Agenda Packet — Redding City Council, December 4, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The proposed off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan, and the proposed off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan. The off-site improvements would not reduce mobility, access, or otherwise preclude continuity of established land uses in the area, and would be consistent with General Plan goals and policies relative to providing livable, diverse neighborhoods and the City’s construction standards and specifications, State regulations on roadway and facility design, materials, and signage. The off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact LU-1 and LU-2.

Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 66 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on land use and planning.

Cumulative land use and planning impacts were evaluated in Impact LU-3 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that potential future development that may occur from implementation of the General Plan would not create substantial land use impacts and development in surrounding communities would also be subject to federal, state, and local policies and plans governing land use.

The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. The Project will be consistent with the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code, and any future development that would occur within the City or in the Project vicinity would be subject to further site-specific development and environmental review to determine consistency with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other regional plans and policies, as appropriate. No overlapping land use impacts from cumulative projects would occur. Therefore, the conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts remain valid. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact LU-3.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to land use and planning. In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects, which are discussed throughout this Section 15183 CEQA Checklist.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no land use and planning related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 67 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

12. Mineral Resources
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
MIN-1: The proposed General Plan
would not 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 or 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.
(Appendix G questions XII. a & b)
Less than
Significant No No No No No Impact Yes
MIN-2: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
not result in less-than-significant
cumulative impacts with respect to
mineral resources.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to mineral resources, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on such resources. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

None.

GP EIR Impact MIN-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to mineral resources, given that the City’s Mineral Resources Overlay District in combination with GP policies would ensure that potential mineral resources would be avoided by future development.

Project Analysis
Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) identified in the General Plan are located in the Clear Creek basin, generally along Clear Creek Road, and along the Sacramento River near the terminus of Smith Road within the Churn Creek Bottom area, outside of the City’s Sphere of Influence. The Project site is not located within an identified MRZ, nor within a City-designated Critical Mineral Resource Zone as depicted on General Plan EIR Figure 5.12-1, Locally Designated Mineral Resource Areas in Redding. The Project would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources. Therefore, the Project impact would be less than described in the General Plan EIR, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact MIN-1.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Therefore, the off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact MIN-1.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on mineral resources. Cumulative mineral resource impacts were evaluated in Impact MIN-2 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that development in the City and local region would not contribute to an overall loss in the availability of known mineral resources of value locally, regionally, or at the State level. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. The Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within an identified MRZ and would Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 68 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources. Therefore, the conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts remain valid. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact MIN-2.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to mineral resources, and no additional mineral resource-related standard conditions of approval apply to tentative subdivision map projects.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no mineral resource related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 69 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

13. Noise
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
NOI-1: Construction activities associated
with buildout of the General Plan
Planning Area would result in temporary
noise increases at sensitive receptors.
(Appendix G questions XIII. a)
Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Yes
NOI-2: Buildout of the General Plan
Planning Area would cause a substantial
traffic noise increase on local roadways
and could locate sensitive receptors in
areas that exceed established noise
standards.
(Appendix G questions XIII. a)
Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
NOI-3: Buildout of the individual land
uses and projects for implementation of
the proposed General Plan may expose
sensitive uses to excessive levels of
groundborne vibration.
(Appendix G questions XIII. b)
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
No No No No
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Yes
NOI-4: The proximity of the future
development in the General Plan Planning
Area to an airport or airstrip would not
result in exposure of future residents
and/or workers to excessive airportrelated noise.
(Appendix G questions XIII. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
NOI-5: Buildout of the proposed General
Plan, in combination with past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects,
would result in potentially significant
cumulative impacts with respect to noise.

Potentially
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to noise, and evaluated the potential impacts of the buildout of the General Plan on noise. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following Noise Element goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal N1: A city with appropriate noise and vibration levels that support a range of places from quiet neighborhoods to active and exciting entertainment districts.

Policy N1A: Encourage the use of site planning and building materials/design as primary methods of noise-attenuation.

Policy N1B: Discourage use of noise barriers and walls constructed exclusively for noise-attenuation purposes, where possible. In instances where noise barriers cannot be avoided, consider the use of site planning and building material/design features in conjunction with barriers to mitigate visual impacts and reduce the size of barriers.

Policy N1E: Require new development to generate operational and/or construction vibration levels no greater than 75 VdB at the property line of a sensitive receptor where feasible.

Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 70 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Goal N2: Protect residents from exposure to excessive transportation-related noise.

Policy N2A: Generally, prevent development of new projects which contain noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing or projected levels of noise from transportation sources which exceed the levels specified in Table N-1, unless the project design includes effective mitigation measures to reduce exterior noise and noise levels in interior spaces to the levels specified in that table.

Policy N2B: New development should be required to mitigate noise created by transportation noise sources consistent with the levels specified in Table N-1 in outdoor-activity areas.

Policy N2H: Establish standards for vibration during construction and operation that require vibration levels to be reduced below 85 VdB within 200 feet of an existing structure.

Goal N3: Protect the economic base of the City of Redding by preventing incompatible land uses from encroaching upon existing or planned noise-producing uses. Strive to prevent the introduction of new fixed noise sources in noise-sensitive areas.

Policy N3A: Development of noise-sensitive uses where the noise level due to non-transportation sources will exceed the noise-level standards of Table N-2 as measured immediately at the property line of the new development should be prohibited unless adequate mitigation measures are utilized, noise easements are established, or other appropriate measures are taken.

Policy N3B: Strive to mitigate noise created by new proposed non-transportation sources consistent with the noise-level standards of Table N-2 as measured immediately at the property line of lands designated for noise-sensitive land uses.

GP EIR Impact NOI-1: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to noise impacts during construction.

The GP EIR requires Mitigation Measure NOI-1, which will require the City to update the noise ordinance to include construction noise attenuation and plan requirements. However, the GP EIR concluded that at the programmatic level, construction activities could result in a temporary substantial increase in noise levels above ambient conditions, and the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The impacts were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Project Analysis
Noise impacts resulting from construction depend upon the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise-generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise-sensitive areas. Construction noise impacts primarily result when construction activities occur during noise-sensitive times of the day (e.g., early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), the construction occurs in areas near noise-sensitive land uses, or when construction lasts over extended periods of time. The City of Redding Zoning Ordinance limits allowable construction hours for work occurring within 500 feet of residences.

From May 15 through September 15, construction noise is prohibited during the hours of 7 p.m. and 6 a.m. on weekdays and on weekends and holidays between 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. From September 16 through May 14, construction noise is prohibited during the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and on weekends and holidays between 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. The General Plan also states that if construction would result in noise levels of 75 dBA or greater at property lines during allowable hours, methods of reducing noise impacts to the land uses near the construction should be considered.

As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Noise and Vibration Assessment was completed to evaluate construction-related noise impacts using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025b).

To assess construction noise impacts at the receiving property lines of existing noise-sensitive receptors, hourly average construction noise levels were calculated at various possible distances. The analysis showed that construction noise levels could possibly exceed the City of Redding’s recommended threshold of 75 dBA depending on the construction phase and the distance from nearby noise-sensitive receptors. The analysis recommends implementing noise-reduction measures when construction activities occur within certain distances of surrounding residential property lines, including grading within 155 feet, demolition, site preparation, or trenching within 140 feet, building exterior, paving, or landscaping work within 60 feet, and building interior work within 50 feet of existing surrounding residential property lines. Most of the project construction will be conducted at distances greater than the distances noted above and would produce noise levels below the City’s recommended noise threshold. There are only a small number of planned residential lots nearby existing noise sensitive residential land uses.

The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to construction noise (Conditions 41 and 42), which outline best management practices such as noise barriers, equipment muffling, idling restrictions, strategic equipment placement, use of quiet technologies, and coordination with adjacent land uses to minimize noise disturbance, while also designating a disturbance coordinator to address complaints and enforce corrective measures. The complete text of Conditions 41 and 42 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 71 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision use of the required construction best management practices would ensure that construction noise would result in a less-than-significant temporary noise impact. The Project impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-1.

GP EIR Impact NOI-2: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to traffic noise increases and locating sensitive receptors in areas that exceed established noise standards. Specifically, the GP EIR identified that increases in traffic noise on two roadway segments, Rancho Road west of Airport Road, and Twin View Road Boulevard south of Oasis Boulevard, would experience a potentially significant traffic noise increase. The City Council addressed this impact in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration.

Project Analysis
The Project site is not located along a roadway segment for which the General Plan EIR estimated that traffic noise increases would result in a potentially significant impact on sensitive receptors.

The Project’s Noise and Vibration Assessment (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025b) evaluated operational traffic noise using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5, based on projected peak-hour traffic volumes. The Project’s contribution to noise levels is estimated to range from 0 to 2 dBA Ldn along road segments in the surrounding vicinity. An increase of 1 dBA Ldn is expected along Buenaventura Boulevard and Quartz Hill Road. The Project would not elevate overall noise levels along Buenaventura Boulevard to 60 dBA Ldn, nor result in a 5 dBA Ldn incremental increase, which is the threshold associated with substantial impacts. Along Quartz Hill Road, the Project would not result in a 3dBA Ldn increase, which is the applicable threshold given that existing ambient noise levels range between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn. Modeled traffic noise levels at residences along Old Lantern Drive, Spinnaker Drive, Steamboat Street, and Keel Court were calculated to increase noise levels by approximately 4 dBA Ldn. However, noise levels would remain below 60 dBA Ldn and would not exceed the 5 dBA Ldn threshold for substantial impacts.

Overall, the operational traffic noise associated with the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-2.

GP EIR Impact NOI-3: The GP EIR identified significant impacts relative to potential generation of excessive levels of groundborne vibration during construction and operation. The GP EIR includes Mitigation Measures NOI-2 through NOI-4, requiring reduction of potential vibration impacts during construction below the pertinent thresholds, and reducing potential vibration impacts on residential projects near existing railroads, and for mitigating industrial projects.

Project Analysis
The Project site is not located within 200 feet of a railroad line or Interstate 5, and would not include pile-driving activities or industrial uses that would result in excessive construction or operational groundborne vibration or noise levels. The Project’s Noise and Vibration Assessment (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025b) evaluated if construction-related vibration levels would potentially exceed applicable vibration thresholds at adjoining sensitive land uses to the east. The assessment determined that the use of a vibratory roller at less than 20 feet from neighboring residential structures would exceed 0.3 in/sec Peak Particle Velocity (PPV), which is the threshold associated with substantial impacts. However, the vibratory roller is primarily used for paving/compaction of the drive aisles which is not expected to occur within 25 feet of neighboring residential structures.

The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to groundborne vibration (Condition 43), which requires smaller machinery and low-impact methods near sensitive buildings, avoidance of dropping heavy equipment, and designating a disturbance coordinator to address vibration-related complaints. The complete text of Condition 43 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The use of the required best management practices would ensure that groundborne vibration would result in a less-than-significant impact, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-3.

GP EIR Impact NOI-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to exposure of future residents and/or workers to excessive airport-related noise, given that the Noise element policy N-2F would require new development in the vicinity of Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark to comply with the noise standards of the Master Plan for each facility
Project Analysis
The Project site is not located within two miles of a public or private airport, nor within established noise contours for the Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Airpark. The Redding Municipal Airport is located approximately 9.8 miles southeast of the Project site, and the Benton Airpark is approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the site. No impact would result. The Project impact would be less than described in the General Plan EIR, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-4.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 72 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan 2045. The off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan 2045. The off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-1 through NOI-4.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on noise. Cumulative noise impacts were evaluated in Impact NOI-5 of the General Plan EIR as significant and unavoidable, given that buildout of the General Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in potentially significant cumulative impacts with respect to noise. The impact was addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
The following noise-related mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 is related to updating the City’s noise ordinance and is not directly applicable to the Project. As part of this Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Noise and Vibration Assessment (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025b) was completed in accordance with Mitigation Measures NOI-2 and NOI-4. Mitigation Measure NOI-3 is not applicable to the Project, as the Project site is not located within 200 feet of railroad lines or Interstate 5.

NOI-1: Update the noise ordinance to include construction noise attenuation and plan requirements such as:
• Limiting construction times and days.
• Use of best-available noise control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment re-design, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds), wherever feasible. • Limitations on the use of impact tools (e.g., jack hammers and hoe rams) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible. Where the use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used along with external noise jackets on the tools.

NOI-2: Prior to issuance of a building permit for a project requiring pile driving during construction within 135 feet of fragile structures, such as historical resources, 100 feet of non-engineered timber and masonry buildings (e.g., most residential buildings), or within 75 feet of engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster); or a vibratory roller within 25 feet of any structure, the project applicant shall prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. This noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted by a qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer. The vibration levels shall not exceed Federal Transit Administration (FTA) architectural damage thresholds (e.g., 0.12 inches per second [in/sec] peak particle velocity [PPV] for fragile or historical resources, 0.2 in/sec PPV for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, and 0.3 in/sec PPV for engineered concrete and masonry). If vibration levels would exceed this threshold, alternative uses such as drilling piles as opposed to pile driving and static rollers as opposed to vibratory rollers shall be used. If necessary, construction vibration monitoring shall be conducted to ensure vibration thresholds are not exceeded.

NOI-3: New residential projects (or other noise-sensitive uses) located within 200 feet of existing railroad lines and Interstate 5, shall be required to conduct a groundborne vibration and noise evaluation consistent with Federal Transit Administration (FTA)- approved methodologies
NOI-4: During the project-level California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process for industrial developments under the General Plan Update or other projects that could generate substantial vibration levels near sensitive uses, a noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to the operations of that individual development. This noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted by a qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer and shall follow the latest CEQA guidelines, practices, and precedents.

SCOAs for Subdivisions – Noise
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following noise-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:

Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 73 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision #41. The following measures shall be implemented if a noise analysis prepared for the project indicates that nearby sensitive receptors will be impacted by temporary construction noise:
a. Adherence to Section 18.40.100 and Chapter 16.12 of the Redding Municipal Code pertaining to construction activities. b. Utilize the following best management practices to control construction noise:
• Construct temporary noise barriers, where necessary and feasible, to screen stationary noise-generating equipment.

Temporary noise barrier fences would provide a five (5) dBA noise reduction if the noise barrier interrupts the line-ofsight between the noise source and receptor and if the barrier is constructed in a manner that eliminates any cracks or gaps. • Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
• Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Locate stationary noise-generating equipment, such as air compressors or portable power generators, as far as possible from sensitive receptors as feasible. If they must be located near receptors, adequate muffling (with enclosures where feasible and appropriate) shall be used to reduce noise levels at the adjacent sensitive receptors. Any enclosure openings or venting shall face away from sensitive receptors.
• Utilize “quiet” air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • Establish construction staging areas at locations that will create the greatest distance between the construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. • Locate material stockpiles, as well as maintenance/equipment staging and parking areas, as far as feasible from sensitive receptors.
• Route construction-related traffic along major roadways and as far as feasible from sensitive receptors. • Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing sensitive receptors bordering the project site.
• Prepare and provide to the City Engineer, prior to commencement of construction, a detailed construction schedule for major noise-generating construction activities. The construction plan shall identify a procedure for coordination with adjacent residential land uses so that construction activities can be scheduled to minimize noise disturbance. #42. Designate a “disturbance coordinator” who would be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise.

The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator, who will be available at all hours and days of the week and include the information in notices that may be sent to neighboring properties regarding the construction schedule. #43. The following measures shall be implemented if a vibration analysis prepared for the project indicates that vibration levels may exceed 75 VdB for continuous activities or 85 VdB if the number of events per day are infrequent, as addressed in Table N-5 of General Plan 2045 Noise Element:
a. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the contractor shall verify and provide confirmation to the City, that the equipment assumptions made in the vibration analysis prepared for the project are still valid. The project proponent shall use this information to modify determinations made in the vibration analysis, and to define the measures necessary for reducing vibration levels below the thresholds as may be necessary and provide documentation of such to the City Engineer. b. Smaller equipment (less than 18,000 pounds) shall be used near the property lines adjacent to sensitive buildings to minimize vibration levels to 0.3 in/sec PPV or less. For example, a smaller vibratory roller similar to a Caterpillar model CP433E vibratory compactor could be used when compacting materials within twenty-five feet (25’) of the adjacent conventional building. The smaller equipment intended to implement this requirement shall be individually identified among the list of equipment required under the above condition as the subset of equipment allowed for use at the property lines.
c. Select demolition methods that do not involve large impact tools such as hoe-rams within twenty-five feet (25’) of the Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 74 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision adjacent conventional building. Portable jackhammers, saws, or grinders shall be used to minimize impacts to the ground. d. Avoid dropping heavy equipment and use alternative methods for breaking up existing pavement, such as a pavement grinder, instead of dropping heavy objects, within twenty-five feet (25’) of the adjacent conventional building. e. Designate a disturbance coordinator responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration who will be available at all hours and days of the week. The contact information for the responsible party shall be clearly posted on the construction site.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no noise related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 75 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

14. Population and Housing
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
PH-1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would directly result in
population growth in the General Plan
area.
(Appendix G questions XIV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
PH-2: General Plan implementation
would not result in displacing a
substantial number of people and/or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.
(Appendix G questions XIV. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No No Impact Yes
PH-3: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
not result in less than-significant
cumulative impacts with respect to
population and housing.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to population and housing, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal CDD11: Strive to ensure that new residential development is appropriately located and designed and can accommodate a mixture of housing types and uses.

Policy CDD11B: Maximum residential densities within a given range of the land use classifications of this General Plan are appropriate for projects that demonstrate superior design features and amenities and/or the development is an affordable housing project that is supported by financial aid or other assistance provided by the City of Redding. Site constraints may dictate that the maximum number of residential dwelling units allowed by the General Plan classification for a given parcel of land may not be realized.

Policy CDD11G: Continue to allow residential developments to include a mix of residential densities and dwelling types, provided that the proposed development is in scale with the neighborhood and that the total dwelling unit count is consistent with the applicable General Plan density range depicted on the General Plan Diagram.

Policy CDD11J: Encourage the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units in single family residential districts consistent with State law to increase the housing stock and provide more affordable housing options in support of the goals of the Housing Element.

GP EIR Impact PH-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to population growth, given that future development in the City would require compliance with General Plan goals, policies, and implementation actions and that growth under the GP would not be considered unplanned.

Project Analysis
The Project site is zoned as “RS-2.5” Residential Single Family, which permits a base residential density of 2.5 dwelling units per gross developable acre. The Project is a Tentative Map for the development of infrastructure and grading that would support a 120-lot singlefamily housing development. The Project site is 114 acres, with 65.3 acres planned for development. Within the 65.3 acre development area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project proposes 120 housing lots on the 48.5 Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 76 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision developable acres, resulting in a net density of 2.5 units per gross developable acre. This aligns with the density evaluated by the General Plan EIR for this setting and with the zoning designation of the property. Therefore, the growth projections of the General Plan EIR remain valid, and the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area. In addition, the off-site improvements that would extend across BLM land would occur within a Growth Area identified in the General Plan, and would be within the General Plan Sphere of Influence and Planning Area. The Project impact would be less than significant, and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PH-1.

GP EIR Impact PH-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to displacement of people and housing, given that the GP would not redesignate land currently designated for residential uses to non-residential uses, and thus would not displace residents or housing.

Project Analysis
The Project site is vacant and no residential structures would be impacted. Therefore, the Project would not displace people, remove housing, or necessitate construction of replacement housing. No impact would result. The Project impact would be less than described in the General Plan EIR, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PH-2.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on population and housing.

Cumulative population and housing impacts were evaluated in Impact PH-3 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that development would not induce a substantial amount of unplanned population growth or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred, or displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. Therefore, the conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts are still valid. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PH-3.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to population and housing. In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects, which are discussed throughout this Section 15183 CEQA Checklist.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no population and housing related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 77 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

15. Public Services, Parks, and Recreation
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
PS-1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not result in the need
for new or physically altered fire
protection and emergency medical
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance
objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
PS-2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative fire protection services
impact.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-3: The proposed General Plan would
not result in the need for new or
physically altered police facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts to
maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance
objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative police protection services
impact.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-5: The proposed General Plan would
not result in the need for new or
physically altered school facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts to
maintain acceptable service ratios or other
performance objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-6: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative school services impact.
(Appendix G question XV. a))
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 78 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
PS-7: The proposed General Plan would
not result in the need for new or
physically altered public facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios
or other performance objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-8: The proposed General Plan would
not in combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, result in
cumulative library impacts in the area.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
REC-1: The proposed General Plan
would not 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.
(Appendix G question XVI. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
REC-2: The proposed General Plan
would not include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion
of additional recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment.
(Appendix G question XVI. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
REC-3: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in cumulative
parks and recreation impacts in the area.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to public services, parks, and recreational facilities, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on such services and resources. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal CDD2: Work to assure the ability of the City, school districts, and other public-service providers to efficiently provide expected and necessary public facilities and services to constituents.

Policy CDD2B: Require new developments to maintain adequate service levels for existing development while providing for the upgrade/expansion of existing public services as appropriate.

Policy PF3D: Implement the California Building Code and any local ordinances to protect life, control fire losses and fire protection costs through the use of automatic suppression systems. Adequate water supplies to construct fire suppression infrastructure as necessary should be available.

Goal PF3: Ensure adequate fire protection and emergency medical response for residents and businesses in the community.

Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 79 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Policy PF3F: Ensure through development review, projects adequately address on-site fire safety and protection and comply with applicable fire and building codes.

Goal PS4: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage resulting from urban and wildland fires.

Policy PS4B: Design new development and redevelopment projects to meet state and local standards for fire protection; encourage the upgrade of existing structures to current standards. Encourage the installation of smoke detectors in residential and commercial facilities constructed prior to the requirement of their installation, as appropriate.

Policy PS4C: Apply appropriate codes and standards, to ensure all new and existing developments provide:
• Defensible space.
• Non-combustible design with appropriate building exterior and roofing materials. • Spark arresting system, Fire alarms, and fire sprinkler systems are installed.

Policy PS4D: Continue to include the Fire Department in the project development review process to ensure projects adequately address safety, on-site fire protection, and comply with applicable fire and building codes.

Policy PS4F: Prioritize developing and funding a comprehensive vegetation management and weed-abatement program, beyond the wildfire mitigation through the Electric Utility, for City-owned properties, open-space areas, including those that are located in existing subdivisions and in new developments to prevent and reduce the risk of fire.

Policy PS4G: Develop a program to construct and maintain fire-access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires. These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City's trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features shall be minimized.

Policy PS4J: Utilize techniques, as determined appropriate by the Fire Marshal, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential.

Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul-de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided.

Policy PS4M: Construct emergency-vehicle access routes to open-space areas at optimal locations within projects during the development process, as funding or law allows. As funding and physical conditions allow, construct such access routes in existing developments where warranted.

Policy PS4N: Ensure new subdivisions have adequate fire protection measures such as multi-access for firefighting apparatus, noncombustible building construction, appropriate defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously.

Goal R6: Ensure that new development contributes to the park, recreation, and improved open-space needs of the City.

Policy R6A: Adhere to the standards of the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan to ensure that new residential projects provide appropriate levels of improved open-space and/or recreational amenities.

Policy R6B: Continue to require developers of residential property to contribute park sites or pay in-lieu fees at the maximum rate allowed by State law or as directed by the City Council.

Policy R6C: Continue to require both residential and commercial development to pay impact fees for their fair share of the costs of constructing/providing new facilities so that new development maintains the current service level of park facilities.

Goal R9: Minimize the impacts of recreational facilities on adjacent residential development.

Policy R9A: Lighting in parks and recreational facilities should incorporate appropriate mitigation features such as:
• Restrictions on the height, wattage, and/or orientation of the lighting equipment. • Shielding requirements for light fixtures.
• Limitations on the times the lights may be utilized.
• Installation of vegetative screens where playing fields abut adjacent residential uses.

Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 80 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision • Restrictions on lighting color and temperature.

GP EIR Impact PS-1 through PS-7: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, including but not limited to fire protection facilities, police facilities, schools, parks and libraries in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance service ratios or objectives for any public services.

Project Analysis
The Project site is within the coverage area of Redding Fire Station #1 and Redding Fire Station #6. Fire Station #1 is located at 1335 Shasta Street, approximately 2.5 miles to the southeast of the site, while Fire Station #6 is located at 1695 Beltline Road, approximately 2 miles northeast of the site. The Redding Police Department is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the site. The Project site is located in the Gateway Unified Elementary School District and Gateway Unified High School District. The closest schools to the Project site are the Buckeye School of the Arts located approximately 1.5 miles northeast, and Shasta High School located approximately 2 miles south. Shasta Public Library is the nearest library to the Project site, located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the Project site along Parkview Avenue.

The Project site is zoned “RS-2.5” Residential Single Family, which permits a base residential density of 2.5 dwelling units per gross developable acre. The Project is a Tentative Map for the development of infrastructure and grading that would support a 120-lot singlefamily housing development. The Project site is 114 acres, with 65.3 acres planned for development. Within the 65.3 acre development area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project proposes 120 housing lots on the 48.5 developable acres, resulting in a net density of 2.5 units per gross developable acre, which is consistent with the density evaluated by the General Plan EIR for this setting. Therefore, the growth projections of the General Plan EIR remain valid, and the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area or result in the need for new or physically altered fire or police facilities.

The Project is subject to Chapter 16.20 of the Redding Municipal Code, which requires new development to pay a fire facilities-impact 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. The development would include multiple public access points in compliance with the California Fire Code, the City’s Municipal Code, and General Plan policy PS4L to ensure adequate emergency access. All new roads would be designed to allow access by Fire Department, Law Enforcement, and other emergency responder use, and would provide widths in accordance with the City’s construction standards. Additionally, an Evacuation Assessment completed as part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist concluded that, even under a conservative worst-case scenario, the Project would minimally increase evacuation times and would not substantially impair the City’s emergency response or evacuation capabilities (W-Trans 2025b).

Chapter 16.24 of the Redding Municipal Code directs school districts to levy fees on development in school districts that have been determined to be overcrowded, which would reduce impacts to less than significant per Section 65996 of the California Government Code. In accordance with state subdivision law, projects containing 50 or more lots may be required to dedicate land for park development. The proposed subdivision would meet that threshold and would thus be required to dedicate land to create a new park (or pay the established in-lieu fee at the City’s discretion) as part of the Project design. As discussed in Impact REC-1 and REC-2, the Project would include an approximately 3-acre neighborhood park, as well as designated trails through native vegetated open space, and playgrounds. The potential environmental impacts associated with construction of the proposed new on-site recreational facilities are evaluated as part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist. No additional new or expanded recreational facilities would be required.

Overall, the Project impact relative to the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PS-1 through PS-7.

GP EIR Impact REC-1 through REC-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to recreational facilities.

Project Analysis
The Project includes an approximately 3-acre neighborhood park, as well as designated trails through native vegetated open space and playgrounds. The potential environmental impacts associated with construction of the proposed new on-site recreational facilities are evaluated as part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist. The Project could result in more people utilizing existing local and regional parks and other recreational facilities. Several primary parks and recreational facilities are located within approximately two miles of the Project site, including Buckeye Park, Amethyst Park, Carnelian Park, Lake Redding Park, Caldwell Park, and the Redding Aquatic Center. Given the number of existing park and recreational options available in the Project vicinity, the Project is unlikely to increase use of parks such that substantial physical deterioration would occur or such that expansion of recreational facilities would be required.

The Project impact would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact REC-1 and REC-2.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 81 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvements that would extend across BLM land extend would occur within a Growth Area identified in the General Plan. The off-site improvements would not result in new significant environmental impacts relative to public services, parks, and recreation.

Therefore, the off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PS-1 through PS-8, and REC1 through REC-2.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on public services, parks, and recreation. Cumulative impacts were evaluated in Impact PS-2, PS-4, PS-6, and REC-3 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant.

The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. Therefore, the conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts remain valid. The Project would include onsite recreational facilities and would not substantially increase demand on regional parks such that physical damage would occur, nor result in the need to acquire and develop additional off-site park facilities or new or physically altered governmental facilities. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PS-2, PS-4, PS-6, and REC-3.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to public services, parks, and recreation.

SCOAs for Subdivisions – Final Map
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following park-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#4. Prior to recording the final map, in-lieu park fees must be paid accordance with Chapter 17.54 of the Subdivision Ordinance, unless an equivalent parkland dedication is made in conformance with the tentative map approval.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no public services, parks, and recreation related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 82 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

16. Transportation
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
TRANS-1: The proposed General Plan
would not conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance, or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities.
(Appendix G question XVII. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
TRANS-2: Implementation of the
proposed General Plan may generate
VMT levels inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b) regarding policies to reduce VMT.
(Appendix G question XVII. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
TRANS-3: The proposed General Plan
would not substantially increase hazards
due to a geometric design feature (e.g.
sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment).
(Appendix G question XVII. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
TRANS-4: The proposed General Plan
would not result in inadequate emergency
access.
(Appendix G question XVII. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
TRANS-5: Implementation of the
proposed General Plan would not, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, result in
a cumulative impact with respect to
transportation.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to transportation, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on transportation. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal PS4: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage resulting from urban and wildland fires.

Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul-de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided.

Policy PS4L: Apply as appropriate, subdivision regulations requiring each residential development having 50 or more dwelling units and each commercial development employing 150 or more people to have at least two connected points of public Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 83 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision access as may be determined necessary by the Fire Marshal.

Goal T1: A transportation system that meets the diverse needs of users of all ages and abilities, including safe, efficient, sustainable, and comfortable routes for walking, bicycling, and public transportation to increase the use of these modes of transportation, and enable convenient and active travel as part of daily activities.

Policy T1A: Strive to ensure that where complete streets infrastructure is constructed, it improves transportation choices for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and public transportation riders and that users of all ages and abilities are considered in the planning, design, approval, construction, and operation of new streets, and the alteration and maintenance phases of existing streets by:
• Including infrastructure that promotes a safe means of travel for all users along the right of way, such as sidewalks, shared-use paths, bicycle lanes (including protected bicycle lanes or buffered bicycle lanes where feasible) or paved shoulders.
• Providing pedestrian and bike connections from developments to adjacent main streets, open space areas, parks, transit stops, schools, commercial and employment centers, and other activity centers as opportunities arise. • Designing new development to incorporate street connectivity for all users. • Including new or alteration of existing infrastructure that facilitates safe crossing of the right-of-way for all users, such as: accessible curb ramps, high-visibility crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, smaller curb radii, corner bulb-outs, pedestrian signals, and bicycle detection at traffic signals where warranted. • Incorporating features that improve the comfort, convenience, and safety of users such as pedestrianoriented/wayfinding signs, pedestrian-scale lighting, benches and other street furniture, bicycle parking facilities, comfortable and attractive public transportation stops and facilities, street trees, landscape, and planting strips.

Goal CDD17: Provide residential streets that are designed to reduce vehicle speed, that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use, and that are aesthetically pleasing.

Policy CDD17A: Allow a variety of residential street widths and designs to be incorporated into new residential developments based on the function of the various streets. Pavement width should generally be limited to the minimum necessary to adequately meet circulation demands and emergency vehicle access.

Policy CDD17B: Encourage new neighborhoods to incorporate detached sidewalks and to establish landscaped “parkways” between curb and sidewalk. Continuous and consistent tree planting to form canopy closure is encouraged.

GP EIR Impact TRANS-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system.

Project Analysis
The Project is consistent with the land use designation for the site, the RS-2.5 zoning district, and City development standards. The development would include multiple public access points in compliance with the California Fire Code, the City’s Municipal Code and General Plan policy PS4L to ensure adequate emergency access. The primary vehicular access to the Project site is proposed via a new off-site roadway that would extend from Buenaventura Boulevard to the site, which would be constructed within an approved City right-of-way across BLM property west of the site. A new tee intersection with Buenaventura Boulevard would be stop controlled on the new connecting roadway. The Project would also include residential streets that would connect to Steamboat Street and Keel Court to the east, which then connect to Spinnaker Drive. All new roads would be designed to allow access by Fire Department, Law Enforcement, and other emergency responder use, and would provide widths in accordance with the City’s construction standards.

Pedestrian and bicycle access would be provided along sidewalks, on-site multi-use trails, and shared use of minor streets. Pathways and sidewalks would be placed throughout the development for easy pedestrian circulation to and from the residential areas, parks, Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 84 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision and open space areas. The Project will dedicate street rights-of-ways and construct streets that will accommodate all forms of transportation as provided by the City’s Complete Streets policy, the Subdivision Ordinance, right-of-way and construction requirements of RMC Chapter 16.13, and the City’s construction standards.

As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Transportation Impact Study was completed to evaluate the potential transportation impacts and operational effects associated with the Project (W-Trans 2025a). The Transportation Impact Study notes that the Project includes sidewalks and trails that provide adequate connectivity within the site and to neighboring developments. The proposed sidewalks are at least five feet wide and are proposed on either side of each Project street. Proposed trails would provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between the Project streets and the proposed open spaces and park. ADA-compliant curb ramps would be included at new intersections. With these improvements, the Project is consistent with the City policies related to pedestrian facilities and the Project would be adequately connected to the nearby neighborhoods and the surrounding pedestrian network.

The Transportation Impact Study notes that existing bicycle facilities, along with shared use of minor streets and proposed trails, would provide adequate access for cyclists. Connectivity is expected to improve further with City planned bicycle lane extensions along Quartz Hill Road, as outlined in the City’s Active Transportation Plan and Bikeway Action Plan. The Project does not include any bicycle facilities that would inhibit or conflict with the City’s Active Transportation Plan and Bikeway Action Plan.

The Transportation Impact Study notes that although transit access is limited in the area, it is considered acceptable given the Project’s location and expected minimal demand. The Project would not conflict with City policies related to transit facilities.

Overall, the Project would not conflict with any existing City policies related to pedestrians, bicyclists, or transit and would therefore have a less-than-significant impact on these modes with provision of sidewalks and streetlighting along the new project streets and ADA-compliant curb ramps at intersections. The impact relative to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact TRANS-1.

GP EIR Impact TRANS-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to generation of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) levels, given that the forecasted rate of VMT per resident under GP Year 2045 conditions would not exceed the established regional threshold. This finding was consistent with the 2018 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for the Shasta Region, which noted that Redding has the lowest rate of VMT per capita in Shasta County, and the shortest average trip lengths in the County, reflecting the proximity of homes, jobs, and services within Redding.

Project Analysis
The Project’s Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2025a) evaluated anticipated VMT levels. The Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA) travel demand model includes hundreds of traffic analysis zones (TAZs) within the region that contain information for scenario years between 2015 and 2040. The model includes aggregate travel data for factors such as trip counts, travel distances, total VMT, population, and employment figures. The Project site is located within TAZ 463, which has a total projected VMT of 18,789 miles per day in 2025. With a combined population of 1,145 persons, the total daily VMT per capita would be 18.4.

As contained in the 2018 RTP, the projected total daily VMT per capita with implementation of the RTP initiatives is 26.8 miles per day in 2020. Applying OPR’s guidance, a residential project generating a VMT that is 15 percent or more below this value, or 22.8 miles per capita per day or less, would have a less-than-significant VMT impact. The Project is expected to have a daily VMT per capita of

18.4, which is approximately 31 percent below the countywide average. Since this is more than 15 percent below the countywide average value, the Project’s transportation impact related to VMT would be considered less than significant. Accordingly, based on OPR guidance and information contained within the SRTA travel demand model and the 2018 RTP, the Project’s impact on VMT would be less than significant and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact TRANS-2.

GP EIR Impact TRANS-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to increasing roadway hazards due to a geometric design feature.

Project Analysis
The primary vehicular access to the Project site is proposed via a new off-site roadway that would extend from Buenaventura Boulevard to the site, which would be constructed within an approved City right-of-way across BLM property west of the site. A new tee intersection with Buenaventura Boulevard would be stop controlled on the new connecting roadway. The Project would also include residential streets that would connect to Steamboat Street and Keel Court to the east, which then connect to Spinnaker Drive.

The Project’s Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2025a) evaluated sight distance at the proposed new intersection with Buenaventura Boulevard. The proposed intersection would be stop-controlled on the minor street approach, therefore, the Highway Design Manual’s corner sight distance criteria were applied. The segment of Buenaventura Boulevard adjacent to the Project site does not have a posted speed limit, so a design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph) was applied for evaluation purposes. The Transportation Impact Study found that while corner sight distance criteria for a design speed of 45 mph are not met, stopping sight distance criteria are satisfied. To promote safe and effective intersection visibility, the Project design incorporates recommendations from the study.

Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 85 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision These include maximizing available sight lines by placing signage, monuments, and other structures outside the vision triangles for drivers on the minor street approach, installing intersection lighting, and adding intersection warning signs on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches.

The analysis also considered whether Project traffic would cause queues to extend out of dedicated turn lanes into through lanes or create sight distance issues. The findings determined that there are no scenarios where the projected maximum queue lengths at intersections would exceed the available stacking space due to Project traffic. The Project would not increase queues to a position where adequate stopping sight distance would no longer be available.

Overall, implementation of the Project would not result in conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or actions or otherwise increase hazards due to a design feature that may have a significant impact on the environment. The Project impact would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact TRANS-3.

GP EIR Impact TRANS-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to emergency access.

Project Analysis
During construction, impairment of emergency response and evacuation plans could occur if temporary road closures are required.

The Project would require work within Buenaventura Boulevard, including connection of a new access road intersection and utility tieins. Such construction would potentially require temporary partial lane closures over a period of two to four weeks. No full roadway closures would occur during construction of the Project, and no on-street worker parking or equipment staging would occur.

Encroachment permits and the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps include conditions of approval related to traffic control (Condition 27), which require preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan to ensure that construction equipment and activities do not obstruct roadways. The Traffic Control Plan will be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.

The Project would be consistent with subdivision regulations that limits cul-de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and provision of sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas. Emergency-vehicle access routes are provided in the proposed open-space areas at the site, and street widths and grades will accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously. Additionally, the City of Redding Public Works Department and Fire Department have reviewed the Project plans according to adopted construction standards and specifications and confirmed that adequate emergency access is provided. The Project provides adequate emergency access and on-site circulation, meeting the necessary design standards. While the Project would be expected to result in a slight increase in delay for traffic on Quartz Hill Road, emergency response vehicles can claim the right-of-way by using lights and sirens, and the Project is expected to have a negligible effect on emergency response times, ensuring that emergency services can still operate efficiently.

Overall, the Project would meet and exceed the minimum number of access points required under City Code and the California Fire Code. Emergency access and site circulation are anticipated to function acceptably with incorporation of applicable design standards into the site layout, and traffic from the Project would be expected to have a less-than-significant impact on emergency response times.

The Project impact would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact TRANS-4.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan 2045. The off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan 2045. The proposed new off-site roadway would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City’s construction standards and specifications, and with State regulations on roadway and facility design, materials, and signage. The road would allow access by Fire Department, Law Enforcement, and other emergency responder use, and would provide widths in accordance with the City’s construction standards. As discussed in Impact TRANS-3, the Project’s Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2025a) evaluated sight distance at the proposed new off-site intersection with Buenaventura Boulevard, and includes recommendations that incorporated into the Project to ensure acceptable site distance. The off-site improvements would not result in additional transportation impacts, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact TRANS-1 through TRANS-4.

Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 86 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on transportation. Cumulative impacts were evaluated in Impact TRANS-5 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. The conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts on transportation, including VMT, are still valid. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impacts TRANS-5.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to transportation.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following transportation-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#27. Projects within the VHFHSZ shall provide a Traffic Control Plan ensuring that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The plan shall be prepared in accordance with the City’s Guidelines for Temporary Traffic Control Plan Development. The Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no transportation related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 87 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

17. Utilities and Service Systems
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
UTIL-1: Sewer and wastewater treatment
systems have adequate capacity to meet
proposed General Plan requirements, and
would not result in the need for new or
expanded wastewater treatment facilities.
(Appendix G question XIX. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
UTIL-2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not 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.
(Appendix G question XIX. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
UTIL-3: Water supply and delivery
systems are adequate to meet proposed
General Plan requirements.
(Appendix G question XIX. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
UTIL-4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative impact with respect to water
supply.
(Appendix G question XIX. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
UTIL-5: Existing and/or proposed storm
drainage systems are adequate to serve
the drainage requirements of the proposed
General Plan.
(Appendix G question XIX. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
UTIL-6: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative impact with respect to
stormwater facilities.
(Appendix G questions XIX. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
UTIL-7: Existing and/or proposed
facilities would be able to accommodate
proposed General Plan -generated solid
waste.
(Appendix G questions XIX. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 88 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
UTIL-8: The proposed General Plan
would comply with federal, state, and
local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste.
(Appendix G questions XIX. e)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
UTIL-9: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative impact with respect to solid
waste facilities.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to utilities and service systems, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on utility systems. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal PF1: Ensure that adequate public services and facilities are available to support development in an efficient and orderly manner.

Policy PF1A: Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on-site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.

Policy PF1B: Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.

Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction, and maintenance costs.

Goal PF3: Ensure adequate fire protection and emergency medical response for residents and businesses in the community.

Policy PF3F: Ensure, through development review, that projects adequately address on-site fire safety and protection and comply with applicable fire and building codes.

Goal PF7: Provide for efficient collection, recycling, or disposal of solid waste while maintaining an adequate waste disposal capacity.

Policy PF7B: Continue to require solid waste collection service for residential, commercial, and industrial uses within the incorporated area.

Goal PF8: Avoid increases in existing 100-year flood levels.

Policy PF8A: Adhere to the following thresholds for stormwater drainage facilities to the extent feasible:
• Design drainage facilities to convey a 100-year storm.

Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 89 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision • Until adequate stormwater facilities are in place, utilize a policy of “no net increase in runoff” for development projects in all drainage basins.

Policy PF8D: Encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and coverage by impermeable surfaces.

Policy PF8F: Encourage the use of green infrastructure design and Low Impact Development techniques for stormwater facilities.

Policy CDD2B: Require new developments to maintain adequate service levels for existing development while providing for the upgrade/expansion of existing public services, as appropriate.

GP EIR Impact UTIL-1 and UTIL-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to sewer and wastewater treatment systems.

Project Analysis
The Project is consistent with the land use designation for the site, the RS-2.5 zoning district, City development standards, and is within city limits where supporting utilities and public services exist. The Project includes construction of necessary on-site infrastructure to serve the Project in accordance with the City standards. Utility extensions within the Project site would be installed underground and each residential lot would be served by an approved sanitary sewer lateral connection. The Project site is located within the North Redding wastewater tributary zone. Wastewater is collected and transported to the Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located on Metz Road. The Clear Creek WWTP is operated and maintained in compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit limits and best management practices (BMPs). As summarized in the General Plan EIR, the Clear Creek WWTP is currently sized to provide treatment capacity for 9.4 million gallons per day (MGD) of average dry weather flow (ADWF) and 40 MGD for peak hour wet weather flow (WWF). The WWTP’s ADWF range from 3.8 MGD to 7.8 MGD. Clear Creek WWTP recently completed a capacity upgrade, and analysis of the facility capacity indicates that the facility should have capacity to manage peak sewer flows to Ultimate Build-Out model scenario. The City of Redding Public Work’s Department currently meets the wastewater treatment and collection demands of its service area, and based on the existing capacity of the Clear Creek WWTP and the projected Project wastewater flows, the Project can be adequately served from existing wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, the Project would not require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, and no environmental impacts associated with construction of new treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities would result. Therefore, the Project impact would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact UTIL-1 and UTIL-2.

GP EIR Impact UTIL-3 and UTIL-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to water supply and delivery systems.

Project Analysis
The Project is consistent with the land use designation for the site, the RS-2.5 zoning district, City development standards, and is within city limits where supporting utilities and public services exist. The Project includes 120 single family residential lots, which would increase potable water demand in the immediate vicinity as compared to existing conditions. As summarized in the General Plan EIR, the City’s water supplies would be able to serve General Plan build-out demands under normal, single-dry, and multiple dry years from 2025 through 2045 for properties within the City’s service area, including the Project site. Because the Project is consistent with the General Plan and would be within the buildout analyzed in the General Plan EIR, adequate water supplies would be available to serve the Project, and construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities would not be required. The Project impact would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact UTIL-3 and UTIL-4.

GP EIR Impact UTIL-5 and UTIL-6: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to storm drainage systems.

Project Analysis
The Project includes storm-drainage facilities that will be designed and constructed consistent with the requirements of City Construction Standards, the City of Redding Storm Water Quality Improvement Plan, and the City of Redding Phase II NPDES Permit from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. This includes on-site storm water facilities that will drain to new on-site detention basins. In accordance with the City’s SCOA for Subdivisions, prior to improvement-plan approval, proper management of stormwater peak flows in accordance with City Council Policy 1806 and the specifications of the City Engineer will be required. Such measures address impacts from the 10-, 25-, and 100-year-storm events, and the Project will address peak flows to maintain predevelopment levels at all locations downstream of the Project. The adequacy of the storm water drainage system to serve the site has been identified and incorporated into the Project design. No additional storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities beyond those identified in the Project and evaluated in this Checklist would be required. The Project impact would be less than Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 90 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact UTIL-5 and UTIL-6.

GP EIR Impact UTIL-7, UTIL-8, and UTIL-9: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to solid waste facilities and compliance with solid waste regulations.

Project Analysis
Construction of the Project would result in a temporary increase in solid waste disposal needs associated with construction, including solid waste and vegetation from site clearing, grading, tree removal, and street improvements. During construction, the contractor would be required to comply with CALGreen requirements, specifically recycling and/or salvaging for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste generated during most “new construction” projects. Excavated soils may be utilized for backfill at the site or off-hauled with other construction debris for recycling or disposal as required by City and County regulations.

Following construction, solid waste within the City of Redding is collected and transported to the Redding Transfer Station and Material Recovery Facility and then to the West Central Landfill. On behalf of Shasta County, the City operates the West Central Landfill.

According to CalRecycle, the landfill has a remaining capacity of over 6.5 million cubic yards and a maximum daily throughput capacity of 700 tons (CalRecycle 2025). The proposed 120-lot residential subdivision is expected to generate less than one ton of solid waste per day, based on the assumption that single-family homes in California produce approximately 10 pounds of waste per household daily.

The landfill has sufficient capacity to adequately serve the Project. Solid waste generated during construction and operation of the Project would represent a small fraction of the daily permitted tonnage of this facility and other regional landfill facilities. The Project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

The City provides solid waste disposal (curbside pick-up) service, which homes in the proposed subdivision would utilize.

The Project would be required to comply with City of Redding ordinances governing storage, collection, and disposal of solid waste set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 9.28, Solid Waste and Recycling. Solid waste disposal services provided within Redding must also follow the applicable State and local regulations related to the collection of solid waste. The Project is consistent with the residential type and density established for the site by the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, as well as the analysis presented in the General Plan EIR. The Project’s solid waste disposal needs would be sufficiently accommodated by existing landfills, and compliance with applicable statutes and regulations would be required by Municipal Code Chapter 9.28. The Project impact would be less than significant and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact UTIL-7, UTIL-8, and UTIL-9.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on utilities and service systems.

Cumulative impacts were evaluated in Impact UTIL-2, UTIL-4, UTIL-6, and UTIL-9 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant.

The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. The conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts on utilities and service systems are still valid. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impacts UTIL-2, UTIL-4, UTIL-6, and UTIL-9.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to utilities and service systems.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following utilities and service systems-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#16. Essential utilities, including, but not limited to, sanitary sewer, water, electric, natural gas, and communication distribution lines, including main lines and service laterals, shall be extended and sized to serve each lot and to provide logical extensions Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 91 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision of service to subsequent phases and adjacent properties in accordance with Section 17.60.080 of the Subdivision Ordinance.

These utilities shall be installed in accordance with the capacity, construction, metering, and testing standards of the City and other involved private utility company(s), including applicable utility master plans. #18. Any necessary off-site utility extensions shall be placed in a public-street right-of-way or public-service easement in a location approved by the City Engineer and other responsible utility companies. Vehicular access for maintenance purposes shall be provided to all utility infrastructure outside a public right-of-way as determined necessary by, and in a manner approved by, the City Engineer.
#19. New “dry” utilities, including electric, telephone, and cable television, must be installed underground in accordance with Section 17.60.090 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Any existing overhead facilities within a proposed subdivision and along peripheral streets must also be placed underground, unless waived under the project-specific conditions and the overhead facilities are determined to not constitute or exacerbate the risk of wildfire. #20. Electric-supply facilities shall be furnished and installed in accordance with the Redding Electric Utility Service Policy Resolution currently in effect at the time the developer’s plans are approved by the City. #21. The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the relocation or modification of existing utility facilities or structures necessitated by the construction of the project or of improvements required as a condition of approval of this project, including reimbursement of any costs to the affected utility for work performed to support the project, unless other arrangements are made between the developer and the affected utility. #22. After the initial review of project improvement plans by the Engineering Division, the developer shall consult with the Redding Electric Utility (REU) for preparation of an electric-service plan. A copy of the electric-service plan, developed and approved by REU, shall be incorporated into the final improvement plans. #23. Streetlights shall be provided in accordance with applicable Redding Electric Utility Construction Standards 553.0, et seq. #27. Projects within the VHFHSZ shall provide a Traffic Control Plan ensuring that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The plan shall be prepared in accordance with the City’s Guidelines for Temporary Traffic Control Plan Development. The Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no utilities and service systems related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 92 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

18. Wildfire
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
WILD-1: Development under the 2023-
2045 General Plan Update could
substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.
(Appendix G question XX. a)
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
No No No No
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Yes
WILD-2: Development under the 2023-
2045 General Plan could exacerbate
wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing
winds, and other factors, thereby
exposing Project occupants to elevated
particulate concentrations from a wildfire.
(Appendix G question XX. b)
Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No
Significant
and
Unavoidable
Yes
WILD-3: The 2023-2045 General Plan
would not require the installation and
maintenance of associated infrastructure
in areas that are undeveloped or vacant,
which could exacerbate fire risk or result
in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment.
(Appendix G question XXI. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
WILD-4: The proposed General Plan
would not expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, postfire slope instability,
or drainage changes
(Appendix G question XXI. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
WILD-5: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in significant and unavoidable
cumulative impacts with respect to
wildfire.

Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No
Significant
and
Unavoidable
Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to wildfire hazards, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on wildfire conditions and related hazards. Following certification of the General Plan EIR, the City of Redding adopted a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The CWPP establishes a coordinated framework for reducing wildfire risk through strategic planning, fuel management, and emergency preparedness. Developed in collaboration with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other local, state, and federal agencies, the CWPP identifies high-risk areas and outlines strategies for vegetation treatment, public education, and evacuation readiness. The CWPP directly supports and reinforces the wildfire-related goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and is incorporated into the analysis in this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal PS4: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage resulting from urban and wildland fires.

Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 93 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Policy PS4B: Design new development and redevelopment projects to meet State and local standards for fire protection; encourage the upgrade of existing structures to current standards. Encourage the installation of smoke detectors in residential and commercial facilities constructed prior to the requirement of their installation, as appropriate.

Policy PS4C: Apply appropriate codes and standards to ensure all new and existing developments provide:
• Defensible space.
• Non-combustible design with appropriate building exterior and roofing materials. • Spark arresting system, fire alarms, and fire sprinkler systems are installed.

Policy PS4E: Prioritize developing and funding a comprehensive vegetation management and weed-abatement program, beyond the wildfire mitigation through the Electric Utility, for City-owned properties and open-space areas, including those that are located in existing subdivisions and in new developments, to prevent and reduce the risk of fire.

Policy PS4G: Develop a program to construct and maintain fire-access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires. These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City’s trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features should be minimized.

Policy PS4J: Utilize techniques, as determined appropriate by the Fire Marshal, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential.

Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul-de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided.

Goal PF3: Ensure adequate fire protection and emergency medical response for residents and businesses in the community.

Policy PF3F: Ensure, through development review, that projects adequately address on-site fire safety and protection and comply with applicable fire and building codes.

GP EIR Impact WILD-1: The GP EIR identified significant impacts relative to construction of new development within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone that could cause a temporary impairment of an evacuation route due to road closure during construction. The GP EIR includes Mitigation Measure WILD-1, requiring development within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone to prepare a Traffic Control Plan, to ensure that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The Traffic Control Plan would be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.

Project Analysis
Coordinated emergency response and evacuation planning within the City of Redding is guided by the City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The City’s EOP is an all-hazard plan that outlines the roles and responsibilities of various agencies and public services in organizing and responding to emergencies and disasters within the City of Redding. The EOP provides a framework for coordinating response and recovery activities during a large-scale emergency. The City’s CWWP was developed in partnership with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 94 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision local, state, and federal agencies, and identifies high-risk areas, vegetation treatment, public education and evacuation readiness. The City’s CWPP was adopted in 2024 after certification of the General Plan EIR, and supports the goals and policies outlined in the City’s General Plan relative to wildfire, emergency response, and evacuation planning.

The Project site is within a CAL FIRE designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), where fire protection services are provided by the City of Redding. Surrounding land uses to the east and south are also located within a VHFHSZ in an LRA. The off-site improvement area to the west on BLM land is within a Federal Responsibility Area (FRA), where the federal government is responsible for fire protection. To the north, the off-site improvement area is located within a designated VHFHSZ within a State Responsibility Area (SRA), where CAL FIRE provides fire protection services. Fire protection for the Project site would be provided by the Redding Fire Department (RFD). The Project site is within the coverage area of Redding Fire Station #1 located at 1335 Shasta Street, approximately 2.5 miles to the southeast of the site, and Redding Fire Station #6 located at 1695 Beltline Road, approximately 2 miles northeast of the site.

During Project construction, impairment of emergency response and evacuation plans could occur if temporary road closures are required. The Project would require work within Buenaventura Boulevard, including connection of a new access road intersection and utility tie-ins. Such construction would potentially require temporary partial lane closures over a period of two to four weeks. No full roadway closures would occur during construction of the Project, and no on-street worker parking or equipment staging would occur.

The normal functionality of Buenaventura Boulevard would be temporarily altered with partial lane closures and traffic controls to accommodate construction activities. However, General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure WILD-1 and the City’s SCOAs for tentative subdivision maps (Condition 27) include conditions of approval related to traffic control, which would require preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan reviewed and approved by the Redding Fire and Police Departments to ensure that construction equipment or activities do not obstruct roadways during the construction period, and to ensure provision of access to emergency response services. The Traffic Control Plan would include the following:
• During construction, two-way traffic would be maintained along Buenaventura Drive and surrounding local roads. • Through traffic would be maintained through temporary signals, flaggers, or other means. • As construction progresses, emergency providers would be notified in advance of the timing, location, and duration of construction activities and the locations and durations of any temporary detours and/or lane closures. • The contractor would be required to have ready the means necessary to accommodate access by emergency vehicles, such as plating over excavations, flaggers, or other means.

Following construction, the Project would increase the number of people who would need to evacuate northwest Redding in the event of an emergency, however, the Project would not alter the functionality of the surrounding roadways or affect the use of Quartz Hill Road and Buenaventura Boulevard as regional evacuation routes. As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, an Evacuation Assessment was completed to conservatively determine the potential effect on evacuation times in the Project vicinity (W-Trans 2025b).

In a conservative worst-case scenario, the Project is expected to add 225 vehicles to an evacuation occurring all at once during the nighttime hours when all residents would typically be at home. The Evacuation Assessment analyzed two different fire scenarios from two origin points with extreme wind conditions where the fire would move toward the project site. The Evacuation Assessment determined that the addition of Project-generated traffic would increase the time needed to evacuate existing residents by 4.6 to 6.9 minutes, assuming a worst-case, single-surge scenario. The Evacuation Assessment notes that when considering the City’s actual operational practices, including phased evacuation zones managed through Genasys Protect, active traffic control at intersections by City staff, and more realistic vehicle spacing, the true added clearance times would be lower. With application of the measures detailed above, the Evacuation Assessment estimates that the expected increase in evacuation time would be approximately 2 to 5 minutes, and would not materially affect the City’s ability to move residents from high-risk areas to defensible corridors such as Quartz Hill Road and onward to low-risk dispersal routes. In accordance with the published guidance by the State Attorney General, entitled “Best Practices for Analyzing and Mitigating Wildfire Impacts of Development Projects Under the California Environmental Quality Act,” the Evacuation Assessment was used to inform expert judgment and support a determination of whether the Project would significantly affect residents’ ability to safely and reasonably evacuate. Both the Fire Department and Police Department confirmed that the Project would not substantially impair or physically interfere with the City’s Emergency Operations Plan or the emergency evacuation of the Project area.

Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 95 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision • Implementation of a new standard for developments and road construction projects in very high fire hazard severity zones where an evacuation plan is made to ensure adequate ingress and egress is provided during an emergency throughout the duration of construction.
• Adoption of a CWPP to identify priority areas for fire prevention, special fuel treatment, conduct targeted outreach and propose policies to effectively increase wildfire preparedness.

The Project would be consistent with subdivision regulations and General Plan policy PS4K that limits cul-de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and provision of sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas. In accordance with General Plan policies PS4L, PS4M, and PS4N, emergency-vehicle access routes are provided in the proposed open-space areas at the site, and street widths and grades will accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously. Additionally, the City of Redding Public Works Department and Fire Department have reviewed the Project plans according to adopted construction standards and specifications and confirmed that adequate emergency access is provided. While the Project would be expected to result in a slight increase in delay for traffic on Quartz Hill Road, emergency response vehicles can claim the right-of-way by using lights and sirens, and the Project is expected to have a negligible effect on emergency response times, ensuring that emergency services can still operate efficiently.

Overall, the Project would not substantially impair or interfere with the City’s emergency response and evacuation plans. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact WILD1.

GP EIR Impact WILD-2: The GP EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan could increase population, buildings, and infrastructure in wildfire-prone areas. The GP EIR noted that prohibiting development in areas within High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and the wildland urban interface is not feasible or practical as the City has a responsibility to meet other obligations, such as promoting both economic development and corresponding residential development, as required by State housing law, within its adopted growth boundaries. With implementation of the General Plan policies and actions, and mandatory wildfire hazard reduction measures per State regulations, impacts related to exacerbating the risk of pollutant concentrations from wildfire and the uncontrolled spread of wildfire could be reduced, but not necessarily to a less-thansignificant level. Therefore, due to potential unknown impacts from future development under the General Plan, impacts at the programmatic level were determined to be significant and unavoidable, and were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Project Analysis
The Project site is located within a CAL FIRE designated VHFHSZ and was previously subjected to damage during the 2018 Carr Fire.

To mitigate risks associated with development in the VHFHSZ, the City enforces adherence to a comprehensive set of State and local codes regulations, including the California Building Standards Code, California Fire Code, SRA Fire Safe Regulations, Public Resources Code Section 4291, and Redding Municipal Code Chapter 9.20. These codes require specific fire safety measures such as the creation of defensible space and fuel reduction within 100 feet of structures, ember-resistant zones within 5 feet, and the overall maintenance of properties to reduce the risk of uncontrolled fires or the spread of fires to other properties. The California Fire Code, particularly Section 4905.2 and Chapter 49, outlines construction methods and vegetation management standards for wildland-urban interface areas, further reinforcing these requirements.

In accordance with General Plan policies PS4E and PS4G, the City is developing a comprehensive vegetation management and weedabatement program for public lands placed and private open space easements to prevent and reduce the risk of fire. Additionally, a program is being developed to construct and maintain fire-access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires.

The Project itself incorporates a range of wildfire resiliency features consistent with General Plan policies and State and local codes described below, including roadways designed to accommodate both emergency vehicles and evacuating residents, multiple access points to prevent bottlenecks, and the strategic use of natural and constructed firebreaks such as wide roads and open spaces to disrupt fuel continuity. As outlined in the Project Description, wildfire resiliency features include:
• New roads are designed to accommodate both emergency vehicles and evacuating residents simultaneously. • Multiple points of access are provided to prevent bottlenecks and ensure that residents can evacuate quickly and safely, as required by local regulations.

Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 96 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision • The design of the subdivision incorporates natural and constructed firebreaks to protect the community from wildfires, including wide roadways and strategically placed open spaces that reduce the continuity of fuel and slow the spread of fire. • Homes and community structures will be required to maintain defensible space around their perimeters, including clearing flammable vegetation and other combustible materials to create defensible spaces to be mandated by local fire codes and guidelines.
• A fire fuel reduction plan has been developed to lower wildfire risk by clearing flammable vegetation. Zone 1, within 100 feet of structures, will have 90-100% of brush and small trees removed, designated trees cleared per the grading plan, and large trees thinned to 10% canopy. Zone 2, from 100 to 200 feet out, will see 50% of the brush and small trees removed, with similar tree clearing and thinning to 50% canopy.
• Vegetation management would involve regular maintenance, including pruning, clearing, and spacing of plants to reduce fire risk. Within developed areas, residents would choose from recommended plants that are less likely to ignite and that can act as a barrier to slow the spread of fire. A Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) would be established to maintain common areas/parks, wildland fuel vegetation management areas, and landscaping along roadways involving regular inspections and maintenance to ensure that vegetation is kept at safe levels, reducing the overall fire risk to the community. • Homes will incorporate non-combustible materials for exterior walls, such as cement board cladding, masonry, or stucco following the guidelines of the California Residential Code. • Homes will feature Class A fire-rated roofing systems designed to block embers from penetrating and per the standards outlined in CAL FIRE’s Home Hardening program, the California Residential Code, California Building Code, and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines.
• Windows and glass doors will be double-paned and made of tempered glass, aligning with the California Residential Code and FEMA recommendations.
• Attic, soffit, and crawlspace vents in future homes will be covered with non-combustible mesh, with openings no larger than 1/8 inch to prevent embers from entering the home while still allowing adequate air circulation, as required by the California Residential Code and FEMA standards.
• Homes will be equipped with residential sprinkler systems. • Fencing and decking attached to residences or adjacent to slopes would be constructed of fire-resistant or non-flammable materials.

The Project site’s topography generally slopes to the southwest, while prevailing wind directions fluctuate seasonally between northto-south and south-to-north. Although substantial grading will occur at the site to accommodate development, the site's overall slope orientation will remain unchanged. Additionally, because a large portion of the area will be left undeveloped as open space, the Project is not expected to alter prevailing wind patterns.

Taken together, the Project’s adherence to stringent building codes, fire safety regulations, incorporation of fire-resilient design features, and implementation of vegetation and fuel management strategies represent the most effective wildfire hazard-reduction measures currently available. Nonetheless, due to the inherent risks associated with development in a VHFHSZ, the potential wildfire impact remains significant and unavoidable, but falls within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact WILD-2.

GP EIR Impact WILD-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to wildfire impacts from installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure including those in VHFHSZ, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable local, regional, and State plans and regulations addressing wildfire prevention, including adopted State regulations, Redding Municipal Code standards, and General Plan 2045 policies aimed at minimizing the impact of infrastructure on the environment.

Project Analysis
The Project will construct public streets and utilities to serve the development. New utilities, including electric service, will be placed underground. No new aboveground power transmission lines would be installed at the site. The Project is not classified as a remote hillside development due to its proximity to existing infrastructure, therefore, emergency water sources are not required as part of the Project.

The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) owns, operates, and maintains the 230-kV overhead electrical power transmission Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 97 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision lines that cross a portion of the Project site within 250-foot easements. The existing power lines would continue to be maintained per California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) requirements, including maintenance of vegetation around the existing power lines, strict wire-to-wire clearances, annual inspections of aboveground power lines, and the implementation of fire prevention plans. WAPA regulates land uses and vegetation within its easement area. No Project structures will be constructed within the WAPA easement area on the site, such as homes, buildings, sheds, swimming pools, basketball courts, tennis courts, gazebos, etc. As required, vegetation to be planted within the easement areas will not exceed a maximum height of 12 feet at maturity, and will be selected in accordance with the WAPA’s Preferred Vegetation List for the Redding area. Lighting standards will be less than 15 feet in height, and will be grounded and located away from power lines. A minimum of 30 feet of unobstructed access will be provided to be maintained around all towers, and guard rails will be included to protect the tower structures from the possibility of a motor vehicle hitting a transmission line structure. WAPA conducts vegetation management around its transmission lines to reduce wildfire risks, including clearing brush, trimming trees, and removing potential fuel sources. The City of Redding and WAPA will continue to collaborate for vegetation management, including advanced reporting systems to help with early detection and preventive maintenance. These measures collectively help mitigate fire risks along the electrical power lines at the Project site. Additionally, the Redding Electric Utility’s (REU) Wildfire Mitigation Plan provides strategies and measures, such as vegetation management, enhanced inspections, and operational practices, aimed at reducing fire hazards from public utilities.

Implementation of the City's CWPP will further reduce wildfire risk by establishing a coordinated framework for fuel management, emergency preparedness, and community engagement. The CWPP was developed in partnership with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other local, state, and federal agencies, and identifies high-risk areas and vegetation treatment. The Project would be required to comply with building and design standards in the California Building Code and California Fire Code, which include provisions for fire-resistant building materials, the clearance of debris, and fire safety requirements during construction activities. Public Resources Code Section 4291 also requires vegetation around buildings or structures to maintain defensible space and fuel reduction within 100 feet of structures, ember-resistant zones within 5 feet, and the overall maintenance of properties to reduce the risk of uncontrolled fires or the spread of fires to other properties. Additionally, SRA Fire Safe Regulations would prevent structures from being placed within 30 feet of a roadway, reducing the potential for new roadways to exacerbate wildfire risks. These measures, along with policies and actions in the General Plan for undergrounding of power lines, would minimize wildfire risks associated with the installation and maintenance of infrastructure.

Overall, the Project impact relative to wildfire impacts from installation or maintenance of infrastructure would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact WILD-3.

GP EIR Impact WILD-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to wildfire impacts from post-fire instability, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable local, regional, and State plans and regulations addressing wildfire prevention, including adopted State regulations, Redding Municipal Code standards, and General Plan 2045 policies aimed at minimizing the impact of post-fire hazards.

Project Analysis
Grading of slopes at the Project site will require compliance with the City’s Grading Ordinance. The Project site is not located within a designated high-risk flood zone, such as a 100-year or 500-year flood hazard area (see Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact HYD-3). Published landslide maps do not indicate large-scale slope instability at the Project site (see Section 7, Geology and Soils, Impact GEO-1). Additionally, no active landslides were observed at the Project site during completion of site-specific geotechnical study field activities. Retaining walls would be constructed as part of the Project to provide stability to hillside slopes where needed.

Implementation of California Building Code mandated grading, drainage, and slope stabilization measures substantially reduces geologic risks and helps ensure long-term site stability and safety. With compliance with the California Building Code, it is unlikely that a landslide would occur on-site as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

Storm water from impervious surfaces would be conveyed to proposed on-site detention basins located along the eastern edge of the site. The detention basins will be appropriately sized to detain and treat storm water runoff in accordance with City requirements (see Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact HYD-3). All components will be designed and constructed as required by City standards and any specific requirements of the Building Official and/or City Engineer. As such, it is not anticipated that the Project would expose people or structures to significant risks including flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post-fire instability, or drainage changes.

Overall, the Project impact relative to post-fire instability would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact WILD-4.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 98 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan and General Plan EIR, and the off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan 2045.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure WILD-1 would ensure that during construction of the off-site improvements at the intersection with Buenaventura Boulevard, adequate traffic access for the public and emergency responders would be provided during construction and during a potential evacuation scenario. The off-site improvements would be designed and constructed in adherence with applicable local, regional, and State plans and regulations addressing wildfire prevention, including adopted State regulations, Redding Municipal Code standards, and General Plan policies aimed at minimizing the impact of infrastructure on the environment. No hillsides or geologic structures known to be at risk of landslide or flooding are located adjacent to the off-site areas. Therefore, the off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impacts WILD-1 through WILD-4.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on wildfire hazards. Cumulative wildfire impacts were evaluated in Impact WILD-5 of the General Plan EIR as significant and unavoidable, given that the increase of potential development projects within a VHFHSZ could result in a cumulatively significant impact, and since contributions from the General Plan would result in new development in such areas. The impact was addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. The Project will implement Mitigation Measure WILD-1, as well as standards in the California Fire Code, California Building Standards Code, SRA Fire Safe Regulations, the requirements in the Redding Municipal Code, City Fire and Public Works Standards, Redding Fire Department wildfire requirements, Public Resources Code Section 4291, General Plan policies, and the City’s wildfire-related standard conditions of approval for tentative subdivision map projects.

Implementation of the City's CWPP will also reduce wildfire risk within the City by establishing a coordinated framework for fuel management, emergency preparedness, and community engagement. The CWPP includes interagency response protocols and promotes public education initiatives that improve evacuation readiness and defensible space compliance. However, the Project could still result in significant and unavoidable impacts, as described in Impact WILD-2. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would be cumulatively considerable, but would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact WILD-5.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure was identified in the General Plan EIR related to wildfire.

WILD-1: Project applicants proposing development within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan to ensure that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following wildfire-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#19. New “dry” utilities, including electric, telephone, and cable television, must be installed underground in accordance with Section 17.60.090 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Any existing overhead facilities within a proposed subdivision and along peripheral streets must also be placed underground, unless waived under the project-specific conditions and the overhead facilities are determined to not constitute or exacerbate the risk of wildfire. #24. Developments shall be designed to provide adequate fire-safety and shall comply with the requirements of Section 17.60.110, Fire Safety, of the Subdivision Ordinance, the California Building Code, and the California Fire Code as approved by the Fire Marshal. This includes the location and necessary easements to service “on-lot” hydrants on flag lots or oversized lots as required.
#25. Brush piles resulting from land-clearing activity shall be fully removed or otherwise eliminated from the site prior to the start of the fire season or, if generated during fire season, be removed immediately. #26. For projects located within a Cal Fire designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) and adjacent to steep slopes/open space, wildfire fuel reduction shall be conducted as required by the Redding Fire Department and shall be thereafter maintained in a fire safe condition through a Landscape Maintenance District or other program approved by the Fire Department.
#27. Projects within the VHFHSZ shall provide a Traffic Control Plan ensuring that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The plan shall be prepared in accordance with the City’s Guidelines for Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 99 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Temporary Traffic Control Plan Development. The Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no wildfire related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 100 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision REFERENCES:

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022. Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality.

California Arts Council. Redding Cultural District. Website accessed in September 2025, https://www.caculturaldistricts.org/redding.

California Department of Conservation. 2024. Shasta County Important Farmland 2020.

California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2025. Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed September 2025.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2025. West Central Landfill Facility Summary (SWIS No. 45-AA-0043). Website accessed in September 2025, SWIS Facility/Site Summary.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2025. California Scenic Highway Program.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB). 2019. Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River Basin and the San Joaquin River Basin.

City of Redding. 2003. Stormwater Quality Improvement Plan. Redding, CA.

City of Redding. 2004. Parks, Trails & Open Space Master Plan. Redding, CA.

City of Redding. 2014. Emergency Operations Plan. Redding, CA.

City of Redding. 2024. General Plan 2045. Redding, CA.

City of Redding. 2024. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Redding 2023-2045 General Plan Update (SCH No. 2022050300).

City of Redding. 2024. Community Wildfire Protection Plan. October.

County of Shasta. 2024. Shasta County Open Data Portal. https://data-shasta.opendata.arcgis.com ENPLAN. 2024. Tree Survey Report for The Peaks Subdivision Project. Redding, CA.

Enterprise Anderson Groundwater Sustainability Agency (EAGSA). 2022. Enterprise Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan Gallaway Enterprises. 2025a. Biological Resources Assessment - Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife, and Botanical Resources, The Peaks Single-Family Housing Development Project. September.

Gallaway Enterprises. 2025b. Crotch’s Bumble Bee Report for the Peaks Single-Family Housing Development Project. September.

Gallaway Enterprises. 2025c. Milkweed Survey Report for the Peaks Single-Family Housing Development Project. September.

Gallaway Enterprises. 2025d. Draft Delineation of Aquatic Resources. The Peaks Single-Family Housing Development Project.

September.

GHD. 2025a. Carter Creek Watershed-Existing Conditions Hydrology. July 3.

GHD. 2025b. Carter Creek Watershed-Proposed Conditions Hydrology. July 9.

Historic Resource Associates. 2025. Phase I Archaeological Resources Study. The Peaks Subdivision Project. July.

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2025a. The Peaks Subdivision, 850 Quartz Hill Road, Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment.

September.

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2025b. The Peaks Subdivision Noise and Vibration Assessment. September.

Mid Pacific Engineering Inc. (MPE). 2024. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report - The Peaks Residential Subdivision.

Redding Electric Utility (REU). 2023. Wildfire Mitigation Plan.

Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals (SVAQEEP). 2024. Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area: 2024, Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan.

Shasta Regional Transportation Agency. 2018. Regional Transportation Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region. Redding, CA.

W-Trans. 2025a. Final Transportation Impact Study for The Peaks Subdivision. September.

W-Trans. 2025b. The Peaks Evacuation Assessment. September.

Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map From: Haley Wright
To: Schlegel, David
Subject: Peaks Development
Date: Friday, October 17, 2025 11:16:08 AM
Attachments: Peaks Development.docx
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important To David Schlegel at the development services department, regarding the Peaks development,
Our family is currently building our dream home in the Land Park Subdivision.

We picked this location for its decreased congestion of housing and development. We desire to raise our family in the city, but in the fringes, where there are less people and in turn less crime. Shasta County has some of the highest crime rates in the state of California and our children’s safety is a priority for us. We chose this location for its small tightknit community. Land Park Subdivision is made up of neighbors that know each other and do life together.

In light of the Police Chief announcing the onslaught of sex offenders being sent to Redding through the NGOs (non-governmental organizations), I am concerned the Peaks development will create opportunities for sex offenders to be located near our children and families. We have chosen a secluded part of town to limit opportunities for such people to be in proximity of our children. Our immediate neighborhoods do not have any sex offenders and in a two mile radius Megan’s Law reveals eight sex offenders surrounding us. Through a google search of the first three low income housings that pop up: 910 Canby road, 777 cypress ave, 1895 Benton Dr; there are as follows 88,101, and 71 sex offenders in a two mile radius. This is alarming and concerning for the safety of our children. How is the city able to ensure this housing project will not bring more sex offenders and NGOs near our children? This is not the location for more congested housing and low income housing.

The project would bump up against a gated community – Stanford hills, and Land Park subdivision that is filled with families who have chosen to raise their children apart from the main city locations. This project would extremely decrease the desire of living in these communities and choosing to raise a family in Redding. There are few places left in Redding that offer the life style and community that these neighborhoods still protect.

It would further burden low income families to move to such a location that secludes them from the resources they need. The Peaks development offers low income housing without public transportation, without nearby grocery stores and without nearby job opportunities. How are these families to sustain themselves when they are not surrounded by resources to aid them? Can the city consider moving the Peaks project to another location that would give low income families access to jobs and other resources they need. I’d recommend looking into Stillwater Park area. This is the location where Amazon is currently building a warehouse that has promised to provide 100 new jobs.

Lastly, Sheryll Bullock, a neighbor in the Quartz Hill area has shared the Cal Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding) Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map From: sara atchley.thomas
To: Schlegel, David
Cc: Sheryl Bullock; Nancy Costa; Duncan Thomas
Subject: The Peaks CEQA Documentation - Comment
Date: Friday, October 17, 2025 8:31:10 AM
Attachments: CALFIRE Reports 2024.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear Mr. Schlegel,
After a review of the City of Redding's CEQA documentation for the Peaks Project, I have the following comments on the Final Transportation Impact Study (TIS) for the Peaks Subdivision and the Peaks Evacuation Assessment.

1. The TIS states “The project would meet the minimum number of access points required under City Code and the California Fire Code,” however the project does not meet the California Public Resources Code - PRC § 4290.5 recommendation for subdivisions over 30 units to have a secondary egress as defined at California Regulations Code 14 CCR § 1267.01.

The attached CALFIRE Subdivision Survey Reports from 2024 directly adjacent to the Peaks Project note the lack of a secondary egress for the Land Park, Stanford Hills, River Ridge and Ironwood Lane subdivisions and recommend these subdivisions have a secondary egress.

California Regulations Code 14 CCR § 1267.01 Defines an adequate secondary egress route as a road, navigable by a passenger vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds or less, of equal construction standard to the primary road. The secondary road does not have to be rated to carry the same quantity of traffic (e.g., a two-lane paved road and a one-lane paved road is acceptable). An adequate secondary egress route is NOT: a road with locked gates or limited access or a road that directs traffic to the same outlet road as the primary road or results in a circular traffic flow, to the extent practicable.

Given the traffic evacuation gridlock that occurred during the Carr Fire on Quartz Hill Road resulting in 4 deaths within 600 feet of the Peaks Subdivision, I urge the City to revise the TIS and specifically address why the City has not created a second egress for the Peaks, Land Park, Standford Hills, and River Ridge Subdivisions per California Public Resources Code - PRC § 4290.5 and California Regulations Code 14 CCR § 1267.01.

2. The Peaks Evacuation Assessment makes the assumption that 50% of Peak residents will use Keswick Dam Road in an emergency, however, Keswick Dam Road is not on the City of Redding's Wildfire Evacuation Routes. Quartz Hill Road is the single route for residents living in the Peaks Subdivision.

This faulty assumption needs to be addressed in a revised Evacuation Assessment.

Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map I look forward to the City’s response to my comments.

Thank you,
Sara Atchley Thomas
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding) Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Albion
21-XSH-0E17
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Albion
Address: 1005 Albion Ave City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments:

Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Albion 21-XSH-0E17

Page 2 of 4 ends

Part II: Site Information and Fire Survey
Subdivision Description
Date Surveyed: March 6, 2024
Estimated number of dwelling units 89
Survey Results
Type(s) of vegetation within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Grass ☑ Brush
☑ Trees ☐ Timber
☐ Other:

Topographic features within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Canyon ☑ Chimneys
☐ Mid-slope ☐ Slope Setback
☐ Saddle ☐ Ridge Top
☑ Flat Land
Residential structure types identified (check all that apply):
☑ Single Family ☐ Duplex
☐ Townhomes ☐ Apartments
☐ Mobile/Manufactured ☐ Other:

Identified water source(s) availability (check all that apply):
☑ Hydrants ☐ Draft Hydrants
☐ Private Water Tanks ☐ No Water Source
☐ Wharf Hydrant
Access and Evacuation
Is there a secondary egress route in the subdivision? (PRC 4290.5, 14 CCR 1267.01(a)(i)(ii))
☐ Yes ☑ No
Is the secondary egress route navigable by a passenger vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds or less, of equal construction standard of the primary road? (14 CCR 1267.01(a)(i))
Note: The secondary road does not have to be rated to carry the same quantity of traffic (e.g., a two-lane paved road and a one-lane paved road is acceptable).

Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Albion 21-XSH-0E17

Page 3 of 4 ends

☐ Yes ☑ No
Is there another road with locked gates or limited access; or a road that directs traffic to the same outlet road as the primary road or results in a circular traffic flow, to the extent practicable? (14 CCR 1267.01(a)(ii)) ☐ Yes ☑ No

Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Albion 21-XSH-0E17

Page 4 of 4 ends

Part III: Recommendations
Access and Evacuation Recommendations (check all that apply):
☑ Create a secondary access to the subdivision.
☐ Make improvements to the existing secondary access to the subdivision. ☑ Install reflective addressing signs for structures and roads in conformance with 14 CCR § 1274.01, 1274.02, 1274.03, and 1274.04 and the California Fire code, California Code of Regulations, title 24, part 9.
☑ Install reflective evacuation route street signs directing residents from their local roads to the nearest collector road(s) and/or arterial highway(s) (see California Highway Design manual for definitions), based on the standards for emergency management signing in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices ☑ Where additional routes may exist, but with a gate that does not conform to the requirements in 14 CCR § 1273.09, recommend that gates (including private gates) remain unlocked during red flag warnings or high fire danger conditions. ☑ When side street parking narrows the road to a smaller width than the standards in 14 CCR § 1273.01, during red flag warnings or conditions of high fire danger, limit street parking so a wider pathway is available to support rapid evacuation. ☑ Conduct community-wide evacuations drills.
☑ Install reflective markers to indicate road edges or other areas of danger that might not be evident during periods of low visibility.

Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Ironwood
24-XSH-9D17
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Ironwood
Address: 280 Ironwood Ln. City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments: Redding Fire Department
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Ironwood 24-XSH-9D17

Page 2 of 4 ends

Part II: Site Information and Fire Survey
Subdivision Description
Date Surveyed: March 6, 2024
Estimated number of dwelling units 48
Survey Results
Type(s) of vegetation within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Grass ☑ Brush
☑ Trees ☐ Timber
☐ Other:

Topographic features within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Canyon ☑ Chimneys
☐ Mid-slope ☐ Slope Setback
☐ Saddle ☑ Ridge Top
☑ Flat Land
Residential structure types identified (check all that apply):
☑ Single Family ☐ Duplex
☐ Townhomes ☐ Apartments
☐ Mobile/Manufactured ☐ Other:

Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Ironwood 24-XSH-9D17

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Ironwood 24-XSH-9D17

Page 4 of 4 ends

Part III: Recommendations
Access and Evacuation Recommendations (check all that apply):
☑ Create a secondary access to the subdivision.
☐ Make improvements to the existing secondary access to the subdivision. ☑ Install reflective addressing signs for structures and roads in conformance with 14 CCR § 1274.01, 1274.02, 1274.03, and 1274.04 and the California Fire code, California Code of Regulations, title 24, part 9.
☑ Install reflective evacuation route street signs directing residents from their local roads to the nearest collector road(s) and/or arterial highway(s) (see California Highway Design manual for definitions), based on the standards for emergency management signing in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices ☐ Where additional routes may exist, but with a gate that does not conform to the requirements in 14 CCR § 1273.09, recommend that gates (including private gates) remain unlocked during red flag warnings or high fire danger conditions. ☑ When side street parking narrows the road to a smaller width than the standards in 14 CCR § 1273.01, during red flag warnings or conditions of high fire danger, limit street parking so a wider pathway is available to support rapid evacuation. ☑ Conduct community-wide evacuations drills.
☑ Install reflective markers to indicate road edges or other areas of danger that might not be evident during periods of low visibility.

Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Old Lantern
24-XSH-99AD
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Old Lantern
Address: 3520 Old Lantern Dr. City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments: Redding Fire Department
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Old Lantern 24-XSH-99AD

Page 2 of 4 ends

Part II: Site Information and Fire Survey
Subdivision Description
Date Surveyed: March 6, 2024
Estimated number of dwelling units 72
Survey Results
Type(s) of vegetation within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Grass ☑ Brush
☑ Trees ☐ Timber
☐ Other:

Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Old Lantern 24-XSH-99AD

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Old Lantern 24-XSH-99AD

Page 4 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Santa Cruz
21-XSH-DF86
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Santa Cruz
Address: 950 Santa Cruz Dr City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments:

Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Santa Cruz 21-XSH-DF86

Page 2 of 4 ends

Part II: Site Information and Fire Survey
Subdivision Description
Date Surveyed: March 6, 2024
Estimated number of dwelling units 32
Survey Results
Type(s) of vegetation within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Grass ☑ Brush
☑ Trees ☐ Timber
☐ Other:

Topographic features within and around the subdivision (check all that apply):
☑ Canyon ☑ Chimneys
☑ Mid-slope ☐ Slope Setback
☐ Saddle ☑ Ridge Top
☑ Flat Land
Residential structure types identified (check all that apply):
☑ Single Family ☐ Duplex
☐ Townhomes ☐ Apartments
☐ Mobile/Manufactured ☐ Other:

Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Santa Cruz 21-XSH-DF86

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Santa Cruz 21-XSH-DF86

Page 4 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Post-CEQA Public Comments (4(b)2 - Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613 by City of Redding)Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: October 28, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map

FINDINGS
THE PEAKS – 850 QUARTZ HILL SUBDIVISION
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICATION S-2025-00613

ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
The following California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) findings are necessary to adopt the statutory exemption under Public Resources Code Section 15183:

1. The project is consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified.

The Project is consistent with the General Plan density of “Residential, 2 to 3.5 dwelling units per acre,” designated for the property in the City’s General Plan 2045 and the density of the Project is equivalent to the zoning district for the site of “RS-2.5” Residential SingleFamily – 2.5 Units Per Acre.

2. There are no project specific effects which are peculiar to the project or its site.

The CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Exemption Checklist for the Project evaluated all significant effects that might be peculiar to the Project or its site and determined that there were no such effects. The Project is a typical subdivision which meets all of the City’s General Plan, zoning and development standards criteria and the Project site does not create, expose or otherwise include any specific effects which are peculiar. Environmental studies supporting this finding are included as attachments to the Checklist.

3. There are no project specific impacts which the GPU EIR failed to analyze as significant effects.

The CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Exemption Checklist concludes that the General Plan EIR analyzed all significant effects from the Project and whether there were any new significant effects that the General Plan EIR failed to analyze. The General Plan designated the area for single-family residential or residential uses at the density which the Project proposes and analyzed all significant effects from the Project. Environmental studies included as attachments to the Checklist support this finding.

4. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which the GPU EIR failed to evaluate.

The General Plan EIR analyzed cumulative effects from the buildout of residential uses at the density proposed by the Project and the Project does not propose new or more intensive uses than those which the General Plan EIR analyzed. The CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Checklist concludes that the General Plan EIR also analyzed potentially significant off-site impacts from projects presented in the land use designations found in the General Plan. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts that were not Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: The Peaks Subdivision Findings (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025- S-2025-00613 – The Peaks Subdivision
analyzed by the General Plan 2045 EIR. Environmental studies which support this finding can be found in the record.

5. There is no substantial new information which results in more severe impacts than anticipated by the General Plan EIR.

As concluded in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Checklist, there is no new information identified in any of the supporting documents that results in a more severe impact than what is anticipated by the General Plan 2045 EIR. The environmental studies supporting this finding are included in the record as an attachment to the Checklist.

TENTATIVE MAP FINDINGS (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66474)
In accordance with Section 66474 of the Government Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings:

1. That the density or use of the proposed map is consistent with the General Plan designation of Residential 2 to 2.5 Units per Acre or applicable area and specific plans as specified in Section 65451 of the Government Code.

The property addressed as 850 Quartz Hill Road has a General Plan designation of “Residential, 2 to 3.5 dwelling units per acre.” The proposed map subdivides a 65.3-acre portion of the 114-acre parcel into 120 residential lots. Of that 65.3-acre portion, approximately

16.8-acres contain slopes of 20 percent or greater – leaving a total of 48.5-acres of developable area for a density calculation. One hundred twenty lots divided by 48.5 acres yields a density of 2.5 units per acre, thereby making the density of the Project consistent with the General Plan.

2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan or area or specific plans.

The Project’s street and lot design conform to the standards of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and further several General Plan policies; among these, that the design of the subdivision is able to respect the existing neighborhood’s scale and character, as directed by General Plan Goal CDD9, “Preserve existing community character and fabric and promote the development of livable and cohesive neighborhoods and districts,” by having the same or similar lot frontage widths and improvements while including a higher standard of design with the Architectural Design Guidelines Book. In addition, the design of the roads and grading for the subdivision is consistent with General Plan Policy CDD3D, “Require new development to work with existing site topography to avoid mass grading to the extent feasible while addressing access, drainage, and other development considerations. Where feasible, substantial fill slopes visible from roads, parks, and other public areas should be designed to mimic natural land contours.”

3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density and type of development due to steepness of terrain; location of water courses; size or shape of the property; inadequate frontage, access, or building area; or other physical condition.

Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: The Peaks Subdivision Findings (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025- S-2025-00613 – The Peaks Subdivision
While the site includes some challenges with regard to shape, slope and electric transmission utility lines, it is still physically suitable for the proposed density and type of development.

There is enough area to accommodate the designed road and lots adjacent to the slopes. A strategy of tiered grading and retaining walls creates sufficient flatness of terrain to allow for construction of streets and building pads. The site has adequate frontage and access to Buenaventura Boulevard as well as Quartz Hill Road via new road construction and road connections to the existing Steamboat Street and Keel Court as well. The property is outside of the floodplain, and has no other physical condition that would preclude it from development.

4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat.

A CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Exemption Checklist has been prepared for the project.

Based on the biological resource assessment completed for the project, the only potentially significant impacts identified with the Project were to Western Spadefoot Toads, Red Bluff Dwarf Rush, Maverick Clover, Sulfur Creek Brodiaea and Henderson’s Bent Grass. Protocol level surveys for all of these special status species are required in the Conditions of Approval for the Project. If any are discovered, consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife would be required. With the CEQA Section 15183 Exemption Checklist, the City’s General Plan 2045 EIR and its associated Mitigation Monitoring Program, the Project would have no significant effect on the environment. The Conditions of Approval also contain provisions for the protection of the Crotch’s Bumble Bee, Western Spadefoot Toad, nesting birds and bats that may inhabit the site. With these avoidance and minimization measures in place, the Project would not cause substantial harm to the environment or wildlife.

5. 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 ensure that water, sanitary sewer, storm drain, and other necessary public utilities will be included with development of the subdivision. Through the implementation of the Conditions of Approval, the Project does not present any adverse impacts to public health.

6. The design of the proposed division and improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

Government Code Section 66474 (g) goes on to clarify that “In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.” There is an easement which provides access through the subdivision from the neighboring property to the south and northward through an existing road which connects to Quartz Hill. The subdivision design follows most of this easement and improves the dirt road to a road standard in some length. The current subdivision design includes a small number of parcels that would encumbered by the easement and those Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: The Peaks Subdivision Findings (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025- S-2025-00613 – The Peaks Subdivision
lots would not be constructed upon until the easement is abandoned. Through the network of public roads to be established by the Subdivision and particularly the construction of ‘Road B’ the property to the south would have an improved access which would certainly be substantially equivalent alternative access in accordance with Government Code Section 66474 (g).

Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: The Peaks Subdivision Findings (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025- Access o Two separate
access points to
public roads meets
access standards
for subdivisions of
this size. o Provides
secondary access
for River Ridge
Terrace
Subdivision
New Access
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: The Peaks - Access Road Exhibit - Steamboat Street - Keel Court (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025- CL MON
127
762.70
(775)
(775)
(700)
(725)
(750)
(775)
(775)
(700)
(725)
(750)
(700)
(
(625)
(650)
(675)
(675)
(650)
(675)
(700)
(725)
(700)
(700)
(725)
(750)
(700)
(725)
(750)
(775)
(725)
(700)
(675)
(675)
(650)
(675)
(675)
(750)
(775)
(775)
(725)
(750)
(775)
(775)
(750)
(725)
(750)
(725)
(750)
(725)
(725)
(675)
(750)
(775)
(775)
(675)
(675)
(700)
(750)
(725)
6 (725)
(725)
(6
0) 0
(700)
(725)
(700)
(725)
(750)
(7
(700)
(725)
(700)
50) 7 (
(725)
(775)
(775)
00) (7
(725)
(775)
(775)
0) (75
(775)
750) (
0)
(775)
0) (70
(700)
(725)
70 (
)
(6
(700)
(675)
(675)
75) (6
(700)
(700)
725) (
50) (7
(
(6
(675)
60 70
114
115
47 34
3 4
5 42
24 43
29 31
53 55
56 57
84 75 77
82 118
119
100
99 98
112
95 6
7 18 23
19 22
32 30
33 35
36 107
76 21
81 39
40 41
49 50
51 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
48 46
2 52
17 20
61 1
110
117
108 109
96 62
89 90
91 92
94 83
65 26
80 104
68 64
79 59
72 58
25 27
28 45
16 PROPOSED FUTURE CITY PARK PARCEL

5.69 AC
69 63
71 67 73
106
116
120

PARCEL A

26.24 AC
44 93
78 PARCEL B

22.24 AC
113
74 37
38 54
87 85
111
105 8
86 88
66 97
103 102
101
ROAD E
ROAD A

KEEL RD

KEEL CT

SPINNAKER DR ROAD H

ROAD C STEAMBOAT ST
ROAD J
ROAD D

QUARTZ HILL RD WAGON DR

BAKER RD
ROAD F

SPINNAKER DR

BUENAVENTURA BLVD

OLD LANTERN DR

WHITE SAIL DR

AMERICANA WAY

FIRST CABIN CT
ROAD I

WAPA EASEMENT

WAPA EASEMENT
ROAD B
Derek Rubinger
Date
Drafting
Check
ProjectManager
Project No.

TitleClientProject
Plot Date: 18 June 2025 - 10:30 AM Plotted By: Path and Filename: \\Ghdnet\ghd\US\Redding\Projects\561\12628201\Digital_Design\ACAD\Figures\Tentative Map Support Exhibits\12628201 - TM FIRE FUEL REDUCTION.dwg Scale
Design
Check
Project
Director
www.ghd.com
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated herein, as an instrumentof professional service, is the property of GHD. This document may only be used by GHD’s client (and any other person who GHD has agreed can use this document) for the purpose for which it was prepared and must not be used byany other person or for any other purpose.

Author Designer
ARCH D
Size
Conditions of Use
Sheet No.

No. Date Issue Checked Approved
Sheet

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
MAP
K2 DEVELOPMENT

COMPANY, INC
B. TENNEY R. WENHAM
126282012025-06-18

PRELIMINARY
850 QUARTZ HILL ROAD

SUBDIVISION
GHD Inc.
330 Hartnell Ave Suite B
Redding California 96002 USA
T 1 530 242 1700
D. RUBINGER E. SAMAYR. WENHAM B. TENNEY

CITY OF REDDING
777 CYPRESS AVE
REDDING, CA 96001
###
1 OF 1
1" = 150'

FIRE FUEL REDUCTION

PLAN EXHIBIT
ZONE 1: AREAS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE ADJACENT TO OPEN SPACE AND ARE WITHIN 100-FEET OF THE BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR RESIDENTIALCONSTRUCTION OR BUILDINGS IN THE PARK. REMOVE 90-100% OF EXISTING BRUSH AND TREES WITH LESS THAN 6-INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT.REMOVE TREES SHOWN TO BE REMOVED ON THE TENTATIVE MAP GRADINGPLAN. THIN TREES (GREATER THAT 6-INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT)TORESULT IN NO MORE THAN 10% CANOPY COVERAGE AT TREE MATURITY.

ZONE 2: AREAS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE BETWEEN 100 AND200-FEET FROM THE BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION OR BUILDINGS IN THE PARK. REMOVE 50% OF EXISTING BRUSH AND TREES WITHLESS THAN 6-INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT. REMOVE TREES SHOWN TO BEREMOVED ON THE TENTATIVE MAP GRADING PLAN. THIN TREES (GREATER THAN 6-INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT) TO RESULT IN NO MORE THAN 50% CANOPY COVERAGE AT TREE MATURITY.

NOTE: PROVIDE ZONE 1 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT FOR 60-FEET WIDTH ALONG TRAILS AND ACCESS ROADS SHOWN ON THE TENTATIVE MAP.

LEGEND (THIS SHEET)
Packet Pg. 221
Attachment: Fire Fuel Reduction Plan - The Peaks Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Packet Pg. 222
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 223
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 224
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 225
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 226
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 227
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 228
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 229
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 230
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 231
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 232
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 233
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 234
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 235
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 236
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 237
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 238
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 239
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) From: Members, Council
To: Erin Resner; Jack Munns; Mike Littau; Paul Dhanuka; Tenessa Audette Cc: Bade, Steve; Curtis, Christian; Pagan, Jeremy; Toy, Lily; Schlegel, David; Gannon, Jennifer; Barnhart, Erin; Tipton, Sharlene
Subject: Fw: The Peaks Subdivision 10/28/25 Tentative Map Approval - APPEAL Date: Monday, November 3, 2025 11:59:43 AM
Attachments: CALFIRE Reports 2024.pdf
Sharlene Tipton, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk/Elections Official
777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001
Ph 530-225-4447 / fx 530-225-4463
[email protected]
From: Debbie Heide
Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2025 9:36 AM
To: Audette, Tenessa <[email protected]>; Munns, Jack <[email protected]>; Littau, Mike <[email protected]>; Resner, Erin <[email protected]>; Dr. Dhanuka, Paul <[email protected]>; Planning Commission
<[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: The Peaks Subdivision 10/28/25 Tentative Map Approval - APPEAL CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

You don't often get email from . Learn why this is
important
Sent from my iPad
Formal Appeal to the Redding City Council and Planning
Commission regarding the Proposed Peaks Project on Quartz Hill Road October 28, 2025 Tentative Map Approval
Dear Redding City Council and Planning Commission Members, I am formally appealing the October 28, 2025 vote of the Commission to approve the Peaks Tentative Map on the grounds that the subdivision does not meet Public Resource Code (PRC) 4290.5 recommendation for subdivisions over 30 units to have a secondary egress as defined at California Code of Regulations (CCR) 1267.01.

The Peaks traffic study on Page 24 states “The project would meet the minimum number of access points required under City Code and the California Fire Code,” however the project does not meet Public Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Resource Code 4290.5 recommendation for subdivisions over 30 units to have a secondary egress as defined at California Code of Regulations 1267.01.

PRC 4290.5 – California Public Resources Code (PRC) 4290.5 requires the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (the Board), in consultation with the State Fire Marshal, to identify existing subdivisions with more than 30 dwelling units located in the State Responsibility Area (SRA) or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, identified pursuant to Section 51178 of the Government Code, without a secondary means of egress route that are at significant fire risk
14 CCR 1267.01(a)(i)(ii)- An adequate secondary egress route is a road, navigable by a passenger vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds or less, of equal construction standard to the primary road. The secondary road does not have to be rated to carry the same quantity of traffic (e.g., a two-lane paved road and a one-lane paved road is acceptable).
(ii) An adequate secondary egress route is not:
(A) a road with locked gates or limited access; or
(B) a road that directs traffic to the same outlet road as the primary road or results in a circular traffic flow, to the extent practicable.

In support of this appeal, please review the attached 2024 CALFIRE reports for subdivisions adjacent to the Peaks Project area noting the lack of a secondary egress for the Land Park, Stanford Hills, Spinnaker Drive and Ironwood Lane subdivisions and recommending each subdivision have a secondary egress (Attached).

In addition to the 2nd egress issue, there is the issue of the Emergency Evacuation Memo that assumed >70 percent of Peaks residents would exit using Keswick Dam Road. That is a poor assumption as Keswick Dam Road was impassable during the Carr Fire. There was fire on both sides of the road and fire personnel from Marin County had to abandon their fire truck and take cover at the dam.

Before last night's meeting, I in support of the Peaks Subdivision as long as it had its own second egress to Quartz Hill Road; however, after listening to the many citizens opposed to the project last night and their stories of evacuating during the Carr Fire, I am now of the opinion that even if an actual second egress is constructed, it will not change the reality of an approximately 2 hour drive from the Peaks area neighborhoods during an emergency fire evacuation. Thus, I have changed my position to being in support of the project only if the Buenaventura Bridge can be constructed first.

Thank you,
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Albion
21-XSH-0E17
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Albion
Address: 1005 Albion Ave City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments:

Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Albion 21-XSH-0E17

Page 2 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Albion 21-XSH-0E17

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Albion 21-XSH-0E17

Page 4 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Ironwood
24-XSH-9D17
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Ironwood
Address: 280 Ironwood Ln. City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments: Redding Fire Department
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Ironwood 24-XSH-9D17

Page 2 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Ironwood 24-XSH-9D17

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Ironwood 24-XSH-9D17

Page 4 of 4 ends

Part III: Recommendations
Access and Evacuation Recommendations (check all that apply):
☑ Create a secondary access to the subdivision.
☐ Make improvements to the existing secondary access to the subdivision. ☑ Install reflective addressing signs for structures and roads in conformance with 14 CCR § 1274.01, 1274.02, 1274.03, and 1274.04 and the California Fire code, California Code of Regulations, title 24, part 9.
☑ Install reflective evacuation route street signs directing residents from their local roads to the nearest collector road(s) and/or arterial highway(s) (see California Highway Design manual for definitions), based on the standards for emergency management signing in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices ☐ Where additional routes may exist, but with a gate that does not conform to the requirements in 14 CCR § 1273.09, recommend that gates (including private gates) remain unlocked during red flag warnings or high fire danger conditions. ☑ When side street parking narrows the road to a smaller width than the standards in 14 CCR § 1273.01, during red flag warnings or conditions of high fire danger, limit street parking so a wider pathway is available to support rapid evacuation. ☑ Conduct community-wide evacuations drills.
☑ Install reflective markers to indicate road edges or other areas of danger that might not be evident during periods of low visibility.

Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Old Lantern
24-XSH-99AD
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Old Lantern
Address: 3520 Old Lantern Dr. City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments: Redding Fire Department
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Old Lantern 24-XSH-99AD

Page 2 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Old Lantern 24-XSH-99AD

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Old Lantern 24-XSH-99AD

Page 4 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Version 1.9
State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
PO Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subdivision Survey Report
Part I: Site Information
Subdivision Information
Subdivision Name:

Subdivision ID:

Santa Cruz
21-XSH-DF86
Subdivision is located
within:

Responsibility Area
LRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
Map: Santa Cruz
Address: 950 Santa Cruz Dr City: Redding
County: Shasta
CALFIRE Administrative Unit:

SHU - Shasta - Trinity Unit
CAL FIRE Unit Contact:

Unit Chief Sean Ohara
Primary Fire Protection Agency: City Fire Department
Comments:

Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Santa Cruz 21-XSH-DF86

Page 2 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Santa Cruz 21-XSH-DF86

Page 3 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Santa Cruz 21-XSH-DF86

Page 4 of 4 ends

Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 261
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 262
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 263
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 264
Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) From:

To: Planning Commission; Audette, Tenessa; Munns, Jack; Littau, Mike; Resner, Erin; Dr. Dhanuka, Paul Subject: Formal Appeal to the Redding City Council and Planning Commission regarding the Proposed Peaks Project Date: Tuesday, November 4, 2025 2:37:44 PM
Attachments: Peaks Map with inset.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important I am submitting a formal appeal in response to the Planning Commission vote on Tuesday, October 28, 2025.

Name:

Richard Bullock
Statement & Request
Request for Preservation of Open Space and Drainage Corridor – Peaks Project, Lots 77 & 78 (see attached map)
By my count, approximately 78 of the proposed 120 new homes in the Peaks Project back up to open space. That’s an excellent design choice—it maintains the area’s natural character and provides homeowners with a scenic buffer.

However, the current plan removes that same design consideration from our existing section of the neighborhood on Spinnaker Drive. The design shows new houses placed directly behind our property fence —which is just six feet from our swimming pool.

Immediately beyond our fence is a steep 12-foot bank that drops away from our yard. It’s not suitable for construction, but it does grow grass and weeds up to four feet tall. If that slope becomes part of someone else’s backyard, who will maintain it? Without regular weed abatement, it will quickly become a fire hazard.

Beyond that bank lies a 35- to 40-foot-wide seasonal runoff area. During moderate or heavy rains, this area carries 2–4 inches of water that drains to the catch basin and culvert leading under Spinnaker Drive toward the Sacramento River. The ground stays wet and soggy well into June, and in prior years, the City itself installed straw wattles and bales to prevent erosion.

This natural corridor supports wildlife such as turkeys, deer, quail, foxes, and bobcats. It’s also used informally by neighbors as a footpath connecting Spinnaker Drive and the gravel extension of Keel Court.

At a City information meeting about the Peaks Project, I asked whether this area could remain designated as Open Space. The response I received was, “Who’s going to take care of it?” The answer is simple: the same people who have been maintaining it for the past 18 years—the homeowners along Spinnaker Drive and Keel Court—who have voluntarily cleared weeds up to 100 feet back each summer for fire safety. Even though the City owns the property, the upkeep and fire prevention clearing has always been done by residents.

Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Therefore, I respectfully ask that the proposed construction on Lots 77 and 78 be reconsidered or removed, allowing this area to remain Open Space—just as the majority of homes in the new development have behind them.

Preserving this buffer will protect a vital drainage and wildlife corridor, maintain fire safety, and provide design consistency across both the new and the existing neighborhood.

Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.

Richard Bullock
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) up here, but it could happen. We lost our home that night but did rebuild. We like this area and would hope the City and Planning Commission will take into consideration all the extra traffic that will be created once all these new homes are built up here.

Thank you for your time,
Debbie Pastega
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) From: Sheryl Bullock
To: Planning Commission; Audette, Tenessa; Dr. Dhanuka, Paul; Resner, Erin; Munns, Jack; Littau, Mike Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission decision to approve the application for the Peaks Project, October 28, 2025 Date: Thursday, November 6, 2025 8:33:03 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Redding; please be careful with links or attachments.

You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important Sheryl Bullock
Redding
I appeal the Planning Commission’s decision on October 28, 2025 to approve the application for The Peaks project on the following grounds:
1) I am requesting an additional road out to Quartz Hill directly from The Peaks. It will enhance the functionality and design of this project. In addition, it will relieve the traffic impact on River Ridge Terrace neighborhood streets on a regular basis as well as decreasing evacuation time should we have another wildfire.

Now that we have extensive development being implemented on the top of Quartz Hill with considerable housing being added, it is more important than ever that additional egress be added as well.
2) Car trips per day on Steamboat, Old Lantern and Keel Court will be higher than estimated in the reports for this project. Being that these homes are low to moderate income, the homes will likely be used by multiple generations using vehicles and some residents will be renting rooms to people who have additional vehicles.
3) Roads B & C should NOT extend south of Keel Road beyond where the Peaks homes are located. It is the intent of this project to connect the road with Jaxon Baker’s development. (“Additional roads will connect the development to the land to the south in the future.” Noise & Vibration assessment-introduction)
These roads should be closed off to any further development such as the Alize subdivision and Mountain Properties, which will be developed in the near future, and to the existing Stanford Hills subdivision. If roads B & C are connected to the Alize subdivision in the future, it will easily push the number of car trips on Keel to Spinnaker/Old Lantern and to Steamboat to Spinnaker/Old Lantern in excess of 2,000 car trips per day which would exceed the threshold.

We cannot “stack” more subdivisions to The Peaks. This would create many negative issues for River Ridge Terrace homeowners such as noise levels, additional traffic, traffic safety issues, evacuation time delays as well as reduced property values. 4) According to this design, my home will be dramatically impacted by The Peaks on 3 sides of our property. We will have a public trail running along the whole north side of my property line. While I don’t mind having a trail next to my home, my home will be facing a much busier street, Spinnaker Drive, and there is likely a two story home on a small lot planned on Lot 78 at my rear fence line 6 feet from our pool. My husband, Richard Bullock, has submitted an appeal to have lots 77 and 78 modified or relocated and given key reasons to support our Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) November 2, 2025
To: Planning Commission
Re: Peaks Subdivision
Dear Planning Commission Members:

We are writing this letter to express our concerns and needs in regards to the “restoration project” you are planning west of Spinnaker Drive and Keel Court. We reside at 1302 Spinnaker Dr at the corner of Keel Ct. Lot 77 is being planned directly along our backyard fence line. Our neighbors are Rich and Sheryl Bullock. --Environmental restoration refers to the deliberate process of assisting the recovery of ecosystems that have been degraded, damaged or destroyed. The primary objective of environmental restoration is to reestablish ecological balance, enhance habitat quality, and promote long-term environment sustainability and resilience. Given this, The Peaks does not fit the definition of a ‘restoration’ project as it has never been a housing project.

The land designated to become The Peaks is a town treasure and could potentially become a tremendous resource and legacy for Redding. This land has and continues to support an abundant population of wildlife, including but not limited to: Monarch butterflies, black bear, bobcats, bats, wild boar, mountain lions, coyote, wild turkeys, deer, owls, squirrels, woodpeckers, vultures, raccoons, Bald Eagles, opossums, jack rabbits, varies types of snakes and reptiles, year-round natural ponds and pools. In early 2000s, there was an area designated Wetland, and it provides habitat for sensitive species such as Monarch butterflies, and many of those just named.

A true “restoration project” would seek to restore the natural habitat that the Carr Fire Firenado destroyed in 2018. The city could use the grant monies and actually remove the dead trees and fire destruction, honor the Wetlands Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) designation, and create a lovely space, possibly for public use. On leash walking trails and viewing areas for wildlife may be a place to start. --We would like to express our adamant dislike and disapproval of the plan to have lot 77 back right up on our property/fence line, 1302 Spinnaker Dr., and lot 78 which will back up to our next-door neighbors’ property at 1308 Spinnaker Dr. This represents an intrusion of privacy and likely decline in our property value. Not only will our view of the acreage behind us be destroyed, you will be taking out older established Blue Oak trees which support wildlife such as hummingbirds, bats, and various finch, sparrow and other species of avian wildlife. These trees are also Carr Fire survivors. I personally spent hours and hours hosing burnt bark and foliage off them in the attempt to save them. I am happy to say I was successful with all of them. They are the only source of shade our backyard has and they will be dearly missed.

The proposed development will increase traffic volumes on Keel and Spinnaker Drive by approximately 500% based on the traffic study completed for this project.

The traffic study does not discuss Stafford Hills residents using the proposed road connection at Buena Ventura via White Sail/Spinnaker to avoid the left turn onto Keswick Dam Blvd which has poor decision and stopping sight distance due to substandard geometric conditions. A better use of the block grant would be to partner with the county and make improvements to both Quartz Hill and Keswick Dam Blvd, providing adequate shoulders to improve emergency vehicles access while evacuating residents during a natural disaster, like we experienced during the Carr Fire.

If the city does move forward with this project we would like to see the following at a minimum:

A) Push back lots 77 and 78 60’ or more to create an easement between the lots and the back of both houses at 1302 and 1308 Spinnaker Dr. This area, owned and neglected by the city has been maintained by us as well as our neighbors for many, many years. I anticipate that would remain consistent.

Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613) B) Allow the Blue Oak trees to remain. This would preserve habitat for sensitive wildlife such as the bats.

C) Make it a requirement that the park improvements, along with bike and pedestrian facilities are completed at the same time as infrastructure (ie. roads, drainage, curb, gutter, and sidewalks) before any houses are constructed.

We do question the cities motivation for the use of this block grant, and do not see it as having our best interest at heart but as a means to develop a plot of city owned land to increase their tax base on the tax payer’s dime.

Thank you for your time and attentions to our concerns.

Christine Mayerchak

Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Appeal Letters & Emails (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613)

CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTION 15183

EXEMPTION CHECKLIST

FOR GENERAL PLAN

CONSISTENCY

SECTION 15183 EXEMPTION CHECKLIST
State Clearinghouse No. 2022050300
References and Documentation
The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision
Tentative Subdivision Map Application S-2025-00613
Prepared by:

CITY OF REDDING
Development Services Department
Planning Division
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, California 96001
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 1 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision October 2025

CITY OF REDDING
CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183 EXEMPTION CHECKLIST FOR

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
INTRODUCTION:

The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Project (Project) involves the development of a residential subdivision, including infrastructure improvements and site grading, to support a 120-lot single-family housing community at 850 Quartz Hill Road (APN 115-170-001) within the Redding city limits in Shasta County, California. The City of Redding (City) was awarded Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Recovery - Infrastructure (CDBG-DR-INF) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to complete this Project in response to the 2018 Carr Fire. Project site improvements would include street alignments with sidewalks and lighting, storm water drainage basins, sewer and water connections, electric connections, telephone connections, landscaping, traffic and emergency vehicle access, grading, and other features conforming to City standards and regulations. The current Tentative Map that is the subject of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist includes 120 single family residential lots for future development.

On March 26, 2024, the Redding City Council certified a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2022050300) and adopted the City of Redding General Plan 2045 (General Plan). The General Plan establishes a blueprint for future land development in the City that meets community desires and balances the environmental protection goals with the need for housing, employment opportunities, services, infrastructure, and a more compact, livable community. The General Plan applies to all parcels within the adopted Planning Area and sets the goals and policies that guide future development. It also included a corresponding General Plan Diagram (land use map), a Circulation Plan exhibit, and implementing policies focusing population growth in locations where existing infrastructure and services are available.

Relationship of Project to Adopted General Plan
The Project site and off-site improvement areas are located in northwest Redding and within the Planning Area of the General Plan. The General Plan land use designation for the Project site is Residential – 2 to 3.5 Dwelling Units per Acre. The Project site is a 114-acre parcel, with 65.3 acres identified for development as part of the Tentative Map. The remaining acreage consists of two lots which are not planned for development by the City. Within the 65.3 acre development area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project includes 120 lots within the 48.5 acre development area, which results in a net density of 2.5 units per acre, which is consistent with the density range allowed by the General Plan land use designation for the Project site and the density evaluated for the site in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the growth projections of the General Plan EIR remain valid with implementation of the Project. In addition, the off-site improvements extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan 2045 and are located within the Planning Area and Sphere of Influence of the General Plan. The Project would be required to abide by all applicable goals and policies in the adopted General Plan.

Relationship of Project to Adopted Zoning Ordinance
The zoning designation for the Project site is RS-2.5 Residential Single Family. The RS-2.5 zoning district allows for a base density of

2.5 housing units per gross developable acre, with a maximum density of 3.5 housing units per gross developable acre. Homes within this zoning district can cover up to 40% of a lot and be as tall as 35 feet. Each lot must be at least 8,000 square feet, 75 feet wide, and 100 feet deep. In comparison, the Project site is a 114-acre parcel, with 65.3 acres identified for development as part of the Tentative Map. Within that area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project includes 120 housing lots within the 48.5 acre development area, which results in a net density of 2.5 units per gross developable acre, which is consistent with the density regulations for the RS-2.5 zoning district. The proposed residential lots would comply with the development standards of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance and no exceptions to the standards are being requested. This would include adherence to the City’s Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code (Title 18 of the Municipal Code). The Project would be consistent with building setback, height limitations, lot coverage, and other requirements within the RS-2.5 zoning district, and future homes would be comparable to the height of single-family residences in a developed residential subdivision on adjacent properties to the east of the site.

Applicability of the General Plan Program EIR
The General Plan Program EIR evaluated the broad environmental effects of the General Plan and can be used to evaluate subsequent activities that are consistent with the General Plan as described in the CEQA Statute and Guidelines. Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines applies to projects that are consistent with existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was previously certified. CEQA mandates that such projects shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 2 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. Section 15183 is intended to streamline the review of such projects and reduce the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. When individual later activities contemplated under, and consistent with, a General Plan are proposed, a Lead Agency is required to examine the later project or activity to determine whether its effects were adequately analyzed in the Program EIR. If a project or activity is found to have no effects beyond those analyzed in the Program EIR and requires no new mitigation measures, then no further CEQA documentation is required. In approving a project meeting the requirements of Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those the agency determines:

1. Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located;

2. Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent;

3. Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action; and

4. Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR.

Overview of Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist
This Section 15183 Exemption Checklist addresses the potential impacts from the Project in relation to the analysis presented in the General Plan EIR that was certified on March 26, 2024 (SCH No. 2022050300). The discussion in the checklist is formatted to address each of the thresholds identified by Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, which also were relied upon by the General Plan EIR. The analysis assumes that the Project would be subject to all applicable Mitigation Measures (MMs) identified by the General Plan EIR, applicable regulatory requirements, applicable General Plan policies, Zoning Ordinance requirements, and applicable City Standard Conditions of Approval (SCOA) for Tentative Subdivision Maps.

Summary of Results
As concluded by the analysis in this Section 15183 Exemption Checklist, no new environmental effects have been identified and no new mitigation measures are required beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR. The Project would comply with all applicable zoning requirements, including minimum lot size and setbacks identified for the Residential – 2 to 3.5 Dwelling Units per Acre designation and RS-2.5 Residential Single Family Zone. The Project is consistent with the development density established for the site by the City of Redding Zoning Code and City of Redding General Plan 2045 Land Use Classifications and associated policies. There are no specific effects which are peculiar to the Project or its site, or that the General Plan EIR failed to analyze as significant effects. No potentially significant off-site or cumulative impacts have been identified which were not previously and adequately evaluated in the General Plan EIR. No new information has been identified which would result in a determination of a more severe impact than what had been anticipated by the General Plan EIR. The Section 15183 Exemption Checklist concludes that the Project is within the scope of the General Plan EIR, and that no further CEQA documentation is required prior to implementing the Project.

Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 3 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

1. Tentative Subdivision Map Application Number: S-2025-00613

2. Project Title: The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

3. Lead agency name and address:

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

4. Contact Person and Phone Number: Lily Toy, Planning Manager, (530) 245-7231

5. Project Location: The Project site is located at 850 Quartz Hill Road (APN 115-170-001) in the City of Redding, Shasta County, California. The site is located within Township 32 North, Range 5 West, Section 22 on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5’ Redding topographic quadrangle map. The Project also includes off-site improvements on three adjacent parcels, including APN 115-180-001 to the west (Bureau of Land Management [BLM] land), APN 115-460-017 to the east, and APN 115-180-028 to the south. Figure 1 (Vicinity Map) shows the Project site location within the City of Redding and Shasta County. Figure 2 (Project Site and Off-site Improvement Areas) shows the Project site and off-site improvement areas, along with surrounding roadways and adjacent land uses.

6. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The City-owned property at 850 Quartz Hill Road is approximately 114 acres in size and located approximately 550 feet south of Quartz Hill Road and approximately 400 feet east of Buenaventura Boulevard.

Additionally, the Project would include approximately 1.27 acres of off-site improvements. These include a new access road with underlying utility extensions extending within a new City right-of-way across BLM land west of the Project site (approximately 1.25 acres), extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line approximately 50 linear feet onto an adjacent property to the east of the Project Site (approximately 0.01 acre), and minor grading where proposed Road B would connect to an existing gravel road on a neighboring parcel to the south (less than 0.01 acre).

The Project site is largely undeveloped, with the exception of unimproved roads, overhead electrical transmission lines owned, operated, and maintained by the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), and existing sewer trunk lines. The site is located at an elevation of approximately 665 to 800 feet above mean sea level. The site is characterized by undulating hills and small drainages.

The Project site was impacted by the Carr Fire, which reached the City of Redding on July 26, 2018. The site is located within a designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), where fire protection services are provided by the City of Redding. Surrounding land uses to the east and south are also located within a VHFHSZ in an LRA. The off-site improvement area to the west on BLM land is within a Federal Responsibility Area (FRA), where the federal government is responsible for fire protection. Areas to the north of the Project site are located within a designated VHFHSZ within a State Responsibility Area (SRA), where CAL FIRE provides fire protection services.

Surrounding land uses to the north include vacant land, rural residential lots within unincorporated Shasta County, and Quartz Hill Road. Surrounding land uses to the south include vacant land with overhead electrical transmission lines and single-family residences in a developed residential subdivision. Land uses to the east include single-family residences in a developed residential subdivision. Land uses to the west include vacant BLM land, rural residential lots within unincorporated Shasta County, and Buenaventura Boulevard. The Sacramento River is located approximately one mile west and one mile south of the Project site.

7. Project Sponsor Name and Address: City of Redding
777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001

8. General Plan Designation: Residential – 2 to 3.5 Dwelling Units per Acre; Greenway

9. Zoning: “RS-2.5” Residential Single Family

10. Description of Project: The proposed Project is the development of a residential subdivision, including infrastructure Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 4 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision improvements and site grading, to support a 120-lot single-family housing community at 850 Quartz Hill Road (APN 115-170- 001) within the Redding city limits in Shasta County, California. The City was awarded Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Recovery - Infrastructure (CDBG-DR-INF) funds administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to complete this Project in response to the 2018 Carr Fire.

The Project site is 114 acres, with 65.3 acres planned for development of 120 residential lots and a 5.69-acre park parcel, of which approximately 3.0 acres will be available for developed park facilities. Within the 65.3 acre development area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project proposes 120 housing lots on the 48.5 developable acres, resulting in a net density of 2.5 units per gross developable acre. This aligns with the RS-2.5 zoning district regulations for the site.

The Project site also includes two additional parcels that will be created: Parcel A (26.24 acres at the southern end) and Parcel B (22.24 acres at the northern end). Neither parcel is currently planned for residential development. As part of the Project, Parcel B is proposed to include open space trails and a maintenance access road. These parcels may also be designated for future residential lots, park use, open space/conservation, or as remainder parcels.

Project site improvements would include street alignments with sidewalks and lighting, storm water detention basins, sewer and water connections within street rights-of way, electric connection within street rights-of way, landscaping, traffic and emergency vehicle access, grading, and other features conforming to City standards and regulations. The Project limits development near greenways and stream corridors, establishes setbacks, includes trail systems throughout the Project site, and includes a park site with an overlook offering views of open spaces and greenways. The City’s greenway land use classification applies to natural open space and includes slope areas exceeding 20 percent at the Project site. It also applies to 100-year floodplain areas, however, no such floodplains exists on the property. Slope areas exceeding 20 percent were identified through topographic surveys, and the Project design avoids urbanization and significant alteration of the areas.

Figure 3 (Land Use & Zoning Designations), shows the General Plan Land Use Designations and Zoning Designations for the Project site. Figure 4 (Site Layout), shows the Project’s preliminary site plan, as depicted in the Tentative Subdivision Map.

Residential Lots
The Project includes 120 single family residential lots. Residential lot sizes would range from approximately 8,000 square feet to approximately 54,000 square feet and would be arranged around internal residential streets and cul-de-sacs. Many lots would include easement areas to limit development in rear and/or side yard areas and preserve natural topography and features. This would include public vegetation management easements on slopes and in undeveloped areas. Additionally, stormwater detention easements would extend across portions of several lots.

At Project completion, 51 percent of the finished lots would contain covenants restricting the future homes for sale to incomequalifying buyers earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income. The remaining lots would be developed and sold at market value.

The residential lots and future homes would comply with the development standards of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance and no exceptions to the standards are being requested. This would include adherence to the City’s Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code (Title 18 of the Municipal Code). The Project would build residential lots, and any future home development would require consistency with building setback, height limitations, lot coverage, and other requirements within the RS-2.5 zoning district.

Table 1 summarizes City development standards that would apply to the Project as part of the RS-2.5 zoning district.

Table 1 – Residential Lot Development Standards
Land Use Min Lot Area Min Lot Width Min Lot Depth
Residential Lots 8,000 sf 75 ft for street frontage lots 35 ft for cul-de-sac lots
100 ft
Wildfire Resiliency Features
The Project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), where the City of Redding provides fire protection services.

Surrounding land uses to the east and south are also located in an LRA. State Responsibility Areas (SRAs), managed by CAL FIRE, border the site to the north. Federal Responsibility Areas (FRAs), managed by the federal government, border the site to the west. Both the Project site and surrounding properties are designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ), and were subjected to damage during the 2018 Carr Fire.

To protect development in the VHFHSZ, the City requires adherence to a wide range of state and local codes. The Project Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 5 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision would be subject to compliance with the most recent California Building Standards Code, State Fire Safe Regulations, California Fire Code, Public Resources Code Section 4291, the requirements in the Redding Municipal Code, Chapter 9.20, Fire Code, City Fire and Public Works Standards, Redding Fire Department wildfire requirements, and other standards. The California Fire Code (Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) includes Section 4905.2, Construction Methods and Requirements within Established Limits. The California Fire Code Chapter 49 cites specific requirements for wildland-urban interface areas that include, but are not limited to, providing defensible space and hazardous vegetation and fuel management. The Project would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 9.20, Fire Code, which includes fire safety measures and protection systems for new buildings and standards to minimize the ignition and spread of wildfire due to slopes. The State Fire Safe Regulations, Public Resources Code Section 4291, and the California Fire Code are all applicable to the Project, and have specific requirements for new development to create defensible space and extensive fuel reduction within 100 feet of a structure, an ember-resistant zone within 5 feet of a structure, and the overall maintenance of properties to reduce the risk of uncontrolled fires or the spread of fires to other properties.

The Project also incorporates wildfire resiliency features, including:
• New roads would be designed to accommodate both emergency vehicles and evacuating residents simultaneously.

Multiple points of access are provided to prevent bottlenecks and ensure that residents can evacuate quickly and safely, as required by local regulations.
• The design of the subdivision incorporates natural and constructed firebreaks to protect the community from wildfires, including wide roadways and strategically placed, managed open spaces that reduce the continuity of fuel and slow the spread of fire.
• Homes and community structures would be required to maintain defensible space around their perimeters, including clearing flammable vegetation and other combustible materials to create defensible spaces to be mandated by local fire codes and guidelines.
• A fire fuel reduction plan has been developed to lower wildfire risk by clearing flammable vegetation. Zone 1, within 100 feet of structures, will have 90-100% of brush and small trees removed, designated trees cleared per the grading plan, and large trees thinned to 10% canopy. Zone 2, from 100 to 200 feet out, will see 50% of the brush and small trees removed, with similar tree clearing and thinning to 50% canopy. • Vegetation management would involve regular maintenance, including pruning, clearing, and spacing of plants to reduce fire risk. Within developed areas, residents would choose from recommended plants that are less likely to ignite and that can act as a barrier to slow the spread of fire. A Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) would be established to maintain common areas/parks, wildland fuel vegetation management areas, and landscaping along roadways involving regular inspections and maintenance to ensure that vegetation is kept at safe levels, reducing the overall fire risk to the community.
• Homes would incorporate non-combustible materials for exterior walls, such as cement board cladding, masonry, or stucco following the guidelines of the California Residential Code. • Homes would feature Class A fire-rated roofing systems designed to block embers from penetrating and per the standards outlined in CAL FIRE’S Home Hardening program, the California Residential Code, California Building Code, and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines. • Windows and glass doors would be double-paned and made of tempered glass, aligning with the California Residential Code and FEMA recommendations.
• Attic, soffit, and crawlspace vents in future homes would be covered with non-combustible mesh, with openings no larger than 1/8 inch to prevent embers from entering the home while still allowing adequate air circulation, as required by the California Residential Code and FEMA standards. • Homes would be equipped with residential sprinkler systems. • Fencing and decking attached to residences or adjacent to slopes would be constructed of fire-resistant or nonflammable materials.

Site Access and Circulation
The development includes multiple access points in compliance with the California Fire Code and the City’s Municipal Code to ensure adequate emergency access. The primary vehicular access to the Project site is proposed via a new off-site roadway that would extend from Buenaventura Boulevard to the site, and would be constructed within an existing and proposed City right-of-way across BLM property west of the site. A new tee intersection with Buenaventura Boulevard would be stop controlled on the new connecting roadway. The Project would also include residential streets that would connect to Steamboat Street and Keel Court to the east, which then connect to Spinnaker Drive and then north to Quartz Hill Road. Barricaded stub streets would be provided for future circulation to the property to the south and to Parcels A and B. All new roads would be designed to allow access by Fire Department, Law Enforcement, and other emergency responder use, and would provide widths in accordance with the City’s construction standards.

Additionally, the following recommendations, as outlined in the Transportation Impact Study prepared for the Project (WTrans 2025a), will be implemented as part of the Project.

Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 6 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision • To maximize available sight lines at the Buenaventura Boulevard intersection, any new signage, monuments or other structures to be placed near the Project entrance will be positioned outside of the vision triangles of a driver waiting on the minor street approach, and intersection lighting will be installed. Additionally, oversized intersection warning signs (W2-2) will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches. • To improve safety at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road/Quartz Hill Road, the existing intersection ahead warning signs (W2-1) on the Keswick Dam Road approaches will be replaced with oversized signs conveying the same messaging and “cross traffic does not stop” signs (W4-4P) added to the poles with STOP signs on the Quartz Hill Road approaches.

Utilities
The Project would connect to existing utilities located on the site and within adjacent roadways, and extend the utilities throughout the site, within the new roadways. The extensions would allow for connections for services to the future residences.

Potable and fire supply water would be provided from an existing 12-inch water main located within Buenaventura Boulevard, and from existing 8-inch water mains located within Keel Court and Steamboat Street. For wastewater service, the development would connect to an existing 10-inch trunk sewer that crosses the Project site in a northerly direction, then connects to an existing sewer main in Spinnaker Drive east of the Project site. The development would also connect to an existing 8-inch truck sewer located along the easterly site boundary. Electricity would be provided by Redding Electric Utility from existing underground electrical lines located adjacent to the Project site within Buenaventura Boulevard, Keel Court, and Steamboat Street.

Each residential lot would be served by an approved water and sanitary sewer lateral connection, as well as connections for underground electric, telephone, and cable utilities. The Project would not include the installation of natural gas connections.

Any future development would be subject to the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, which regulates energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting.

Utility extensions within the Project site would be installed underground to reduce the risk of ignitions from wind-blown debris or falling trees. Undergrounding utilities also improves the resilience of the community’s infrastructure by minimizing the likelihood of power outages during a wildfire event. Regular inspections and maintenance of utility infrastructure would be required to prevent potential ignition sources. This includes ensuring that the existing Western Area Power Administration overhead transmission line easements are clear of vegetation, that transformers and other equipment are properly maintained, and that any potential hazards are promptly addressed. The subdivision would be equipped with strategically placed fire hydrants. These systems would be designed to meet the requirements of local fire codes, ensuring that they are capable of supporting the firefighting needs of the community.

Storm Water
The Project would include storm drain facilities designed consistent with the requirements of City Construction Standards, the City of Redding Storm Water Quality Improvement Plan, and the City of Redding Phase II NPDES Permit from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Quality Order No. 2003–05 - DWQ). The Project includes proper management of stormwater peak flows in accordance with City Council Policy 1806 and the specifications of the City Engineer, which address impacts from the 10-, 25-, and 100-year-storm events. The Project would address peak flows by incorporating detention basins, detaining up to approximately 29 acre-feet, to maintain predevelopment levels at all locations downstream of the Project, and would also incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the polluting of stormwater, both during construction and long-term.

Outdoor Recreational Space, Landscaping, and Parking
The Project would include an approximately 5.69-acre neighborhood park parcel (with approximately 3.0 acres available for developed park facilities) to be developed consistent with the policies and standards of the City’s adopted Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan. The park would be located within an area that meets the criteria for Open Space in accordance with Redding Municipal Code Section 18.35. The Project would also include designated trails through native vegetated open space, street trees, onsite and perimeter ornamental landscaping and other recreation related improvements.

Landscaping at the Project site would include proposed trees, shrubs, accents, and ornamental grasses installed within public right of way areas along residential roadways, within landscaped portions of designated open space, at trailheads, within park areas, as well as on private properties. The Project will comply with the applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code and ensure that impacted trees are replaced with native tree species. The community’s landscaping would prioritize fire-resistant plants and materials. Drainage basins and slopes would be strategically planted with low-growing native grasses planted for erosion control. The Project would provide on-street parking in accordance with the City’s zoning ordinance and parking at the Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 7 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision proposed neighborhood park, with designated parking spaces that would be accessible as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act Standards for Accessible Design.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements
Pedestrian and bicycle access would be provided along sidewalks and with on-site multi-use trails. Pathways and sidewalks would be placed throughout the development for easy pedestrian circulation to and from the residential areas, parks, and open space areas.

Lighting
Outdoor lighting at the Project site would include exterior building light fixtures, accent lighting in landscaped areas, pedestrian-scale pathway lighting fixtures, and pole mounted street and intersection lighting fixtures. The outdoor lighting would comply with requirements contained in the California Building Code and the Redding Municipal Code, which includes maximum height limits and requirements that lighting fixtures be shielded or recessed to reduce light spillage onto adjoining properties.

Fencing and Retaining Walls
Individual residential lots would have fencing along the perimeters, excluding the front yard setback. Retaining walls would be constructed to provide stability to hillside slopes, where needed. Retaining walls would include, but not be limited to, concrete masonry unit, gabion, and stone/boulder retaining walls in different areas of the Project site. These features would be required to comply with the requirements of Section 18.40.180 (Walls and Fences) of the Zoning Ordinance and the California Building Code as appropriate.

Off-Site Improvements
Project-related off-site improvements include a new access road with underlying utility extensions extending within existing and proposed City right-of-way across Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land located west of the Project site (APN 115- 180-001). The new access road would be approximately 550 feet in length and would connect to Buenaventura Boulevard. Offsite improvements would also include extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line approximately 50 linear feet onto an adjacent property to the east of the Project Site (APN 115-460-017), and minor grading where proposed Road B would connect to an existing gravel road on a neighboring parcel to the south (APN 115-180-028).

Construction
Project construction is anticipated to begin in 2026 and require approximately 18 months to complete initial site improvements for a Final Map. Project construction would begin with site preparation, including clearing and grading of development areas to provide surfaces for the movement of construction equipment. Site clearing and grubbing would remove select trees, grass, and other vegetation. The Project site would be rough graded to elevations shown on final improvement plans and in accordance with recommendations in design-level geotechnical studies.

Project construction would be conducted in accordance with a Traffic Control Plan, as required by the City’s Construction Standards, to ensure that construction equipment and activities do not block roadways during the construction period and to minimize effects of the work on traffic and pedestrians. The Traffic Control Plan would include requirements for signs, flaggers, and other traffic control devices conforming to the current California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and as needed when impacting existing public roadways.

It is estimated that future home construction and other amenities would then occur over an approximately 10-year period.

11. Discretionary Actions: The Project includes a discretionary permit for a Tentative Subdivision Map. In addition, the following is a list of other public agencies whose approval may be required for the Project:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: The Project may potentially require a Section 404 Nationwide Permit under the Clean Water Act for filling of wetlands or other waters of the U.S.

U.S. Bureau of Land Management: The Project would require approval from the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management for improvements on BLM land.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife: The Project may potentially require a Section 1602 Notification of Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement for filling of wetlands or other waters of the U.S. or State.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board: The Project may potentially require a 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act for filling of wetlands or other waters of the U.S., or a Waste Discharge Permit for filling Stateonly wetlands.

Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 8 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision State Water Resources Control Board: The Project would require a General Construction Permit for disturbance of one or more acres of soil.

County of Shasta: An Encroachment Permit may be required for improvements made within County right-of-way.

Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 9 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS RELATIVE TO THE GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM EIR:

This Section 15183 Exemption Checklist provides an analysis of potential environmental impacts resulting from the Project. Following the format of the General Plan EIR and the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, environmental effects are evaluated to determine if the Project would result in a potentially significant impact triggering additional review under Guidelines Section 15183. • Items checked “New effect peculiar to Project or site” or “New significant effect” indicates that the Project could result in a new significant effect not previously identified in the General Plan EIR which either requires mitigation to be reduced to a less than significant level or which has a significant, unmitigated impact that is peculiar to the Project. • Items checked “New significant off-site or cumulative impact” indicates that the Project would result in off-site and/or cumulative impacts that were not previsions identified in the General Plan EIR. • Items checked “More severe adverse impact” indicates that there is new information or details which leads to a determination that a Project impact is more severe than previously discussed in the General Plan EIR.

A Project does not qualify for a Section 15183 exemption if it is determined that it would result in significant impacts in the above categories.

An analysis of each potential environmental effect is provided below for each subject area. Where warranted, the analysis includes specific information/data pertaining to individual impact areas.

Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 10 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

1. Aesthetics
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
AES-1: The proposed General Plan
would not substantially alter or damage
scenic vistas or substantially damage
scenic resources, including, but not
limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic
highway.
(Appendix G questions I. a & b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
AES-2: The proposed General Plan
would not substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings nor conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulation
governing scenic quality in non-urbanized
areas.
(Appendix G question I. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
AES-3: The proposed General Plan
would not create a new source of
substantial light or glare that would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the area.
(Appendix G question I. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
AES-4: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
not result in less-than-significant
cumulative impacts with respect to
aesthetics.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to aesthetics, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on aesthetics. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal CDD4: Work to protect and enhance the relationship between urban development and the Sacramento River, its tributaries, and hillside open space areas.

Policy CDD4A: Preserve significant native trees and other vegetation along the river and creek corridors, to the extent feasible, while allowing passive recreation and providing opportunities for active uses where appropriate.

Policy CDD4E: Pursue open space accessways that complement existing development and, where applicable, protect the privacy and security of adjoining residences.

Goal CDD6: Retain the natural appearance of the steep hillside areas and ridge lines.

Policy CDD6A: Strive to protect the visual integrity of prominent ridge lines (see Figure CDD-4) and avoid alterations to the topography that can be viewed from vista points. The City should consider the use of tools such as the following to avoid or minimize development impacts:

Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 11 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision • Purchase of land (public or public-private partnerships). • Creating conservation easements or similar measures.
• Utilizing design measures such as building height limitations, increased ridge-line setbacks, and/or standards for use of appropriate building forms, colors, and materials that blend into the surroundings.

Policy CDD8H: Strive to ensure that new developments reflect the existing physical characteristics, building design, streetscape, open space requirements, and urban form that preserve and contribute to the overall character and livability of the established neighborhood.

Goal CDD9: Preserve existing community character and fabric and promote the development of livable and cohesive neighborhoods and districts.

Policy CDD9A: Require new residential, office, and commercial development to reflect enduring, interesting, and attractive designs and to provide community amenities, as appropriate.

Goal CDD16: Improve the visual attractiveness of the City’s arterial and collector streets; encourage walking, biking, and public transit use, and make these transportation options safe and convenient choices for all.

Policy CDD16A: Street tree-planting should be a unifying visual element along the streets and strive to establish a program to retrofit existing arterial streets to include median and street-side landscape.

Goal NR6: Protect the aesthetic and biological value of Oak Woodlands and other natural vegetation and establish a healthy and robust urban forest.

Policy NR6A: Strive to preserve and protect existing native oaks, especially valley oaks that are often associated with riparian habitats, in the design and review of development projects. The preservation of stands of trees within developments is generally preferred over preservation of individual trees, with the exception of special-status species, heritage trees, and other trees as may be identified in the City’s Municipal Code.

GP EIR Impact AES-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to scenic vistas and scenic highways, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, as well as GP policies aimed at preserving the visual quality and scenic views and ensuring development is aesthetically compatible with surrounding areas.

Project Analysis:

The California Scenic Highway Program includes a list of officially designated and eligible State scenic highways. The Project site is not located along a designated scenic highway corridor (Caltrans 2025). The nearest such corridor is located approximately 5.6 miles to the north of the Project site near Shasta Dam. Therefore, no impact would result on State scenic highways.

Scenic resources identified in the Redding General Plan 2045 include the Sacramento River and its tributaries, mountains and foothills, and open hillsides. Additionally, General Plan Policy CDD6A strives to protect the visual integrity of prominent ridge lines (identified on Figure CDD-4 of the General Plan) and avoid alterations to the topography that can be viewed from vista points. The Sacramento River is located approximately one mile from the site. The Sacramento River is not visible from the Project site, and the Project would not alter the Sacramento River riparian corridor and associated habitat. The Project site is not located along an identified prominent ridge line in the General Plan, nor would it obstruct scenic views of a surrounding prominent ridge line. The closest such ridgeline identified on Figure CDD-4 of the General Plan is located approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the site. The Project includes open space areas with trail systems, as well as a park site with an overlook offering views of open spa`ces and greenways.

As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Tree Survey Report was completed to identify the species, size, health, and structural condition of trees at the site (ENPLAN 2024). The Tree Survey Report evaluated 409 trees representing nine different species that have a trunk diameter of 6-inches or greater. Many of the trees identified are located in areas that are not anticipated to be impacted, including open space areas, non-developable areas, and off-site locations. Based on the review, the Project would remove up to approximately 300 trees, including blue oak, gray pine, interior live oak, Gooding’s black willow, Fremont cottonwood, crape myrtle, Raywood ash, Chinese pistache, and one redwood tree. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to tree preservation and replanting (Condition 13), which outline procedures for preserved trees to be clearly marked on plans, with protection and replacement measures to be completed in compliance with Chapter 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance.

The complete text of Condition 13 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” Chapter 18.45, Tree Management Ordinance, promotes the conservation of mature, healthy trees in the design of new development. In addition, Chapter 13.40 of the City’s Municipal Code, Trees and Shrubs, regulates trees on public areas and planter strips. The Municipal Code also regulates and establishes protections for identified Heritage Trees. No landmark or heritage trees have been identified on the site.

Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 12 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision The Project will comply with the applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, and includes landscaping and planting programs to ensure that impacted trees are replaced with native tree species. Landscaping would include proposed trees, shrubs, accents, and ornamental grasses installed at public right of way areas along residential roadways, within landscaped portions of designated open space, at trailheads, within park areas, as well as on private properties.

Development of the Project would not obstruct a scenic vista identified in the General Plan and would be consistent with the development density allowed for the site and with the development pattern established on nearby properties. Although the proposed development would alter the appearance of the existing site conditions, it would not degrade the City’s visual quality or scenic views. The impact on scenic vistas would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AES-1.

GP EIR Impact AES-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to visual character, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, as well as GP policies aimed at preserving the visual quality and scenic views and ensuring development is aesthetically compatible with surrounding areas.

Project Analysis:

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, an urbanized area is defined as having a minimum of 2,000 housing units or a population of at least 5,000 people. The Project site is located within Redding’s city limits, in an urbanized area where surrounding neighborhoods have similar densities and amenities. Applicable local regulations include the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and the Zoning Code (Title 20 of the Municipal Code). The proposed residential lots and any future home construction would be required to comply with all applicable standards in the City’s Zoning Ordinance, including lot coverage standards, building setbacks, parking, and height limits, which would be comparable to the single-family residences in a developed residential subdivision on adjacent properties to the east of the site. It would also be required to meet the requirements of Municipal Code Section 17.60.050, which encourages subdivision designs to incorporate and enhance natural features.

The Project would not change the land use designation or zoning for the site, and is consistent with the General Plan and zoning density allowed for the site. The Project is required to comply with the City’s existing regulations and the General Plan policies to preserve the existing visual character of the City while also introducing new development that would be compatible. The General Plan policies ensure that future development would enhance vitality, context, form, and function, and support development in the City and seek to establish and/or retain the City’s sense of place. This includes policy CDD-8H, which aims to ensure that projects reflect the existing physical characteristics, building design, streetscape, open space requirements, and urban form that preserve and contribute to the overall character and livability of the established neighborhood. The Project includes a variety of housing options, configurations, and sizes to account for a diverse range of demographics and lifestyle needs. Visual focal points and sight lines are coordinated throughout the site that highlight desirable views, and by preserving the integrity of natural site features while accommodating development.

The proposed development is required to meet all required setbacks, and would include on-site landscape vegetation and open space features. The Project limits development near greenways and includes open space areas with trail systems, as well as a park site with an overlook offering views of open spaces and greenways. The Project would be required to comply with Chapter 18.45 and Chapter

13.40 of the Municipal Code, as described in Impact AES-1. The proposed landscaping would contain large amounts of greenspace and shade trees, including replacement of impacted trees with native tree species. In addition, an architectural design guidelines book will be presented for approval to the Planning Commission that would make a specific design theme with higher standards for appearance and architectural features a part of the conditions of approval for the tentative map.

The proposed development would be compatible with the existing adjacent development and with the neighborhood character. Although the Project would alter the appearance of the existing conditions, it would not create a substantial adverse impact on scenic vistas or degrade the City’s visual character or quality because the Project would be required to comply with the development standards of the City’s development ordinances, including the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. This would include adherence to the City’s Municipal Code Section 17.60.050 relative to connections with the natural environment, which requires that the design of subdivision take advantage of and integrate natural features into Project design. The Project integrates trail networks throughout open space areas and features a park with an overlook that provides scenic views of the surrounding greenways and open landscapes. The Project would be consistent with height limitations and lot coverage requirements within the RS-2.5 zoning district, and would be comparable to the height of single-family residences in a developed residential subdivision on adjacent properties to the east. The impact on visual character would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AES-2.

GP EIR Impact AES-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to light and glare, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code and the California Building Code relative to light standards.

Project Analysis:

Nighttime construction work is not anticipated for the Project. Therefore, no exterior lighting would be required during construction, and no construction-related impacts would result. Future development of the Project site would add additional sources of nighttime Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 13 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision light at the Project site due to outdoor residential lighting, including street lights and exterior porch lighting. The lighting would be customary for the development type and would comply with the California Building Code and the City’s Zoning Ordinance light standards to prevent glare and light spillover. The residential homes would generally have non-reflective surfaces with interspersed windows. The façades of the homes include various building projections and a variety of siding materials that will scatter or absorb light. No façade contains large reflective surfaces of metal or glass wall panels. Thus, no daytime glare is anticipated. The impact from new sources of light or glare would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AES-3.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvements would not be visible from the Sacramento River and would not alter the Sacramento River riparian corridor and associated habitat. The off-site improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable local and State design standards. The improvements would not occur along a designated scenic highway corridor. The materials, form, line, and texture would be altered along the roadway extension across BLM land as a result of the new road resurfacing, paved areas, sidewalks, curbs, lighting, landscaping, signage, and other related improvements. Although there will be visual modifications to the off-site areas compared to existing conditions, the overall view-scape surrounding the areas would not be impeded or altered by structures or other Project elements. The color for roadway improvements would be black asphalt and smooth in texture similar to the existing roadways.

Landscaped and hardscaped areas would introduce different colors and texture to the roadways, which may be seen as an aesthetic enhancement. The lighting would be customary for the development type and would comply with the California Building Code and the City’s Zoning Ordinance light standards to prevent glare and light spillover. The impact of the off-site improvements on aesthetics, including scenic vistas, scenic highways, visual character, light, and glare would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impacts AES-1 through AES-3.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to aesthetics, and evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. Cumulative aesthetic impacts were identified in Impact AES-4 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant. The Project would not change the land use designation or zoning for the site, and is consistent with the General Plan and zoning density allowed for the site. The Project would be required to comply with the City’s existing regulations and the General Plan policies aimed to preserve the existing visual character of the City while also introducing new development that would be compatible. The off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan, and the off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan. The Project would not result in impacts relative to a State scenic highway or conflict with an applicable zoning code or regulation. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts on such resources. The Project would result in less than significant impacts related to scenic vistas and the creation of a new source of light and glare. The conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts remain valid, as the Project would not result in new substantial growth that was not evaluated in the General Plan EIR’s cumulative analysis. As such, impacts would be less-than-cumulatively-considerable, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AES-4.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to aesthetics.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following aesthetic-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#12. Subdivision clearing, grading, and erosion-control plans shall be in full conformance with Section 16.12 of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance. The final grading improvement plans shall be consistent with the preliminary grading plan and any tree-preservation plans considered with the approved tentative map. #13. All trees identified for preservation shall be clearly identified on the subdivision improvement plans. A tree construction/protection plan shall be prepared by a qualified (tree) professional in accordance with Chapter 18.45, Tree Management, of the Zoning Ordinance and included as part of the subdivision grading improvement-plan package. Treeprotection measures identified in the tree construction/protection plan shall be reflected in the final subdivision improvement plans and followed during construction. Tree replacement and/or planting shall be in accordance with the provisions of Chapter

18.45. Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 14 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no aesthetic related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 15 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
AG-1: The proposed General Plan would
convert Prime Farmland to urban land
use.
(Appendix G question II. a)
Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No No Impact Yes
AG-2: The proposed General Plan would
not require a zone change or general plan
amendment and/or conflict with an
existing Williamson contract, nor would
the General Plan conflict with existing
zoning for, timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code Section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code Section
51104(g)).
(Appendix G questions II. b & c)
No Impact No No No No No Impact Yes
AG-3: The General Plan would result in
loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use.
(Appendix G question II. d)
Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
AG-4: The proposed General Plan would
not involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use.
(Appendix G question II. e)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
AG-5: The proposed General Plan in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in significant and unavoidable
cumulative impacts with respect to
agricultural and forestry resources.

Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to agriculture and forestry resources, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on agriculture and forestry. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal NR6: Protect the aesthetic and biological value of Oak Woodlands and other natural vegetation and establish a healthy and robust urban forest.

Policy NR6A: Strive to preserve and protect existing native oaks, especially valley oaks that are often associated with riparian habitats, in the design and review of development projects. The preservation of stands of trees within developments is generally preferred over the preservation of individual trees, with the exception of special-status species, heritage trees, and other trees as may be identified in the City’s Municipal Code.

Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 16 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Policy NR6B: Consider identifying appropriate “areas” to be used for the planting of native trees when desirable to offset development impacts to woodland resources. This General Plan explicitly recognizes that there are tradeoffs between the goals and policies that promote infill development over outward expansion and resultant impacts to woodland resources within the future urban footprint.

GP EIR Impact AG-1: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to agriculture and forestry, including potential conversion of Prime Farmland, loss and conversion of forest land, and cumulative impacts on agriculture and forestry resources. With implementation of the General Plan policies and actions, impacts related to potentially converting Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses could be reduced, but not necessarily to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, due to potential unknown impacts from future development under the General Plan, impacts at the programmatic level were determined to be significant and unavoidable, and were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Project Analysis:

According to the 2020 Shasta County Important Farmland Map (California Department of Conservation 2024), and as depicted on Figures 5.2-1 and Figure 5.2-2 of the General Plan EIR, the Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located on land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site and off-site improvement areas are designated as “other land.” Therefore, the Project would not convert Prime Farmland to urban land use. No impact would result. The Project impact would be less than described in the General Plan EIR, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AG-1.

GP EIR Impact AG-2: The GP EIR identified no impact related to conflicts with existing zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contracts, nor any impact related to conflicts with existing zoning for forestland or timberland zoned Timberland Production.

Project Analysis:

According to the Shasta County Open Data Portal (County of Shasta 2024), and as discussed in the General Plan EIR, there are no lands within the City of Redding under a Williamson Act contract. The Project site is thus not located on lands covered by a Williamson Act contract, and there are no any active agricultural or forest lands within the site. Additionally, the Project site is not zoned for agricultural, forest land, or timberland. No impact would result. The Project impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AG-2.

GP EIR Impact AG-3: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to potential conversion of forested areas such as oak woodlands to non-forested uses to accommodate future demand. With implementation of the General Plan policies and actions, impacts related to potentially converting forested areas to non-forested uses could be reduced, but not necessarily to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, due to potential unknown impacts from future development under the General Plan, impacts at the programmatic level were determined to be significant and unavoidable, and were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Project Analysis:

The Project site is not zoned for forest land or timberland, nor are there any active forest lands within the site. As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Tree Survey Report was completed to identify the species, size, health, and structural condition of trees at the site (ENPLAN 2024). The Tree Survey Report evaluated 409 trees representing nine different species that have a trunk diameter of 6-inches or greater. Many of the trees identified are located in areas that are not anticipated to be impacted, including open space areas, non-developable areas, and off-site locations. Based on the review, the Project would remove up to approximately 300 trees, including blue oak, gray pine, interior live oak, Gooding’s black willow, Fremont cottonwood, crape myrtle, Raywood ash, Chinese pistache, and one redwood tree. General Plan Policy NR6A addresses preservation of native oaks, and Policy NR6B addresses efforts to establish areas for the replanting of native trees. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to tree preservation and replanting (Conditions 12 and 13), which outline procedures for preserved trees to be clearly marked on plans, with protection and replacement measures to be completed in compliance with Chapter 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance.

The complete text of Condition 12 and 13 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” Chapter 18.45, Tree Management Ordinance, promotes the conservation of mature, healthy trees in the design of new development, and includes requirements for tree planting. The Project will comply with the applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, and will require landscaping and planting programs to ensure that impacted trees are replaced with native tree species. Therefore, the Project impact would be less than significant, and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AG-3.

GP EIR Impact AG-4: The GP EIR identified a less-than-significant impact related to conversion of farmland, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, as well as GP policies aimed to offset Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 17 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision regional agricultural impacts.

Project Analysis:

The Project site is not located on lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, or on lands covered by a Williamson Act contract. In addition, the Project site is not zoned for agricultural, forest land, or timberland, nor are there any active agricultural or forest lands within the site. The Project would not convert or rezone farmland to non-agricultural use, or any forest land to non-forest use. No impact would result, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AG-4.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvement areas are not located on lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, nor on lands covered by a Williamson Act contract. In addition, the off-site improvement areas are not zoned for agricultural, forest land, or timberland, nor are there any active agricultural or forest lands within the off-site areas. The BLM property is largely undeveloped with minimal trees and vegetation. The Project would not convert or rezone any farmland to non-agricultural use, or any forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, the impact of the off-site improvements on agriculture and forest resources would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impacts AG-1 through AG-4.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to agriculture and forestry resources, and evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. Cumulative impacts at the programmatic level were identified in Impact AG-5 of the General Plan EIR as significant and unavoidable, and were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project would not change the land use designation or zoning for the site, and is consistent with the General Plan and zoning density allowed for the site. The Project site is not located on lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, or on lands covered by a Williamson Act contract. In addition, the Project site is not zoned for agricultural, forest land, or timberland, nor are there any active agricultural or forest lands within the site. The Project would not result in new significant impacts relative to agriculture and forestry resources. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts on such resources. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AG-5.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No feasible mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to agriculture and forestry resources.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following agriculture and forestry-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#12. Subdivision clearing, grading, and erosion-control plans shall be in full conformance with Section 16.12 of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance. The final grading improvement plans shall be consistent with the preliminary grading plan and any tree-preservation plans considered with the approved tentative map. #13. All trees identified for preservation shall be clearly identified on the subdivision improvement plans. A tree construction/protection plan shall be prepared by a qualified (tree) professional in accordance with Chapter 18.45, Tree Management, of the Zoning Ordinance and included as part of the subdivision grading improvement-plan package. Treeprotection measures identified in the tree construction/protection plan shall be reflected in the final subdivision improvement plans and followed during construction. Tree replacement and/or planting shall be in accordance with the provisions of Chapter

18.45. CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no agriculture or forestry related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 18 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

3. Air Quality
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
AQ-1: The proposed General Plan would
conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the 2021 Air Quality Attainment Plan.
(Appendix G question III. a)
Significant and
Unavoidable No No No No
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Yes
AQ-2: Construction of projects under the
proposed General Plan would generate
regional and localized emissions of
criteria air pollutants or precursor
emissions in excess of the SCAQMD
thresholds, resulting in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of criteria
pollutants for which the Project region is
non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality
standard and potentially exposing
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations.
(Appendix G questions III. c)
Significant and
Unavoidable No No No No
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Yes
AQ-3: Operation of projects under the
proposed General Plan would generate
regional and localized emissions of
criteria air pollutants or precursor
emissions in excess of the SCAQMD
thresholds, resulting in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of criteria
pollutants for which the Project region is
non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality
standard and potentially exposing
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations.
(Appendix G questions III. b)
Significant and
Unavoidable No No No No
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Yes
AQ-4: The proposed General Plan would
not result in other emissions that would
adversely affect a substantial number of
people.
(Appendix G questions III. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
AQ-5: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in significant cumulative impacts
with respect to air quality.

Significant and
Unavoidable No No No No
Significant
and
Unavoidable
Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on air quality. General Plan EIR Impact AQ1 assessed the General Plan’s consistency with the Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2021 Air Quality Attainment Plan, which has since been updated to the 2024 Air Quality Attainment Plan. As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, the Project’s consistency with the updated 2024 Air Quality Attainment Plan has been reviewed. There have been no other substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 19 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal NR13: Coordinate with surrounding jurisdictions, the Shasta County Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the California Air Resources Board (ARB), and other partners where feasible toward the development of a consistent and effective approach to the regional air pollution problem.

Policy NR13A: Utilize the following thresholds that have been adopted by regional agencies when determining air quality impacts of discretionary projects. Update the thresholds as may be recommended by the SCAQMD from time to time.

Level "A": Up to:
• 25 pounds per day of oxides of nitrogen
• 25 pounds per day of reactive organic gases
• 80 pounds per day of fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
• 80 pounds per day of inhalable particulate matter (PM10) Level "B": Up to:
• 137 pounds per day of oxides of nitrogen
• 137 pounds per day of reactive organic gases
• 137 pounds per day of inhalable particulate matter (PM10) Policy NR13B: Utilize the process discussed in this Element to apply SMM and BAMM to discretionary projects and as one of the determinants of when an EIR is required to address air quality impacts. Update Emission Reduction Efficiency percentages as recommended by SCAQMD.

Policy NR13C: Coordinate with the SCAQMD to use consistent and accurate procedures in the review of projects which may have air quality impacts. Refer development applications that exceed Level “A” thresholds to the SCAQMD for review and comment. Incorporate the recommendations as appropriate.

Policy NR13E: Work with the SCAQMD and other partners as appropriate to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards in order to protect all residents from the health effects of air pollution.

Policy NR13F: Coordinate with SCAQMD in evaluating the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants and odors, and impose appropriate conditions on projects to protect public health and safety so as to reduce the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants and/ or noxious odors.

Policy EJ3B: Utilize the Zoning Ordinance and other development regulations require adequate buffering and/or effective technologies to protect sensitive land uses where appropriate. Generally, avoid siting new sensitive land uses (such as residences, day care centers, educational and/ or health facilities), within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, and/ or more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU operations exceed 300 hours per week). Such buffers may vary in depth depending on the type and concentration of pollutants.

GP EIR Impact AQ-1 and AQ-2: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to development intensity at build-out, including potential conflicts with the 2021 Air Quality Attainment Plan, and generation of construction and operational criteria emissions in excess of applicable thresholds, and were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Project Analysis
Redding is located within the Northern Sacramento Valley Air Basin (NSVAB), and within the jurisdiction of the Shasta County Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The 2024 Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP) is the applicable air quality plan for the region, and provides local guidance to achieve attainment of Federal and State ambient air quality standards (AAQS). The current 2024 Air Quality Attainment Plan includes forecasted estimates for reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions (ozone precursors) for the NSVAB through the year 2025. The Project is consistent with the development density assigned to the site, and would not generate additional emissions beyond those previously calculated in Table 5.3-10 of the General Plan EIR. As an individual project under the General Plan, the Project would not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of AAQS. The SCAQMD and the Natural Resources Element of the Redding General Plan establishes mitigation thresholds for ROG and NOx, as well as for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and inhalable particulate matter (PM10). Redding General Plan Policy NR13A enforces the applicable regional air quality thresholds established by the SCAQMD, which include tiered thresholds at two levels:

Level "A" Level "B"
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 20 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision 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 PM2.5 137 pounds per day of PM10
80 pounds per day of PM10
If a project has unmitigated emissions less than the Level "A" threshold, then it is viewed as a minor project from an air quality perspective and only application of Standard Mitigation Measures (SMMs) is required. Land uses that generate unmitigated emissions above Level "A" require application of appropriate Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMs), in addition to the SMMs. If, after applying SMMs and BAMMs, a use still exceeds the Level "B" threshold, then emission offsets will be required.

Construction Period Emissions
As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, an Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment was completed to evaluate the potential air quality and health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025a).

The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022 was used to estimate emissions from on-site construction activity, construction vehicle trips, and evaporative emissions. As shown in Table 3-1, the predicted unmitigated peak maximum daily construction emissions for ROG, PM10, and PM2.5 would not exceed the Level “A” or Level “B” significance thresholds. However, the Project’s estimated unmitigated peak maximum daily construction emissions are above the Level “A” threshold for NOx (but below the Level “B” threshold). The Project would be required to implement the SMMs recommended by SCAQMD, which have been adopted by the City as General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Since the Project is above Level “A” thresholds but below Level “B” thresholds for NOx, both Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 from the General Plan EIR are applicable to the Project and will be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the Project. Additionally, the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to air quality (Conditions 32 through 34), which require the SMMs recommended by SCAQMD, as well as Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMs), where applicable. The complete text of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, and Conditions 32 through 34 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, and the City’s SCOA, the Project’s construction-related emissions would be below the air quality thresholds.

Table 3-1 – Construction Air Pollutant Emissions (pounds per day) NOx ROG PM2.5 PM10
Max Unmitigated
Project Construction
Emissions
84 9.4 11.4 20.4
Level “A” Thresholds 25 25 80 80
Level “B” Thresholds 137 137 --- 137
Operational Period Emissions
ROG, PM, and NOx emissions from the Project would be generated primarily from vehicles driven by future residents. Evaporative emissions from architectural coatings and maintenance products (classified as consumer products) are also typical ROG emission sources from these types of land uses. Woodburning fireplaces and stoves are not part of the Project design. CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions from operation of the Project assuming full build-out. As shown in Table 3-2, the Project’s predicted unmitigated peak maximum daily operational emissions for NOx, ROG, PM10, and PM2.5 would not exceed the Level “A” or Level “B” significance thresholds.

Table 3-2 – Operational Air Pollutant Emissions (pounds per day) NOx ROG PM2.5 PM10
Peak Max Project
Operational Emissions

6.60 15.52 1.60 5.51
Level “A” Thresholds 25 25 80 80
Level “B” Thresholds 137 137 --- 137
Overall, the Project impact relative to generation of construction and operational criteria emissions in excess of applicable thresholds would be less than significant with mitigation, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AQ-1 and Impact AQ-2.

GP EIR Impact AQ-3: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to generation of regional operational emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds, and were addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Project Analysis
As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, an Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment was completed to evaluate the potential health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025). The number and Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 21 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision types of construction equipment and diesel vehicles, along with the anticipated length of their use for different phases of construction, were based on site-specific construction activity schedules for the Project. Project construction activity would generate dust and equipment exhaust, while Project operation would generate new vehicle trips, consisting of mostly light-duty gasoline-powered vehicles.

The U.S. EPA AERMOD dispersion model was used to predict diesel particulate matter concentrations at sensitive at off-site residences in the vicinity of the Project site.

For construction period emissions, the concentrations of emissions are estimated to exceed the SCAQMD toxic air contaminant (TAC) threshold. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 from the General Plan EIR are applicable to the Project and will be incorporated into the conditions of approval to ensure that the Project implements applicable SMMs and BAMMs. Mitigation Measure AQ-2 includes the use of applicable Level B BAMMs, which incorporate the use of construction equipment that has low DPM exhaust emissions. With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 and the proposed conditions of approval, the Project’s construction-related emissions would not exceed the maximum risk to an offsite receptor and would be considered less than significant with mitigation, and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AQ-3.

Following construction, the Project would not place residents in close proximity to high volume roads, nor close to an industrial source of TACs or a source of odorous emissions. Additionally, the Project would not site new sensitive land uses in conflict with the recommendations in CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. For example, the Project would not site sensitive land uses near a gas station, dry-cleaning operation, freeway, distribution center, or major rail service or maintenance yard. Emissions from Project traffic would be considered negligible relative to operational health risks, given that the Project is not anticipated to generate large amounts of truck trips that would involve diesel vehicles. The operational impact would be less than significant, and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AQ-3.

GP EIR Impact AQ-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to generation of odor emissions that could adversely affect a substantial number of people.

Project Analysis
Implementation of the Project would not result in major sources of odor. Minor odors from the use of equipment during construction activities would be intermittent and temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. The Project type is not one of the common types of facilities identified by SCAQMD that is known to produce odors, and would not be located near such a facility. Thus, the Project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AQ-4.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. Cumulative air quality impacts were identified in Impact AQ-5 of the General Plan EIR as significant and unavoidable given that the General Plan would not be consistent with the applicable 2021 AQAP, as projected emissions for ozone precursors (NOx and ROG) generated by buildout of the proposed General Plan Update exceeded the projected levels of these emissions in the AQAP. The General Plan build-out is also expected to generate construction and operational emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. The significant unavoidable impact was addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact, in that individual projects are rarely sufficient in size to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions may contribute to cumulative adverse air quality impacts. The Project-level analysis shows that with implementation of applicable General Plan EIR mitigation measures, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in a criteria pollutant, would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and would not create objectionable odors. The Project would not change the land use designation or zoning for the site, and is consistent with the General Plan and zoning density allowed for the site. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR. As described above, implementation of the applicable mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR would be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the Project to ensure that the Project implements all applicable SMMs and BAMMs contained in the General Plan Natural Resources Element to reduce emissions to be less than the applicable thresholds, which include the most recent SCAQMD recommendations for construction. With implementation of the applicable mitigation measures, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and therefore less than significant. No new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 22 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact AQ-5.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
The following air quality mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR and would be applicable to the Project.

AQ-1: The City shall ensure that discretionary development shall incorporate all applicable Standard Mitigation Measures (SMMs) contained in the General Plan Natural Resources Element to reduce emissions to be less than the applicable thresholds. These SMMs include but are not limited to the most recent SCAQMD recommendations for construction. SMMs retained in the General Plan Update are listed below:
• Provide energy-efficient process systems, such as water heaters, furnaces, and boiler units. • Apply nontoxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturer's specification to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).
• Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering prior to final occupancy. • All grading operations of a project shall be suspended when winds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 miles per hour as directed by the AQMD.
• All new wood burning devices shall be EPA Phase II certified. • Streets should be designed to maximize pedestrian access to transit stops. • Large residential, commercial, and industrial projects should include bus shelters at transit access points. • Provide temporary traffic control as appropriate during all phases of construction to improve traffic flow (e.g., flag person). • Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow to off-peak hours. • Water active construction sites at least twice daily as directed by the Public Works Department. • All truck hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials should 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. • Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil materials are carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend water sweeper with reclaimed water).
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip.

AQ-2: Applicants of future discretionary development projects that would generate construction-related or operational-related emissions that exceed applicable thresholds, shall include, but are not limited to, Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMs) recommended by SCAQMD, to the extent feasible and applicable to the Project. BAMMs that are deemed applicable for this Project and that would reduce emissions below significance thresholds are listed below:

Residential Level A BAMMs
• Implement all applicable SMMs.
• Contribute to traffic-flow improvements that reduce emissions and are not growth inducing (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.).
• Install an electrical outlet at the front and back of all residential units for electrical yard equipment.

Residential Level B BAMMs
• Implement all applicable SMMs and Level "A" Mitigation Measures. • Implement applicable BAMMs which incorporate the use of construction equipment that has low DPM exhaust emissions, including all off road construction equipment shall be powered by Tier 4 diesel engines.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following air quality-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#32. The following Standard Mitigation Measures (SMMs) shall be applied during grading and construction activities to control dust and particulate emissions as applicable to the project:
a. Apply nontoxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturer’s specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more).
b. Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering prior to final occupancy.

Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 23 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision c. All grading operations shall be suspended by the City Engineer when winds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 miles per hour as directed by the Air Quality Management District (AQMD). d. Provide temporary traffic control as appropriate during all phases of construction to improve traffic flow (e.g., flag person) as approved by the City Engineer.
e. Schedule construction activities that could affect traffic flow in off-peak hours as determined by the City Engineer. f. Water active construction sites at least twice daily or as directed by the Public Works Department. g. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil and/or other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet (2’) 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. h. Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil materials are carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend water sweeper with reclaimed water).
i. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip.
#33. In addition to the requirements of the California Building Code, the following operational SMMs shall be applied as appropriate to each project and as recommended by the Shasta County Air Quality Management District:
a. Provide energy-efficient process systems, such as water heaters, furnaces, and boiler units. b. All new wood burning devices shall be EPA Phase II certified. c. Large residential, commercial, and industrial projects should include bus shelters at transit access points. d. Contribute to traffic-flow improvements that reduce emissions and are not growth-inducing (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.)
e. Install an electrical outlet at the front and back of all residential units for electrical yard equipment. f. Streets should be designed to maximize pedestrian access to transit stops. #34. If the Project emissions exceed 25 lbs/day for ROG and NOx and/or 80 lbs/day of PM2.5 and PM10 after applying appropriate SMMs, apply appropriate and feasible Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMs) as identified by the Development Services Director in consultation with the Shasta County Air Quality Management District.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no air quality related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 24 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

4. Biological Resources
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
BIO-1: The proposed General Plan
Update would not have a substantial
adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations by the
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or United States Fish and
Wildlife Service.
(Appendix G question IV a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
BIO-2: The proposed General Plan would
not have a substantial adverse effect on
riparian habitat and other sensitive natural
communities identified in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations or
by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or United States Fish and
Wildlife Service.
(Appendix G question IV. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
BIO-3: The proposed General Plan would
not have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.
(Appendix G question IV. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
BIO-4: The proposed General Plan could
interfere with the movement of a 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.
(Appendix G question IV. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
BIO-5: The proposed General Plan would
not conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources
nor with the provisions of an adopted
habitat conservation plan, natural
community conservation plan, or other
approved local, regional, or State habitat
conservation plan.
(Appendix G questions IV. e & f)
No Impact No No No No No Impact Yes
BIO-6: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in significant and unavoidable
cumulative impacts with respect to
biological resources.

Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No
Significant
and
Unavoidable
Yes
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 25 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to biological resources, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on such resources. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal NR4: Preserve and protect significant habitats, plants, and wildlife that exist in the Planning Area.

Policy NR4A: Avoid development-related disturbances of sensitive habitats and “special status species” by encouraging innovative site design and planning. Ensure implementation of statutory protection for these species and require appropriate mitigation if disturbed.

Policy NR4B: Prioritize the preservation and enhancement of the fisheries of the Sacramento River and those tributary streams and stream segments depicted in Figure NR-1 and/or other streams or water bodies identified by appropriate regulatory agencies.

Policy NR4D: Provide adequate buffering of sensitive habitats based on the type of habitat, its size, value, and requirements of regulatory agencies. Work with other agencies and organizations as appropriate to establish habitat mitigation banks, habitat conservation plans, conservation easements, and other mechanisms that serve to protect sensitive habitats and species.

Goal NR5: Protect and preserve creek corridors, riparian areas, vernal pools, and wetlands.

Policy NR5A: Continue to require new development to provide at least the minimum river and creek-corridor development setbacks (buffer areas) in accordance with Figure NR-1 and the Redding Municipal Code (RMC). These setbacks may be modified based on project/resource-specific circumstances and appropriate mitigation. Consider requiring dedication of these areas to the City for open space and public uses and/or establish a permanent conservation easement granted to the City or other appropriate organizations as a condition of development approval.

Policy NR5B: In addition to the protection of the stream corridors depicted in Figure NR-1, work with project developers to also protect those secondary stream tributaries depicted in Figure NR-4, vernal pools, riparian habitats, and wetlands in their natural state to the extent feasible. Where appropriate, undertake restoration and require development buffers from these resources. The mitigation of all adverse impacts on wetland resources and, if applicable, threatened, or endangered species, is required in compliance with State and Federal regulations protecting such resources.

Policy NR5C: Encourage the acquisition, preservation, restoration, and enhancement of native vegetation with a focus on wetlands and riparian habitat that will improve the biological value and integrity of the City's natural resources. Encourage native landscape in unvegetated, manmade areas, such as along streets and in abandoned lots.

Policy NR5D: Uses allowed within riparian corridors should:
• Minimize the creation of erosion, sedimentation, and increased runoff. • Emphasize retention and enhancement of natural riparian vegetation. • Provide for unimpaired passage of fish and wildlife.
• Avoid activities or the development of new features that result in disturbance or dispersal of wildlife. • Avoid channelization to the extent feasible, except as may be necessary to preserve public safety. • Avoid substantial interference with surface and subsurface flows. • Incorporate natural vegetation buffers.

Goal NR6: Protect the aesthetic and biological value of Oak Woodlands and other natural vegetation and establish a healthy and robust urban forest.

Goal NR7: Protect habitat linkages and migratory corridors.

Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 26 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Policy NR7A: Maintain, preserve, and enhance the habitat linkages/wildlife corridors and sensitive habitats that are created by the open-space ("Greenway") network established by this General Plan. Require development in areas defined as "Greenway" to consider corridor impacts and, where necessary, provide alternate usable links between habitat types or areas and/or provide alternate development plans that avoid the open-space network and sensitive habitats.

Policy NR7B: Maintain and preserve other natural habitat linkages and wildlife corridors in the City where feasible. Discourage development impacts to these linkages and corridors and fully mitigate adverse impacts.

GP EIR Impact BIO-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to special-status species, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable GP policies aimed at preserving and enhancing areas that provide habitat for specialstatus species, and with the regulations of the Federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, California Fish and Game Code, Federal Clean Water Act, and California Native Plant Protection Act.

Project Analysis: Special-Status Plants
As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Biological Resources Assessment was completed to analyze the potential effects on special status at the Project site and off-site improvement areas (Gallaway Enterprises 2025a). As part of the assessment, botanical surveys were conducted within different portions of the Project site on September 10 and November 4, 2024. No special-status plant species were identified during the botanical surveys. Based on literature review, habitat disturbance, and on-site survey observations, the potential for special-status plants to occur on the site and off-site improvement areas is low. However, intermittent drainages and riverine habitat potentially suitable for Henderson’s bent grass, Maverick clover, and Red Bluff dwarf rush were identified. Additionally, although the Project site is not hydrologically connected to Sulphur Creek, due to the proximity in which Sulphur Creek brodiaea occurs to the area and the necessary habitat elements, there is a low potential for Sulphur Creek brodiaea to occur within the site. As the blooming periods for these plants did not fully coincide with the time of the botanical surveys, these species were unable to be positively identified.

The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to special status plants (Condition 35), which requires pre-construction rare plant surveys following State and federal guidelines, and if special-status species are found, either avoiding them during construction or implementing an approved mitigation plan. The complete text of Condition 35 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” In accordance with the City’s SCOA for Subdivisions, additional pre-construction botanical surveys will be conducted on the Project site during the appropriate survey window for Henderson’s bent grass, Maverick Clover, Red Bluff dwarf rush, and Sulphur Creek brodiaea.

If special status plant species are present, their populations will be flagged and, if possible, avoided during construction. If avoidance were not possible, then consultation with the CDFW would be conducted and on-site or off-site compensation (such as through a mitigation bank or transplanting) would be required. Therefore, the potential impact on special-status plants would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-1.

Project Analysis: Special-Status Wildlife Species
As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Biological Resources Assessment was completed to analyze the potential effects on special status species and critical habitats at the site (Gallaway Enterprises 2025a). The findings of the Biological Resources Assessment have been used as the basis of this biological resources analysis. Potential impacts related to individual species include the following:
• Migratory Birds and Raptors. Suitable nesting habitat for various avian species is present within the Project site and off-site improvement areas. During habitat assessments conducted on October 24 and 28, 2024, established nest structures were observed, primarily in the northeast corner of the Project site. All observed nest structures were inactive (i.e., not containing eggs or chicks), as the assessments took place outside the typical nesting season for the area (February 1 through August 31).

Nesting birds are protected under both California Fish and Game Code Section 3503 (active bird nests) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to migratory birds/raptors (Condition 35). This includes avoidance and minimization measures requiring that grubbing and vegetation removal are completed outside of the bird nesting season, and if not feasible, for completion of pre-construction surveys for nesting birds by a qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to the commencement of construction activities. If active nests are found in areas that could be affected and would be subject to prolonged construction-related noise, a no-disturbance buffer zone will be created around active nests until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged or the nest fails. The size of the buffer zone and types of construction activities restricted within it will be determined through coordination with the CDFW.
• Special Status Bats. The likelihood of special status bats, including pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) and Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), occurring on the Project site and off-site improvement areas is considered low. However, trees and snags with a diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than 12 inches and containing suitable features (e.g., cavities, peeling bark) may provide suitable roosting habitat. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to bats (Condition 35). This includes completion of a pre-construction survey of the study area to locate Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 27 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision maternity colonies and identify measures to protect colonies from disturbance if construction (including the removal of trees and/or snags with a greater than 12-inch DBH) occurs during the bat maternity season (mid-April to August). If a maternity colony is located, a disturbance free buffer shall be established by a qualified professional, in consultation with CDFW, to ensure the colony is protected from Project activities. Additionally, trees greater than 12-inch DBH would be removed using a two-step tree removal process to allow roosting bats to evict the roost on their own prior to removal of the tree. • Western Spadefoot. Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) is a Species of Special Concern in California and is proposed for listed as federally threatened. The nearest California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) occurrence is located approximately 9.4 miles southeast of the Project site. Suitable habitat consists of open grasslands with intermittent streams and vernal pools. Vernal pools and water sources that are ponded for a minimum of 30 days are essential for breeding and depositing eggs. Because aquatic features within the site may retain water for at least 30 days, and the surrounding grassland offers suitable conditions for aestivation, there is a potential for Western spadefoot to be present on the Project site. In accordance with the City’s SCOA for Subdivisions and General Plan Policy NR4A, the City is conditioning the Project to comply with regulations protecting special-status species and minimization measures outlined in the Project-specific biological resource reports. This includes avoidance and minimization measures requiring pre-construction surveys for Western spadefoot aligned with precipitation events when ponded water is present, and appropriate measures if identified. The complete text of the avoidance and minimization measures can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” • Crotch’s Bumble Bee. Crotch’s bumble bee (CBB) (Bombus crotchii) is listed as Candidate Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. In California, CBB inhabit woodlands, grasslands and upland scrub that contain requisite habitat elements, such as small mammal burrows. Milkweed is a preferred food source for CBB. The nearest CNDDB occurrence is located approximately 30 miles southeast of the Project site in Red Bluff in 1956. As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, focused surveys for this species were conducted at the Project site and off-site improvement areas on July 28-30 and August 13, 2025, and no CBB were observed (Gallaway Enterprises 2025b). Because there are no documented occurrences within a 20-mile radius of the Project, and focused surveys did not detect any evidence of CBB within the Project site and offsite improvement areas, the data supports that there is little risk of take, and the potential for CBB occurring is low. In accordance with the City’s SCOA for Subdivisions and General Plan Policy NR4A, the City is conditioning the Project to comply with applicable regulations and minimization measures outlined in the Project-specific biological resource reports.

This includes avoidance and minimization measures requiring coordination with CDFW on survey efforts, avoidance of individual bees during construction activities if observed, and establishment of non-disturbance buffers around CBB nest if discovered. The complete text of the avoidance and minimization measures can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” • Monarch Butterfly. Monarch butterfly (Danaus Plexippus) is a federal candidate species under the Endangered Species Act.

There are no CNDDB occurrences of monarch butterflies within Shasta County, although their migration range covers all of California. Suitable habitat includes obligate milkweed host plants (Asclepias speciosa). As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a milkweed survey was conducted at the Project site in May 2025, which identified milkweed plants in and around existing drainages (Gallaway Enterprises 2025c). Additionally, showy milkweed (Asclepias speciosa) plants have been separately observed along the southern site boundary and on BLM land adjacent to and west of the current Project site.

In accordance with the City’s SCOA for Subdivisions and General Plan Policy NR4A, the City is conditioning the Project to comply with regulations protecting special-status species and minimization measures outlined in the Project-specific biological resource reports. This includes avoidance and minimization measures if this species becomes federally listed, including protecting milkweed host plants if work occurs when monarch butterfly would potentially be present. The complete text of the avoidance and minimization measures can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.”
With required compliance with applicable General Plan policies, the City’s SCOA for Subdivisions, the minimization measures that will be made part of the conditions of approval for the Project, and regulations of the Federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, California Fish and Game Code, Federal Clean Water Act, and California Native Plant Protection Act, the potential impact relative to special-status species would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-1.

GP EIR Impact BIO-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to riparian corridors and other sensitive natural communities, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable GP policies aimed at protecting such areas, and with mandatory implementation of conditions associated with streambed alteration agreements and waste discharge requirements.

Project Analysis
The Redding General Plan Planning Area contains state-determined sensitive natural communities, including Great Valley Cottonwood, Great Valley Oak Riparian Forest, Great Valley Willow Scrub, and riparian forest in areas immediately adjacent to the Sacramento Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 28 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision River and its tributaries. The Sacramento River is located approximately one mile west and south of the site. The Project does not alter the Sacramento River riparian corridor and associated sensitive natural communities. A Biologic Resources Assessment completed as part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist did not identify sensitive natural communities or designated critical habitat on the Project site (Gallaway Enterprises, 2025a). The Project site includes clusters of blue oaks and other tree species that would require removal.

The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to tree preservation and replanting (Condition 13), which outline procedures for preserved trees to be clearly marked on plans, with protection and replacement measures to be completed in compliance with Chapter 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance. The complete text of Condition 13 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The Project will comply with the applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, and includes landscaping and planting programs to ensure that impacted trees are replaced with native tree species. Landscaping would include proposed trees, shrubs, accents, and ornamental grasses installed at public right of way areas along residential roadways, within landscaped portions of designated open space, at trailheads, within park area, as well as on private properties. The impact would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-2.

GP EIR Impact BIO-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to impacts on wetlands, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable GP policies aimed at protecting wetlands, and with mandatory implementation of conditions associated with Section 404 permits and Section 401 water quality certifications, and project specific mitigation measures for the protection of wetlands during construction activities.

Project Analysis
As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Delineation of Aquatic Resources was completed for the Project site and off-site improvement areas (Gallaway Enterprises 2025d). The delineation identified approximately 1.334 acres of aquatic resources, including two seasonal wetlands (0.077 acre), two fresh emergent wetlands (0.058 acre), and 31 features classified as “other waters of the United States” (1.2 acres). Portions of these resources at the site will be affected by the proposed development. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to permitting, waters, and wetlands (Condition 35). This includes obtaining all legally required permits and approvals from outside agencies with jurisdiction, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). In accordance with Condition 35 and General Plan Policy NR5B, the Project is required to comply with State and Federal regulations protecting water and wetlands and compensating for permanent impacts to ensure no net loss of aquatic resources. The City will be required to coordinate with regulatory agencies to either purchase credits at a minimum 1:1 ratio from an approved mitigation bank or through onsite/offsite habitat restoration at ratios determined by the permitting agencies. With mandatory compliance with the policies and regulations of the General Plan, stream corridor setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (where applicable), and required permits/approvals from outside agencies having jurisdiction on wetlands, the Project’s impact on aquatic resources would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-3.

GP EIR Impact BIO-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to migratory fish, migratory corridors, and nursery sites, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable GP policies aimed at preserving and enhancing areas, and with the regulations of the Federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and California Fish and Game Code.

Project Analysis
The General Plan Land Use Diagram depicts open-space Greenways on portions of the Project site. General Plan Policy NR7A pertains to maintaining, preserving, and enhancing the habitat linkages/wildlife corridors and sensitive habitats that are created by the openspace (“Greenway”) network. This includes requiring development in such areas to consider corridor impacts and, where necessary, provide alternate usable links between habitat types or areas and/or provide alternate development plans that avoid the open-space network and sensitive habitats. The Project design minimizes development within the Greenway corridors identified on the site, and incorporates natural drainage basins and open-space areas along the majority of the corridors.

The Project site is not located along the Sacramento River, within a 100-year floodplain, or along creeks or associated riparian corridors that represent migratory fish and wildlife corridors. The Biological Resources Assessment concluded that the riverine habitat at the site lacks sufficient water to support the presence of Central Valley DPS steelhead, Central Valley spring-run and Sacramento River winter-run ESU Chinook salmon, and southern DPS green sturgeon. No intermittent streams known to be suitable as rearing habitat for salmonids is present on the Project site.

The General Plan EIR notes several special status bird species within Redding’s Sphere of Influence. Suitable nesting habitat for various avian species is present within the Project site and off-site improvement areas. During habitat assessments conducted on October 24 and 28, 2024, established nest structures were observed, primarily in the northeast corner of the Project site. All observed nest structures were inactive (i.e., not containing eggs or chicks), as the assessments took place outside the typical nesting season for the area (February 1 through August 31). Nesting birds are protected under both California Fish and Game Code Section 3503 (active bird nests) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to complying with regulations protecting migratory and native bird species (Condition 35). This includes avoidance and minimization Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 29 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision measures requiring that grubbing and vegetation removal are completed outside of the bird nesting season, and if not feasible, for completion of pre-construction surveys for nesting birds by a qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to the commencement of construction activities. If active nests are found in areas that could be affected and would be subject to prolonged construction-related noise, a no-disturbance buffer zone would be required to be created around active nests until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged or the nest fails. The size of the buffer zone and types of construction activities restricted within it will be determined through coordination with the CDFW. With mandatory compliance with regulations protecting migratory and native bird species, the Project’s impact would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-4.

GP EIR Impact BIO-5: The GP EIR identified no impact relative to conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.

Project Analysis
There is no habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan that pertains to the Project site. As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, a Tree Survey Report was completed to identify the species, size, health, and structural condition of trees at the site (ENPLAN 2024). The Tree Survey Report evaluated 409 trees representing nine different species that have a trunk diameter of 6-inches or greater. Many of the trees identified are located in areas that are not anticipated to be impacted, including open space areas, non-developable areas, and off-site locations. However, the Project would remove up to approximately 300 trees, including blue oak, gray pine, interior live oak, Gooding’s black willow, Fremont cottonwood, crape myrtle, Raywood ash, Chinese pistache, and one redwood tree. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to tree preservation and replanting (Condition 13), which outline procedures for preserved trees to be clearly marked on plans, with protection and replacement measures to be completed in compliance with Chapter

18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance. The complete text of Condition 13 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The Project will comply with the applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, and includes landscaping and planting programs to ensure that impacted trees are replaced with native tree species.

Landscaping would include proposed trees, shrubs, accents, and ornamental grasses installed at public right of way areas along residential roadways, within landscaped portions of designated open space, at trailheads, within park area, as well as on private properties. The Project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and its impact would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-5.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. Cumulative biological impacts were identified in Impact BIO-6 of the General Plan EIR as significant and unavoidable given that future development could result in cumulative loss of habitat and sensitive natural communities in Redding and potentially contribute to a general decline for the region, and could result in the loss or displacement of wildlife that would have to compete for suitable habitats with existing adjacent populations. The significant unavoidable impact was addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Since development outside Redding is beyond the City’s ability to regulate or control, the cumulative change was identified as having the potential to rise to a level of significance and was treated as a significant and unavoidable impact. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project would comply with existing local, state, and federal regulations, including all applicable policies of the General Plan that mitigate impacts to sensitive biological resources, including special-status species, sensitive natural communities, federally protected wetlands, and wildlife and fish movement corridors. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact BIO-6.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to biological resources, as impacts were determined to be less than significant given that projects must comply with applicable General Plan policies, federal and state environmental regulations, permits, and mitigation measures that safeguard sensitive habitats, wetlands, and special-status species. General Plan policy NR4A requires Project avoidance and statutory protections for sensitive habitats and special status species, and conditions from the City’s Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 30 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Standard Conditions of Approval for Tentative Subdivision Maps would also be applicable to the Project, which are summarized below.

SCOA for Subdivisions - Biological Resources
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following biological-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#12. Subdivision clearing, grading, and erosion-control plans shall be in full conformance with Section 16.12 of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance. The final grading improvement plans shall be consistent with the preliminary grading plan and any tree-preservation plans considered with the approved tentative map. #13. All trees identified for preservation shall be clearly identified on the subdivision improvement plans. A tree construction/protection plan shall be prepared by a qualified (tree) professional in accordance with Chapter 18.45, Tree Management, of the Zoning Ordinance and included as part of the subdivision grading improvement-plan package. Treeprotection measures identified in the tree construction/protection plan shall be reflected in the final subdivision improvement plans and followed during construction. Tree replacement and/or planting shall be in accordance with the provisions of Chapter

18.45. #35. Minimization measures shall be implemented, as outlined in project-specific biological resource reports to address potential impacts to any identified special status species that occur or may occur on the site. Protocols or other guidance established by applicable resources agencies shall be utilized to determine the presence of such species as appropriate. In addition, the following measures shall be specifically applied as appropriate for the project:
a. Bats
If vegetation removal and/or construction activities are to occur during the roosting season (March 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey no more than seven (7) days before vegetation removal or construction activities begin. If an active roost is found, a non-disturbance buffer shall be established for a distance of five hundred feet (500’) around the nest unless a smaller buffer zone is approved by CDFW. Construction may resume once the young have left the nest or as approved by the qualified biologist. The survey shall be provided to the CDFW. If a lapse in construction activities of fourteen (14) days or more occurs during the roosting season, an additional roost survey is required to ensure no roosts were established in the area while construction was on hold. Minimum qualifications for a Qualified Biologist include a bachelor’s degree in biological or environmental science, natural resources management, or related discipline; field experience in the habitat types that may occur at the project site; familiarity with the Covered Species (or closely related species) that may occur at the project site; and prior preconstruction survey, construction monitoring, or construction oversight experience (if and as relevant to the activity to be conducted). b. Migratory Birds/Raptors
If feasible, vegetation removal and/or construction shall be conducted between September 1 and January 31. If vegetation removal and/or construction activities are to occur during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey no more than seven (7) days before vegetation removal or construction activities begin. If an active nest is found, a non-disturbance buffer shall be established by a qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW. Construction may resume once the young have left the nest or as approved by the qualified biologist. The survey shall be provided to the CDFW. If construction activities cease for a period greater than seven (7) days, additional preconstruction surveys will be required.
c. Invertebrates
If the delineation of aquatic resources and biological assessment prepared for the project indicates that vernal pool shrimp species may be impacted, the project applicant shall carry out one of the following two actions regarding vernal pool fairy shrimp and vernal pool tadpole shrimp:
1) Retain a qualified biologist to conduct protocol-level surveys for federally-listed vernal pool shrimp to determine presence/absence and appropriate mitigation. The biologist shall prepare a report with the methods and results of such surveys and submit the report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of Redding Development Services Director;
or,
2) Assume the presence of federally-listed vernal pool shrimp and mitigate, at a ratio as approved by the appropriate federal and state regulatory agencies, for all impacts on shrimp habitat in accordance with state and federal requirements.

Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 31 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision d. Special Status Plants
The applicant shall have a pre-construction rare plant survey of the proposed disturbance area or other project features that may impact special status plant species on the project site. The survey must be conducted by a qualified botanist during the appropriate survey window for rare and endangered plants that have the potential to occur within the project site if such a survey has not been provided to the City. Surveys shall follow the most current version of the California Native Plant Society Botanical Survey Guidelines, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Plant Species Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities and U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed and Candidate Plants. If special status plant species are present, their populations will be flagged and, if possible, avoided during construction. If avoidance is not possible, a plan will be developed for approval by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife which may include transplanting the plant population, compensation, or other measures established by the agency. e. Aquatic Resources
1) Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any potential federal and/or state jurisdictional waters, as identified in the project aquatic resource delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that all applicable resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the USACOE, CDFW, CVRWQCB, USFWS, or any other applicable agency identified through the permitting process, or that all applicable resource agencies have determined that the identified aquatic resources are not jurisdictional
2) Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures shall be in place prior to the onset of construction activities near jurisdictional waters and in project areas where there is a potential for surface water runoff to drain into jurisdictional waters. The measures shall be monitored and maintained until construction activities have ceased. 3) High-visibility fencing, flagging, or markers shall be installed along the edges of the work zone near avoided waters and riparian areas. In addition, equipment entry and exit points and staging, storage, and stockpile areas must be clearly marked prior to the entry of mechanical equipment or vehicles into the construction area.

Project Specific Minimization Measures - Biological Resources In accordance with SCOA # 35 of the City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, minimization measures shall be implemented, as outlined in project-specific biological resource reports to address potential impacts to any identified special status species that occur or may occur on the site. The following measures were outlined in a Biological Resources Assessment that was completed for the Project (Gallaway Enterprises 2025a).

Henderson’s Bent Grass, Maverick Clover, Red Bluff Dwarf Rush, and Sulphur Creek Brodiaea Consistent with the City of Redding's Standard Conditions of Approval (COA) for Tentative Subdivision Maps, implement COA #35, with the following specifics. If impacts to the drainages present within the BSA are proposed, it is recommended that pre-construction CDFW protocol-level surveys be conducted during the appropriate survey windows (i.e., blooming periods) for Henderson’s bent grass, Maverick Clover, Red Bluff dwarf rush, and Sulphur Creek brodiaea by a qualified botanist to determine presence or absence within the BSA. If special-status botanical species are observed within the BSA, then avoidance and minimization measures that are recognized by CDFW shall be implemented based on the level of potential impacts. Minimization options recognized include:

1. The Project shall be designed to avoid or minimize impacts to areas where special-status botanical species occur and maintain protective elements such as fencing, open space or conservation easements, and/or buffer zones around suitable habitat where special-status botanical species occur prior to construction activities, and/or;

2. If the Project cannot completely avoid impacts to special-status botanical species, then consultation with the CDFW shall be conducted. As a result of consultation with CDFW, minimization measures may include collecting seeds and/or transplanting the impacted plants, or on-site and offsite compensation.

Crotch’s Bumble Bee (CBB)
To avoid impacts to CBB, the following are recommended avoidance and minimization measures:
• Continue coordinating with CDFW on CBB survey efforts, including submitting the 2025 survey report. Based on the low likelihood of CBB presence and site-specific conditions, such as no documented occurrences within a 20-mile radius and no individuals observed during the initial survey, confirm whether CDFW recommends additional surveys. • If CBB or other species of bumble bees are observed during Project activities, allow the bumble bee to leave the work area under its own volition and notify a qualified biologist of the observation to determine appropriate avoidance measures. • If a CBB nest is discovered during surveys or construction activities, the qualified biologist shall establish a non-disturbance Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 32 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision buffer around the suitable nesting habitat and CDFW should be consulted. No work shall occur within the buffer until the nest is confirmed to be inactive.
• If CBB are discovered to be present at the site, then it is advised that a CESA incidental Take Permit (ITP) is obtained prior to construction activities occurring in the buffer area defined by the biologist in coordination with CDFW.

Monarch Butterfly
If, during the review of the Project or the implementation of development of the Project, monarch butterfly becomes listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act, the following are recommended avoidance and minimization measures to avoid impacts to monarch butterflies:
• Any vegetation removal/ground disturbing activities should be conducted between November 1 through March 15, when monarchs are not likely to be present.
• If vegetation removal/ground disturbing activities cannot be conducted between November 1 through March 15, then a survey of milkweed shall be conducted, and protection buffers shall be established around the milkweed plants, as determined by a qualified biologist.
• If a monarch butterfly is observed during Project activities, allow the monarch butterfly to leave the work area on its own accord.
• Occurrences of milkweed should be avoided to the greatest extent practicable. • Consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall be initiated. The results of the consultation efforts with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall be incorporated into the Project activities, and any additional conditions adhered to.

Western Spadefoot
To avoid impacts to Western spadefoot, the following are recommended avoidance and minimization measures:
• Prior to the start of construction, two (2) nighttime pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during and/or immediately following separate precipitation events that occur between October and May, when ponded water is present. • Should any life stage of western spadefoot be found within the Project site, CDFW shall be consulted prior to initiation of Project activities.
• If listed under the Federal ESA, and there is any life stage of western spadefoot toad found within the Project site, USFWS shall be consulted prior to initiation of Project activities.

Migratory Birds and Raptors
Consistent with the City of Redding's Standard Conditions of Approval (COA) for Tentative Subdivision Maps, implement COA #35, with the following specifics. To avoid impacts to avian species protected under the MBTA and the CFGC, Project activities should occur outside of the typical nesting season (February 1 - August 31) whenever feasible. When work is planned to occur within the nesting season for migratory birds and raptors, the following are recommended avoidance and minimization measures to be implemented:
• If work is proposed during the nesting season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within seven (7) days prior to the initiation of any site disturbing activities for nesting birds and raptors within and within 500 feet, where accessible, of the BSA, followed by a results report. • If an active nest is identified during the pre-construction survey, a non-disturbance buffer will be established by the qualified biologist, in consultation with CDFW and USFWS, to comply Fish and Game Code sections 3503 and 3503.5 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
• The non-disturbance buffer defined by the qualified biologist will be established based on the species, nest type and tolerance to disturbance. Construction activity shall be prohibited within the buffer zones until the young have fledged, or the nest fails.

Nests shall be monitored by a qualified biologist once per week; or more frequently as requested by CDFW or USFWS; and a nesting status report shall be submitted to the CEQA lead agency upon the nest status being deemed as inactive by the biologist. • If feasible, grubbing and vegetation removal should be initiated outside of the bird-nesting season (February 1 through August 31). If grubbing and vegetation removal cannot be initiated outside of the bird nesting season, then the following shall occur:
• A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey within and within 500-feet of the BSA, where accessible, within seven (7) days prior to the start grubbing or vegetation removals, followed by a results report. • All vegetation and grubbing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to minimize impacts to nesting birds and other native wildlife.
• Removal or burning of slash piles should be initiated outside of the bird-nesting season (February 1 through August 31). If removal or burning of slash piles cannot be initiated outside of the bird nesting season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 33 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision survey of the slash piles for nesting birds within and within 500-feet, where accessible, of the slash pile, followed by a results report. Removal and burning of slash piles shall not occur until a qualified biologist determines that there are no active nests within the piles.

Pallid Bat and Western Red Bat
Consistent with the City of Redding's Standard Conditions of Approval (COA) for Tentative Subdivision Maps, implement COA #35, with the following specifics. To avoid impacts to bats, the following are recommended avoidance and minimization measures:
• Trees and/or snags with a greater than 12” DBH should be removed and/or fallen at dusk from September 1 through April 15 outside of the bat maternity season (mid-April to August) and when ambient temperatures are above 45 degrees Fahrenheit. • If tree removal cannot be performed outside of the maternity season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a bat habitat assessment (survey) of suitable roosting habitat within seven (7) days prior to tree removal activities, followed by a results report. • Trees greater than 12” DBH should be removed using a two-step tree removal process to allow roosting bats to evict the roost on their own prior to removal of the tree. A two-step tree removal process is conducted as follows:

Day 1: Remove all limbs/branches that are void of any roosting bat habitat potential (cavities, crevices, or exfoliating bark) from the tree to create a change to the microclimate within the tree that may be unappealing to bats roosting within the tree.

Additionally, remove small-diameter trees and brush in the area of the larger trees to create changes to the surrounding environment of the tree and to create noise and vibration to encourage bats to vacate the roost on their own. The tree shall be left for 24 hours to allow bats to vacate the roost. No heavy equipment shall be used on Day 1. Only hand tools (i.e. chainsaws, loppers, weed eaters, etc.)
Day 2: Remove the entire tree.
• A qualified bat biologist must be on-site during any alteration or disturbance to or in the area of an active bat roost.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no biological resource related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 34 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

5. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
CULT-1: The proposed General Plan
could cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5.
(Appendix G question V. a)
Significant and
Unavoidable No No No No Less than Significant Yes
CULT-2: The proposed General Plan
could cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an archeological
resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5.
(Appendix G question V. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
CULT-3: The proposed General Plan
would not disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries.
(Appendix G question V. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
TCR-1: The proposed General Plan
would not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code Sections, 21074,
5020.1(k), or 5024.1
(Appendix G questions XVIII. a & b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
CULT-5: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in less-than-significant cumulative
impacts with respect to cultural and tribal
resources.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to cultural and tribal cultural resources, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on such resources. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal NR9: Protect and enhance historically and culturally significant resources within the Planning Area.

Policy NR9A: Strive to ensure the protection of prehistoric, cultural, and archaeological resources during the development process.

Consult with local Wintu tribes as appropriate to help identify and preserve cultural resources during the development review process.

Policy NR9B: Require that any human remains discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the City be treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws.

Policy NR9C: Continue to consult and require record searches for discretionary projects with the Northeast Center of the California Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 35 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) located at the CSU Chico. Consult with and distribute environmental review documents to the Native American Heritage Commission through the State Clearinghouse.

Policy NR9D: Encourage partnerships to identify, preserve, protect, and/or restore historic buildings, structures, landmarks, and important cultural resources.

GP EIR Impact CULT-1: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to the potential for future development to adversely impact historic resources through changes to accommodate adaptive reuse, removal, or reconstruction. The impact was addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the GP EIR.

Project Analysis
On February 5, 2024, a record search was conducted at the Northeast Information Center (NEIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) in Chico, California. Records were examined within the Project boundaries and within an approximate one-quarter mile radius around the site. According to the NEIC record search, and the California Built Environment Resource Database (BERD), there are no built environment properties identified within the Project site or off-site improvement areas listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI), California Inventory of Historic Resources (CIHR), and California State Historic Landmarks (CHL). Additionally, the Project is not located within a local historic district, as none have been formally designated by the City of Redding. It is also outside the boundaries of the state-designated Redding Cultural District and is not situated within Downtown Redding, Turtle Bay, or the riverfront park areas that comprise the Cultural District (California Arts Council 2025). Based on the review, the Project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Therefore, the Project impact would be less than described in the General Plan EIR, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact CULT-1. Please refer to Impact CULT2 for an evaluation of potential historic-period archaeological resources.

GP EIR Impact CULT-2 and TCR-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable regulatory requirements that would mitigate potential impacts, including GP policies, state policies and regulations under the California Public Resources Code, and City SCOAs for subdivisions.

Project Analysis
The Redding General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions to address potential archaeological and tribal cultural resource impacts.

Policy NR9A strives to ensure protection of prehistoric, cultural, and archaeological resources during the development process and requires consultation with local Wintu tribes to help identify and preserve cultural resources during the development review process.

In accordance with Policy NR9A, on April 11, 2024, the City issued letters to the following tribes, which included formal notification of the Project to applicable tribal representatives pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1(b):
• Nor-Rel-Muk Nation
• Winnemem Wintu Nation
• Wintu Tribe of Northern California
• Grindstone Indian Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki Indians of California • Pit River Tribe
• Redding Rancheria
• Shasta Indian Nation
• Greenville Rancheria
• Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians
• Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians
On April 17, 2024, Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians responded that the tribe is not aware of known cultural resources on site.

The tribe noted that it has a process to protect cultural resources if encountered, and provided tribal contact information in the event tribal cultural items or Native American human remains are found during construction. No other responses from tribes were received for the Project pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1(b).

The Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians also responded as part of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) review process, as did the Wintu Tribe of Northern California, and the Shasta Indian Nation. The Mooretown Rancheria indicated that the tribe is not aware of any known cultural resources on site. The Shasta Indian Nation stated that the Project is located outside their Tribal area. The Wintu Tribe of Northern California indicated that the Project site includes areas of cultural significance at risk of being impacted by the Project’s construction, and requested a copy of the Phase I Archaeological Resources Study completed for the Project, which was shared with the Tribe.

General Plan policy NR9C directs the completion of consultation with the Northeast Center of the California Historical Resources Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 36 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Information System (CHRIS) to conduct archaeological record searches for discretionary projects. As part of a Phase I Archaeological Resources Study completed for the Project (Historic Resource Associates 2025), a records and literature search was conducted at the Northeast Information Center, as well as a review of publications, files, and maps for ethnographic, historic-era, and prehistoric resources and background information. The study also included communication with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a review of the Sacred Lands File, and completion of a pedestrian archaeological survey of the Project site and offsite improvement areas.

According to the NEIC record search, two previously completed cultural resource surveys have been prepared that encompass the Project site and off-site improvement areas. The location of two previously identified archaeological resources were documented within close proximity to a portion of the Project site. Based upon NEIC records, neither archaeological site had been formally evaluated for the California Register of Historic Resource (CRHR) or the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As part of the Phase I Archaeological Resources Study completed for the Project, pedestrian archaeological surveys were conducted by walking 1-meter transects in areas identified as sensitive for archaeological resources, including the locations of the two previously recorded archeological resources. In areas of lower sensitivity, surveys were conducted by walking transects spaced 5 to 10 meter apart. The pedestrian archaeological surveys did not identify evidence of the previously mapped archaeological resources, nor any other archaeological resources. The intensity of the 2018 wildfire is believed to have caused damage to both archaeological sites, including the fracturing of rocks and disturbance of any surface-level historical artifacts. Additionally, the review of the NAHC Sacred Lands File did not identify known tribal resources on the Project site.

General Plan policy NR9D encourages partnerships to identify, preserve, protect, and/or restore important cultural resources. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to cultural resources (Conditions 36 and 37), which outline procedures for tribal consultation, archaeological monitoring, and respectful treatment of discovered cultural or human remains during development. The complete text of Conditions 36 and 37 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” In accordance with General Plan Policy NR9D and SCOA 37, the City is conditioning the Project to include archaeological and Native American monitoring during ground-disturbing activities within a 50-meter radius of the two previously identified archaeological resources. The City will also coordinate with the Wintu Tribe of Northern California to support additional construction monitoring where necessary. Implementation of General Plan policies, state policies and regulations under the California Public Resources Code, the City’s SCOAs for subdivisions, and Project avoidance and minimization measures would be followed to preserve and/or record any resources consistent with appropriate laws and requirements, including any unknown or previously unanticipated resources in the event of discovery of during Project construction.

Therefore, the Project impact on archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact CULT-2 and TCR-1.

GP EIR Impact CULT-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to potential disturbance of human remains, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable regulatory requirements that would mitigate potential impacts, including GP policies, and policies and regulations under the California Health and Safety Code and California Public Resources Code.

Project Analysis
Based on consultations with the Northeast CHRIS, the NAHC, and tribal representatives, no human remains have been documented on the Project site. Additionally, no remains were observed or recorded during archaeological surveys conducted as part of the Project's Phase I Archaeological Resources Study. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, mandate the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. In such a scenario, the Project would be required to adhere to existing law and General Plan policies, such as Policy NR9B, which requires that any human remains discovered during implementation of projects within the City be treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws. Additionally, the City’s SCOAs for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to potential disturbance of human remains (Condition 37), which outline procedures for respectful treatment of discovered cultural or human remains during development. The complete text of Condition 37 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” Therefore, compliance with policies in the General Plan and the City’s SCOA for subdivisions ensure that impacts to human remains would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact CULT-3.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on cultural resources. Cumulative cultural impacts were identified in Impact CULT-5 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that future development in Redding would be subject to federal and State laws protecting cultural resources, including the goals and policies of General Plan that protect historical, archaeological and tribal cultural resources and human remains, in combination with federal and State regulations.

The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project would comply with existing local, state, and federal regulations, including all applicable policies of the General Plan that mitigate impacts to cultural resources. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact CULT-5.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to cultural resources, as impacts to archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources, and human remains were determined to be less than significant given that projects must comply with applicable regulatory requirements, including General Plan policies, state environmental laws under the California Public Resources and Health and Safety Codes, and the City’s Subdivision Code of Ordinances, that minimize potential environmental effects.

SCOA for Subdivisions - Cultural Resources
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following cultural resources-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#36. If the City is made aware of a Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR) as identified in Public Resources Code § 21074, the City shall consult with the culturally affiliated tribe(s) to preserve the potential resources during the development review process. #37. If a cultural resources analysis identifies an existing archaeological, historical or cultural resource site, or concludes that the development area of the project has high potential for buried cultural resources, the following steps shall be taken:
a. A qualified professional Archaeologist, who meets the Federal Secretary of Interior’s Standards (36 CFR Part 61), shall identify an Archaeological Monitoring Area (AMA), shall prepare a Cultural Resources Management/Monitoring Plan, and shall monitor all ground disturbing work activities within the AMA. If unanticipated resources that are not human remains are found during construction the Archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily pause ground disturbance within a 30-foot radius of the find until an assessment of resources can take place. If the archaeologist determines that previously unevaluated prehistoric artifacts, midden soils, or other TCRs were discovered, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the City of Redding as well as any culturally affiliated Tribe to consult on appropriate and respectful treatment. Construction activities could continue in other areas of the project site. b. If human remains are discovered, in accordance with State law, all work shall halt within 50 feet of the remains. The archaeologist and/or contractor shall immediately notify the City of Redding, the Shasta County Sheriff, and the Shasta County Coroner and should it be determined that the human remains are Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted by the Shasta County Coroner and the State Historic Preservation Officer within 24 hours pursuant to Public Resources Code §5097.98. The NAHC appoints and notifies a Tribe that is the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) who then has 48 hours after accessing the property to provide recommendations regarding treatment of the discovery. Provisions for treatment of said remains shall be determined through consultation with the City, landowner and MLD, in compliance with State laws. Work shall not resume until a plan between the MLD and the City has been agreed upon. The City shall inform the Developer of permission to resume construction activities in the area of discovery.

Project Specific Minimization Measures - Cultural Resources Consistent with the City of Redding’s SCOA for Tentative Subdivision Maps, Condition 37 shall be implemented as follows: Based on the findings of the Phase I Archaeological Study completed for the Project, archaeological and Native American monitoring is recommended during all ground-disturbing activities within a 50-meter radius of the two previously identified archaeological resources.

The City shall also coordinate with the Wintu Tribe of Northern California to support additional construction monitoring where necessary.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no cultural resource related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 38 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 39 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

6. Energy
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
ENE-1: Implementation of the General
Plan Update would not result in
potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy
resources.
(Appendix G question VI. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
ENE-2: The proposed General Plan
would not conflict with or obstruct a State
or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency.
(Appendix G question VI. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
ENE-3: The proposed General Plan
would not require or result in the
relocation or construction of new or
expanded energy facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects.
(Not included in Appendix G)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
ENE-4: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in less-than-significant cumulative
impacts with respect to energy.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to energy resources, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on energy resources. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal NR11: Support the State’s clean energy initiatives through policies and procedures that align with the electrification, conservation, and renewable energy goals of the City.

Policy NR11B: Continue to utilize the California Green Building Standards Code in commercial and residential construction to address energy and other resource efficiencies.

GP EIR Impact ENE-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to energy, including wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, as well as GP policies aimed at reducing energy impacts.

Project Analysis
During the grading and construction phases of the Project, the primary energy source utilized would be petroleum from construction equipment and vehicle trips. To a lesser extent, electricity would also be consumed for the temporary electric power for as-necessary lighting and electronic equipment. Energy use during construction would be characterized as short-term, representing a small demand on local and regional fuel supplies that would be adequately accommodated and would be temporary. Construction contractors would be required to minimize nonessential idling of construction equipment during construction in accordance with the California Code of Regulations Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449. Such required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption during construction.

Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 40 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Project operation would result in energy consumption in the form of electricity for heating and cooling of buildings, generation of hot water, lighting of indoor and outdoor spaces, and providing power to various forms of equipment. The Project would also result in energy use associated with disposal of solid waste and for pumping, distribution, and treatment of Project-related water and wastewater demands, as well as energy use associated with vehicle trips. The Project would be subject to the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations. Title 24, Part 6 applies to all new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings, and regulates energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting.

Compliance with federal, state, and local regulations (e.g., Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, Renewable Portfolio Standards, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, Advanced Clean Cars Program, Zero-Emission Vehicles Mandate and Senate Bill 350 provisions) would increase building energy efficiency and vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce building energy demand and transportation-related fuel usage. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation for the site and would result in electricity usage roughly equivalent to what has been anticipated within the General Plan. The Project would also comply with the Landscape Ordinance (Chapter 18.47 of the Redding Municipal Code) to reduce overall water use onsite thereby reducing energy usage required at water treatment facilities. The Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy use throughout Project operations. Further, the energy demands of the Project can be accommodated within the context of available Redding Electric Utility’s (REU) resources and energy delivery systems. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact on energy resources related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact ENE-1.

GP EIR Impact ENE-2 and ENE-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to conflicts with a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and relocation or expansion of energy facilities.

Project Analysis
The statewide Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements do not directly apply to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy providers, whose compliance with RPS requirements would contribute to the State of California objective of transitioning to renewable energy. The Project would follow Title 24 standards where applicable, including the current and future iterations of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen. The Project also would be subject to compliance with applicable General Plan policies related to energy consumption and energy efficiency, which would support the Statewide goal of transitioning the electricity grid to renewable sources. There would be no conflict with a State or local plan for renewable energy. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation and would result in electricity usage roughly equivalent to what has been anticipated within the General Plan. The Project would not include natural gas connections for residential and nonresidential land uses. The Project would not directly result in the construction or relocation of new or expanded energy facilities beyond those identified as part of the Project. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact ENE-2 and ENE-3.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvement area would include an underground utility extension to Buenaventura Road which would include electrical power lines. This would be accessible to potential future development but would not be utilized as part of this Project. The off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and planning area of the General Plan 2045, and the off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan 2045. The off-site improvements would not result in impacts to energy related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption, conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan, or would require relocation or construction of new or expanded energy facilities. Therefore, the off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact ENE-1 through Impact ENE-3.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on energy resources. Cumulative energy impacts were identified in Impact ENE-4 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that projects within the City would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, California Building Code, as well as General Plan policies aimed at reducing energy impacts and aligning with the state’s goals for carbon neutrality. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project would follow Title 24 standards where applicable, including the current and future iterations of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen. The Project also would be subject to compliance with applicable General Plan policies related to energy consumption and energy efficiency. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation for the site and would result in electricity usage roughly equivalent to what has been anticipated within the General Plan.

Therefore, the conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts are still valid, as the Project would not result in new substantial growth that was not evaluated in the General Plan EIR’s cumulative analysis. The Project’s contribution to cumulative Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 41 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact ENE-4.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to energy, and no additional energy-related standard conditions of approval apply to tentative subdivision map projects.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no energy related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 42 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

7. Geology and Soils
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
GEO-1: The proposed General Plan
would not exacerbate hazards from
surface rupture of a known active fault,
strong seismic ground shaking, seismicrelated ground failure, or landslides. (Appendix G question VII. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
GEO-2: The proposed General Plan
would not result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil.
(Appendix G question VII. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
GEO-3: The proposed General Plan
would not result in a significant impact
related to development on a geologic unit
or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
projects, and potentially result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.
(Appendix G question VII. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
GEO-4: The proposed General Plan
would not create substantial risks to life
or property as a result of its location on
expansive soil, as defined in Section
1803.5.3 of the California Building Code,
creating substantial direct or indirect risks
to life or property.
(Appendix G question VII. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
GEO-5: The proposed General Plan
would not utilize septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where soils would be incapable of
adequately supporting the in cases where
sewers are not available for the disposal
of wastewater.
(Appendix G question VII. e)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
GEO-6: The proposed General Plan
development would not directly or
indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or unique
geologic feature.
(Appendix G question VII. f)
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
GEO-7: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in less-than-significant cumulative
impacts with respect to geology and soils.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 43 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to geology and soils, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal PS1: Minimize the loss of life, injury, and property damage due to seismic and geologic hazards.

Policy PS1A: Continue to require that new structures and alterations to existing structures comply with the seismic safety requirements of the California Building Code (CBC); adopt updated provisions of the CBC related to seismic safety as they become available.

Policy PS1B: Geotechnical investigations for proposed developments on sites with potential hazards, including necessary infrastructure in areas determined to have a “high” liquefaction potential shall be prepared as may be required by the Building Official.

Policy PS1C: As may be required by the Building Official and/or City Engineer, project proponents shall determine the landslide, slope-instability, and erosion potential of proposed development sites located in potential hazard areas. Consider utilizing building setbacks, grading techniques, or appropriate measures when constructing in or near unstable areas.

Goal NR1: Minimize soil erosion and sedimentation problems resulting from development activities; improve the quality of stormwater runoff.

Policy NR1D: Ensure that erosion control devices are installed and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the grading ordinance, NPDES, conditions of granting permit approval, and any other applicable requirements; and that project monitoring and erosion-control enforcement activities are undertaken to ensure that that the facilities function effectively.

GP EIR Impact GEO-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to hazards from surface rupture of a known active fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, or landslides.

Project Analysis
Based on the Project’s Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (MPE 2024), Figure 5.7-2 of the General Plan EIR, and official Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone maps, neither the Project site nor the off-site improvement areas are located within an AlquistPriolo Zone or along any known active, potentially active, or inactive fault traces. The Project is required to comply with the latest version of the California Building Standards Code, which contains criteria and standards designed to reduce ground rupture risks. No impact from fault rupture would result.

The Project site is located in an area designated in the Public Safety Element of the General Plan as having a moderately-low groundshaking potential in the event of a major earthquake on a regional fault. In accordance with General Plan policy PS-1A, the Project is required to comply with the seismic safety requirements of the California Building Code, which contains seismic building criteria and standards that are designed to reduce ground shaking risks to acceptable levels. Based on the Project’s Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (MPE 2024), the soil and rock conditions encountered during the subsurface investigation meet the criteria for Site Classification C, as defined by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Site Class C would be used to determine seismic design parameters in accordance with the California Building Code. In addition, a soils compaction report with proposed foundation recommendations would be required to be approved before the issuance of a building permit. Because the Project would be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and with Project-specific recommendations contained in a soils report and design-level geotechnical studies, the potential impact related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

As determined in the General Plan EIR, the soils and underlying geology at the Project site are identified as having low potential for liquefaction. The Project site is not located on or near documented landslide hazard areas, and no evidence of ground slippage or subsidence occurring naturally on the site are known. The Project will be required to comply with the City’s Grading Ordinance and California Building Standards Code, and a soils and geotechnical investigation report is required prior to approval of a building permit and appropriate recommendations of the report will be incorporated into the Project. Because the Project would be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and with Project-specific recommendations contained in design-level geotechnical studies, the potential impact related t seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides, would be less than significant.

Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 44 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Overall, the Project impact relative to hazards from surface rupture of a known active fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismicrelated ground failure, or landslides would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-1.

GP EIR Impact GEO-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to potential soil erosion, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable GP goals and policies, in combination with the Redding Grading Ordinance and other State and local erosion control requirements.

Project Analysis
Based on the Project’s Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (MPE 2024), the Project site contains two primary soil classifications: Auburn very stony loam, 8 to 30 percent slopes, and Red Bluff loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes. Auburn very stony loam, 8 to 30 percent slopes, is well drained and has moderate runoff with a low hazard of erosion. Red Bluff loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, is well drained and has high runoff with a moderate hazard of erosion. Exploratory test pits excavated during the subsurface investigation encountered native Red Bluff Formation soils and Copley Greenstone metavolcanic rock. The Project would be required to comply with the Grading Ordinance in the City’s Municipal Code, which includes requirements for control of erosion due to construction activities.

The City and/or the contractor would also be required to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that would comply with applicable erosion and sediment control measures contained in the City’s municipal storm water permit and the State Water Board’s Construction General Permit. Both the City and State permits require the implementation of erosion control measures in order to prevent soil erosion and the resulting sedimentation or other pollution of nearby bodies of water. Because the Project would preserve topsoil on site, if suitable, and would implement applicable erosion and sediment control measures during construction, the potential impact related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than significant, and the impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-2.

GP EIR Impact GEO-3 and GEO-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to potential unstable or expansive soils, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable GP goals and policies, in combination with the Redding Grading Ordinance and other State and local erosion control requirements.

Project Analysis
Exploratory test pits excavated for the Project’s Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (MPE 2024) encountered native Red Bluff Formation soils and Copley Greenstone metavolcanic rock. Results indicate the soils on the Project site possess “high” to “very high” expansion potential. The Project is required to comply with the City’s Grading Ordinance and California Building Standards Code. In order to assure that any proposed buildings are adequately supported, a Soils Engineering Report is required as part of the Building Permit process. This Report will evaluate the strength of underlying soils and make recommendations on the design of building foundation systems to demonstrate that buildings meet the structural stability standards required by the California Building Standards Code. The Report must be approved by the City prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. With this standard requirement, in addition to compliance with the City’s Grading Ordinance and implementation of standard engineering techniques, impacts would be less than significant, and the impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-3 and GEO-4.

GP EIR Impact GEO-5:The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to use of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Project Analysis
Project-generated wastewater would be conveyed through Redding’s wastewater collection system. The Project does not involve the construction or use of septic systems or an alternative wastewater disposal system. No impact would result, and the impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-5.

GP EIR Impact GEO-6: The GP EIR identified potential significant impacts relative to paleontological resources or unique geological features. The GP EIR includes Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2 to reduce the potential impact to undiscovered paleontological resources to a less-than-significant level by addressing discovery of unanticipated buried resources and preserving and/or recording those resources consistent with appropriate laws and requirements.

Project Analysis
Geologic mapping indicates the Project site is underlain by Pleistocene age Red Bluff Formation soils overlying Devonian age Copley Greenstone metavolcanic rock. Exploratory test pits excavated for the Project’s Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (MPE 2024) also encountered native Red Bluff Formation soils and Copley Greenstone metavolcanic rock. The overlying Pleistocene age Red Bluff Formation has an elevated paleontological sensitivity. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, development allowed under the General Plan Update may result in impacts to paleontological resources or unique geological features. Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2 from the General Plan EIR would be applicable to the Project, which address the potential scenario of discovering unanticipated paleontological resources during construction, and preserving and/or recording such resources consistent with appropriate laws and requirements. Additionally, the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to paleontological resources (Condition 38). The complete text of Mitigation Measures GEO-1, GEO-2, and Condition Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 45 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision 38 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1, GEO-2, and the City’s SCOA, the Project’s impact on paleontological resources would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-6.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Additionally, Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2 of the General Plan EIR and the City’s SCOA Condition 38 would apply to the off-site improvements, reducing the potential impact on undiscovered paleontological resources to a less-than-significant level.

Therefore, the off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-1 through Impact GEO6.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on geology and soils. Cumulative impacts were identified in Impact GEO-7 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that projects within the City would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, California Building Standards Code, General Plan policies, State and local regulations addressing building construction, and Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2. Development projects throughout the City and in other communities would also be subject to federal, State, and local policies and regulations that would address seismic and geologic hazard impacts. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Overall, federal, State, and local policies and regulations would address potential local and site-specific impacts associated with geology and soils. The Project’s contribution to cumulative geology and soil impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GEO-7.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

The following mitigation measures from the General Plan EIR, along with the City’s standard conditions of approval related to paleontology, would be applicable to the Project.

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR and would be applicable to the Project.

GEO-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for projects involving ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas mapped with “low-to-high” paleontological sensitivity, the project applicant shall consult with a geologist or paleontologist to confirm whether the grading would occur at depths that could encounter highly sensitive sediments for paleontological resources. If confirmed that underlying sediments may have sensitivity, construction activity shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. The paleontologist shall have the authority to halt construction during ground-disturbing activities, as outlined in Mitigation Measure GEO-2.

GEO-2 In the event of any fossil discovery, regardless of depth or geologic formation, ground-disturbing activities shall halt within a 50-foot radius of the find until its significance can be determined by a qualified paleontologist. Significant fossils shall be recovered, prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and deposited in a designated paleontological curation facility, in accordance with the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. The repository shall be identified, and a curatorial arrangement shall be signed prior to collection of the fossils.

SCOA for Subdivisions – Geology (Paleontology)
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following paleontological-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#38. If a project is located in a paleontologically sensitive area and grading is expected to reach depths that could encounter paleontological resources, as determined by a registered geologist or paleontologist, then construction activity shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. The paleontologist shall have the authority to halt construction during grounddisturbing activities to assess the potential resources. In the event of any fossil discovery, regardless of depth or geologic formation, ground-disturbing activities shall halt within a 50-foot radius of the find until its significance can be determined by a qualified paleontologist. Significant fossils shall be recovered, prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and deposited in a designated paleontological curation facility, in accordance with the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. The repository shall be identified, and a curatorial arrangement Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 46 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision shall be signed prior to collection of the fossils.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no geology and soils related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 47 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

8. Greenhouse Gases
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
GHG-1: The proposed General Plan
would generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the
environment.
(Appendix G question VIII. a)
Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
GHG-2: The proposed General Plan
would not conflict with an applicable
plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of
GHGs.
(Appendix G question VIII. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
GHG-3: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would, in combination with
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
projects, result in a cumulative impact
with respect to GHG emissions.

Significant
and
Unavoidable
No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to greenhouse gases (GHG), and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal NR14: Improve the sustainability of the community through continued local efforts to reduce GHG emissions and to meet the climate action goals of the State of California.

Policy NR14B: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from new development by encouraging development that lowers vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and discouraging auto-dependent sprawl and dependence on the private automobile; promoting development that is compact, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly, and transit-oriented; promoting energy-efficient building design and site.

Policy NR14C: Coordinate with SCAQMD to ensure projects incorporate feasible mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions and air pollution from both construction and operations, if not already provided for through project design.

Policy CDD10D: Encourage development in the City to include inviting, attractive, accessible, and walkable urban mixed-use neighborhoods combining residential, commercial, recreational, open space, and employment to maximize the use of underused urban lots.

Policy NR14D: Utilize appropriate CEQA streamlining mechanisms for projects that are consistent with this General Plan and its EIR.

GP EIR Impact GHG-1 and GHG-2: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to generation of GHG Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 48 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision emissions, given that such emissions at build out of the GP are not currently projected to result in an 85 percent reduction from existing conditions. Such a reduction is necessary to ensure the City is on a trajectory to achieve the long-term reductions goals of AB 1279 and substantial progress toward the State’s carbon neutrality goals for year 2045. The GP EIR concluded this impact is cumulatively significant and unavoidable as it pertains to buildout of the GP, and it is addressed in the GP EIR’s CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts related to conflict with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan and the Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA) Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

Project Analysis
As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist , an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment was completed to evaluate potential Project impacts (Illingworth & Rodkin 2025a). GHG emissions for the Project would result from both short-term construction activities and long-term operational sources. Construction emissions were estimated at 3,133 metric tons (MT) of CO2 equivalents (CO₂e) over the full construction period and amortized over a 30-year project lifespan at approximately 104 MT CO₂e annually. Operational emissions based on full build-out assumptions modeled with CalEEMod were projected at 1,250 MT CO₂e per year by 2037. When combined with amortized construction emissions, the total annual GHG emissions are estimated to be 1,354 MT CO₂e.

The City of Redding has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions. Similarly, neither the Shasta County Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) or the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has yet adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that would apply to the Project. Since there is no adopted numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions, the methodology for evaluating the Project’s impacts relative to GHG emissions focuses on consistency with statewide, regional, and local plans adopted for the purpose of reducing or mitigating GHG emissions.

General Plan Policy NR14C relates to coordinating with SCAQMD to ensure projects incorporate feasible mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions and air pollution from both construction and operations. As described in Section 3 of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist (Air Quality), Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 from the General Plan EIR are applicable to the Project and will be incorporated into the conditions of approval to ensure that the Project implements applicable SCAQMD Standard Mitigation Measures (SMMs) and Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMs), which will also reduce construction-related GHG emissions.

Additionally, the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to air quality (Conditions 32 through 34), which require the SMMs recommended by SCAQMD, as well as BAMMs, where applicable.

The Project would be subject to the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations. Title 24, Part 6 applies to all new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings, and regulates energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting. Compliance with federal, State, and local regulations (e.g., Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, Renewable Portfolio Standards, Advanced Clean Cars Program, Zero-Emission Vehicles Mandate and Senate Bill 350 provisions) would increase building energy efficiency and vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce building energy demand and transportation-related fuel usage.

Because the Project is consistent with the General Plan’s density allowance and the RS-2.5 zoning district density regulations, its construction and operational GHG emissions would align with those analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The Project is also consistent with applicable General Plan policies that address lowering VMT, including, but not limited to, the following:
• The Project is located within existing City limits where services and infrastructure are available in proximity to the site. • The Project will be constructed at a density consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations assigned to the site. • Policy T4C - The Project is located in proximity to existing development. • Policy T1A - The Project will construct street and other mobility-related infrastructure to accommodate all users. • Policy T1A - The Project includes open space facilities with trail systems and a community park.

The Project will provide housing for residents to both live and work in the City rather than commuting to other areas, which would contribute to minimizing VMT and reducing VMT per service population. The Project would not interfere with the ability to implement the regional strategies in Shasta County Area contained in the RTP/SCS. The Project does not redesignate or rezone the site to accommodate future development that was previously unaccounted for, and thus would not induce additional population, VMT, or additional emissions.

The CARB 2022 Scoping Plan includes measures to move to a zero-emissions (decarbonized) transportation sector and aims to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) and includes mechanical CO2 removal and carbon capture and sequestration actions, as well as natural working lands management and nature-based strategies. The Scoping Plan measures are statewide and programmatic in nature and largely advisory, as CARB does not directly regulate many of the sectors identified by the Plan’s measures.

The measures would be implemented at the State level and do not relate to the construction and operation of individual projects such as the Project. Although Project construction and operation may be affected by State level regulations and policies that would be implemented, such as the Phase 2 heavy-duty truck greenhouse gas standards proposed to be implemented within the transportation sector, the Project would not impede the State from developing or implementing the GHG reduction measures identified in the 2022 Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 49 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Scoping Plan. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan.

The Project would result in a development consistent with the growth and land use assumptions evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of GHGs. The Project impact would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GHG-1 and GHG-2.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable local and State design standards. The off-site improvement areas are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan 2045, and the off-site improvements extending across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan 2045. The off-site improvements will be consistent with General Plan goals and policies relative to providing livable neighborhoods, as well as the City’s construction standards and specifications and applicable State regulations for roadway and facility design. The off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GHG-1 and GHG-2.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on GHG emissions. Cumulative GHG impacts were identified in Impact GHG-3 of the General Plan EIR as significant and unavoidable, given that emissions at build out of the General Plan are not currently projected to result in an 85 percent reduction from existing conditions. The impact was addressed in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. GHG emissions, by their nature, represent a cumulative global impact. However, the geographic extent of CEQA is the State of California, therefore, the geographic scope of potential cumulative impacts related to GHG is the State of California. It is unlikely that a single project could generate enough GHG emissions to noticeably change the global average temperature. Instead, GHG emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to the significant adverse environmental impacts of global climate change. Therefore, the Project analysis presented in Impact GHG-1 and Impact GHG-2 represents the cumulative analysis for impacts from GHG emissions. The Project analysis in Impact GHG-1 and Impact GHG-2 found that the Project as proposed would not conflict with applicable GHG reduction strategies for new development, and would not conflict with the CARB Climate Change Scoping Plan. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative GHG impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and therefore less than significant. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact GHG-3.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to GHG emissions, and no additional GHG-related standard conditions of approval apply to tentative subdivision map projects.

As discussed under Impact GHG-1 and GHG-2 above, Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 from the General Plan EIR are applicable to the Project and will contribute to the reduction of construction-related GHG emissions. Additionally, the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to air quality (Conditions 32 through 34), which establish air quality requirements for construction and operational phases, including dust control measures, energy-efficient systems, and thresholds for applying Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMMs). These conditions will contribute to reduction of GHG emissions. The complete text of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 and Condition 32 through 34 can be found in Section 3, Air Quality.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no GHG related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 50 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
HAZ-1: The proposed General Plan
would not create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials.
(Appendix G question IX. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
HAZ-2: The proposed General Plan
would not 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.
(Appendix G question IX. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
HAZ-3: The proposed General Plan
would not emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within

0.25 miles of an existing or proposed
schools.
(Appendix G question IX. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
HAZ-4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment by being located on a site
that is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5.
(Appendix G question IX. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No No Impact Yes
HAZ-5: The proposed General Plan
would be located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within 2 miles of a public
airport or public use airport, resulting in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the Project
area.
(Appendix G question IX. e)
Less than
Significant No No No No No Impact Yes
HAZ-6: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan could impair
implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan.
(Appendix G question IX. f)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
HAZ-7: The proposed General Plan
would not expose people or structures,
either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires.
(Appendix G question IX. g)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 51 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
HAZ-8: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
not result in less-than-significant
cumulative impacts with respect to
hazards and hazardous materials.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to hazards and hazardous materials, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. Following certification of the General Plan EIR, the City of Redding adopted a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The CWPP establishes a coordinated framework for reducing wildfire risk through strategic planning, fuel management, and emergency preparedness. Developed in collaboration with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other local, state, and federal agencies, the CWPP identifies high-risk areas and outlines strategies for vegetation treatment, public education, and evacuation readiness. The CWPP directly supports and reinforces the wildfire-related goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and is incorporated into the analysis in this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Goal PS4: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage resulting from urban and wildland fires.

Policy PS4C: Apply appropriate codes and standards, to ensure all new and existing developments provide:
• Defensible space.
• Non-combustible design with appropriate building exterior and roofing materials. • Spark arresting system, fire alarms, and fire sprinkler systems are installed.

Policy PS4I: Require that remote hillside developments maintain sufficient water supplies on-site, when appropriate, to provide wildland fire protection. Water supplies may be stored in the form of ponds, storage tanks, or other features acceptable to the Fire Marshal.

Policy PS4J: Utilize techniques, as determined appropriate by the Fire Marshal, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential.

Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul-de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided.

Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 52 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Goal PS9: Reduce the risk of personal injury, property damage, and environmental degradation resulting from the use, transport, disposal, and release/discharge of hazardous materials.

Policy PS9E: Take appropriate actions to implement the Hazardous Materials Emergency Response component of the City's Emergency Operations Plan in the event of a hazardous material spill, accident, or release.

Policy PS8E: Enforce requirements for residences and businesses maintain visible and clearly legible street address numbers, as may be required by state and local regulations, to shorten the response time of emergency personnel.

GP EIR Impact HAZ-1 and HAZ-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to hazards to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, given that contractors would be required to comply with existing and future hazardous materials laws and regulations.

Project Analysis
Construction of the Project would include the transport and use of common hazardous materials inherent to the construction process, including petroleum products for construction equipment and vehicles, and paints, asphalt materials, concrete curing compounds, and solvents for construction of Project improvements. These materials are commonly used during construction, are not acutely hazardous, and would be used in relatively small quantities. The Project does not require demolition of any existing built structures, therefore, construction would not create a hazard related to the release of asbestos, lead-based paint or other hazardous materials from demolition activities. As described in the General Plan EIR, numerous laws and regulations ensure the safe transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials that Project contractors would be required to comply with during construction. Project construction would also be required to implement storm water best management practices during construction in accordance with City of Redding regulations and the State Water Board General Construction Storm Water Permit. Best management practices addressing materials management would be required, including proper material delivery and storage, spill prevention and control, and management of concrete and other wastes. Because the Project would be required to comply with existing and future hazardous materials laws and regulations and applicable best management practices addressing the transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, the potential to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment during construction of the Project would be less than significant.

The Project involves residential uses that are consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning regulations for the site. Residential uses are not typically associated with hazardous materials, and the Project would not include uses that would result in the storage, use, transport, emission, or disposal of hazardous substances, nor are hazardous substances proposed or currently in use in the immediate vicinity. Future residents most likely would use small quantities of common household cleaners, batteries, fertilizers, and similar products. Such materials are often referred to as household toxics, and several ongoing programs facilitate the proper disposal of such materials.

The potential to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, substances or waste would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HAZ-1 and HAZ-2.

GP EIR Impact HAZ-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to emitting hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or wastes in the vicinity of a school, given that all users of hazardous materials are subject to federal, State, and local laws that ensure that hazardous material use, emission and transportation are controlled to a safe level.

Project Analysis
The nearest schools to the Project site are Buckeye School of the Arts located approximately 1.5 miles northeast, and Shasta High School located approximately 2 miles south. Construction activities would include the use of materials such as fuels, lubricants, degreasers, paints, and solvents. These materials are commonly used during construction, are not acutely hazardous, and would be used in small quantities. The City and its contractors would be required to comply with existing and future hazardous materials laws and regulations covering transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, and because of the nature and quantity of the hazardous materials to be potentially used by the Project, the impact related to the use of such materials during construction would be less than significant. Following construction, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions, and there are no schools located within onequarter mile of the site. The impact would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HAZ-3.

GP EIR Impact HAZ-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to hazards to the public or the environment from projects included on hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 53 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Project Analysis
To determine if any part of the Project site or off-site improvement areas is located on property listed under Government Code Section 65962.5, online data resources identifying such facilities or sites were reviewed (CalEPA 2025). These include:
• Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database; • List of Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites from the Water Board GeoTracker database; • List of solid waste disposal sites identified by the Water Board with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels; • List of "active" Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders from the Water Board; and • List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code.

Based on the review of applicable databases, the Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located on a property listed pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code. The Project site is not a current or former hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste disposal site, and is not identified on or adjacent to any parcels on lists compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The nearest Cortese-listed site is located approximately 1.25 miles northeast of the Project site and is associated with a former automotive garage site (CalEPA 2025). The Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to being located on a site included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65965.5. No impact would result. The impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HAZ-4.

GP EIR Impact HAZ-5: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to safety hazards or excessive noise for people residing or working near an airport.

Project Analysis
The Project site is not located within two miles of a public or private airport. The closest public airport is Benton Airpark, located approximately 2.5 miles south of the Project site. Because the Project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, the Project would not result in a related safety hazard. No impact would result. The impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HAZ-5.

GP EIR Impact HAZ-6: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to impairment or interference with the City’s emergency response and evacuation plans, given that individual projects would be required to comply with state laws and regulations, as well as GP policies.

Project Analysis
Coordinated emergency response and evacuation planning within the City of Redding is guided by the City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The City’s EOP is an all-hazard plan that outlines the roles and responsibilities of various agencies and public services in organizing and responding to emergencies and disasters within the City of Redding. The EOP provides a framework for coordinating response and recovery activities during a large-scale emergency. The City’s CWWP was developed in partnership with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other local, state, and federal agencies, and identifies high-risk areas, vegetation treatment, public education and evacuation readiness. The City’s CWPP was adopted in 2024 after certification of the General Plan EIR, and supports the goals and policies outlined in the City’s General Plan relative to wildfire, emergency response, and evacuation planning.

During Project construction, impairment of emergency response and evacuation plans could occur if extended road closures are required. The Project will require work within Buenaventura Boulevard, including connection of a new access road intersection and utility tie-ins. Such construction would potentially require temporary partial lane closures over a period of two to four weeks. No full roadway closures would occur during construction of the Project, and no on-street worker parking or equipment staging would occur.

The normal functionality of Buenaventura Boulevard would be temporarily altered with partial lane closures and traffic controls to accommodate construction activities. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to traffic control (Conditions 27), which requires preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan reviewed and approved by the Redding Fire and Police Departments to ensure that construction equipment or activities do not obstruct roadways during the construction period, and to ensure provision of access to emergency response services. The complete text of Condition 27 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The Traffic Control Plan would include the following:
• During construction, two-way traffic would be maintained along Buenaventura Drive and surrounding local roads. • Through traffic would be maintained through temporary signals, flaggers, or other means. • As construction progresses, emergency providers would be notified in advance of the timing, location, and duration of construction activities and the locations and durations of any temporary detours and/or lane closures. • The contractor would be required to have ready the means necessary to accommodate access by emergency vehicles, such as plating over excavations, flaggers, or other means.

Following construction, the Project would increase the number of people who would need to evacuate northwest Redding in the event Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 54 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision of an emergency, however, the Project would not alter the functionality of the surrounding roadways or affect the use of Quartz Hill Road and Buenaventura Boulevard as regional evacuation routes. As part of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, an Evacuation Assessment was completed to conservatively determine the potential effect on evacuation times in the Project vicinity (W-Trans 2025b).

In a conservative worst-case scenario, the Project is expected to add 225 vehicles to an evacuation occurring all at once during the nighttime hours when all residents would typically be at home. The Evacuation Assessment analyzed two different fire scenarios from two origin points with extreme wind conditions where the fire would move toward the Project site. The Evacuation Assessment determined that the addition of Project-generated traffic would increase the time needed to evacuate existing residents by 4.6 to 6.9 minutes, assuming a worst-case, single-surge scenario. The Evacuation Assessment notes that when considering the City’s actual operational practices, including phased evacuation zones managed through Genasys Protect, active traffic control at intersections by City staff, and more realistic vehicle spacing, the true added clearance times would be lower. With application of the measures detailed above, the Evacuation Assessment estimates that the expected increase in evacuation time would be approximately 2 to 5 minutes, and would not materially affect the City’s ability to move residents from high-risk areas to defensible corridors such as Quartz Hill Road and onward to low-risk dispersal routes. In accordance with the published guidance by the State Attorney General, entitled “Best Practices for Analyzing and Mitigating Wildfire Impacts of Development Projects Under the California Environmental Quality Act,” the Evacuation Assessment was used to inform expert judgment and support a determination of whether the Project would significantly affect residents’ ability to safely and reasonably evacuate. Both the Fire Department and Police Department confirmed that the Project would not substantially impair or physically interfere with the City’s Emergency Operations Plan or the emergency evacuation of the Project area.

As described in the Evacuation Assessment, in the aftermath of the Carr Fire, the City has implemented major improvements in evacuation readiness, including the following:
• Adoption of the Genasys Protect platform to pre-map evacuation zones and support phased evacuation orders. • Formal integration of traffic control practices so that intersections can be actively managed during evacuations. • Enacting limits to road construction projects that would result in closures on City arterials to take into account emergency evacuations.
• Expanded public communication systems for timely evacuation warnings and orders as well as constant communications between field staff and the modernized Emergency Operations Center (EOC). • Ongoing Fire and Police training and coordination based directly on the gaps identified in 2018. • Implementation of a new standard for developments and road construction projects in very high fire hazard severity zones where an evacuation plan is made to ensure adequate ingress and egress is provided during an emergency throughout the duration of construction.
• Adoption of a CWPP to identify priority areas for fire prevention, special fuel treatment, conduct targeted outreach and propose policies to effectively increase wildfire preparedness.

The Project would be constructed in accordance with City roadway specifications, including accommodation of necessary fire apparatus turning movements to ensure emergency vehicle accessibility. The Project includes multiple public access points (Buenaventura Boulevard, Steamboat Street, and Keel Court) in compliance with the California Fire Code, General Plan policy PS4L, and the City’s Municipal Code to ensure adequate emergency access. In addition, the existing unimproved maintenance access road that connects directly to Quartz Hill Road could be used by the Fire Department and other emergency vehicles and first responders in the event of an emergency, resulting in a total of four potential access points. Implementation of the City's CWPP will further reduce wildfire risk by establishing a coordinated framework for fuel management, emergency preparedness, and community engagement. The CWPP was developed in partnership with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other local, state, and federal agencies, and identifies high-risk areas and vegetation treatment.

Overall, while the Project introduces new households, it also enhances the roadway system, creates additional fire protection features, and leverages the City’s improved evacuation planning and operations (W-Trans 2025b). The Project development includes new roads designed to accommodate both emergency vehicles and evacuating residents simultaneously, as well as multiple access points in compliance with the California Fire Code, ensuring adequate emergency access is provided to the site, which would also reduce contribution of traffic to a single regional roadway. The Project would not substantially impair or interfere with the City’s emergency response and evacuation plans. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant, and the Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HAZ-6.

GP EIR Impact HAZ-7: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, given that projects would be required to adhere to applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, as well as GP policies and state laws and regulations that would reduce fire risks.

Project Analysis
The Project site and surrounding areas are located within a CAL FIRE designated Very High Fire Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) and experienced damage during the 2018 Carr Fire. To protect development in the VHFHSZ, the City requires compliance with a broad range of State and local fire safety regulations. These include the California Building Standards Code, State Fire Safe Regulations, Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 55 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision California Fire Code (including Chapter 49 and Section 4905.2), Public Resources Code Section 4291, Redding Municipal Code Chapter 9.20, City Fire and Public Works Standards, and Redding Fire Department wildfire requirements. These codes mandate defensible space, hazardous vegetation and fuel management, ember-resistant zones within 5 feet of structures, and fuel reduction within 100 feet of buildings to minimize wildfire ignition and spread.

As described in the Project description portion of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist, the Project also incorporates wildfire resiliency features, including:
• New roads are designed to accommodate both emergency vehicles and evacuating residents simultaneously. Multiple points of access are provided to prevent bottlenecks and ensure that residents can evacuate quickly and safely, as required by local regulations.
• The design of the subdivision incorporates natural and constructed firebreaks to protect the community from wildfires, including wide roadways and strategically placed, managed open spaces that reduce the continuity of fuel and slow the spread of fire.
• Homes and community structures would be required to maintain defensible space around their perimeters, including clearing flammable vegetation and other combustible materials to create defensible spaces to be mandated by local fire codes and guidelines.
• A fire fuel reduction plan has been developed to lower wildfire risk by clearing flammable vegetation. Zone 1, within 100 feet of structures, will have 90-100% of brush and small trees removed, designated trees cleared per the grading plan, and large trees thinned to 10% canopy. Zone 2, from 100 to 200 feet out, will see 50% of the brush and small trees removed, with similar tree clearing and thinning to 50% canopy. • Vegetation management would involve regular maintenance, including pruning, clearing, and spacing of plants to reduce fire risk. Within developed areas, residents would choose from recommended plants that are less likely to ignite and that can act as a barrier to slow the spread of fire. A Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) would be established to maintain common areas/parks, wildland fuel vegetation management areas, and landscaping along roadways involving regular inspections and maintenance to ensure that vegetation is kept at safe levels, reducing the overall fire risk to the community.
• Homes would incorporate non-combustible materials for exterior walls, such as cement board cladding, masonry, or stucco following the guidelines of the California Residential Code. • Homes would feature Class A fire-rated roofing systems designed to block embers from penetrating and per the standards outlined in the CAL FIRE’s Home Hardening program, the California Residential Code, California Building Code, and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines. • Windows and glass doors would be double-paned and made of tempered glass, aligning with the California Residential Code and FEMA recommendations.
• Attic, soffit, and crawlspace vents in future homes would be covered with non-combustible mesh, with openings no larger than 1/8 inch to prevent embers from entering the home while still allowing adequate air circulation, as required by the California Residential Code and FEMA standards.
• Homes would be equipped with residential sprinkler systems. • Fencing and decking attached to residences or adjacent to slopes would be constructed of fire-resistant or nonflammable materials.

The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) owns, operates, and maintains 230-kV overhead electrical power transmission lines that cross a portion of the Project site within 250-foot easements. Overhead electrical power transmission lines can pose fire risks in areas with dry vegetation and areas prone to wildfires, including the potential for downed power lines that can lead to sparks or arcing that can ignite nearby vegetation. WAPA regulates land uses and vegetation within its easement area. No structures are allowed within the WAPA easement area, including homes, buildings, sheds, swimming pools, basketball courts, tennis courts, gazebos, etc. All vegetation to be planted within the easement area will be specified to not exceed a maximum height of 12 feet at maturity, and will be selected in accordance with the WAPA’s Preferred Vegetation List for the Redding area. Lighting standards will be less than 15 feet in height, and will be grounded and located away from power lines. Thirty feet of unobstructed access is required to be maintained around all towers, and guard rails are required to protect the tower structures from the possibility of a motor vehicle hitting a transmission line Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 56 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision structure. WAPA conducts vegetation management around its transmission lines to reduce wildfire risks, including clearing brush, trimming trees, and removing potential fuel sources. The City of Redding and WAPA will also collaborate for vegetation management, including advanced reporting systems to help with early detection and preventive maintenance. These measures collectively help mitigate fire risks along the electrical power lines at the Project site. Additionally, the Redding Electric Utility’s (REU) Wildfire Mitigation Plan provides strategies and measures, such as vegetation management, enhanced inspections, and operational practices, aimed at reducing fire hazards from public utilities.

In the event of a fire or wildland fire, the City’s EOP would be implemented, compliant with its standards for safety and evacuation (see Impact HAZ-6). The Project development includes multiple access points in compliance with the California Fire Code, ensuring adequate emergency access is provided to the site, which would also reduce contribution of traffic to a single regional roadway. The Project would not impair implementation of the City's EOP or interfere with established evacuation travel routes (see Impact HAZ-6).

The Project would not change existing circulation patterns or effect emergency response routes. Electrical power and natural gas would be provided from underground utility lines adjacent to the Project site. Implementation of the City's CWPP will further reduce wildfire risk by establishing a coordinated framework for fuel management, emergency preparedness, and community engagement. The CWPP was developed in partnership with CAL FIRE, the Redding Fire Department, the Buckeye Fire Protection District, and other local, state, and federal agencies, and identifies high-risk areas and vegetation treatment.

Overall, the Project includes wildfire resilience measures and is subject to a broad range of State and local fire safety regulations, including applicable sections of the City’s Municipal Code, General Plan policies, and the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps related to wildfire. Through required adherence to fire safety regulations and the safeguards incorporated into the Project design and management, the risk of wildfire pertaining to Impact HAZ-7 would remain less than significant, and within the scope of the General Plan EIR.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on hazards and hazardous materials. Cumulative impacts were evaluated in Impact HAZ-8 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that potential impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level in compliance to local, regional, State, and federal regulations, such as those that control the use and transportation of hazardous materials and waste and address development in areas adjacent to airports and at risk of wildfire. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR. As described in Impact HAZ-1 through HAZ-7, the Project would be required to comply with existing and future laws and regulations governing hazardous materials and development in areas at risk of wildfire. Since impacts associated with hazardous materials, airport hazards, and fire hazards are, by nature, focused on specific sites or areas, impacts from the Project would not contribute to a cumulative increase in hazards in the city or the larger region. Cumulative projects in other jurisdictions would also be required to comply with existing and future laws and regulations governing hazardous materials and development in areas at risk of wildfire, and the Project would not combine to create a significant cumulative effect. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HAZ-8.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to hazardous materials wildfire.

SCOAs for Subdivisions – Hazardous Materials
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following hazardous materials-related and public safety/fire -related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#24. Developments shall be designed to provide adequate fire-safety and shall comply with the requirements of Section 17.60.110, Fire Safety, of the Subdivision Ordinance, the California Building Code, and the California Fire Code as approved by the Fire Marshal. This includes the location and necessary easements to service “on-lot” hydrants on flag lots or oversized lots as Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 57 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision required.
#25. Brush piles resulting from land-clearing activity shall be fully removed or otherwise eliminated from the site prior to the start of the fire season or, if generated during fire season, be removed immediately. #26. For projects located within a Cal Fire designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) and adjacent to steep slopes/open space, wildfire fuel reduction shall be conducted as required by the Redding Fire Department and shall be thereafter maintained in a fire safe condition through a Landscape Maintenance District or other program approved by the Fire Department.
#27. Projects within the VHFHSZ shall provide a Traffic Control Plan ensuring that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The plan shall be prepared in accordance with the City’s Guidelines for Temporary Traffic Control Plan Development. The Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits. #39. If a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment or other analysis indicates the potential for hazardous materials contamination from previous uses on the site, the following steps shall be taken by the project proponent. All conditions of approval and mitigation measures will be printed on all construction documents, contracts, and project plans prior to issuance of grading permits.
a. Prior to issuance of grading permits, shallow soils samples shall be taken on-site to determine the location of any contaminated soils on the site with concentrations above worker safety thresholds established by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB). Once a soil sampling analysis is complete, a report of the findings shall be provided to the City of Redding for review and approval. All associated costs shall be the responsibility of the project proponent should the City require an independent review of the report. b. Any soils with residual agricultural or other hazardous chemicals exceeding the RWQCB Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) or other applicable hazardous waste limits for residential and commercial uses shall be removed and disposed of off-site at a licensed hazardous materials disposal site. #40. The following measures shall be applied to construction activities occurring on the project site:
a. Hazardous materials, including fuel oils, cement, and solvents shall be stored and contained in an area protected from direct runoff and away from areas where they could enter waters of the United States or waters of the State. Secondary containment shall be used for storage of hazardous materials. b. Construction equipment shall be inspected daily for leaks. Leaking fluids shall be contained upon detection and equipment repairs shall be made as soon as practicable or the leaking equipment shall be removed from the site. c. Secondary equipment such as drip pans or absorbent materials shall be used to catch spills or leaks when removing or changing fluids.
d. Spill containment and clean-up materials shall be kept on site at all times for use in the event of accidental spills.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no hazards and hazardous materials related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 58 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

10. Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
HYD-1: The proposed General Plan
would not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially degrade surface
or groundwater quality.
(Appendix G questions X. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
HYD-2: The proposed General Plan
would not substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the Project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of
the basin.
(Appendix G question X. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
HYD-3: The proposed General Plan
would not substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site;
iii) create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows.
(Appendix G questions X. c)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
HYD-4: The proposed General Plan
would not be in a flood hazard, tsunami,
or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants
due to Project inundation.
(Appendix G question X. d)
Less than
Significant No No No No No Impact Yes
HYD-5: The proposed General Plan
would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan.
(Appendix G question X. e)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 59 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
HYD-6: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
result in less-than-significant cumulative
impacts with respect to hydrology and
water quality.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to hydrology and water quality, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan 2045 are applicable to the Project.

Policy PF8A: Adhere to the following thresholds for stormwater drainage facilities to the extent feasible:
• Design drainage facilities to convey a 100-year storm. • Until adequate stormwater facilities are in place, utilize a policy of "no net increase in runoff" for development projects in all drainage basins.

Policy PF8B: Work toward constructing stormwater detention/retention basins at strategic locations to minimize current flooding risk. Select and pursue the acquisition of sites considered appropriate for such facilities as funding permits Policy PF8D: Encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and coverage by impermeable surfaces.

Policy PF8F: Encourage the use of green infrastructure design and Low Impact Development techniques for stormwater facilities.

Policy PS2G: Continue to require that individual development projects mitigate their stormwater impacts in accordance with City Council Policy 1806 (Floodplain Development and Stormwater Detention) and/or other policy or regulations that the City may establish for this purpose.

Policy PS2H: Continue to require new development and redevelopment projects to minimize hazards of flooding and demonstrate that existing and/or planned (on- or offsite) drainage facilities are sized to accommodate project storm runoff and to prevent off-site increase in peak runoff rates and flood elevations.

Goal NR1: Minimize soil erosion and sedimentation problems resulting from development activities; improve the quality of stormwater runoff.

Policy NR1C: Utilize the stormwater protection measures of the City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit and the provisions of the City’s grading ordinance to control sources of pollutants and improve and maintain urban runoff water quality.

Policy NR3A: Avoid impacts to groundwater recharge areas through open space preservation, runoff management, stream setbacks, clustering of development, and Low Impact Development (LID) treatment where appropriate.

GP EIR Impact HYD-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to water quality requirements, waste discharge requirements, and degradation of surface and groundwater, given that the goals and policies in the Natural Resources Element and Public Facilities and Services Element in combination with other State and federal regulations, would reduce water Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 60 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision quality impacts.

Project Analysis
Project construction activities have the potential to degrade water quality as a result of erosion caused by earthmoving activities during construction or the accidental release of hazardous construction chemicals. The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to erosion control and stormwater treatment facilities (Conditions 12, 14, and 15). These conditions require that subdivision grading and erosion-control plans conform to local ordinances and approved preliminary plans, that stormwater treatment facilities comply with municipal and State permit requirements with long-term maintenance responsibility, and that drainage infrastructure be consistent with City policies and standards. The complete text of Conditions 12, 14, and 15 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The Project would be required to comply with the Grading Ordinance in the City’s Municipal Code, which includes requirements for control of erosion due to construction activities for certain project types and locations. Because the Project would disturb more than one acre of land, the City and/or the contractor would also be required to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that would comply with applicable control measures contained in the City’s municipal storm water permit and the State Water Board’s Construction General Permit. Both the City and State permits require the implementation of best management practices addressing materials management, including proper material delivery and storage, spill prevention and control, management of concrete and other wastes, and prohibiting the discharge of materials other than storm water and authorized non-storm water discharges. Mandatory compliance with these requirements aligns with General Plan policies NR1C and NR1D, and would reduce the Project’s potential for causing construction-related erosion and polluted runoff that would degrade water quality. The Project impact would be less than significant.

The Project design proposes collection, treatment, and conveyance of storm water consistent with applicable City of Redding Construction Standards outlined in Chapter 16.12 of the Redding Municipal Code, the City of Redding Stormwater Management Program, and the City of Redding Municipal Storm Water General Permit. These plans and standards incorporate strategies to minimize storm water pollution through low impact development (LID) features, and mandatory compliance with applicable regulations.

Mandatory compliance with these requirements aligns with General Plan policies PF8A, PF8B, and PF8F, which call for designing stormwater systems to handle prevent and handle runoff from new development, incorporating stormwater basins, and promoting LID techniques, and will reduce the potential for violating water quality standards and waste discharge requirements to a less-thansignificant level.

Overall, the Project impact relative to water quality requirements, waste discharge requirements, and degradation of surface and groundwater would be less than significant within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-1.

GP EIR Impact HYD-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to impeding sustainable groundwater management, given that the goals and policies in the Natural Resources Element in combination with State and federal regulations, like the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), would ensure that groundwater resources are sustainably managed.

Project Analysis
The Project site is located approximately 1.5 miles west of the Redding Area Groundwater Basin and the Enterprise subbasin (Groundwater Basin 5-6.04). The Enterprise subbasin is classified as a medium-priority basin and has a Groundwater Sustainability Plan in place to ensure sustainable management of its groundwater resources. The primary source of domestic water in Redding is from surface water sources. Per the General Plan EIR, in 2020, groundwater made up 23 percent of City of Redding water supplies and is forecasted to provide approximately 30 percent of supplies in 2045.

Contractor-supplied water would be used during construction for dust suppression. Use of groundwater is not anticipated during construction of the Project. However, temporary groundwater dewatering may be required to provide a dry work area during certain construction activities. Dewatering methods generally involve pumping water out of a trench or excavation area. Such dewatering would be temporary and prolonged lowering of the groundwater levels in any one location would not be necessary. The Construction General Permit regulates water quality compliance for construction activities that disturb one or more acres of land, including dewatering activities. No substantial deficit in the local groundwater basin or lowering of water levels would occur. Therefore, the impact on groundwater from construction-related activities would be less than significant.

Following construction, the Project would obtain water from the City of Redding water supplies. The Project is consistent with the land use designation for the site, the RS-2.5 zoning district, and City development standards. The Project site is located within city limits where supporting utilities and public services exist. As summarized in the General Plan EIR, the City’s water supplies would be able to serve the demand under normal, single-dry, and multiple dry years from 2025 through 2045 for properties within its service area.

According to the Enterprise and Anderson Groundwater Sustainability Plans, both sub basins have the groundwater resources available to meet current and projected water supply commitments. Furthermore, as discussed in Impact HYD-5, the Project site is located outside of the coverage area of the Enterprise and Anderson Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plans. While the Project would result in Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 61 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision construction of new impervious surfaces, it would also incorporate open space areas, as well as stormwater detention conforming to City of Redding Municipal Storm Water Permit requirements that facilitate groundwater infiltration within the Project site. Although the Project would increase the amount of impervious surface at the site compared to existing conditions, such increases are not anticipated to impact the ability of water to infiltrate into the ground. Therefore, the Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project would impede sustainable groundwater management. The operational impact would be less than significant.

Overall, the Project impact relative to impeding sustainable groundwater management would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-2.

GP EIR Impact HYD-3: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to substantially altering existing drainage patterns or through the addition of impervious surfaces resulting in erosion, siltation, flooding, and storm drainage capacity.

Project Analysis
As discussed in Impact HYD-1, the Project would disturb greater than one acre of land, and the City and/or its contractor would be required to obtain coverage under the Storm Water Construction General Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that will address erosion, sedimentation, and other specified requirements. Mandatory compliance would reduce the potential impacts relative to erosion or siltation from construction activities to a less-than-significant level by requiring implementation of best management practices and compliance with applicable requirements. Additionally, pursuant to Redding Municipal Code Chapter 16.12, Clearing, Grading, Fills and Excavation, the Project would be required to submit grading plans, which would be accompanied by a soils engineering report, engineering geotechnical report, and drainage calculations, to obtain the required grading permits. Mandatory compliance with these requirements would reduce the Project’s potential impact during construction to, and the impact would be less than significant.

As part of the Project, stormwater associated with new impervious surfaces would be collected via storm LID features, including storm water detention basins designed to comply with the City of Redding’s requirements. The City’s Stormwater Management Program and Chapter 14.19, Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control, ensures that development complies with the City’s Municipal Phase II Storm Water Permit. Further, City Council Policy 1865 applies to all development projects and requires a hydrology analysis be prepared demonstrating that appropriate measures will be taken with the Project such that rate of stormwater runoff after development will not exceed the pre-development condition. Hydrology studies prepared for the Project analyze both existing and proposed storm drain systems to ensure that their capacity is not exceeded (GHD 2025a & 2025b). Stormwater generated as a result of the new impervious surfaces would be captured by permanent LID features designed to comply with the City requirements in order to retain the increase in stormwater runoff to mimic pre-development hydrologic conditions. The LID components and drainage infrastructure would work with the existing topography of the site and would not significantly alter the existing drainage pattern of the Project site. Stormwater management and detention for the Project would include two existing and two new detention basins. Hydrology studies using HEC-1 modeling indicate that, under full site development, peak flows from the local watershed would remain at or below existing levels for all analyzed storm events. As a result, potential on- or off-site erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site due to increases in impervious surfaces would be less than significant.

The Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within a 100-year flood hazard area, within a 500-year flood hazard area, or within a floodway or other special flood hazard zone.

Overall, the Project impact would be less than significant and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-3.

GP EIR Impact HYD-4: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to release of pollutants due to Project inundation from flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone.

Project Analysis
The Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within a 100-year flood hazard area, 500-year flood hazard area, floodway, dam failure inundation area, or within a tsunami or seiche zone (FEMA 2025, DWR 2025). No impact would result. Therefore, the Project impact would be less than described in the General Plan EIR, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-4.

GP EIR Impact HYD-5: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to conflicts with the implementation of a water quality control plan or groundwater sustainable plan.

Project Analysis
The Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins establishes thresholds for key water resource protection objectives for both surface waters and groundwater (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2019). The Project is not located contiguous to a river and would not alter water quality parameters established in the Water Quality Control Plan.

As discussed in Impact HYD-1 and HYD-3, the City and/or its contractor would be required to obtain coverage under the Storm Water Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 62 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Construction General Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that will address erosion, sedimentation, and other specified requirements. Additionally, stormwater generated as a result of the new impervious surfaces would be captured by the proposed permanent LID features designed to comply with the City requirements in order to retain the increase in stormwater runoff to mimic pre-development hydrologic conditions. Mandatory compliance would reduce the potential for conflicts with the Water Quality Control Plan by requiring implementation of best management practices and compliance with applicable requirements.

A Delineation of Aquatic Resources completed for the Project (Gallaway Enterprises 2025) identified approximately 1.334 acres of wetlands and other waters of the United States within the site. As discussed in Impact BIO-3, the City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to permitting, waters, and wetlands (Condition 35). This includes obtaining all legally required permits and approvals from outside agencies with jurisdiction. In accordance with Condition 35 and General Plan Policy NR5B, the Project is required to comply with State and Federal regulations protecting water and wetlands and compensating for permanent impacts to ensure no net loss of aquatic resources. With mandatory compliance with the policies and regulations of the General Plan, stream corridor setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (where applicable), and required permits/approvals from outside agencies having jurisdiction on wetlands, the Project’s impact on aquatic resources would be less than significant.

The Project site is located approximately 1.5 miles west of the Redding Area Groundwater Basin and the Enterprise subbasin (Groundwater Basin 5-6.04). The Project is located outside of the coverage area of the Enterprise Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Enterprise Anderson Groundwater Sustainability Agency 2022). Additionally, as discussed in Impact HYD-2, the Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project would impede sustainable groundwater management.

Overall, the Project impact relative to conflicts with a water quality control plan or groundwater sustainable plan would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-5.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Project-related off-site improvements include construction of a 550-foot access road with underlying utility extensions across BLM land west of the site, a 50-foot extension of a paved maintenance access road and sewer line onto the adjacent property to the east, and minor grading to connect Road B to an existing gravel road on the neighboring parcel to the south. Additionally, intersection warning signs will be installed on both Buenaventura Boulevard approaches and at the intersection of Keswick Dam Road and Quartz Hill Road. The off-site improvement areas are located contiguous to the Project site and would be subject to mandatory compliance with applicable storm water regulations identified in Impact HYD-1 through HYD-5. The off-site improvements are not located within a 100-year flood hazard area or other special flood hazard zone, and are located outside of the coverage area of the Enterprise Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan. The off-site improvements do not cross or affect any identified wetlands or other waters. The off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-1 through HYD-5.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on hydrology and water quality.

Cumulative impacts were evaluated in Impact HYD-6 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given mandatory compliance with best management practices in accordance with the NDPES program, and implementation of the water quality policies contained in the General Plan. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR. As described in Impact HYD-1 through HYD-5, the Project would comply with water quality measures contained in the Storm Water General Construction Permit, as well as the City’s NPDES Permit and local storm water requirements. Therefore, impacts to water quality during construction and operation would not be cumulatively considerable. The Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or impede sustainable groundwater management of the local groundwater basin. The Project is not located within an area that is at risk for flooding, tsunami, or seiche, and the Project does not conflict with the applicable Basin Plan or Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact HYD-6.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR related to hydrology and water quality.

SCOAs for Subdivisions
In accordance with City of Redding Ordinance 2469, Section 26, the following hydrology and water quality-related standard conditions of approval apply to all tentative subdivision map projects:
#12. Subdivision clearing, grading, and erosion-control plans shall be in full conformance with Section 16.12 of the Buildings and Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 63 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Construction Ordinance. The final grading improvement plans shall be consistent with the preliminary grading plan and any tree-preservation plans considered with the approved tentative map. #14. Stormwater treatment facilities shall be designed consistent with the requirements of the City of Redding Municipal Code Chapter 14.19 and the City’s Small Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (No. 2013-0001-DWQ). Project design shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) and stormwater treatment features to minimize the pollution of stormwater, both during construction and after construction in perpetuity. Such ongoing maintenance costs shall be borne by the project by way of private maintenance, a landscape maintenance district, an escrow account, a homeowner’s association established through the California Department of Real Estate, or other such financing mechanism.
#15. Prior to improvement-plan approval, the developer must obtain approval from the City Engineer for proper drainage infrastructure design storm water management via an approved Drainage Report signed and sealed by a California-Licensed Professional Engineer. Said Drainage Report shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements outlined in City Council Policy 1806 and the design criteria as outlined in the City of Redding Construction Standards (CORCs), or as approved by the City Engineer.
#35. e. Aquatic Resources
1) Prior to issuance of a grading permit affecting any potential federal and/or state jurisdictional waters, as identified in the project aquatic resource delineation, the project applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Redding Development Services Department that all applicable resource agency permits and mitigation requirements have been successfully secured from the USACOE, CDFW, CVRWQCB, USFWS, or any other applicable agency identified through the permitting process, or that all applicable resource agencies have determined that the identified aquatic resources are not jurisdictional
2) Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures shall be in place prior to the onset of construction activities near jurisdictional waters and in project areas where there is a potential for surface water runoff to drain into jurisdictional waters. The measures shall be monitored and maintained until construction activities have ceased. 3) High-visibility fencing, flagging, or markers shall be installed along the edges of the work zone near avoided waters and riparian areas. In addition, equipment entry and exit points and staging, storage, and stockpile areas must be clearly marked prior to the entry of mechanical equipment or vehicles into the construction area.

CONCLUSION:

As addressed above, there are no hydrology and water quality related impacts that are peculiar to the Project site that were not adequately evaluated by the General Plan EIR. There are no new off-site or cumulatively-considerable impacts that are peculiar to the Project, nor any new or more severe impacts to the environment beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed by the General Plan EIR.

Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 64 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

11. Land Use and Planning
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
LU-1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not divide an
established community.
(Appendix G questions XI. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
LU-2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not conflict with land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
(Appendix G questions XI. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
LU-3: The proposed General Plan, in
combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, would
not result in less-than-significant
cumulative impacts with respect to
aesthetics.

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

The General Plan EIR described existing conditions in the Plan Area related to land use and planning, and evaluated the potential impacts of the build-out of the General Plan. There have been no substantive changes to the regulatory framework, environmental conditions, or the City’s Municipal Code since certification of the General Plan Update EIR.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan Community Development and Design Element are applicable to the Project. Please refer to other sections of this 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist for additional resource-related goals and policies from the Redding General Plan.

Goal CDD1: Encourage urban growth to occur within the city and provide a development pattern that establishes an orderly urban service area.

Policy CDD1D: Refer all development applications which have the potential to impact land or facilities in the unincorporated area to Shasta County for review and comment.

Goal CDD2: Work to assure the ability of the City, school districts, and other public-service providers to efficiently provide expected and necessary public facilities and services to constituents.

Policy CDD2B: Require new developments to maintain adequate service levels for existing development while providing for the upgrade/expansion of existing public services, as appropriate.

Goal CDD3: Foster a proper balance between development areas and the natural environment.

Policy CDD3A: Generally prohibit development in natural floodplains and hillsides, and those that exceed a slope of 20 percent. Minor encroachments into these areas for new developments may be authorized without a General Plan amendment, if necessary, to facilitate the installation of public utility infrastructure, provide public street emergency access, provide public trail connections, establish evacuation routes, or otherwise facilitate the construction of the project as approved by the City. In residential areas subject to flooding or slope exceeding 20 percent, the City shall allow a density of 1.0 dwelling unit per 20 acres through a Use Permit subject to appropriate standards.

Policy CDD3B: Require buffer areas between development projects and significant watercourses, riparian vegetation, and wetlands in accordance with the Natural Resources Element and the Redding Municipal Code (RMC).

Policy CDD3D: Require new development to work with existing site topography to avoid mass grading to the extent feasible while addressing access, drainage, and other development considerations. Where feasible, substantial fill slopes visible from Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 65 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision roads, parks, and other public areas should be designed to mimic natural land contours.

Goal CDD4: Work to protect and enhance the relationship between urban development and the Sacramento River, its tributaries, and hillside open space areas.

Policy CDD4A: Preserve significant native trees and other vegetation along the river and creek corridors to the extent feasible, while allowing passive recreation and providing opportunities for active uses where appropriate.

Goal CDD11: Strive to ensure that new residential development is appropriately located and designed and can accommodate a mixture of housing types and uses.

Policy CDD11J: Encourage the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units in single-family residential districts consistent with State law to increase the housing stock and provide more affordable housing options in support of the goals of the Housing Element.

GP EIR Impact LU-1: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to dividing an established community, given that the GP includes provisions that directly address land use connectivity, compatibility, and encroachment of new development on existing neighborhoods and land uses.

Project Analysis
Division of an established community typically occurs when a new physical feature, in the form of a highway or railroad, physically transects an area, thereby removing mobility and access within an established community. The majority of the Project site is currently vacant and surrounded by residential land uses and public roadways. There are no components of the Project that would reduce mobility, access, or otherwise preclude continuity of established land uses in the area. The Project impact would be less than significant, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact LU-1.

GP EIR Impact LU-2: The GP EIR identified less-than-significant impacts relative to conflicts with a land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The General Plan is intended to ensure consistency between the General Plan and federal, state, and local laws.

Project Analysis
The Project site is classified as “RS-2.5” Residential Single Family, which allows 2 to 3.5 dwelling units per acre. The Project is a Tentative Map for the development of infrastructure and grading that would support a 120-lot single-family housing development. The Project site is 114 acres, with 65.3 acres planned for development. Within the 65.3 acre development area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project proposes 120 housing lots on the 48.5 developable acres, resulting in a net density of 2.5 units per gross developable acre. This aligns with the RS-2.5 zoning district regulations for the site. Therefore, the Project is consistent with density and lot size requirements of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and the growth projections of the General Plan EIR remain valid. In addition, the off-site improvements that would extend across BLM land extend across a Growth Area identified in the General Plan and are located within the Sphere of Influence and Planning Area of the General Plan. The Project would be consistent with the General Plan and fulfill its goals and policies relative to providing livable, diverse neighborhoods. The Project also would fulfill the goals and policies of the General Plan relative to avoiding and mitigating environmental effects. No impact related to a conflict with a land use plan, policy, or regulation would result. Therefore, the Project impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact LU-2.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 66 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on land use and planning.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

CONCLUSION:

Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 67 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
Discussion:

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

None.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

Therefore, the off-site improvements would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact MIN-1.

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on mineral resources. Cumulative mineral resource impacts were evaluated in Impact MIN-2 of the General Plan EIR as less than significant, given that development in the City and local region would not contribute to an overall loss in the availability of known mineral resources of value locally, regionally, or at the State level. The Project site and off-site improvements are located within the cumulative area of analysis evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and the site is located within the city limits. The Project is consistent with the General Plan density allowance and Zoning designation of the site. The Project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within an identified MRZ and would Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 68 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources. Therefore, the conclusions of the General Plan EIR relative to cumulative impacts remain valid. The Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no new potential cumulative impacts not previously addressed in the General Plan EIR would occur as a result of the Project. The Project would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact MIN-2.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

CONCLUSION:

Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 69 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

Potentially
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following Noise Element goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal N1: A city with appropriate noise and vibration levels that support a range of places from quiet neighborhoods to active and exciting entertainment districts.

Policy N1A: Encourage the use of site planning and building materials/design as primary methods of noise-attenuation.

Policy N1E: Require new development to generate operational and/or construction vibration levels no greater than 75 VdB at the property line of a sensitive receptor where feasible.

Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 70 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Goal N2: Protect residents from exposure to excessive transportation-related noise.

Policy N2B: New development should be required to mitigate noise created by transportation noise sources consistent with the levels specified in Table N-1 in outdoor-activity areas.

Policy N2H: Establish standards for vibration during construction and operation that require vibration levels to be reduced below 85 VdB within 200 feet of an existing structure.

GP EIR Impact NOI-1: The GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts relative to noise impacts during construction.

The City’s SCOA for tentative subdivision maps includes standard conditions of approval related to construction noise (Conditions 41 and 42), which outline best management practices such as noise barriers, equipment muffling, idling restrictions, strategic equipment placement, use of quiet technologies, and coordination with adjacent land uses to minimize noise disturbance, while also designating a disturbance coordinator to address complaints and enforce corrective measures. The complete text of Conditions 41 and 42 can be found at the end of this section, under “Applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions of Approval.” The Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 71 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision use of the required construction best management practices would ensure that construction noise would result in a less-than-significant temporary noise impact. The Project impact would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-1.

Overall, the operational traffic noise associated with the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact, and would be within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact NOI-2.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 73 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision #41. The following measures shall be implemented if a noise analysis prepared for the project indicates that nearby sensitive receptors will be impacted by temporary construction noise:
a. Adherence to Section 18.40.100 and Chapter 16.12 of the Redding Municipal Code pertaining to construction activities. b. Utilize the following best management practices to control construction noise:
• Construct temporary noise barriers, where necessary and feasible, to screen stationary noise-generating equipment.

The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator, who will be available at all hours and days of the week and include the information in notices that may be sent to neighboring properties regarding the construction schedule. #43. The following measures shall be implemented if a vibration analysis prepared for the project indicates that vibration levels may exceed 75 VdB for continuous activities or 85 VdB if the number of events per day are infrequent, as addressed in Table N-5 of General Plan 2045 Noise Element:
a. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the contractor shall verify and provide confirmation to the City, that the equipment assumptions made in the vibration analysis prepared for the project are still valid. The project proponent shall use this information to modify determinations made in the vibration analysis, and to define the measures necessary for reducing vibration levels below the thresholds as may be necessary and provide documentation of such to the City Engineer. b. Smaller equipment (less than 18,000 pounds) shall be used near the property lines adjacent to sensitive buildings to minimize vibration levels to 0.3 in/sec PPV or less. For example, a smaller vibratory roller similar to a Caterpillar model CP433E vibratory compactor could be used when compacting materials within twenty-five feet (25’) of the adjacent conventional building. The smaller equipment intended to implement this requirement shall be individually identified among the list of equipment required under the above condition as the subset of equipment allowed for use at the property lines.
c. Select demolition methods that do not involve large impact tools such as hoe-rams within twenty-five feet (25’) of the Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 74 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision adjacent conventional building. Portable jackhammers, saws, or grinders shall be used to minimize impacts to the ground. d. Avoid dropping heavy equipment and use alternative methods for breaking up existing pavement, such as a pavement grinder, instead of dropping heavy objects, within twenty-five feet (25’) of the adjacent conventional building. e. Designate a disturbance coordinator responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration who will be available at all hours and days of the week. The contact information for the responsible party shall be clearly posted on the construction site.

CONCLUSION:

Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 75 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Discussion:

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES:

The following goals and policies from the Redding General Plan are applicable to the Project.

Goal CDD11: Strive to ensure that new residential development is appropriately located and designed and can accommodate a mixture of housing types and uses.

Project Analysis
The Project site is zoned as “RS-2.5” Residential Single Family, which permits a base residential density of 2.5 dwelling units per gross developable acre. The Project is a Tentative Map for the development of infrastructure and grading that would support a 120-lot singlefamily housing development. The Project site is 114 acres, with 65.3 acres planned for development. Within the 65.3 acre development area, 16.8 acres have slopes over 20%, leaving 48.5 acres for net development. The Project proposes 120 housing lots on the 48.5 Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 76 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision developable acres, resulting in a net density of 2.5 units per gross developable acre. This aligns with the density evaluated by the General Plan EIR for this setting and with the zoning designation of the property. Therefore, the growth projections of the General Plan EIR remain valid, and the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area. In addition, the off-site improvements that would extend across BLM land would occur within a Growth Area identified in the General Plan, and would be within the General Plan Sphere of Influence and Planning Area. The Project impact would be less than significant, and within the scope of the General Plan EIR relative to Impact PH-1.

OFF-SITE ANALYSIS:

CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS:

The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential cumulative impacts of the build-out of the General Plan on population and housing.

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN EIR MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

CONCLUSION:

Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 77 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision

15. Public Services, Parks, and Recreation
Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
PS-1: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not result in the need
for new or physically altered fire
protection and emergency medical
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance
objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
PS-2: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative fire protection services
impact.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-3: The proposed General Plan would
not result in the need for new or
physically altered police facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts to
maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance
objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-4: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative police protection services
impact.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-5: The proposed General Plan would
not result in the need for new or
physically altered school facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts to
maintain acceptable service ratios or other
performance objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-6: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not, in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in a
cumulative school services impact.
(Appendix G question XV. a))
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: CEQA 15183 Exemption Checklist_Peaks 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision (2.1--Appeal APPL-2025-01438 of "The Peaks" Tentative Section 15183 CEQA Exemption Checklist 78 The Peaks – 850 Quartz Hill Subdivision Impact Statement
from General Plan EIR
GP EIR
level of
significance
New effect
peculiar to
Project or
site?
New
significant
effect?
New
significant
off-site or
cumulative
impact?
More
severe
adverse
impact?
Project
level of
significance
Within
scope of
GP EIR?
PS-7: The proposed General Plan would
not result in the need for new or
physically altered public facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios
or other performance objectives.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
PS-8: The proposed General Plan would
not in combination with past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, result in
cumulative library impacts in the area.
(Appendix G question XV. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
REC-1: The proposed General Plan
would not 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.
(Appendix G question XVI. a)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than Significant Yes
REC-2: The proposed General Plan
would not include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion
of additional recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment.
(Appendix G question XVI. b)
Less than
Significant No No No No Less than
Significant Yes
REC-3: Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not in combination
with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, result in cumulative
parks and recreation impacts in the area.

Redding City CouncilDecember 4, 2025

Redding City Council
December 4, 2025