or as approved by a qualified biologist.

Preconstruction/
Construction
CDFW/City/
Construction
Management
MM-3. If construction, including the removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags, occurs during the bats’ non-volant period (March 1 through August 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey of the project area biological study area (BSA) (Figure 2) to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than seven (7) days prior to the implementation of construction activities (including staging and equipment access). If a lapse in construction activities occurs for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the BSA, a disturbance-free buffer will be established by a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFW) to adequately protect the colony from project activities.

Preconstruction/
Construction
City/
Construction
Management
Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety

ATTACHMENT D

Comments and Response to Comments (if any)

Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) 1 Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project
Response to Public Comments Received on CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, State Clearinghouse #2021120354
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project was made available to the public and interested agencies for a minimum 30-day review period. The agency review period was managed by the State Clearinghouse (SCH) and closed on January 14, 2022.

The public review period was managed by staff and closed on January 14, 2022. All written comments received during the public and agency review period are attached, along with written responses to environmental issues raised by commenters on the IS/MND. Comments received on the public draft IS/MND do not identify new significant impacts or significant new information that would require recirculation of the draft IS/MND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. This technical memorandum is being used to summarize comments and support adoption of the public draft IS/MND.

Response to Comments
A total of one comment letter was received regarding the IS/MND. The comment letter is attached to this technical memorandum:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Letter A)

1. Letter A was submitted by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and includes five comments and recommendations related to Migratory Birds and Raptors, Bats, Natural Environmental Study, Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement, Entrapment of Wildlife.

Comment A1. Migratory Birds and Raptors:

Response: Mitigation Measure MM-2 will be modified to include the 300-foot and 450- foot buffers. Recommendation noted.

Comment A2. Bats:

The City requests information (published scientific data and pilot studies) that demonstrate the benefit and effectiveness of conducting hibernacula season pre-construction surveys, as well as information on how this protocol is being applied consistently across the State by CDFW.

Comment A3. Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts:

NESMI documents do not provide CEQA analysis or identify mitigation measures. The NESMI does include “Conservation Measures” described as “environmental resource Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) 2 conservation measures and best management practices”, including those listed in the comment letter. These best management practices (BMPs) are project features that are included in the standard specifications and standard special provisions for non-urban projects. The BMPs do not constitute mitigation under CEQA as they have not been incorporated to reduce a potentially significant impact.

Comment A4. Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement:

The non-vegetated ephemeral ditch results from a roadside culvert subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The existing culvert has been identified as nonjurisdictional and will be abandoned in place. The nearest riparian vegetation is located outside of the project area along West Fork Stillwater Creek and will not be impacted.

Comment A5. Entrapment of Wildlife:

The City of Redding Construction Standards (Section 306) requires all trenches to be covered at the end of each work day. A potentially significant impact has not been identified in relation to entrapment; however, it is standard practice to inspect pipes prior to installation to check for defects and to ensure they do not contain any debris or material that could enter a closed system. While strategies to prevent entrapment should not be incorporated as a mitigation measures, they can be included in the special provisions for the project.

Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Northern Region
601 Locust Street
Redding, CA 96001
www.wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
January 14, 2022
Amber Kelley
Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
Public Works Department
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001
[email protected]
SUBJECT: Review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project, State Clearinghouse Number
2021120354, Redding, Shasta County
Dear Amber Kelley:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) dated December 14, 2021, for the abovereferenced project (Project). As a trustee for the State’s fish and wildlife resources, the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and their habitat. As a responsible agency, the Department administers the California Endangered Species Act and other provisions of the Fish and Game Code that conserve the State’s fish and wildlife public trust resources. The Department offers the following comments and recommendations on this Project in our role as a trustee and responsible agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code §21000 et seq.

Project Description
The Project as proposed is the construction of “a safety improvement project on Old Oregon Trail. The purpose of the project is to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. The project is needed as this section of roadway has little to no roadway shoulder and non-motorized access is limited. This section of roadway also has an accident rate that is higher than the statewide average for similar roadways. The existing road alignment would be widened to create one standard 12-foot wide lane in each direction with 6-foot wide paved shoulders. A section of roadway would also be realigned to improve a compound curve. The project includes earthwork, vegetation removal, drainage modification, utility relocation, fencing and guardrail installation, paving, striping, sign installation, and right of way (ROW) acquisition.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

Tree removal would be necessary to allow for road widening, and existing culverts beneath the road would be replaced, extended, or abandoned in place as needed.

Utility poles, fire hydrants, and waterlines would be relocated if they conflict with the new roadway improvements. New guardrail would be installed where needed for public safety. Most work would occur within the existing ROW, but some permanent ROW would be needed from adjacent private lands to realign the roadway and improve the curve. A temporary construction easement (TCE) may be needed in one location to allow for culvert extension. Contractor staging areas would be located in existing graveled pullouts along the Old Oregon Trail existing ROW.” The Project is located in northeast Redding along Old Oregon Trail between Paso Robles Avenue and Bear Mountain Road.

Comments and Recommendations
The Department has the following comments and recommendations as they pertain to biological resources:

Migratory Birds and Raptors
Mitigation measure MM-2 states that a 250-foot buffer will be placed around active raptor nests, if found. The Department recommends increasing this buffer as 250- feet may not be sufficient to protect nests of special-status raptor species from disturbance. For example, white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), a Fully Protected species, is identified in the MND as having potential to occur in or adjacent to the Project area. The Department generally recommends minimum starting buffer distances of 300-feet for raptors and 450-feet for special-status raptors; or using species specific buffer guidance, whenever available.

Additionally, the Department recommends the inclusion of the following statement to mitigation measure MM-1: The results of pre-construction surveys shall be sent electronically to the Department at [email protected].

Bats
The Department recommends Mitigation measure MM-3 be changed to include avoidance of potential impacts to bat hibernacula. MM-3 should read (changes in bold): “If construction, including the removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags, occurs during the bats non-volant period (March 1 through August 31) or during the bat hibernation period (November 1 – March 1), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey of the project area biological study area (BSA) to locate maternity and/or roosting colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The pre-construction survey will be performed no more than seven (7) days prior to the implementation of construction activities (including staging and DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

equipment access). If a lapse in construction activities occurs for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the BSA, a disturbance-free buffer will be established by a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFW) to adequately protect the colony from project activities. If pre-construction surveys and tree removal occur during the bat hibernation period, the trees should be removed in a humane fashion using a two-day process to prevent accidental death of bats if no precipitation is forecast and if the forecasted nighttime low temperatures do not drop below 45°F or less. If weather is cold (i.e., forecasted nighttime low temperatures reach 45˚F or less for that evening) or if precipitation is forecast, then no removal can occur. The two-day tree removal process includes removing the non-habitat trees and brush along with certain tree limbs on the first day and the remainder of the tree on the second day.”
Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts
A Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts (NESMI) was prepared for this Project, dated March 2020. The NESMI included recommended avoidance and minimization measures, two of which were not incorporated into the MND. The Department recommends the incorporation of the following measures:

BIO-6. All equipment used for off-road construction activities will be weed-free prior to entering the BSA.

BIO-7. Any seed mixes or other vegetative material used for revegetation of disturbed sites will consist of sterile seed and/or locally adapted native plant materials to the extent practicable.

Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
The Delineation Report discusses a watercourse as a feature excluded from the notification requirements of FGC section 1600 et seq. This feature is explained as follows:

One ephemeral stream occurs in the study area (shown on page 2 in the Figure 3 mapbook). It occurs as a bed and bank feature approximately 1-foot wide with a dominant substrate of soil. The feature has formed on a hillslope below a culvert passing under Old Oregon Trail. The upslope side (east end) of the culvert is a ditch that drains Old Oregon Trail and adjacent uplands but lacks indicators of an OHWM, likely due to the low gradient. The defined channel starts below the culvert outfall (on the west side of the road) and continues approximately 40 feet downslope, where the feature loses its bed and bank and the water fans out as sheet flow or dissipates into the ground.

Since the stream lacks a surface connection with a traditional navigable DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

water, we consider it isolated and mapped it as an excluded feature.

Please note that FGC section 1600 et seq. does not require a watercourse to be hydrologically connected to a traditionally navigable waterway in order to meet the notification requirements set forth in FGC section 1602.

For any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow, or change the bed, channel, or bank (which includes associated riparian resources) of a river or stream, or use material from a streambed, FGC section 1602 requires a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Notification from the applicant. Project activities, which would be subject to LSA Notification requirements include construction of stormwater features that discharge on or over the streambank and modification of associated riparian resources growing on the bank. Work within ephemeral streams, washes, watercourses with subsurface flow, and floodplains are also subject to notification requirements. Issuance of an LSA Agreement is subject to CEQA.

The Department, as a responsible agency under CEQA, will consider the CEQA document for the Project. The CEQA document should fully identify the potential impacts to the stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, monitoring, and reporting commitments for completion of the agreement. To obtain information about the LSA notification process, please access our website at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA.

Avoid Inadvertent Entrapment of Wildlife
If applicable, trenched and excavated areas should be covered securely prior to stopping work each day, or a ramp should be provided to prevent wildlife entrapment.

If pipes are left out onsite, they should be inspected for animals prior to burying, capping, moving, or filling. The Department recommends a mitigation measure be developed and included in the MND to avoid inadvertent entrapment of wildlife. This measure could be as follows:

To prevent the inadvertent entrapment of wildlife, the construction contractor shall ensure that, at the end of each workday, trenches and other excavations that are over one foot deep have been backfilled or covered with plywood or other hard material. If backfilling or covering is not feasible, one or more wildlife escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks shall be installed in the open trench. Pipes shall be inspected for wildlife prior to capping, moving, or placing backfill over the pipes to ensure that animals have not been trapped. If animals have been trapped, they shall be allowed to leave the area unharmed.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

If you have any questions, please contact Kristin Hubbard, Environmental Scientist, at (530) 225-2138, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Tina Bartlett, Regional Manager
Northern Region
ec: State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Kristin Hubbard, Amy Henderson
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Habitat Conservation Planning Branch
DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) 1 Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project
Response to Public Comments Received on CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, State Clearinghouse #2021120354
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project was made available to the public and interested agencies for a minimum 30-day review period. The agency review period was managed by the State Clearinghouse (SCH) and closed on January 14, 2022.

The public review period was managed by staff and closed on January 14, 2022. All written comments received during the public and agency review period are attached, along with written responses to environmental issues raised by commenters on the IS/MND. Comments received on the public draft IS/MND do not identify new significant impacts or significant new information that would require recirculation of the draft IS/MND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. This technical memorandum is being used to summarize comments and support adoption of the public draft IS/MND.

Response to Comments
A total of one comment letter was received regarding the IS/MND. The comment letter is attached to this technical memorandum:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Letter A)

1. Letter A was submitted by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and includes five comments and recommendations related to Migratory Birds and Raptors, Bats, Natural Environmental Study, Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement, Entrapment of Wildlife.

Comment A1. Migratory Birds and Raptors:

Response: Mitigation Measure MM-2 will be modified to include the 300-foot and 450- foot buffers. Recommendation noted.

Comment A2. Bats:

The City requests information (published scientific data and pilot studies) that demonstrate the benefit and effectiveness of conducting hibernacula season pre-construction surveys, as well as information on how this protocol is being applied consistently across the State by CDFW.

Comment A3. Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts:

NESMI documents do not provide CEQA analysis or identify mitigation measures. The NESMI does include “Conservation Measures” described as “environmental resource Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) 2 conservation measures and best management practices”, including those listed in the comment letter. These best management practices (BMPs) are project features that are included in the standard specifications and standard special provisions for non-urban projects. The BMPs do not constitute mitigation under CEQA as they have not been incorporated to reduce a potentially significant impact.

Comment A4. Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement:

The non-vegetated ephemeral ditch results from a roadside culvert subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The existing culvert has been identified as nonjurisdictional and will be abandoned in place. The nearest riparian vegetation is located outside of the project area along West Fork Stillwater Creek and will not be impacted.

Comment A5. Entrapment of Wildlife:

The City of Redding Construction Standards (Section 306) requires all trenches to be covered at the end of each work day. A potentially significant impact has not been identified in relation to entrapment; however, it is standard practice to inspect pipes prior to installation to check for defects and to ensure they do not contain any debris or material that could enter a closed system. While strategies to prevent entrapment should not be incorporated as a mitigation measures, they can be included in the special provisions for the project.

Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Northern Region
601 Locust Street
Redding, CA 96001
www.wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
January 14, 2022
Amber Kelley
Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
Public Works Department
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001
[email protected]
SUBJECT: Review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project, State Clearinghouse Number
2021120354, Redding, Shasta County
Dear Amber Kelley:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) dated December 14, 2021, for the abovereferenced project (Project). As a trustee for the State’s fish and wildlife resources, the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and their habitat. As a responsible agency, the Department administers the California Endangered Species Act and other provisions of the Fish and Game Code that conserve the State’s fish and wildlife public trust resources. The Department offers the following comments and recommendations on this Project in our role as a trustee and responsible agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code §21000 et seq.

Project Description
The Project as proposed is the construction of “a safety improvement project on Old Oregon Trail. The purpose of the project is to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. The project is needed as this section of roadway has little to no roadway shoulder and non-motorized access is limited. This section of roadway also has an accident rate that is higher than the statewide average for similar roadways. The existing road alignment would be widened to create one standard 12-foot wide lane in each direction with 6-foot wide paved shoulders. A section of roadway would also be realigned to improve a compound curve. The project includes earthwork, vegetation removal, drainage modification, utility relocation, fencing and guardrail installation, paving, striping, sign installation, and right of way (ROW) acquisition.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

Tree removal would be necessary to allow for road widening, and existing culverts beneath the road would be replaced, extended, or abandoned in place as needed.

Utility poles, fire hydrants, and waterlines would be relocated if they conflict with the new roadway improvements. New guardrail would be installed where needed for public safety. Most work would occur within the existing ROW, but some permanent ROW would be needed from adjacent private lands to realign the roadway and improve the curve. A temporary construction easement (TCE) may be needed in one location to allow for culvert extension. Contractor staging areas would be located in existing graveled pullouts along the Old Oregon Trail existing ROW.” The Project is located in northeast Redding along Old Oregon Trail between Paso Robles Avenue and Bear Mountain Road.

Comments and Recommendations
The Department has the following comments and recommendations as they pertain to biological resources:

Migratory Birds and Raptors
Mitigation measure MM-2 states that a 250-foot buffer will be placed around active raptor nests, if found. The Department recommends increasing this buffer as 250- feet may not be sufficient to protect nests of special-status raptor species from disturbance. For example, white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), a Fully Protected species, is identified in the MND as having potential to occur in or adjacent to the Project area. The Department generally recommends minimum starting buffer distances of 300-feet for raptors and 450-feet for special-status raptors; or using species specific buffer guidance, whenever available.

Additionally, the Department recommends the inclusion of the following statement to mitigation measure MM-1: The results of pre-construction surveys shall be sent electronically to the Department at [email protected].

Bats
The Department recommends Mitigation measure MM-3 be changed to include avoidance of potential impacts to bat hibernacula. MM-3 should read (changes in bold): “If construction, including the removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags, occurs during the bats non-volant period (March 1 through August 31) or during the bat hibernation period (November 1 – March 1), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey of the project area biological study area (BSA) to locate maternity and/or roosting colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The pre-construction survey will be performed no more than seven (7) days prior to the implementation of construction activities (including staging and DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

equipment access). If a lapse in construction activities occurs for a period greater than 7 days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the BSA, a disturbance-free buffer will be established by a qualified biologist (in consultation with CDFW) to adequately protect the colony from project activities. If pre-construction surveys and tree removal occur during the bat hibernation period, the trees should be removed in a humane fashion using a two-day process to prevent accidental death of bats if no precipitation is forecast and if the forecasted nighttime low temperatures do not drop below 45°F or less. If weather is cold (i.e., forecasted nighttime low temperatures reach 45˚F or less for that evening) or if precipitation is forecast, then no removal can occur. The two-day tree removal process includes removing the non-habitat trees and brush along with certain tree limbs on the first day and the remainder of the tree on the second day.”
Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts
A Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts (NESMI) was prepared for this Project, dated March 2020. The NESMI included recommended avoidance and minimization measures, two of which were not incorporated into the MND. The Department recommends the incorporation of the following measures:

BIO-6. All equipment used for off-road construction activities will be weed-free prior to entering the BSA.

BIO-7. Any seed mixes or other vegetative material used for revegetation of disturbed sites will consist of sterile seed and/or locally adapted native plant materials to the extent practicable.

Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
The Delineation Report discusses a watercourse as a feature excluded from the notification requirements of FGC section 1600 et seq. This feature is explained as follows:

One ephemeral stream occurs in the study area (shown on page 2 in the Figure 3 mapbook). It occurs as a bed and bank feature approximately 1-foot wide with a dominant substrate of soil. The feature has formed on a hillslope below a culvert passing under Old Oregon Trail. The upslope side (east end) of the culvert is a ditch that drains Old Oregon Trail and adjacent uplands but lacks indicators of an OHWM, likely due to the low gradient. The defined channel starts below the culvert outfall (on the west side of the road) and continues approximately 40 feet downslope, where the feature loses its bed and bank and the water fans out as sheet flow or dissipates into the ground.

Since the stream lacks a surface connection with a traditional navigable DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

water, we consider it isolated and mapped it as an excluded feature.

Please note that FGC section 1600 et seq. does not require a watercourse to be hydrologically connected to a traditionally navigable waterway in order to meet the notification requirements set forth in FGC section 1602.

For any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow, or change the bed, channel, or bank (which includes associated riparian resources) of a river or stream, or use material from a streambed, FGC section 1602 requires a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Notification from the applicant. Project activities, which would be subject to LSA Notification requirements include construction of stormwater features that discharge on or over the streambank and modification of associated riparian resources growing on the bank. Work within ephemeral streams, washes, watercourses with subsurface flow, and floodplains are also subject to notification requirements. Issuance of an LSA Agreement is subject to CEQA.

The Department, as a responsible agency under CEQA, will consider the CEQA document for the Project. The CEQA document should fully identify the potential impacts to the stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, monitoring, and reporting commitments for completion of the agreement. To obtain information about the LSA notification process, please access our website at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA.

Avoid Inadvertent Entrapment of Wildlife
If applicable, trenched and excavated areas should be covered securely prior to stopping work each day, or a ramp should be provided to prevent wildlife entrapment.

If pipes are left out onsite, they should be inspected for animals prior to burying, capping, moving, or filling. The Department recommends a mitigation measure be developed and included in the MND to avoid inadvertent entrapment of wildlife. This measure could be as follows:

To prevent the inadvertent entrapment of wildlife, the construction contractor shall ensure that, at the end of each workday, trenches and other excavations that are over one foot deep have been backfilled or covered with plywood or other hard material. If backfilling or covering is not feasible, one or more wildlife escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks shall be installed in the open trench. Pipes shall be inspected for wildlife prior to capping, moving, or placing backfill over the pipes to ensure that animals have not been trapped. If animals have been trapped, they shall be allowed to leave the area unharmed.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project) Amber Kelley, Environmental Compliance Manager
City of Redding
January 14, 2022

If you have any questions, please contact Kristin Hubbard, Environmental Scientist, at (530) 225-2138, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Tina Bartlett, Regional Manager
Northern Region
ec: State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Kristin Hubbard, Amy Henderson
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Habitat Conservation Planning Branch
DocuSign Envelope ID: 468ABCEF-0DD2-4D02-91A9-187E8CA28450 Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: Response to Public Comments (available online) (4.11(e)--Old Oregon Trail Safety Improvement Project)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Authorize purchase of Atlas Copco blower in the amount of $190,948.53 for the City of Redding Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant; and approve additional funding in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for shipping and handling, taxes, and start-up and commissioning services.

Fiscal Impact
The Wastewater Utility Division has sufficient funds available in the approved Fiscal Year 2021- 22 budget for this purchase.

Alternative Action
The City Council (Council) could choose not to approve the purchase and additional funds and provide alternative direction to staff.

Background/Analysis
As part of the Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (CCWWTP) expansion project in 2012, five (5) new Houston Service Industries (HSI) air blowers (blowers) were installed as part of the updated wastewater treatment process. The functionality and operation of these blowers has been unreliable from the time they were installed. Despite the manufacturer covering the cost of years of repairs, services, and replacements the problems have not been remedied and the blowers continue to experience issues. Atlas Copco has subsequently purchased HSI and has been working with the City of Redding (City) to correct the problems.

MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
ITEM NO. 4.11(f)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 836
Report to Redding City Council February 9, 2022
Re: 4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant Page 2 On July 21, 2020, the Council approved an Evaluation and Purchase agreement with Atlas Copco to provide the City with a new blower on a “Trial and Buy” basis. This blower has proven to be much more reliable and has a wider range of airflow that better suits the needs of the CCWWTP.

The City completed the purchase of this blower in 2021. Subsequently, the other HSI blowers are failing, and currently, there are only two of the five blowers operating as designed, including the newest installed blower. Atlas Copco has provided a quote to purchase another blower to replace one of the inoperable blowers. As time and budget allows, the inoperable HSI blowers will be systematically replaced with new Atlas Copco blowers in future budget cycles. The air blowers are some of the most critical pieces of equipment for CCWWTP and must be operational in order to operate the biological process of the plant.

Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• This agenda item is a routine operational item.

Attachments
Quote No. 2915353 (available online)
7-21-20 Staff Report (available online)
Packet Pg. 837
Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022 1/12

CLEAR CREEK WWTP

CITY OF REDDING
Mr. John Rossie
Quote no 2915353
01/19/2022
Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
2/12
Atlas Copco Compressors LLC
Atlas Copco Compressors LLC
300 Technology Center Way
Ste. 550
Rock Hill, SC 29730
Phone: +1 866-472-1013
www.atlascopco.us
www.atlascopco.com/air-usa
Contact: Mr. John Rossie
Company: CITY OF REDDING CLEAR CREEK
Address: 2220 METZ RD
ANDERSON CA 96007-9478
United States
Phone: +1 530-440-4745
Email: [email protected]
Dear Mr. John Rossie
Thank you for your recent enquiry. Further to our discussions, please find enclosed our quotation as per your requirements.

We trust the enclosed information is of interest and look forward to hearing back with your comments. If you require any further information on this or any of our products or services, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best Regards,
Gatlin Gold
Municipal Sales Manager - Blowers
Mobile: +1 832-297-7916
[email protected]
Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
3/12
Price Summary
Description Qty
ZB 6 VSD+ 250 I Air ANSI 460V 1
Atlas Copco Turbo Blower
Model: ZB 6 VSD+
Impeller Type: Impeller I
Motor power: 250 kW
Supply voltage: 440-460 V (3 ph)
Frequency: 60 Hz
Electrical approval: cULus
Flanged connection: ANSI flanges
Cooling: Air cooled
Product company: APF
Test certificate: Yes
Anchor pads: Yes
Wooden package: Yes
16" Discharge Expansion Joint GR 1
Protonode (Ethernet) Kit 1
Grand Total (excl VAT) USD 190,948.53
Payment & delivery conditions
Quote valid to: 02/28/2022
Commissioning: Included
Installation: Not included unless otherwise noted
Freight Inlcuded
Warranty: See Standard Conditions of Sale
Payment terms: Progressive Payments
Delivery time: 18-20 Weeks
Incoterms & location: FOB - Free on board
Delivery Terms Equipment will be delivered in our standard packaging unless otherwise stated (off-loading and positioning to be done by others). Optional items may impact delivery. Delivery time can be confirmed upon acceptance of your order/final instructions to proceed.

Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
4/12
Product Description
ZB 5-6 VSD+

ATLAS COPCO OIL-FREE CENTRIFUGAL BLOWER
The Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ is the latest generation of magnetic bearings centrifugal blowers It includes advanced features ensuring efficiency to its maximum as well as enhanced reliability. Its plug-and-play design provides simple installation and easy access for service activities.

The Atlas Copco magnetic bearing technology provides
operational peace of mind and full control over the rotating component. No matter the conditions, the machine controls and adjusts the shaft’s position at any given time,
guaranteeing an optimal operation. Coupled to a highly
efficiency permanent magnet motor, this machine is the ideal combination of efficiency and reliability.

Having an efficient technology is only the first step towards the machine’s total efficiency. The Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ is also delivered with a state of the art packaging, minimizing the losses from the air entry point to the discharge flange.

The extra touch to the Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ is given to the cooling circuits. Proper cooling is built into the blower’s design. Streams of fresh air are running within and around internal components to ensure the lowest possible operating temperature. Thanks to the internal close water loop circuit, the motor and variable frequency drive are maintained at a constant temperature, no matter the environmental or the operating conditions. This design provides an extended
reliability as well as an increased lifetime of the machine.

The Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ features even more unique
benefits. From the modulating blow-off valve extending the machine’s turndown, to the magnetic bearing controller
continuous power feed without the need of a UPS, these are making the ZB 5-6 VSD+ the perfect product for any low
pressure application.

Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
5/12
Reliability
Atlas Copco magnetic bearing technology
The Atlas Copco magnetic bearing technology is a strong active technology. At any moment, the full control of the shaft is ensured thanks to the magnetic force adjusting the shaft's position, no matter the conditions.

This technology:
• Ensures a full control over the rotating assembly and a complete adjustment of the shaft’s position in order to face any operating conditions
• Has unlimited starts and stops and no contact between stator and rotor at any given moment
• Does not require the use of process air to operate or to cool down components
• Combines air and water cooling to ensure extended
components’ lifetime within a compact and powerful
design
• Does not require the use of a UPS (power battery
bank) to provide power to the magnetic bearing
controller
Built-in cooling paths
The Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ turbo blower has an advanced cooling design. Several dedicated paths are present to provide the optimum cooling requirement:
• The magnetic bearing cooling path is using fresh air
from outside of the blower which is cleaned and ducted
directly onto the bearings
• The internal cooling path also uses fresh cleaned air from outside of the machine to circulate around the
mechanical components such as the permanent
magnet motor
• The Electrical cubicle cooling path is taking fresh air from the bottom of the cubicle to the top, cooling down every cubicle component
• The water cooling path runs through the permanent
magnet motor and high frequency drive, maintaining
these key components at their optimum operating
temperature
Regulating blow-off valve
With its new regulating algorithm, the Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ features a regulating blow-off valve. This component brings huge benefits to the machine:
• It allows a quick response to dynamically adjust its
position during the blower’s operation
• It provides an extended turndown in the area where
traditional turbo blowers would surge or shutdown
• It bridges flow gaps between blowers running in
parallel, allowing the process to be accurately
provided with the exact amount of flow needed
Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
6/12
Efficiency
Atlas Copco centrifugal blower
Atlas Copco has a long history with centrifugal equipment. For more than a decade, the ZB high-speed turbo blower range proved its superior efficiency. With this new generation, the ZB 5-6 VSD+ continues the success story, putting efficiency in the front line of this product’s benefits. The product includes:
• Magnetic bearing technology for high efficiency
operation without the consumption of process air
• High-efficient permanent magnet motor for reduced
losses along the speed range and an optimum
operation in the complete blower’s operating map
• State-of-the-art impeller designed to operate at
dedicated pressure levels
• Premium labyrinth seal reducing leakages and
energy losses over the compression stage
Separated process air path
Too often, process air is mixed with cooling air within centrifugal turbo blowers, increasing the power consumption of the machine. The Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ is changing this habit and is built with a dedicated air path going to the process, ensuring minimal pressure drops as well as minimal temperature increase. This feature:
• Guarantees energy savings by separating cooling
air paths to the process air path and increased flow
delivered from the machine
• Ensures the lowest discharge air temperature to the
process
• Allows simple ducting for air intake from a remote
location
Plug-and-play package
When designing blowers, Atlas Copco makes a priority to build simple, easy to install and serviceable machines. The Atlas Copco ZB 5-6 VSD+ is a perfect example of this mindset. The machine:
• Includes all necessary components straight from
the factory
• Requires a single electrical connection to feed all
the machine’s electrical components
• Has a reduced footprint and installation space
required around the machine
• Is easily transportable with forklift slots embedded
within the base frame
Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
7/12
Working principle
Traditionally, process air is used to cool down components in centrifugal turbo blowers. This, however, has a serious impact on the performance. There is no better way to cool down a component than having a dedicated stream of fresh air. The Atlas Copco ZB blower separates the cooling paths from the process path as it is presented below.

The process air path
Air is taken from the atmosphere (A), passes through a set of baffles (B) reducing its noise, it is filtered by high-efficiency filters (C) before entering the element via a direct connection. The impeller, which is spinning at high speed (D) provides energy to the air which then will turn into pressure. Air is then delivered to a discharge cone and passes by a high-efficiency check valve (F) before entering the process. The modulating blow-off valve (G) and noise cancelling silencer (H) are present to derivate air from the main line for either protection or regulation purposes.

Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
8/12
The magnetic bearing cooling air system
Air is taken from the atmosphere (A), passes through a set of baffles reducing its noise (B), is filtered through a high-efficiency filter (C) before blown into the bearings via two air fans (I). After cooling down the magnetic bearings, the warm air is being rejected to the centralized location at the top of the machine, which can be ducted or piped outside of the blower room if needed.

The closed-loop water system
Atlas Copco ZB turbo blowers use an internal water and glycol circuit to cool down the permanent magnet motor and high frequency drive assuring to use them at their best efficiency regardless of the operating or ambient conditions. The closed loop is set-up as followed: a pump (J) circulates the mix through the line, starting with the water cooled high frequency drive (K) and then followed by the water cooled permanent magnet motor (E). Depending on the required cooling capacity, a thermostatic valve (L) adjusts the flow going to the heat exchanger (M) or back to the pump (J).

The heat exchanger includes in the air-cooled machine variants a variable speed air fan to regulate the required cooling power in the most precise way. If there is no need to cool down the liquid after the motor, none of it is passing by the heatsink, totally removing the power consumption of the cooling fan. Heated air from the heat exchanger is then driven towards the centralized cooling air grid before being rejected into the atmosphere (ducted, piped or none of these).

Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
9/12
Scope of supply
• Structural base frame with integrated forklift slots
• Sound enclosure for indoor installation
• High efficient air inlet filter with electronic sensor • Integrated baffling system for reduced noise level
• Direct connection between air intake and blower’s compression stage • Atlas Copco’s permanent magnet synchronous motor
• Built-in regulation blow-off valve and silencer
• Turbo blower centrifugal single stage impeller
• Integrated close-loop water circuit
• High frequency Variable Speed Drive (VSD / VFD)
• Elektronikon® “Mk5 - control and monitoring system
• RFI filters reducing harmonic disturbances in the electrical network • AC chokes against high voltage peaks
• Constant power supply to magnetic bearing controller without the use of a battery bank (UPS)
• LC filters protecting the permanent magnet motor from harmonics • IEC or cULus electrical approval
• TT-TN or IT earthing system
• Remote monitoring and (3G) connectivity
• All alarm and safety devices connected to the blower controller • Plug-and-play package with singe electrical connection Additional features and options
• Low pressure drops check valve
• Compensator for machine’s connection to the piping
• Anchor pads
• Performance test certificate
• Witness performance test
Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
10/12
Standard Conditions of Sale
GENERAL – Unless otherwise expressly agreed in writing by a duly authorized representative of Atlas Copco these terms and conditions supersede all other communications and agreements and notwithstanding any conflicting or different terms and conditions in any order or acceptance of Purchaser, all sales and shipments shall exclusively be governed by these terms and conditions. When used herein “affiliates” shall mean Atlas Copco AB and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. Section headings are for purposes of convenience only. “Products” as used herein shall include products, parts and accessories furnished Purchaser by Atlas Copco. Orders shall be subject to acceptance at Atlas Copco Compressors LLC’s principal corporate offices in Rock Hill, South Carolina.

DELIVERY – Unless otherwise agreed in writing, Products manufactured, assembled or warehoused in the continental United States are delivered F.O.B. shipping point, and Products shipped from outside the continental United States are delivered F.O.B. point of entry.

Where the scheduled delivery of Products is delayed by Purchaser or by reason of any of the contingencies referred to in Section 5.

Atlas Copco may deliver such Products by moving it to storage for the account of and at the risk of Purchaser. Shipping dates are approximate and are based upon prompt receipt of all necessary information and approvals from Purchaser. Atlas Copco reserves the right to make delivery installments.

SECURITY AND RISK OF LOSS - Upon request from Atlas Copco, Purchaser agrees to execute a security agreement covering the Products sold or other assets and to perform all acts which may be necessary to perfect and assure a security position of Atlas Copco.

Notwithstanding any agreement with respect to delivery terms or payment of transportation charges, the risk of loss or damage shall pass to Purchaser and delivery shall be deemed to be complete upon delivery to a private or common carrier or upon moving into storage, whichever occurs first, at the point of shipment for Products assembled, manufactured or warehoused in the continental United States or at the point of entry for Products shipped from outside the continental United States.

PAYMENT – If Purchaser fails to pay any invoice when due, Atlas Copco may defer deliveries under this or any other contract with Purchaser, except upon receipt of satisfactory security for or cash in payment of any such invoice.

A service charge of the lesser of 1% per month or the highest rate permitted by applicable law shall be charged on all overdue accounts. Failure on the part of Purchaser to pay invoices when due shall, at the option of Atlas Copco, constitute a default in addition to all other remedies Atlas Copco may have under these conditions of sale or applicable law. If, in the judgment of Atlas Copco, the financial condition of Purchaser at any time prior to delivery does not justify the terms of payment specified. Atlas Copco may require payment in advance or cancel any outstanding order, whereupon Atlas Copco shall be entitled to receive reasonable cancellation charges. If delivery is delayed by Purchaser, payment shall become due on the date Atlas Copco is prepared to make delivery. Should manufacture be delayed by Purchaser, pro rata payments shall become due if and to the extent required at Atlas Copco by its contracts with the manufacturer. All installment deliveries shall be separately invoiced and paid for without regard to subsequent deliveries.

Delays in delivery or non-conformities in any installment shall not relieve Purchaser of its obligations to accept any pay for remaining installments.

FORCE MAJEURE – Atlas Copco shall not be liable for loss, damage, detention, or delay, nor be deemed to be in default from causes beyond its reasonable control including but not limited to acts of God, fire, storm, strike or other concerted action of workmen, act or omission of any governmental authority or of Purchaser, compliance with import or export regulations, insurrection or riot, embargo, quarantine, epidemic, pandemic, delays or shortages in transportation, or inability to obtain necessary engineering talent, labor, materials, or manufacturing facilities from usual sources. In the event of delay due to any such cause, the date of delivery will be postponed by such length of time as may be reasonably necessary to make up for such delay.

NEW PRODUCT WARRANTY – Atlas Copco warrants to the Purchaser that all stationary compressors, portable compressors, compressed air dyers, Atlas Copco-designed compressor parts and other Products manufactured by Atlas Copco and affiliates shall be free of defects in design, material and workmanship for a period of fifteen (15) months from date of shipment to Purchaser, or twelve (12) months from date of initial start-up, whichever occurs first, except as set forth below or in the New Products Warranty attached hereto.

Should any failure to conform with this warranty appear prior to or after shipment of the Product to Purchaser during the specified periods under normal and proper use and provided the Product has been properly stored, installed, handled and maintained by the Purchaser, Atlas Copco shall, if given prompt notice by Purchaser, repair or replace, the non-conforming Product or authorize repair or replacement by the Purchaser at Atlas Copco’s expense.

Replaced Products become the property of Atlas Copco.

Atlas Copco warrants Products or parts thereof repaired or replaced pursuant to the above warranty under normal and proper use, storage, handling, installation, and maintenance, against defects in design, workmanship and material for a period of thirty (30) days from date of start-up of such repaired or replaced Products or parts thereof or the expiration of the original Product warranty, whichever is longer.

When the nature of the defect is such that it is appropriate in the judgment of Atlas Copco to do so, repairs will be made at the site of the Product. Repair or replacement under applicable warranty shall be made at no charge for replacement parts, F.O.B. Atlas Copco Warehouse, warranty labor, serviceman transportation and living costs, when work is performed during normal working hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, exclusive of holidays). Labor performed at other times will be billed at the overtime rate then prevailing for services of Atlas Copco personnel.

The Atlas Copco warranty does not extend to Products not manufactured by Atlas Copco or affiliates. As to such Products, Purchaser shall be entitled to proceed only upon the terms of that particular manufacturer’s warranty. The Atlas Copco warranty does not apply to defects in material provided by Purchaser or to design stipulated by Purchaser.

Used Products, Products not manufactured by Atlas Copco or affiliates and Products excluded from the above warranties are sold AS IS with no representation or warranty, and ALL WARRANTTIES OF QUALITY, WRITTEN, ORAL, OR IMPLIED, other than may be expressly agreed to by Atlas Copco in writing, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIABILITY OR FITNESS, ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED.

Any services performed by Atlas Copco in connection with the sale, installation, servicing or repair of a Product are warranted to be performed in a workmanlike manner. If any nonconformity with this warranty appears within 45 days after the services are performed, the exclusive obligation of Atlas Copco shall be to re-perform the services the services in a conforming manner.

THE FOREGOING WARRANTIES ARE EXCLUSIVE AND IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES OF QUALITY, WRITTEN, ORAL

OR IMPLIED, AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED. Correction of nonconformities as provided above shall be Purchaser’s exclusive remedy and shall constitute fulfillment of all liabilities of Atlas Copco (including any liability for direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential damage) whether in warranty, strict liability, contract, tort, negligence, or otherwise with respect to the quality of or any defect in Products or associated services delivered or performed hereunder.

Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
11/12
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY – IN NO EVENT SHALL ATLAS COPCO BE LIABLE FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, however arising, whether in warranty, strict liability, contract, tort, negligence or otherwise, including but not limited to loss of profits or revenue, loss of total or partial use of the Products or facilities or services, downtime cost, or claims of the Purchaser for such or other damages whether on account of Products furnished hereunder or delays in delivery thereof or services performed upon or with respect to such Products. Atlas Copco’s liability on any claim whether in warranty, strict liability, contract, tort, negligence or otherwise for any loss or damage arising out of, connected with, or resulting from this contract or the performance or breach thereof, or from the design, manufacture, sale, delivery, resale, repair, replacement, installation, technical direction of installation, inspection, servicing, operation or use of any Product covered by or furnished under this contract shall in no case (except as provided in the section entitled “Patent Indemnity”) exceed the purchase price allocable to the Product or Part thereof which gives rise to the claim.

All causes of action against Atlas Copco arising out of or relating to this contract or the performance hereof shall expire unless brought within on year of time of accrual thereof.

PRICES – Prices to the Purchaser shall be the Atlas Copco list price in effect at time of order. Atlas Copco may, upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to Purchaser, change prices, or other terms of sale affecting the Products, by issuing new price schedules, bulletins or other notices.

This contract applies to new Products only. Purchases of used equipment shall be on terms to be agreed upon at time of sale to Purchaser.

This price does not include any Federal, state or local property, license, privilege, sales, service use, excise, value added, gross receipts, or other like taxes which may now or hereafter by applicable to, measured by or imposed upon or with respect to this transaction, the property, its purchase, sale, replacement, value, or use, or any services performed in connection therewith. Purchaser agrees to pay or reimburse Atlas Copco, its subcontractors or suppliers any such taxes, which Atlas Copco, its subcontractors or suppliers are required to pay or collect or which are required to be withheld by Purchaser.

The price shall also be subject to adjustment in accordance with the published Price Adjustment Clauses, which price adjustment information shall supersede the terms of this Section 8, where inconsistent herewith.

INFORMATION FURNISHED PURCHASER – Any design, manufacturing drawings or other information or materials submitted to the Purchaser and not intended for dissemination by Purchaser remain the exclusive property of Atlas Copco and may not, without its consent, be copied or communicated to a third party.

PATENT INDEMNITY – For purposes only of this Section 10, where used, the designation “Atlas Copco” shall be deemed to mean Atlas Copco North America Inc. and its subsidiaries.

Atlas Copco shall at its own expense defend any suits or proceedings brought against purchaser insofar as based on an allegation that Products furnished hereunder constitute an infringement of any claim of any patent of the United States of America, other than a claim covering a process performed by said Products or a product produced by said Product, provided that such Products are manufactured by Atlas Copco, are not supplied according to Purchaser’s detailed design, are used as sold by Atlas Copco. Purchaser shall have made all payments then due hereunder, and Atlas Copco is notified promptly in writing and given authority, information and assistance for the defense of said suite or proceeding; and Atlas Copco shall pay all damages and costs awarded in any suit or proceeding so defended, provided that his indemnity shall not extend to any infringement based upon the combination of said Products or any portion thereof with other Products or things not furnished hereunder unless Atlas Copco is a contributory infringer. Atlas Copco shall not be responsible for any settlement of such suit or proceeding made without its written consent. If in any suit or proceeding defended hereunder any Product is held to constitute infringement, and its use is enjoined, Atlas Copco shall, at its option and its own expense, either replace said Products with non-infringing Products; or modify them so that they become non-infringing; or remove them and refund the purchase price and the transportation costs thereof. THE FOREGOING STATES THE ENTIRE LIABILITY OF ATLAS COPCO AND AFFILIATES WITH RESPECT TO PATENT INFRINGEMENT.

To the extent that said Products or any portion thereof are supplied according to Purchaser’s detailed design or instructions, or modified by Purchaser, or combined by Purchaser with equipment or things not furnished hereunder, except to the extent that Atlas Copco is a contributory infringer, or are used by Purchaser to perform a process, or produce a product, and by reason of said design, instructions, modification, combination, performance or production, a suit or proceeding is brought against Atlas Copco, Purchaser agrees to indemnify Atlas Copco in the manner and to the extent Atlas Copco indemnities Purchaser in this Section 10 insofar as the terms hereof are appropriate.

ASSIGNMENT – Any assignment of this contract or any rights hereunder, without prior written consent of Atlas Copco by a duly authorized representative thereof shall be void.

TERMINATION – Any order or contract may be cancelled by Purchaser only upon payment of reasonable charges (including an allowance for profit) based upon costs and expenses incurred, and commitments made by Atlas Copco.

PARTIAL INVALIDITY – If any provision herein or portion thereof shall for any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or enforceability shall not affect any other provision or portion thereof, but these conditions shall be construed as if such invalid or unenforceable provision or portion thereof had never been contained therein.

REMEDIES – The remedies expressly provided for in these conditions shall be in addition to any other remedies, which Atlas Copco may have under the Uniform Commercial Code or other applicable law.

NOTE: Sale of the equipment or services described or referred to herein at the price indicated is expressly conditioned upon the terms and conditions set forth on the front and back of this page. Any confirmatory action by the Purchaser hereunder, or any acceptance of such equipment of services, shall constitute assent to said terms and conditions. Any additional or different terms or conditions set forth in the Purchaser’s order or other communications are objected to by Seller and shall not be effective or binding unless assented to in writing by an authorized representative of Seller.

Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Quote
Quote number: 2915353
Date: 01/19/2022
12/12

PAYMENT TERMS
Unless expressly agreed to in writing on a specific contract or order, our standard payment terms are:

For orders under $75,000 the payment terms shall be Net 30 days from date of shipment.

For orders over $75,000 or with lead times greater than six months the following terms shall apply:

1. Domestic Shipments
NET 45 for all progress payments
A. 20% of the contract value upon approval of submittal package B. 60% of the contract value upon satisfactory completion of factory tests or shipment from factory C. 15% of the contract value upon delivery to site
D. 5% of contract value upon commissioning and final acceptance, not to exceed 180 days from delivery For late payments, the customer agrees to pay the greater value of $250 per business calendar day for payment not received or A. 1.5% of the invoice value if not paid in full within 10 business days of the agreed upon NET 45 terms B. 2.5% of the invoice value if not paid in full within 20 business days of the agreed upon NET 45 terms C. 3% of the invoice value per calendar month if not paid in full In those cases where progress payments are required, all work on the order will cease if payment is not received in accordance with the
payment schedule.

2. Export Shipments
All export shipments are subject to purchaser arranging for an irrevocable letter of credit in favor of Atlas Copco Compressors LLC, from a recognized American bank.

Should the order fall in a category that requires progress payments, the letter of credit shall be arranged to release payment in accordance with the agreed payment schedule.

3. Payment Retention
Payment retention will not be allowed. An irrevocable bank letter of credit will be furnished at Atlas Copco’s expense in lieu of retention.

4. Credit Approval
All terms are subject to credit approval by Atlas Copco Compressors LLC.

CANCELLATION SCHEDULE
Definitions:

Standard Stocked Equipment - equipment as shown in the current catalog and available for shipment from the US Distribution Center.

Standard Non-Stocked Equipment - equipment as shown in the current catalog but not currently stocked at the US Distribution Center.

Engineered Equipment - equipment requiring customized features not shown in the current catalog.

Orders for Standard Stocked Equipment
* 20% of equipment price
Orders for Standard Non-Stocked Equipment
A) Prior to release for manufacturing:
* 20% of equipment price
B) After production has started:
* 40% of equipment price
C) After production has been completed:
* 60% of equipment price
Orders for Engineered Equipment
A) Prior to release for manufacturing:
* 20% of the purchase price
B) After production has started
* 40% of the base compressor price
* 40% of optional equipment of purchased materials will be charged C) After production has completed
* 60% of the base compressor price
* 100% of optional equipment
Accepted by:________________________________________________ Date:_________________ Name:_____________________________________ Title:_____________________ Company:___________________________________
Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: Quote No. 2915353 (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Approve the Evaluation and Purchase Agreement with Atlas Copco Compressors LLC, in the amount of $130,000 for an air blower at the Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, and approve additional funding in the amount not to exceed $20,000 for shipping and handling, taxes, installation, and start up and commissioning services.

Fiscal Impact
The Wastewater Utility Division has sufficient funds available in the approved Fiscal Year 2020- 21 budget for this purchase.

Alternative Action
The City Council has the option to not approve the agreement and the allocation of additional funds and provide alternative direction to staff.

Background/Analysis
As part of the Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (CCWWTP) expansion project in 2012, five (5) new Houston Service Industries (HSI) air blowers (blowers) were installed as components of the updated wastewater treatment process. These blowers have been problematic in their inability to reliably operate and function as designed from the time of installation. Years of repairs, services, and replacements at the cost of the manufacturer have yet to remedy all issues, particularly on one of the five blowers. The original five year warranty period for the blower units formally ended in 2017. Atlas Copco Compressors LLC (Atlas Copco) has subsequently purchased HSI and has been working with the City of Redding (City) to correct the problems. Even though the warranty period has expired on the blowers, Atlas Copco has continued to provide service to the City in a good faith effort to try and remedy the problems.

MEETING DATE: July 21, 2020
ITEM NO. 4.11(b)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.11(b)--Evaluation and Purchase Agreement with Atlas Copco Compressors LLC, for an Air Blower at the Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: 7-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant) Report to Redding City Council July 13, 2020
Re: 4.11(b)--Evaluation & Purchase Agreement Atlas Copco Compressors LLC, for Air Blower at CCWWTP Page 2
The proposed Evaluation and Purchase Agreement (Agreement) is a remedy from Atlas Copco to provide the City with a new blower that is believed to better suit the needs of the CCWWTP. The blower will be replacing a non-operational blower so there is no interruption in service or process. The agreement will allow the City to install and operate this new blower on a trial basis for up to 90 days. If the blower meets the operational needs, the City can purchase the blower at cost from Atlas Copco. If the blower does not meet operational needs, the City can return the blower and pursue other options.

The agreement has been approved as to form by the City Attorney.

Council Priority/City Manager Goals
This agenda item is a routine operational item.

Attachments
Evaluation and Purchase Agreement (available online)
Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: 7-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(f)--Authorize Purchase of Blower for Clear Creek Wastewater Plant)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Accept Bid Schedule No. 5177 (Job No. 3650), CARR Fire Buenaventura Trail Ten Bridges Project, awarded to SNL Group Inc., as satisfactorily complete, with a final cost of $658,538.

Fiscal Impact
The total project cost, including surveying, design, bidding, construction, field engineering, inspection, and contract administration, was $658,538. The project was initially funded by the Parks Division. The City will receive reimbursement from public assistance funds including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (75 percent) and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) (18.75 percent). Ultimately, the Parks Division will be responsible for the remaining 6.25 percent. An additional $26,578 of indirect costs from the Engineering Division was not eligible for reimbursement.

Alternative Action
The City Council (Council) could choose to not accept the project as satisfactorily complete, and advise staff on how to proceed.

Background
SNL Group, Inc., has completed all items of work on the CARR Fire Buenaventura Trail Ten Bridges Project as of December 30, 2021, which was within the contract time frame. The Public Works Department subsequently filed the notice of completion with the County of Shasta. The project warranty period expires one year from the completion date of December 30, 2021.

MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
ITEM NO. 4.11(g)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.11(g)--Project Acceptance, Bid Schedule No. 5177, Job No. 3650, CARR Fire Buenaventura Trail Ten Bridges Project
Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 852
Report to Redding City Council February 8, 2022
Re: 4.11(g)--CARR Fire Buenaventura Trail Ten Bridges Project Page 2 At its August 17, 2021, meeting, the Council awarded a construction contract to SNL Group, Inc., of Redding, California, for $410,660 and approved a $41,000 construction contingency fund. Also authorized was $90,000 for contract administration and construction inspection fees and $195,000 for project development costs. The City Manager was authorized to approve additional increases in either the construction management or construction contingency amounts up to a total of $15,000, for a total authorized amount of $751,660. Project development costs include engineering, environmental, and consultant services. During construction, there were no change orders leaving a balance of $41,000, in the contingency fund. The final project cost was $631,960.

This project involved the replacement of ten bridges on the Buenaventura Ten Bridges Trail that burned during the CARR Fire. The bridges were constructed with steel beams, precast concrete deck and abutment panels, and steel handrailing. The project also included minor earthwork, clearing, grubbing and other miscellaneous items of work.

Cost Summary
Awarded Amounts Actual Cost
Project Development Costs $195,000 $195,000
Construction Contract + Contingency $451,660
Construction Contract + Contract Change Orders $410,660 Contract Administration & Inspection $90,000 $26,300
Engineering Division Indirect Costs $26,578
Additional City Manager Authority $15,000 $0.00
Total $751,660.00 $658,538.00
Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• This agenda item is a routine operational item.
c: Josh Anthony, Construction Manager
Attachments
Location Map
Packet Pg. 853
Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: Location Map (4.11(g)--CARR Fire Buenaventura Trail Ten Bridges Project)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Authorize the following actions relative to Bid Schedule No. 5263 (Job No. 2629) Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase One Project:
(1) Award to Jason Abel Construction, Inc., in the amount of $6,330,696.50; (2) Approve an additional $1,006,000 to cover the cost of administration and inspection fees and $250,000 for project development costs;
(3) Approve $630,000 to provide construction contingency funding; (4) Authorize the City Manager to approve additional increases in either the construction management or construction contingency amounts up to a total of $50,000; (5) Find that the project is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 15302 (c) - Replacement or Reconstruction; and (6) Adopt Resolution approving and adopting the 27th Amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 2021-078 appropriating $200,000 in funding for the project.

Fiscal Impact
The Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Project Phase One (1) Project is being funded by the Wastewater Utility. However, there are supplemental funds utilized from the Water Utility and Storm Drain and Streets Divisions related to improvements to each of its facilities. Sufficient funds are budgeted for this project from Wastewater, Water, and Streets budgets. A budget resolution is needed to appropriate Storm Drain funds.

Cost Summary
Item Estimated
Project Development Costs $250,000
Construction Contract + Contingency $6,960,696.50
Contract Administration, Inspection, Testing $1,006,000 Additional City Manager Authority $50,000
Total Project Costs $8,266,696.50
MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
ITEM NO. 4.11(h)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.11(h)--Award Bid Schedule No. 5263 (Job No. 2629) Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase One (1) and adopt budget resolution appropriating funds Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 855
Report to Redding City Council February 7, 2022
Re: 4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase 1 Page 2 Project cost components are estimates and some shifting of the project development, construction management, and construction contingency funds may be necessary to balance the project within the approved budget.

Alternative Action
The City Council could choose to not award the bid for the Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase One (1) Project and provide staff with alternative direction. Without this project, there is greater potential for increased maintenance costs, a decrease in reliability, and an increased risk of sanitary sewer overflows or water main breaks for City of Redding (City) residents.

Background/Analysis
Attached is a tabulation of bids received and opened on January 27, 2022, for the Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase One (1) Project. The low bid in the amount of $6,330,696.50 was received from Jason Abel Construction, Inc., of Corning, California. The engineer's estimate was $6,875,660. Total project development costs for this project are estimated to be $250,000.

Project development costs include engineering, surveying, right-of-way, environmental, and consultant services.

The project includes replacement of nearly 11,000 linear feet of aged sanitary sewer mains by open trench or pipe bursting methods that have reached the end of their useful life. Sewer laterals will be replaced to the right-of-way boundary and reconnected, and new lateral cleanouts will be installed. Existing sanitary sewer manholes and rodholes in the project area will be rehabilitated or replaced. The project will also include some storm drain, water, and street improvements.

Storm drain improvements include replacement of approximately 600 linear feet of storm drain piping by open trench and slipline methods. Water improvements include replacement of approximately 1,800 linear feet of water mains with new eight-inch piping, as well as replacement of associated water services and fire hydrant assemblies. Street work includes rehabilitation of asphalt concrete pavement in Placer Street by cold milling and overlay and installation of new pavement striping.

Staff has determined that the project qualifies as Categorically Exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15302(c) - Replacement or Reconstruction. The project will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity. The project area has been reviewed and does not have significant values for wildlife habitat or other environmental resources. The project has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.

Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• This agenda item is a routine operational item.

Attachments
Resolution
Bid Tabulation
Location Map
CEQA NOE Magnolia Ph1 (unfiled)
Packet Pg. 856
Resolution No. 2022 - ____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF REDDING APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 27 TH AMENDMENT TO CITY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 2021-078
APPROPRIATING $200,000 TO APPROPRIATE FUNDING FOR THE MAGNOLIA AREA SEWER IMPROVEMENT PHASE ONE PROJECT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING THAT Budget Resolution No. 2021-078 be and is hereby amended as follows:

FUND DIVISION DESCRIPTION INCREASE DECREASE
147 809

Storm Drain Utility Capital $200,000
THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustments by this Resolution are as follows:

Decrease (Increase) Beginning Balance
147-809-1-0001-01 Beginning Balance $ 200,000
Increase Expenditures
147-809-4203-27 Magnolia Area Improvements $200,000
Total $ 200,000 $ 200,000
THAT the purpose is to appropriate $200,000 in funding for the Magnolia Area Sewer Improvement Phase One Project for fiscal year 2021-22.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the _____ day of ________, 2022 and was duly adopted at said meeting by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

KRISTEN SCHREDER, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVAL:

PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: Resolution (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase 1) BID TABULATION FOR:

MAGNOLIA AREA SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1
Bid Schedule No.: 5263
Job No.: 2629 ENGINEER'S EST Jason Abel Construction, Inc. Cox & Cox Construction, Inc. 1/27/2022 UNIT UNIT UNIT

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL 1 Prepare Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan LS 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $2,641.00 $2,641.00 2 Implement Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan LS 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $77,387.00 $77,387.00 3 Traffic Control LS 1 $325,000.00 $325,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $407,767.00 $407,767.00 4 Construction Area Sign EA 28 $350.00 $9,800.00 $350.00 $9,800.00 $252.00 $7,056.00 5 Project Funding Sign EA 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $1,637.00 $1,637.00 6 Trench Sheeting & Shoring LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $237,043.00 $237,043.00 7 Bypass Pumping LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $64,936.00 $64,936.00 8 Sanitary Sewer Lateral Locate EA 253 $400.00 $101,200.00 $595.00 $150,535.00 $179.00 $45,287.00 9 Sanitary Sewer (8", Alternative Method) LF 6660 $250.00 $1,665,000.00 $245.00 $1,631,700.00 $220.00 $1,465,200.00 10 Sanitary Sewer (8", Slurry) LF 997 $340.00 $338,980.00 $245.00 $244,265.00 $242.00 $241,274.00 11 Sanitary Sewer (8") LF 2971 $265.00 $787,315.00 $170.00 $505,070.00 $198.00 $588,258.00 12 Sanitary Sewer Lateral (4") LF 5750 $200.00 $1,150,000.00 $205.00 $1,178,750.00 $190.00 $1,092,500.00 13 Sanitary Sewer Lateral (6") LF 200 $220.00 $44,000.00 $210.00 $42,000.00 $244.00 $48,800.00 14 Replace Manhole Frame and Cover (Sewer) EA 5 $2,000.00 $10,000.00 $950.00 $4,750.00 $1,428.00 $7,140.00 15 Rehabilitate Manhole, Sewer (Type 1- 4 ft) EA 20 $7,500.00 $150,000.00 $11,500.00 $230,000.00 $9,382.00 $187,640.00 16 Manhole (Sewer, Type 1- 4 ft) EA 16 $11,000.00 $176,000.00 $6,500.00 $104,000.00 $12,119.00 $193,904.00 17 Abandon Manhole EA 6 $3,000.00 $18,000.00 $4,500.00 $27,000.00 $2,973.00 $17,838.00 18 Remove Manhole EA 2 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $4,148.00 $8,296.00 19 Rodhole (Sanitary Sewer) EA 6 $3,500.00 $21,000.00 $950.00 $5,700.00 $2,286.00 $13,716.00 20 Sag Repair LF 100 $500.00 $50,000.00 $150.00 $15,000.00 $990.00 $99,000.00 21 Replace Manhole Frame and Cover (Storm
Drain) EA 4 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,250.00 $5,000.00 $1,675.00 $6,700.00 22 Valley Gutter (Concrete) LF 300 $125.00 $37,500.00 $75.00 $22,500.00 $59.00 $17,700.00 23 Storm Drain (15" RCP) LF 83 $275.00 $22,825.00 $460.00 $38,180.00 $233.00 $19,339.00 24 Storm Drain (15" RCP, Slurry) LF 166 $375.00 $62,250.00 $495.00 $82,170.00 $204.00 $33,864.00 25 Storm Drain (15" HDPE, Slurry) LF 50 $330.00 $16,500.00 $420.00 $21,000.00 $393.00 $19,650.00 26 Storm Drain (24", Slipline) LF 223 $225.00 $50,175.00 $347.00 $77,381.00 $355.00 $79,165.00 27 Replace Area Drain EA 3 $3,600.00 $10,800.00 $4,700.00 $14,100.00 $4,178.00 $12,534.00 28 Modified Catch Basin #3 EA 1 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $7,451.00 $7,451.00 29 Manhole (Storm Drain, Type 2- 4') EA 3 $7,000.00 $21,000.00 $3,900.00 $11,700.00 $8,665.00 $25,995.00 30 Water (6") LF 43 $120.00 $5,160.00 $195.00 $8,385.00 $316.00 $13,588.00 31 Water (8", Slurry) LF 2020 $200.00 $404,000.00 $203.00 $410,060.00 $201.00 $406,020.00 32 Water (12" DIP, Slurry) LF 113 $275.00 $31,075.00 $277.00 $31,301.00 $339.00 $38,307.00 33 Valve (6" Gate) EA 1 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,926.00 $1,926.00 $2,555.00 $2,555.00 Water Items
Storm Drain Items
Sanitary Sewer Items
General Items
Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: Bid Tabulation (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements BID TABULATION FOR:

MAGNOLIA AREA SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1
Bid Schedule No.: 5263
Job No.: 2629 ENGINEER'S EST Jason Abel Construction, Inc. Cox & Cox Construction, Inc. 1/27/2022 UNIT UNIT UNIT

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL 34 Valve (8" Gate) EA 14 $2,600.00 $36,400.00 $2,386.00 $33,404.00 $2,718.00 $38,052.00 35 Valve (12" Butterfly) EA 2 $3,600.00 $7,200.00 $5,795.00 $11,590.00 $4,063.00 $8,126.00 36 Water Service EA 25 $4,700.00 $117,500.00 $7,500.00 $187,500.00 $5,924.00 $148,100.00 37 Abandon Valve EA 4 $550.00 $2,200.00 $300.00 $1,200.00 $912.00 $3,648.00 38 Remove Valve EA 10 $750.00 $7,500.00 $800.00 $8,000.00 $714.00 $7,140.00 39 Fire Hydrant Assembly EA 1 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $9,750.00 $9,750.00 $10,906.00 $10,906.00 40 Cold Mill Asphalt Concrete SY 30770 $3.00 $92,310.00 $3.95 $121,541.50 $6.00 $184,620.00 41 Asphalt Concrete Overlay Ton 3150 $150.00 $472,500.00 $139.00 $437,850.00 $112.00 $352,800.00 42 Adjust Valve EA 54 $600.00 $32,400.00 $1,250.00 $67,500.00 $554.00 $29,916.00 43 Adjust Manhole ES 25 $1,100.00 $27,500.00 $1,250.00 $31,250.00 $554.00 $13,850.00 44 Traffic Stripe (6" Thermoplastic) LF 26820 $2.50 $67,050.00 $0.95 $25,479.00 $1.00 $26,820.00 45 Traffic Stripe (8" Thermoplastic) LF 1030 $3.00 $3,090.00 $2.50 $2,575.00 $2.00 $2,060.00 46 Thermoplastic SF 1800 $8.00 $14,400.00 $8.00 $14,400.00 $7.00 $12,600.00 47 Pavement Marker EA 673 $10.00 $6,730.00 $8.00 $5,384.00 $6.00 $4,038.00 48 Install Sign EA 2 $800.00 $1,600.00 $1,250.00 $2,500.00 $1,207.00 $2,414.00 TOTAL - CONTRACT ITEMS $6,875,660.00 $6,330,696.50 $6,335,278.00 Shaded areas indicate corrections made in accordance with the Special Provisions.

Street Items
Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: Bid Tabulation (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements BID TABULATION FOR:

MAGNOLIA AREA SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1
Bid Schedule No.: 5263
Job No.: 2629
1/27/2022

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY
1 Prepare Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan LS 1
2 Implement Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan LS 1
3 Traffic Control LS 1
4 Construction Area Sign EA 28
5 Project Funding Sign EA 1
6 Trench Sheeting & Shoring LS 1
7 Bypass Pumping LS 1
8 Sanitary Sewer Lateral Locate EA 253
9 Sanitary Sewer (8", Alternative Method) LF 6660
10 Sanitary Sewer (8", Slurry) LF 997
11 Sanitary Sewer (8") LF 2971
12 Sanitary Sewer Lateral (4") LF 5750
13 Sanitary Sewer Lateral (6") LF 200
14 Replace Manhole Frame and Cover (Sewer) EA 5
15 Rehabilitate Manhole, Sewer (Type 1- 4 ft) EA 20
16 Manhole (Sewer, Type 1- 4 ft) EA 16
17 Abandon Manhole EA 6
18 Remove Manhole EA 2
19 Rodhole (Sanitary Sewer) EA 6
20 Sag Repair LF 100
21 Replace Manhole Frame and Cover (Storm
Drain) EA 4
22 Valley Gutter (Concrete) LF 300
23 Storm Drain (15" RCP) LF 83
24 Storm Drain (15" RCP, Slurry) LF 166
25 Storm Drain (15" HDPE, Slurry) LF 50
26 Storm Drain (24", Slipline) LF 223
27 Replace Area Drain EA 3
28 Modified Catch Basin #3 EA 1
29 Manhole (Storm Drain, Type 2- 4') EA 3
30 Water (6") LF 43
31 Water (8", Slurry) LF 2020
32 Water (12" DIP, Slurry) LF 113
33 Valve (6" Gate) EA 1
Water Items
Storm Drain Items
Sanitary Sewer Items
General Items
Site Work Solutions AVERAGE

UNIT UNIT UNIT

PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE
$3,445.88 $3,445.88 $3,195.63
$19,045.50 $19,045.50 $40,477.50
$557,440.87 $557,440.87 $371,735.96
$339.36 $9,502.08 $313.79
$3,578.71 $3,578.71 $3,238.57
$187,468.97 $187,468.97 $208,170.66
$110,680.87 $110,680.87 $91,872.29
$513.71 $129,968.63 $429.24
$299.87 $1,997,134.20 $254.96
$325.44 $324,463.68 $270.81
$246.94 $733,658.74 $204.98
$262.70 $1,510,525.00 $219.23
$333.50 $66,700.00 $262.50
$1,571.64 $7,858.20 $1,316.55
$12,536.60 $250,732.00 $11,139.53
$17,047.63 $272,762.08 $11,888.88
$2,452.97 $14,717.82 $3,308.66
$6,715.28 $13,430.56 $5,287.76
$3,308.33 $19,849.98 $2,181.44
$550.25 $55,025.00 $563.42
$2,613.95 $10,455.80 $1,846.32
$75.89 $22,767.00 $69.96
$307.75 $25,543.25 $333.58
$329.64 $54,720.24 $342.88
$332.61 $16,630.50 $381.87
$411.20 $91,697.60 $371.07
$5,152.85 $15,458.55 $4,676.95
$13,395.89 $13,395.89 $8,782.30
$9,476.80 $28,430.40 $7,347.27
$488.44 $21,002.92 $333.15
$218.39 $441,147.80 $207.46
$349.85 $39,533.05 $321.95
$3,709.90 $3,709.90 $2,730.30Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: Bid Tabulation (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements BID TABULATION FOR:

MAGNOLIA AREA SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1
Bid Schedule No.: 5263
Job No.: 2629
1/27/2022

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY
34 Valve (8" Gate) EA 14
35 Valve (12" Butterfly) EA 2
36 Water Service EA 25
37 Abandon Valve EA 4
38 Remove Valve EA 10
39 Fire Hydrant Assembly EA 1
40 Cold Mill Asphalt Concrete SY 30770
41 Asphalt Concrete Overlay Ton 3150
42 Adjust Valve EA 54
43 Adjust Manhole ES 25
44 Traffic Stripe (6" Thermoplastic) LF 26820
45 Traffic Stripe (8" Thermoplastic) LF 1030
46 Thermoplastic SF 1800
47 Pavement Marker EA 673
48 Install Sign EA 2

TOTAL - CONTRACT ITEMS
Shaded areas indicate corrections made in accordance with the Specia Street Items
Site Work Solutions AVERAGE

UNIT UNIT UNIT

PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE
$4,119.27 $57,669.78 $3,074.42
$7,723.25 $15,446.50 $5,860.42
$6,579.66 $164,491.50 $6,667.89
$521.31 $2,085.24 $577.77
$865.09 $8,650.90 $793.03
$10,829.49 $10,829.49 $10,495.16
$4.59 $141,234.30 $4.85
$162.70 $512,505.00 $137.90
$1,109.90 $59,934.60 $971.30
$2,516.85 $62,921.25 $1,440.28
$1.01 $27,088.20 $0.99
$2.47 $2,544.10 $2.32
$8.02 $14,436.00 $7.67
$7.40 $4,980.20 $7.13
$1,038.92 $2,077.84 $1,165.31

AVERAGE BID
$8,159,376.57 $6,941,783.69
Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: Bid Tabulation (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements CITY OF REDDING LOCATION MAP MAGNOLIA AREA SEWER IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE 1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT LOCATION PROJECTPacket Pg. 862 Attachment: Location Map (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase 1) Packet Pg. 863
Attachment: CEQA NOE Magnolia Ph1 (unfiled) (4.11(h)--Award Bid Sched. No. 5263. Magnolia Area Sewer Improvements Phase 1)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Accept update on the City of Redding’s COVID-19 Local Economic Stimulus Package projects.

Fiscal Impact
The City Council (Council) previously approved an allocation of $9 million in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Cap and Trade auction proceeds to be used for projects that reap an energy savings benefit to the City of Redding (City). To date, the City Manager has authorized purchases and projects totaling nearly $3.2 million and a consulting services agreement for engineering support for just over $1.2 million.

Alternative Action
The Council may choose not to accept the project status report and provide further direction to staff.

Background/Analysis
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020, the Council unanimously approved the City of Redding Economic Response Plan. Included in the plan, is the allocation of $9 million in Cap and Trade auction proceeds to be used for several projects (Program) associated with the Local Economic Stimulus Package that equates to a savings in energy costs for the City. On May 5, 2020, the Council authorized the City Manager to execute agreements, purchase orders, and contracts associated with the program to ensure an expedited delivery schedule. The Council also directed staff to provide regular status updates on the program and ratify all City Manager awards.

As directed by the City Manager, staff has endeavored to break up most of the work into smaller contracts, with values lower than $500,000, with the idea that local contractors and vendors will compete better due to lack of mobilization costs and other local advantages. However, the City has limited control because these are Public Works contracts and must be awarded to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder in accordance with State of California law.

MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
ITEM NO. 4.11(i)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.11(i)--COVID-19 Economic Stimulus Package Projects Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 864
Report to Redding City Council February 3, 2022
Re: 4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update Page 2 To date, staff has awarded 14 projects totaling just under $3.2 million, including projects for lighting improvements at sport fields, the Library, the Corporation Yard, City Hall, and the Police Department, and projects to install solar power generation systems and replace roofs at various fire stations, as well as several purchase orders and on-call contract services for lighting, plumbing, mechanical work, and equipment. Seven projects have been completed, and nine of the 14 projects have been awarded to contractors with local offices.

Staff and the design consultant are finalizing bid packages for the final LED Lighting Retrofit at Various Locations Project and the Aquatic Center Pumping System Upgrades Project. The design consultant is also preparing draft design packages for several heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) projects. The attached Project Status Report provides more detailed information on project status and costs. Staff will continue to return to the Council monthly to provide progress updates.

Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• Budget and Financial Management – “Achieve balanced and stable 10-year Financial Plans for all funds.”
• Communication and Transparency – “Improve the quality of communication with the public and City employees to enhance knowledge and increase transparency to improve public trust.”
• Government of the 21st Century – “Be relevant and proactive to the opportunities and challenges of today’s residents and workforce. Anticipate the future to make better decisions today.”
• Economic Development – “Facilitate and become a catalyst for economic development in Redding to create jobs, retain current businesses and attract new ones, and encourage investment in the community.”
Attachments
Project Status Report
05-05-20 Staff Report (available online)
04-21-20 Staff Report (available online)
Packet Pg. 865
Project # Description Project Type Contract Method
Award/PO
Date
Ratification
Date Contractor
Local Contractor,
Sub, or Supplier? Cost Est Actual Cost
$ to Local
Contractors
Estimated
Completion
Date
Acceptance
Date Project Status

PROJECTS IN CONSTRUCTION
C19-PO-01 Sourcewell purchase order for stadium lighting (Equipment Only) at Alta Mesa Park, Softball Park, South City Park, Buckeye Park, and Caldwell Park Stadium Lighting Purchase Order (Equipment Only) 7/16/2020 7/21/2020 Musco No $ 1,227,941 $ 1,227,941 $ - 10/31/2022 Purchase order with Musco for equipment.

C19-L-04 LED Lighting Retrofit at City Hall and Police Station Lighting Standard Bid 8/2/2021 8/17/2021 Fluoresco Services, LLC No $ 519,000 $ 144,118 $ - 3/4/2022 Construction delayed because of some long material lead times.

C19-LS-02 Installation of City purchased stadium lighting equipment at Buckeye Park and Caldwell Park
Stadium Lighting Standard Bid
(Installation Only) 2/17/2021 3/16/2021 Builders Solutions, Inc. Yes $ 341,500 $ 303,485 $ 303,485 3/4/2022 Contractor completing punch-list items.

C19-LS-01 Installation of City purchased stadium lighting equipment at Alta Mesa Park, Softball park, South City Park Kiwanis 1, and Tiger Field Stadium Lighting Standard Bid (Installation Only) 3/31/2021 4/20/2021 Builders Solutions, Inc. Yes $ 465,014 $ 463,168 $ 463,168 10/31/2022 Construction delayed due to long material lead times and baseball schedule. All fields except Tiger Field complete.

C19-S-01 Solar PV at Fire Stations 7 & 8 Solar Standard Bid 9/29/2021 10/19/2021 B & B Solar Inc. Yes $ 100,529 $ 98,900 $ 98,900 3/25/2022 Contractor obtaining building permits.

C19-S-02 Solar PV & Replace Roofs at Various Fire Stations (Stations 2, 4, 5, and 6) Solar Standard Bid 11/23/2021 12/21/2021 Harbert Roofing, Inc. Yes $ 525,610 $ 426,213 $ 426,213 5/1/2022 Contractor obtaining building permits.

C19-L-06 LED Lighting Retrofit at Civic Center Auditorium Lighting Standard Bid 11/23/2021 12/21/2021 Fluoresco Services, LLC No $ 162,111 $ 77,387 $ - 4/29/2022 Construction starting.

PROJECTS IN DESIGN
C19-L-05 LED Lighting Retrofit at Caldwell Park, Fire Stations, MLK Jr Center, Enterprise Park, Old City Hall, Senior Citizens Hall, Soccer Park, and Aquatic Center.

Lighting Standard Bid $ 616,761 8/5/2022 Jacobs finalizing bid package.

C19-M-03 Upgrade HVAC at City Hall & Police Department HVAC Standard Bid $ 888,430 11/24/2022 Jacobs preparing design package.

C19-M-04 Upgrade HVAC at Caldwell Park Rec Center and Enterprise Park Community Room HVAC Standard Bid $ 171,000 6/15/2022 City will work with on-call contractor for improvements.

C19-M-05 Upgrade HVAC at Corp Yard HVAC Standard Bid $ 195,000 12/15/2022 Jacobs preparing design package.

C19-P-03 Upgrade Pumping Control System at the Aquatic Center Plumbing Standard Bid $ 132,239 11/15/2022 Jacobs preparing bid package.

C19-S-03 Solar PV & Replace Roofs - Fire Stations 1 and 3 Solar Standard Bid $ 250,000 TBD Structural design and improvements needed for addition of solar equipment. Staff evaluating cost to benefit.

C19-W-04 Replace Windows at Fire Stations 1 through 6 Windows Standard Bid TBD 10/7/2022 City staff is preparing design package in-house.

C19-M-06 Replace HVAC at Civic Center Auditorium HVAC Standard Bid $ 3,500,000 TBD Design on hold until City can determine if budget will be available.

C19-S-04 Install Solar and Replace Roof at Civic Center Auditorium Solar Standard Bid $ 1,600,000 TBD Design on hold until City can determine if budget will be available.

PROJECTS COMPLETE
C19-L-01 LED Lighting Retrofit at three Non Profit Buildings at Diestelhorst Landing. Lighting On-Call Contract 6/9/2020 7/21/2020 B&C Yes $ 48,000 $ 13,000 $ 13,000 7/9/2020 7/31/2020 Construction completed.

C19-L-02 LED Lighting Retrofit at Library Lighting Standard Bid 11/19/2020 12/15/2020 Clear Blue Energy Corp. No $ 194,263 $ 53,633 $ - 3/1/2021 2/22/2021 Construction completed.

C19-L-03 LED Lighting Retrofit at Corp Yard Lighting Standard Bid 12/15/2020 1/19/2021 Fluoresco Services, LLC No $ 391,117 $ 143,650 $ - 6/22/2021 8/6/2021 Construction completed.

C19-P-01 Replace Water Heaters in Fire Stations 2, 3, 4, and 6 Plumbing On-Call Contract 6/30/2020 7/21/2020 American Leak Detection Yes $ 49,000 $ 13,050 $ 13,050 9/16/2020 10/2/2020 Construction completed.

C19-P-02 Replace Laundry Facilities in Fire Stations 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8 Plumbing On-Call Contract 6/25/2020 7/21/2020 American Leak Detection Yes $ 17,000 $ 12,759 $ 12,759 9/16/2020 10/2/2020 Construction completed.

C19-M-01 Replace HVAC Units in Fire Stations 1,2,4,6 HVAC On-Call Contract 6/9/2020 7/21/2020 ACCO Yes $ 92,109 $ 95,278 $ 95,278 12/1/2020 11/30/2020 Construction completed.

C19-M-02 Replace HVAC Units in Old City Hall HVAC On-Call Contract 6/15/2020 7/21/2020 ACCO Yes $ 135,755 $ 97,985 $ 97,985 1/20/2021 1/13/2021 Construction completed.

Sub Total: $ 11,622,379 $ 3,170,566 $ 1,523,838

PROJECT MANAGEMENT/DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES C-19-DC-01 Project Management, Design and Construction Services Engineering Consultant PSA 6/9/2020 7/21/2020 Jacobs Engineering Yes $ 1,240,816 On-going design and construction management services Total $ 12,863,195 $ 3,170,566 $ 1,523,838
Project Budget $9 M. Projects will be prioritized and delivered to fit within approved budget
Energy Efficiency Economic Response Plan (EEERP) Project Status Report Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: Project Status Report (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Authorize the City Manager to award any public works contract, purchase order, or agreements, of any value, associated with the $9.5 million GHG funding approved as part of the Local Economic Stimulus Package.

Fiscal Impact
The City Council has previously approved the allocation of $9.5 million in Cap and Trade auction proceeds to be used for projects that reap an energy savings benefit to the City of Redding. There is no further fiscal impact to granting authority to the City Manager to execute the agreements, purchase orders, and contracts associated with these projects. There may, however, be an added benefit of seeing the money infused more rapidly into the local economy.

Alternative Action
The City Council could choose to not authorize the City Manager to execute the agreements, purchase orders, or contracts associated with the Cap and Trade distribution funds to expedite delivery of the work. This would lengthen the process to use the authorized funding.

Background/Analysis
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020, the City Council unanimously approved the Economic Response Plan. Included in the plan is the allocation of $9.5 million in Cap and Trade auction proceeds to be used for projects associated with the Local Economic Stimulus Package that equate to a savings in energy costs for the City of Redding. By authorizing the City Manager to negotiate, execute, and direct the agreements, purchase orders and contracts, staff can proceed with rapidly assigning the work and awarding bids. The benefit to this is being able to see the Cap and Trade action proceeds go to work as soon as possible in the community, and thereby providing the local MEETING DATE: May 5, 2020
ITEM NO. 9.1(b)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected]
[email protected]
SUBJECT: 9.1(b)--Consider authorizing the City Manager to award energy savings contracts, purchase orders, and agreements related to the Green House Gas (GHG) funding approved by the City Council as part of the Local Economic Stimulus.

Barry Tippin, City Manager
Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: 05-05-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) Report to Redding City Council April 28, 2020
Re: 9.1(b)--Authorize City Manager to award energy savings contracts Page 2 economy a direct opportunity to see a quick positive impact to jobs and business activity. The projects within the package may include, , LED light replacement in City facilities, reroofing and some solar installation at Fire Stations, replacing largely older and heavy energy using equipment with newer more efficient equipment, and additional energy saving projects to be determined
Council Priority/City Manager Goals
 Budget and Financial Management – “Achieve balanced and stable 10-year Financial Plans for all funds.”
 Public Safety – “Work to improve all aspects of public safety to help people feel secure and safe where they live, work, and play in the City of Redding.”  Communication and Transparency – “Improve the quality of communication with the public and City employees to enhance knowledge and increase transparency to improve public trust.”
 Government of the 21st Century – “Be relevant and proactive to the opportunities and challenges of today’s residents and workforce. Anticipate the future to make better decisions today.”
 Economic Development – “Facilitate and become a catalyst for economic development in Redding to create jobs, retain current businesses and attract new ones, and encourage investment in the community.”
Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: 05-05-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Accept the City of Redding Economic Response Plan and provide direction to staff as follows:
(1) Approve deferral of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) hotels and motels. (2) Approve modification of existing Community Assistance for Redding Electric Services (CARES) guidelines.
(3) Approve modification of amortization policy for City of Redding utility bills. (4) Approve the refund of all City of Redding utility deposits. (5) Rescind approval of allocation of Cap and Trade funds for the Wildfire Mitigation and Building Electrification programs; approve Cap and Trade auction proceeds to be distributed to electric customers; and adopt Resolution approving and adopting the 32nd Amendment to City of Redding Budget Resolution No. 2019-050 to appropriate a total of $9 million in Greenhouse Gas allotment for utility rebates. (6) Approve adoption of a utility grant program for small businesses utilizing $600,000 of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding.
(7) Economic Stimulus Package
a. Approve additional use of $5 million of Greenhouse Gas allotment and adopt Resolution approving and adopting the 33rd Amendment to City of Redding Budget Resolution No. 2019-050 allocating money for projects designated as providing energy savings for the general fund.
b. Provide direction on projects involving utilities funding and borrowing.

Fiscal Impact
The amount of impact of this proposal depends on the City Council’s (Council) direction for staff. The programs implemented thus far are expected to impact the General Fund due to approximately $500,000 in missed revenue projections. Programs such as modifying the Amortization Program guidelines and deferring Transient Occupancy Tax will reduce reserves in the short term by providing cash flow relief to businesses. Using restricted revenue funds to modify existing CARES program guidelines, and also refunding City of Redding utility deposits MEETING DATE: April 21, 2020
ITEM NO. 9.1(b)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected]
[email protected]
SUBJECT: 9.1(b)--Consider Economic Response Plan related to the Covid-19 pandemic's impact on the City and provide direction regarding mitigation measures.

Barry Tippin, City Manager
Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) Report to Redding City Council April 16, 2020
Re: 9.1(b)--Economic Response Plan Page 2
and creating a utility grant program for small business will not impact unrestricted reserves. If the additional utility credit is approved, $9 million in Cap and Trade auction proceeds would need to be allocated, some of which would be reallocated from previously funded projects, to bring the total allocation to $11 million for utility rebates. To complete projects listed in the Local Economic Stimulus Package, $5 million in Cap and Trade auction proceeds would need to be allocated in addition to the $4 million already allocated. The Council could also, through approval of this report, provide direction and identify an amount of money to reserve to pay for any potential borrowing for projects that would be approved through the Local Economic Stimulus Package.

Alternative Action
The Council has multiple options with this report. If it chooses to not accept the report in its entirety, all currently implemented programs would cease and no additional community assistance programming would take place at this time. The Council could choose to accept the report, and therefore all of the currently implemented projects as well, and provide direction to staff regarding which new projects to move forward.

Background/Analysis
The Covid-19 global pandemic has been a health catastrophe causing significant disruption in individual, community and societal norms while devastating the economy. The City of Redding, as the local governmental entity, needs to take bold action in line with the State and Federal Government to not only protect the health and welfare of the individual but also of the economy.

The City of Redding City Council will be presented with a number of proposed initiatives and projects to help individuals and businesses through this difficult time. The attached City of Redding Economic Response Plan is a report detailing programming currently implemented, as well as programming that could be implemented to assist the community. These items are varied in cost and source of funding.

Currently implementing
 Maintain City services
 Suspend Return to Owner fees for impounded animals
 Suspend late fees and interest on payments due to the City of Redding  Suspend City of Redding utility shut-offs due to non-payment  Suspend City of Redding utility payment late fees
 Cap and Trade distribution of $50 to every Redding Electric Utility (REU) account holder
Pending approval
 Deferral of Transient Occupancy Tax payment from hotel and motel businesses  Modify existing –Community Assistance for Redding Electric Services (CARES) program guidelines to provide opportunity for additional financial assistance to qualifying utility customers
 Modify Utilities Amortization program guidelines to extend the amortization period, and extend the program to commercial customers
 Refund City of Redding utility deposits to residential and commercial customers  Additional Cap and Trade distribution of $200 to every REU account holder  Utility grant program for small businesses
 Local Economic Stimulus Package containing multiple projects that will result in local contract work opportunities and energy savings to the City of Redding Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) Report to Redding City Council April 16, 2020
Re: 9.1(b)--Economic Response Plan Page 3
Council Priority/City Manager Goals
 Budget and Financial Management – “Achieve balanced and stable 10-year Financial Plans for all funds.”
 Public Safety – “Work to improve all aspects of public safety to help people feel secure and safe where they live, work, and play in the City of Redding.”  Communication and Transparency – “Improve the quality of communication with the public and City employees to enhance knowledge and increase transparency to improve public trust.”
 Government of the 21st Century – “Be relevant and proactive to the opportunities and challenges of today’s residents and workforce. Anticipate the future to make better decisions today.”
 Economic Development – “Facilitate and become a catalyst for economic development in Redding to create jobs, retain current businesses and attract new ones, and encourage investment in the community.”
Attachments
Resolution - GHG Customer Distribution
Resolution - Green House Gas Allotment
COR Economic Response Plan 2020
Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) Resolution No. 2020 - ____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF REDDING APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 32ND AMENDMENT TO CITY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 2019-050 RESCINDING

APPROVAL OF ALLOCATION OF CAP AND TRADE FUNDS FOR THE WILDFIRE MITIGATION AND BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION PROGRAMS; APPROVE THE APPROPRIATION OF $9,000,000 OF CAP AND TRADE AUCTION PROCEEDS TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO RATEPAYERS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019-20.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING THAT Budget Resolution No. 2019-050 be and is hereby amended as follows:

FUND DIVISION DESCRIPTION INCREASE DECREASE
142 854 GHG Customer Distribution $9,000,000
THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustments by this Resolution are as follows:

USE SOURCE

OF FUNDS OF FUNDS
Decrease in Beginning Balance
142-851-01-0001-01 Beginning Balance $ 1,077,910
Decrease in Cap and Trade Revenues
142-851-01-4400-01 Environmental Attributes $ 2,022,090 Elimination of Building Electrification Project
142-854-8908-98 Building Electrification $ 4,000,000
Elimination of Wildfire Mitigation Project
142-854-8908-99 Wildfire Mitigation $ 1,900,000
Increase in GHG Customer Distribution
142-854-8908-90 GHG Customer Distribution $ 9,000,000
Total $ 9,000,000 $ 9,000,000
THAT the purpose is to rescind approval of allocation of Cap and Trade funds for the Wildfire Mitigation and Building Electrification programs; approve the appropriation of $9,000,000 of Cap and Trade auction proceeds to be distributed to ratepayers for fiscal year 2019-20.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the 21st day of April, 2020 and was duly adopted at said meeting by the following vote:

Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ADAM McELVAIN, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVAL:

PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) Resolution No. 2020 - ____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF REDDING APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 33RD AMENDMENT TO CITY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 2019-050 APPROVE AND APPROPRIATE ADDITIONAL USE OF $5,000,000 OF GREENHOUSE GAS

ALLOTMENT FOR PROJECTS DESIGNED AS PROVIDING ENERGY SAVINGS FOR THE GENERAL FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019-20.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING THAT Budget Resolution No. 2019-050 be and is hereby amended as follows:

FUND DIVISION DESCRIPTION INCREASE DECREASE
142 854 Energy Efficiency Measures $5,000,000
THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustments by this Resolution are as follows:

USE SOURCE

OF FUNDS OF FUNDS
Decrease in Beginning Balance
142-851-01-0001-01 Beginning Balance $ 5,000,000
Increase in Energy Efficiency Measures
142-854-8908-96 Energy Efficiency Measures $ 5,000,000
Total $ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000
THAT the purpose is to approve and appropriate additional use of $5,000,000 of Greenhouse Gas allotment allocating money for projects designed as providing energy savings for the General Fund for fiscal year 2019-20.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the 21st day of April, 2020 and was duly adopted at said meeting by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ADAM McELVAIN, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVAL:

PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
1 Table of Contents
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................2 Plan Elements................................................................................................................................................2 Elements currently implemented .............................................................................................................2 Maintain City Services..........................................................................................................................2 Suspend Return to Owner fees............................................................................................................3 Suspend Late Fees and Interest on City Payments .............................................................................3 Suspend Utility Shut-Off ......................................................................................................................4 Suspend Utility Late Fees.....................................................................................................................4 Distribution of $50 to REU Account Holders.......................................................................................4 Pending the City Council’s approval .........................................................................................................4 Deferral of Transient Occupancy Tax...................................................................................................5 Modify Existing CARES Program Guidelines........................................................................................5 Modify Utilities Amortization Program Guidelines.............................................................................5 Refund City of Redding Utilities Deposits............................................................................................6 Additional Cap and Trade Distribution................................................................................................6 Utility Grant Program for Small Businesses ........................................................................................6 Local Economic Stimulus Package........................................................................................................7 Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
2 Executive Summary
The Covid-19 global pandemic is a health catastrophe causing significant disruption in individual, community and societal norms. While the direct human suffering owed to the disease itself is horrific, the damage to the economy due to necessary health precautions is equally devastating. The City of Redding (City), as the local governmental entity, needs to take bold action in line with the State and Federal Government to not only protect the health and welfare of the individual but also that of the local economy. The City of Redding City Council (Council) has directed that a plan be developed to assist the community in economic recovery to coincide with the cessation of the pandemic. This report provides detailed information on the various programs that have been developed to help foster the economy through this economic disaster.

Some programs have already been implemented while others still need final approval from the City Council. In brief, the programs are listed below.

Currently implement Plan Element Value
Suspend Return to Owner fees $200
Suspend late fees and interest on City of
Redding payments
$60,000
Suspend City of Redding utility shut-offs Increased Cash Flow Suspend City of Redding utility late fees $425,000
Distribution of $50 to REU account holders $2,200,000
Plan Element Pending approval
Deferral of Transient Occupancy Tax $250,000 Est. deferred Modify existing CARES program guidelines $1,500,000
Modify existing Utilities amortization
program guidelines
Increased Cash Flow
Refund City of Redding utility deposits $3,400,000
Additional Cap and Trade distribution $9,000,000
Utility grant program for small businesses $600,000
Local Economic Stimulus Package $20,000,000
Total Value of City Response Plan Est @ $37,500,000
Plan Elements
Elements currently implemented
Maintain City Services
City services provided to the community are critical in nature and are unable to cease in functionality. A multitude of projects, already in the works, have to continue processing in spite of the pandemic that has affected the nation. In order to keep projects moving forward, and to Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
3 continue to serve the community in this critical capacity, City departments implemented immediate changes to comply with State and Federal directives. Personnel able to work from home were provided resources to do so. Meetings of large groups of staff and/or the public were eliminated, and preparations were made to provide access to public meetings without further endangering the community. As a result of the rapid response of staff, City services continue to function for the bulk of the community. In spite of the closure of City Hall and the diminished personnel in the Avtech and Corp Yard buildings, and the Transfer Station, critical City services such as police, fire, electric, solid waste removal, water and wastewater maintenance, and parks services still operate to the benefit of the community. Each position, whether working from home or in the office, is a critical component of maintaining the support of these services. Department directors monitor work product and load to ensure the City continues to function efficiently. The City is providing increased availability of cleaning supplies and sanitizing materials to offices and meeting spaces to maintain worker health.

To provide additional relief to residents and business owners, several programming decisions were implemented. Taking into consideration the varied economic status of Redding residents and businesses, the following steps were taken to provide some help financially.

Suspend Return to Owner fees
Effective March 23, 2020, Haven Humane Society suspended the charging of return to owner fees for animals impounded for running at large. A small portion of the fee is typically returned to the City to recoup costs of providing animal regulation services for the community. The total cost is expected to be less than $200 for the City. This allows Haven to reduce the number of animals left in the shelter while it is being operated at minimum capacity, and it is a benefit for community members who are unable to make the payment at this time.

Suspend Late Fees and Interest on City Payments
The City has initiated the suspension of late fees and penalties for payments and all General Accounts Receivable for items like hangar rents and imposed fines. This is made possible through individual review of accounts as payments are submitted and the reporting is analyzed. Both systems are housed in the legacy system so adjustments are applied manually to individual accounts. The $35 returned check and returned ACH payment fees have been suspended as well. Returned check and ACH fees are charged on an individual basis, and returned items are reported from the City’s banking system daily. When applicable, the returned item amount with the additional fee are typically charged back to established accounts. The fee will be eliminated from these charge backs.

The current plan is to suspend penalties and interest for receivables due in March and April 2020, which would include payments due in April and May. Based on last year’s activities, it is estimated that the loss of revenue to the general fund from the suspensions will be $55,000. The suspension of the returned check and ACH fees is estimated to be $5,000 for the same time period. If extended an additional month through the end of the fiscal year (June 30, 2020), the savings to the community equates to an estimated $60,000 which will result in an equal amount of lost revenue for the City.

Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
4 Suspend Utility Shut-Off
Effective March 18, 2020, the City of Redding Utilities Customer Service suspended the practice of utility shut-offs due to non-payment. Each month, under normal circumstances, approximately 220 utility accounts are disconnected after failure to pay for utility service received over the previous 60 days. Typically, 75 percent of these customers pay their past due amount and have their utilities reconnected within two weeks. With the Covid-19 pandemic and the anticipated increase in the number of utility customers having difficulty keeping up with all of their monthly expenses, it was decided that loss of utility service should not contribute to the stress and anxiety already experienced. Once the pandemic has passed, the Customer Services division will work with customers using various tools to bring the accounts into good standing. It is known that this effort will result in a temporary increase in accounts receivable and decreased cash flow for all utilities – resulting in an equal amount of temporary financial relief to residents of the City of Redding. This measure may result in an increase in bad debt expense, however, additional proposed measures, listed later in this report, could assist in reducing bad debt expense.

Furthermore, bad debt would be sent to a collection agency with a recovery rate of approximately 30 percent.

Suspend Utility Late Fees
Like shut-offs, late fees for utility payments have been suspended. Late fees, historically, amount to $1.7 million per year. While late fee collections are not always linear, it is a close approximation that the suspension will save customers in excess of $425,000 due to the high potential that there will be an increase in late payments. Late fees are an administrative penalty, and therefore, are deposited in the General Fund. If it is assumed that there will be no attempt to collect the past-due late fees, the General Fund will miss revenue projections in this category by at least $425,000.

Distribution of $50 to REU Account Holders
The City Council approved the distribution of excess reserves to be credited to every Redding Electric Utility customer in December 2019 in the amount of $50 per account. The funding source for the distribution is the Greenhouse Gas Allowance Auction Proceeds (also referred to as GHG or Cap and Trade), in an amount equal to about $2.2 million, and will be accomplished via a bill credit.

Pending the City Council’s approval
The following programming ideas were developed to provide additional options to provide financial relief to residents and businesses. These plan elements vary in how they target a diverse set of community members. Reaching as much of the community as possible is crucial for Redding to solidify its economic foundation. These proposals require the City Council’s approval to proceed. Some of the following items can be implemented immediately, while others will need to be further developed and brought back to the Council for further direction.

Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
5 Deferral of Transient Occupancy Tax
Defer payment of TOT from hotel and motel business until August 1, 2020 (payment due August 19, 2020). This deferral would be interest free and full payback would be made by November 1, 2020. The TOT deferral program could provide for much need cash flow for the Hotel and Motel industry by allowing an estimated $250,000 to remain with the business for operating expense. This program would be limited to Hotels/Motels with Business Licenses of 65-40-1 or 65-50-1.

Modify Existing CARES Program Guidelines
Community Assistance for Redding Electric Services (CARES) provides up to $300 of emergency assistance for the electric portion of bills for City of Redding utility customers. The intent of the CARES program is to help customers who have suffered a temporary financial hardship and to bring their account to a current status. Customers are eligible for CARES assistance once every 12 months. This program is funded out of the Public Benefits charges included in each ratepayers’ bill. Staff recommends applying a $300 CARES credit to all residential customers enrolled in the Residential Energy Discount Program (REU’s low income program). This would provide $1.2 million of immediate utility cost relief to our lowest-income customers with an additional $600,000 of additional relief available to those who may apply due to becoming eligible due to impacts from covid-19. These funds would be replenished with the new budget year beginning on July 1, 2020. Should the Council choose to do this, staff recommends providing the Electric Utility Director authority to repeat this process, should the Stay at Home order continue through the summer, and also suspend the once-per-year limitation for applicants. This would have no impact on the Electric Utility’s financial metrics as defined in Council Policy 1414, as Public Benefit Programs are restricted.

Modify Utilities Amortization Program Guidelines
The City of Redding Utilities Customer Service provides amortization for residential customer bills that are past due. This allows customers to “catch-up” on their bill for up to 12 months by amortizing the past-due balance. Staff recommends temporarily expanding this to commercial customers and temporarily extending the amortization for a period of up to 24 months, which would essentially provide a zero percent loan to customers that are past-due and having trouble paying their bill. In addition, this would allow commercial customers who receive Small Business Administration Loans to focus on other essential costs. This would have a temporary impact on City of Redding Utilities, as cash would not be received for up to two years. The risk to the utilities would be any eventual non-performance of these loans; non-performance would mean not paying the full amortization over the 24-month period. Therefore, staff recommends establishing an “eligibility criteria” that the customer must have not been disconnected for nonpayment of utilities in the previous year to be automatically approved for the amortization.

Customers not eligible for automatic amortization may still request it and approval will be granted on a case by case basis. Should the Council choose to do this, Staff recommends providing the Electric Utility Director administrative authority to modify program elements as necessary. As this could affect water, wastewater, and solid waste utilities, the Public Works Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
6 Director would collaborate in these decisions. This plan element will potentially provide millions of dollars in available cash flow for residents and businesses.

Refund City of Redding Utilities Deposits
Staff recommends returning all customer deposits held by Utilities Customer Services. This would return approximately $3.4 million to customers, including approximately $600,000 to commercial customers. The City holds utility deposits on customer accounts that present a higher credit risk to the utilities. By returning deposits, the City is returning monies to customers most in need. This would have no immediate impact on the Electric Utility’s financial metrics as defined in Council Policy 1414 as customer deposits are not included in unrestricted reserves for the purpose of calculating days of cash on hand. The risk to the utilities would be future bad debt accruals of non-payment of utilities by customers who have demonstrated difficulty paying bills.

However, this bad debt would be sent to a collection agency with a recovery rate of approximately 30 percent. Should the Council choose to do this, Staff recommends providing the Electric Utility Director authority to modify administrative processes for billing future utility deposits as defined in City Council Policy 1404. The deposit requirement will be reinstated at an unknown time in the future.

Additional Cap and Trade Distribution
Staff recommends a $200 credit on Electric utility bills to all customers out of Cap and Trade auction proceeds, which is similar to the $50 refund recently approved by Council. This would provide an additional $9 million in rebates to electric utility customers, bringing the total rebate amount, including the Council’s action on March 26, 2020, to approximately $11 million. To fund this program, the Council would need to allocate the balance of current year Cap and Trade revenues and cancel two Council-approved programs that have yet to launch: Wildfire Mitigation and Building Electrification. Wildfire Mitigation has yet to start due to the California Air Resources Board not providing a quantification methodology for reduced greenhouse gasses achieved through fuels reduction, thus the Cap and Trade funds are not available for this purpose. Building Electrification has yet to start due to staffing limitations. This would have no impact on the Electric Utility’s financial metrics as defined in Council Policy 1414 as Cap and Trade revenues are restricted.

Utility Grant Program for Small Businesses
As an entitlement city for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the City receives an annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant funding which is used for public service and public improvements. Due to the Federal CARES act the City received an additional allocation of $447,450. This funding, combined with unused funding from past projects, for a total of $600,000 provides the City an opportunity to provide funding toward eligible small business utility payments for those in the most need or are unable to receive Federal assistance or grants. If approved, staff will present the program and the amount available as part of the required public hearing to approve the use of the funding.

Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update) City of Redding Economic Response Plan – April 2020
7 Local Economic Stimulus Package
The Local Economic Stimulus Package is composed of multi-departmental projects intended to result in a combination of benefits to the City. In its infancy, this was a mass project designed to create an energy savings with each completed project. The City, however, has multiple deferred maintenance projects that must be completed to maintain the infrastructure stability of its assets.

Staff developed the following plan in a response to a need to merge the energy savings needs of the City with its deferred maintenance needs and infuse much needed capital into the local economy.

The projects in this package were specifically chosen as critical needs either in the realm of energy savings, which qualifies the project to be paid for through GHG auction proceeds, or for its contribution to eliminating the deferred maintenance needs of the City. A combination of GHG funding, utility reserves, municipal bond, and energy cost savings would be used to fund the package with little or no net budgetary impact to the General Fund. The total value of the economic stimulus package is estimated at approximately $20 million. Approximately $9.5 million of GHG money could be allocated for the completion of the projects that realize an energy savings for the City. The energy savings over time for the General Fund could be used to fund the deferred maintenance needs.

Several of the anticipated projects such as the work at various fire stations and lighting upgrades would be started immediately and put out to bid as soon as possible. Other projects, such as the replacement of the heating and air conditioning system at the Civic Auditorium will need to be analyzed further. The intent is to move quickly to infuse available GHG funds and provide economic benefit for the community.

The calculated energy savings from the energy savings projects could be used to secure bond funding to accelerate up to another $10 million in local projects including improvements to the Redding Aquatic Center, park facilities, required building maintenance, and other amenities.

Staff will return to the City Council with a full project list and borrowing options should the City Council provide direction to do so.

Completion of projects totaling up to $20 million is quite a large endeavor. However, the plan would be to bid multiple smaller projects to provide the best opportunity for local contractors to participate in the process, and thereby providing the local economy a direct opportunity to see quick and significant economic benefit in jobs and business activity. According to multipliers provided by the Shasta County Economic Development Corporation, the City of Redding would see a direct benefit equal to 328 jobs and $30 million of economic impact.

Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: 04-21-20 Staff Report (available online) (4.11(i)--COVID Economic Stimulus Package Projects Update)

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Authorize the following actions relative to capital project execution at City of Redding (City) Airports:
(1) Adopt Resolution authorizing the filing of three grant applications with the Federal Aviation Administration for Airport Improvement Program funding for the following projects: (a) Airport Master Plan Update and Airport Master Drainage Plan at Redding Municipal Airport; (b) Runway and Taxiway Connector Pavement Preservation and Magnetic Variations (MAGVAR) Updates Project at Benton Airpark; and (c) authorizing a subsequent application for California Department of Transportation Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant funds for the Runway and Taxiway Connector Pavement Preservation and MAGVAR Updates Project at Benton Airpark; (2) Adopt Resolution approving and adopting the 28th Amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 2021-078 appropriating an additional $2,208,660 to the City’s Airport Fund; and
(3) Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute grant applications, submit all subsequent documentation necessary to obtain grant funds for the projects, and appropriate all grant funds received to the Airport Fund in accordance with the Airports Capital Improvement Plan.

Fiscal Impact
The proposed request includes projects at both Redding Municipal Airport (RDD) and Benton Airpark (Benton) across multiple fiscal years at varying amounts and times for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant reimbursement. The local match requirements and sources vary depending on project location; Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) are eligible to use for RDD projects while Airport Funds and State grant funds can be utilized to fulfill match grant requirements at Benton, as noted below.

MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022
ITEM NO. 4.11(j)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected] [email protected]
SUBJECT: 4.1(j)--Authorize Fiscal Year 2022 Federal Aviation Administration Grant Applications for Improvements at Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark and Adopt Resolution Appropriating Funds
Chuck Aukland, Public
Works Director
Packet Pg. 883
Report to Redding City Council February 10, 2022
Re: 4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark Page 2
Airport Master Plan Update Project – $1,161,907
This RDD project will be included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 grant cycle and could be funded by the FAA AIP grant at 90.66 percent of the total cost, amounting to $1,053,385. This project will require a local match of $108,522 and will be fully reimbursed through PFCs.

Drainage Master Plan Improvements Project – $556,751
This RDD project will be included in the FY 2023-24 grant cycle and could be funded by a FAA AIP grant at 90.66 percent of the total cost, equating to $504,751. The study will need to be initially funded by the City, but in December of FY 2023-24, the City could submit a grant application to be reimbursed at 90.66 percent, lowering the local cost to $52,000 which will be reimbursed through PFCs. Though the project has been confirmed as eligible under the AIP Program by the FAA, the City of Redding is not able to apply for this grant until FY 2023-24 because of FAA funding constraints and expected availability of funds. The Airport is requesting grant approval now in preparation to submit the AIP application in FY 2023-24, or earlier if the FAA funding comes available.

Runway and Taxiway Connector Pavement Preservation and Magnetic Variations (MAGVAR) Updates Project - $490,000
This Benton project will be included in the FY 2021-22 grant cycle at a total cost of $490,000, and could be funded by the FAA AIP at 90 percent of the total cost, equating to $441,000. All projects at Benton can be matched in part by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant program at five percent of the FAA awarded grant amount; the maximum amount of the award would be $22,050. PFCs cannot be used for projects at General Aviation Airports, so the balance of $26,950 would likely come from the Airport Enterprise Fund. It is important to note that approval from the City Council (Council) now is a critical step to releasing this project for bidding and providing a certified bid tabulation to the FAA before its deadline of April 11, 2022, which is noted in the Federal Register.

Alternative Action
The Council could choose to not adopt the resolution authorizing the filing of the aforementioned grant applications with the FAA for AIP funding at the Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark, or the application for Caltrans Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant funds for Benton Airport. Alternatively, the Council could choose to not adopt the resolution necessary to move forward with the planned capital projects at the airports. Such actions may jeopardize future FAA funding in the following fiscal years and delay all identified projects by at least a year until alternative funding sources could be identified.

Background/Analysis
The following projects as depicted in the FAA approved Airport Capital Improvement Program are ready for execution and require approval for grant application and budget appropriation to proceed:

Packet Pg. 884
Report to Redding City Council February 10, 2022
Re: 4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark Page 3
Airport Master Plan Update Project
An Airport Master Plan (AMP) is a comprehensive study of an airport and usually describes the short, medium, and long-term development plans to meet future aviation demand. These plans are generally required by the FAA to be completed every 10 years. In order to keep up with the anticipated air service expansion at RDD, infrastructure must be planned, developed, approved by the FAA, and maintained. Based on the amount of development needed over the next five years, as incorporated in the Airports Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the FAA recommended the Airport update its master plan document. The Airport Master Plan Update will establish the goals and forecasts of the airport over the next decade and develop a framework for growth. The objective of the Master Plan is to provide the City with guidance for future expansion which will satisfy aviation demands, correct airport layout and design deficiencies, and be compatible with the environment. This plan will also have consideration for projects that could be pursued by the adjoining United States Forest Service air tanker base. Coordination between the City, the FAA, the Consultant (Coffman Associates), and other airport stakeholders will be essential to bringing together all facts and data relevant to completing the update and to developing a mutual agreement regarding future development at the airport.

The master plan update is directly tied to the Strategic Plan for RDD which is currently underway and anticipated to be complete by August 2022. The Strategic Plan will verify forecasting of air service demand. The Authorization of Services for this update will follow for the Council’s approval at a later meeting once the Independent Fee Evaluation is complete and all FAA requirements are satisfied.

Airport Master Drainage Project
The recently completed Preliminary Design Concept Study Project revealed very flat conditions and lack of grade and irregularities within the Runway Safety Area (RSA) which extends beyond either side of the Primary Runway (RWY 16-34) at RDD. RDD is required to maintain proper drainage within these safety areas for a distance of 250 feet on both the east and west sides of the runway centerline. Runway safety design standards require a 0.5 percent to 3.0 percent downgrade to prevent excessive damage in the event a plane were to run off of the pavement into the RSA as a result of an unplanned exit off the runway pavement in an emergency. As required by the FAA, the airport must request funding to resolve the deficient Runway Safety Areas and it places emphasis on these projects when completed prior to other lower priority-rated projects. In order to prepare the scope for the Runway Safety Area Rehabilitation Project that must be accomplished in Fiscal Year 2023-24, the Master Drainage Project must be administered first to evaluate current conditions and provide floodplain analysis.

Runway and Taxiway Connector Pavement Preservation and Magnetic Variations (MAGVAR) Updates Project
Magnetic declination, sometimes called Magnetic Variation or “MAGVAR”, is the angle between magnetic north and true north. This angle is constantly changing and shifting magnetic fields which affects the airport and airline operations and causes runway identifiers to change over time. Due to MAGVAR, the runway designator (numerals) will be changing at Benton Airpark. All airfield signage referencing the runways will also need to be updated accordingly.

This project will also include signage modifications which are required in order to meet FAA standards (which are updated from time to time).

Packet Pg. 885
Report to Redding City Council February 10, 2022
Re: 4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark Page 4
Additionally, according to the Benton Airport Pavement Management System (APMS) update completed in April 2019, the last runway reconstruction project at Benton occurred in 2012. The Runway Pavement Condition Index (PCI) value has been calculated to be 88. Though noted to be in a fair condition, the runway numbers must be repainted and adjusted for MAGVAR and a rehabilitation project could easily coincide with the MAGVAR update to extend the useful life of the pavement. The scope of work for administration, inspection, and testing is attached for reference. Staff will return to the Council for authorization to award the project following receipt of competitive bids.

The Resolution authorizing submittal has been approved as to form by the City Attorney.

Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• This agenda item is a routine operation item.

Attachments
Budget Resolution
AIP Resolution
Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) Construction Administration Scope of Services (available online) RDD Airport Drainage Study Scope Final Rev 1_Complete (available online) Federal Register (available online)
Benton ACIP FY2022 - FY2027 Feb. 2022 (available online) RDD ACIP FY2022 - FY 2027 Feb. 2022 (available online)
Packet Pg. 886
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF REDDING APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 28TH AMENDMENT TO CITY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 2021-078
APPROPRIATING $2,208,660 FOR THE AIPORT MASTER PLAN UPDATE, AIRPORT

MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN, AND RUNWAY AND TAXIWAY CONNECTOR

PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND MAGNETIC VARIATION UPDATES PROJECT (CONSTRUCTION) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING THAT Budget Resolution No. 2021-078 be and is hereby amended as follows:

FUND DIVISION DESCRIPTION INCREASE DECREASE
134
134
821
824
Redding Municipal Airport
Benton Airport Operations
$1,718,660
$490,000
THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustments by this Resolution are as follows:

USE SOURCE

OF FUNDS OF FUNDS
Increase (Decrease) Beginning Balance
134-824-01-0001-01 Beginning Balance $ 26,950
Increase (Decrease) Revenue
134-821-6-1170-01 Passenger Facility Charges 160,520
134-821-6-2650-70 Federal Grant - Capital - Transportation 1,558,140 134-824-6-2650-70 Federal Grant - Capital - Transportation 441,000 134-824-6-1200-70 State Grant - Capital - Transportation 22,050 Increase Expenditures
134-821-4582-02 Airport Master Plan Update $ 1,161,910
134-821-4582-03 Drainage Master Plan Improvements 556,750 134-824-4582-04 Slurry RW 15-33 Magvar Construction 490,000 Total $ 2,208,660 $ 2,208,660
THAT the purpose is to appropriate $2,208,660 for the Airport Master Plan Update, Airport Master Drainage Plan, and Runway and Taxiway Connector Pavement Preservation and Magnetic Variation Updates Project (Construction) for fiscal year 2021-22.

Packet Pg. 887 Attachment: Budget Resolution (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the 15th day of February, 2022, and was duly adopted at said meeting by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

KRISTEN SCHREDER, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVAL:

PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 888 Attachment: Budget Resolution (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING

AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF THREE GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR

AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (AIP) GRANT MONIES TO

ACCOMPLISH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS AT
REDDING MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND BENTON AIRPARK;

AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF ONE APPLICATION FOR

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRPORT
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MATCHING GRANT FUNDS; AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE

THE APPLICATION AND ALL SUBSEQUENT DOCUMENTATION

NECESSARY TO OBTAIN FAA GRANT MONIES AND MATCHING

FUNDS FROM CALTRANS AND APPRORIATE THE FUNDING TO THE

AIRPORT FUND
WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) District Office has recommended that applications for unencumbered Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Entitlement Grand Funds be submitted; and WHEREAS, there is a significant need for the Airport Master Plan Update and the Drainage Master Plan Improvements Study at Redding Municipal Airport, and the Runway 15-33 MAGVAR and TAXIWAY “A” Pavement Preservation Construction at Benton Airfield; and WHEREAS, staff recommends the City of Redding apply for FAA AIP Grants in the amount of $2,208,658 to accomplish the projects outlined in Exhibit A, a true copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Redding that a Federal AIP grant be acquired;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that for the projects outlined in Exhibit A, the City Council of the City of Redding hereby authorizes:

1. The filing of an application for an FAA Airport Improvement Program Entitlement Grant and Caltrans Airport Improvement Program Matching Grant for the Benton Airfield project; and

2. The City Manager, or his designee, on behalf of the City of Redding, to execute the application to obtain the necessary FAA funding to complete the project identified in Exhibit A for Redding Municipal Airport, including the subsequent Acceptance of the Grant Offer, if awarded, and to appropriate all funds obtained for these projects to the Airport Fund; and

3. The City Clerk to attest the signature of the City Manager, or designee, and to impress the official seals of the City of Redding on the aforesaid documentation, when appropriate.

Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: AIP Resolution (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the 15 th day of February, 2022, by the
following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
____________________________________
KRISTEN SCHREDER, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVED:
_______________________________ ____________________________________ PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: AIP Resolution (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark)

EXHIBIT A
PROJECT LOCATION FAA PFC’s STATE AIRPORTS TOTAL
Airport
Master Plan
Update
Redding
Municipal
$1,053,385 $108,522 $0 $0 $1,161,907
Drainage
Master Plan
Update
Redding
Municipal
$504,751 $52,000 $0 $0 $556,751
Runway 15-
33 MAGVAR
and Taxiway
“A”
Pavement
Preservation
Benton
Airfield
$441,000 $0 $22,050 $26,950 $490,000
Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: AIP Resolution (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark) Coffman Associates A‐1 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
EXHIBIT A ‐ SCOPE OF SERVICES

REDDING MUNICIPAL AIRPORT (RDD)

REDDING, CALIFORNIA

AIRPORT MASTER PLAN

INTRODUCTION
This Airport Master Plan Scope of Services for Redding Municipal Airport (RDD) is being prepared prior to initiation of the study, to establish the goals of the project and framework from which all parties to the project may participate. The objective of the Master Plan is to provide the Sponsor (City of Redding) with guidance for future development which will satisfy aviation demands and be compatible with the environment. Coordination between the Sponsor, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Consultant (Coffman Associates) and other parties with an interest in the airport will be essential to bringing together all facts and data relevant to the project and to developing a mutual agreement regarding future development at the airport. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of key airport stakeholders will be established for thestudy.

Required and generalized master planning objectives in this Scope will include:
• To research factors likely to affect air transportation demand segments in the City of Redding and regional area over the next twenty (20) years including the development of forecasts for passenger enplanements, operations (commercial service, air taxi, general aviation, and military), and based aircraft.
• To determine projected needs of airport users for the next twenty (20) years, taking into consideration recent revisions to FAA design standards and the airport’s conformance requirements, commercial passenger and cargo trends, and the impact of general aviation fleet transitions on design standards.
• A terminal building analysis to determine the future needs of the structure based on the commercial enplanement and operations forecasts.   The result will be a determination of the adequacy of the existing facility and alternatives to address any future areas of deficiency. • To recommend improvements which will enhance the airports’ ability to satisfy future aviation needs taking into consideration the potential for increased commercial passenger traffic and general aviation needs.
• To analyze the airfield system to determine the existing and ultimate runway lengths required to satisfy the airport’s critical aircraft(s). This analysis will include future improvements necessary to the airfield system (i.e., runway configuration) to aid in supporting forecast demand.

Also,the analysis will considerthe potential for closure and removal of any airfield pavement(s) not Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐2 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
deemed necessary and/or justified for future capital expenditures. • To produce accurate base maps of existing and proposed facilities and updated Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawings consistent with the FAA’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) No. 2.00.

Digital Geographic Information System(GlS) data will be submitted into FAA’s AirportInformationData Portal(ADIP)system as an “airspace evaluation”. This task will conform to the Survey Requirements Matrix contained in FAA AC 150/5300‐18B.  The data will be submitted to the FAA AGIS system per the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) column of Table 2‐1.
• To review future use and zoning of airport property and approaches to each runway for future protection. This will involve the development of new noise exposure contours. • Landside development options to maximize revenue streams, including both aviation and non‐aviation related activities.
• To establish a schedule of development priorities and a program for improvements proposed in the Master Plan, consistent with the FAA’s capital improvement program planning. • Consider sustainability efforts, specifically waste and recycling improvements as part of FAA’s updated standards.  An energy audit assessment of airport‐owned buildings will also be conducted to identify and quantify potential energy savings measures.

FAA REVIEW OF AIRPORT MASTER PLANS
The FAA plays a substantial role in reviewing and evaluating airport master plans for which they have provided financial assistance.  According to FAA AC 150/5070‐6B, Airport Master Plans, “the recommendations contained in an airport master plan represent the views, policies and development plans of the airport sponsor and do not necessarily represent the views of the FAA.

Acceptance of the master plan by the FAA does not constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted in the plan, nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriate public law.

The FAA reviews all elements of the master plan to ensure that sound planning techniques have been applied.   However, the FAA only approves the following elements of airport master plans:
• Forecasts of Demand
• Airport Layout Plan

SUMMARY OF PRIMARY GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
A variety of guidance documents are referenced for each element and task contained in thisscope ofservices.  Attachment A1 presents a summary table of the primary reference documents by task as outlined in this scope of work.

Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐3 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
ELEMENT 1 ‐ STUDY INITIATION ANDORGANIZATION
The purpose of this element is to allow for proper time to manage the project including the project website, project updates with the sponsor, team management, and overall QA/QC.

Task 1.1 Study Design
Description: ln accordance with Federal Aviation Administration guidelines for the preparation of master plans contained in Advisory Circulars 150/5070−6B, Airport Master Plans, and 150/5300−13‐A, Change 1, Airport Design, prepare an outline of the basic elements of the master planning work effort. Identify respective individual work tasks which will be necessary to meet both the requirements set by the FAA and the sponsor for each element of the Master Plan work scope. Prepare detailed descriptions of each individual work task which describe the specific work effort involved and identify the result or product of the work effort.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Prepare work scope and budget.

Sponsor:   Review work scope and budget.

Product:   Work Scope and Budget.

Expenses:     None.

Task 1.2 Establish Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and Conduct TAC Kickoff Meeting Description: Potential members will be identified and asked to serve on a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) forthe Master Plan. The TAC will be composed of airportstakeholders which may include: a) representatives of FAA as well as other local, regional, state, or federal agencies; b) airport board, users, and tenants; and c) local community representatives. The TAC, which is a non‐voting body, will advise the Consultant on the content and recommendations of the Master Plan study through meetings and review of draft working papers.  The TAC will not exceed fifteen (15) members.

The initial, or kickoff meeting, of the TAC will be undertaken during the initial inventory trip by the Consultant.  The Consultant will prepare meeting materials and lead TAC discussion to flesh out key goals and objectives for the study.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Prepare meeting material for the TAC and conduct kickoff meeting.

Sponsor:   Distribute invitations and initiation materials to TAC and provide meeting room.

Product: Conduct TAC kickoff meeting and make all meeting materials available on the project website.  If necessary, a virtual option will be made available for the TAC meeting.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for two (2) nights, rental car for three (3 days), and per diem for three (3) days.

Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐4 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Task 1.3 Develop Graphic Schema and Project Website
Description: Develop a customized uniform graphic schema for all presentation materials.   The graphic schema will then be used for cover art, chapter headers and footers, exhibits, display boards and powerpoint presentations and any ancillary material.   The graphic schema will be used throughout the process to provide a uniform and professional feel to all materials.

Various project materials will be hosted on a custom project specific website developed by the Consultant to allow public access to project materials.  During the planning process, draft chapters, TAC presentations and TAC handout materials will be available on the website.  The website will have a public involvement section which will include an FAQ section, notices of public information workshops, and a public comment section.  All comments will be reviewed by the project team and pertinent comments will be addressed within the Draft and Final Master Plan documents.  The project website will be hosted by the Consultant and a link will be available on the sponsor website.

The project website will be available for the duration of the project.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Develop project specific website.  Host the project materials on a project specific website.

Sponsor:   Review and provide comment.

Product: Website access to project materials.  Encourage use of the website to comment on the draft materials during the planning process.

Expenses:   None
ELEMENT 2 ‐ INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
The purpose of this study element is to assemble and organize relevant information and data pertaining to the Redding Municipal Airport and the surrounding area. A series of inventory efforts are necessary to collect and organize a variety of specific historical, technical, legal, financial, and planning data as described in the following tasks.

Task 2.1    Introduction Chapter
Description:  Develop a draft introduction chapter which clearly states the purpose and need for the Master Plan project.  It will include goals and objectives for the project, baseline assumptions, elements included in the study, anticipated schedule, public involvement opportunities, and an initial SWOT analysis developed based on discussion during the kick‐off meeting.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Draft narrative and graphics for inclusion in the Introduction chapter.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:   Review and comment.

Product: Draft Introduction chapter.

Expenses: None.

Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐5 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Task 2.2   Obtain New Color Aerial Photography, Mapping, and FAA Airports‐GIS Aeronautical Survey
Description: The Consultant will assemble new digital electronic color aerial photography and new topographic/planimetric and obstruction mapping of the Airport and its environs in accordance with FAA Advisory Circulars 150/5300‐16B, General Guidance and Specifications for Aeronautical Surveys: Establishment of Geodetic Control and Submission to the National Geodetic Survey; 150/5300‐17C, Standards for Using Remote Sensing Technologies in Airport Surveys; and 150/5300‐18B, General Guidance And Specifications For Submission Of Aeronautical Surveys To NGS: Field Data Collection And Geographic Information System (GIS) Standards. Data will be collected for as required in 18B table 2‐1 (Survey Requirements Matrix) for the project type “Airport Layout Plan”.

Topographic and planimetric mapping will be collected to the limits of the subconsultantscope (see Exhibit B). Aerial photography of the airport including existing airport property, as well as the inner approach surface areas, will be obtained by the Consultant.  The digital color Ortho photography will be used for base mapping, exhibits and a deliverable to the airport.  The horizontal datum will be NAD83 and the vertical datum will be NAVD88.  The contour interval will be 2 feet.

Submit a Statement of Work, any additional required pre work plans and post collection reports to the Airport Surveying – GIS Program Manager via the Airports Data Information Portal (ADIP) website for review and approval. The airport survey will be tied to the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) according to AC 150/5300‐16B. The survey data collected during the project will be formatted to allow the data to be loaded directly into the FAA’s Airports GIS system via the FAA’s ADIP web portal.

Object data collection will be performed within the limits described in Exhibit B. These objects will be used to perform obstacle analysis for existing and future FAR Part 77 surfaces and Engineering Brief 99a surfaces. Obstacles for the surfaces in 150/5300‐18B will be collected by surface and submitted to the ADIP portal.

The object data points may be supplemented with other existing feature data sets including, but not limited to, the FAA Digital Obstacle File (DOF), the FCC Antenna Registry (ASR), and the NOAA Universal Data Delivery Format (UDDF). Additional feature data collection, such as a supplemental data collection flight, are not part of this scope.

Portions of Task 2.2 are to be sub‐contracted to a firm that specializes in AGIS surveys.  This scope of work is outlined in Exhibit B.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   AGIS survey and uploading of all AGIS required data to the FAA ADIP web portal.

Sponsor:      Initiate AGIS project via the FAA ADIP web portal and allow direct access to the consultant.  Facilitate airport access for ground survey crews.

Subconsultant: Martinez Geospatial will be responsible for collection and processing of data.

Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐6 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Product:   New digital color Ortho photography and topographic/planimetric and object collection for use in preparing base maps, airport layout plan, and airspace and inner approach surface drawings.  Survey data uploaded into FAA’s ADIP system.  Will meet the requirements of FAA ACs 150/5300‐16B, 17C, and 18B consistent with what is provided in Exhibit B (AGIS Scope of Work).

Expenses:   None.

Task 2.3 Inventory Airport Facilities
Description: Perform inventories of physical facilities and existing land uses within the present boundaries of the Redding Municipal Airport. These inventories will identify and describe existing facilities asto age, type, ownership, and condition, as well as changesto building conditions and usessince the completion ofthe last Master Plan, and will include, as a minimum,the following items.
• Airfield: Runways, taxiways, aprons, lighting and marking, navigational aids. • Terminal Area: Terminal building, access, and parking. • General Aviation Areas: Square footage of hangars, ramp areas. • Military use areas (as applicable): Ramp, access and parking. • Air cargo: Sort building, ramp, access, staging.
• FBO/Specialty Operators: Leased area, airfield facilities. • Support: Utilities, fire and rescue facilities (ARFF), fueling facilities, maintenance areas. • Other areas: Airport tenants including military facilities (as necessary). • Wildlife Hazards: summarize known wildlife issues.
• Additionalon−airportandoff−airportlanduses.
ln addition, all available plans, specifications, maps, photographs, drawings, and other data, including FAA Master Records (or other records maintained by the FAA), or other reports or studies considered to be relevant, will be obtained for possible use during the study.  This task includes an on‐site inventory trip to gather data, tour the airport facilities, and to conduct in‐ person interviews with airport staff and relevant airport tenants as necessary.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Conduct a complete inventory of the airport facilities to accumulate pertinent data including an on‐site tour of facilities and in‐person interviews with airport staff and airport tenants as necessary.

Sponsor: Provide the Consultant access to the airport property and airport records as necessary.

Product: Tabulated airport facilities inventory for input to later tasks, highlighting changed conditions since the last Master Plan was prepared.

Expenses: Trip for two Consultants to RDD for inventory and TAC kick‐off meeting included in Task 1.2.

Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐7 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Task 2.4 Inventory Commercial Airline, Air Traffic Activity, and Airspace Description: A detailed review of available information pertaining to air traffic and passenger activity at the Redding Municipal Airport will be performed for the past 20−year period. Data collection will include an inventory count of aircraft based at the Airport by aircraft type, enplaning and deplaning passenger data as reported to RDD, air cargo (as available) and fuel sales maintained by the Airport or fixed base operators. The information will be collected in various formatsfor forecasting purposes.

Air traffic activity data for the airport will be assembled and organized from various sources such as the FAA’s Traffic Flow Management System Count (TFMSC), FAA’s National Based Aircraft Inventory Program (www.basedaircraft.com), GCR’s Airport IQ, and other validated and acceptable sources per the FAA.  Relevant data on commercial, general aviation (private and corporate), air taxi, and military activity will be collected.  Data will be obtained from the Sponsor, the FAA Western‐Pacific Region San Francisco Airports District Office (ADO), and Fixed Base Operators (FBOs).   The assembled data will include, as available:
a) Historical operations, including local (touch‐and‐go) and itinerant operational splits. b) Based aircraft by type, as available.
c) Estimated use (by percentage) of each runway.

Review and perform inventories of airspace and air traffic procedures at the airport. Conduct interviews with airport officials, FAA representatives, pilots, and others as necessary or appropriate to develop a complete description of the existing airspace environment and current airport traffic procedures.  Basic inventory items will include:
a) Airport traffic patterns.
b) Approach and departure procedures.
c) Military airspace near the airport.
d)   National Parks/Wilderness Areas.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Assemble data.

Sponsor:    Assist Consultant in obtaining available airport records.

Product: Input to subsequent tasks.

Expenses:   None.

Task 2.5 Inventory Local Plans, Land Uses, and DemographicData Description: Obtain available information concerning local land use, economic development and environmental plans, and demographic or economic factors which are likely to have a significant impact on the demand for air transportation in the Lincoln air trade area as well as those factors that involve potential impact characteristics of the airport environs. Key information will include the area−wide composition, characteristics, distribution, and growth patterns of the following:
• Population
• Economic base (business, income, and employment)
Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐8 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
• Present and projected land uses
• Existing and planned surface transportation
• Long range transportation plan
• Zoning ordinance(s)
• Height and hazard ordinance/mitigation measures
Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Assemble data based on latest informationavailable.

Sponsor:   Assist in collection of data.

Product:   Input to later analysis.

Expenses:   None.

Task 2.6       Obtain Tabulated Wind Data and Create Wind Roses Description: The Consultant will obtain the most current ten years of wind data for Redding Municipal Airport from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ‐ National Climatic Center and/or on−airport weather reporting aids for use in preparing an updated wind rose for the airport layout plan.  Develop IFR, VFR, and All‐Weather wind roses.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:        Obtain tabulated wind data.

Sponsor:   Coordinate with the Consultant as necessary.

Product:   Tabulated wind data for use in preparing an updated wind rose.

Expenses:   None.

Task 2.7 Prepare Introduction/Inventory Working Paper
Description: A working paper will be developed which will provide up‐to‐date information in tabular, narrative, and graphic format.   This will include information on the airport facilities, applicable air traffic activity, access, overview of airspace, air traffic characteristics, and an operations data summary describing aircraft activity for use in subsequent analysis.   This task involves the use of existing data for the airport.  This includes an Introduction chapter.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDFs of the draft material.

Expenses:   None.

ELEMENT 3 – AVIATION DEMAND FORECASTS
This study element is intended to update the estimate of future levels of air traffic by quantity and by characteristics that will identify the demand that is projected on the Redding Municipal Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐9 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Airport and the local socioeconomic characteristics contributed by the local area. The following work tasks will be carried out as part of this element.

Task 3.1 Review Regional Aviation and Socioeconomic Forecasts Description: Review and analyze current local and regional socioeconomic forecasts obtained in the inventory element.  Similarly review the forecasts and assumptions of the aviation forecasts prepared by the FAA for its Terminal Area Forecasts.  The forecasts prepared for the last Master Plan will also be reviewed and analyzed.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Review all socioeconomic material pertaining to the study and the region.

Sponsor:   Assist in identifying potential sources of information and assist Consultant in obtaining identified socioeconomic material.

Product:   Forecasts of expected socioeconomic factors and aviation activity at Redding Municipal Airport and other regional airports.

Expenses:   None.

Task 3.2 Prepare Aviation Demand Forecasts
Description: Develop aviation demand forecasts using both simple and more complex methodologies (as necessary), taking into consideration forecasts from other sources such as the FAA.  Historical aviation activity statistics for the airport will be organized to evaluate airport peaking characteristics and fleet mix ratios.  The methodology used in this analysis will involve a variety of techniques that will factor in national transportation statistics, local socioeconomic factors, as well as the independent airport data.   Potential analysis techniques will include relatively simple correlation and graphical comparison, as well as more complex regression analysis.  The forecasts shall result in estimates of aviation demand for five, ten and twenty years including:
• Commercial Airlines Passenger and Cargo Projections
o Annual volume and mix of aircraft operations
o Passenger enplanements
o Air cargo (as applicable)
o Air taxi (related to scheduled or non‐scheduled operations having fewer than 60 passenger seats
• General Aviation Projections
o Based aircraft by aggregate and fleet mix
o Aircraft operations by aggregate, itinerant/local
o Other air taxi to include Part 135 and fractional ownership operations • Peaking characteristics for operations for use in demand capacity evaluations o Air Carrier
o General Aviation
Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐10 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
o Total airport
Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Prepare aviation demand forecasts for the 20−year planning horizon.

Sponsor:   Assist Consultant in obtaining available airport records.

Product:   Complete incremental forecasts for the years 2026, 2031, and 2041. These forecasts will be coordinated with the FAA (for their approval) to ensure that the study proceeds based on generally supported assumptions.

Expenses:   None.

Task 3.3   Identify Existing and Future Airport Design Critical Aircraft Description: Utilizing data provided by the airport and that obtained from FAA database resources, identify the current critical and future aircraft for the airport.  The aircraft identified will be the most demanding aircraft, or family of aircraft, conducting a minimum of 500 annual operations.

The analysis will include a projection of aircraft operations by runway design code (RDC) and airport reference code (ARC) to determine future planning design standards.

This analysis will outline the RDC for commercial airline and general aviation.   Moreover, the analysis will be considered for each of the airport’s two runways, as applicable, to determine sufficiency in later tasks.

Consultant:   Determine current critical aircraft and projection of future critical aircraft by RDC and ARC.

Sponsor:     Assist the Consultant in obtaining available airport records.

Product:   Determination of existing and future critical aircraft for airfield design.  This task will be coordinated with the FAA during the forecastreview and approval process.

Expenses:   None.

Task 3.4 Prepare Forecast Working Paper
Description: A working paper will be developed which will provide detailed results of the forecasting effort.  Since this data will become an important parameter for input into the remaining elements of this Study, it will be submitted to the FAA for review and approval before dependent tasks are finalized.  If the forecasts differ from the FAA’s Terminal Area Forecast by more than 10 percent in the five‐year period, or 15 percent in the 10‐year period, the forecasts may need to be revised and/or coordinated with other FAA offices.  At the FAA ADO’s discretion, the forecasts may need further coordination with FAA HQ. This task also includes time required to coordinate, make changes, and/or modify the forecasts based on FAA review, comment, and approval.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.  Complete FAA TAF worksheets.  Request FAA forecast review/approval.

Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐11 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of the draft material.

Expenses:   None.

Task 3.5 Conduct TAC Meeting No. 2 and Public Workshop No.1 Description: Meet with the TAC to present the draft material from Elements 1 and 2.  Lead discussion of the draft material and review the project schedule, progress, and subsequent work efforts.  This task will include holding an open−house style format public information workshop the evening of TACmeeting. The workshop will allow forinterested public entitiesto review project materials and interact with the Consultant.  Prepare graphic display and/or handout information necessary to adequately explain draft material to date.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Provide presentation material and necessary graphics for the meeting. Also provide documentation allowing for the sponsor to publish notice of public meeting.

Sponsor: Distribute meeting notices and arrange for meeting room.  Publication of the public meeting notice are a reimbursable expense for the Sponsor.

Product: Conduct second TAC meeting for Master Plan study and post all presentation material to the project website.  If necessary, a virtual option will be made available for the TAC meeting.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for two (2) nights, rental car for three (3 days), and per diem for three (3) days.

Ten (10) 36x24 foam core mounted display boards for the public information workshop.  FedEx (or similar) 2nd day delivery of the display boards.

ELEMENT 4 – FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
The purpose of this study element is to determine available capacities of various facilities at the Redding Municipal Airport, their conformance or non−conformance with FAA standards, and identify the facilities that will be needed to meet compliance requirements or projected demand over the next twenty years.

Task 4.1 Establish Physical PlanningCriteria
Description:  Identify physical facility planning criteria for use in assessing the adequacy of various airport facilities to meet forecast demands.   These criteria shall be based upon the latest FAA requirements and standards as they apply to the level of activity identified, new technology, and role of the airport.  These criteria shall include dimensional standards for safety including runway length, runway separation, height restrictions, etc.  In addition, these criteria shall include require‐ ments to maintain airspace/air traffic control including approach and runway protection zones, safety areas, and other general physical area requirements such as apron, terminal/operations, Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐12 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
access circulation and parking, hangars and services, administrative, ARFF, and other airportservice and support facilities.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop physical planning criteria.

Sponsor:   Review.

Product:   Detailed criteria for airport physical planning.

Expenses:   None.

Task 4.2 Determine Airfield Capacity and Delay
Description: Using the FAA’s airfield capacity/delay model, estimate current and future levels of airfield capacity (annual service volume) and delay for RDD. These analyses will be based on the existing airfield configuration, aviation demand forecasts, and an analysis of airspace capacity potentials and constraints, and will involve the investigation of management and operational procedures in order to optimize the use of the runways, taxiways, and aprons.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Estimate airfield capacity and delay utilizing FAA guidance.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product:   Detailed description the airport annual service volume for the current, 5, 10, and 20−year Ɵme frames.

Expenses:   None.

Task 4.3 Determine Terminal Building Capacity
Description:   Based on the forecasts for passenger enplanements and commercial aircraft operations, develop terminal building capacity needs by functional area.   The functional areas include arrival, departure, concessions, rental cars, and circulation needs.  The result of this analysis will indicate what terminal building elements need to be enhanced to accommodate both current and future need.   The analysis will also contemplate the possibility of a replacement terminal building, if justified.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Identify specific terminal building capacities and requirements.

Sponsor:     Provide technical drawing of the terminal building. Review and comment.

Product:     Detailed description of terminal building requirements necessary to support passenger demand through the year 2041.

Expenses:       None.

Task 4.4 Prepare Airfield Facility Requirements
Description: Identify physical facility planning criteria for evaluating the adequacy of the airside facilities to meet forecast demands and FAA conformance requirements.  These criteria shall be Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐13 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
based upon the latest FAA requirements and standards as they apply to the level of activity identified and the future role of the airport. Dimensional standards and runway length requirements based on FAA guidance will be examined and compared to existing facilities.  Airside facilities to be examined will include, but not be limited to the following.  Runways/taxiways (service volume, length, width, and configuration).  Runway/taxiway design standard conformance.
 Line‐of‐sight requirements (pavement grade).
 Airfield perimeter fencing.
 Airfield pavement strength (using best available data).  Airfield marking and lighting.
 Airfield navigational aids and weather observation equipment.  Airport traffic control tower needs (ATCT).
 Instrument approach procedures/visibility minimums.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Identify specific airside facility requirements.

Sponsor:     Review and comment.

Product:     Detailed description of facility requirements necessary for airside development to support forecast aviation demand through the year 2041.

Expenses:       None.

Task 4.5 Prepare Landside Facility Requirements
Description: Using information provided by the aviation planning criteria established under preceding tasks, develop a set of facility requirements addressing the landside facilities necessary to support the airfield and its related activity.   The following are included in the landside facility analysis:
 Airline Passenger Terminal Capacity and Requirements:   Based on the aviation demand forecasts(primarily enplanements), determine current and future terminal building capacity constraints by functional area (i.e., ticket counters, lobby, circulation, TSA security, hold room, gates, departure processing, apron area, arrivals processing, concessions, building systems, administration, and operations).
 Access and Circulation Capacity Requirements:  Includes analysis of airport entrance roads, terminal loop road, other airport access roads.
 Vehicle Parking Capacity and Requirements:  Determine vehicle parking needs for the short and long term to include public parking, employee parking, rental car ready/return/service, and administration parking.
 Air Cargo Capacity Requirements:  Analyze existing air cargo facilities on the airport for individual parameters that will limit their capacity and estimate the maximum capacity of each parameter. Based upon this information together with the forecasts of air cargo, develop an estimate of the type, size, and number of air cargo facilities that will be needed in the future, including apron, building, vehicle, and truck parking. This examination will include an evaluation of fleet mix changes that may be possible.

Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐14 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
 General Aviation Requirements:  Analyze the need for additional general aviation landside requirements including an estimate of new hangar space (square feet), aircraft parking apron and tie‐down space, FBO facilities, access and parking.  Support Requirements:  Analyze the adequacy of existing support facilities and establish projections of future needs.  Elements to be analyzed include fuel storage capacity, ARFF equipment and facilities, Snow Removal Equipment and facilities, airport maintenance facilities, revenue support infrastructure.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:      Identify specific landside area facility needs.

Sponsor:      Review.

Product:   Detailed description of facility requirements necessary for landside development to support forecast aviation demand through the 20‐year planning period.

Expenses:   None.

Task 4.6 Prepare Facility Requirements Working Paper
Description: A draft working paper will be developed which will provide detailed results of the facility requirements effort. The draft working paper will document assumptions and methodologies used in preparing facility requirements. Prepare narratives describing the assumptions and methodologies used in preparing the facility requirements.   Present facility requirement information in tabular and/or graphical format.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of the draft material.

Expenses:   None.

ELEMENT 5 ‐ AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
The purpose of this study element is to develop those airport development alternatives that appear most feasible and evaluate them to determine the most prudent and feasible alternative concept available for the airport.

Task 5.1 Establish Alternative Development Issues
Description: Based upon the results of the facility requirements necessary to meet projected demand, identify those issues which will impact the development of alternatives for the various functional areas of the airport. This task will provide insights into the potentials for and policies constraining the development of specific land uses within the existing or future airport boundaries, including those areas which are unconstrained and meet current functional potential, thereby requiring no additional development.

Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐15 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Establish alternative development issues.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product:   Alternative development issues.

Expenses:   None.

Task 5.2 Evaluate Potential AirfieldAlternatives
Description: The airfield facility requirements developed in the previous evaluations will be translated into a series of alternative plans for comparative evaluation in relation to the established planning criteria. The analysis will address a maximum of three possible airfield alternatives (in addition to the “do nothing”). The alternatives with greatest potential for meeting airside demand in the most prudent order will be evaluated.   This analysis will focus on the runway/taxiway system.  Numerous graphic exhibits will be produced to adequately show each alternative.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:     Development of airfield development alternatives.

Sponsor:   Review.

Product: A series of development options, each of which will attempt to meet the forecast airfield facilitydemands as well as FAA airfield criteria.

Expenses:   None.

Task 5.3 Terminal Building Alternatives
Description:  The terminal alternatives analysis will review the current and long‐term plans for the terminal building in relation to the updated forecasts and facility requirements from this study.  If growth levels over the planning period show that the terminal building needs to be expanded, up to three expansion alternatives will be shown.  These alternatives will address any functional area inadequacies (current and future) identified in Element 4 related to the terminal building.  This analysis will be conducted consistent with FAA AC 150/5070‐6B, Airport Master Plans, and FAA AC 150/5360‐13A, Airport Terminal Planning.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:     Review current and long‐range terminal plans, identify and evaluate up to three (3) alternatives addressing remaining terminal development issues.

Sponsor:     Review and comment with input for refinements and preferences.  Provide detailed schematic drawing of the existing terminal building.

Product:     A series of airline terminal improvement alternatives and documented comparative evaluation.

Expenses:   None.

Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐16 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Task 5.4 Evaluate Potential Landside Alternatives
Description: Based on the facility requirements determined under the previous element, formulate preliminary development alternatives. These alternatives will be based on concepts for development within airport boundaries which show all necessary development during the planning period and beyond.  Thistask will be conducted simultaneously with other tasksin this element and result in a series of overall development options for the airport.

Specific landside alternative issues to examine will include:
 Commercial air cargo facility development options.
 General aviation development opportunities.
 Support facility improvements to meet the demand outlined in Element 4.  Nonaviation land development options for potential land use release Responsibilities:

Consultant:     Develop up to three (3) landside development options, one being the “no‐ build” concept alternative.

Sponsor:     Review.

Product:   A series of landside alternatives which fulfill the facility requirementsto meet forecast demand levels.

Expenses:   None.

Task 5.5 Prepare Alternatives Working Paper
Description: A working paper describing the various airside and landside development alternatives will be prepared for submission to the TAC for review and comment.  The working paper will detail the analysis involved in the assessment of the alternatives and outline the advantages and disadvantages of each to enable the logical and systematic evaluation of each alternative concept.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of draft material.

Expenses:   None
Task 5.6 Conduct TAC Meeting No. 3 and Pubic Workshop No.2 Description: Prepare graphic display and/or handout information necessary to adequately explain the draft material. Meet with the TAC to review the draft material, as well as to review the project schedule, progress, and subsequent work efforts.   This task will include holding an open−house style format public informationworkshop the evening of TACmeeting. Theworkshop will allow forinterested public entitiesto review project materials and interact with the consultant.

Responsibilities:

Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐17 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Consultant: Provide presentation material and necessary graphics for the meeting.  Also provide documentation allowing for the sponsor to publish notice of public meeting.

Sponsor:   Distribute meeting notices and arrange for meeting room.

Product: Conduct second TAC meeting for Master Plan study and post all presentation material to the project website.  If necessary, a virtual option will be made available for the TAC meeting.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for two (2) nights, rental car for three (3 days), and per diem for three (3) days.

Eight (8) 36x24 foam core mounted display boards for the public information workshop.  FedEx (or similar) 2nd day delivery of the display boards.

ELEMENT 6 – RECOMMENDED MASTER PLAN CONCEPT AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The purpose of this study element is to present a single consolidated Master Plan concept that combines both airside and landside recommendations.  The recommended concept may be one of the airside and landside alternatives studied in the alternatives section or, more likely, it will be a composite utilizing the best elements of each.  A 20‐year capital improvement programs identifies potential projects is also presented.

Task 6.1 Recommended Master Plan Concept
Description: Following input from airport administration, the TAC, and the public on the alternatives prepared in the previous element, present a detailed comparative evaluation and the supporting rationale to sufficiently describe the single recommended program for development and use of airport facilities.   The recommendation for the most prudent and feasible Master Plan concept will become the basis for the final refinement of development costs and scheduling.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:      Develop a recommended Master Plan concept.

Sponsor:     Review.

Product:      A detailed graphic that reflects the recommended Master Plan concept.

Expenses:   None.

Task 6.2 On‐Airport Land Use Classification
Description: Based upon the recommended concept presented in Task 6.1, an on‐airport land use plan will be developed in graphic and narrative form.  The on‐airport land use plan will first identify all airport property needed now and in the future for aeronautical purposes.  Any remaining land will be identified as either aeronautical reserve or available for non‐aeronautical revenue producing purposes.

Responsibilities:

Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐18 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Consultant:      Develop an on‐airport land use plan.

Sponsor:     Review.

Product:      A detailed graphic that reflects the recommended on‐airport land uses.

Expenses:   None.

Task 6.3 Prepare Capital Program
Description: Develop a recommended 20−year airport capital improvement program for Redding Municipal Airport. The airport capital improvement program will identify individual projects for each year through the first five years of the plan, then prioritize projects through the intermediate (6−10 year) and long term (11−20 year) periods.  The list of projects will be focused on those that are eligible for FAA grant funding through the Airport Improvement Program.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:          Develop a detailed capital program and list of projects to be considered over the next 20‐years.

Sponsor:   Provide review and input.

Product:   Capital program for the 20−year planning period.

Expenses:   None.

Task 6.4 CIP Cost Estimates
Description: Develop cost estimates (current dollars) for each project based on recent project costs in the region.  This task will be undertaken by the current airport engineer who is a subconsultant on this project.  The cost estimates are to be planning level and subject to refinement when the project becomes ripe for implementation.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Provide CIP list to subconsultant and review final cost estimates.

Subconsultant: Cost estimates to be developed by the current airport consulting engineer, Mead and Hunt.

Sponsor:   Review and provide input.

Product:   Detailed cost estimates for each project in the CIP.

Expenses:     None.

Task 6.5 Prepare CIP Development Schedule
Description: Prepare the airport development schedules for the recommended Master Plan concept for Redding Municipal Airport.   Prioritize projects based on FAA priorities (i.e. safety), airport priorities, and anticipated grant funding. Itemsthat are eligible for funding under the Airport Improvement Program will be identified in accordance with FAA Order 5100.38D, Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Handbook.

Responsibilities:

Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐19 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Consultant:   Prepare an airport development schedule and estimated costs.

Sponsor:   Review.

Product:   Development schedules and cost for the improvements proposed as a part of the selected Master Plan concepts.

Expenses:     None.

Task 6.6 Prepare Funding Source Outline and Implementation Plan Description: Common sources of funding for implementation of the capital projects identified in the study will be discussed.  The primary funding source will be through FAA AIP.  Other sources including state grants and local sources will be presented.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:          Identify the primary funding sources for capital improvements.

Sponsor:   Provide review and input.

Product:   A guidance document for airport management to follow when considering financing of capital projects.

Expenses:   None.

Task 6.7   Prepare Master Plan Concept, CIP, and Implementation Plan Working Paper Description: Prepare a detailed CIP and financial plan working paper which outlines the overall airport capital improvement program for the selected airport development alternative.  Organize narrative and graphical presentations of the information in this working paper to allow for a final review and adjustment of the overall airport development concept.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of draft material.

Expenses:   None.

ELEMENT 7 – LAND USE COMPATIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Task 7.1 Define Study Area Boundary
Description:  Using data and imagery acquired in Task 2.2, the boundaries of the area selected for detailed analysis will be established.  The study area will comply with guidance provided in Caltran’s Airport Land Use Planning Handbook and will generally follow boundaries of locally established census tracts or traffic analysis zones, physiographic features, or political boundaries and encompass an area somewhat larger that the Part 77 horizontal surface for the airport.

Responsibilities:

Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐20 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Consultant:   Define the land use study area boundary.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   A defined airport land use study area.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.2 Existing Land Use Analysis
Description:   Review existing GIS land use maps, serial photography, general plans, and other documentation of existing land uses in the area.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Define the land use study area boundary.

Sponsor:   Furnish Consultant with land use maps and data, as needed.  Review the existing land use maps produced.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   Existing land use map for inclusion in the Master Plan.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.3 Prepare Aircraft Noise Exposure Contours
Description: Refine the operational fleet mix as necessary in preparation for running noise contours.   Identify an estimate of the number of operations by specific aircraft type.   Compile computer batch files for development of existing and future noise exposure contours using FAA’s Airport Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) Provide computer plot of 65 DNL and higher contours, at 5 DNL increments, and areas (in square miles and acres) within each contour.  Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) will also be plotted. Two computer modeling runs will be developed − one for existing conditions and one for future conditions. The noise contours will be plotted on base maps utilizing aerial photography, if available, and/or best available mapping. No population impact counts will be developed under the task.  Information on forecast operations will be obtained from the forecast analysisin the Master Plan.  Information on traffic patterns and runway utilization rates will be reviewed with the airport sponsor. The results of the analysis will be included in the airport plans/land use compatibility working paper. Digital copies of the AEDT analysis can be provided to the sponsor at the conclusion of the analysis if requested.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:          Develop existing and future noise exposure contours.

Sponsor:   Review traffic pattern and runway utilization assumptions.

Product:   Existing and future noise exposure contours for the airport.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.4   Land Use Controls and Plans
Description:  Review and summarize existing zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐21 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
codes, and land use and transportation plans, and land use management documentation in the study area.   Prepare tables and exhibits of the zoning, future land planning designation, and improvements.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Review reports and documents from area planning agencies and prepare summary tables and exhibits.

Sponsor:     Review and comment.

Product:   Tables and exhibits for analysis in later tasks.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.5   Non‐compatible Development Analysis
Description:  Based on information collected in Task 6.2, areas with the greatest potential for non‐ compatible development when compared to updated noise exposure contours and Part 77 approach surfaces will be identified.  It is anticipated that this area will not extend beyond one mile from each runway end.  Additionally, land use control inconsistencies will be identified.  Growth‐ risk areas will be categorized by type of land use.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Responsible for this task.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product:      Growth risk analysis including mapping of non‐compatible growth areas.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.6   Land Use Management Techniques
Description:  Identify various land use management techniques that could be applied in the airport vicinity.  These techniques may include, but not necessarily be limited to: changesin existing zoning districts, creation of new zoning classifications, modification of other development regulations and building codes, property and easement acquisition, and other mitigation measures.  A review of the California Division of aeronautics Land Use Guidance and its applicability to planned improvements at the airport will be included.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Responsible for this task.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product: A list of recommended land use management techniques that may be effective in promoting land use compatibility.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.7 Identify Airport Compatibility Issues and Policy Alternatives Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐22 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Description:  Identify important noise, overflight, safety, and airspace compatibility issues based on existing land use patterns, potential future development patterns, existing and forecasted noise contours, and the compatibility guidelines from Caltrans Airport Land Use Handbook.  Based on these issues, identify land use compatibility policy alternatives for discussion and further consideration.  These policy will be developed and subject to refinement in Element 5.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Responsible for this task.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product: A discussion of airport land use compatibility issues and policy alternatives for inclusion in a supporting appendix.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.8   Recycling Plan
Description: The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 includes a new requirement for airport master plans to address recycling by:
• Evaluating the feasibility of solid waste recycling,
• Minimizing the generation of waste,
• Identifying operations & maintenance requirements,
• Reviewing of waste management contracts, and
• Identifying the potential for cost savings or revenue generation.

To develop a recycling plan that meets this FAA requirement, the Consultant will:

1. Collect baseline information on theairport’swaste management program. Meet with Airport staff to understand how waste is managed at the airport and what current education efforts for passengers, employees, contractors and tenants are already in place. In addition, collect information such as waste collection contracts, monthly waste/recycling invoices, and the waste‐ related costs for waste and recycling (containers, hauling, disposal, and labor).

2. Assess existing waste management program. To understand the sources, composition, and quantities of waste generated at the airport, conduct a facility walk‐through, and an examination of monthly waste/recycling invoices.

3. Assess opportunities for expansion of recycling program. Review current waste collection contracts and conduct research on current market conditions to determine whether there are any logistical limitations to expanding the recycling program.

4. Develop recommendations for improving the recycling program. Based on the above assessment of the airport’s waste and recycling program, develop recommendations for improving the airport’s recycling program as well as minimizing waste generated at the airport.

Recommendations will include identification of potential cost savings or revenue generation.

Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐23 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop Recycling Plan
Sponsor:   Assist in collection of data.

Product:   Recycling Plan
Expenses:   None.

Task 7.9   Land Use Compatibility and Environmental Analysis Working Paper Description: Prepare a detailed off‐airport land use compatibility and environmental analysis working paper. The land use compatibility analysis will provide information related to off‐airport land uses, their compatibility with airport environs, and recommendation to enhance the protection of the airport from encroachment of incompatible land uses.  The environmental analysis will utilize the information from Task 1.3 and analyze the NEPA categories and the impact to them from the recommended Master Plan concept.  The environmental analysisisintended to identify any projects that raise an environmental “red‐flag” that may require additional analysis or time to implement.

Additional environmental analysis such as an environmental Assessment may be required to implement a project.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of draft material.

Expenses:   None.

Task 7.10 Coordination Meetings (2x)
Description:   Detailed land use analysis and policy recommendations requires extensive coordination with airport sponsors.  Two separate and dedicated meetings are planned to review and coordinate the land use element of the Master Plan.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Provide presentation and necessary graphics at the meetings.

Sponsor:   Distribute meeting notices and arrange for meeting room.

Product: Coordination meetings focused on‐airport land use compatibility and post all presentation material to the project website.  If necessary, a virtual option will be made available for the meetings.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for two (2) nights, rental car for three (3 days), and per diem for three (3) days.

Packet Pg. 914 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐24 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
ELEMENT 8 – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Task 8.1 Environmental Inventory
Description: The purpose of thistask isto obtain information regarding environmentalsensitivities on or near airport property. Sources of information will include past environmental documents, agency maps, existing literature, and relevant internetsources. An inventory of existing conditions for all resource categories outlined in FAA Order 1050.1F, Desk Reference, will be provided.  The resource categories are included in Table 1.   Informal consultation with various federal and state agencies will occur only if needed information is not available through resourceslisted above.  The information obtained in this task is intended to identify any significant environmental resources prior to the alternatives evaluation process in order to lessen or eliminate environmental requirements for potential project development.  To be included in the Inventory chapter of the Master Plan.

Table 1
FAA Order 1050.1F, Desk Reference
Resource Categories
1 Air Quality 9 Land Use
2 Biological Resources 10 Natural Resources and Energy Supply 3 Climate 11 Noise and Noise‐Compatible Land Use
4 Coastal Resources 12 Socioeconomics, Environmental Justice, and Children's Environmental
5 Department of Transportation Act,
Section 4(f) 13 visual Effects
6 Farmlands 14 Water Resources
7 Hazardous Materials, Solid Waste,
and Pollution Prevention 15 Cumulative Impacts
8 Historical, Architectural,
Archeological, and Cultural Resources
Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Assemble data based on latest informationavailable.

Sponsor:   Assist in collection of data.

Product:   Input into later analysis.

Expenses:   None.

Task 8.2 Environmental Overview (NEPA)
Description: The purpose of this task is to identify potential environmental issues associated with the airport development alternatives and recommended development concept, including mitigation measures that may be needed for proposed projects.

Packet Pg. 915 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐25 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Once a recommended Master Plan concept has been developed, a preliminary environmental overview will be conducted using the information collected to identify any potential environmental concerns that must be addressed prior to program implementation.   This evaluation will be structured in a table format and will include an analysis of potential impacts on environmental resources as defined within FAA’s Order 1050.1F and its accompanying Desk Reference.  Projects which may require further NEPA analysis (i.e., Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement) will be identified.  This evaluation is not intended to serve as a formal Environmental Assessment under NEPA.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Assemble data based on latest information available.

Sponsor:   Assist in collection of data.

Product:   Input to later analysis.

Expenses:   None.

Task 8.3 Airport Energy Audit
Description:   Quest Energy, as a subconsultant, will perform an energy audit for the Redding Municipal Airport as part of the Airport Master Plan project.   The energy audit will identify, prioritize, and quantify potential energy efficiency measures (EEMs) as well as renewal energy opportunities.  The energy audit will include all airport owned facilities.  One on‐site visit to the airport is anticipated by the Subconsultant.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Provide guidance to the Subconsultant.

Subconsultant:   Quest Energy, as a subconsultant, will do this analysis and supply the summary report for inclusion in the Master Plan.

Sponsor:   Assist in collection of data.

Product:   Stand‐alone energy audit document.

Expenses:   None.  (Cost for subconsultant to travel to RDD for a presentation is included in the fixed fee cost of this task.)
Task 8.4   Environmental Analysis Working Paper
Description: Prepare a detailed environmental analysis working paper based on the recommended development concept determined in Task 6.1. The environmental analysis will utilize the information from Task 8.1 and analyze the NEPA categories and the impact to them from the recommended Master Plan concept.  The environmental analysisisintended to identify any projects that raise an environmental “red‐flag” that may require additional analysis or time to implement.

Additional environmental analysis such as an Environmental Assessment may be required to implement a project and will be prepared separately from this Master Plan.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Packet Pg. 916 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐26 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of draft material.

Expenses:   None.

Task 8.5 Conduct TAC Meeting #4 and Public Information Workshop #3 Description:  Prepare graphic display and/or handout information necessary to adequately explain assumptions and rationale supporting the recommended concept, CIP, financial plan, compliance, environmental overview, and recycling plan.  Meet with the TAC to review the materials, as well as to review the projectschedule, progress, and subsequent work efforts.  Thistask will include holding an open‐house style format public information workshop the evening of TAC meeting.   The workshop will allow for interested public entities to review project materials and interact with the consultant.  Task includes preparation time for the TAC and workshop.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Provide presentation and necessary graphics at the meeting.

Sponsor:   Distribute meeting notices and arrange for meeting room.

Product: Conduct fourth TAC meeting for Master Plan study and post all presentation material to the project website.  If necessary, a virtual option will be made available for the TAC meeting.  Conduct third Public Information Workshop.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for two (2) nights, rental car for three (3 days), and per diem for three (3) days.

Five (5) 36x24 foam core mounted display boards for the public information workshop.  FedEx (or similar) 2nd day delivery of the display boards.

ELEMENT 9 – AIRPORT PLANS
The purpose of this study element is to prepare a new Airport Layout Plan (ALP) set for Redding Municipal Airport.  All plans will be prepared in a format which complies with the content contained within FAA’s current guidelines for the preparation of an airport layout plan as defined by the FAA Airports ARP SOP 2.00 Standard Procedure for FAA Review and Approval of Airport Layout Plans (October 1, 2013), and which is readily acceptable to the FAA and can be utilized by the Sponsor in carrying out implementation.  All plans will be produced digitally using the data collected in Element 2 and any additional data the sponsor may have or want to include. The digital plans and pdf files of each sheet will be a deliverable item to the Sponsor at the completion of this project in CAD or GIS format at the sponsors discretion. The ALP will be included as an appendix in the Master Plan documents.  A narrative consistent with FAA AC 150/5070‐6B‐Section 202c will also be included in the appendix that describes each drawing included in the ALP set.

The drawing set will include the depiction of all applicable design standards contained in the latest version of FAA AC 150/5300‐13A, Airport Design, including but not limited to landing areas, movement areas and aircraft parking areas (e.g., runways, taxiways, helipads, aprons, etc.), Packet Pg. 917 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐27 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
required facility identifications, description labels, imaginary surfaces, RPZs, taxiway safety areas, runway and taxiways object free areas, runway obstacle free zones and basic airport and runway data tables.  If necessary, data tables will be included on a separate sheet.

Task 9.1 Airport Layout Plan Drawing
Description: Following the Recommended Airport Master Plan Concept developed under the preceding elements and FAA AC 150/5070‐6B, an ALP drawing for the airport will be prepared.  The ALP will reflect updated physical features, location of airfield facilities (runways, taxiways, navigational aids), and existing landside development.  Development of recommended landside and airfield facilities, including runways and taxiways; property and runway protection zone boundaries; and revenue support areas will also be shown.  Guidelines for the preparation of an airport layout plan as defined by the FAA Airports ARP SOP 2.00 Standard Procedure for FAA Review and Approval of Airport Layout Plans (October 1, 2013) will be followed.  A Title Sheet and Airport Data Sheet will also be prepared and included with the full Airport Layout Plan set.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Prepare a new ALP for the airport.

Sponsor:     Review and comment.

Product:   A new ALP drawing for the airport which meets federal guidelines.

Expenses:   None.

Task 9.2 Terminal Area Drawing(s)
Description: Prepare Terminal Area Drawing(s) reflecting development resulting from the recommendations of this study.  Depending on the future recommended development for the general aviation areas, more than one drawing may be required to adequately reflect the detail of development within the area.  The drawing(s) will include detailed planning level information such as access taxiways, apron areas, hangar layouts, aircraft tie‐down areas, customer and employee parking areas, and vehicular circulation and access for the short, intermediate, and long‐term planning periods.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:      Prepare Terminal Area Drawing(s).

Sponsor:     Review and comment.

Product:   Terminal Area Drawing(s) reflecting the selected development alternative for these facilities at the airport.

Expenses:   None.

Task 9.3 Part 77, Approach and Inner Approach Surface Plans Description: Prepare Part 77, Approach and Inner Approach Surface plansin conformance with FAR Part 77 and FAA Airports ARP SOP 2.00 Standard Procedure for FAA Review and Approval of Airport Layout Plans (October 1, 2013).  As necessary, height of potential obstructions will be researched Packet Pg. 918 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐28 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
and identified on the drawing along with an obstruction chart/table indicating the obstruction description, their top elevation, affected Part 77 surface, the penetration, disposition and corrective action to eliminate or mitigate the obstruction.  Submittal of any identified obstructions to OE/AAA for FAA airspace review is not included in this scope of services.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Prepare a new Part 77, Approach and Inner Approach Surface plans for the airport. File new obstructions via the OEAAA system
Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product:   Part 77, Approach and Inner Approach Surface plans for the airport to meet federal guidelines. Product will include aerial photography of the inner approach surfaces and runway protection zones.

Expenses:   None.

Task 9.4 Departure Surface Drawings
Description:  Prepare new departure surface drawings in accordance with guidelines as defined by the FAA Airports ARP SOP 2.00 Standard Procedure for FAA Review and Approval of Airport Layout Plans (October 1, 2013). Obstruction information will be obtained from the Part 77 obstruction analysis completed in Task 9.3, approach plans, and the current Airport Obstruction (OC) chart (as available).  This drawing will follow guidelines in FAA Engineering Brief No. 99A, Changes to Tables 3‐2 and 3‐4 of Advisory Circular 150/5300‐13A, Airport Design.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Prepare new departure surface drawings for the airport.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product:   Departure surface drawings for the airport which meet federal guidelines.

Expenses:   None.

Task 9.5 Airport Property Map
Description:  Update the Exhibit A ‐ Airport Property Map, including the appropriate graphics and information to indicate the type of acquisition (i.e., federal funds,surplus property, local funds only, etc.) of various land areas within the airport's boundaries.  The primary intent of the drawing is to identify and/or delineate all designated airport property owned or to be acquired by the airport owner.  The drawing will inventory all parcels which currently make up the airport or are proposed for acquisition by the airport sponsor.  In addition, the drawing will also show any property that has been disposed of by the airport in the past.  Details will be limited to the depiction of existing and future facilities (i.e., runways, taxiways, runway protection zones, and terminal facilities) which would indicate aeronautical need for airport property.   This work effort will utilize information obtained from the current "Exhibit A ‐ Property Map" as well as other sources.  The Property Map will be updated in conformance with the guidelines outlined in FAA Airports ARP SOP 3.00 Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for FAA Review of Exhibit ‘A’ Airport Property Inventory Maps (October 1, 2013).  This task does not include a formal property deed search, instead the airport will provide Packet Pg. 919 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐29 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
historical information regarding the acquisition of existing airport property and easements, as well as boundary surveys, as needed.  If the sponsor is unable locate all the information needed to complete the Exhibit A – Property Map to FAA SOP 3.0 standards, then only an Airport Property Map as defined in FAA SOP 2.0 will be developed.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Update the Airport Property Map for the airport.

Sponsor:   Provide appropriate historical data and review Airport Property Map.

Product:   Updated Airport Property Map for the airport.

Expenses:   None.

Task 9.6 On‐Airport Land Use Plan
Description: An on‐airport land use plan for will be developed based on the identified overall development concept.  This will include general aviation areas, terminal complex, ground access and vehicular circulation system service areas, industrial/commercial development areas, and distinctions between aeronautical and non‐aeronautical uses.  The drawing will outline any non‐ aeronautical land use plans so that future revisions to the ALP are not required should a land use release is requested.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:      Prepare On‐Airport Land Use Plan.

Sponsor:      Review and comment.

Product:   On‐Airport Land Use Plan and Off‐Airport Land Use Plan.

Expenses:   None.

Task 9.7 Preparation of Draft ALP Drawing Set
Description: Preparation of up to four (4) copies of the “Draft” ALP drawing set for submission to the Sponsor, and subsequent comprehensive agency review by the FAA.  The ALP Drawing Set will be prepared in conformance with FAA Airports ARP SOP 2.00 Standard Procedure for FAA Review and Approval of Airport Layout Plans (October 1, 2013).  Drawings will be a minimum size of 24” x 36”.  FAA review will be concurrent. Drawings will be submitted with or prior to publication of the “Draft” Final Master Plan.

This task includes time required to make changes during sponsor and FAA review and approval process.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Provide up to four (4) copies of the full Airport Layout Plan drawing sets, depicting the sponsor selected “Recommended Plan” for sponsor and FAA use.

Packet Pg. 920 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐30 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Sponsor:   Provide up to four (4) unsigned copies of ALP drawing set to FAA for review.

Include signed transmittal letter indicating the changes from the last approved ALP drawing.  Provide two (2) fullset of drawingsto FAA for review.

Product:   Up to four (4) copies of the full ALP drawing set as well as a completed FAA ALP Checklist.  PDF and print copies.

Expenses:   Printing of the ALP set.

Task 9.8 Preparation of Final ALP and Final ALP Drawing Set Description: Revise the Draft Airport Layout Plans and Drawings prepared in the previous task to reflect comments received from the FAA review.  Upon approval from the Sponsor, provide four (4) copies of the revised full ALP drawing sets to the Sponsor for their signature.  The Sponsor will forward the signed drawings to the FAA for final approval.  Electronic copies will be made available and may be used for final approvals.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Provide up to four (4) revised copies of the full Airport Layout Plan drawing sets.

Sponsor:   Review and sign all drawings.   Forward all drawings to the FAA for final approval.

Product:   Up to four (4) copies of full ALP drawing set.

Expenses:   Print costs for final ALP sets.

Task 9.9   ALP Working Paper
Description: Prepare a detailed working paper that describes each drawing in the ALP set.  The working paper will include the FAA standards being applied and the rationale for their application.

This working paper is a concise summation of the Master Plan findings and a technical presentation of how those finding are depicted in the ALP set.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the working paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of draft material.

Expenses:   None.

ELEMENT 10 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Task 10.1 Project Management
Description: Projects such as this demand a refined approach to project management to achieve success.  This effort includes communication among the project team for purposes of tracking progress, administering records, launching project activities, maintaining the project schedule, Packet Pg. 921 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐31 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
managing/mitigating risks and solving challenges, invoicing and monitoring project budget, preparation of progress reports, and project close out.  The project timeline and coordination are anticipated to take place over a period of eighteen (18) months.  Project coordination in the form ofsemi‐regular project coordination conference calls/on‐line communication is also included.  This task does not include on‐site meetings (included in other tasks).  Approximately eight hours per month are anticipated for project management, invoicing, and other project monitoring tasks.

Responsibilities:

Consultant: Provide project management for scheduled 18‐month timeline.

Sponsor: As necessary aid consultant.

Product: Project management services.

Expenses: None
Task 10.2 Airport Management/Document Sharing Application Description:  This airport management application will be used to support and enhance certain components detailed in the Master Plan to assist airport staff in the collection, organization, and use of information including the AGIS survey (Task 2.2).   The application is accessed through a secure web page.  Once logged in, the users can establish new user accounts, set permissions, view maps and modules, and run customized reports.  Available modules include a base map and tasks related data quality control, airspace analysis, lease management, and wildlife hazard management.

This task includes the setup associated with the application website, logins, and 18‐months use of the application.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:     Prepare and host the Master Plan management and document sharing application.

Sponsor:     Review and utilize during the Master Plan process.

Product:     Application setup and 18‐months use of the application.

Expenses:   One time set up fee.

ELEMENT 11 – OPTIONAL TASKS
The master planning process is dynamic and new information can emerge during the process that requires additional analysis.  Therefore, two optional tasks are included in this scope of service that may be required if directed by FAA.

Task 11.1 Safety Risk Management (SRM) Support Services Description:  An SRM is a formalized and proactive approach to system safety applied through an integrated collection of practices, procedures, and programs through risk management.  FAA Order 5200.11A, FAA Airports (ARP) Safety Management System, provides detailed guidance on the potential actions that may trigger the need for an SRM process.  One of those triggers is FAA’s Packet Pg. 922 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐32 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
responsibility to review and approve a new or updated Airport Layout Plan (ALP).  A new ALP is a deliverable of this Master Plan which may trigger the need for an SRM.  All large, medium, and small hub airports are required to incorporate SRM into their planning documents.  The FAA may elect to conduct an SRM at non‐hub (i.e., RDD) and general aviation airports as appropriate.

The purpose of this element is to complete a safety assessment following guidance in FAA Order 5200.11A, should it be required by FAA.  This will include assembling a panel of stakeholders and safety experts to examine the hazards and risks associated with the recommended development concept identified in Element 6.  The panel meeting will not result in recommendations for the best or safest development concept, instead the panel will determine mitigation measures, if necessary, to ensure the recommended development concept can function within acceptable risk levels.

Preliminary Coordination
Description:  Coordinating teleconferences with FAA and RDD to develop a plan and schedule for the SRM.  Coordination will include:
 Panel participant list and coordination requirements
 Meeting time and place
 Handouts and visual aids
 General meeting structure and agenda
Conduct SRM Panel Meeting
Description:   The planning consultant, Coffman Associates, will provide facilitation services (through a sub‐consultant specializing in SRM facilitation) and work with the FAA project manager to complete the SRM panel and subsequent documentation in accordance with FAA guidance.  A meeting note taker will be provided by Coffman Associates (or the designated facilitation sub‐ consultant).   Coffman Associates will prepare and present an overview of the master plan and alternatives to the panel during the SRM meeting.  The purpose is to present a clear and concise description of the alternatives and the recommended development concept to allow ARM panel members to quickly understand the relevant operational and safety factors.  The presentation will include an overview of the SRM process and description of the SRM requirements.

The meeting will be completed in one day (either virtually or in‐person).  The meeting will result in a draft Safety Assessment Screening for Airport Planning and Development Projects (SAS‐1).  A Safety Assessment Screening for Modification of Standards (SAS‐2) will also be completed if necessary.  SAS for signatures will be obtained at the conclusion of the meeting.

Final Reports
Description:  Coffman Associates and the facilitation sub‐consultant will prepare a draft final report on the deliberations and finding of the panel.  The report will include final copies of the SAAS‐1 and SAS‐2 (if necessary).  The draft report will be circulated among the FAA project manager, Coffman Associates, and Airport management.  A Final Report will then be produced that incorporates any relevant comments.

Responsibilities:

Packet Pg. 923 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐33 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Consultant: Work with FAA project manager, and Airport staff to identify members of the SRM panel.  Identify and contract with facilitator sub‐consultant.

Subconsultant: Meeting facilitator will attend SRM panel meeting, organize notes, and prepare the draft report.

Sponsor: Provide location for the meeting unless one virtually.

Product: Meeting agendas, PowerPoint presentation, completed SAS‐1 and Sas‐2(if needed), and the final report.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for two (2) nights, rental car for three (3 days), and per diem for three (3) days.  Travel for one (1) Subconsultant from Kansas City (MCI) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for Subconsultant for two (2) nights, and per diem for three (3) days).

Task 11.2 RPZ Alternatives Analysis
Description:  If the recommended concept identified in Element 6 includes any changes to the size or location of the RPZsthat would expand or introduce incompatible land uses within any RPZ, then the consultant will develop a specialized RPZ Alternatives Analysis white paper as required by FAA.

The white paper will follow guidance in FAA Memorandum, Interim Guidance on Land Uses Within a Runway Protection Zone.  The white paper will then be coordinated with FAA for review.  The result of the FAA review may require changes to the recommended development concept.  The white paper will be included as an appendix to the master plan.  It should be noted that Draft FAA AC 150/5190‐4B, Airport Land Use Compatibility Planning was published for public/industry comment on June 22, 2021.  Should this draft AC be adopted during the course of this Master Plan, then the relevant RPZ alternative analysis process presented in the AC will be followed.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Develop complete narrative and graphics for the RPZ Alternatives Analysis white paper.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

FAA:     Review and comment.

Product:   PDF’s of white paper.

Expenses:   None.

ELEMENT 12 – APPROVALS AND FINAL REPORTS
Task 12.1 Prepare Draft Final Master Plan Report
Description: A “Draft” Final Master Plan Report document will be prepared.  This document will incorporate appropriate comments, edits and corrections received during the review period.  Ten (10) copies of the “Draft” Final Report will be provided.  The FAA will receive one (1) of the ten copies.  These copies are intended for the sponsor approval process and are not intended to be distributed to the TAC.  The “Draft Final” will be made available on the project website.

Packet Pg. 924 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐34 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Prepare and print up to ten (10) hard copies of the Draft Final Master Plan study and an electronic (PDF) version.

Sponsor:   Review and comment.

Product:   Ten (10) Draft Final Master Plan Reports.

Expenses:   Cost to print ten (10) Draft Final Master Plan documents.

Task 12.2 Obtain Master PlanApprovals
Description:  Coordinate final approval of the Master Plan and ALP with the Airport staff.  This task will include a presentation to the Redding City Council (or other approving body) seeking approval of the Master Plan.  The Airport action desired is to direct the consultant to obtain approval of the ALP from the FAA.  Includes preparation time for the presentation to City Council.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Make a presentation to the Redding City Council (or other approving body).

Sponsor:   Coordinate presentation time and location.

Product:   Redding City Council (or other approving body) approval.

Expenses: Travel for one (1) Consultant from Phoenix (PHX) to Redding (RDD).  Lodging for one (1) night, rental car for two (2) days, and per diem for two (2) days.

Task 12.3 Prepare Executive Summary Brochure
Description:  Prepare an executive summary brochure.  The executive summary is anticipated to be an overview of the entire study, as presented in earlier technical memorandums.  The executive summary brochure is anticipated to be an 11x17 bi‐fold brochure.   100 printed copies of the executive summary brochure and an electronic PDF will be provided to the sponsor.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:     Prepare the executive summary brochure.

Subconsultant: None.

Sponsor:     Review and comment prior to distribution.

Product:     Summary Report (printed and PDF).

Expenses:   100 executive summary brochures.

Task 12.4 Prepare Final Master Plan Report
Description:  Following the final review period for the “Draft” Final Master Plan Report, a Final Master Plan Report document will be prepared.   This document will incorporate appropriate comments and corrections received during the review period.  Ten (10) copies of the Final Report will be provided, as well as an electronic copy in a PDF format.  One (1) of the printed copies (and a digital copy) will be provided to the FAA.  Note:  FAA requires all deliverables in electronic format.

Responsibilities:

Packet Pg. 925 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐35 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Consultant:   Prepare the Final Master Plan report incorporating all appropriate edits, and comments received during the review period.

Sponsor:   Coordinate distribution of the final report.

Product:   Ten (10) copies of Final Master Plan Report.  Intended distribution is nine (9) – Airport, one (1) – FAA.

Expenses:   Ten (10) printed copies of Final Master Plan Report.

ELEMENT 13 – CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) DOCUMENTATION FOR

MASTER PLAN APPROVAL
The Redding Municipal Airport Master Plan Update CEQA documentation element has been prepared to provide a detailed element and task description of the environmental study efforts required to comply with CEQA.  The objective of the Environmental Review and Documentation is to provide the Sponsor, community, and public officials with proper guidance regarding CEQA environmental documentation for the future development as outlined in the Airport Master Plan.

Coordination between the Sponsor, State of California, FAA, and the Consultant will be essential to bringing together all facts and data relevant to the project and to developing a mutual agreement regarding the extent of the required CEQA environmental documentation. (Note:  Element 13 is not eligible for AIP funding as part of the Master Plan Update) Task 13.1 Initial Study (CEQA)
Description: Prepare an Initial Study, per the Sponsor’s guidance, as the basis for the Sponsor’s determination whether the Master Plan qualifies for a Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or will require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).  Utilizing the aviation forecasts developed under a previous task, identify potential operational issues associated with the alternatives.  Prepare an assessment of biological, wetland, noise, traffic, and air quality impacts.  The air quality emissions will be determined using the most current version of the EPA‐ approved Emissions Dispersion Modeling System.  (Note: a dispersion analysis is specifically not proposed under this task; should a dispersion analysis be required, it will be prepared under Task

12.4, Special Studies.  In addition, additional environmental studies may be required to support adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, as well as preparation of an EIR.  It is not possible to determine the scope or nature of such additional studies at this time.) Responsibilities
Consultant:   Develop narrative and graphics for Initial Study.

Sponsor:   Provide Initial Study checklist and format.  Review and comment on the Initial Study prior to submission.

Product:   Initial Study.

Expenses:   Cost to print Initial Study (up to 20 copies).

Task 13.2 Determine Environmental Documentation (CEQA)
Packet Pg. 926 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐36 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
Description:  Based on the Initial Study, the Sponsor will determine the appropriate form of CEQA documentation for the proposed Master Plan Update.  In the event that the completed Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed Master Plan may have a significant impact on the environment, or that mitigation measures incorporated into the Master Plan or agreed to by the applicant would avoid any significant impacts, the Sponsor may adopt a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration.   If the Sponsor determines on the basis of the completed Initial Study that there is substantial evidence the Master Plan may have significant environmental effects, or that it is unclear whether the Master Plan would have such effects and there is serious public controversy and/or disagreement among experts concerning potential significant effects, a Notice of Preparation will be distributed indicating that an EIR will be prepared for the project.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Assist Sponsor in determining and distributing the Initial Study and any Notice of Determination (for Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration) or Notice of Preparation (for Environmental Impact Report).

Prepare twenty (20) copies of the combined Initial Study and Notice of Determination or Notice of Preparation.

Sponsor:   Determine whether to adopt a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, or to prepare an Environmental Impact Report.

Product:   Twenty (20) copies of the Initial Study and Notice of Determination or Notice of Preparation.

Expenses:   Cost for printing 20 copies of the Initial Study and Notice of Determination or Notice of Preparation.

Task 13.3 Additional Environmental Documentation (CEQA) Description: Thistask allowsforthe preparation of an EIR for the Master Plan Update as determined under Task 12.2.  The EIR document may be focused to address a limited number of potentially significant impacts, as may have been identified in the Initial Study.  The final scope of services and cost for this task will be based on additional negotiations between the Sponsor and the Consultant.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Prepare an EIR as appropriate.

Sponsor:   Negotiate the final scope of services and cost for the preparation of the additional environmental documentation.

Product:   An Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Expenses:   Cost to print EIR as necessary (20 copies)
Task 13.4 Special Studies
Description: During the course of the preparation of the Initial Study, consideration of the required CEQA documentation, or preparation of an EIR (should either prove necessary), the need forspecial studies may be identified.  These may potentially include a biological assessment, air emissions Packet Pg. 927 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Coffman Associates A‐37 RDD Master Plan Scope – 1.5.22
dispersion analysis, aesthetics analysis,socioeconomic (demographics) analysis, and traffic analysis.

This section of the Scope is intended to accommodate the preparation of these special studies, should they be required.  Prior to initiation of any of these studies, the Consultant will notify the Sponsor, providing justification for work to be performed and a statement of reasonable cost to allow the Sponsor to evaluate the need for the special study and its necessity.  Subsequent to this determination, the Consultant will obtain the written authorization of the Sponsor prior to proceeding with each study.  The final scope of services and cost for each special study prepared under this task will be based on negotiations between the Sponsor and the Consultant.

Responsibilities:

Consultant:   Identify the need and scope of each special study.  Contract with a qualified individual or firm for the preparation of each special study.  Coordinate the preparation of the special study.

Sponsor:   Suggest/recommend qualified individual or firms.  Negotiate the final scope of services and cost for the preparation of each special study. Authorize the preparation of each special study.

Product:   Special studies as required.

Expenses:   Cost of printing special studies (up to 20 copies) Packet Pg. 928 Attachment: Exhibit A Scope of Services - Airport Master Plan (available online) (4.11(j)--FAA Grant Funding for Projects FY22 - Redding Attachment A