Agenda Packet — Redding City Council, May 6, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

Planning and Research (OPR) as required by CEQA. This letter serves as an important reminder that CEQA’s circulation, notice, and consultation requirements play a critical role in the Department’ s trustee mandate to conserve the State’s fish and wildlife resources for all the people of California.

In general, CEQA requires lead agencies to submit draft environmental impact reports (EIR), proposed negative declarations, and proposed MNDs to the State Clearinghouse at OPR when:

A state agency is the lead agency, a responsible agency, or a trustee agency; A state agency otherwise has jurisdiction by law with respect to the project; or The proposed project is of statewide, regional, or areawide significance.

Pub. Resources Code, § 21082.1, subd. (c)(4); CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15205, subd. (b), 15206, subd. (b)(1)-(7).)
In the case of this Project, the Department is acting as a trustee agency for the State’s fish and wildlife resources because the Project will impact those natural resources. There may also be State permits necessary for wetland impacts, in which case there would be State responsible agencies.

Submitting CEQA documents to OPR as required helps to ensure responsible and trustee agency input from the Department during lead agency environmental review.1 CEQA also requires lead agencies to submit the following notices to OPR:

Notice of Preparation ( NOP) of an EIR;
Notice of Completion (NOC) of an EIR;
Notice of Determination (NOD) when the lead agency is a state agency; and Notice of Determination ( NOD) for local agency conclusions that certain housing projects specified by statute are not subject to CEQA.

Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21080.4, 21108, 21152.1, 21161.) Again, these notices serve to ensure state agency participation in lead agency review under CEQA, including Department participation as a responsible and trustee agency.

The Department urges State and local lead agencies to ensure environmental analyses are submitted to the State Clearinghouse as required by CEQA. Complying with these requirements, along with CEQA’s responsible and trustee agency notice and consultation requirements, plays a critical role in the Department’ s trustee mandate to conserve California’s important fish and wildlife resources.

Comments and Recommendations
The Department has the following recommendations and comments as they pertain to biological resources:
1 See, e.g., Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21082.1, subd. (c)(4), 21083, subd. (d); see also §§ 21069, 21070 (responsible and trustee agencies defined).

DocuSign Envelope ID: 99E4C69E- 456D-4972-82F0-456784D93BEE Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Sean Price, Assistant Planner
City of Redding
June 7, 2021

Page 3 ends

Mitigation for the Loss of Wetlands, Streams, and other Waters Wetlands are considered extremely valuable natural resources. To this end, the state policy requires no net loss of these habitats. The Department considers all wetlands sensitive, and the State has a “No Net Loss” wetland Policy. 2 The Mitigation for impacts to fresh emergent wetland should be included in the MND at a ratio greater than 2:1. Currently, Mitigation Measure MM-1(c) states, “The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other waters through the purchase of mitigation credits at an agency-approved mitigation bank at a minimum 1:1 ratio or through onsite/offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio.” The Department recommends the ratio for impacts to streams, wetlands or other waters start at 2:1. In addition, onsite/offsite habitat restoration should have a monitoring and maintenance period and associated success criteria established within the MND.

According to the Biological Review dated May 2020, and prepared by Wildland Resource Managers, no surveys for vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) (federally threatened), vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) (federally endangered) or western spadefoot toad (Spea hammondii) (Priority 1 Species of Special Concern) were conducted in the pond present onsite. The Department presumes the Project applicant is assuming presence. Mitigation measures will need to be higher than 2:1 for impacts to these species and consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should be underway or completed for the federally listed species prior to approval of this Project since it is a mitigative negative declaration and all mitigation is agreed to up front.

Mitigation under CEQA may be different than for permitting.

Botanical Surveys
The Biological Review stated there was suitable habitat for Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop Gratiola heterosepala) (state endangered), which occurs in clay soils in or near shallow water and blooms April through September. Surveys for the project were conducted beginning September 30, 2019 and concluding April 8, 2020. Since suitable habitat was observed, surveys should have been conducted when the plant was most likely to be observed blooming which would not have been at the very beginning or the very end of the species blooming period. If such dates are to be used, a reference site should have been visited to determine the species was still identifiable. The Department recommends surveys be conducted during the appropriate blooming period to ensure Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop is not present.

Botanical surveys should follow the Department’ s March 20, 2018, Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities, available here:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler. ashx?DocumentID= 18959. If no special status plant species are found during the botanical survey , no other measures will be required.

However, if drought conditions exist, additional pre-construction surveys for special status plant species may be warranted. If special status plant species are found during the botanical surveys, the plants should be marked by a qualified biologist familiar with the species. If the area can be avoided, exclusionary fencing will be placed around the plants and no pedestrian or vehicular entry shall be allowed. Botanical survey results shall be 2 Fish and Game Commission Wetlands Resources Policy (Amended 8/18/05) DocuSign Envelope ID: 99E4C69E- 456D-4972-82F0-456784D93BEE Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Sean Price, Assistant Planner
City of Redding
June 7, 2021

Page 4 ends

emailed to the Department at R1CEQARedding@wildlife. ca.gov.

Mitigation
Although an adequate bat survey was not conducted, bats were observed onsite according to the Biological Review. Impacts to roosts are usually accompanied by high mortality of bats may be a significant impact, because a single colony could consist of the entire local population of a species. The availability of suitable roosting habitat is considered a limiting factor in almost all bat species. Roost site suitability is often based on a narrow range of suitable temperatures, relative humidity, physical dimensions, etc., and many species exhibit high roost site fidelity. Depending on the impact, if any, to the roosting habitat, additional mitigation may be necessary and could include providing replacement or alternate roost habitat. If necessary, humane evictions should be conducted during seasonal periods of bat activity, which may vary by year, location, or species and must be conducted by or under the supervision of a biologist with specific experience conducting exclusions. Humane exclusions could consist of a two-day tree removal process whereby the non-habitat trees and brush are removed along with certain tree limbs on the first day and the remainder of the tree on the second day. This two -step process changes the microhabitat of the area causing the bats to vacate the area under their own volition, therefore minimizing mortality and other impacts to bat species.

Mitigation for impacts to bats was included in the MND; however, the Department recommends adding these two additional sentences to Mitigation Measure MM-3: Humane evictions should be conducted during seasonal periods of bat activity, which may vary by year, location, or species and must be conducted by or under the supervision of a biologist with specific experience conducting exclusions. Humane exclusions could consist of a two-day tree removal process whereby the non-habitat trees and brush are removed along with certain tree limbs on the first day and the remainder of the tree on the second day.

Mitigation Measure MM-4 is not mitigation for the oak woodland or individual oak trees being removed. The oak trees should be replaced with native oak trees, as opposed to shade trees”, which is not specific and would not replace lost habitat value. In Shasta County, oak woodlands continue to be removed without any effective mitigation measures, resulting in a continuous regional loss of oak woodlands. Oak woodlands are important to a wide range of wildlife species and have higher levels of biodiversity than virtually any other terrestrial ecosystem in California. Oak woodlands provide habitat for nearly half of the 632 terrestrial vertebrates species found in the state. Oak woodland should be replaced at a minimum 3:1 ratio at Stillwater Plains Mitigation Bank or another conserved offsite location. The Department recommends and encourages retaining and working around the existing mature, healthy oaks to the extent possible, and mitigating appropriately for losses that cannot be avoided.

If you have any questions, please contact Amy Henderson, Senior Environmental Scientist, at (530) 225-2779, or by email at [email protected].

DocuSign Envelope ID: 99E4C69E- 456D-4972-82F0-456784D93BEE Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Sean Price, Assistant Planner
City of Redding
June 7, 2021
Page5
Sincerely,
Curt Babcock
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
ec: Sean Price, Assistant Planner
City of Redding
[email protected]
Amy Henderson
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Amy.Henderson@wildlife. ca.gov
Matthew Roberts
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
[email protected]
Lynn Coster
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
Lynn.Coster@Waterboards. ca.gov
Habitat Conservation Planning Branch
CEQACommentLetters@wildlife. ca.gov
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99E4C69E- 456D-4972-82F0-456784D93BEE Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for From: Yaniv Benaroya
To: Niemer, Kim
Cc: Price, Sean; Wayne Rasmussen; qslmatt@gmail. com
Subject: Letter of Opposition Pertaining to the Proposed Holiday Market Place Shopping Center, 2469 Hartnell Avenue, Redding, California
Date: Monday, June 7, 2021 2:40:17 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

Dear Ms. Niemer,
As the owner of the Hen House property at 2621 Hartnell Avenue, I am opposed to the proposed Holiday Market Place shopping center project at 2469 Hartnell Avenue. I have been working with the Shopping Center developer in recent weeks to resolve issues pertaining to several adverse impacts of the Project on my parking lot. However, several serious planning issues remain, and progress has stalled.

Until the above issues are resolved, I am concerned that the Center’ s impacts, particularly the substantial loss of parking on my property, would put the Hen House out of business. It would also have a similar effect on any other use of the site, thus rendering it unusable.

As a result, I am requesting that the Planning Commission hearing on the Project either be continued to allow time for me to resolve my issues with the Developer, or that the Project be denied. City participation with us in our discussions would be very much appreciated. Should the Commission choose to proceed with acting on the Project, I request that the CEQA document first be expanded to adequately address all of the potentially significant adverse impacts on my property. This should include land use, parking loss, and vehicular ingress and egress impacts.

Finally, I request that the City Attorney prepare an opinion regarding the City’s potential legal exposure created by the widening of Hartnell Avenue and the resulting loss of use of my property.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
Yaniv Benaroya
President & Broker Salesperson Lic #. 01905157
Property Upsurge, Inc.
501 Railroad Ave
Pittsburg, CA 94565
Lic #. 01888599
Mobile: 510-928-4270
Office: 925-363-5328
Fax: 866-531-3314
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Email: yaniv@propertyupsurge. com
Web: http:// www.propertyupsurge. com
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for 1 June 7, 2021
Lily Toy, Planning Manager
Sean Price, Planner
Redding Planning Commissioners
777 Cypress Ave.

Redding, CA 96001
Re: Summit Development/Holiday Market
Dear Planning Commissioners;
Our organization filed a public records request as follows on the project:

1. A map showing the oak trees that will be preserved on site.

2. The mitigation ratio the developer must mitigate for oak trees removed that must be planted on site and for the ratio for mitigation offsite.

3. If it is a mitigation bank, the location and name of the mitigation bank.

4. Is mitigation required for interior live oaks?
We only received general answers to our questions as noted in an email from Planner Sean Price:

Thank you for submitting your information request. The proposed draft conditions require the replacement of Oak Trees removed for the development at a minimum ratio of 1:1. As you know from your attendance at the Clover Creek community outreach, the developer as expressed his interest in replacement at a ratio of 3:1. The development team also expressed their desire to keep as many mature oaks as possible. Due to possible issues during improvement plan stage ( i.e. utility trench location, existing vs finish grade, hydrology, etc.) at this time the specific trees that will be saved is unknown. The development team has submitted the attached tree survey document showing the general location of mature oaks with general location of buildings/ landscape areas overlaid. Feel free to contact me with any further questions or concerns.

Unfortunately, this answer is somewhat vague as to what the final required mitigation will be. The Planning Commission or Planning Department should specify at the hearing what the exact mitigation will be as well as answers to our questions 3 and 4
We would like to commend the Planning Department for requiring mitigation for the removal of the any blue oak trees on the project site; however, we feel that this mitigation should also include interior live oaks. The best result would be for the developer to work the oak trees into the landscaping as much as possible and that the Planning Department will require that a grove of the larger blue oaks be preserved.

Oak trees are a keystone species in many habitats. Oak trees can support over 500 different types of caterpillars in the United States, whereas crepe myrtles can support only one species of caterpillar (The Nature of Oaks, Doug Tallamy 2021); thus, crepe myrtle is a food desert for insects. Caterpillars are one Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for 2 of the most important sources of food for baby birds. Scientists tell us that the world’s insect population is in an alarming decline, up to 50%. Oak trees support many species of insects, which is why so many birds visit them. Acorns are a food source for birds, squirrels, deer, insects and even bears.

The old Cobblestone Shopping Center, formerly Raley’ s, was built preserving a number of blue oaks in the parking lot and the north end of the Center. They have survived for 35 years, while almost all of the horticultural trees that were planted (except along the street and in a median) died and the new owners had to plant new trees. Interior live oaks were also preserved and are still standing today. This type of oak preservation can be done in the new development, as well.

BIOLOGICAL SURVEY
The plant survey (Page 12 of the Biological Review) of the site was completed on April 8, 2020 too early for many wetland plants to have flowered and be identified. From a casual observation from the roadway and adjacent parcel in late May, a SEA member easily identified the following plants not in the biological survey: coyote thistle (Eryngium articulatum), seepspring monkeyflower (Erythranthe guttata), mallow (Sidalcea hirsuta), wavy-leaf soaplant (Chlorogalum pomeridianum), Fitch’ s spikeweed Centromadia fitchii), and woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum) all plants not on the biological survey. There are undoubtedly other plants that were missed. The survey is inadequate.

Sincerely,
David Ledger, President
Shasta Environmental Alliance
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 1

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Permit No. UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, GPA- 2020- 01667, and RZ-2020- 01668 SUBJECT Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of a use permit, parcel map, General Plan amendment, and rezoning for the development of a shopping center and self-storage facility on

12.13 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive. The shopping center consists of a 30,000-square- foot Holiday Market Grocery Store, and five outer pads for retail, a drive-through restaurant, a coffee drive-through, and an automobile fueling station with a convenience store. The project also includes the request to allow a self- storage facility on

2.8 acres of land. A parcel map related to the project will delineate each of the retail spaces and the proposed mini-storage warehouse facility on their respective parcel, taking the total parcels from five to seven. The rezone is a request to change the current zoned “ SC” Shopping Center on the proposed 2.8-acre self- storage facility parcel to “ HC” Heavy Commercial. The general plan amendment request reflects the rezone request to amend the existing general plan designation of Shopping Center” to “ Heavy Commercial.”
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site encompasses five parcels of approximately

12.13 acres. The property is currently vacant and is populated with blue and Interior live oak trees, annual grasses with scattered shrubs. Commercial uses are located to the north and west. To the south the project is bordered by single and multiple family uses. West of the project is a mix of commercial and multiple family. The project site slopes gently from north to south. An intermittent stream flows in a southwest direction beginning approximately at the midpoint of the property on Hartnell Avenue exiting the property at the southwest corner of the property. An emergent wetland exists along the intermittent stream just west of the center of the project site. An ephemeral swale parallels Shasta View Drive along Appian Way which joins with the intermittent stream at the southwest quadrant of the project site. A small isolated pond also exists within the southwest quadrant of the project site.

FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION The City of Redding conducted an Initial Study attached), which determined that the proposed project could have significant environmental effects. Subsequent revisions in the project proposal create the specific mitigation measures identified below. The project, as revised and as agreed to by the applicant, avoids or mitigates the potentially significant environmental effects identified, and the preparation of an environmental impact report will not be required. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If there are substantial changes that alter the character or impacts of the proposed project, another environmental impact determination will be necessary.

Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2
The project includes measures to mitigate potentially significant impacts to transportation in the area.

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 which it determines are equivalent or more effective. The lead agency would adopt written findings that the new measure is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it, in itself, 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 a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. All potentially significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant.

2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration, with its supporting documentation, fully incorporated herein, 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
Transportation
Mitigation Measure 1 – Off-site improvement along Shasta View Drive shall include the following:
a. Restriping of the portion of Shasta View Drive between Hartnell Avenue and Goodwater Avenue to a three- lane arterial with one travel lane in each direction with a two-way left turn lane.
b. Construct a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to Christian Avenue.

PUBLIC REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
Draft copies or notice of this Mitigated Negative Declaration were distributed to:

Shasta County Clerk
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Redding
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Redding
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Redding California Native Plant Society, Shasta County
Interested Parties
All property owners within 500 feet of the property boundary Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 3

PUBLIC REVIEW
x) Draft document referred for comments May 21, 2021 .

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.

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 Response to Comments, attached).

Copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Initial Study, documentation materials, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program may be obtained at the Planning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Redding, 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001 and online on the Planning/ Projects page of the Development Services website at:
www. cityofredding. org. Contact: Sean Price, ( 530) 225- 4471 Lily Toy, Planning Manager Date
Date of Final Report
Attachments:

A. Location map
B. Initial Study
C. Mitigation Monitoring Program
April 30, 2021
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

ENVIRONMENTAL

INITIAL STUDY

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
References and Documentation
Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development
Use Permit Application UP-2020-01669
Parcel Map Application PM-2021-00290
Rezoning Application RZ-2020-01668
General Plan Amendment Application GPA-2020-01667
Prepared by:

CITY OF REDDING
Development Services Department
Planning Division
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, California 96001
May 6, 2021
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 2

CITY OF REDDING

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

1. Project Title: Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development

2. Lead agency name and address:

CITY OF REDDING
Development Services Department
Planning Division
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Sean Price, Assistant Planner, ( 530) 225-4471

4. Project Location: 2469 and 2522 Hartnell Avenue, 3055 and 3091 Appian Way, and 3050 Leonard Street

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

TJG/ Summit Development Corporation DKM Engineering
2451 Birchwood Circle P.O. Box 1307
Redding, CA 96002 Anderson, CA 96007

6. General Plan Designation: Shopping Center

7. Zoning: “ SC” Shopping Center

8. Description of Project: The project consists of a use permit, parcel map, General Plan amendment, and rezoning for the development of a shopping center and self-storage facility on 12.13 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive. The shopping center consists of a 30,000-square- foot Holiday Market Grocery Store, and five outer pads for retail, adrive-through restaurant, acoffee drive-through, and an automobile fueling station with aconvenience store. The project also includes the request to allow a self-storage facility on 2.8 acres of land. A parcel map related to the project will delineate each of the retail spaces and the proposed mini-storage warehouse facility on their respective parcel, taking the total parcels from five to seven. The rezone is a request to change the current zoned “SC” Shopping Center on the proposed 2.8-acre self-storage facility parcel to “HC” Heavy Commercial. The general plan amendment request reflects the rezone request to amend the existing general plan designation of “Shopping Center” to “Heavy Commercial.”

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site encompasses five parcels of approximately 12.13 acres. The property is currently vacant and is populated with blue and Interior live oak trees, annual grasses with scattered shrubs. Commercial uses are located to the north and west. To the south the project is bordered by single and multiple family uses. West of the project is a mix of commercial and multiple family. The project site slopes gently from north to south. An intermittent stream flows in a southwest direction beginning approximately at the midpoint of the property on Hartnell Avenue exiting the property at the southwest corner of the property. An emergent wetland exists along the intermittent stream just west of the center of the project site. An ephemeral swale parallels Shasta View Drive along Appian Way which joins with the intermittent stream at the southwest quadrant of the project site. A small isolated pond also exists within the southwest quadrant of the project site.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required ( e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 3

11. 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.? Consultation letters were sent to the Redding Rancheria and the Wintu Tribe of Northern California on March 25, 2021, to invite their participation in the project development process. On April 22, 2020, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-54-20 that suspends the mandated timeline for tribal consultation for a period of 60 days. As of April 22, 2021, no request for consultation was received.

Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. ( See Public Resources Code section 21080. 3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’ s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082. 3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

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 Potentially Significant Unless 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 X Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire X Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: ( To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of 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.
x 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.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “ potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 4 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 Planning Division of the Development Services Department, 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001. Contact Assistant Planner Sean Price at (530) 225-4471.

Sean Price, Assistant Planner Date
Development Services Department
May 7, 2021
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 5 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/ 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
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 as part of the Initial Study. 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 will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment.

Less Than Significant Impact. The development will have the potential for impacting the environment, although this impact will be below established thresholds that are considered to be significant.

Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The development will 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 will 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.

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:

Attachment A – Figure 1 – Location Map
Figure 2 – Project Site Plan
Figure 3 – Parcel Map
Figure 4 – Grading Plan
Figure 5 – Vegetation Map
Figure 6 – Preliminary Utilities Plan
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 6 Figure 7 – Building Elevations
Attachment B – Wetlands Delineation, Wildland Resource Managers, May 2020 (on file with the Planning Division and available online) Attachment C – Biological Review, Wildland Resource Managers, May 2020 (on file with the Planning Division and available online) Attachment D – Cultural Resources Inventory Survey, Sean Michael Jensen, M.A., December 2019 (on file with the Planning Division) Attachment E – Oak Tree Report, Wildland Resource Managers, dated September 27, 2019 ( on file with the Planning Division and available online)
Attachment F – Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum for Holiday Market, GHD, dated March 1, 2021 (on file with the Planning Division and available online)
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES:

MM-1. Prior toissuance of a grading permit affecting any jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, as identified inthe project wetland delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that the following resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the Corps, CDFW, RWQCB, or any other applicable agency ( i.e., USFWS) identified through the permitting process:* a. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into “waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands, authorization under a Nationwide Permit or Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps. For any features determined to not be subject to the Corps jurisdiction during the verification process, authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB. For fill requiring a Corps permit, water quality certification shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to discharge of dredged or fill material. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to issuance the issuance of a grading permit. b. Prior to any activities that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of any intermittent or ephemeral creeks, notification of streambed alteration shall be submitted to the CDFW; and, if required, a 1602 streambed alteration agreement shall be obtained by the project applicant. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. c. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other waters through the purchase of mitigation credits at an agency- approved mitigation bank at a minimum 1:1ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/ offsite habitat restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan, including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance, and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies ( i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted for review and approval. The affected regulatory agency shall identify when measures shall be implemented and completed for those activities impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All measures contained in the permits or associated with any agency approvals shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

If nesting birds or raptors are found, 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-3. To the extent practicable, removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags shall occur before bat maternity colonies form (i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volant (i.e., after August 31). If construction (including the removal of large trees 12 inch dbh ) occurs during the bat non-volant season (March 1 through August 31), a qualified professional shall conduct a pre-construction survey of the study area to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than 7 days prior to the implementation of construction activities. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the study area, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from project activities.

Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 7 MM-4. The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15-gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

MM-5 Off-site improvement along Shasta View Drive shall include the following:
o Restriping of the portion of Shasta View Drive between Hartnell Avenue and Goodwater Avenue to a three-lane arterial with one travel lane in each direction with a two-way left turn lane. o Construct a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to Christian Avenue.

MM-6 Construct a 3-leg, single lane roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue intersection.

I. AESTHETICS: Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, 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? x b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
x
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? Public views are those that area 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?
x
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
x
Discussion:
a-c) The project site is located on land that is highly visible as viewed primarily along Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive. The City’ s Planning Division has reviewed the site design and building elevations and has determined the proposed design is in conformance with the City’ s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Commercial Design Guidelines. The project would be consistent in height with buildings on the developed adjacent commercial properties. Therefore, the project does not represent a significant adverse visual impact. The project site is not located adjacent to a state-designated scenic highway.

The six commercial buildings are proposed to be architecturally compatible which includes a mixture of materials including, metal roofing material, stucco, stone veneer, lap siding, wood plank siding, board and batt, grove siding, and glazing. The buildings and associated facades will have varying heights, awnings, canopies, cornices, pitched roofs, trellises, and other decorative fixtures to provide articulation to the building elevations which, along with varying natural earth tone colors and patterns, provide variation in the appearance of the buildings.

Other project features include, but not limited to landscaping, hardscape features, solid waste enclosures, monument signs, building signage, and parking lot, driveway and walkway lighting. d) There would not be an adverse effect on day or nighttime views in the area. Shielding of lighting as required by City Ordinance will minimize any impact to a level of less than significant. The following standard condition will be applicable and therefore any potential impact will be less than significant.

Construction activities for the project will be limited to normal daytime hours (i.e., 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays from May 15 through September 15, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays from September 16 through May 14, and from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays in accordance with RMC Section 18.40.100). The proposed project would not require nighttime Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 8 lighting for construction activities. Thus, no impact would occur in this regard.

Standard Condition Regarding Lighting
In accordance with Chapter 18.40.090, Lighting, of the Redding Municipal Code, any new roof-mounted or freestanding exterior lighting shall be designed, located, directed, and shielded in such a manner so as to prevent objectionable light at, and glare across, the property lines. A lighting detail/ photometric study demonstrating how this requirement will be satisfied shall be submitted with the building permit application.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 City of Redding Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18.40.090
Mitigation:

None necessary.

II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: 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:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less- ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
x
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? X
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 5110(g))?
X
d Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest land? x
Discussion:
a-e) The project site contains soils that consist of Red Bluff Loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes ( RbB), and Churn Gravelly Loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes (CfA) and is not within an area identified by the California Department of Conservation’ s Important Farmland Series Mapping and Monitoring Program as meeting the criteria for Prime Farmland if irrigated. Red Bluff loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, is representative of the Redding series, in which permeability is very slow. Runoff is slow to medium, and the hazard of erosion is slight to moderate. Churn Gravelly Loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, is moderately well drained.

Permeability and runoff are slow. The hazard of erosion is none to slight. These soil classifications do not represent prime suitability for agricultural use; therefore, development of the property would not result in any impact to agricultural resources.

Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 9 Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 City of Redding General Plan Background Report, Chapter 9.4: Agricultural Lands California Department of Conservation’ s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, Soil Survey of Shasta County Area.

Mitigation:

None necessary.

III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district 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? X
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 X c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X d) Result in other emissions ( such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? X
Discussion:
a-c) Shasta County, including the far northern Sacramento Valley, currently exceeds the state' s ambient standards for ozone (smog) and particulates ( 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 and/ 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 of contributing incrementally to the problem. The Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan acknowledged this dilemma; and as a result, Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council for impacts to air quality resulting from growth supported under the General Plan.

The City Air Quality Element of the General Plan establishes emission- reduction goals of 20 to 25 percent, depending on the projected level of unmitigated emissions for a project. Mitigation thresholds are established for the important regional/ local pollutants, including: Reactive Organic Gases ( ROG) and Oxides of Nitrogen ( NOx), which are ozone precursors, and Inhalable Particulate Matter, 10 Micron (PM10). The mitigation thresholds for these pollutants are tiered at two levels as follows:

Level " A" Level " B"
25 pounds per day of NOx 137 pounds per day of NOx
25 pounds per day of ROG 137 pounds per day of ROG
80 pounds per day of PM10 137 pounds per day of PM10
If a project has unmitigated emissions less than the Level " A" threshold, then itis viewed as a minor project (from an air quality perspective) and only application of Standard Mitigation Measures ( SMMs) is required to try to achieve at least a 20 percent reduction in emissions, or the best reduction feasible otherwise. Land uses that generate unmitigated emissions above Level " A" require application of appropriate Best Available Mitigation Measures ( BAMMs), in addition to the SMMs, in order to achieve a net emission reduction of 20 percent or more. If, after applying SMMs and BAMMs, a use still exceeds the Level " B" threshold, then a minimum of 25 percent of the unmitigated emissions exceeding 137 pounds per day must be offset by reducing emissions Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 10 from existing sources of pollution; otherwise, an Environmental Impact Report is required.

Under policy of the Air Quality Element, a project has the potential to impact air quality primarily in two ways: ( 1) the project would generate vehicle trip emissions ( with NOx, ROG, and PM10) that contribute cumulatively to local and regional air quality conditions; and (2) fugitive dust (particulate/ PM10) emissions are possible during construction activities. As a shopping center and self-storage facility serving and underserved area of the city where many residents travel much farther for these services, the project does not have the potential to generate significant emission concentrations of other pollutants subject to state and federal ambient air quality standards.

Application of Standard Mitigation Measures ( SMMs) is required in order to strive toward the General Plan policy of a 20 percent reduction in emissions to address small-scale cumulative effects. SMMs applicable to this project address primarily short-term impacts related to construction and are standard development regulations promulgated in the City Grading Ordinance and California Building Code identified below. Application of the SMMs and the application of Best Available Mitigation Measures for NOx emissions as outlined below would reduce the project’ s potential air quality impacts to a level less than significant.

1. Nontoxic soil stabilizers shall be applied according to manufacturer’ s specification to all inactive construction areas previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).

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

3. Temporary traffic control shall be provided as appropriate during all phases of construction to improve traffic flow (e.g., flag person).

4. Construction activities that could affect traffic flow shall be scheduled in off-peak hours.

5. Active construction areas, haul roads, etc., shall be watered at least twice daily or more as needed to limit dust.

6. Exposed stockpiles of soil and other backfill material shall either be covered, watered, or have soil binders added to inhibit dust and wind erosion.

7. All truck hauling solid and other loose material shall be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between top of the load and the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of CVC Section 23114. This provision is enforced by local law enforcement agencies.

8. 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. Wheel washers shall be used where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or trucks and any equipment shall be washed off leaving the site with each trip.

9. Alternatives to open burning of cleared vegetative material on the project site shall be used unless otherwise deemed infeasible by the City Planning Division. Suitable alternatives include, but arenotlimited to, on-sitechipping and mulching and/ or hauling to a biomass fuel site.
c) Potential impacts to neighboring homes ( sensitive receptors) from fugitive dust caused during construction are mitigated by application of the SMMs discussed above.
d) The project does not involve land use that could generate objectionable odors affecting substantial number of people.

Documentation:

Shasta County APCD Air Quality Maintenance Plan and Implementing Measures City of Redding General Plan, Air Quality Element
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 City of Redding General Plan Background Report, Chapter 9.7, Natural Resources and Air Quality California Air Resources Board. 2017. Area designations maps/ state and national. http:// www.arb.ca.gov/ desig/ adm/ adm.htm accessed April 19, 2021).

Mitigation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 11 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 special- status 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?
x
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
x
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
x
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?
x
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? x 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?
x
Discussion:
a) A Biological Review Report was prepared for the project by Wildland Resource Managers ( WRM), dated May 2020, to assess the impacts of the proposed project on biological resources in the project area and vicinity. In addition to research, database review, and species list reviews, a habitat assessment and biological reconnaissance survey was conducted. Upon numerous inspections of the project area few wildlife species were observed and no listed species of flora or fauna were found. Several bird species were observed moving through the area as well as bats foraging over the site. These movements were classified as “opportunistic” rather than evidencing a travel corridor or migratory movement, of which there is no evidence. On February 26, 2020 and April 8, 2020, a spade-foot toad survey was conducted paying particular attention to the intermittent and ephemeral stream areas. No toads were seen or heard. Although the intermittent stream that flows through the project area has connectivity to the Sacramento River downstream, fish passage during normal flows is restricted by barriers. b) According to the California Natural Diversity Database ( CNDDB), 11 sensitive habitats, either on the Federal or State status, occur within CNDDB Enterprise Quadrant in which the project site is located: foothill yellow-legged frog, bald eagle, bank swallow, tricolored blackbird, vernal pool fairy shrimp, green sturgeon, steelhead, chinook salmon- Central Valley spring-run and - Sacramento River winter-run, gray wolf, slender Orcutt grass. Based on the Biological Review Report, discussed above, no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulation, or by CDFW or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were observed on the project site.
c) A Wetlands Delineation was prepared for the project by WRM in November 2019 and revised in May 2020. The field study efforts mapped 4 features in the proposed project site, including wetlands and other waters: emergent wetland, ephemeral swale, intermittent stream and a pond. There is an intermittent stream that flows through the center of the project site from north to south. The stream only carries water during the wet season from a culvert under Hartnell Avenue south across the property to the southwest corner. After leaving the property the stream is channeled along the western side of Shasta View Drive south to Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 12 Clover Creek Preserve. There is no true riparian habitat present. An ephemeral stream originates near the paved parking area in the northwest corner of the property and flows to north to south, intersecting the intermittent stream near the center of the property. This stream has a very shallow gradient with annual vegetation present within the stream channel. The emergent wetland is just to the east, and associated within, the intermittent stream near the center of the property. This wetland is moist during the winter months but dries out during the summer. The emergent pond holds water during the rainy season and quickly dries with the onset of warm weather. The delineation summarized that the combined total of jurisdictional wetland features on the proposed project site is 0.4013 acres. The project will impact all the wetland features found on the property. The intermittent stream will be placed within a 24-inch buried culvert and the ephemeral stream, emergent wetland and pond will be filled to the necessary project grade. In February 2020 the wetlands delineation report along with a Pre-construction notice, both prepared by WRM, were submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with a request for a preliminary jurisdictional determination and assistance with implementation of appropriate mitigation measures. However, a response from the Corps is still pending.

Implementation of MM-1 would reduce potential impacts to jurisdictional waters to less than significant. d) Although no active bird nests were observed on the proposed project site during the field inspections, birds could establish nests in vegetation on or adjacent to these areas in future nesting seasons. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) requires that nesting migratory birds not be adversely affected by human activities. Nesting migratory birds would potentially be directly or indirectly impacted by construction activities associated with the proposed project. Direct impacts include mortality resulting from removal of vegetation contained an active nest with eggs or chicks. Indirect impacts include nest abandonment by adults in response to loud noise levels or human encroachment, or a reduction in the amount of food available to young birds due to changes in feeding behavior by adults. Most migratory birds anticipated to occur in the project area next between February 1 and August 31. Implementation of MM-2 would reduce potential impacts to nesting migratory birds to less than significant.

During the biological field inspection, it was observed that there is some bat roosting habitat on-site in the form of tree cavities and bark crevices as well as several snags. However, no bat activity was observed around these features. The non-riparian trees on the site offer lower habitat values for bats; however, even on the non-riparian trees itis possible that bats could roost in trunk cavities or under loose bark. Implementation of MM-3 would reduce potential impacts to roosting bats to less than significant. e) The City has adopted a Tree Management Ordinance ( Chapter 18.45 of the RMC) that promotes the conservation of mature, healthy trees in the design of new development. The ordinance also recognizes that the preservation of trees will sometimes conflict with necessary land-development requirements. The City’ s General Plan EIR further acknowledges that preservation of native trees will sometimes conflict with normal land development and that implementation of the General Plan will ultimately set aside over 7,000 acres of open space, much of which contains oak habitat. But efforts must still be made to retain existing trees if reasonably possible, and to sufficiently plant new trees in the context of the new development. A tree survey is required to identify natural trees and tree groups most suitable for preservation or " candidate trees/ groups." Where all identified candidate trees/ groups cannot be preserved, the set-aside of a natural area or areas within a project site that is particularly suitable for the planting, retention, and/ or natural regeneration of trees is considered to be a desirable means of accomplishing the goals of the ordinance.

A Tree Survey was prepared for the project by Wildland Resource Managers. The survey found two primary vegetation associations on the project site. Blueoak/ interior live oak woodlands were found along the eastern and southern edges of the property covering approximately 31.4 percent of the project site. The survey identified 193 blue oaks larger than 6-inch dbh and 92 interior live oak larger than 6-inch dbh. The Tree Survey Exhibit depicts the location of the group oftrees on the proposed site plan. Further, it identified that there are several small to medium- sized oak trees located in the southwest portion of the site, however, none would be considered candidate trees. It was further observed that some vegetation management has taken place in the past as there is evidence of oak harvesting resulting in root crown sprouting and an open appearance in the north central portion of the project area. The proposal does not incorporate the retention of any of the trees. The developer is obligated to replant suitable new trees at the time of construction for shade. The Tree Management Ordinance identifies minimum planting criteria of one tree per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area or covered space, hence based on the proposed 83,888 square feet of gross floor area, a minimum of 84 trees are required. Additionally, the street frontages are required street trees at a ratio of 1 tree for every 30 feet of street frontage, therefore with the project site consisting of approximately 2,100 feet of street frontage, a minimum of 70 trees are required along the street frontages. Therefore, the requirement to plant a minimum of 154 new trees as a standard condition of development. Additionally, to mitigate the loss of trees at the project site MM-4 requires replacement at a minimum of 1:1 ratio resulting in a minimum of 194 trees planted in association with the project. Hence, the project is Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 13 consistent with the intent of the Tree Management Ordinance. f) No habitat conservation plans or other similar plans have been adopted for the project site or project area. No impact would occur in this regard.

Documentation:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Natural Diversity Data Base City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 City of Redding Municipal Code, Chapter 18.45, Tree Management Ordinance City of Redding General Plan Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH # 1998072103 Wetlands Delineation, by Wildland Resource Managers, May 2020 Tree Survey by Wildland Resource Managers, September 27, 2019 Mitigation:

MM-1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, as identified in the project wetland delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that the following resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the Corps, CDFW, RWQCB, or any other applicable agency (i.e., USFWS) identified through the permitting process:* d. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into “waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands, authorization under a Nationwide Permit or Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps. For any features determined to not be subject to the Corps jurisdiction during the verification process, authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB. For fill requiring a Corps permit, water quality certification shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to discharge of dredged or fill material. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to issuance the issuance of a grading permit. e. Prior to any activities that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of any intermittent or ephemeral creeks, notification of streambed alteration shall be submitted to the CDFW; and, if required, a 1602 streambed alteration agreement shall be obtained by the project applicant. Verification shall be provided tothe City of Redding Development Services Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. f. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other waters through thepurchase of mitigation credits at anagency-approved mitigation bank at a minimum 1:1ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/ offsite habitat restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan, including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance, and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies (i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted for review and approval. The affected regulatory agency shall identify when measures shall be implemented and completed for those activities impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All measures contained in the permits or associated with any agency approvals shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

MM-3. To the extent practicable, removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags shall occur before bat maternity colonies form (i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volant (i.e., after August 31). If construction ( including the removal of large trees 12 inch dbh ) occurs during the bat non-volant season ( March 1 through August 31), a qualified professional shall conduct a pre-construction survey of the study area to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than 7 days prior to the implementation of Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 14 construction activities. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the study area, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from project activities.

MM-4. The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15-gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

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?
x
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
x
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
x
Discussion
a-c) An archaeological inventory survey, dated December 2019 was prepared by Sean Michael Jensen, M.A. Based upon archaeological reports, records searches, and information contained in the General Plan EIR pertinent to the vicinity of the subject property, it has been determined that the project site is not in an area of archaeological or cultural sensitivity. While the project is not anticipated to affect cultural resources, a condition of approval will require if, during the course of development, any archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources are uncovered or otherwise detected or observed, construction activities in the area affected shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. A qualified archaeological professional must then be retained by the developer to investigate the discovered cultural object to determine its significance.

If the cultural object is deemed potentially significant by the archaeologist, appropriate treatment and measures shall be followed in accordance with applicable laws, as reviewed and approved by the City, prior to the resumption of work in the affected area.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan Background Report, 1998
City of Redding General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH # 1998072103 Archaeological Inventory Survey, by Sean Michael Jensen, M.A., December 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?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 15 Discussion
a) The project would not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Direct energy use would involve the short-term use of energy for construction activities. Project construction would primarily consume diesel and gasoline through operation of construction equipment, material deliveries, and debris hauling. Construction is estimated to result in a short-term consumption of energy, representing a small demand on local and regional fuel supplies that would be easily accommodated and would be temporary. Long term use of electricity for operations such as lighting, heating, and cooling in the development is excepted to be less than significant.
b) The project will not conflict with any State or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Air Quality Element, 2000 California Long-Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan, 2011 Regional Transportation Plan for Shasta County, 2015
Mitigation:

None necessary.

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake, fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publications 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
x
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? x
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 onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
x
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
x
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?
x
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? x
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 16 Discussion:
a, c, d) There are no Alquist-Priolo earthquake faults designated in the Redding area of Shasta County. There are no other documented earthquake faults in the immediate vicinity that pose a significant risk, and the site is located in an area designated in the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan as having a low ground- shaking potential. The project is not located on or near any documented landslide hazard areas, and there is no evidence of ground slippage or subsidence occurring naturally on the site. The type of soils and underlying geology is identified as having no potential for liquefaction.

No portion of the site falls within the 100-year floodplain of the Sacramento River or any creek. b) The project site contains two soil classifications types, Red Bluff Loam (RbA), and Churn Gravelly Loam (CfA). These classifications are characterized by slopes of 3-8% percent and slow to medium runoff with a hazard of erosion that is slight to moderate. The soil is well-drained and has moderately slow permeability. Proposed grading will consist of that necessary for improvements of property in preparation for paving, landscaping, and building construction.

The project is subject to certain erosion- control requirements mandated by existing City and State regulations. These requirements include:

City of Redding Grading Ordinance. This ordinance requires the application of “ Best Management Practices” ( BMPs) in accordance with the City Erosion and Sediment Control Standards Design Manual ( Redding Municipal Code Section

16.12.060, Subsections C, D, E). In practice, specific erosion- control measures are determined upon review of the final project improvement plans and are tailored to project-specific grading impacts.

California Regional Water Quality Board “ Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.” This permit somewhat overlaps the City’ s Grading Ordinance provision by applying state standards for erosion- control measures during construction of the project.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board “ Project Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP).” This plan emphasizes stormwater best management practices and is required as part ofthe Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.

The objectives of the SWPPP are to identify the sources of sediment and other pollutants that affect the quality of stormwater discharges and todescribe and ensure the implementation of practices toreduce sediment and other pollutants in stormwater discharges.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife “ 1600 Agreement.” This notification is required for any work within a defined streambed.

U.S. Army corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit. A new Nationwide 29 Permit (residential developments) will be required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address impacts to jurisdictional waters.

Actions for compliance with these regulations are addressed under standard conditions of approval, which are uniformly applied to all land development projects. Since the project is subject to uniformly applied ordinances and policies and the overall risk of erosion is low, potential impacts related to soil erosion and sedimentation are less than significant. f) The proposed project does not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal. No impact has been identified.
g) No unique geologic features, fossil-bearing strata, or paleontological sites are known to exist on the project site.

Documentation:

City of Redding Health and Safety Element, figures 4-1 (Ground Shaking Potential) and 4.2 (Liquefaction Potential) City of Redding General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report City of Redding General Plan Background Report, 1998
City of Redding Grading Ordinance, RMC Chapter 16.12
City of Redding Standard Specifications, Grading Practices City of Redding Standard Development Conditions for Discretionary Approvals Soil Survey of Shasta County Area, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, August 1974 Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 17 State Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, Regulations related to Construction Activity Storm Water Permits and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans
Mitigation:

None 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?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
Discussion:
a) In 2005, the Governor of California signed Executive Oder S-3-05, establishing that it is the State of California’ s goal to reduce statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emission levels. Subsequently, in 2006, the California State Legislature adopted Assembly Bill AS 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act. In part, AB 32 requires the California Air Resources Board to develop and adopt regulations to achieve a reduction in the State’ s GHG emissions to year 1990 levels by year 2020.

California Senate Bill SB97 established that an individual project’ s effect on GHG emission levels and global warming must be assessed under CEQA. SB97 further directed that the State Office of Planning and Research ( OPR) develop guidelines for the assessment of a project’ s GHG emissions. Those guidelines for GHG emissions were subsequently included as amendments to the CEQA Guidelines. The guidelines did not establish thresholds of significance and there are currently no state, regional, county, or city guidelines or thresholds with which to direct project-level CEQA review. As a result, the City of Redding has utilized the best available information to develop a threshold until a specific quantitative threshold is adopted by the state or regional air district.

As the Lead Agency, the City has opted to utilize a quantitative non-zero project- specific threshold using a methodology recommended by the California Air Pollution Officers ( CAPCOA) and accepted by the California Air Resources Board. According to CAPCOA’ s Threshold 2.3, CARB Reporting Threshold, 10,000 metric tons of carbon- dioxide equivalents per year (mtCO2eq/ yr) is recommended as aquantitative non-zero threshold. According to the CAPCOA, this threshold would be 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. This approach is estimated tocapture over half the future residential and commercial development projects and is designed to support the goals of AB 32 and not hinder it.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies four primary constituents that are most representative of the GHG emissions. They are:

Carbon Dioxide ( CO2): Emitted primarily through the burning of fossil fuels. Other sources include the burning of solid waste and wood and/ or wood products and cement manufacturing.

Methane ( CH4): Emissions occur during the production and transport 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 CFC’ s, 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 electricity generation and transportation. The EPA estimates that nearly 85 percent of the nation’ s GHG emissions are comprised of carbon dioxide (CO2). The majority of CO2is generated by petroleum Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 18 consumption associated with transportation and coal consumption associated with electricity generation. The remaining emissions are predominately the result of natural- gas consumption associated with a variety of uses.

With regard to the project, the predominant associated GHG is CO2 generated by motor-vehicle travel to and from the site. To a substantially lesser degree, the project will result in CH4 emissions associated with use of electric power generated by the Redding Electric Utility (REU), though it should be noted that REU distributes power from a variety of sources, including hydroelectric, wind, and natural gas.

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, as well as 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, including Air Quality SSM 1 through 9 (listed in Section III, Air Quality, above), will be used during construction to further limit any potential contribution to negative impacts from GHG emissions. The project’ s direct or indirect impact on measurable GHGs in the Redding area would be less than significant.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, 2000
CPCOA website, July 19, 2010
California Office of the Attorney General, “ The California Environmental Quality Act Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Local Agency Level,” updated January 6, 20010.

Air Quality Management District, https:// www.co.shasta. ca.us/ index/ drm_index/ aq_index.aspx. Accessed April 22, 2020 Mitigation:

None 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? x 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?
x
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
x
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?
x
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
x
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? x g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? x Discussion:

Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 19 a, b, c, d) The nature of the project as a shopping center and storage facility, does not present a significant risk related to hazardous materials or emissions. There are no documented hazardous material sites located on or near the project. e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. There would be no impact on public safety. f) The project does not involve a use or activity that could interfere with emergency- response or emergency- evacuation plans for the area.
g) The project site is not located within the Very High Fire Severity Zone and is not adjacent to areas with significant fuel loads. The property does not have a wildland fire-hazard potential and will not expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildland fires.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Health and Safety Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None 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 ground water quality? x b) Substantially decease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
x
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:
x
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; x ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
x
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
x
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? x
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? x
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
x
Discussion:
a) The project proposes to extend the public sewer system down Leonard Street to serve this site and the properties to the south.

Construction and operation of the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 20 established by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB) in its Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins. Water pollution best management practices are required and will be incorporated into the improvement plans for the project. The City’ s construction standards require that all projects prepare an erosion and sediment control plan (ESCP) prior to construction to address water pollution control. The ESCP will ensure that water quality standards are not substantially affected by the project during construction. b) The project would utilize City water service for domestic uses and fire protection. The proposed project would not impact groundwater supplies.
c) Stormwater runoff from the site flows from north to south by way of an intermittent stream. The stream carries water from a culvert under Hartnell Avenue south across the property to the southwest corner. An ephemeral stream flows from the northwest to the center of the site where itjoins the aforementioned intermittent stream. The project will be required to install storm drain pipe connecting the culvert under Hartnell Avenue to the storm drain system running along the western side of Shasta View Drive, but would not alter the pattern or result in substantial erosion, surface runoff, flooding on- or off- site, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality with construction.

The project is subject to standard requirements defined under Section VII., Geology and Soils, and mitigation measures ( if any) under Section IV., Biological Resources, above that minimize the potential for erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The final improvement plans for the project must also incorporate specific design measures intended to limit pollutant discharges in stormwater from urban improvements as established under the State’ s National Pollutant Elimination System ( NPDES) general permit, which the City is now obligated to follow in accordance with State Water Quality Control Order No. 2003-0005-DWQ.

Feasible Best Management Practices ( BMPs) would be incorporated in the final design of the project’ s storm-drain system, as approved by the City Engineer, based on the BMPs listed in the latest edition of the California Storm Water Quality Association Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook.

City of Redding Policy 1806 requires that all subdivision development include stormwater detention facilities designed to maintain existing predevelopment rates of runoff during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm event with a 6-hour duration. The project application includes a stormwater hydrology analysis prepared by Wildland Resource Managers and dated May 2020 that concludes that impacts from stormwater drainage and runoff would be less than significant. d) The property is not located within any agency or otherwise- documented flood-hazard boundary, tsunami, or seiche zones. The threat of a tsunami wave is not applicable to inland, central valley communities such as Redding. Seiches could potentially be generated in either Shasta or Whiskeytown Lakes during an earthquake. However, neither lake has been identified in the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan as having any risk to the City under such circumstances. There is no documented threat of mudflows affecting the project site.
e) The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan Background Report, Chapter 10, Health and Safety Element, 1998 Federal Emergency Management Agency Floodplain regulations, FIRM map 06089C1554G, dated March 17, 2011 City of Redding Storm Drain Master Plan, Montgomery- Watson Engineers 1993 Mitigation:

None necessary.

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? x
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 21 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
x
Discussion:
a) The project does not have the potential to physically divide an established community. The project site is zoned “ SC” Shopping Center as are the properties to the north and west. The zoning transitions to multiple family and then single-family zoning to the south.
b) The project is approximately 12.13 acres in size. The project area is currently zoned for shopping center, “ SC” Zoning Designation, and has a General Plan designation of “Shopping Center.” A shopping center, therefore, is appropriate within the existing zoning district and General Plan designation. However, a self-storage facility is not a permitted land use with the existing zoning district nor General Plan designation. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a rezoning to “HC” Heavy Commercial and a general plan amendment to “Heavy Commercial.” The zoning transitions to multiple family to the east across Leonard Street and single family to the south, however, as a self-storage facility, very little traffic or noise is associated with these sues. The main office and gate for the facility is located along the Leonard Street frontage at the northwest corner of the facility. A detention basis and an emergency access easement is proposed along the south property line which will buffer the single family and multiple family districts from the proposed shopping center and self-storage facility. The project is compatible with the applicable policies and regulations of the City General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and is not in conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Community Development Element, 2000 City of Redding General Plan Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH # 1998072103 City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None 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 that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? x b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local General Plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
x
Discussion:
a) The project site 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.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 Mitigation:

Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 22 None 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 inthe vicinity ofthe project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
x
b) Generation of excessive ground- borne vibration or groundborne noise levels? x 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?
x
Discussion:
a) During the construction of the proposed project, there will be a temporary increase in noise in the project vicinity above existing ambient noise levels. The most noticeable construction noise will be related to grading, utility excavation, and land-clearing activity. The City' s Grading Ordinance ( RMC Chapter 16.12.120.H) limits grading- permit-authorized activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No operations are allowed on Sunday. Since heavy construction work associated with the project is limited in scope and by existing regulation, the anticipated noise impact to neighboring residents is considered less than significant.
b) Due to the nature of the project as a shopping center and mini storage facility, it would not result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels and would not result in generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground- borne noise levels. c) The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or airport, or within area of the Redding Municipal Airport or Benton airport land use plan.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Noise Element, 2000
City of Redding Grading Ordinance Redding Municipal Code, Section 16.12.120 City of Redding General Plan, Transportation Element, 2000 City of Redding Zoning Ordinance Redding Municipal Code, Section 18.40.100 City of Redding Municipal Airport Area Plan
Mitigation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 23 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less- ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less- ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned 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)?
x
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
x
Discussion:
a, b) The project will improve the frontage of the project site. The nature of the project, as a shopping center and self-storage facility, would not induce unplanned population growth and does not propose the extension of an new roads or utilities not anticipated by the General Plan. The project does not displace substantial numbers of people. No impacts to population and housing will result from the project.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Housing Element, 2014
Mitigation:

None necessary.

XV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less- ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Fire Protection? x
Police Protection? x
Schools? x
Parks? x
Other public facilities? x
Discussion:

Fire and Police Protection:

The City would provide police and fire protection to the project from existing facilities and under existing service levels. The size of the project would not mandate the need for additional police or fire facilities.

The project is subject to Chapter 16.20 of the Redding Municipal Code, which requires new development to pay a citywide fire facilitiesimpact fee calculated to mitigate a project’ s fair share of cumulative impacts to the City’ s fire-protection infrastructure based upon improvements necessary to accommodate new development under the City’ s General Plan.

Schools:

The project is a commercial shopping center and mini storage facility and will have no impact to schools.

Parks:

Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 24 The project will not cause a physical deterioration of an existing park facility or cause an adverse physical impact associated with a new park facility.

Other public facilities:

See discussion under Item XIX ( Utilities and Service Systems) below.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None necessary.

XVI. RECREATION:

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? x
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?
x
Discussion:
a) The project is a shopping center and self-storage facility. As a nonresidential development project, the proposal is not expected to generate any significant additional demand for recreation opportunities or impact existing or proposed recreational facilities in Redding.
b) The project does not propose any recreational facilities or require construction or expansion of facilities. There would be no adverse physical impact associated with the project.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 City of Redding General Plan, Recreation Element, 2000
City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None necessary.

XVII. TRANSPORTATION: 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?
x
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision ( b)? x
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 25 XVII. TRANSPORTATION: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less- ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
x
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? x
Discussion:
a - c) A traffic study for the area was prepared by GHD, dated March 1, 2021. The study assessed four scenarios; ( 1) existing conditions; ( 2) existing plus project conditions; ( 3) year 2040 no project conditions; and (4) year 2040 plus project conditions.

The study identified under the “ Existing Plus Project” scenario, the Shasta View Drive roadway segment is projected to operate at LOS F. Implementation of MM-5 which involves restriping of Shasta View Drive and construction of sidewalk along the east side of Shasta View Drive will reduce potential impacts to the Shasta View Drive roadway segment to less than significant.

Under the “Year 2040 Plus Project” scenario, the unsignalized intersection at Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue is projected to operate at LOS E in the AM and LOS F in the PM peak hours. Implementation of MM-6 requiring the construction of a roundabout at this intersection will reduce potential impacts to the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue intersection to less than significant.

Therefore, incorporating the off-site improvements as mitigations, no impacts associated with traffic volumes are anticipated.

The project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system and the project will not conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. 3(b). The project will be required to construct frontage improvements along Shasta View Drive, Hartnell Avenue, and Leonard Avenue, including sidewalk along Shasta View Drive and Hartnell Avenue. The project would not significantly increase any hazards due to design but would enhance the circulation system with completion of sidewalks along both streets.

The project is subject to Chapter 16.20 of the Redding Municipal Code, which requires new development to pay a citywide transportation- development impact fee calculated to mitigate a project’ s fair share of cumulative impacts tothe City’s streetand traffic-control infrastructure based upon improvements necessary to accommodate new development under the City’s General Plan.

With the proposed improvements, impacts totransportation would be considered less than significant, and likely will improve levels of service.
d) The Redding Fire Marshall has reviewed the project. The project includes entrances along Shasta View Drive and an emergency access/ exit from the facility to Maraglia Street which is adequate access for emergency access and fire protection.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Transportation Element, 2000 City of Redding General Plan Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH # 1998072103 City of Redding Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan, 2018 City of Redding Traffic Impact Fee Program
City of Redding Active Transportation Plan, 2018
Redding Area Bus Authority System Map and Route Guide, October 2000 Holiday Market Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum, prepared by GHD, dated January 14, 2021 Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 26 Mitigation:

MM-5 Off-site improvement along Shasta View Drive shall include the following:
a. Restriping of the portion of Shasta View Drive between Hartnell Avenue and Goodwater Avenue to a three-lane arterial with one travel lane in each direction with a two-way left turn lane. b. Construct a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to Christian Avenue.

MM-6 Construct a 3-leg, single lane roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue intersection.

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
x
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.
x
Discussion:
a, b) In accordance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), the City consulted with the local Native American tribes requesting notification pursuant to Section 21080.3 of CEQA. This consultation included contacting the local Native American via letters sent on March 8, 2021. No tribal cultural resources were identified within the project area and the proposed project would therefore, not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of any known tribal cultural resources.

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 or wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
x
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
x
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 27 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less- ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
x
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
x
e) Comply with Federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? x Discussion:
a) Wastewater generated from the project would be that associated with the shopping center and manager’ s office discharged into the City sanitary sewer system. This type and intensity of land use activity does not generate wastewater demands that would exceed treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed development does not generate the need for the construction of new water or wastewater- treatment facilities.

The project is subject to Chapter 16.20 of the Redding Municipal Code, which requires new development to pay water and sewer impact fees calculated to mitigate aproject’ s fair share of cumulative impacts to the City’ s water and sewer distribution, collection, and treatment infrastructure based upon improvements necessary to accommodate new development under the City’ s General Plan.

Project-related stormwater- management improvements consist of construction of collection and conveyance systems in accordance with City construction standards and City Policy 1806 pertaining to stormwater detention ( also see IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, d and e).
b) Potable water is available from the City to serve all seven parcels of the project with adequate pressure and flows for fire suppression. The demands of the project can be accommodated within the City’ s existing water resources and the reasonably foreseeable future during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. c) All seven of the project parcels will utilize the City’ s sanitary sewer system to dispose of wastewater. Adequate sewer capacity is available in the City’ s existing system.
d, e) The City provides solid waste disposal service, which the project would utilize. Adequate capacity is available to serve the needs of the project without need of special accommodation.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Elements, 2000 City of Redding Water and Sewer Atlas
Mitigation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 28 XX. WILDFIRE: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

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?
x
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose projects occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire?
x
c) Require installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure ( such as roads, fuel sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
x
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
x
Discussion:
a) The project site is not located within the Very High Fire Severity Zone and is not adjacent to areas with significant fuel loads. The project would not impair an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. b, c, d) Because the project site is relatively flat without any significant slope and vegetation, nor is it surrounded by any significant vegetated area or slopes, the project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire, require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that could exacerbate wildfire risks, or expose people or structures to downstream flooding or landslides. No impacts associated with wildfire are anticipated.

Documentation:

CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps, Shasta County, 2008 Mitigation:

None necessary.

XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less- ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below the self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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? X
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)? X
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 29 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less- ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Does the project have potential environmental effects which may cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
X
Discussion:

Based on the analysis undertaken as part of this Initial Study, the following findings can be made:
a) The project has the potential to degrade wildlife habitat in general due to erosion and sedimentation resulting from grading and construction of project infrastructure. However, the project conditions as identified under Hydrology/ Water Quality have been established to reduce potential impacts to a level less than significant. b) As discussed in Item III, the project will contribute to regionwide cumulative air quality impacts. However, under policy of the General Plan, application of Standard Mitigation Measures ( SMMs) and Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMS) will reduce potential impacts from this project to a level less than significant. c) As discussed herein, the project does not have characteristics which could cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

Documentation:

See all Sections above.

Mitigation:

None Necessary
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 1- April 30, 2021

HARTNELL COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BY SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CONTENTS
This document is the Mitigation Monitoring Program ( MMP) for the Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development. The MMP 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. 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 Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development. 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.

Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020-01668, GPA-2020-01667 - 2- April 30, 2021, 20

MITIGATION MONITORING TABLE
The Mitigation Monitoring Table identifies the mitigation measures proposed for the Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development. These mitigation measures are reproduced from the Initial Study and conditions of approval for the project. The tables have the following columns:

Mitigation Measure: Lists the mitigation measures identified within the Initial Study for a specific impact, along with the number for each measure as enumerated in the Initial Study.

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 measure.

NONCOMPLIANCE COMPLAINTS
Any person or agency may file a complaint asserting noncompliance with the mitigation measures 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 conduct an investigation 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 complainant shall receive written confirmation indicating the results of the investigation or the final action corresponding to the particular noncompliance issue.

Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 3- April 30, 2021
Mitigation Measure Timing/ Implementation Enforcement/ Monitoring Verification Date and Initials)
Mitigation Measure 1 – Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, as identified in the project wetland delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that the following resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the Corps, CDFW, RWQCB,
or any other applicable agency ( i.e., USFWS) identified through the permitting process:*
a. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands,
authorization under a Nationwide Permit or
Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps.

For any features determined to not be subject to the
Corps jurisdiction during the verification process,
authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from
regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB. For
fill requiring a Corps permit, water quality
certification shall be obtained from the RWQCB
prior to discharge of dredged or fill material.

Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding
Development Services Department prior to issuance
the issuance of a grading permit.
b. Prior to any activities that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of any
intermittent or ephemeral creeks, notification of
streambed alteration shall be submitted to the
CDFW; and, if required, a 1602 streambed alteration
agreement shall be obtained by the project applicant.

Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding
Development Services Department prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.
c. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other
waters through the purchase of mitigation credits at
an agency- approved mitigation bank at a minimum
1:1 ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/ offsite habitat
restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan,
including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance,
and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies
i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted
for review and approval. The affected regulatory
Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit Planning Division, and Public Works Department
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 4- April 30, 2021
agency shall identify when measures shall be
implemented and completed for those activities
impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All
measures contained in the permits or associated with
any agency approvals shall be implemented to the
satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

Mitigation Measure 2 – If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds or raptors ( February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey 7 days before
construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, 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.

Prior to issuance of a grading or tree
removal permit.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Mitigation Measure 3 – To the extent practicable, removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags shall occur before bat maternity colonies form ( i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volant ( i.e., after August 31). If construction including the removal of large trees 12 inch dbh ) occurs during the bat non- volant season ( March 1 through August 31), a qualified professional shall conduct a pre-construction survey of the study area to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than 7 days prior to the implementation of construction activities. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the study area, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from project activities.

Prior to issuance of a grading or tree
removal permit.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Mitigation Measure 4 – The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15- gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

Prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Mitigation Measure 5 – Off-site improvement along Shasta View Drive shall include the following:
o Restriping of the portion of Shasta View Drive
between Hartnell Avenue and Goodwater
Avenue to a three- lane arterial with one travel
lane in each direction with a two-way left turn
Prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 5- April 30, 2021
lane.
o Construct a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of
Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to
Christian Avenue.

Mitigation Measure 6 – Construct a 3-leg, single lane
roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue
intersection.

Prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation

WILSONAVE

ALDENAVE

MARLENEAVE

BELLADONNAST

LEONARDSTBILLINGS

DRMARILYNAVE

JONQUILWAY

FORESTHOMES

DROAKVIEW DRKENTWOOD

DRBONESET

STAPPIAN

AVESHASTA WAYLICHEN VIEW

DRSHASTAVIEWDRHAWN

AVEHARTNELL
AVE MTG.

DATE:ITEM:ATTACHMENT: LOCATIONMAPGISDIVISION INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT DATE PRODUCED: 0400200Feet-P:\Planning\ ProProjects\UP\UP-2020-01669. aprxNOVEMBER24,
2020 UP-2020-01669 / GPA- 2020-01667 / RZ-2020-01668TJG / SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT2469 & 2525 HARTNELLAVE/3055 & 3091 APPIAN WAY/ 3050LEONARDST
AP# 110-210-
055 / 110-020-
001, - 037, - 038 & -
0612469HARTNELL
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

NOPARKING

HARTNELL AVENUELEONARD

VIEWSTREET SHASTA

DRIVECB
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell Commercial Complex)

NOPARKING

HARTNELL AVENUELEONARD

VIEWSTREET SHASTA

DRIVECB
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell Commercial Complex) Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

NOPARKING

HARTNELL AVENUELEONARD

VIEWSTRET SHASTA
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell Commercial Complex)

NOPARKING

HARTNELL AVENUELEONARD

VIEWSTREET SHASTA

DRIVECB
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell Commercial Complex)

HARTNELL AVENUELEONARD

STREET SHASTA VIEW
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell Commercial Complex)

HARTNELL AVENUELEONARD

STREET SHASTA VIEW
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell Commercial Complex) Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO REDDING PLANNING COMMISSION
Recommendation
Conduct a public hearing and, upon conclusion forward a recommendation to Council to: ( 1) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act; (2) Determine that the necessary findings for approval are in evidence; and ( 3) Approve Use Permit Application UP-2020-01669, Parcel Map Application PM-2021-00290, General Plan Amendment GPA- 2020- 01667, and Rezone application RZ-2020- 01668, subject to the draft conditions.

Project Description
The applicant is requesting approval of a use permit, parcel map, general plan amendment, and rezoning for the development of a shopping center and mini- storage facility on 12.13 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive.

PARCEL SIZE. 12.13 acres.

TERRAIN/VEGETATION. The property is currently vacant and is populated with blue and Interior live oak trees, annual grasses with scattered shrubs. The project site slopes gently from north to MEETING DATE: June 8, 2021
ITEM NO. 4(b)1
FROM:

APPROVED BY***
sprice@cityofredding. org [email protected]. ca.us
SUBJECT: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP-2020-01669/Parcel Map Application PM2021- 00290/ General Plan Amendment Application GPA- 2020- 01667/ Rezoning Application RZ2020-01668, by TJG/Summit Development Corporation, requesting approval to allow the construction of the Hartnell Commercial Complex consisting of a 30,000- square- foot Holiday Market Grocery Store and five outer pads for retail, a drive-through restaurant, a coffee drivethrough, and an automobile fueling station with a convenience store on property located at 2469 and 2525 Hartnell Avenue, 3055 and 3091 Appian Way in a “ SC” Shopping Center District and a 38,400- square- foot mini- storage facility on property located at 3050 Leonard Street currently in a " SC" Shopping Center District. The rezone is a request to change the current zoned “ SC” Shopping Center on the proposed 2.8-acre self- storage facility parcel to “ HC” Heavy Commercial. The General Plan amendment request reflects the rezone request to amend the existing General Plan designation of “ Shopping Center” to “ Heavy Commercial.” Sean Price, Assistant Planner
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Report to Redding Planning Commission June 4, 2021
Re: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, TJG/ Summit Development Corp ( Hartnell Com Complex) Page 2
south. An intermittent stream flows in a southwest direction beginning approximately at the midpoint of the property on Hartnell Avenue exiting the property at the southwest corner of the property. An emergent wetland exists along the intermittent stream just west of the center of the project site. An ephemeral swale parallels Shasta View Drive along Appian Way which joins with the intermittent stream at the southwest quadrant of the project site. A small isolated pond also exists within the southwest quadrant of the project site.

EXISTING LAND USE. The property is currently vacant.

GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION. “ Shopping Center”.

ZONING DESIGNATION. “ SC” Shopping Center.

SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Heavy Commercial
East: Heavy Commercial and Residential Multi- Family
South: Residential Multi-Family and Residential Single-Family West: General Commercial and Residential Single- Family Background
The project site encompasses five parcels of approximately 12.13 acres and was previously developed with a retail complex located at the northwest corner. The site is currently undeveloped and has sparse coverage of Blue and Interior Live Oak trees, annual grasses and scattered native shrubs. Commercial uses are located to the north and west. To the south the project is bordered by single and multiple family uses. West of the project is a mix of commercial and multiple family.

The proposed shopping center consists of a 30,000-square-foot Holiday Market Grocery Store, and five outer pads for retail, a drive- through restaurant, a coffee drive- through, and an automobile fueling station with a convenience store. The project also includes the request to allow a mini- storage facility on 2.8 acres of land. A parcel map related to the project will delineate each of the retail spaces and the proposed mini-storage warehouse facility on their respective parcel, taking the total parcels from five to seven. The rezone is a request to change the current zoned “ SC” Shopping Center on the proposed 2.8-acre mini-storage facility parcel to HC” Heavy Commercial. The general plan amendment request reflects the rezone request to amend the existing general plan designation of “Shopping Center” to “Heavy Commercial.” Issues
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY. It is staff’ s opinion that the project shopping center embodies the very land uses that are envisioned by the property’ s zoning and General Plan designations and that the surrounding area is currently underserved by the types of goods and services that will be provided by the proposed shopping center. The Community Development and Design Element of the General Plan defines the Shopping Center designation as being applicable to sites for shopping centers serving a larger market area than a neighborhood center, but a smaller market area than a regional center, typically including two or more anchor tenants, such as a supermarket and combined drug/ variety/ garden business, tenants offering consumer goods and Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Report to Redding Planning Commission June 4, 2021
Re: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, TJG/ Summit Development Corp ( Hartnell Com Complex) Page 3
personal services, and office and clinic uses. Sites designated Shopping Center generally range from 5 to 20 acres and accommodate 50,000 to 200,000 square feet of building area. The project is consistent with the General Plan definitions of allowable land uses. The project provides a transition to the residential uses nearby through the use of appropriate setbacks, landscape buffers, and solid masonry walls with pedestrian access points enhancing compatibility between the residential and commercial land uses (Policy CDD9D).

The proposed mini-storage facility on the east side of the project site requires an amendment to the General Plan and Rezone for consistency. The site is currently zoned “ SC” Shopping Center with a General Plan classification of “Shopping Center.” These current designations do not allow for mini- storage facilities. The project requires a general plan amendment to “ Heavy Commercial” and a rezoning to “ HC” Heavy Commercial, to allow for the development of the mini- storage facility at this site. With the approval of the general plan amendment and rezoning applications, the construction of the proposed storage facility would be permissible with a Site Development Permit. The zoning transitions to multiple family to the east across Leonard Street and single family to the south, however, as a self-storage facility, very little traffic or noise is associated with these ensues. The main office and gate for the facility is located along the Leonard Street frontage at the northwest corner of the facility. A detention basis and an emergency access easement is proposed along the south property line which will buffer the single family and multiple family districts from the proposed shopping center and self-storage facility. In the opinion of department staff, the storage facility provides a suitable “ buffer” between the activity of the shopping center and the single-family residences located east of the development.

SITE DESIGN. The project site is located on land that is highly visible as viewed primarily along Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive. The City’s Planning Division has reviewed the site design and building elevations and has determined the proposed design is in conformance with the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Commercial Design Guidelines. The project would be consistent in height with buildings on the developed adjacent commercial properties.

Other project features include, but not limited to landscaping, hardscape features, solid waste enclosures, monument signs, building signage, and parking lot, driveway and walkway lighting.

TRAFFIC. A traffic study for the area was prepared by GHD. The study identified two intersections with existing less than ideal level of service, Shast a View Drive at Goodwater Avenue and Alta Mesa Drive at Hartnell Avenue. The project will include off-site improvements to Shasta View Drive including restriping Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to Goodwater Avenue, as well as construction of sidewalk along the east side of Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to approximately 573 feet north of Kerry Avenue. Furthermore, the applicant will also be obligated to contributing their fair share of the cost of design and construction for signalized intersections at both the Shasta View Drive at Goodwater Avenue and Alta Mesa Drive at Hartnell intersections. Therefore, incorporating the off-site improvements and fair share costs as a mitigation, no impacts associated with traffic volumes are anticipated.

These mitigations are reflected as conditions of approval, attached. The project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system and the project will not conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).

In regards to project frontage improvements, the project will be required to construct frontage improvements including sidewalk along Shasta View Drive and Hartnell Avenue. Frontage Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Report to Redding Planning Commission June 4, 2021
Re: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, TJG/ Summit Development Corp ( Hartnell Com Complex) Page 4
improvements along Leonard Street will also be required. The project would not significantly increase any hazards due to design but would enhance the circulation system with completion of sidewalks along both streets.

BIOLOGICAL. A Biological Review Report was prepared for the project by Wildland Resource Managers (WRM), to assess the impacts of the proposed project on biological resources in the project area and vicinity. In addition to research, database review, and species list reviews, a habitat assessment and biological reconnaissance survey was conducted. Upon numerous inspections of the project area few wildlife species were observed and no listed species of flora or fauna were found. As a result of the delineation of Waters of the U.S., a small jurisdictional water of approximately 0.4 acres in size was located. The report identified the loss of jurisdictional waters and potential habitat loss for migratory birds, bats and any other potential species of concern. Mitigation measures contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration include:

Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into “ waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands, authorization under a Nationwide Permit or Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps. For any features determined to not be subject to the Corps jurisdiction during the verification process, authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB.

Allowing tree removal only outside of the nesting seasons for migratory birds and bats, unless their absence is confirmed by a qualified biologist.

Purchase wetland credits for 0.15 acres of wetland features at an approved wetland bank.

These mitigations are reflected in the attached conditions of approval.

LIGHTING. There would not be an adverse effect on day or nighttime views in the area. Shielding of lighting as required by City Ordinance will minimize any impact to a level of less than significant. The following standard condition will be applicable and therefore any potential impact will be less than significant.

BUILDING DESIGN. The project site is located on land that is highly visible as viewed primarily along Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive. The six commercial buildings are proposed to be architecturally compatible which includes a mixture of materials including, metal roofing material, stucco, stone veneer, lap siding, wood plank siding, board and batt, grove siding, and glazing. The buildings and associated facades will have varying heights, awnings, canopies, cornices, pitched roofs, trellises, and other decorative fixtures to provide articulation to the building elevations which, along with varying natural earth tone colors and patterns, provide variation in the appearance of the buildings.

TREE PRESERVATION. The City has adopted a Tree Management Ordinance (Chapter 18.45 of the RMC) that promotes the conservation of mature, healthy trees in the design of new development. The ordinance also recognizes that the preservation of trees will sometimes Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Report to Redding Planning Commission June 4, 2021
Re: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, TJG/ Summit Development Corp ( Hartnell Com Complex) Page 5
conflict with necessary land-development requirements. The City’s General Plan EIR further acknowledges that preservation of native trees will sometimes conflict with normal land development and that implementation of the General Plan will ultimately set aside over 7,000 acres of open space, much of which contains oak habitat. But efforts must still be made to retain existing trees if reasonably possible, and to sufficiently plant new trees in the context of the new development. A tree survey is required to identify natural trees and tree groups most suitable for preservation or " candidate trees/ groups." Where all identified candidate trees/ groups cannot be preserved, the set-aside of a natural area or areas within a project site that is particularly suitable for the planting, retention, and/ or natural regeneration of trees is considered to be a desirable means of accomplishing the goals of the ordinance.

A Tree Survey was prepared for the project by Wildland Resource Managers. The survey found two primary vegetation associations on the project site. Blue Oak/interior live oak woodlands were found along the eastern and southern edges of the property covering approximately 31.4 percent of the project site. The survey identified 193 blue oaks larger than 6-inch diameter at breast height ( dbh) and 92 interior live oak larger than six-inch dbh. The Tree Survey Exhibit depicts the location of the group of trees on the proposed site plan. Further, it identified that there are several small to medium-sized oak trees located in the southwest portion of the site, however, none would be considered candidate trees. It was further observed that some vegetation management has taken place in the past as there is evidence of oak harvesting resulting in root crown sprouting and an open appearance in the north central portion of the project area. The proposal does not incorporate the retention of any of the trees. However, the developer is proposing to retain those healthy trees that will not be impacted by buildings and paving. The developer is obligated to replant suitable new trees at the time of construction for shade. The Tree Management Ordinance identifies minimum planting criteria of one tree per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area or covered space, hence based on the proposed 83,888 square feet of gross floor area, a minimum of 84 trees are required. Additionally, the street frontages are required street trees at a ratio of one tree for every 30 feet of street frontage, therefore with the project site consisting of approximately 2,100 feet of street frontage, a minimum of 70 trees are required along the street frontages. Therefore, the requirement to plant a minimum of 154 new trees is a standard condition of development. However, to mitigate the loss of trees at the project site a mitigation of the project requires replacement at a minimum of 1:1 ratio resulting in a minimum of 194 trees planted in association with the project. Hence, the project is consistent with the intent of the Tree Management Ordinance.

PARCEL MAP. The proposed parcel map is intended to divide the each of the retail spaces and the proposed mini- storage warehouse facility on their respective parcel, taking the total parcels from five to seven. The parcel sizes range from 0.57 acres (24,829 square feet) to 3.47 acres (151,153 square feet). The “ SC” Shopping Center and “ HC” Heavy Commercial zoning districts allow parcels to be a minimum size of 10,000 square feet. The proposed parcels are well over the minimum requirements. Reciprocal driveway and parking easements are managed privately by the shopping center’ s Property Owners Association.

Environmental Determination
Staff prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. A notice of availability of the environmental document was sent to surrounding property owners, local agencies, and the State Clearinghouse for public review. The public review period will end on June 7, 2021. The environmental document Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Report to Redding Planning Commission June 4, 2021
Re: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, TJG/ Summit Development Corp ( Hartnell Com Complex) Page 6
concludes that with the application of standard City and agency development standards and regulations and the identified mitigation measures, the project does not have the potential to significantly affect the environment.

Public Comment
To date staff has received four written comments from residents expressing concern about the project. These comments are attached. The comments express concern over the lack of sidewalk on the west side of Shasta View Drive, noise, traffic, dust, transient activit y, and the use of Leonard Street as a result of the proposed mini-storage development. One comment received from Angela Moskow of the California Oaks Coalition expressed concern over the removal of oak woodlands on the property.

Additionally, the applicant held a public information meeting regarding the project on May 20, 2021. Staff was in attendance and observed a majority of positive comments.

Project Conditions
The conditions for this project are attached.

Required Findings
Certain findings must be found to be in evidence to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration under CEQA Section 15074 and approval of the use permit as set forth in Section 18.14.030 and

18.10.030 of the Zoning Code and approval of the tentative parcel map as set forth in Section 66474 of the State Government Code. The findings are provided as an attachment to this report.

Planning Commission Authority
Although the City of Redding Planning Commission has the authority to approve Use Permit applications, since the proposal also includes a rezoning and general plan amendment applications the proposal requires approval by the City Council with a recommendation from the Planning Commission.

Alternatives
The following alternatives are offered for consideration:

1. Based upon a determination that the necessary findings are in evidence, recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, Parcel Map Application PM-2021- 00290, General Plan Amendment Application GPA-2020-01667, and Rezoning Application RZ-2020-01668, subject to the attached draft conditions. ( Staff Recommendation)

2. Recommend denial to the City Council of the use permit, parcel map, general plan amendment, and rezoning applications. Such action must be based upon a finding that the project is inconsistent with the General Plan or other City development standards or poses a threat to public health, safety, or welfare. Staff has not identified any justification for denying the project.

Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Report to Redding Planning Commission June 4, 2021
Re: 4(b)1--Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669, TJG/ Summit Development Corp ( Hartnell Com Complex) Page 7

3. Continue the item or refer the item back to staff for project modifications the Planning Commission deems necessary to support the project. Minor modifications can be incorporated into a motion for a recommendation of approval.

Conclusion
The proposed shopping center and mini storage facility has been thoroughly considered and the impacts from the proposed change have been adequately mitigated through the project conditions. The use of this site as a shopping center and storage facility is the highest and best use of the site that will best serve the neighborhood. Therefore, staff recommends the Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council supporting the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project. c: TJG/ Summit Development
North State Grocery
DKM Engineering
Attachments
Findings
Use Permit Draft Conditions
Parcel Map Draft Conditions
Draft Resolution for General Plan Amendment
Draft Ordinance for Rezoning
Location/ Zoning Map
General Plan Map
Proposed Zoning Map
Proposed General Plan Map
Site Plan
Parcel Map
Architecture Package
Comments
Mitigated Negative Declaration- Initial Study- Mitigation Monitoring Program Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

FINDINGS
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION UP-2020-01669

SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT

USE PERMIT FINDINGS

1. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use. The shopping center and mini- storage facility use at this site will have additional impacts to the neighborhood in regards to traffic and general activity at the site. The conditions of approval require improvements that address these potential impacts such as road improvements, landscaping, fencing, and traffic signal. Overall the additional traffic signal and other improvements will mitigate the impacts so that the use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the neighborhood.

2. The proposed use will not be injurious or detrimental to the general welfare of the city.

As described under Finding 1 above, the proposed project would not result in any detrimental effects upon the health, safety, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhood because the site has adequate distance separated by a public road from residences and traffic will be improved by the proposed improvements. For the same reasons described under Finding 1, the proposed project would not be injurious or detrimental to the general welfare of the City.

3. The proposed use is consistent with the goals and policies established by the General Plan and the Redding Zoning Ordinance. The site is currently zoned “ SC” Shopping Center with a General Plan classification of Shopping Center ( SC). This current designation does not allow for convenience gas marts. The project requires a general plan amendment and rezoning to Heavy Commercial to allow for the development of a mini storage facility on the eastern portion of this site. With the approval of the general plan amendment and rezoning applications, the construction of the proposed shopping center and mini storage would be permissible. The project is consistent with General Plan goals and policies that call for complete streets ( Goal T3), economic vitality (CDD13), and increased retail opportunities in appropriate locations ( CDD13A, B, D).

4. The proposed use and project design are consistent with the design guidelines established by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Redding Zoning Ordinance Section

18.40.050, Design Criteria. The proposal is subject to the adopted design criteria for commercial development referenced in the Redding Zoning Ordinance. In accordance with the design criteria, the architectural design of the proposal incorporates the use of various building materials and forms and design techniques that provide interest and avoid long, blank walls along the street front.

PARCEL MAP FINDINGS

1. The proposed division of the property is consistent with the General Plan designations of Shopping Center " SC" and Heavy Commercial “ HC.” The proposed parcels have Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for sufficient acreage, configuration, and access to public streets to satisfy General Plan, Zoning requirements, and Planning Commission Resolution 2001-03.

2. The design of the proposed division is consistent with the General Plan and zoning in terms of lot size and accessibility. All proposed parcels have sufficient size, configuration, and access to satisfy the standard " SC" Shopping Center/Heavy Commercial “ HC” District zoning criteria applicable to the site and can support future commercial uses promoted under the General Plan.

3. The site is physically suitable for the development proposed. The parcel map would create lots that have suitable area to support the future commercial development consistent with the Holiday Marketplace as proposed under Use Permit Application UP2020- 01669.

4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density. The proposed parcel map involves land designated for only commercial uses proposed by Use Permit Application UP-2020- 01669.

5. The design of the proposed division and improvements will not cause environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project parcels were evaluated as part of the use permit process in which mitigations were proposed under Use Permit ApplicationUP-2020-01669.

6. The design of the proposed division and improvements will not cause serious public health problems. Adequate measures have been applied with the conditions of approval to address potential concerns related to public health, including, but not limited to, provisions for water for domestic use and fire protection, extension of sanitary sewer facilities to ensure proper management of wastewater, installation of necessary storm drainage, construction of proper public streets and sidewalk, and provision for proper and orderly timing for construction of necessary improvements.

7. The design of the proposed division and improvements will not conflict with easements for access through, or use of property within, the proposed division. The parcel map, with application of the conditions of approval, will not conflict with any existing public easements of record.

ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS

1. Based on the Initial Study and the information contained in the record, there will be no significant effect on the environment. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate for the project.

2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and its supporting documentation fully reflect the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Redding.

Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for USE PERMIT APPLICATION UP-2020-01669

HARTNELL COMMERCIAL COMPLEX

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
General Requirements

1. Approval is granted for TJG/ Summit Development Corporation to construct of the Hartnell Commercial Complex consisting of a 30,000-square-foot Holiday Market Grocery Store, and five outer pads for retail, a drive- through restaurant, a coffee drivethrough, and an automobile fueling station with a convenience store in substantial conformance with the site plan approved by the Planning Commission on June 8, 2021.

Minor modifications may be approved by the Development Services Director; any substantial revisions will require either an amendment to this permit or a new use permit.

2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Parcel Map PM- 2021- 00290 realigning the parcel configuration of the project, shall be recorded.

3. Parking is to be improved in accordance with Chapter 18.41 of the Redding Municipal Code with a minimum of 214 spaces.

4. The developer is to submit an acoustical analysis in compliance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code when the building plans are submitted in order to achieve interior CNEL noise levels of 40 dBA in sleeping areas and 45 dBA in habitable areas. The analysis and attending noise mitigation measures are to be approved by the Development Services Department prior to issuance of a building permit.

5. Any night lighting is to be oriented so as to not glare onto adjacent residential areas or public rights-of-way.

6. All outdoor storage is prohibited.

7. The mini-storage units are to be used for storage only. The office area shall be used for administrating the rental of the ministorage units only. Any other uses, including creating a caretaker's residence, renting out office space, or using the office as a U-Haul or other rental equipment franchise, shall require an amendment to this use permit.

8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, final plans for the entire project shall be provided that demonstrate that all applicable conditions of this Use Permit and requirements of the Redding Zoning Ordinance will be satisfied. Final plans shall consist of the following:
a. Final building architectural elevations. The existing elevations of the anchors and retail pads shall be designed and enhanced as shown on the elevations approved with the Use Permit, or similar or enhanced design as approved by the Development Services Director.
b. Landscape plans.
c. Improvement plans for required public space.
d. Materials/plans for hardscape features.

Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 2
e. Detail of all trash and recycling-area enclosures, screen walls, retaining walls, and sound walls.
f. Lighting plan ( building and parking lot) specifying the design of individual light fixture types. The plan shall include a photometric analysis demonstrating that excessive light and glare does not impact adjoining residential properties. A post - occupancy review shall be conducted by the Planning Division to ensure compliance with Sections 18.40.090 and 18.41.090 of the Redding Zoning Ordinance.
g. Civil improvement plan related to grading, drainage, and utilities.

Site Design/Performance Standards

10. The drive-through facilities shall meet the design standards of Section 18.43.080 of the Redding Zoning Ordinance, including incorporation of a minimum 42-inch- high masonry screen wall or a minimum 42-inch- high combination landscaped berm and masonry screen wall between the drive-through aisle and the public street or parking lot.

11. A cumulative area(s) equal to a minimum of 5 percent of the total building area shall be provided in the form of public gathering space in accordance with the standards of Section 18.33.040 of the Redding Zoning Ordinance. As specified in the City’s Commercial Design Criteria, this area( s) " should reflect careful planning and not simply be leftover areas." Plaza areas shall incorporate features such as metal trellis, decorative retaining walls, planters, fountains, public art, and incorporate stamped and colored concrete, stone pavers, or similar paving features. Any area with a dimension of less than 10 feet or located at a building entrance shall clearly demonstrate how use of the area meets the intent of Section 18.33.040.

12. Decorative hardscape features shall be provided at the main building entrances, all driveway entrances, and interior parking lot pedestrian crosswalks required by the Building Code.

13. Aboveground water-service utilities shall be screened from view from the street to the extent possible with landscaping and/ or masonry walls and be located for access from interior driveways where feasible. The locations shall be approved by the Public Works and Development Services departments.

14. All utility meters or similar mechanical equipment locations visible from a public street or the parking lot shall be placed in cabinets or incorporate other effective screening devices consistent with the project architecture.

15. The driveway access to refuse- collection locations shall have minimum turning radii of

29.5 feet inside and 45 feet outside.

16. The driveway access to store merchandise-receiving locations shall have a minimum outside radius of 50 feet; it is the developer’ s responsibility to determine if greater room for delivery truck movements is necessary based upon tenant needs.

Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 3

17. All noise walls, screening walls, landscape walls, retaining walls, and refuse-collection enclosures shall be constructed of masonry materials consistent with the architectural design of the center to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department.

18. All outdoor storage of miscellaneous equipment or materials ( e.g., pallets, racks, boxes, throwaway items) is prohibited. Any such storage shall be located within a masonry enclosure complementing the architecture of the main building.

19. Shopping cart collection areas in the parking lot shall be low profile in design in accordance with Section 18.41.130 of the Redding Zoning Ordinance. Business owners shall comply with Chapter 9.07 ( Shopping Carts) of the Redding Municipal Code, including but not limited to the requirements for cart signage and the development and implementation of cart containment and retrieval plans.

Streets and Circulation

20. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall be responsible to design and construct a three-lane roadway section ( re-striping) on Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to approximately 573 feet north of Kerry Avenue. The cross- section shall include shoulders, two travel lanes, and a center-turn lane subject to approval by the City Engineer. Enhanced east- west pedestrian crossings, including rectangular rapid flashing beacons, shall be installed at two intersections along Shasta View Dr, as determined by the City Engineer. Re- striping shall consist of grinding the existing stripes, slurry seal, and placement of new striping and markings.

21. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, due to the displacement of pedestrians from the existing wide shoulders from the restriping, the applicant shall be responsible to design and construct a 5-foot sidewalk where gaps exist on the eastern side of Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to approximately 573 feet north of Kerry Avenue.

22. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall be responsible for contributing their fair share cost of 24.9 percent of the cost of design and construction for a signalized intersection at the Hartnell Avenue and Alta Mesa Drive intersection.

23. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall be responsible for contributing their fair share cost of 16 percent of the cost of design and construction for a signalized intersection at the Shasta View Drive and Goodwater Avenue intersection.

24. Frontage Improvements – Hartnell Avenue shall be improved as follows:
a. Widening and restriping to provide a 96-foot Right of Way cross- section – i. 8-foot Parking
ii. 3-foot Parking Buffer
iii. 6-foot Bike Lane
iv. 2-foot Bike Lane Buffer
v. 12-foot Travel Lane
vi. 14-foot Center Turn Lane
vii. 12-foot Travel Lane
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 4
viii. 2-foot Bike Lane Buffer
ix. 6-foot Bike Lane
x. 3-foot Parking Buffer
xi. 8-foot Parking
b. A 5-foot sidewalk
c. Street improvements shall include preparation of the subbase, all aggregate base, and asphalt concrete between the gutter and the existing street section and all necessary transitions and tie-in paving, as well as asphalt overlay work on the existing street sections necessary to provide a uniform cross slope from centerline to the gutter. All required street improvements shall include appropriate storm drain facilities, streetlights, and any necessary striping and signage.

25. Frontage Improvements – Shasta View Dr shall be improved as follows:
a. Widening and restriping to provide a 96-foot Right of Way cross- section ( from existing face of curb west to east) –
i. 8-foot Bike Lane
ii. 2-foot Bike Lane Buffer
iii. 12-foot Travel Lane
iv. 12-foot Center Turn Lane
v. 12-foot Travel Lane
vi. 2-foot Bike Lane Buffer
vii. 5-foot Bike Lane
viii. 2.5-foot Curb & Gutter
ix. 5-foot Landscape Buffer
x. 10-foot Full Width Commercial Sidewalk
b. Street improvements shall include preparation of the subbase, all aggregate base, and asphalt concrete between the new gutter and the existing street section and all necessary transitions and tie-in paving, as well as asphalt overlay work on the existing street sections necessary to provide a uniform cross slope from centerline to the gutter. All required street improvements shall include appropriate storm drain facilities, streetlights, and any necessary striping and signage.

26. Frontage Improvements – Leonard Street shall be improved as follows:
a. Provide a 60-foot Right of Way cross-section per City of Redding Construction Standard 112.30.

27. Intersection Improvements - Shasta View Drive and Hartnell Avenue shall be improved as follows:
a. Construct all signal and intersection modifications required to properly align existing and proposed cross-sections of Shasta View Drive and Hartnell Avenue through the intersection.

Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 5
b. The signal pole and mast arm on the south-eastern corner of the intersection shall be relocated.
c. The existing 170 signal controller shall be replaced with a 2070 controller.

Municipal Utilities, Drainage, and Grading

28. All food service facilities require Oil Grease Interceptors to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial Waste division.

29. Any onsite public wet utilities shall be located within a 15-foot Public Service Easement with no longitudinal encroachment of other utilities.

30. Public storm- drain improvements are to be constructed to City of Redding standards.

31. A grading permit is to be obtained from the Public Works Department . Installation of sediment- control measures shall be in place prior to October 15 of any year.

32. All water meters with backflows shall be located in the public right of way.

33. The fuel- dispensing area( s) must be covered and on impermeable surfaces, extending a minimum of 8 feet from the face of the fuel dispensers. These area(s) must be graded and constructed to prevent drainage across, or from, the dispensing area. Canopy- roof downspouts must be routed to prevent drainage flow through the fuel-dispensing area. A structural control, such as an oil/water separator, sand filter, or approved equal, must be installed in storm drains to intercept and pretreat water and must be regularly inspected and maintained. Materials removed may need to be disposed of as hazardous waste.

Provide calculations to justify sizing of structural control. The facility must have a spill cleanup plan. The dispensing area must be dry- swept routinely. Dispensing equipment must be inspected routinely for proper functioning and leak detection.

34. No structures are allowed in the 15-foot public service easements.

35. Prior to improvement-plan approval, the applicant shall obtain approval for storm water peak flow in accordance with City Council Policy 1806 and the specifications of the Engineering Division. Such measures shall address impacts from the 10-, 25-, and 100- year storm events. Projects shall address peak flows to maintain predevelopment levels at all locations downstream of the project. The drainage report shall be prepared to the format outlined by the City Engineer, stamped and signed and dated by a qualified engineer, and provided to the City Engineer with submittal of site improvement plans.

36. Provide a storm drain system that conveys the existing drainage from the north through the development and connecting to the existing channel to the south.

37. The project shall meet all MS4 clean- water compliance in addition to detention requirements.

38. Prior to the beginning of any clearing, grading, or site improvement activities, improvement plans for grading, drainage, utilities, and other required improvements shall Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 6
be approved by the City Engineer and other concerned City of Redding departments.

These plans shall be in conformance with Redding Municipal Code ( RMC) Title 16.12.

Prior to the issuance of a clearing and/or grading permit, an Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be included and approved by the City Engineer as part of all clearing and grading permit applications. As-built improvement plans with the Engineer’ s Declaration are required in conformance with RMC 16.12. All excess earth material shall be disposed of lawfully.

39. If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds or raptors ( February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey 7 days before construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, 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.

40. To the extent practicable, removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags shall occur before bat maternity colonies form (i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volant i.e., after August 31). If construction ( including the removal of large trees 12 inch dbh ) occurs during the bat non-volant season ( March 1 through August 31), a qualified professional shall conduct a pre- construction survey of the study area to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than 7 days prior to the implementation of construction activities. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the study area, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from project activities.

41. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into “ waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands, authorization under a Nationwide Permit or Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps. For any features determined to not be subject to the Corps jurisdiction during the verification process, authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB. For fill requiring a Corps permit, water quality certification shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to discharge of dredged or fill material. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to issuance the issuance of a grading permit.

42. Prior to any activities that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of any intermittent or ephemeral creeks, notification of streambed alteration shall be submitted to the CDFW; and, if required, a 1602 streambed alteration agreement shall be obtained by the project applicant. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit.

43. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent los s of streams, wetlands, and other waters through the purchase of mitigation credits at an agencyapproved mitigation bank at a minimum 1:1 ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/offsite habitat restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan, including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance, and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies ( i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted for review and approval. The affected regulatory agency shall identify when Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 7
measures shall be implemented and completed for those activities impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All measures contained in the permits or associated with any agency approvals shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

Redding Electric Utilities

44. Existing overhead utilities along the Hartnell Avenue and Leonard Street frontages shall be relocated underground. This shall include through the Leonard Street intersection continuing to the easterly property line of 2635 Hartnell Avenue (automotive repair). Offsite utility work may be required to accommodate under grounding of existing overhead utilities.

45. Street Lights required on all frontages.

46. A five-foot public service easement shall be dedicated adjacent to all right of way.

Solid Waste

47. Double enclosures recommended to accommodate trash and cardboard recycling for each retail business that produces large amounts of cardboard.

Landscape, and Fencing

48. The project landscape plan shall be designed and installed in compliance with the requirements of Section 18.41.100 and Chapter 18.47 of the Redding Zoning Ordinance and the Redding Landscape Plan Requirements and Installation Guidelines dated January 2000. These landscape regulations require, in part, the following:
a. Provision of broad- leafed shade trees in and around the parking areas at a minimum ratio of one tree for every four spaces in a planter containing a minimum area of 72 square feet. A minimum of 60 square feet of landscape shall be provided for each required parking space and 80 square feet of landscape for each additional parking space. The landscape plan shall include a tabulation of trees and landscape area demonstrating compliance with Section 18.41.100(d) of the Redding Zoning Ordinance.
b. Landscaping equal to a minimum of 5 percent of total building area shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.47.050(B) of the Redding Zoning Ordinance. The landscape areas used to satisfy this requirement shall be identified on the landscape plan.
c. A minimum 15-foot-wide landscape planter shall be provided along Industrial Street.

The landscape planters shall include irrigated groundcover, shrubs, and shade trees placed at a minimum of one tree for every 30 feet of frontage. d. Any area between the back of the sidewalk and the property line shall be incorporated into the adjacent street- side planter.

Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 8
e. Parking lot landscaping shall incorporate landscaped berms, shrubs, and/or decorative walls to screen the view of parking areas from adjoining streets. f. Required trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallons in size. g. Planters not utilizing densely planted groundcover or turf shall include the use of high-quality-fabric weed barrier and appropriate mulch materials. h. Groundcover shall be of live plant material. Walk-on bark, gravel, colored rock, and similar materials shall be used in combination with a living groundcover in all nonturf area as a mulch to control weeds and conserve or retain water until a living groundcover has achieved full coverage.
i. Planters shall be protected from vehicles by 6-inch- high concrete curbs or equivalent materials.
j. All parking lot and landscape improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of an occupancy permit.
k. Placement of all aboveground or underground utility infrastructure located in a landscape planter shall be shown on the landscape plan.

49. The proposed project may require a Stream or Lake Alteration Agreement from the State Department of Fish and Game or a " 404" Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for wetland impacts. The project proponent is responsible for contacting the State Department of Fish and Game and/or the Army Corps of Engineers to verify the need to obtain an agreement or a permit.

50. An Oak Tree Mitigation Plan shall be incorporated into the landscape and grading plans for protection of oak trees identified for preservation. Preservation efforts shall be to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department.

51. The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15-gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

Cultural Resources

52. If, during the course of development, any archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources are uncovered or otherwise detected or observed, construction activities in the area affected shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. A qualified archaeological professional must then be retained by the developer to investigate the discovered cultural object to determine its significance. If the cultural object is deemed potentially significant by the archaeologist, appropriate treatment and measures shall be followed in accordance with applicable laws, as reviewed and approved by the City, prior to the resumption of work in the affected area.

Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 9
Signs

53. Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, an Administrative Sign Permit application for a sign plan for the entire commercial center shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with Section 18.42.050 of the Redding Zoning Ordinance.

The sign plan shall address the location, size, and types of freestanding and wall signage allowed for each tenant, as well as the distribution of the total allowable signage area between tenants. All signage shall complement the architectural features of the buildings and be in compliance with Chapter 18.42 (Signs) of the Redding Zoning Ordinance and the Redding Advertising Sign Design Manual.

54. No more than three monument signs or two monument signs and one pole sign are allowed along the project street frontage and a minimum of 100 feet of separation shall be maintained between any two such signs, unless modifications of these standards are authorized by an Administrative Sign Permit and/or Variance.

55. The pole sign shall have a maximum sign area of 90 square feet and a maximum height of 25 feet, unless modifications of these standards are authorized by an Administrative Sign Permit and/ or Variance.

Fire

56. Gates for storage facility shall have a 15-foot wide minimum opening. Gate opening may have to be wider if fire apparatus must turn while entering. Gates shall be electronic opening by way of Click- to-Enter system or a Knox Key over- ride and default to an unlocked position in the event of power loss so as to be manually opened by emergency personnel. The location of the Knox Key over- ride shall be on a post or other approved location for use by emergency personnel.

57. Provide one additional hydrant to serve the Holiday Market. Hydrant to be located near the northwest corner of the building.

58. The location of the Fire Department Connection ( FDC) for the shopping center main building shall be on the south-east corner, within 40 feet of the hydrant, but no closer than 10 feet. There shall be a Post Indicator Valve ( PIV) in the same vicinity of the FDC so as to isolate the water supply from the FDC. All on -site hydrants, water systems and valves shall be behind COR approved back- flow protection.

59. All on- site driveways adjacent to a building shall have a minimum width of 26 feet, unless a lesser width is approved by the Fire Marshal.

60. No combustible vertical construction will be allowed until serviceable fire hydrants and fire flow are available for firefighting purposes during construction.

Industrial Waste

61. A general Industrial Wastewater Survey/ Application No. 1 ( Form F-0020) for each proposed commercial facility shall be completed and submitted to the Municipal Utilities Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020- 01669 June 4, 2021
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 10
Department, Industrial Waste Division, for evaluation of wastewater pretreatment requirements prior to issuance of a building permit.

62. If a food- preparation facility of any kind is proposed within the project, an Industrial Wastewater Survey/Application No. 2 for each such food-preparation facility shall be completed and submitted to the Municipal Utilities Department, Industrial Waste Division, for evaluation and sizing for wastewater pretreatment of oil and grease removal requirements. If outside washing/ cleaning of any food- preparation service equipment is planned or included in the facility design, a covered sanitary sewer-connected work area is required. It must be designed so as to prevent pollutants from entering the outside environment and storm water from entering the sewer system. It must also be connected to an oil and grease interceptor.

63. If proposed commercial building( s) will have mixed types of uses, which includes one or more food-preparation facilities, the applicant shall provide each such food-preparation facility with a separate water service and meter from the common water- service meter serving the other remaining commercial user.

Environmental Health Department

64. Plans and specifications for proposed food facilities shall be submitted to the Shasta County Division of Environmental Health for review and written approval prior to issuance of a building permit.

Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for PARCEL MAP APPLICATION PM-2021-00290

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
General Requirements

1. In accordance with Redding Municipal Code Chapter 17.20, tentative map approval is granted for Parcel Map Application PM- 2021- 00290, allowing five parcels totaling 12.13 acres to be divided into seven lots to support future development. The parcel map shall be prepared and development commenced in accordance with these conditions and the tentative parcel map as approved by the Planning Commission on June 8, 2021. The requirements of a condition shall prevail in the event that there is any inconsistency between a condition and information or data presented on the tentative parcel map.

2. The applicant shall note that approval of the tentative parcel map will expire three years from the effective date unless an extension has been approved in accordance with Section

17.20.140 of the Redding Municipal Code.

3. A final (parcel) map shall be prepared in accordance with Chapter 17.40 of the Redding Municipal Code. The parcel map and all necessary supporting documents and information must be filed with the City Engineer prior to the expiration date of the tentative map.

4. In accordance with Section 18.40.040 of the Redding Municipal Code (Compliance With Map Requirements), all conditions marked at the end with an asterisk (*) shall be noted on the parcel map under a "Statement of Conditions" to provide notification to future property owners of development requirements and restrictions established for the parcel map.* Map Requirements
The following conditions apply to the preparation and recording of a parcel map:

5. In accordance with Chapter 17.50, Dedications and Reservations, of the Redding Municipal Code, the property owner shall dedicate to the City all rights-of-way and easements necessary to provide public access and utilities to all parcels in the subdivision and to properly manage storm drainage.

6. The parcel map shall waive access and abutters' rights to Churn Creek Road, Hartnell Avenue and Leonard Street for Parcels 1 through 7, other then what is shown on the improvement plans for Use Permit UP-2020-01669.

Development Requirements

7. A reciprocal driveway and parking easement shall be provided for parcels 1 through 6 at the time of conveyance of any of these parcels. *
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for RESOLUTION NO. 2021-______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING

ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM

OF THE CITY OF REDDING RELATING TO THE LAND USE

CLASSIFICATION OF THE NORTHSTATE GROCERY, INC PROPERTY
APN 110- 020- 061) CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 4.12 ACRES LOCATED AT 3050 LEONARD STREET IN THE CITY OF REDDING
GPA- 2020- 01667)
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the General Plan on October 3, 2000; and WHEREAS, the amendment to the General Plan Diagram is desired to allow for the development of a 38,400- square- foot mini- storage facility as identified in Use Permit Application UP- 2020- 01669; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to said amendment on June 8, 2021, for General Plan Amendment Application GPA- 2020- 01667 as described on the attached amendment to the General Plan Diagram and made a recommendation to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed pertinent documents prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and recommended that the Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted for GPA- 2020- 01667 after consideration of all testimonial and written evidence submitted prior to and during the aforementioned public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on GPA- 2021- 01667 on X, 2021; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Redding as follows:

1. The above recitations are true and correct.

2. The City Council has reviewed the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, all reports submitted by staff, and all testamentary and documentary evidence presented at the public hearing, and has determined that the actions contemplated will not have an adverse impact on the environment.

3. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for GPA- 2020- 01667 as referred to the City Council by the Planning Commission.

Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

4. The City Council hereby approves the amendments to the General Plan Diagram as set forth on the map attached hereto and made part hereof by;
LOCATION: Approximately 4.12 acres located at 3050 Leonard Street FROM: Shopping Center (SC)
TO: Heavy Commercial ( HC)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Redding City Council on the xth day of x, 2021, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ERIN RESNER, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVED:

PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDDING ADOPTING THE

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT

TO THE CITY OF REDDING ZONING MAP RELATING TO THE

REZONING OF THE NORTHSTATE GROCERY, INC PROPERTY ( APN
110- 020- 061) CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 4.12 ACRES LOCATED AT 3050 LEONARD STREET IN THE CITY OF REDDING (RZ-2020-01668) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Finding of fact: the City finds and declares as follows:

A. The Zoning Map of the City of Redding is incorporated in and made part of Redding Municipal Code Title 18, known as the City of Redding Zoning Ordinance.

B. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to said amendment on June 8, 2021, for RZ-2020- 01668 to allow for the development of a 38,400-square-foot mini-storage facility as identified in Use Permit Application UP2020- 01669 and recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project and the attached amendment to the Zoning Map.

C. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on x, 2021 prior to the first reading of this ordinance.

D. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

E. Adoption of this ordinance will not adversely impact the welfare of the citizens of the City of Redding and its surrounding region.

Section 2. On the basis of the initial study for Rezoning Application RZ-2020- 01668 prepared by the Development Services Department, the City Council finds that the subject rezoning will not have a significant effect on the environment and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration with the following findings;

1. The City of Redding has completed a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the rezoning.

Based on the analysis of the potential impacts associated with the rezoning, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment.

2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and its supporting documentation reflect the independent judgement and analysis of the City of Redding.

Section 3. The boundaries of the districts referred to in Section 18.01.050 of the Redding Municipal Code, as designated on a map entitled “ Zoning Map of the City of Redding, California,” Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for dated January 7, 2003, are hereby altered as set forth on the map attached hereto and made part hereof by;
LOCATION: Approximately 4.12 acres located at 3050 Leonard Street FROM: " SC" Shopping Center
TO: " HC" Heavy Commercial
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption; and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause its publication according to law.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that this ordinance was introduced and read by the City Council of the City of Redding at a regular meeting on the xth day of x, 20121 and was read and adopted at a regular meeting on the __ day of ___________, 2021, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ERIN RESNER, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVED:

PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for RS-2
SC
GC
HC
OS
RM-12
RM-9
RS-3
RS-3.5
GC
RS-3

WILSONAVE

ALDENAVE

MARLENEAVE

BELLADONNAST

LEONARDSTBILLINGS

DRMARILYNAVE

JONQUILWAY

FORESTHOMES

DROAKVIEW DRKENTWOOD

DRBONESET

STAPPIAN

WAYLICHENAVESHASTA

VIEWDRSHASTAVIEW

DRHAWNAVE

HARTNELL AVE
MTG. DATE:

ITEM:ATTACHMENT: GIS DIVISIONINFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT DATE PRODUCED:0400200Feet- ZONINGMAPP:\Planning\ ProProjects\UP\UP-2020-01669. aprxNOVEMBER24,
2020 UP-2020-01669 / GPA- 2020-01667 / RZ-2020-01668TJG / SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT2469 & 2525 HARTNELLAVE/3055 & 3091 APPIAN WAY/ Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

WILSONAVE

ALDENAVE

MARLENEAVE

BELLADONNAST

LEONARDSTBILLINGS

DRMARILYNAVE

JONQUILWAY

FORESTHOMES

DROAKVIEW

DRKENTWOOD

DRBONESET

STAPPIANWAYLICHENAVESHASTA

VIEWDRSHASTAVIEW

DRHAWNAVEHARTNELLAVE
SCGCHCGC6
to1010to
203.5to
62to

3.5 2
to
2 3.
to
5 3.
510
to 20
MTG. DATE:ITEM:

ATTACHMENT:GIS DIVISION INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGYDEPARTMENT DATE PRODUCED:
0400200Feet- GENERAL PLANMAPP:\Planning\ ProProjects\UP\UP-2020-01669. aprxNOVEMBER24,
2020 UP-2020-01669 / GPA- 2020-01667 / RZ-2020-01668TJG / SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT2469 & 2525 HARTNELLAVE/3055 & 3091 APPIAN WAY/ Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

ALDEN AVE

MARLENE AVE

BELLADONNA ST

LEONARD STBILLINGS

DRMARILYN AVE

JONQUIL
WAY
F
O
R
E
S
T
H
O
M
E
S
D

R OAKVIEW

DRKENTWOOD DRBONESET

STAPPIAN WAYLICHEN

AVESHASTA
VIEW

DRSHASTA

V IEW DR

HAWN AVE HARTNELL

AVE WILSON AVE SC
GC HCGC 6 to
10 10 to 20

3.5 to 6
2to 3.
5 2 to

3. 5

3. 2
5 to
10 to20
HC MTG. DATE:

ITEM:ATTACHMENT: GIS
DIVISION INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT DATE PRODUCED: 0 400200 Feet- PROPOSED ZONING MAP P:\Planning\ ProProjects\ UP\UP- 2020- 01669.aprx JUNE 4, 2021
UP- 2020-01669 / GPA-2020- 01667 / RZ-2020-01668 TJG / SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT 2469 & 2525 HARTNELL AVE/ 3055 & 3091 APPIAN WAY/ 3050

LEONARD ST
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

ALDEN AVE

MARLENE AVE

BELLADONNA ST

LEONARD STBILLINGS

DRMARILYN AVE

JONQUIL
WAY
F
O
R
E
S
T
H
O
M
E
S
D

R OAKVIEW

DRKENTWOOD DRBONESET

STAPPIAN WAYLICHEN

AVESHASTA
VIEW

DRSHASTA

V IEW DR

HAWN AVE HARTNELL

AVE WILSON AVE SC
GC HCGC 6 to
10 10 to 20

3.5 to 6
2to 3.
5 2 to

3. 5

3. 2
5 to
10 to20
HC MTG. DATE:

ITEM:ATTACHMENT: GIS DIVISION
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT DATE PRODUCED: 0 400200 FeetPROPOSED GENERAL PLAN MAP P:\Planning\ ProProjects\ UP\UP- 2020- 01669.aprx JUNE 4, 2021
UP- 2020-01669 / GPA-2020- 01667 / RZ-2020-01668 TJG / SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT 2469 & 2525 HARTNELL AVE/ 3055 & 3091 APPIAN WAY/ 3050

LEONARD ST
Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for From: Betty Yuill
To: Toy, Lily
Subject: Shasta View/Hartnell Holiday projects
Date: Friday, May 14, 2021 11: 07: 49 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

I own the home at, 2980 Shasta View Dr. My concerns are very real. It seems the homeowners on the Westside of Shasta View Drive are being left out of all Enviormental documents that I have read! I’m not only speaking of homes on S.V. Please take into consideration of all the single family homes and apartments on the West that have been patronizing the Holiday Market for years. Their welfare is a serious matter, Why? Because of mother’ s pushing children in buggies, disabled people in wheel chairs and others must travel in the street in the right tuning lane on S.

View to reach the existing Holiday Market. Why? Because there is “NO” sidewalk on the west side. It is only a matter of time until someone is injured or killed. This is not the first time I have requested a sidewalk at the Planning Dept. Customers walk in street to avoid grass, mud, a fence and tree on public land where a sidewalk is needed so the street is used. It is my understanding a sidewalk is going in on the east side, again this is not a safe option either, because cars that try to turn left onto side streets get rear ended. A crosswalk dose not seem as safe as a signal. My home on the corner of S. View has had cars making a right coming from East (where New Holiday is proposed) they end up in my front yard tearing the fence down and it has been replaced twice. I also spent close to 1000 placing huge boulders in front to hopefully protect my Grandaughter and Great Grandchildren. I sold a potion of my corner to allow the signal install at the NW corner. So Where is the sidewalk to go with to it? If you need videos we have a camera be glad to share, have seen a lot. Another example is the car traveling in the right turning lane off Hartnell to S.View he ran into the sign that placed just passed the industrial driveway. Please someone truly need to take responsibility now. Do not wait to take responsibility after the inevitable happens! Remember all of us we will be your customers, plead “ Help US BE SAFE”. The City needs to really should look at the NW corner it is a trash collector, wild trees, Ifound a bag of meth, a lot of garbage etc.. my market value has declined, more noise, pollutants and traffic will continue to effect it. I bought when there was only a stop sign, etc.

Getting out of the driveway takes time, patience and is scary. Accidents happen and now we expect more! Sincerely, Betty Yuill and Gomez 05/14/21
Sent from my iPhone
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for California Wildlife Foundation/ California Oaks, 201 University Avenue, Berth H-43 Berkeley, CA 94710, ( 510) 763-0282 June 2, 2021
Lily Toy, Planning Manager
City of Redding, Development Services Department
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001
RE: Hartnell Commercial Complex proposal by Summit Development, Permit No. UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021-00290, GPA-2020-01667, and RZ-2020-01668 Submitted via email: ltoy@cityofredding. org
Dear Ms. Toy:

The California Oaks program of California Wildlife Foundation (CWF/CO) works to conserve oak ecosystems because of their critical role in sequestering carbon, maintaining healthy watersheds, providing wildlife habitat, and sustaining cultural values. Shasta Environmental Alliance, a member of California Oaks Coalition, reached out to CWF/CO with concerns about the proposed Hartnell Commercial Complex project impacts on the oak trees on the site.

CWF/CO reviewed the Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration, Biological Review, Environmental Initial Study, and Oak Resource Report. It is concerning that the project does not include the retention of any of the native trees, including 10 blue oaks that are 20-inches or greater at breast height, that the plan for revegetation of the site does not specify that it will include native oaks, that the environmental analysis does not consider the Greenhouse Gas GHG) impacts of the proposed tree removals, and that the mitigation does not include conservation of oak woodlands.

ALIGNMENT OF PROJECT WITH SHASTA COUNTY OAK GUIDELINES AND CITY OF REDDING

GENERAL PLAN
Shasta County’ s Oak Woodland Management Guidelines recommend that when planning a building site that oaks are maintained for habitat and landscape values. Further, the City of Redding’ s General Plan includes the following Natural Resource (NR) goals:
7: Recognize the aesthetic and biological values of oak woodlands and other natural vegetation.
8: Recognize and protect habitat linkages and migratory corridors . 9: Promote and facilitate habitat preservation, restoration and enhancement.

The Biological Review cited these, as well as other natural resource goals from the General Plan, yet these goals were not properly addressed in the Initial Study. The Initial Study simply references a section of the General Plan EIR that development can somet imes conflict with tree protection goals and then states:

But efforts must still be made to retain existing trees if reasonably possible, and to sufficiently plant new trees in the context of the new development. A tree survey Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for 2 is required to identify natural trees and tree groups most suitable for preservation or "candidate trees/groups." Where all identified candidate trees/groups cannot be preserved, the set-aside of a natural area or areas within a project site that is particularly suitable for the planting, retention, and/ or natural regeneration of trees is considered to be a desirable means of accomplishing the goals of the ordinance.

The removal of all of the trees—including 285 candidate trees— on the site combined minimal mitigation that does not specify oak tree replacement runs counter to the aforementioned General Plan goals and Shasta County’ s Oak Woodland Management Guidelines.

HABITAT AND CLIMATE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The Biological Review characterizes the site as isolated from other habitat:

Wildlife corridors and migratory routes: With housing subdivisions and retail stores on all four sides, the project site is an island of vegetation within a developed landscape. The Shasta Meadows subdivision lies to the north, the Sunset Oaks subdivision is to the east, the Forest Homes subdivision is to the south and the Cockerill Acres subdivision is to the west. In addition, Hartnell Avenue and Shasta View Drive, both busy arterial roads, are found along the north and west sides. These developments limit access to and through the parcel by terrestrial wildlife species. During site visits WRM personnel noted several bird species moving through the area as well as bats foraging over the site. These movements may be classified as “ opportunistic” rather than evidencing a travel corridor or migratory movement, of which there is no evidence.

The vegetation island characterization is contradicted by the Biological Review’ s Figure 2, Soils of the Project Area, which shows oak habitat continues to the east and the south of the project, with isolated oaks also to the southwest of the project site. Much of the adjacent development to the south and east appears to be more aligned with the Redding General Plan Natural Resource goals of retaining some natural habitat. The use of the project parcel by birds and bats, which the Biological Review characterizes as “ opportunistic” will be impossible if the native trees on the site are removed and replaced with non-native trees.

Another deficiency of the environmental review is that California law requires the GHG impacts of proposed oak removals to be assessed and mitigated. Net present value of GHG emissions forms the foundation of the state’ s greenhouse reduction objectives, as well as the California Forest Protocol preservation standards. Every ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) released into the atmosphere by oak woodland or forest conversion represents a measurable potential adverse environmental effect.

MITIGATION
The Initial Study indicates blue oak and interior live oak woodland covers approximately 31.4 percent of the parcel, with small and medium stature oaks on another portion of the site.

CWF/CO was puzzled by the discussion in the Initial Study calling for mitigation replanting at a rate of 1:1, which would result a minimum of 194 trees planted. Given that 285 trees are being removed, it is unclear why the figure is not 285, as the 92 impacted interior live oaks of diameter of 6-inches or greater also provide habitat and carbon sequestration value. Further, Public Resources Code §21083.4 requires mitigation for trees of 5-inches or more in diameter at breast height above natural grade level, rather than 6-inches . The plan should not move forward without a majority of the oaks of greater than 5-inch diameter at breast height being retained, without a revegetation plan for the site that requires the reestablishment of oaks for landscaping, and Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for 3 without a plan for oak habitat that is conserved in perpetuity to partially mitigate project impacts on Redding’ s native tree canopy.

Sincerely,
Janet Cobb Angela Moskow
Executive Officer Manager
California Wildlife Foundation California Oaks Coalition Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 1

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Recirculated
Permit No. UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, GPA- 2020- 01667, and RZ-2020- 01668 SUBJECT Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of a use permit, parcel map, General Plan amendment, and rezoning for the development of a shopping center and self-storage facility on

Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2
The project includes measures to mitigate potentially significant impacts to transportation in the area.

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.

2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration, with its supporting documentation, fully incorporated herein, 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
MM-1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, as identified in the project wetland delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that the following resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the Corps, CDFW, RWQCB, or any other applicable agency ( i.e., USFWS) identified through the permitting process:*
a. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into “ waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands, authorization under a Nationwide Permit or Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps. For any features determined to not be subject to the Corps jurisdiction during the verification process, authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB. For fill requiring a Corps permit, water quality certification shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to discharge of dredged or fill material. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to issuance the issuance of a grading permit. b. Prior to any activities that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of any intermittent or ephemeral creeks, notification of streambed alteration shall be submitted to the CDFW; and, if required, a 1602 streambed alteration agreement shall be obtained by the project applicant. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. c. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other waters through the purchase of mitigation credits at an agencyPacket Pg. 415 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 3
approved mitigation bank at a minimum 1:1 ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/ offsite habitat restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan, including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance, and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies ( i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted for review and approval. The affected regulatory agency shall identify when measures shall be implemented and completed for those activities impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All measures contained in the permits or associated with any agency approvals shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

MM-2. If vegetation removal or construction activities will occur during the nesting season for birds or raptors ( February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey 7 days before construction activities begin. If nesting birds or raptors are found, 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-3. To the extent practicable, removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags shall occur before bat maternity colonies form ( i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volant ( i.e., after August 31). If construction ( including the removal of large trees 12 inch dbh ) occurs during the bat non-volant season ( March 1 through August 31), a qualified professional shall conduct a preconstruction survey of the study area to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than 7 days prior to the implementation of construction activities. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the study area, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from project activities.

MM-4. The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15-gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

MM-5 Off-site improvement along Shasta View Drive shall include the following:
o Restriping of the portion of Shasta View Drive between Hartnell Avenue and Goodwater Avenue to a three- lane arterial with one travel lane in each direction with a two-way left turn lane.
o Construct a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to Christian Avenue.

MM-6 Construct a 3-leg, single lane roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue intersection.

PUBLIC REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
Draft copies or notice of this Mitigated Negative Declaration were distributed to:

Shasta County Clerk
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Redding
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Redding
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Redding California Native Plant Society, Shasta County
Interested Parties
All property owners within 500 feet of the property boundary Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP-2020- 01669, GPA-2020-01667, RZ-2020-01669, PM-2021-00290 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 4

PUBLIC REVIEW
x) Draft document referred for comments May 8, 2021 .

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.

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 Response to Comments, attached).

Copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Initial Study, documentation materials, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program may be obtained at the Planning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Redding, 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001 and online on the Planning/ Projects page of the Development Services website at:
www.cityofredding. org. Contact: Sean Price, ( 530) 225- 4471 Lily Toy, Planning Manager Date
Date of Final Report
Attachments:

A. Location map
B. Initial Study
C. Mitigation Monitoring Program
May 7, 2021
Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

WILSONAVE

ALDENAVE

MARLENEAVE

BELLADONNAST

LEONARDSTBILLINGS

DRMARILYNAVE

JONQUILWAY

FORESTHOMES

DROAKVIEW DRKENTWOOD

DRBONESET

STAPPIAN

AVESHASTA WAYLICHEN VIEW

DRSHASTAVIEWDRHAWN

AVEHARTNELL
AVE MTG.

DATE:ITEM:ATTACHMENT: LOCATIONMAPGISDIVISION INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT DATE PRODUCED: 0400200Feet-P:\Planning\ ProProjects\UP\UP-2020-01669. aprxNOVEMBER24,
2020 UP-2020-01669 / GPA- 2020-01667 / RZ-2020-01668TJG / SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT2469 & 2525 HARTNELLAVE/3055 & 3091 APPIAN WAY/ 3050LEONARDST
AP# 110-210-
055 / 110-020-
001, - 037, - 038 & -
0612469HARTNELL
Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

ENVIRONMENTAL

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF REDDING
Development Services Department
Planning Division
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, California 96001
May 6, 2021
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 2

CITY OF REDDING

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

1. Project Title: Hartnell Commercial Complex by Summit Development

2. Lead agency name and address:

CITY OF REDDING
Development Services Department
Planning Division
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Sean Price, Assistant Planner, ( 530) 225-4471

4. Project Location: 2469 and 2522 Hartnell Avenue, 3055 and 3091 Appian Way, and 3050 Leonard Street

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

TJG/ Summit Development Corporation DKM Engineering
2451 Birchwood Circle P.O. Box 1307
Redding, CA 96002 Anderson, CA 96007

6. General Plan Designation: Shopping Center

7. Zoning: “ SC” Shopping Center

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required ( e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 3

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

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

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “ potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 4 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.

Sean Price, Assistant Planner Date
Development Services Department
May 7, 2021
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 5 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:

No Impact. The development will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment.

Less Than Significant Impact. The development will have the potential for impacting the environment, although this impact will be below established thresholds that are considered to be significant.

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

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:

Attachment A – Figure 1 – Location Map
Figure 2 – Project Site Plan
Figure 3 – Parcel Map
Figure 4 – Grading Plan
Figure 5 – Vegetation Map
Figure 6 – Preliminary Utilities Plan
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 6 Figure 7 – Building Elevations
Attachment B – Wetlands Delineation, Wildland Resource Managers, May 2020 (on file with the Planning Division and available online) Attachment C – Biological Review, Wildland Resource Managers, May 2020 (on file with the Planning Division and available online) Attachment D – Cultural Resources Inventory Survey, Sean Michael Jensen, M.A., December 2019 (on file with the Planning Division) Attachment E – Oak Tree Report, Wildland Resource Managers, dated September 27, 2019 ( on file with the Planning Division and available online)
Attachment F – Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum for Holiday Market, GHD, dated March 1, 2021 (on file with the Planning Division and available online)
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES:

Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 7 MM-4. The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15-gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

MM-6 Construct a 3-leg, single lane roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue intersection.

I. AESTHETICS: Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:

Construction activities for the project will be limited to normal daytime hours (i.e., 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays from May 15 through September 15, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays from September 16 through May 14, and from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays in accordance with RMC Section 18.40.100). The proposed project would not require nighttime Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 8 lighting for construction activities. Thus, no impact would occur in this regard.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 City of Redding Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18.40.090
Mitigation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 9 Documentation:

Mitigation:

None necessary.

Level " A" Level " B"
25 pounds per day of NOx 137 pounds per day of NOx
25 pounds per day of ROG 137 pounds per day of ROG
80 pounds per day of PM10 137 pounds per day of PM10
If a project has unmitigated emissions less than the Level " A" threshold, then itis viewed as a minor project (from an air quality perspective) and only application of Standard Mitigation Measures ( SMMs) is required to try to achieve at least a 20 percent reduction in emissions, or the best reduction feasible otherwise. Land uses that generate unmitigated emissions above Level " A" require application of appropriate Best Available Mitigation Measures ( BAMMs), in addition to the SMMs, in order to achieve a net emission reduction of 20 percent or more. If, after applying SMMs and BAMMs, a use still exceeds the Level " B" threshold, then a minimum of 25 percent of the unmitigated emissions exceeding 137 pounds per day must be offset by reducing emissions Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 10 from existing sources of pollution; otherwise, an Environmental Impact Report is required.

1. Nontoxic soil stabilizers shall be applied according to manufacturer’ s specification to all inactive construction areas previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).

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

3. Temporary traffic control shall be provided as appropriate during all phases of construction to improve traffic flow (e.g., flag person).

4. Construction activities that could affect traffic flow shall be scheduled in off-peak hours.

5. Active construction areas, haul roads, etc., shall be watered at least twice daily or more as needed to limit dust.

6. Exposed stockpiles of soil and other backfill material shall either be covered, watered, or have soil binders added to inhibit dust and wind erosion.

Documentation:

Mitigation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 11 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

Fish and Wildlife Service?
x
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
x
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?
x
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? x 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?
x
Discussion:
a) A Biological Review Report was prepared for the project by Wildland Resource Managers ( WRM), dated May 2020, to assess the impacts of the proposed project on biological resources in the project area and vicinity. In addition to research, database review, and species list reviews, a habitat assessment and biological reconnaissance survey was conducted. Upon numerous inspections of the project area few wildlife species were observed and no listed species of flora or fauna were found. Several bird species were observed moving through the area as well as bats foraging over the site. These movements were classified as “opportunistic” rather than evidencing a travel corridor or migratory movement, of which there is no evidence. On February 26, 2020 and April 8, 2020, a spade-foot toad survey was conducted paying particular attention to the intermittent and ephemeral stream areas. No toads were seen or heard. Although the intermittent stream that flows through the project area has connectivity to the Sacramento River downstream, fish passage during normal flows is restricted by barriers. b) According to the California Natural Diversity Database ( CNDDB), 11 sensitive habitats, either on the Federal or State status, occur within CNDDB Enterprise Quadrant in which the project site is located: foothill yellow-legged frog, bald eagle, bank swallow, tricolored blackbird, vernal pool fairy shrimp, green sturgeon, steelhead, chinook salmon- Central Valley spring-run and - Sacramento River winter-run, gray wolf, slender Orcutt grass. Based on the Biological Review Report, discussed above, no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulation, or by CDFW or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were observed on the project site.
c) A Wetlands Delineation was prepared for the project by WRM in November 2019 and revised in May 2020. The field study efforts mapped 4 features in the proposed project site, including wetlands and other waters: emergent wetland, ephemeral swale, intermittent stream and a pond. There is an intermittent stream that flows through the center of the project site from north to south. The stream only carries water during the wet season from a culvert under Hartnell Avenue south across the property to the southwest corner. After leaving the property the stream is channeled along the western side of Shasta View Drive south to Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 12 Clover Creek Preserve. There is no true riparian habitat present. An ephemeral stream originates near the paved parking area in the northwest corner of the property and flows to north to south, intersecting the intermittent stream near the center of the property. This stream has a very shallow gradient with annual vegetation present within the stream channel. The emergent wetland is just to the east, and associated within, the intermittent stream near the center of the property. This wetland is moist during the winter months but dries out during the summer. The emergent pond holds water during the rainy season and quickly dries with the onset of warm weather. The delineation summarized that the combined total of jurisdictional wetland features on the proposed project site is 0.4013 acres. The project will impact all the wetland features found on the property. The intermittent stream will be placed within a 24-inch buried culvert and the ephemeral stream, emergent wetland and pond will be filled to the necessary project grade. In February 2020 the wetlands delineation report along with a Pre-construction notice, both prepared by WRM, were submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with a request for a preliminary jurisdictional determination and assistance with implementation of appropriate mitigation measures. However, a response from the Corps is still pending.

A Tree Survey was prepared for the project by Wildland Resource Managers. The survey found two primary vegetation associations on the project site. Blueoak/ interior live oak woodlands were found along the eastern and southern edges of the property covering approximately 31.4 percent of the project site. The survey identified 193 blue oaks larger than 6-inch dbh and 92 interior live oak larger than 6-inch dbh. The Tree Survey Exhibit depicts the location of the group oftrees on the proposed site plan. Further, it identified that there are several small to medium- sized oak trees located in the southwest portion of the site, however, none would be considered candidate trees. It was further observed that some vegetation management has taken place in the past as there is evidence of oak harvesting resulting in root crown sprouting and an open appearance in the north central portion of the project area. The proposal does not incorporate the retention of any of the trees. The developer is obligated to replant suitable new trees at the time of construction for shade. The Tree Management Ordinance identifies minimum planting criteria of one tree per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area or covered space, hence based on the proposed 83,888 square feet of gross floor area, a minimum of 84 trees are required. Additionally, the street frontages are required street trees at a ratio of 1 tree for every 30 feet of street frontage, therefore with the project site consisting of approximately 2,100 feet of street frontage, a minimum of 70 trees are required along the street frontages. Therefore, the requirement to plant a minimum of 154 new trees as a standard condition of development. Additionally, to mitigate the loss of trees at the project site MM-4 requires replacement at a minimum of 1:1 ratio resulting in a minimum of 194 trees planted in association with the project. Hence, the project is Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 13 consistent with the intent of the Tree Management Ordinance. f) No habitat conservation plans or other similar plans have been adopted for the project site or project area. No impact would occur in this regard.

Documentation:

MM-1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, as identified in the project wetland delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that the following resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the Corps, CDFW, RWQCB, or any other applicable agency (i.e., USFWS) identified through the permitting process:* d. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into “waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands, authorization under a Nationwide Permit or Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps. For any features determined to not be subject to the Corps jurisdiction during the verification process, authorization to discharge ( or a waiver from regulation) shall be obtained from the RWQCB. For fill requiring a Corps permit, water quality certification shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to discharge of dredged or fill material. Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding Development Services Department prior to issuance the issuance of a grading permit. e. Prior to any activities that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of any intermittent or ephemeral creeks, notification of streambed alteration shall be submitted to the CDFW; and, if required, a 1602 streambed alteration agreement shall be obtained by the project applicant. Verification shall be provided tothe City of Redding Development Services Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. f. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other waters through thepurchase of mitigation credits at anagency-approved mitigation bank at a minimum 1:1ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/ offsite habitat restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan, including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance, and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies (i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted for review and approval. The affected regulatory agency shall identify when measures shall be implemented and completed for those activities impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All measures contained in the permits or associated with any agency approvals shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

MM-3. To the extent practicable, removal of large trees with cavities, crevices, or snags shall occur before bat maternity colonies form (i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volant (i.e., after August 31). If construction ( including the removal of large trees 12 inch dbh ) occurs during the bat non-volant season ( March 1 through August 31), a qualified professional shall conduct a pre-construction survey of the study area to locate maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance. The preconstruction survey will be performed no more than 7 days prior to the implementation of Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 14 construction activities. If a maternity colony is located within or adjacent to the study area, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from project activities.

MM-4. The developer will replace the blue oak trees removed from the site with suitable minimum 15-gallon size shade trees at minimum ratio of 1:1.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

Documentation:

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?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 15 Discussion
a) The project would not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Direct energy use would involve the short-term use of energy for construction activities. Project construction would primarily consume diesel and gasoline through operation of construction equipment, material deliveries, and debris hauling. Construction is estimated to result in a short-term consumption of energy, representing a small demand on local and regional fuel supplies that would be easily accommodated and would be temporary. Long term use of electricity for operations such as lighting, heating, and cooling in the development is excepted to be less than significant.
b) The project will not conflict with any State or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Air Quality Element, 2000 California Long-Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan, 2011 Regional Transportation Plan for Shasta County, 2015
Mitigation:

None necessary.

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake, fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publications 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
x
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? x
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 onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
x
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
x
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?
x
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? x
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 16 Discussion:
a, c, d) There are no Alquist-Priolo earthquake faults designated in the Redding area of Shasta County. There are no other documented earthquake faults in the immediate vicinity that pose a significant risk, and the site is located in an area designated in the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan as having a low ground- shaking potential. The project is not located on or near any documented landslide hazard areas, and there is no evidence of ground slippage or subsidence occurring naturally on the site. The type of soils and underlying geology is identified as having no potential for liquefaction.

The project is subject to certain erosion- control requirements mandated by existing City and State regulations. These requirements include:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife “ 1600 Agreement.” This notification is required for any work within a defined streambed.

Documentation:

City of Redding Health and Safety Element, figures 4-1 (Ground Shaking Potential) and 4.2 (Liquefaction Potential) City of Redding General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report City of Redding General Plan Background Report, 1998
City of Redding Grading Ordinance, RMC Chapter 16.12
City of Redding Standard Specifications, Grading Practices City of Redding Standard Development Conditions for Discretionary Approvals Soil Survey of Shasta County Area, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, August 1974 Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 17 State Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, Regulations related to Construction Activity Storm Water Permits and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans
Mitigation:

None necessary.

VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project:

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies four primary constituents that are most representative of the GHG emissions. They are:

Carbon Dioxide ( CO2): Emitted primarily through the burning of fossil fuels. Other sources include the burning of solid waste and wood and/ or wood products and cement manufacturing.

Nitrous Oxide ( N2O): The principal emitters include agricultural and industrial land uses and fossil fuel and waste combustion.

The primary generators of GHG emissions in the United States are electricity generation and transportation. The EPA estimates that nearly 85 percent of the nation’ s GHG emissions are comprised of carbon dioxide (CO2). The majority of CO2is generated by petroleum Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 18 consumption associated with transportation and coal consumption associated with electricity generation. The remaining emissions are predominately the result of natural- gas consumption associated with a variety of uses.

Documentation:

Air Quality Management District, https:// www.co.shasta. ca.us/ index/ drm_index/ aq_index.aspx. Accessed April 22, 2020 Mitigation:

None necessary.

IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:

Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 19 a, b, c, d) The nature of the project as a shopping center and storage facility, does not present a significant risk related to hazardous materials or emissions. There are no documented hazardous material sites located on or near the project. e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. There would be no impact on public safety. f) The project does not involve a use or activity that could interfere with emergency- response or emergency- evacuation plans for the area.
g) The project site is not located within the Very High Fire Severity Zone and is not adjacent to areas with significant fuel loads. The property does not have a wildland fire-hazard potential and will not expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildland fires.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Health and Safety Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None necessary.

X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:

Construction and operation of the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 20 established by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB) in its Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins. Water pollution best management practices are required and will be incorporated into the improvement plans for the project. The City’ s construction standards require that all projects prepare an erosion and sediment control plan (ESCP) prior to construction to address water pollution control. The ESCP will ensure that water quality standards are not substantially affected by the project during construction. b) The project would utilize City water service for domestic uses and fire protection. The proposed project would not impact groundwater supplies.
c) Stormwater runoff from the site flows from north to south by way of an intermittent stream. The stream carries water from a culvert under Hartnell Avenue south across the property to the southwest corner. An ephemeral stream flows from the northwest to the center of the site where itjoins the aforementioned intermittent stream. The project will be required to install storm drain pipe connecting the culvert under Hartnell Avenue to the storm drain system running along the western side of Shasta View Drive, but would not alter the pattern or result in substantial erosion, surface runoff, flooding on- or off- site, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality with construction.

Documentation:

None necessary.

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? x
Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 21 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:

Documentation:

None necessary.

XII. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 Mitigation:

Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 22 None necessary.

XIII. NOISE: Would the project result in:

Documentation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 23 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Housing Element, 2014
Mitigation:

None necessary.

Fire and Police Protection:

Schools:

The project is a commercial shopping center and mini storage facility and will have no impact to schools.

Parks:

Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 24 The project will not cause a physical deterioration of an existing park facility or cause an adverse physical impact associated with a new park facility.

Other public facilities:

See discussion under Item XIX ( Utilities and Service Systems) below.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None necessary.

XVI. RECREATION:

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Natural Resources Element, 2000 City of Redding General Plan, Recreation Element, 2000
City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Element, 2000 Mitigation:

None necessary.

XVII. TRANSPORTATION: 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?
x
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision ( b)? x
Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 25 XVII. TRANSPORTATION: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less- ThanSignificant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
x
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? x
Discussion:
a - c) A traffic study for the area was prepared by GHD, dated March 1, 2021. The study assessed four scenarios; ( 1) existing conditions; ( 2) existing plus project conditions; ( 3) year 2040 no project conditions; and (4) year 2040 plus project conditions.

Therefore, incorporating the off-site improvements as mitigations, no impacts associated with traffic volumes are anticipated.

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Transportation Element, 2000 City of Redding General Plan Environmental Impact Report, 2000, SCH # 1998072103 City of Redding Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan, 2018 City of Redding Traffic Impact Fee Program
City of Redding Active Transportation Plan, 2018
Redding Area Bus Authority System Map and Route Guide, October 2000 Holiday Market Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum, prepared by GHD, dated January 14, 2021 Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 26 Mitigation:

MM-6 Construct a 3-leg, single lane roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue intersection.

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 or wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
x
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
x
Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 27 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:

Documentation:

City of Redding General Plan, Public Facilities Elements, 2000 City of Redding Water and Sewer Atlas
Mitigation:

None necessary.

Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 28 XX. WILDFIRE: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Documentation:

CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps, Shasta County, 2008 Mitigation:

None necessary.

XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less- ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below the self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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? X
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)? X
Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for City of Redding
Development Services Department
Planning Division Initial Study
UP- 2020-01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 Hartnell Commercial Complex 29 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:

Documentation:

See all Sections above.

Mitigation:

None Necessary
Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 1- April 30, 2021

HARTNELL COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BY SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT 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.

Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020-01668, GPA-2020-01667 - 2- April 30, 2021, 20

Mitigation Measure: Lists the mitigation measures identified within the Initial Study for a specific impact, along with the number for each measure as enumerated in the Initial Study.

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 measure.

Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 3- April 30, 2021
Mitigation Measure Timing/ Implementation Enforcement/ Monitoring Verification Date and Initials)
Mitigation Measure 1 – Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, as identified in the project wetland delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that the following resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the Corps, CDFW, RWQCB,
or any other applicable agency ( i.e., USFWS) identified through the permitting process:*
a. Prior to any discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands,
authorization under a Nationwide Permit or
Individual Permit shall be obtained from the Corps.

Verification shall be provided to the City of Redding
Development Services Department prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.
c. The project applicant shall achieve the mitigation for the permanent loss of streams, wetlands, and other
waters through the purchase of mitigation credits at
an agency- approved mitigation bank at a minimum
1:1 ratio, or through onsite/ offsite habitat restoration at a minimum 3:1 ratio. If onsite/ offsite habitat
restoration is proposed a detailed mitigation plan,
including success criteria, monitoring, maintenance,
and reporting as required by the regulatory agencies
i.e., Corps, CDFW, RWQCB) shall be submitted
for review and approval. The affected regulatory
Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit Planning Division, and Public Works Department
Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 4- April 30, 2021
agency shall identify when measures shall be
implemented and completed for those activities
impacting streams, wetlands, or other waters. All
measures contained in the permits or associated with
any agency approvals shall be implemented to the
satisfaction of the lead regulatory agency.

Prior to issuance of a grading or tree
removal permit.

Prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Mitigation Monitoring Program, UP-2020- 01669, PM-2021- 00290, RZ-2020- 01668, GPA- 2020- 01667 - 5- April 30, 2021
lane.
o Construct a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of
Shasta View Drive from Hartnell Avenue to
Christian Avenue.

Mitigation Measure 6 – Construct a 3-leg, single lane
roundabout at the Alta Mesa Drive and Hartnell Avenue
intersection.

Prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.

Planning Division, and Public
Works Department
Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation

TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
City of Redding Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study December 5, 2017 18
within the North Redding Traffic Benefit District or the Dana Drive Benefit District; or the improvements would require substantial and unlikely acquisition of additional right-of-way in already developed areas of the city.

The advisory group recommended the final list of improvements for inclusion in the Citywide transportation impact fee program shown in "'( 2+
2+ 8' 49658:':/ 54 36'): 85- 8' 3 533+4*+* 3685<+3+4:9
Project
ID Roadway Limits of Project Cost Project Description
BIX
I-5 Northbound
Ramp
Interchange at South
Bonnyview
8,000,000$
Placeholder project for capacity related work at the
Interchange of I-5 with South Bonnyview. May include
all or parts of interchange (ie ramps, roundabouts,
divergent diamond) and likely to be an initial and future phase. Ultimate cost is $21M .

CC2 Churn Creek
Rd
Intersection with Rancho
and Victor $ 4,313,000 Construct a roundabout to improve the intersection of Churn Creek Road, Victor Avenue, and Rancho Road.

CIX
Churn Creek
Interchange
with 299
Intersection of WB
Ramps
4,000,000$
Placeholder project for ramp or intersection
improvements for capacity related work at westbound
intersection of the interchange at SR 299 with Churn
Creek Rd.

CC1
Churn Creek
Rd
Browning St to
Bodenhamer Blvd $ 1,450,000
Widen Churn Creek Road between Bodenhamer Blvd
and Browning Street (approximately 2700 LF). A 96’
Right-of-Way is proposed. However a reduced section
of 3 - 12’ lanes and 2 - 8’ shoulders and completion of ped facilities is proposed.

VC1 Victor Ave
Mistletoe Ln to East
Cypress Ave
1,775,000$
Widen Victor Avenue between E. Cypress Avenue and
Mistletoe Lane (approximately 2700 LF). A 84’ Rightof-Way is proposed for this segment of Victor Avenue.

However a reduced section of 3 - 12’ lanes and 2 - 8’
shoulders and completion of ped facilities is proposed.

VC2 Victor Ave Hartnell to Cypress 2,413, 000$
Widen Victor Avenue between Hartnell Avenue and E.

Cypress Avenue (approximately 2500 LF). An ultimate
100’ Right-of-Way is proposed for this segment of
Victor Avenue, but only 70’ of improvements are
needed at this point: 2 - 11’ lanes, center turn lane, 1 - 10’ parking, 1 - 6’ bike lane and 1 - 10’ paved path.

VC3 Victor Ave Highway 44 to Old Alturas $ 1,475,000
Widen Victor Avenue between State Route 44 and Old
Alturas Road (approximately 2500 LF). A 96’ Right-ofWay is proposed for this segment of Victor Avenue.

However a reduced section of 3 - 12’ lanes and 2 - 8’
shoulders with ped facilities is proposed.

OLD Old Alturas Rd
Victor Ave to Shasta View
Dr
5,500,000$
An 84’ Right-of-Way is proposed for this segment of
Old Alturas and an Interim Arterial will be constructed with seperated ped facilities. Add Roundabouts at
Victor Ave, Lema Rd and Edgewood Dr.

PL Placer Street Pleasant to Airpark 1,800, 000$ Widen to complete the 2nd westbound lane, shoulder and sidewalk.

RA Railroad Ave Sheridan St. to Grandview 2,203,000$
Widen Railroad Avenue between Sheridan Street and
Grandview Avenue ( approximately 3100 LF). An 84’
Right-of-Way is proposed: 3 - 12’ lanes, 2 - 6’ bike
lanes and 1 - 8’ parking.

HIL Hilltop Dr River Bend Rd to I-5 1,650, 000$
Realign Palisades Ave to the west to provide queing
space for a turn lane on Hilltop Drive. This will delay the need to construct another structure over I-5.

MIN Minor Projects
Various Roadway, Bike and
Ped capacity enhancement
projects
6,000,000$ Minor capacity related roadway widening, bike and ped facilities, and grant match
DT1 Debt Service Bond Debt 3,647,000$ Repayment of Bond Debt for Bonnyview RAM
Ramp
Metering
Mitigation to prevent impacts to
Main Line freeways
1,500,000$ Includes placeholder to meter ramps at Twin View, Lake and Cypress
Total City-wide TIF Program Cost Estimate:$ 45,726,000
Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Net Amount Gross Amount Total Amount Payment Method Payment Amount Amount Due

REDDING CITY OF
PO BOX 496071
REDDING CA 96049--607
300004816971 174.30 $ 174. 30 $ 00Invoice $ 0. 174.

AD#
1211188
Account
174.30
Sales Rep: TWoodrum Order Taker: TWoodrum 2021Order Created 07/09/ InsProduct Column Lines DateStart Date# End
1RRS- Redding Record Searchlight 0 0 1.00 118 07/10/2021 07/10/2021 0.00 1 1RRS- Redding.com 0 0 1.00 118 07/10/2021 07/10/2021 0.00 1

ALL TRANSACTIONS CONSIDERED PAID IN FULL UPON CLEARANCE OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTION Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Text of Ad: 07/09/2021
Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: 72021-Use Permit - Shasta View Dr Improvements (large file) (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Packet Pg. 457
Attachment: NOE Traffic Agreement_North State Grocery, Inc. (4.11(b)--Transportation Infrastructure Agmt & Budget Reso for Hartnell

CITY OF REDDING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Accept the Mayor’s recommendation to appoint Michael Brokloff as the City of Redding Representative to the Shasta County Commission on Aging (COA) to fill an unexpired two-year term beginning May 7, 2025, through January 12, 2026, pursuant to the Shasta County COA bylaws.

Fiscal Impact
There is no impact to the General Fund.

Alternative Action
The City Council could choose not to approve the Mayor’s recommendation.

Background/Analysis
The Shasta County Commission on Aging is the official advisory commission to the Shasta County Board of Supervisors and the Area Agency on Aging, Planning and Service Area 2 on matters related to the older adult population of Shasta County. The commission reviews and evaluates the performance of organizations who receive public funds in order to offer constructive advice to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission is comprised of eight members – one from each of the five supervisorial districts, appointed by the supervisor from that district; and one each from the cities of Anderson, Redding, and Shasta Lake, appointed by the respective City Councils.

MEETING DATE: May 6, 2025
ITEM NO. 5.1
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
[email protected]
[email protected]
SUBJECT: 5.1--Consider Mayor's appointment to the Shasta County Commission on Aging.

Jack Munns, Mayor
Packet Pg. 458
Report to Redding City Council April 30, 2025
Re: 5.1--Appointment to the Shasta County Commission on Aging Page 2 According to the attached By-Laws, members from supervisorial Districts 1 and 4 and the cities of Redding and Shasta Lake shall be appointed for 2-year terms expiring on the first Monday after January 1 of even numbered years. Members from supervisorial Districts 2, 3, and 4, and the City of Anderson shall be appointed for 2-year terms expiring on the first Monday after January 1 of odd numbered years.

Former Commissioner Barbara Ghidinelli resigned from this position on January 29, 2024.

Pursuant to the Maddy Act, notice declaring the vacancy was posted on February 2, 2024.

Michael Brokloff has expressed interest in serving the remainder of the two-year term on the Shasta County Commission on Aging. If approved, his term will begin on May 7, 2025, and end January 12, 2026.

Environmental Review
This is not a project defined under the California Environmental Quality Act, and no further action is required.

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

Attachments
^Brokloff, Michael Application
^Shasta County Commission on Aging Bylaws
Packet Pg. 459
Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: ^Brokloff, Michael Application (5.1--Appointment to the Shasta County Commission on Aging) Boards, Commissions,
and Committees
Interests & Experiences
High School, College, Professional, Vocational, or Other Schools Attended. Please include Major or Field of Study, Dates Attended, Degree and Date of Degree.

List any position or office held in governmental agency, civic, or charitable organization. (This is not a requirement for appointment.)
Please state why you want to become a member of this Board, Commission, or Committee.

Please provide any otherinformation which you feel would be useful in reviewing your application State and local law require that you abstain from participation in decisions that may affect your financial interests, including sources of income, interest in real property, personal finances or investments. In addition, if appointed, you may be required to fill out a disclosure statement which identifies certain of your financial interest beginning with the immediate twelve-month period prior to your appointment.

City of Redding City Clerks Office
777 Cypress Ave., 3rd Floor, Redding, Ca 96001
phone: 530.225.4447 | email: [email protected] AA University of the State of New York General Studies 1984 BS Brigham Young University Physical Plant Administration 1988 MBA California State Polytechnic University Business 1993 US Navy Machinist Mate First Class Active 1980-1985 Reserve 1985 - 1992 Board Member: California Association of Healthcare Leaders 3yrs Shasta County Grand Jury 2023 - 2024
Turtle Bay Voluenteer 3yrs
Therapy Dog Team 2025
I care for my 84yo mother
We're all getting older and need to have elder interests represented Process Improvement Experience
Service Organization Management Experience Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: ^Brokloff, Michael Application (5.1--Appointment to the Shasta County Commission on Aging) Boards, Commissions,
and Committees
City of Redding City Clerks Office
777 Cypress Ave., 3rd Floor, Redding, Ca 96001
phone: 530.225.4447 | email: [email protected] Reference 1 Name:

Reference 2 Name:

Reference 1 Phone or Email:

Reference 2 Phone or Email:

References
Verification
Yes
Yes
No
No
If applicable, have you ever attended a meeting of the Board, Commission or Committee to which you are applying for?
Would you be able to attend meetings at the scheduled time? By checking the box below, you agree with the following statement.

I agree that all of the information contained in my responses to the questions on this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I further agree that, by checking the box below and submitting this application, online or otherwise, I am affixing my digital signature to this form as of the date submitted.

I Agree
Thank you for your application! You will be notified if there is a vacancy/opening and you have been selected to serve. Please attach a resume, if applicable, to this application and submit via email to:

[email protected].

Garnet Booth Liz Golnick (Turtle Bay Supervisor) ■
Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: ^Brokloff, Michael Application (5.1--Appointment to the Shasta County Commission on Aging)

Page 1 of 4 ends

Redding City CouncilMay 6, 2025

Redding City Council
May 6, 2025