Agenda — Yreka City Council, July 19, 2022 (part 2 of 2)

Yreka Creek generally
dominates the lowest aspects
of the area to the east of I-5.

Wildland Fire
Environment
80% of the PA is covered in
grass, grass/shrub and/or
shrub (Figure PA2.2, Fuel
Models). These fuel types are
subject to very rapid spread
rates during hot, dry summer
months, making this PA
especially vulnerable as the fire
season progresses through
summer and into fall (Figures
PA2.3 and PA2.4, Burn
Probability). Much of the Kilgore Hills and the Butcher Hill area falls within the vicinity of high burn probabilities in a wildfire ignition. The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance as the fire season progress.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant concern.

Key risks of fire starts include the I-5 corridor, transient occupation along the Yreka Greenway, and lightning storms.

Figure PA2.1. Map of the East Yreka Planning Area
391
114 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA2.2. Fuel Models
Acres / % Acres of Primary Fuel Types – East Side Yreka Acres % Acres
Grass 6,752 58.1%
Grass/Shrub 1,020 8.8%
Shrub 1,554 13.4%
Timber Litter 511 4.4%
Timber Understory 68 0.6%
Slash/Blowdown
Non-modeled 1,710 14.7%
Total 11,615 100%
392
115 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather and topography. Wind is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Wildfires can get large quickly primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA2.3, PA2.4, PA2.5 and PA2.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA2.3 and PA2.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn. There were 2,203 late fire season fires modeled for this PA. • Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early fire season simulations was 20 acres. The average fire size was 8.3 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 16,225 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 5,109 acres. Average acres for the simulation 5,309 and average acres within the PA 1,759 acres burned.

Wildfires burn across PA boundaries and simply expand in size and scope wherever burnable material exists. A fire that starts close to one boundary may have predominantly burned into an adjoining area. When referring below to the “largest” fire burned, this is the total size across all PA boundaries. When “within” the PA, this is the total acres burned within the PA boundary.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA2.5 and PA2.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first 393
116 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

Areas in green are where wildfires are likely to be contained, with areas in red indicating areas of increased suppression difficulty. Areas that present themselves as red early in the season will be of concern throughout the entire season. These areas are a focus for hazard fuels mitigation work as they increase wildfire risk for a longer period of time.

Areas in gray are where: 1) structures are present in a dense enough fashion that no burnable fuel model could be assigned, or 2) areas that will not burn, e.g., irrigated fields, pavement, etc. Recent fire events across California have shown that areas within the gray can still burn; the closer to the WUI, the more vigilance is required. 394
111 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA2.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA2.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 741 / 83% 155 / 17% 896 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 4 / 0.2% 5 / 0.2% 1 / 0% 13 / 0.6% 1,173 / 53.2%. 1,007 / 45.7% 2,203 / 100% 395
112 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA2.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA2.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 1,710 / 14.7% 8,296 / 71.4% 162 / 1.4% 126 / 1.1% 8 / 0.1% 1,313 / 11.3% 11,615 / 100% No. of Structures 771 708 4 0 0 108 1,591
# Acres / % Acres 1,701 / 14.7% 1,929 / 16.6% 0 / 0% 481 / 4.1% 4,868 /

41.9% 2,626 / 22.6% 11,615 / 100%
No. of Structures 771 123 0 85 504 108 301
396
113 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 2.7 and 2.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA2.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Property owners should perform all of their structure hardening and defensible space work as identified in Section 6 and Appendix A. This work should be carried out as soon as possible starting in early spring for areas with red polygons, followed by areas with orange polygons as the next highest priority.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA2.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA2.7)

2. Areas where Structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. Butcher Hill Communications Site

4. Kilgore Hills area
397
114 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA2.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 425 865
398
115 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA2.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 399
116 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
Much of the western side of this PA is within the City of Yreka jurisdiction. This area is under the direct responsibility of the Yreka Fire Department. The rest of the area has CAL FIRE as its main wildland fire agency. The Yreka Fire Department’s station is in downtown Yreka. The nearest CAL FIRE stations are in Yreka and Hornbrook. The South Yreka, Montague, and Grenada Fire Departments would respond under mutual aid agreements.

Primary concerns and challenges faced by protection forces Contact information for local fire protection services
State Resources (CAL FIRE)
▪ CAL FIRE Yreka Station
1809 Fairlane Rd, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-4359
▪ CAL FIRE Hornbrook Station
14638 Bradley Henley Rd, Hornbrook, CA 96044 | (530) 475-3582 Local Community & Volunteer Resources
▪ Yreka Fire Department
401 W. Miner St, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 841-2383
▪ South Yreka Fire Protection District
3420 Easy St. Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-1477
▪ Montague Fire Department
121 South 10th St, Montague, CA 96064 | (530) 459-5343
▪ Grenada Fire Protection District
6055 4th Ave, Grenada, CA | (530) 436-2200
400
117 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P

3. Central Yreka
General Overview/Description
The Central Yreka PA lies to the east of I-5. It is about 4,232 acres in size. Its boundaries were previously designed during the 2013 CWPP and left intact. Most of the Yreka Area’s homes, businesses and related
structures can be found in
this PA. For an
assessment of the entire
incorporated city, see
Planning Area 8. Yreka
City Administrative
Boundary.

The PA is bounded by
Hawkinsville to the north,
West Yreka to the west
and the Pines to the
south. The ridge that
divides Long Gulch and
Humbug Gulch is the
dominant topographic
feature. The highest
elevation in the PA is the
northwest corner at about
4,200 feet. The lowest
point is the junction of
where the ridge comes
down to Yreka Creek.
2,540 feet. The other
prominent topographic
feature is the southern
boundary which is the
ridge that runs above
Greenhorn Park and
divides Greenhorn from
Lime Gulch.

Yreka Creek dominates the lowest aspects of the area where it is to the west of the freeway.

Figure PA3.1. Map of the Central Yreka Planning Area
401
118 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
Yreka has had several fires in the past that have threatened the city but have, as of yet, not impinged on city residents or businesses. The 64,000 plus acre Haystack burn in 1955 is the last large fire event that threatened the City. The 2016 Grade Fire and subsequent 2020 Badger Fire demonstrated the extreme volatility of the area and are reminders that fire continues to be a threat to the city. The Badger Fire burned 557 acres on Badger Mountain Road and Hawkinsville Humbug Road within sight of Yreka, prompting evacuation orders and warnings. The fire was caused by a vehicle. On August 24, 2016, the Grade Fire ignited near Hawkinsville just two miles north of town. It started due to an insufficient residential electrical connection during an extreme north wind event. It burned 710 acres and destroyed five structures.

Approximately 60% of this PA is grass, grass/shrub, and/or shrub (Figure PA3.2, Fuel Models).

These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months, making this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall (Figures PA3.3 and PA3.4, Burn Probability). The ridged bounding the north with the Hawkinsville PA and the ridge to the south bounding with the Pines PA fall within the vicinity of high burn probabilities in a wildfire ignition (See Figures 2 and 3 and trailing Burn Probability discussion.). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant weather concern and are further discussed in the Fire Behavior section below.

Key risks of fire start concerns include the mobile transient population, errant careless acts such as cigarettes being discarded, debris burns being lighted during adverse weather conditions, etc. As fire seasons get longer and drier, the more susceptible the City is to fire starts. 402
119 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA3.1. Fuel Models
Acres / % Acres of Primary Fuel Types – Central Yreka
Acres % Acres
Grass 489 11.6%
Grass/Shrub 630 14.9%
Shrub 1,321 31.0%
Timber Litter 356 8.4%
Timber Understory 125 2.9%
Slash/Blowdown
Non-modeled 1,312 31.0%
Total 4,232 100%
403
120 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA3.3, PA3.4, PA3.5 and PA3.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA3.3 and PA3.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn. There were 1,287 late fire season fires modeled for this PA. • Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
Largest fire modeled during early summer simulations was 20 acres. Average fire size was 9.5 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
Largest fire modeled burned 16,225 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 2,945 acres. Average acres for the simulation 4,912 and average acres within the PA 753 acres burned.

Wildfires burn across PA boundaries and simply expand in size and scope wherever burnable material exists. A fire that starts close to one PA boundary may predominantly burn into an adjoining area. When referring below to the “largest” fire burned, this is the total size across all PA boundaries. When “within” the PA, this is the total acres burned within the PA boundary.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA3.5 and PA3.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an 404
121 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
406
123 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA3.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA3.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season)

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 189 / 65% 103 / 35% 292 / 100%
# of Fires / %
Fires 5 / 0.4% 4 / 0.3% 0 / 0% 58 / 4.5% 767 / 59.9% 447 / 34.9% 1,281 / 100% 407
124 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA3.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA3.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season

Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 1,312 / 31.0% 1,402 / 33.1% 85 / 2.0% 143 / 3.4% 38 / 0.9% 1,252 / 29.6% 4,232 / 100% No. of Structures 2,596 392 3 0 0 223 3,214
# Acres / % Acres 1,312 / 31.0% 400 / 9.5% 0 / 0% 193 / 4.5% 876 / 20.7% 1,452 / 34.3% 4,232/ 100% No. of Structures 2,596 129 0 68 198 223 3,214
408
125 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA3.7 and PA3.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA3.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA3.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA3.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. Oak Ridge Mobile Estates

4. The general west side of the PA

5. The northern extent of the PA

6. The ridge that divides Greenhorn and The Pines PA

7. The area depicted as 1-11 in Figure PA3.8 (the area between the COS Campus and Greenhorn Park)
409
126 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA3.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 521 1,718
410
127 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA3.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 411
128 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
The City of Yreka is a Local Responsibility Area. What that means is that the City has full responsibility for all fires regardless of type. CAL FIRE has wildfire suppression responsibility for all the areas surrounding the City of Yreka. As wildland fires are a threat to State Responsibility Areas (SRA), CAL FIRE will respond and fully support all wildland fire situations, as they pose a threat to SRA lands. The Yreka Fire department will have full responsibility with CAL FIRE as a partner. The nearest CAL FIRE station is in Yreka. Hornbrook and Ft Jones CAL FIRE stations would respond in most cases. The South Yreka, Montague, and Grenada Fire Departments would respond under mutual aid agreements.

4. West Yreka
General Overview/Description
The West Yreka PA is bounded by the Central Yreka PA to the east, and the ridge defined by Soap Creek Ridge to the southwest, tying in with Mahogany Point (elevation 5,994 feet) and Montana Peak (elevation 5,758 feet), West Yreka PA to the west and The Pines PA to the south.

The ridge that divides Long
Gulch and Humbug Gulch is
the dominant topographic
feature. The highest
elevation in the PA is the
northwest corner at about
4,200 feet. The lowest point
is the junction of where the
ridge comes down to Yreka
Creek at an elevation of
2,540 feet. The other
prominent topographic
feature is the southern
boundary which is the ridge
that runs above Greenhorn
Park and divides Greenhorn
from Lime Gulch.

Yreka Creek dominates the
lowest aspects of the area
where it is to the west of the
I-5.

Figure PA4.1. Map of the West Yreka Planning Area
413
130 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
Over 50% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub (see Figure PA4.2, Fuel Models). These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months which makes this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. The defining ridge at the northern boundary and spur that comes off of it fall within the vicinity of high burn probabilities in a wildfire ignition (see Figures PA4.3 and PA

4.4, Burn Probability). The proximity of these areas to more densely populated areas requires great vigilance as the fire season progress. Fuel conditions and weather will also combine with almost 30% of the area presenting itself as difficult to suppress early in the fire season increasing to almost 75% difficult to suppress by late fire season (see Figures PA4.5 and PA

4.6, Suppression Opportunity).

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant concern.

Key risks of fire starts include the Greenhorn Road corridor from residents and recreational use and lightning storms across the general area.
414
131 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA4.2. Fuel Models
Acres/% Acres of Primary Fuel Types
Acres % Acres
Grass 817 10.0%
Grass/Shrub 1,815 22.3%
Shrub 1,770 21.8%
Timber Litter 1,661 20.4%
Timber Understory 1,988 24.4%
Slash/Blowdown
Non-modeled 84 1.0%
Total 8,134 100%
415
132 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA4.3 and PA4.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused. There were 1,541 late fire season fires modeled for this PA.
• Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early fire season simulations was 16 acres. The average fire size was 8.7 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 7,356 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 5,109 acres. Average acres for the simulation 5,309 and average acres within the PA 3,592 acres burned.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA4.5 and PA4.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items 416
133 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
418
135 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA4.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA4.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 667 / 84% 123 / 16% 790 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 43 / 2.8% 643 / 41% 843 / 54.7% 23 / 1.5% 1543 / 100% 419
136 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA4.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA4.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 84 / 1.0% 4,002 / 49.2% 1,202 / 14.8% 429 / 5.3% 1,122 / 13.8% 1,296 / 15.9% 8,134 / 100% No. of Structures 6 57 4 1 2 32 102
# Acres / % Acres 84 / 1.0% 974 / 12.0% 0 / 0% 1,031 / 12.5% 3,801 / 46.7% 2,263 / 27.8% 8,134 / 100% No. of Structures 6 12 0 15 35 34 102
420
137 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA4.7 and PA4.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA4.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA4.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA4.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. The Ridge at the north of the PA (Humbug Ridge Polygon 1-6)

4. The areas just west of the Yreka City PA labelled 1-6 and 1-9 in Figure PA4.8 below. 421
138 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA4.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 4 75
422
139 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA4.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 423
140 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-egress routes are amongst the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
o Evacuation Route Mitigation Actions are a necessity for life safety of citizens and emergency personnel
Evacuation route assessment should include, but is not limited to:
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
CAL FIRE has wildfire suppression responsibility for of the West Side Planning. Yreka City Fire Department and South Yreka Fire Protection District will work in partnership with CAL FIRE under mutual aid agreements. The nearest stations are in Yreka and South Yreka. The Hornbrook, Montague and Grenada Fire Departments would also respond under mutual aid agreements.

5. The Pines
General Overview/Description
The Pines PA lies to the south of the Central Yreka PA. It is about 10,513 acres in size. The PA is bounded by the Central Yreka PA to the north, and the Schulmeyer Gulch PA to the southeast. It is dissected by Highway 3 (Yreka Creek) and Walters Lane (Walters Gulch). The highest elevations are found along the ridge between Walters Gulch and Oak Valley/Schulmeyer Gulch. The highest point is where the southern-most extension of the PA border makes a dramatic turn to the north. This elevation is about 5,440 feet. The lowest point is where Yreka Creek runs under the I-5 freeway in the northeast corner at an elevation of 2,711 feet.

Figure PA5.2. Map of The Pines Planning Area
425
142 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
Almost 50% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub and 45% in timber related fuels (Figure PA5.2, Fuel Models). These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months which make this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. The northern most ridge in the PA and the ridge that divides Yreka Creek and Walters Gulch fall within the vicinity of high burn probabilities in a wildfire ignition (Figures PA5.3 and PA5.4). Fuel conditions and weather combine presenting slightly over 20% of the area as difficult to suppress early in the fire season increasing to almost 70% difficult to suppress by late fire season (Figures PA5.5 and PA 5.6, Suppression Opportunity).

The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant concern.

Key risks of fire starts include the Highway 3. Both the lower end of Highway 3 and the lower end of Walters Gulch have high concentrations of homes. Lightning storms also present the risk of random fire starts.
426
143 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA5.2. Fuel Models
Acres/% Acres of Primary Fuel Types – The Pines
Acres % Acres
Grass 1,669 15.9%
Grass/Shrub 1,943 18.5%
Shrub 1,457 13.9%
Timber Litter 2,994 28.5%
Timber Understory 1,784 17.0%
Slash/Blowdown
Non-burnable 667 6.3%
Total 10,514 100%
427
144 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA5.3, PA5.4, PA5.5 and PA5.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA5.3 and PA5.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn. There were 1,821 late fire season fires modeled for this PA. • Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early fire season simulations was 20 acres. The average fire size was 8.3 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 5,500 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 4,376 acres. Average acres for the simulation was 1,681 and average acres within the PA 668 acres burned.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA5.5 and PA5.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety 428
145 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
430
147 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA5.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA5.4. Burn Probability -Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300 to
1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 797 / 91% 76 / 9% 873 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 2 / 0.1% 0 / 0 35 / 1.9%% 692 / 38.0%% 1,079 / 59.3% 13 / 0.7% 1,821 / 100% 431
148 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA5.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA5.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season

Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain
Cannot
Contain Total
# Acres / % Acres 667 / 6.3% 5,167 / 49.2% 1,213 / 11.5% 1,221 / 11.6% 1,216 / 11.6% 1,028 / 9.8% 10,513 / 100% No. of Structures 147 708 0 0 0 52 605
# Acres / % Acres 667 / 6.3% 1,443 / 13.7% 0 / 0% 982 / 9.3% 3,663 / 34.8% 3,758 / 35.7% 10,513 / 100% No. of Structures 147 155 0 33 218 52 65
432
149 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 1.7 and 1.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA5.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA5.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA5.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons.

3. There are areas of concern at the base of Highway 3 that need to be addressed.

These stand out as they are proximate to areas of high use by motorists exiting and using services Area 1-10 and 1-11 is an area with many homes and structures.

Highway 3 experiences high use.

4. The upper reaches of Walters Gulch Areas 1-13 and 1-14. 433
150 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA5.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 170 290
434
151 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA5.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 435
152 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
CAL FIRE has wildland fire responsibility for the Pines. The South Yreka Fire Protection District has structure protection responsibility. Most fires in the area will generate a mutual response from has responsibility for most of the Yreka City Limits PA. CAL FIRE and South Yreka Fire Protection District has fire responsibilities for some of this area. They will work in partnership with CAL FIRE. The nearest stations are in Yreka and South Yreka. The Hornbrook, Montague, and Grenada Fire Departments would respond under mutual aid agreements.

6. Schulmeyer Gulch
General Overview/Description
The Schulmeyer Gulch PA lies to the south of The Pines PA and north of the Cram/Guys Gulch PA. It is about 8,270 acres in size. There are 511 homes or other structures larger than homes.

Residents are concentrated in the lower reaches of Schulmeyer Gulch and along Old Highway

99. The ridge that divides
Schulmeyer and Guys Gulch
is the dominant feature. The
highest point is the southern
tip of the ridge. The
elevation is about 6,100
feet. The lowest point is
where Guys Gulch nears the
northeast corner of the PA.

The elevation there is 2,680
feet.

Figure PA6.1. Map of Schulmeyer Gulch Planning Area
437
154 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
35% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub and forested fuels comprise about 53% of the area (Figure 6.2, Fuel Models). These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months which makes this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. Forested areas tend to burn more slowly and can have a greater intensity and increased resistance to control. The tendency to want to burn based on the modeling is perhaps the lowest of all of the PAs. This is partially due to the forested fuels which are less susceptible to fire starts than the flashier, lighter brush/grass fuels (Figures PA6.3 and PA6.4, Burn Probability).

Early fire season fuel conditions and weather conditions present a scenario where only 14% of the modeled fire starts become problematic. As the season progresses, over half of the modeled late fire season starts can become troublesome to suppress (Figures PA6.5 and PA6.6, Suppression Opportunity). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance as the fire season progress. The absence of large Class G fires also speaks to the slower spread rates of the forested fuels.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant concern.

Key risks of fire starts include the inhabited areas of Schulmeyer Gulch and Old Highway 99 and the high traffic use along Old Highway 99. Summer lightning storms also present a high firestart risk. 438
155 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA6.2. Fuel Models
Acres/% Acres of Primary Fuel Types – Schulmeyer Gulch
Acres % Acres
Grass 971 11.7%
Grass/Shrub 1,641 19.8%
Shrub 454 5.5%
Timber Litter 2,721 32.9%
Timber Understory 1,650 20.0%
Slash/Blowdown 0 0
Not Modeled 832 10.1%
Total 8,270 100%
439
156 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA6.3, PA6.4, PA6.5 and PA6.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA6.3 and PA6.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn. There were 1,608 late fire season fires modeled for this PA. • Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early fire season simulations was 16 acres. The average fire size was 7.9 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 4,898 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 1,964 acres. Average acres for the simulation 1,667 and average acres within the PA 490 acres burned.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA6.5 and PA6.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of 440
157 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
potential safety concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
442
159 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA6.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA6.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 678 / 96% 26 / 4% 704 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 6 / 0.4% 5 / 0.3% 593 / 36.9% 1,004 / 62.4% 1,608 / 100% 443
160 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA6.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA6.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season

Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 832 / 10.1% 4,294 / 51.9% 1,472 / 17.8% 482 / 5.8% 966 / 11.7% 223 / 2.7% 8,270 / 100% No. of Structures 117 359 14 0 0 21 511
# Acres / % Acres 832 / 10.1% 1,862 / 22.5% 0 / 0% 1,111 / 13.4% 3,318 / 40.1% 1,147 / 13.4% 8,270 / 100% No. of Structures 117 176 0 81 116 21 511
444
161 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 1.7 and 1.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA6.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA6.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA5.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. The Ridge between Walters Gulch and Schulmeyer Gulch

4. Between Schulmeyer Road and Memory Lane

5. Antelope Mountain Communications Site
445
162 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA6.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 196 180
446
163 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA6.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 447
164 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
CAL FIRE has wildland fire responsibility for Schulmeyer Gulch. The South Yreka Fire Protection District has structure protection responsibility. Most fires in the area will generate a mutual aid response from the Yreka Fire Department, the Grenada Fire Protection District and the Montague Fire Department. They will work in partnership with CAL FIRE.

Primary concerns and challenges faced by protection forces Contact information for local fire protection services
State Resources (CAL FIRE)
▪ CAL FIRE Yreka Station
1809 Fairlane Rd, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-4359
▪ CAL FIRE Hornbrook Station
14638 Bradley Henley Rd, Hornbrook, CA 96044 | (530) 475-3582 Local Community & Volunteer Resources
▪ Yreka Fire Department
401 W. Miner St, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 841-2383
▪ South Yreka Fire Protection District
3420 Easy St. Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-1477
▪ Grenada Fire Protection District
6055 4th Ave, Grenada, CA 96038 | (530) 436-2200
▪ Montague Fire Department
121 South 10th St, Montague, CA 96064 | (530) 459-5343
448
165 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P

7. Cram Gulch and Guys Gulch
General Overview/Description
The Cram and Guys Gulch PA lies to the south of the Schulmeyer Gulch PA. It is southern-most PA in the Yreka Area Fire Safe Council area. It is about 8,644 acres in size. There are 511 homes or other structures larger than homes. The majority of the residents are concentrated along both Guys Gulch and
Cram Gulch Roads. The
ridge that divides
Schulmeyer Gulch and Guys
Gulch is the dominant
feature. The highest point is
Antelope Mountain the
southern tip of the ridge at
an elevation of about 6,100
feet ASL. The lowest point is
where Guys Gulch and Cram
Gulch flow under the I-5
bridge in the north at an
elevation of 2,660 feet.

Figure PA7.1. Map of Cram and Guys Gulch Planning Area
449
166 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
60% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub, with forested fuels comprising about 32% of the area (Figure PA7.2, Fuel Models). Grass/shrub fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months which makes this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. Forested area tend to burn slower and can have a greater intensity and increased resistance to control. This PA has perhaps the greatest concentration of high burn probabilities (Figures PA7.3 and PA7.4, Burn Probability).

This is partially due to the grass/brush combinations of fuels coupled with a more flammable forested configuration.

Early fire season fuel conditions and weather conditions present a scenario where only 9% of the modeled fire starts become problematic. As the season progresses, the increase in resistance to control increases a startling 66% of late fire season starts becoming troublesome to suppress (Figures PA7.5 and PA7.6). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance as the fire season progress. The absence of large Class G fires also speaks to the slower spread rates of the forested fuels.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant.

Key risks of fire starts include the inhabited areas of Guys Gulch and Cram Gulch roads. There is little recreational use in the area. Summer lightning storms also present a high fire-start risk. 450
167 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA7.2. Fuel Models
Acres/% Acres of Primary Fuel Types – Cram Guys Gulch
Acres % Acres
Grass 2,216 25.6%
Grass/Shrub 2,304 26.7%
Shrub 737 8.5%
Timber Litter 1,860 21.5%
Timber Understory 918 10.6%
Slash/Blowdown 0 0
Not Modeled 609 7.0%
Total 8,644 100%
451
168 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA7.3, PA7.4, PA7.5 and PA7.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA7.3 and PA7.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn. There were 1,525 late fire season fires modeled for this PA. • Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early fire season simulations was 20 acres. The average fire size was 8.2 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 6,108 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 3,751 acres. Average acres for the simulation 2,512 and average acres within the PA 973 acres burned.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA7.5 and PA7.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an 452
169 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
454
171 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA7.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA7.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 644 / 94% 40 / 6% 684 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 3 / 0.2% 307 / 20.1% 1,154 / 75.7% 61 / 4.0% 1,525 / 100% 455
172 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA7.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA7.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total
# Acres / % Acres 609/ 7.0% 5,775 / 66.8% 1,167 / 13.5% 319 / 3.7% 366 / 4.2% 408 / 4.7% 8,644 / 100% No. of Structures 12 147 5 0 0 18 182
# Acres / % Acres 609 / 7.0%% 1,274 / 14.7% 0 / 0% 1,061 / 12.3% 3,987 / 46.1% 1,713 / 19.8% 8,644 / 100% No. of Structures 12 18 0 14 120 18 182
456
173 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 1.7 and 1.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA7.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA7.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA7.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. The Antelope Mountain Communications Site

4. Cram Gulch Road
457
174 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA7.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 58 81
458
175 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA7.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 459
176 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
CAL FIRE has wildland fire responsibility for Guys and Cram Gulches. The South Yreka Fire Protection District will soon have structure protection responsibility. Most fires in the area will generate a mutual aid response from the Yreka Fire Department, the Grenada Fire Protection District and the Montague Fire Department. They will work in partnership with CAL FIRE.

Primary concerns and challenges faced by protection forces Contact information for local fire protection services
State Resources (CAL FIRE)
▪ CAL FIRE Yreka Station
1809 Fairlane Rd, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-4359
▪ CAL FIRE Hornbrook Station
14638 Bradley Henley Rd, Hornbrook, CA 96044 | (530) 475-3582 Local Community & Volunteer Resources
▪ Yreka Fire Department
401 W. Miner St, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 841-2383
▪ South Yreka Fire Protection District
3420 Easy St. Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-1477
▪ Grenada Fire Protection District
6055 4th Ave, Grenada, CA 96038 | (530) 436-2200
▪ Montague Fire Department
121 South 10th St, Montague, CA 96064 | (530) 459-5343
460
177 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P

8. City of Yreka (Incorporated Area)
General Overview/Description
The City of Yreka PA is intended to provide a complete look at all of the analysis outcomes for city managers and the Yreka Fire Department. Yreka is the largest city in Siskiyou County with a populaton of 7,508. It is also
the County seat. The vast
majority of the structures
within the incorporated area
are in the central portion of
the PA.

It is about 6,383 acres in
size. There are
approximately 3,655
structures that are homes,
major structures or
businesses.

Figure PA8.1. Map of the City of Yreka Planning Area
461
178 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
Yreka has had several fires in the past that have threatened the city but have, as of yet, not impinged on city residents or businesses. The 64,000 plus acre Haystack burn in 1955 is the last large fire event that threatened the City. The 2016 Grade Fire and subsequent 2020 Badger Fire demonstrated the extreme volatility of the area and are reminders that fire continues to be a threat to the city. The Badger Fire burned 557 acres on Badger Mountain Road and Hawkinsville Humbug Road within sight of Yreka, prompting evacuation orders and warnings. The cause of this fire is still under investigation. On August 24, 2016, the Grade Fire ignited near Hawkinsville just two miles north of town. It started due to an insufficient residential electrical connection during an extreme north wind event. It burned 710 acres and destroyed five structures.

Over 60% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub. These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months, making this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. Forested fuels comprise about 32% of the area. Forested areas tend to burn slower and can have a greater intensity and increased resistance to control. This PA has a high concentration of high burn probabilities along the eastern sections. This is partially due to the grass/brush combinations of fuels coupled with a more flammable forested configuration (Figures PA8.2 and PA8.3, Burn Probability).

Early fire season fuel conditions and weather conditions present a scenario where 25% of the modeled fire starts become problematic. That is worth considering as these areas will be the city throughout the fire season. As the season progresses, the increase in resistance to control becomes 55% of late fire season starts becoming troublesome to suppress (Figures PA8.4 and PA8.5, Suppression Opportunity). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress. The absence of large Class G fires also speaks to the slower spread rates of the forested fuels.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant weather concern and are further discussed in the Fire Behavior section below. Fire start concerns include the mobile transient population, errant careless acts such as cigarettes being discarded, debris burns being lighted during adverse weather conditions, etc. As fire seasons get longer and drier, the more susceptible the city is to fire starts.

Key risks of fire starts include the I-5 corridor, transient occupation along the Yreka Greenway and lightning storms.
462
179 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA8.2. Fuel Models
Acres / % Acres of Primary Fuel Types – Yreka City
Acres % Acres
Grass 1,461 22.9%
Grass/Shrub 765 12.0%
Shrub 1,661 26.0%
Timber Litter 331 5.2%
Timber Understory 96 1.5%
Not Modeled 2,069 32.4%
Total 6,383 100%
463
180 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA8.3, PA8.4, PA8.5 and PA8.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA8.3 and PA8.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn. Of the 25,000 fires modeled for the Late Fire Season scenario, 1,887 starts fell within the City of Yreka for the Late Fire Season scenario. • Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early summer simulations was 26 acres. The average fire size was 9 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 16,225 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 3,793 acres. Average acres for the Wildfires burn across PA boundaries and simply expand in size and scope wherever burnable material exists. A fire that starts close to one PA boundary may predominantly burn into an adjoining area. When referring below to the “largest” fire burned, this is the total size across all PA boundaries. When “within” the PA, this is the total acres burned within the PA boundary.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA8.5 and PA8.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety 464
181 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
466
183 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA8.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA8.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 304 / 68% 146 / 32% 450 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 9 / 0.2% 4 / 0.3% 0 / 0.9%% 29 / 23.3% 996 / 60.2% 849 / 15.5% 1,887 / 100% 467
184 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA8.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA8.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 2,069 / 32.4% 2,570 / 40.3% 124 / 1.9% 28 / 0.4% 11 / 0.2% 1,581 / 24.8% 6,383 / 100% No. of Structures 3,185 717 0 0 0 284 4,186
# Acres / % Acres 2,069 / 32.9% 518 / 8.1% 0 / 0% 294 / 4.6% 1,803 / 28.3% 1,699 / 26.6% 6,383 / 100% No. of Structures 3,185 158 0 104 455 284 4,186
468
185 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 1.7 and 1.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA1.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA1.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA8.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted in red polygons

3. Oak Ridge Mobile Estates

4. Butcher Hill Communication Site

5. The general west side of the PA (areas labelled 1-9 and 1-11 in Figure PA8.8 below)

6. The northern extent of the PA (areas labelled 1-4 and 1-5 in Figure PA8.8 below) 469
186 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA8.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 758 2,275
470
187 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA8.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 471
188 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
The City of Yreka is a Local Responsibility Area. This means that the City has full responsibility for all fires regardless of type. CAL FIRE has wildfire suppression responsibility for all the areas surrounding the City of Yreka. As wildland fires are a threat to State Responsibility Areas (SRA), CAL FIRE will respond and fully support all wildland fire situations, as they pose a threat to SRA lands. The Yreka Fire department will have full responsibility with CAL FIRE as a partner. The nearest CAL FIRE station is in Yreka. Hornbrook and Ft Jones CAL FIRE stations would respond in most cases. The South Yreka, Montague, and Grenada Fire Departments would respond under mutual aid agreements.

9. South Yreka Fire Protection District
General Overview/Description
The South Yreka Fire Protection District PA provides a complete look at all of the analysis tools and outcomes available in this CWPP for the Chief and Board of Directors of the South Yreka Fire Protection District. The
expansion of the SYFPD will
bring in homeowners that
were previously not covered
by a fire department.

The SYFPD is about 39,059
acres in size. There are
approximately 1,258
structures that are homes,
major structures or
businesses. CAL FIRE has
wildland fire protection
responsibilities with in the
district boundary. The
SYFPD has structure
protection responsibilities.

Figure PA9.1. Map of the South Yreka FPD Planning Area
473
190 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
Fortunately, the area under the South Yreka Fire Protection District boundary has been spared a large wildland fire event. However, wildfire analysis provided in this PA suggests that the area is still susceptible to an adverse event. Fuels and vegetation conditions are ripe for supporting a severe event if one were to become established.
56% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub (Figure PA9.2, Fuel Models). These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months, making this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. Much of the Kilgore Hills and Cram Gulch areas fall within the vicinity of high burn probabilities in a wildfire ignition (Figures PA9.3 and PA9.4, Burn Probability). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress.

Early fire season fuel conditions and weather conditions present a scenario where only 14% of the modeled fire starts will become problematic. As the season progresses, over 67% of the modeled late fire season starts can become troublesome to suppress (Figures PA9.5 and PA9.6, Suppression Opportunity). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant weather concern and are further discussed in the Fire Behavior section below.

Additional key risks of fire starts include the Old Highway 99 corridor, I-5 corridor, areas immediately to the west that are used for off-roading and other recreational pursuits, and lightning storms.
474
191 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA9.2. Fuel Models
Acres / % Acres of Primary Fuel Types – South Yreka FPD Acres % Acres
Grass 9,686 24.8%
Grass/Shrub 8,617 22.1%
Shrub 3,603 9.2%
Timber Litter 8,603 22.0%
Timber Understory 5,692 14.6%
Not Modeled 2,856 7.3%
Total 39,059 100%
475
192 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA9.3, PA9.4, PA9.5 and PA9.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA9.3 and PA9.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA9.5 and PA9.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential safety 476
193 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
478
195 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA9.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA9.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Fires 2,945 / 93% 224 / 7% 3,169 / 100%
# of Fires / % Fires 2 / 0.0% 6 / 0.1% 37 / 0.7%% 1,374 / 27.8% 3,158 / 63.8% 369 / 7.5% 4,946 / 100% 479
196 | P a g e Y r e k a C W P P
Figure PA9.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA9.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 2,856 / 7.3% 23,460 / 60.1% 4,709 / 12.1% 2,303 / 5.9% 3,332 / 8.5% 2,398 / 6.1% 39,059 / 100% No. of Structures 421 1,083 23 0 0 97 1,624
# Acres / % Acres 2,856 / 7.3% 6,132 / 15.7% 0 / 0% 3,605 / 9.2% 16,485 / 42.2% 9,980 / 25.6% 39,059 / 100% No. of Structures 421 407 0 160 539 97 1,624
480
197 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 9.7 and 9.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA9.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA9.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA9.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. Antelope Communications Site

4. Kilgore Hills

5. Cram Gulch Road

6. There are areas of concern at the base of Highway 3 that need to be addressed.

These stand out as they are proximate to areas of high use by motorists exiting and using services Area 1-10 and 1-11 is an area with many homes and structures.

Highway 3 experiences high use.

7. The upper reaches of Walters Gulch Areas 1-13 and 1-14. 481
198 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA9.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 575 688
482
199 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA9.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 483
200 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
The South Yreka Fire Protection District Volunteer Fire Department has responsibility for structure fires. The entire district is in State Responsibility Area; therefore, CAL FIRE has wildland fire protection responsibilities. The nearest CAL FIRE station is in Yreka. Hornbrook and Ft Jones CAL FIRE stations would respond in most cases. Yreka, Grenada, and Montague Fire Departments would respond under mutual aid agreements.

Primary concerns and challenges faced by protection forces Contact information for local fire protection services
State Resources (CAL FIRE)
▪ CAL FIRE Yreka Station
1809 Fairlane Rd, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-4359
▪ CAL FIRE Hornbrook Station
14638 Bradley Henley Rd, Hornbrook, CA 96044 | (530) 475-3582 Local Community & Volunteer Resources
▪ Yreka Fire Department
401 W. Miner St, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 841-2383
▪ South Yreka Fire Protection District
3420 Easy St. Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-1477
▪ Grenada Fire Protection District
6055 4th Ave, Grenada, CA 96038 | (530) 436-2200
▪ Montague Fire Department
121 South 10th St, Montague, CA 96064 | (530) 459-5343
484
201 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

10. Threat Zone
General Overview/Description
The Threat Zone is a 1½ mile belt that surrounds the Yreka Area WUI. The purpose behind this zone is for assessing potential areas of concern outside the Yreka WUI that could present problems if they were to
burn toward the city. It is
zone of opportunity for
collaboration with partners
and cooperators.

It is about 48,338 acres in
size with 1,072 identified
structures, most of which
are concentrated on east
side of the band. There are
pockets of population east
of Phillipe Road, east of
Kilgore Hills Road and as
one moves south within the
Zone towards Grenada.

Figure PA10.1. Map of the Threat Zone Planning Area
485
202 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Wildland Fire Environment
The 2020 Badger fire occurred in the northern most portion of this PA. The Badger Fire burned 557 acres on Badger Mountain Road and Hawkinsville Humbug Road within sight of Yreka, prompting evacuation orders and warnings. The fire was caused by a vehicle. This zone also experienced the 64,000 acre 1955 Haystack fire that came up out of the Klamath River drainage towards the city of Yreka.
66% of the PA is covered in grass, grass/shrub and/or shrub (Figure PA10.2, Fuel Models).

These fuel types are subject to very rapid spread rates during hot, dry summer months, making this PA especially vulnerable as the fire season progresses through summer and into fall. The southwest corner and the eastern edge of the PA are in the vicinity of high burn probabilities in a wildfire ignition (Figures PA10.3 and PA10.4, Burn Probability). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress.

Early fire season fuel conditions and weather conditions present a scenario where over 20% of the modeled fire starts will become problematic. As the season progresses, 65% of the modeled late fire season starts can become troublesome to suppress (Figures PA10.5 and PA10.6, Suppression Opportunity). The proximity of these areas to zones of population requires great vigilance, as the fire season progress.

Wind-driven wildfires are the most significant weather concern and are further discussed in the Expected Fire Behavior section below. The primary concern for the north, west and south end of the Threat Zone is lightning starts as there are few access points for human interactions. 486
203 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA10.2. Fuel Models
Acres / % Acres of Primary Fuel Types – Threat Zone
Acres % Acres
Grass 14,091 29.2%
Grass/Shrub 10,241 21.2%
Shrub 7,741 16.0%
Timber Litter 6,557 13.6%
Timber Understory 6,061 9.9%
Not Modeled 4,936 10.2%
Total 48,338 100%
487
204 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Analysis of Expected Fire Behavior
Wildfires respond to weather, fuels (vegetation), and topography. Wind - primarily due to downdrafts from lightning storms or strong prevailing winds - is the most critical weather factor influencing fire behavior. Fuels are typically lighter and fires can be more easily suppressed especially in the lower and mid-slope areas of this PA earlier in the fire season. As the fire season progresses, wildfires become more problematic as summer temperatures increase and fuel moistures decrease.

Figures PA10.3, PA10.4, PA10.5 and PA10.6 and their data tables are unique to this PA and were derived from flame length and rate of spread analyses and for two distinct (early and late) fire season situations (see Section 5 for a methodology overview and definitions).

The outcomes were considered for two distinct but equally important fire characteristics:

1. Burn Probability
Figures PA10.3 and PA10.4 illustrate Burn Probability, providing an assessment of what areas and which types of fuels are likely to burn provided an ignition. The darker red a shaded area is, the more likely it is to burn. This is important information to determine where hazardous fuel mitigation may need to be focused.

One of the outputs from the Burn Probability modeling is the size of the modeled fires after two burning periods. This knowledge aids in understanding how fires want to burn and to what extent they might burn.
• Early Fire Season (60th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during early summer simulations was 26 acres. The average fire size was 8.5 acres.
• Late Fire Season (97th percentile weather)
The largest fire modeled during late summer burned 16,225 acres. The largest area burned within the PA was 7,485 acres. Average acres for the simulation 2,876 and average acres within the PA 1,135 acres burned.

2. Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity
Figures PA10.5 and PA10.6 display the outputs from the Initial Attack Suppression Opportunity modeling. This map combines predicted fireline intensity (flame length) and the rate of fire spread data, providing a more detailed and comprehensive view of potential 488
205 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
safety concerns, problem fire hazard areas, and access issues. This tool can be useful to first responders to identify and address area-specific levels of suppression difficulty prior to an emergency. It can also be used by property owners to identify areas where actionable items can be targeted for home hardening/defensible space work and/or targeted hazardous fuels reduction work.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
490
207 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA10.3. Burn Probability - Early Fire Season Figure PA10.4. Burn Probability - Late Fire Season Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Size Class in Acres Class A:
0 to .25
Class B:
.25 to 10
Class C:
10 t0 100
Class D: 100
to 300
Class E: 300
to 1K
Class F:
1K to 5K
Class G:
5K +plus Total
# of Fires / % Acres 3,369 / 85% 590 / 15% 3,959 / 100% # of Fires / % Fires 17 / 0.2% 22 / 0.3% 77 / 0.9%% 1,893/ 23.3% 4,900/ 60.2% 1,228 / 15.5% 8,137 / 100% 491
208 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA10.5. Suppression Opportunity - Early Fire Season Figure PA10.6. Suppression Opportunity - Late Fire Season Note: The darker the color, the higher flame length/fire intensity.

Number of Modeled Fires by Fire Size Class Early Fire Season Late Fire Season Not Modeled Can Contain Likely to
Contain Might Contain Not Likely to Contain Cannot Contain Total # Acres / % Acres 4,936 / 10.2% 28,502 / 59.0% 3,457 / 7.2% 1,130 / 2.3% 3,618 / 7.5% 6,696 / 13.9% 48,338 / 100% No. of Structures 496 508 0 0 1 67 1,072
# Acres / % Acres 4,936 / 10.2% 8,667 / 17.9% 0 / 0% 3,008/ 6.2% 17,942 / 37.1% 13,785 / 28.5% 48,338 / 100% No. of Structures 496 336 0 5 165 70 1,072
492
209 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Outcomes/Results
The above analyses provided outputs that were further used to conduct a proximity analysis of structures within 180 feet of IASO map areas with extremely high resistance to control. The results of this work are found in Figures PA 10.7 and 10.8. These tools are for utilization by property owners and local agencies in continued dialogue about where work should be focused, with a goal of potentially accelerating hazard fuel reduction activities within the PA. An annual review of the following items is recommended: 1) local initiatives for fuel treatment, 2) annual actions to protect residential homes and neighborhoods by creating defensible space, and 3) changes such as fires or other actions that may have modified onsite fuels since the prior review.

1. Structures Potentially at Risk
Figure PA10.7 was developed by creating Zones of Concern that extend 300 feet beyond identified structures.
• Red Polygons: Areas within the red polygons are zones that are at greatest risk for the longest period of time during the fire season. Fire modeling indicated that these areas were in modeled “Not-Likely-to-Contain” and “Cannot Contain” areas. • Orange Polygons: These are areas identified that will become more at risk later in the summer and into the fall before the first rains.

Agencies, responsible parties and community members should identify priority areas for treatment and work outside their immediate defensible space.

2. Priority Areas/Roads for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation
Figure PA10.8 was developed by overlaying the Burn Probability analysis and Initial Attack Suppression Modeling outputs and suggests the following key priorities for treatments:

1. Roads/Infrastructure (areas detailed in Figure PA10.7)

2. Areas where structures are highlighted by red polygons

3. Landscapes/Ridgetops: Humbug, Greenhorn.
493
210 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA10.7. Structures Potentially at Risk and Primary Arterial Roads of Concern Structures Potentially at Risk
Late Season Only Early and Late Season
No. of Structures 281 184
494
211 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure PA10.8. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Mitigation 495
212 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
#1 = Access-ingress/egress are among the highest priority safety elements in a wildfire emergency.
✓ Roadbed width and adequate pullouts
✓ Roadside vegetation clearance
✓ Roadside power-pole and power line clearance
✓ Signing of existing residence(s) on side roads
✓ Clear marking of fire hydrant/water sources
Wildfire Protection Resources
CAL FIRE has wildfire suppression responsibility for the area. The nearest CAL FIRE stations are in Yreka and Hornbrook. Yreka, South Yreka, Montague and Grenada Fire Departments would respond under mutual aid agreements.

Primary concerns and challenges faced by protection forces Contact information for local fire protection services
State Resources (CAL FIRE)
▪ CAL FIRE Yreka Station
1809 Fairlane Rd, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-4359
▪ CAL FIRE Hornbrook Station
14638 Bradley Henley Rd, Hornbrook, CA 96044 | (530) 475-3582 Local Community & Volunteer Resources
▪ Yreka Fire Department
401 W. Miner St, Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 841-2383
▪ South Yreka Fire Protection District
3420 Easy St. Yreka, CA 96097 | (530) 842-1477
▪ Grenada Fire Protection District
6055 4th Ave, Grenada, CA 96038 | (530) 436-2200
▪ Montague Fire Department
121 South 10th St, Montague, CA 96064 | (530) 459-5343
496
213 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
PART III. APPENDICES
Appendix A. Actionable Items Supplement
Appendix B. References
Appendix C. Glossary
Appendix D. Additional Wildfire Analysis Products
497
214 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
498
215 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Appendix A: Actionable Items Supplement
{Supplement to Section 6. Action Plan}
This appendix reinforces Section 6. by providing additional tools to organize and track Actionable Items to help Yreka PAs engage protection actions. An Actionable Items Tracking Template (Table A.1) is a tool that can be used for each PA to identify and track actions categorized into the three primary community protection emphasis areas noted below and can be modified to meet the objectives for an area. A Home Hardening Prioritization Checklist (Table A.2) is also included. An annual review is advised to adjust for potential funding opportunities and other community-based needs or requirements. A short summary of key items from Section 6 follows.

I. WILDFIRE AWARENESS AND EDUCATION [LIFE SAFETY]
➢ Awareness & Preparedness Educational Event
It is recommended to hold an annual wildfire preparedness event for the community with the goal of training and educating citizens on key actions to reduce the negative effects of a wildfire. This event could be scheduled on or around National Wildfire Community Preparedness Day which falls on the first Saturday in May. This event may be ‘allencompassing’ event (include all PA Citizens) and/or done for individual PAs. ➢ Pre-Emergency Family Protection Actions
Every homeowner should be prepared for wildfire emergencies. Taking the time to PLAN AHEAD – Can Save Lives
Five Safety Steps for wildfire or any other type disaster situation:

1. Get alerts to know what to do.

2. Make a plan to protect your people.

3. Get to safety with things you need.

4. Stay safe at home when you can’t leave.

5. Help friends and neighbors get ready.

II. HOME PREPAREDNESS [HOME IGNITABILITY]
➢ Home Hardening Actions
Homeowners need to take the responsibility for improving fire-safety measures at their home. There are simple things like cleaning your gutters or mowing dead grass to the more complex like changing out siding or installing a new roof. Included in this appendix is a guide that expands upon concepts introduced in Section 6 by providing detailed tools and actions to safeguard your home. Table A.1 provides a checklist and explanation of tasks that homeowners should undertake. Figure 30 in Section 6.2.2 displays structures at greatest risk. Initial steps in this assessment process are:
499
216 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

1. Homeowners must assess their roofs, vents and vegetation adjacent to their structures.

2. Walk around of your property and determine what actions will better prepare your home.

3. Complete 30 foot and 100 foot clearing annually per PRC 4291. Use extra precautions to clear the first five feet from the structure clear of anything burnable. ➢ Defensible Space Actions
As noted and illustrated in Section 6.2.2, protecting a home from wildfire requires continual defensible space actions in THREE ZONES around the property. (These zones are also referred to as, Home Ignition Zones or HIZ’s.) Table A.1 below is a checklist that can be printed and used by property owners for each structure or infrastructure element under their ownership.
• ZONE 0 = THE EMBER-RESISTANT ZONE | 0–5 feet: The zone within 5 feet of your home has many different names (e.g., the noncombustible zone, the immediate zone, the zero zone), but the objective is generally the same—to reduce the vulnerability of the home to embers by creating a zone of ember-resistant materials around the home. Gravel, a concrete or brick walkway, or another hardscape feature is commonly used to construct this zone. Tis ember-resistant zone should include the area under and around any attached deck. Be sure to keep this zone clean of any woodpiles, wood mulch, or flammable vegetation.
• ZONE 1 = THE LEAN, CLEAN AND GREEN ZONE | 5–30 feet: The objective of this zone is to reduce the risk of fire spreading from surrounding vegetation to the home. Lean indicates that there is only a small amount of vegetation, if any, present.

Vegetation should be grouped in discontinuous islands. Clean indicates that vegetative debris and dead materials are routinely removed. Green indicates that vegetation within this zone is kept green and well irrigated (if appropriate) during the fire season. • ZONE 2 = THE REDUCED FUEL ZONE | 30–100 feet: The objective of this zone is to reduce fire spread and restrict fire movement into the crowns of trees or shrubs.

Remove dead plant material, lower tree branches and other ladder fuels (e.g., shrubs, lower branches, smaller trees). Locate outbuildings (e.g., for storage) at least 30 feet away from the home and create an ember-resistant zone around all outbuildings and propane tanks.

III. PRIORITY FUEL TREATMENTS [HAZARDOUS FUELS TREATMENT] ➢ Major Access Routes – Highest Priority
Primary roads identified as potential ingress and egress during evacuation or emergency response; should be top priority for fuels treatment. Safe access is crucial for first responders and citizens.
500
217 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
• The tracking table (A.1) will assist each PA in identifying and tracking the fuel treatments; roadside and treatment units.
• Treatment Prescription details are in Section 6.
➢ Community Identified PA Priorities – Fuel Treatment Units Table A.1 displays priority fuels treatment areas that have hazardous fuels profiles that will be difficult to suppress throughout the fire season. These are the areas of first concerns. It also includes areas that have the highest likelihood of burning as determined through the Burn Probability analysis.
• Planning Area collaboration amongst citizens, interagency resources, and local nonprofits that provide assistance in natural resource management will provide input to identify and prioritize types of treatments utilizing wildfire analysis tools provided in this plan.
501
218 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
502
219 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Table A.2. Priority Areas for Hazardous Fuels Reduction Treatment (These treatments could be either across the landscape or isolated through the development of Fuel Breaks) Actionable Items: __________________ Planning Area
Priority Elements Number Action Responsible
Official
Target
Date Status
A. Wildfire Awareness-Education
A challenge for all communities is how to
generate interest and maximize awareness of
the wildfire threat and encourage participation
in preparing for a wildfire at an individual and
community level. Public education is critical to
community preparedness and citizens need to
know.

A-1 EARLY MAY:

Provide community and/or
homeowner/neighborhood training
classes on wildfire awareness &
preparedness
Fire Department, CAL
FIRE, County Fire
Chiefs Assoc. & FSC
We will work with the City and area
citizens to determine the responsible
official and target dates. This form
can be used to do annual tracking of
accomplishments.

A-2 Create online You Tube videos to
educate residents on defensible
space, fire safe landscaping, home
hardening, evacuation, and wildfire
preparedness. Utilize local residents
and homeowner associations to
develop content and provide local
faces.

Fire Department, CAL
FIRE, County Fire
Chiefs Assoc. & FSC
A-3 Make widely available programs
that bridge language barriers as well
as help vulnerable populations; (ie)
LISTOS
Fire Department, CAL
FIRE, County Fire
Chiefs Assoc. & FSC
503
220 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
B. Home Hardening Preparedness
Structures within the WUI Fire Areas built prior
to 2008 WUI building construction standards are
vulnerable to loss from wildfire. The cost of
retrofitting existing structures with wildfire
safety improvements can be significant, but
retrofitting structures combined with adequate
defensible space will make a difference in
whether a structure survives a wildfire.

B-1 Work with City Building officials,
County Fire Departments, CALFIRE
to develop and adopt building
standards that will increase
structure resiliency.

Fire Department, CAL
FIRE, FSC help
B-2 Seek grant funding opportunities
that may be available to propertyowners to help retrofit existing nonconforming structures to current WUI building construction
standards.

B-3 Develop a voluntary home or
community inspection program to
provide property-owners with
specific information on how they
can address the specific structure
hardening needs of their homes.

C. Improve Defensible Space
Defensible Space, Home Ignition Zone concepts
are the key to Reducing Structure Ignitability. All
homes need to comply with California Public
Resource Code (PRC) 4291/Defensible Space
guidelines at a minimum. When applied to the
community these will increase structure
survivability.

Work to implement a fire safe landscaping
review process for new and existing
developments.

C-1 Within designated Wildland Urban
Interface adopt and enforce
California PRC 4291 requirements
for defensible space. Develop an
inspection program that focuses on
property-owner education
Fire Department, CAL
FIRE, FSC help
C-2 Work with CAL FIRE to develop a
program or process to improve
enforcement of defensible space
requirements on SRA lands
surrounding the City’s WUI Fire
Area.

Fire Department, CAL

FIRE, FSC
504
221 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
D. Hazardous Fuel Treatments:

Ingress-Egress Routes
Fuel treatments adjacent to roads can reduce
fire behavior along important travel routes.

Utilize evacuation route fuel treatment
prescriptive guidelines to treat the following
priority roads:
• A (Specific Road Names)
• B
• C
• D
• E
• F
• G
• H
• I
• J
D-1 Identify parcel-owners along
primary evacuation routes and
establish agreements with
landowners to perform fuel
reduction
Fire Department –
GIS helper
Ongoing
D-2 Identify a Project Leader for working
with homeowners in the area
Neighborhood or
Community
members
D-3 Work with FSC/NCRC/Local FD to
seek funding
Project Ldr & Local
Fire Dept
D-4 Establish equipment needed and
schedule out rental or contract use
for implementation and timing
E. Hazardous Fuel Treatments:

Fuel Treatment Units
E-1 Identify & prioritize areas based on
the highest hazard areas per map
tools (in each PA)
Fire Department
and/or YAFSC
E-2 Work with Fire Agency personnel
for advice on treatment design
standards
Fire Department
and/or YAFSC
505
222 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
506
223 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Table A.2. Home Hardening Prioritization Checklist
507
224 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
508
225 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Appendix B: References
Andrews, P. L.; Bevins, C. D.; Seli, R. C. 2008. BehavePlus fire modeling system, version 4.0:

User's Guide. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-106WWW Revised. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Andrews, P.L.; Rothermel, R. C. 1982. Charts for Interpreting Wildland Fire Behavior Characteristics. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-131. Ogden UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Bradshaw, L.; McCormick, E. 2000. FireFamily Plus, Version 4.1. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR67WWW. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Bureau of Land Management, The Diggings, 2021. Yreka, California, Mining Claims and Mines < https://thediggings.com/places/ca0932412324 >
Butler, B. 2014. Preliminary Firefighter Safety Zone Guidelines. < http://1.usa.gov/1HKfhJ5 >; (2017)
California Natural Diversity Database, 2017 < www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb > California Office of Emergency Services, 1950. California disaster and civil defense master mutual aid agreement. < http://bit.ly/1WUgnZz >
California Office of Emergency Services, 2020-2024. California Fire Assistance Agreement, <http://www.oesnews.com/california-fire-assistance-agreement-cfaa/> Chodash, S. (Updated: November 16, 2018). See How Much of California has Burned in the Last Five Years. Popular Science: New York City, NY. <https://www.popsci.com/california-five-yearwildfire?dom=rss-default&src=syn> Cohen, J. D., 2000. Preventing disaster: home ignitability in the wildland-urban interface.

Journal of Forestry 98 (3): pp 15-21.

Cohen, Jack and Dave Strohmaier; Community destruction during extreme wildfires is a home ignition problem, Wildland Fire Today, September 2020
County of Siskiyou California, Commissions & Committees; Siskiyou County Tree Mortality Task Force, April 2017. <https://www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/page/siskiyou-county-tree-mortality-taskforce> County of Siskiyou California, Office of Emergency Services, 2018. Hazard Mitigation Plan. <https://co.siskiyou.ca.us/content/oes-hazard-mitigation-plan> County of Siskiyou California, Public Health Services (PHS); Public Health Emergency Response/Preparedness Resource Center. 2018. < https://www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/content/phsemergency-response-preparedness-services> Diaz, John M. 2012. Economic impacts of wildfire. SFE Fact Sheet 2012-7. Joint Fire Science Program, Southern Fire Exchange. 3 p.
509
226 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Federal Register. National Archives and Records Administration. Urban Wildland Interface Communities within the Vicinity of Federal Lands That Are at High Risk from Wildfire; Notice of proposed rulemaking, 66 Federal Register 160, (August 2001) Fennessey, Brian. 2014. Open Spaces in the WUI. Fire Rescue Magazine, <https://www.firerescuemagazine.com/articles/print/volume-9/issue-2/wildland-urbaninterface/open-spaces-in-the-wui.html> Finney, Mark A. 2006. An Overview of FlamMap Fire Modeling Capabilities. In: Andrews, Patricia L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. 2006. Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: Conference Proceedings. 28-30 March 2006; Portland, OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-41. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Google Earth (Version 7.3.0) [Software]. Mountain View, CA: Google Inc. (2009). <https://www.google.com/earth/desktop/>; (February 2021) Kramer, A.K., M H Mockrin, P.M. Alexandre, and V.V> Radeloff; High wildfire damage in interface communities in California, International Journal of WIldlandfre, 2019 28, 641 to 650. CSIRO Publishing
LANDFIRE: LANDFIRE lcp data distribution, 2012. U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey. <http://landfire.cr.usgs.gov>. (October, 2017)
National Aeronautic And Space Administration, Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Dec 2020.

GISS Surface Temperature Analysis <https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v4/> National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). The basics of defensible space and the “home ignition zone”. < http://bit.ly/1KOgXaf >; (2018)
National Interagency Coordination Center; Retrieved from <www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/intelligence.htm>; (2018) National Interagency Coordination Center, Total Wildland Fires and Acres, (2019) https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html National Interagency Fire Center, Wildland Fire Management Research, Development & Application, 2021. Wildland Fire Decision Support System. <https://wfdss.usgs.gov/wfdss/WFDSS_About.shtml>
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Fire Weather Zones, Tools, Fuels, (2018) https://www.wrh.noaa.gov/fire2/?wfo=mfr
National Wildfire Coordinating Group, https://www.nwcg.gov/term/glossary/size-class-of-fire PBS, Public Broadcast Service, KQED, 2020, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/californiascatastrophic-wildfires-in-3-charts Rothermel, Richard C., How to Predict the Spread and Intensity of Forest and Range Fires USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, GTR INT-143, June 1983 Scott, J. H.; Burgan, R. E. 2005. Standard fire behavior fuel models: a comprehensive set for use with Rothermel's surface fire spread model. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-153. Fort Collins, 510
227 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr153.pdf
Siskiyou Daily News, March 14, 2020. “Vulnerable Populations – Homelessness article Siskiyou Daily News” <https://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/20200314/i-5-corridor-holds-most-ofsiskiyous-homeless-population> Skinner, C., Taylor, A. Agee, J., Briles, C., Whitlock, K. 2018. Ch. 11 Klamath Mountains Bioregion (pp. 171-195); Skinner, Taylor, 2018. Ch. 12 Southern Cascades Bioregion (pp. 195-210); Reigel, R., Miller, R., Skinner, Smith, S., Farris, C., Merriam, K., 2018 Ch 13 Northeastern Plateau Bioregion (pp. 219-249). Van Wagtendonk, J. W., Sugihara, N. G., Scott L. S., Thode, E.T., Shaffer, K. E., Fites-Kaufman, J. (Eds.) 2018. Fire In California/s Ecosystems (2nd Ed), Oakland, CA: University of California Press
St. John, P., Serena,J., Lin II, Dec. 30, 2018. “Here's how Paradise ignored warnings and became a deathtrap”. Los Angeles Times. <https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-mecamp-fire-deathtrap-20181230-story.html> State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2018. Strategic Fire Plan for California.

State of California, CAL FIRE, Accessed May 2018 - Jan 2019. Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) (FRAP). <http://frap.fire.ca.gov>.

State of California, CAL FIRE, 2010. Evacuation Tips
<https://calfire.ca.gov/communications/downloads/fact_sheets/Evacuation.pdf> State of California, CAL FIRE Ready For Wildfire, 2019. < https://www.readyforwildfire.org/ > State of California, CAL FIRE Grant Program, 2021. < https://www.fire.ca.gov/grants/ > State of California, Office of the State Fire Marshall, CAL FIRE FRAP, Communities At Risk List.

First published 2001.
<http://osfm.fire.ca.gov/fireplan/fireplanning_communities_at_risk?filter_field=county_name&fil ter_text=siskiyou)>
Tahoe Fire and Fuels Team, https://www.tahoelivingwithfire.com/about/ University of California Cooperative Extension, California Forest Stewardship Program, Forest Land Steward, Community Resilience, Winter 2021
U.S. Census Bureau; Using American FactFinder; <http://factfinder2.census.gov>; (2020) U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station. 2018. When the Well Runs Dry. U.S.

Dept. of Agriculture,
<https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/topics/tree_mortality/california/documents/BarkBeetles.pdf.> U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station. 1982. Production Rates for Cres Using Hands Tools on Firelines. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, General Technical Report PSW-62 U.S.D.A. Forest Service; Wildland Fire decisions Support System; https://wfdss.usgs.gov/wfdss/WFDSS_About.shtml
511
228 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
USDA Forest Service; Fire Spread Probability, https://wfdss.usgs.gov/wfdss/pdfs/FSPro.pdf USDA Forest Service; National Fuel Moisture Database; Greenhorn, Yreka site:
<www.wfas.net/index.php/national-fuel-moisture-database-moisture-drought-103>; (2021) USDA Forest Service, ‘A Comprehensive Guide to Fuel Treatment Management Practices for Dry Mixed Conifer Forests in the Northwestern United States’ April 2014. Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS-RN-63) < https://www.fs.fed.us/projects/hfi/field-guide/web/page03.php> 512
229 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Appendix C. Glossary
The glossary defines terms or words found in or relating to this plan. For additional terms an online resource is available at the National Wildfire Coordinating Group website.

Aspect Cardinal direction toward which a slope faces.

Assessment 1) A fire weather fire danger product based on a thorough evaluation of all pertinent sources of meteorological, fire danger and resource information. 2) The evaluation and interpretation of measurements, intelligence, and other information to provide a basis for decisionmaking.

Atmospheric
Stability
According to the American Meteorological Society, (also called static stability), the ability of the atmosphere at rest to become turbulent or laminar (statically stable) due to the effects of buoyancy.

Canopy Spacing The distance from the edge of one tree canopy to another. Crown spacing varies from open (with 10 feet or more of space between tree canopies) to closed (where trees may be growing in very close proximity with little space between them).

Climate The prevalent or characteristic meteorological conditions of any place or region, and their extremes.

Crown Fire A fire that advances from top to top of trees or shrubs more or less independent of a surface fire. Crown fires are sometimes classed as running or dependent to distinguish the degree of independence from the surface fire.

Dead Fuels Fuels with no living tissue in which moisture content is governed almost entirely by atmospheric moisture (relative humidity and precipitation), dry-bulb temperature, and solar radiation.

Direct Attack A method of fire suppression where actions are taken directly along the fire’s edge. In a direct attack, burning fuel is treated directly, by wetting, smothering, or chemically quenching the fire or by physically separating burning from unburned fuel.

Drought A period of relatively long duration with substantially below-normal precipitation, usually occurring over a large area.

Fire Behavior The manner in which a fire reacts to the influences of fuel, weather, and topography.

Firebrand Any source of heat, natural or human made, capable of igniting wildland fuels. Flaming or glowing fuel particles that can be carried naturally by wind, convection currents, or by gravity into unburned fuels.

Fire Environment The surrounding conditions, influences, and modifying forces of topography, fuel, and weather that determine fire behavior.

Fire Frequency Temporal fire occurrence described as a number of fires occurring within a defined area within a given time period.

Fire Hazard A fuel complex, defined by volume, type condition, arrangement, and location, that determines the degree of ease of ignition and of resistance to control.

Fire Intensity A general term relating to the heat energy released by a fire. 513
230 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Fire Potential The likelihood of a wildland fire event measured in terms of anticipated occurrence of fire(s) and management’s capability to respond. Fire potential is influenced by a sum of factors that includes fuel conditions (fuel dryness and/or other inputs), ignition triggers, significant weather triggers, and resource capability.

Fire Regime The characterization of fire’s role in a particular ecosystem, usually characteristic of particular vegetation and climatic regime, and typically a combination of fire return interval and fire intensity (i.e., high frequency, low intensity/low frequency, high intensity).

Fire Return
Interval
The length of time between fires on a particular area of land Fire Severity Degree to which a site has been altered or disrupted by fire; loosely, a product of fire intensity and residence time.

Fire Suppression All work and activities connected with control and fire-extinguishing operations, beginning with discovery and continuing until the fire is completely extinguished.

Fire Weather Weather conditions that influence fire ignition, behavior, and suppression.

Flame Length The distance from the base to the tip of the flaming front. Flame length is directly correlated with fire intensity.

Flaming Front The zone of a moving fire where combustion is primarily flaming.

Behind this flaming zone combustion is primarily glowing. Light fuels typically have a shallow flaming front, whereas heavy fuels have a deeper front.

Foehn Wind A warm, dry and strong general wind that flows down into the valleys when stable, high pressure air is forced across and then down the lee slopes of a mountain range. The descending air is warmed and dried due to adiabatic compression producing critical fire weather conditions.

Locally called by various names such as North winds, Mono winds, etc.

Fuel Any combustible material, which includes but is not limited to living or dead vegetation, human-built structures, and chemicals that will ignite and burn.

Fuelbed An array of fuels usually constructed with specific loading, depth, and particle size to meet experimental requirements; also, commonly used to describe the fuel composition.

Fuel Break A natural or manmade change in fuel characteristics which affects fire behavior so that fires burning into them can be more readily controlled.

Fuel
Characteristics
Factors that make up fuels such as compactness, loading, horizontal continuity, vertical arrangement, chemical content, size and shape, and moisture content.

Fuel Continuity The degree or extent of continuous or uninterrupted distribution of fuel particles in a fuel bed thus affecting a fire's ability to sustain combustion and spread. This applies to aerial fuels as well as surface fuels.

Fuel Loading The amount of fuel present expressed quantitatively in terms of weight of fuel per unit area.

Fuel Model Mathematical descriptions of fuel properties (e.g., fuel load and fuel depth) that are used as inputs to calculations of fire danger indices and fire behavior potential.
514
231 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Fuel Moisture
Content
The quantity of moisture in fuels expressed as a percentage of the weight when thoroughly dried at 212 degrees Fahrenheit.

Fuel Rank Live and dead vegetative fuels ranked for their capacity to support high-intensity fire (source: California's Forests and Rangelands: 2017 ASSESSMENT (Chapter 4: Wildfire))
Fuel Type An identifiable association of fuel elements of a distinctive plant species, form, size, arrangement, or other characteristics that will cause a predictable rate of fire spread or difficulty of control under specified weather conditions.

Fuel Reduction Manipulation, including combustion, or removal of fuels to reduce the likelihood of ignition and/or to lessen potential damage and resistance to control.

Front In meteorology, the boundary between two air masses of differing atmospheric properties.

Goals A goal is a broad statement of what you wish to accomplish, an indication of program intentions.

Ground Fire Fire that consumes the organic material beneath the surface litter ground, such as a peat fire.

Home Ignition
Zone (HIZ)
The area where the factors that principally determine home ignition potential during extreme wildfire behavior are present. The characteristics of a home and its immediate surroundings within 100 feet comprise the HIZ.

Initial Attack
(IA)
An aggressive action to put the fire out by the first resources to arrive, consistent with firefighter and public safety and values to be protected.

Intensity The level of heat radiated from the active flaming front of a fire, measured in British thermal units (BTUs) per foot.

Ladder Fuels Fuels that provide vertical continuity between strata, thereby allowing fire to carry from surface fuels into the crowns of trees or shrubs with relative ease. Ladder fuels help initiate and ensure the continuation of crowning.

Live Fuels Living plants, such as trees, grasses, and shrubs, in which the seasonal moisture content cycle is controlled largely by internal physiological mechanisms, rather than by external weather influences.

Mid-flame
Windspeed
The speed of the wind measured at the midpoint of the flames, considered to be most representative of the speed of the wind that is affecting fire behavior.

Mitigation Modifying the environment or human behavior to reduce potential adverse impacts of from a natural hazard.

Objectives They contribute to the fulfillment of specified goals and are measurable, defined, and specific.

Passive Crown
Fire
Also called torching or candling. A fire in the crowns of trees in which single trees or groups of trees torch, ignited by the passing front of the fire.

Pressure
Gradient
The difference in atmospheric pressure between two points on a weather map. Wind speed is directly related to pressure gradient. If distance between constant pressure lines is reduced by one-half, wind speed will be doubled.

Prescribed Fire A wildland fire originating from a planned ignition in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and regulations to meet specific objectives. 515
232 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Red Flag
Warning
Term used by fire weather forecasters to alert forecast users to an ongoing or imminent critical fire weather pattern.

Riparian Situated or taking place along or near the bank of a watercourse.

Safety Zone A preplanned area of sufficient size and suitable location in the wildland expected to prevent injury to fire personnel without using fire shelters.

Shrub A woody perennial plant differing from a perennial herb by its persistent and woody stem; and from a tree by its low stature and habit of branching from the base.

Slash Debris resulting from such natural events as wind, fire, or snow breakage; or such human activities as road construction, logging, pruning, thinning, or brush cutting.

Spotting Refers to the behavior of a fire producing sparks or embers that are carried by the wind and start new fires beyond the zone of direct ignition by the main fire.

Strategy The general plan or direction selected to accomplish incident objectives.

Surface Fire Fire that burns loose debris on the surface, which includes dead branches, leaves, and low vegetation.

Surface Fuels Fuels lying on or near the surface of the ground, consisting of leaf and needle litter, dead branch material, downed logs, bark, tree cones, and low stature living plants.

Structure A constructed object, usually a free-standing building above ground.

Temporary
Refuge Area
(TRA)
A preplanned area where firefighters can immediately take refuge for temporary shelter and short-term relief without using a fire shelter in the event that emergency egress to an established Safety Zone is compromised. Examples: lee side of structure, inside of structure, large lawn or parking area, cab of apparatus. (Firescope, 2013) Topography Referred to as “terrain.” The term also refers to parameters of the “lay of the land” that influence fire behavior and spread. Key elements are slope (in percent), aspect (the direction a slope faces), elevation, and specific terrain features such as canyons, saddles, “chimneys,” and chutes.

Understory Term for the area of a forest which grows at the lowest height level below the forest canopy. Plants in the understory consist of a mixture of seedlings and saplings of canopy trees together with understory shrubs and herbs.

Values at Risk The elements of a community or natural area considered valuable by an individual or community that could be negatively impacted by a wildfire or wildfire operations.

Vertical Fuel
Arrangement
Fuels above ground and their vertical continuity, which influences fire reaching various levels or vegetation strata.

Wildland Fire
Environment
The surrounding conditions, influences, and modifying forces of fuels, topography, and weather that determine wildfire behavior.

Wildland Urban
Interface (WUI)
The line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels.

Describes an area within or adjacent to private and public property where mitigation actions can prevent damage or loss from wildfire. 516
233 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Appendix D. Additional Wildfire Analysis Products
The multi-step wildfire modeling work in this CWPP produced an extensive array of maps and tables to assist every neighborhood across Yreka Area for the purpose of identifying and prioritizing wildfire protection and mitigation actions. Section 5 of the plan displays modeling results in maps for each step of the analysis. Appendix 6 displays the priority projects for consideration during the near horizon of the CWPP. Each Planning Area write-up in Part 2 has Planning Area specific maps of the primary projects.

This Appendix contains additional model outcome map products which supplement those in the plan, providing further detail or further geographical area. The polygons displayed below represent areas highlighted during the analysis of priority areas to work yet did not surface as number 1. These projects are ALL important but strategical the focus was to treat those areas at greatest risk in the near term.

Figure D.1 displays the remainder of the roads identified through the prioritization process. The identified road segments are impacted by areas modeled to be moderately difficult to suppress through those areas that would be impossible to suppress.

Figure D.2 identifies the remainder of the landscapes that are primarily problematic during the latter part of the fire season only.
517
234 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure D.1. Second Order Priority Roads
Note: Access roads identified that traverse an area that was modeled as mostly difficult to suppress in fire modeling analysis.
518
235 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P
Figure D.2. Second Order Actionable Items
Note: Areas that displayed suppression difficulty during late fire season only. These are areas that could be considered once the primary areas have actions to mitigate the hazardous fuels. 519
236 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
520
237 | P a g e Y r e k a A r e a C W P P

Community Resilience Engagement
Who:

A small collaborative of local practitioners based in northern California, extensively versed in wildland fire/fuels management, forestry practices and technology.

What:

Engage citizens and interagency cooperators in wildland urban interface communities.

Provide resources and tools to guide adaptive strategy and actions that will progressively increase neighborhood resilience in a wildfire environment.

Where:

Communities of California facing the 21
st Century reality of increasing wildfire severity
When:

Now more than ever. The 2017-2018 wildfire seasons in CA have clearly reinforced the fact that for our communities, the question of facing wildfire is not if but when.

Why:

As individuals, each of us in Proactive Wildland Resources has been affected by wildfire events recently or for some of us over the course of a lifetime career. Our common thread is the desire and will to move community conditions on a course that enables survival when they face the next wildfire.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yreka Area Community Wildfire Protection Plan | Project Team Members Jay Perkins: Wildland Fire Analysis
Julie Thrupp Titus: Wildland Fire/Fuels
Kelvin Clark: GIS Specialist
Sue Constantinides: Editor
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542

CITY OF YREKA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Prepared by: Juliana Lucchesi, AICP, Planning Director
Agenda Title: Award of City-Wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Meeting date: July 19, 2022
Recommended Action:

Motion to award the contract for the City-Wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update to MIG, Inc., approval of supplemental appropriation of $35,000 to be allocated in the fiscal year 2022-2023, and authorize the City Manager to sign the final contract to complete the scope of work.

Summary:

The City of Yreka prepared and issued a Request for Proposals for a City-Wide Noise Study and Nosie Element Update from March to April. The city received four proposals. Two of the four were considered finalists by the selection committee and supplemental information was requested to assist in the evaluation of the finalists. The city selection committee evaluated the supplemental information and determined that MIG, Inc. satisfied the criteria for award.

Background:

The City of Yreka is in the process of comprehensively updating the 2002 General Plan. The comprehensive update includes the Noise Element which identifies and appraises noise problems in the community (Gov. Code Section 65302(f)). The Element is required to contain a map of noise contours for all potential sources of noise. These contours are developed through noise monitoring that would be completed through this project.

In addition to the state requirements, the proposed scope of work includes developing noise standards per zone. The proposed work scope would result in a more tailored approach to noise regulation that allows for outdoor music events, downtown music venues, and quieter neighborhoods. The noise data and Element language could help with a future noise ordinance formation.

Fiscal Impact:

The General Plan update is funded through General Fund revenues. The anticipated impact to the General Fund would be $55,000.00 which includes the 543
proposed budget with no optional tasks and a 5% contingency for the project.

The Planning Department has $20,000 budgeted for General Plan Update expenditures in fiscal year 2022-2023. The Department did not expend all the $20,000 allocated in the fiscal year 2021-2022 that could be rolled over to cover the cost of the project. The Department is requesting a supplemental appropriation of $35,000 to adequately budget for the project.

Staff Recommendation:

The City Selection Committee consisted of members of the Public Works Department, Planning Department, and the Assistant City Manager. The award criteria was as follows:
• Qualifications and experience of the key personnel assigned to the project (25 pts.)
• Qualifications and experience of the Firm (25 pts.)
• Experience conducting similar projects, e.g., city-wide acoustic studies (25 pts.)
• Clarity on approach to complete all tasks, including schedule, budget, and scope of work (25 pts.)
The two finalists for the contract were relatively close in scoring. The committee made the final decision mainly on the cost of the MIG, Inc. proposal in relation to the other finalist; RSG, Inc.

Attachments:

1. MIG, Inc. Proposal

2. Professional Services Agreement with Exhibits
544
Proposal for City-wide Noise Study
and Noise Element Update
June 10, 2022
Prepared by:
431 I Street, Suite 108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Contact: Chris Dugan, Director of Noise Services
916-956-3802 / [email protected]
545
City of Yreka
Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update This page intentionally left blank.
546
431 I Street, Ste. 108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 956-3802
www.migcom.com

CALIFORNIA

BERKELEY

FULLERTON

KENWOOD

PASADENA

RIVERSIDE

SACRAMENTO

SAN DIEGO

SAN JOSE

LOS ANGELES

COLORADO
DENVER
OREGON

PORTLAND
TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO

WASHINGTON

SEATTLE
Ms. Juliana Lucchesi, AICP June 10, 2022
Planning Director
City of Yreka
806 S. Main Street
Yreka, CA 96097
Re: Request for Proposals (RFP) City of Yreka City-Wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update
Dear Ms. Lucchesi,
MIG, Inc. thanks you for the opportunity to submit this revised proposal to assist the City of Yreka (City) with the preparation of a City-wide noise study that will be used to update the Noise Element of the City’s General Plan. Our proposal describes how MIG’s past and present experience matches the responsibilities, scope of work, and other qualifying criteria sought by the City. As requested by the City, we have revised our April 27, 2022 proposal to include supplemental task, budget, and schedule information related to seasonal ambient noise monitoring efforts and the completion of the draft General Plan by the fall of 2023.

MIG is a full-service environmental consulting firm that specializes in planning and design, environmental impact analysis and documentation, and public outreach and facilitation services. We work diligently to provide the best possible independent, professional consulting services to our clients. We are headquartered in Berkeley, with offices in San Jose, Sacramento, and throughout the western United States. For this proposal, work would be conducted by staff from MIG’s Sacramento and San Jose offices.
547
City of Yreka Page ii
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update My name is Chris Dugan. I would serve as the primary point of contact and over-all Project Manager for MIG’s noise study services. I have garnered the analytical, communication, and management skills necessary to provide the service you expect from my 15 years of environmental consulting experience. As MIG’s Director of Noise Services, I lead the preparation of our client work products that identify, plan for, and take action to reduce potential noise impacts. I am currently serving as Project Manager for the City of Mount Shasta’s city-wide noise study and have led numerous technical plan- and project-level noise evaluations pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

MIG understands the City-wide noise study will be used to update the City’s General Plan Noise Element. While transportation noise from sources such as Interstate 5 and State Route 3 may be prevalent in certain areas, most of the City enjoys a quiet noise environment due to surrounding open space and natural areas and the fact that residential areas are located away and buffered from key transportation corridors. Given the specific information and request for services in the City’s RFP, MIG’s proposal describes the tasks we would undertake to prepare a City-wide noise study that identifies noise contours and develops standards by zone, including mixed use zoning and the City’s downtown area, that would be used to support the City’s 2044 General Plan Noise Element.

Our approach to assisting the City and community of Yreka with noise study services is simple. First, we would prepare the noise study from the context of the Yreka community – a community with a vibrant history and an informed citizenry that is embarking on a key General Plan update. Second, during an initial kick-off meeting, MIG would listen to the City’s specific goals and objectives for the noise study, as well as any suggestions or recommendations for the noise study, to ensure services are tailored in an efficient manner. Third, with the right plan in place, MIG would prepare a succinct, user-friendly noise study and General Plan Noise Element that facilitates information sharing and public support and confidence in the City’s procedures for 548
City of Yreka Page iii
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update planning for and addressing community noise issues. Throughout this process, MIG would rely on our experience preparing and evaluating General Plans throughout the state to keep the 2044 General Plan Noise Element on schedule and within budget.

MIG certifies that:
1) MIG is not in litigation that may have a significant and adverse impact on the ability to perform services for the City of Yreka.
2) MIG has the resources, expertise, and commitment to complete all components of the project in a timely and competent manner, as outlined in Section 2 of this document. 3) Chris Dugan, the MIG Project Manager for this project, will be present at all meetings requested by the City of Yreka and will fully participate in the day-to-day management of the contract.

MIG’s submission constitutes a firm binding offer of services for a period of 90 days. We have tailored this submission to provide a clear, concise explanation of why we are well-qualified to advise and assist the City with the development of the requested noise study and Noise Element; however, should you have any questions regarding our submittal, please do not hesitate to contact me, as I am authorized to negotiate and modify the scope of services described in this proposal.

Thank you again for the opportunity to assist the City with noise consulting services.

Sincerely,
Chris Dugan
Director of Noise Services
431 I Street, Suite 108, Sacramento, CA 95814
Cell: 916-956-3802 / Email: [email protected]
549
City of Yreka Page iv
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update This page intentionally left blank.
550
City of Yreka Page v
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Key Personnel and Staffing ...................................................... 1 2 Project Understanding, Approach, and Scope of Work ........... 3 Project Understanding .............................................................. 3 Proposed Approach .................................................................. 3 Revised Proposed Scope of Work ............................................ 4 Project Management ............................................................... 13 3 Revised Tentative Schedule ................................................... 15 4 Revised Budget/Cost Proposal ............................................... 17 Options for Reducing or Adding Services ............................. 17 5 Qualifications and References ................................................ 19 Experience and References .................................................... 19 Appendix A ……………………………………………….Key Staff Resumes
Appendix B …………………………………..Revised Detailed Cost Proposal 551
City of Yreka Page vi
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update This page intentionally left blank.
552
City of Yreka Page 1
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update 1 KEY PERSONNEL AND STAFFING
This section of our proposal describes the key MIG personnel that would work in concert with City staff to achieve noise study goals. Our team consists of dedicated professionals with demonstrable experience in noise monitoring, traffic and stationary source noise modeling, noise contour development, noise standard development, and noise impact analysis. Key staff resumes are presented in Appendix A to this proposal, and our team organization is shown at the end of this section.

Principal-in-Charge
The majority of the work performed for the City’s noise study would be managed out of MIG’s Sacramento and San Jose offices. Paula Hartman, Esquire, is Principal of MIG’s San Jose office. Paula is a natural resources specialist and a trained environmental lawyer with more than 20 years of experience as a resources planner, biologist, and attorney. As Principal, she works closely with clients and MIG staff to ensure the timely production of documents that meet applicable legal standards.

Project Management / Primary Contact
Chris Dugan, Director of Noise Services, would serve as overall Project Manager and primary City contact for the project. Chris would direct and support the MIG team throughout the noise study process, oversee and review the preparation of technical documentation and analyses, and regularly coordinate and consult with the City on work progress. Chris has 15 years’ experience planning, preparing, and managing environmental compliance documents required by local, state, and federal regulations, including CEQA, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and local zoning / general plan requirements. As MIG’s Director of Noise Services, he prepares planand project-level noise monitoring services, evaluates pre- and post-project noise compliance with zoning standards, general plan standards, and general quality of life standards, and presents noise impact findings to decision-making bodies and community members. Most recently, Chris has led the preparation of several technical studies addressing community noise and abatement of roadway, karaoke, and construction noise sources, as well as the preparation of several CEQA noise impact analyses for comprehensive and focused General Plan updates. 553
City of Yreka Page 2
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Technical Analysts / Support Staff
Phillip Gleason, Analyst IV, would serve as deputy Project Manager and technical analyst and be a back-up point of contact for the City. Phil would provide management continuity, assist with noise monitoring and modeling services, and assist with preparation of the noise study.

Phil has more than 5 years of experience preparing technical noise assessments under CEQA.

Most recently, Phil served as technical noise analyst for the Marin County Housing Element Draft EIR, including noise monitoring, traffic noise modeling, impact analysis, and mitigation development.

Kasey Kitowski, Analyst I, would assist with data inputs for noise modeling. Kasey has one year of experience preparing technical noise documentation. Most recently, they served as the field monitor for several noise surveys and developed traffic noise model inputs for several housing element CEQA documents MIG is currently preparing.

Becca Dannels, GIS Analyst III, would assist with the preparation of noise contour mapping and other noise study and Noise Element graphics using GIS software.

Staffing Commitment Statement
MIG affirms the staff identified above will be available to work on the City-wide noise study. We commit to this staffing plan and will not remove or reassign key team members without prior written approval from the City.

Proposed Organizational Chart
Juliana Lucchesi - Planning Director
Chris Dugan
Project Manager / Point of Contact
Lead Technical Monitor/Analyst/Modeler
Phil Gleason
Noise Monitor
Noise Analyst
Kasey Kitowski
Noise Analyst
Becca Dannels
GIS Analyst
Graphics
554
City of Yreka Page 3
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update 2 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING, APPROACH, AND SCOPE OF WORK
This section of our proposal summarizes MIG’s understanding of the project and presents our scope of work to provide the noise consulting services sought by the City.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
MIG understands the City is seeking a qualified acoustical consulting firm to prepare a costeffective, city-wide noise analysis that:
1) Identifies noise contours for key road, rail, aviation, industrial, and other noise sources. 2) Provides a technical basis for the City’s development of noise standards for different land use zones, including mixed-use and downtown land uses.
3) Support’s the development of the City’s 2044 General Plan Update Noise Element.

The City’s current General Plan Noise Element was adopted in 2002. Like many communities in California, the current Noise Element identifies traffic on regional highways (e.g., Interstate 5 and State Route 3) and local major roadways (e.g., Oberlin Road, Oregon Street) as a pervasive source of community noise. In addition to traffic, the City also includes other noise sources such as auto racing/fairground events and commercial operations (e.g., manufacturing uses). Rail and aviation noise sources are not currently prevalent in the community.

With the exception of lands located near major roads, the County fairground, and substantial commercial operations, most of the City enjoys a quiet noise environment due to surrounding open space areas. The City’s General Plan visioning website notes Yreka is in a time of rediscovery and reinvention, with recent events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, wildfires, and calls for social justice presenting challenges and opportunities for maintaining its historic values while planning for a safer, more resilient, healthier, and inclusive community.1

PROPOSED APPROACH
Given our understanding of the requested services and our knowledge of the City of Yreka, MIG proposes a technical approach to the City’s noise study and Noise Element that combines onthe-ground field monitoring services with computer modeling of both existing and future road traffic 1 Yreka General Plan Website <https://yrekageneralplan2044.com/> 555
City of Yreka Page 4
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update noise conditions. This approach would support the City with the following goals and objectives for the noise study and Noise Element:
• Accurately measure ambient noise levels in and around major transportation and nontransportation noise sources, key land use types, and key areas where land uses changes may occur as part of the General Plan update.
• Characterize the different sources that contribute to ambient noise levels measured in and around the City.
• Identify appropriate noise standards for different land use zones. • Select appropriate noise and land use compatibility guidelines for the City’s updated General Plan Noise Element.
• Develop General Plan policies and programs that embody the City and community of Yreka’s plan for addressing community noise over the next two decades.

REVISED PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1: Project Initiation / Kick-off Meeting
Upon authorization to proceed, MIG would meet with the key City personnel assigned to implement the noise study and oversee preparation of the General Plan Noise Element. Generally, during this meeting, MIG and the City would: 1) Establish roles and responsibilities and lines of communication; 2) Review the proposed work plan and receive comments and suggestions from City staff; 3) Receive any additional information and City has related to the noise study; and 4) Confirm project deliverables, budget, and schedule.

At this time, MIG anticipates the issues that will warrant early discussion and consideration include:
• 2044 General Plan Growth Projections and Land Use Changes: The noise study will be used to prepare an updated General Plan Noise Element. Understanding potential growth – both in terms of population and land use changes – will help MIG identify 556
City of Yreka Page 5
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update necessary ambient noise monitoring sites, data needed for noise modeling, and preliminary strategies for developing noise standards.
• Traffic Data: Data regarding traffic volumes, fleet mix, travel speed, and other variables is necessary to perform traffic noise modeling. MIG would work the City to identify sources of existing and future traffic data sources, such as the most recent “speed survey” or data from City or regional traffic studies.

MIG notes this task DOES NOT include travel time between MIG offices and the City of Yreka. Travel time is presented separately in Task 7 for ease of budgeting and accounting purposes.

Task 1 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 1 deliverables include:
• Kick-off meeting agenda, notes, and action items.

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• Chris Dugan (MIG Project Manager) or Phil Gleason (Senior Analyst) would attend the kick-off meeting with the City in person. Attendance in person will allow MIG to gather necessary context and familiarity with the City and better plan the community noise survey described in Task 2.

Revised Task 2: Conduct Community Noise Surveys
After reviewing noise study goals, objectives, and existing data sources identified in Task 1, MIG would begin preparations for a community noise survey designed to objectively measure and characterize ambient noise levels throughout the City under different seasonal conditions.

The community noise surveys would include a combination of short-term (typically 10 to 30 minutes) and long-term (24 to 48 hours) measurement locations intended to:
• Provide direct observations of existing noise sources in and near the different areas of the City.
• Measure existing ambient noise levels in and near the City under different seasons and conditions.
557
City of Yreka Page 6
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update • Inform how the City’s existing ambient noise environment may change with implementation of the 2044 General Plan.
• Check/improve traffic, fairground, and stationary noise model predictions (see Task 3).

The City is the county seat of Siskiyou County and a hub for tourism. During the peak summer tourism period, the City can experience increases in vehicle traffic and other activities that may increase ambient noise levels as compared to off-peak tourism periods. Similarly, the opening and closing of local schools can lead to changes in traffic patterns and other events that also influence ambient noise levels in the City.2 Finally, seasonal differences in temperature and humidity can also influence sound transmission and ambient noise levels in the City.

To identify potential seasonal differences in ambient noise levels in the City, MIG proposes to conduct to two community noise surveys. The first survey would occur in summer, when school is not in session, during a “peak” tourism period. Preliminarily, MIG anticipates this survey would occur in August, during the Siskiyou Golden Fair, an important tourism event. The second survey would occur during a known “off-peak” tourism period, when school is in session. Preliminarily, MIG anticipates this survey would occur in occur in late January or February, which avoids potential holiday travel/vacation periods in November and December. As an optional task, MIG would conduct a third survey during “moderate” tourism periods. This survey could occur during September/October 2022 or March/April 2023 and would capture ambient noise levels with moderate tourism activity, while school is session, but before winter weather conditions have set in. Each survey would include weekend and weekday monitoring to ensure any weekend tourism effects are captured during the community noise surveys. MIG would repeat noise measurement locations during each survey to provide a record of seasonal differences in ambient noise levels throughout the City.

MIG would prepare a preliminary map of noise monitoring locations for the City’s review and select final noise monitoring locations in coordination with the City. The precise number of short- and long-term noise monitoring locations would be determined as part of Task 2; however, as set forth in the task assumptions below, MIG’s SOW assumes each community noise survey would include up to 4 long-term and 10 short-term monitoring sites. All short-term noise measurements would be permanently attended by one of the qualified staff listed in Section 1 of this proposal. Staff 2 MIG notes the Yreka Unified School District’s 2022-2023 school year starts on August 22, 2022 See https://www.yrekausd.net/
558
City of Yreka Page 7
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update would also periodically attend long-term measurement locations. MIG would conduct the community noise survey with digital sound level meters that meet American National Standards Institute requirements for a Type 1 or Type 2 integrating sound level meter. Staff would calibrate each sound meter immediately before and after each ambient noise monitoring session, and ambient noise levels would be continuously collected over the sample period in a time resolution (e.g., 1-minute, 10- minute, 1-hour) sufficient to characterize the ambient noise environment and capture short-term noise events and increases in noise levels above typical background conditions. MIG staff would also document meteorological and other pertinent environmental factors that occurred during attended monitoring sessions.

MIG notes this task DOES NOT include travel time between MIG offices and the City of Yreka. Travel time is presented separately in Task 7 for ease of budgeting and accounting purposes.

Revised Task 2 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 2 deliverables include:
• Preliminary and final Community Noise Survey Map (prepared using Google Earth or GIS software)
• All community noise survey data files, including digital calibration and data records (Microsoft Excel format) and attended noise monitoring notes (PDF format).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• Each community noise survey would be completed over the course of approximately one (1) week and is uninterrupted due to inclement weather, wildfire, or other emergency. • The community noise survey would include up to 4 long-term and 10 short-term ambient noise measurement locations in the City.
• Each community noise survey would include up to 24 total hours of attended noise monitoring.

Task 3: Model Traffic and Rail Noise Levels
Concurrent with the community noise survey described in Task 2, MIG would begin to collect the data needed to model and predict traffic noise levels in the City, such as, but not limited 559
City of Yreka Page 8
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update to, traffic volumes, vehicle fleet characteristics, travel speeds, etc. Once all necessary data is collected, MIG would proceed with modeling traffic noise levels.

MIG would model traffic noise levels using the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM), Version 3.0 (V. 3.0). TNM is a computer software program that uses traffic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, roadway geometry, and other variables to compute shortand long-term traffic noise levels at user-defined receptor distances from the roadway center.

Such information could include estimates of historical rail noise levels in the City, data from other jurisdictions, or theoretical noise generation levels from standard rail data sources such as the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Impact Assessment document.

MIG would model traffic noise levels for the following features:
• Highways: Interstate 5, State Route 3 (Montague Road/Main Street/Fort Jones Road), State Route 263 (Main Street), assumed to be up to 15 different highway segments (or 30 total model runs for existing and future conditions).
• Local roadways: South Phillipe Lane, Oregon Street, West Miner Street, East Oberlin Road, Greenhorn Road), assumed to be up to 15 different road segments (or 30 total model runs for existing and future conditions).

MIG would model traffic noise levels for both existing and future conditions. MIG anticipates the future condition would align with the City’s 2044 General Plan horizon and that traffic data will be available from the City for this future condition. If data is not available from the City, MIG will work with the City to identify alternative means for predicting future traffic volumes and noise levels, such as an annual growth factor.

In general, the traffic noise modeling conducted for the noise-study would incorporate conservative assumptions about motor vehicle traffic and surrounding site conditions that tend to overpredict noise levels; however, where appropriate, MIG would incorporate specific topographic shielding or other physical barriers located adjacent to modeled road and rail segments. In addition, traffic noise predictions would be compared against actual ambient noise measurements to determine 560
City of Yreka Page 9
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update if specific model adjustments are warranted.

MIG would predict traffic noise levels on a 24-hour basis using the day-night noise level (DNL, or Ldn) basis.3
Noise levels would be predicted at specific receptor distances (e.g., 50 or 100 feet from the roadway or rail track center), which would then be used to develop and identify the distance to specific noise contour levels (e.g., the distance to a specific roadway segment’s 55 DNL, 60 DNL, or 65 DNL noise contour).

Task 3 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 3 deliverables include:
• Preliminary and final list of highway and road segments to be modeled. • All TNM model input, output, and related MIG data development and processing files. • High- and low-resolution traffic and rail noise contour maps in PDF, JPEG, and GIS data formats.

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• MIG would model up to 30 total different road segments (including highways) for existing and future conditions (60 total modeled segments for existing and future conditions).
• MIG would not model any rail track segments.
• The City would provide necessary traffic noise model information for local road segments (e.g., speed limits, road widths, etc.).
• MIG would collect necessary highway traffic model information from Caltrans.

Task 4: Prepare Draft and Final Noise Report
Following the completion of the technical work identified in Tasks 2 and 3, MIG would prepare a clear and concise noise report that:
• Summarizes key acoustic terms, sound propagation concepts, analytical considerations, and typical human responses to adverse noise levels.
3 The City’s current General Plan Noise Element presents traffic and rail noise levels on a 24-hour DNL basis. 561
City of Yreka Page 10
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update • Presents the methodology and results of the community noise survey conducted in Task 2. • Presents the methodology and results of the traffic noise modeling conducted in Task 3.

MIG would prepare the report as a technical compendium to the 2044 General Plan Noise Element prepared in Task 5. The technical noise study would provide information and context for City noises and support the establishment of local noise policies in the Noise Element update. The report would present the results of the ambient noise monitoring survey and traffic and rail noise monitoring in text, table, and graphical format. The main body of the report would be a succinct document that facilitates information sharing and reproduction; technical data, modeling methodologies, and analytical assumptions will be presented in a series of appendices and/or attachments to the main noise report. All report data and findings would be clear, identifiable, and accessible for use in other potential planning or environmental review documents (e.g., 2044 General Plan EIR, subsequent specific plans, and subsequent project-level Initial Studies or Environmental Impact Reports).

Task 4 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 4 deliverables include:
• A draft and final City-wide noise study document complete with graphics and technical appendices (Microsoft Word and PDF formats).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• MIG would prepare one (1) Administrative Draft City-wide noise study for City review and address/respond to one (1) compiled set of comments from City staff on the draft Noise Study before finalizing the document for public use. • The City-wide noise study document will be prepared using Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat PDF (i.e., not publishing software such as InDesign).

Task 5: Prepare Draft and Final Noise Element
The City’s 2044 General Plan Update provides an opportunity to comprehensively address issues critical to Yreka’s future. The Government Code (Section 65302) requires each General Plan to include a Noise Element and establishes minimum content requirements for such elements. The technical noise study completed in Task 4 will develop the noise level information required to be 562
City of Yreka Page 11
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update included in the General Plan update (e.g., traffic noise contour maps), whereas the Noise Element itself will establish the City’s local noise policy and regulations based on any public input received to date. Following completion of the technical noise study, MIG would meet with the City to discuss and strategize policy and program development for the updated Noise Element based on the data in the technical noise study, community concerns, and the development patterns specific to the 2044 General Plan planning process. The Noise Element will include:
• Brief background information on environmental and community noise issues. • Noise level information for traffic, rail, aviation, fairground, commercial facilities, and other sources stipulated by General Plan Guidelines.
• Standards and policies that clearly articulate the City’s procedures for the review, evaluation, and control of community noise levels (as well as any potential vibration issues). The policies would include references to noise and land use compatibility standards for different land use zones, specific standards for different noise sources (e.g., transportation vs. stationary noise sources), noise evaluation and control requirements for individual development projects, and preferred noise attenuation/mitigation strategies.

MIG will prepare all policies using clear language that avoids ambiguity and provides a consistent process for evaluating noise under the 2044 General Plan. • Implementation programs that describe the City’s role, responsibilities, and actions for each Noise Element policy included in the updated Noise Element. • All necessary infographics, contour maps, tables, and other similar information sharing items.

Task 5 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 5 deliverables include:
• A draft and final Noise Element document complete with graphics (Microsoft Word and PDF formats).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
563
City of Yreka Page 12
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update • MIG would prepare one (1) Administrative Draft Noise Element for the City’s review and address/respond to one (1) compiled set of comments from City staff on the draft Noise Element before finalizing the document for public use.
• The Noise Element document will be prepared using Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat PDF (i.e., not publishing software such as InDesign).

Task 6: Meetings
This task consists of MIG staff time to prepare and participate in up to one (1) meeting where the noise study and/or noise element is presented to City decision makers or staff and/or the public.

MIG may present or support City staff in the presentation of the noise study and/or Noise Element at these meetings.

MIG notes this task DOES NOT include travel time between MIG offices and the City of Yreka. Travel time is presented separately in Task 7 for ease of budgeting and accounting purposes.

Task 6 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 6 deliverables include:
• Presentation materials (up to 15 PowerPoint slides per presentation).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• City staff will conduct all noticing and distribution for public meetings. • Public meetings may last up to three (3) hours and would be attended in person by Chris Dugan (MIG Project Manager) or Phil Gleason (MIG Senior Analyst), unless the City approves remote participation in said meeting.

Task 7: Travel Time and Expenses
This task consists solely of staff travel time and travel-related expenses associated with trips between MIG offices and the City of Yreka to:
1) Attend the kick-off meeting described in Task 1.
2) Conduct the community noise monitoring survey described in Task 2. 3) Participate in public meetings described in Task 6.
564
City of Yreka Page 13
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update MIG notes that mileage, lodging, and per diem expenses associated with intra-City travel and overnight stays to conduct the community noise monitoring survey are included in the Task 2 budget line item.

Task 7 Deliverables and Assumptions
There are no specific deliverables for Task 7 (mileage reports and travel expense receipts would be included in the invoices prepared as part of Task 8).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• Staff trips will not incur bridge tolls, toll road fees, or other non-mileage expenses.

Revised Task 8 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 8 deliverables include:
• Monthly invoices with supporting mileage logs, expense receipts, and progress report.

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• MIG would participate in brief conference calls twice a month for a period of approximately six (6) months during peak noise-study and noise element update activities (12 hours total).
• The preparation of the noise study and Noise Element update will take approximately 12 to 15 months to complete from start to finish.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT
MIG has been successful in the highly competitive environmental consulting profession for more than 35 years because we prepare high quality work products and provide excellent customer service. Our focus on quality control and careful project management allows us to help our clients navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by each unique project. 565
City of Yreka Page 14
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update MIG’s quality control begins with assigning qualified, dedicated staff to each project, including a Project Manager (Chris Dugan) that coordinates internal and external communications, reviews all work products, and diligently monitors the status of the project deliverables, budget, and schedule. Each project is also assigned a deputy project manager (Phil Gleason) that is capable of handling urgent project issues or emergencies should unforeseen events occur. All staff recognizes that clear and regular internal and external communications are key to any successful endeavor and help to identify potential issues are the earliest possible time.

MIG will partner and work closely with City staff during the development of the noise study and Noise Element, and our existing project management protocols would support our commitment to the City of Yreka, its staff, and community to deliver the scope of services described above. 566
City of Yreka Page 15
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update 3 REVISED TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
The schedule for the preparation and completion of the City-wide noise study and Noise Element update is contingent on some factors that are not known at this time and outside the control of MIG including the length of time necessary to obtain traffic noise modeling data from the City and/or railroad operators, the length of time associated with administrative draft review periods, and the scheduling of public meetings/hearings to present the noise study and Noise Element.

Nonetheless, based on MIG’s planning-level noise analysis experience, we have prepared a tentative projected schedule for the City-wide noise study and Noise Element update. The project schedule assumes work begins soon after a notice to proceed has been issued by the City. MIG will work with the City to refine the project schedule during our proposed kick-off meeting.

Yreka City-wide Noise Study/Noise Element Revised Tentative Project Schedule Task Start Date End Date
Notice to Proceed July 1, 2022

1. Kick off Meeting 07/18/22 07/22/22

2. Conduct Community Noise Survey 07/25/22 02/10/23
Draft Noise Monitoring Location Map 07/25/22 07/29/22
Final Noise Monitoring Location Map 08/01/22 08/05/22
Noise Survey 1 (Peak Tourism, No School) 08/10/22 08/14/22 Noise Survey 2 (Off-Peak Tourism, with School)) 11/01/22 02/10/23 Optional Noise Survey 3 (Moderate Tourism, with School) 09/01/22 10/31/22

3. Model Traffic and Rail Noise Levels 07/25/22 03/17/23 Collect and review traffic and rail noise model data 07/25/22 12/31/22 Traffic and rail noise modeling 01/03/23 02/28/23
Contour Map Preparation 03/01/23 03/17/23

4. Prepare Draft and Final Noise Study 03/01/23 04/14/23 Draft Noise Study 03/01/23 03/31/23
City Review Period 04/03/22 04/21/23
Final Noise Study 04/24/23 05/05/23

5. Prepare Draft and Final Noise Element 04/24/23 08/04/23 Draft Noise Element 04/24/23 06/09/23
City Review Period 06/12/23 07/14/23
Final Noise Element 07/17/23 08/04/23

6. Meetings (1) As Needed
567
City of Yreka Page 16
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update This page intentionally left blank.
568
City of Yreka Page 17
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update 4 REVISED BUDGET/COST PROPOSAL
As explained in Section 2, MIG has developed a scope of work that responds specifically to the services requested by the City in its March 30, 2022 RFP. MIG’s estimated budget to complete the City’s noise study is summarized in the table on the following page. Our budget estimates are based on current MIG billing rates and the amount of staff time necessary to complete the tasks listed in Section 2, as estimated based on our experience with past planning-level noise consulting services. MIG’s current billing rates for the staff identified in this proposal are:
• Chris Dugan: $195 (Senior Project Manager) / $165 (Senior Analyst II) • Phil Gleason: $140 (Analyst IV)
• Kasey Kitowski: $95 (Analyst I)
• Becca Dannels: $115 (GIS Analyst III)
The budget estimates also include expenses pertaining to mileage and travel expenses for noise monitoring and public meetings. Expense rates are generally based on prevailing IRS mileage and General Services Administration rates for the Yreka area, plus expenses to conduct noise monitoring and maintain equipment in good working order. Please refer to Appendix B for MIG’s detailed cost proposal sheet, including staff hours and rates by task and anticipated subtask, as well as our 2022 rate sheet.

OPTIONS FOR REDUCING OR ADDING SERVICES
Preliminarily, MIG has identified the following options for reducing costs:
• Approve remote participation in certain meetings (Task 6), if warranted.

MIG would work with the City to review the budget proposal and consider specific budget modifications requested by the City.
569
City of Yreka Page 18
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Yreka City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Revised Budget Summary Task Staff
Hours
Staff
Labor Expenses Total Budget
Task 1 Kick-off Meeting 12 $2,160 $228 $2,388
Task 2 Community Noise Surveys (2) 98 $12,530 $1,075 $13,605 Task 3 Model Traffic and Rail Noise Levels 76 $8,220 $0 $8,220 Task 4 Draft and Final Noise Study 62 $7,030 $0 $7,030
Task 5 Draft and Final Noise Element 82 $9,870 $0 $9,870 Task 6 Meetings 5 $825 $0 $825
Task 7 Travel Time and Expenses 40 $3,800 $1,217 $5,017 Task 8 Project Administration and Management 28 $5,100 $0 $5,100 Total Budget Estimate, without Options 403 $49,535 $2,520 $52,055 Optional Tasks
3rd Noise Survey 37 $4,715 $538 $5,253
3rd Noise Survey Travel Time and Expenses 10 $950 $304 $1,254 Optional Tasks Subtotal 47 $5,665 $842 $6,507
Total Budget Estimate, with Options 450 $55,200 $3,362 $58,562 Note: Refer to Appendix B for a detailed cost proposal sheet with rates, hours, and charges per staff per task. 570
City of Yreka Page 19
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update 5 QUALIFICATIONS AND REFERENCES
MIG provides plan-level noise and vibration impact analysis services to communities throughout the state. Plan-level noise analyses provide a broad snapshot of potential noise and vibration impacts associated with changes in land use development and the increasing density/proximity of noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses to major roadways, rail lines, airports, and commercial centers. Plan-level analyses also allow for the proper identification of potential land use/noise compatibility associated with increased proximity to noise sources and/or the combination of sensitive (e.g., residential) and non-sensitive (e.g., commercial) uses in a mixed-use development.

MIG prepares noise elements and impact analyses consistent with state law and general plan guidance. We identify all major sources of noise within a community, conduct ambient noise and vibration monitoring to document existing community conditions, model traffic, stationary, and other sources of noise associated with existing and planned community conditions, and identify and assess changes in land use and noise compatibility that are appropriate given the specific conditions present in an area. MIG supports our clients with the development of appropriate noise compatibility guidelines and policies that protect the community from the adverse effects of exposure to continuous high noise levels while balancing the growth in residential, commercial, and other development envisioned by the planning process.

EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
A selection of our MIG’s noise planning and impact analysis experience from the last five (5) years is summarized in the table on the following page. Projects highlighted in bold font represent a relevant, significant project that is presented in more detail below. 571
City of Yreka Page 20
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Summary of Relevant MIG Noise Consulting Services (Within the Last 5 Years) Project
Ambient / Source
Noise Monitoring
Traffic and/or Rail
Noise Modeling
Noise Impact
Evaluation
General Plan Policy
Development
Zoning Ordinance
Assistance
Santa Fe Springs 2040 General Plan EIR
Santa Fe Springs, CA X X X X X
Garden Grove Focused General Plan Update EIR
Garden Grove, CA X X X X X
Whittier 2040 General Plan EIR
Whittier, CA X X X X
Desert Hot Springs General Plan Update EIR
Desert Hot Springs, CA X X X X
Burlingame General Plan Update EIR
Burlingame, CA X X X X X
Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan EIR
Santa Clara County, CA X X X X
City of Mount Shasta City-wide Noise Study
Mount Shasta, CA X X X
Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Master Plan
Cupertino, CA X X X X
Merrill Avenue Traffic Noise Study
Ontario, CA X X X
Royal Karaoke Conditional Use Permit Noise Study
Westminster, CA X X
6th Street Warehouse Technical Noise Report
San Bernardino County, CA X X X
Santa Clara Valley Medical Center
Behavioral Health Center Project IS/MND
Santa Clara County, CA
X X
Old 215 Industrial Park Noise Impact Analysis
Riverside, CA X X X
SFLC Construction Noise Reduction Compliance Plan
Fontana, CA X
General Drive Industrial Park Noise Impact Analysis
Jurupa Valley, CA X X X
Palo Alto Public Service Building EIR
Palo Alto, CA X X X
County Government Center Campus Development EIR
Redwood City, CA X X
Concrete Batch Plant Replacement Project EIR
Half Moon Bay, CA X X X
572
City of Yreka Page 21
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Santa Fe Springs 2040 General Plan EIR, City of Santa Fe Springs, Los Angeles County Client: City of Santa Fe Springs
Contact: Mr. Wayne Morrell, Director of Planning
11710 Telegraph Road
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
(562) 868-0511, Ext. 7362
[email protected]
Timeframe: January 2020 to February 2022
Scope of Work: MIG prepared the Santa Fe Springs 2040 General Plan update and the associated General Plan Program EIR. Under build-out conditions (Year 2040) the updated General Plan land use diagram permitted, at worst case, the redevelopment and potential increase of 4,572 dwelling units and more than 700,000 square feet of non-residential building space in a largely built-out City with high volumes of truck traffic from existing industrial operations. Project work began with the preparation of an existing conditions report that identified key noise sources within the City and key community issues and concerns regarding existing and planned development patterns. The next step in the process was the development of a draft Noise Element that satisfied the requirements of state law and community concerns. The Noise Element identified 3 goals and 18 policies to protect noise sensitive land uses, provide a clear mechanism for the review of potential noise impacts associated with re-development and mixed-use projects, and ensure projects are compatible with the ambient noise environment and not disruptive to the surrounding community. Finally, the last step in the process was the preparation of the EIR for the General Plan. The Noise analysis estimated existing and future noise levels associated with two (2) major highways, numerous local major roadways, BSNF and UPRR freight rail lines, Metrolink Commuter Rail, a planned light rail extension, and industrial operations. The EIR presented the results of MIG’s modeling in a series of noise contour maps. The Noise analysis also clearly provided the explanation and justification for how the City’s proposed noise and land use compatibility guidelines and General Plan policies would reduce noise levels in the City and mitigate noise levels from future development projects.

Key Personnel: Chris Dugan (Lead Technical Analyst) and Phil Gleason (Analyst) The General Plan update and associated EIR are available at:
https://www.reimaginesantafesprings.org/documents#Environmental A noise contour map from the General Plan is provided on the following page. 573
City of Yreka Page 22
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update 574
City of Yreka Page 23
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Master Plan City of Cupertino, Santa Clara County Client: City of Cupertino
Contact: Ms. Lisa Camelli, Project Manager, Public Works 10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408)-777-1380
[email protected]
Timeframe: January 2022 to present (ongoing)
Scope of Work: MIG is assisting the City of Cupertino with the preparation of the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Master Plan, a locally important park project located next to Interstate 280 and a local major arterial road. A key component of the Master Plan was the preparation of a Noise Technical Report that presented the results of a community noise survey at the planned park site and documented the effectiveness of existing and potential noise barriers at the proposed park site. MIG collected ambient noise levels, correlated ambient noise levels with traffic count data, validated the traffic noise model runs for the project, and identified preliminary options, effectiveness, and costs for noise attenuation features. The results were presented to the community and are being used to inform the park programming and design options being developed for the Master Plan.

Key Personnel: Chris Dugan (Lead Technical Analyst) and Phillip Gleason (Analyst) 575
City of Yreka Page 24
Revised Proposal for City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update County Government Center Campus Development Project EIR, San Mateo County Client: San Mateo County
Contact: Ms. Jasmine Gao, Project Manager
County Manager’s Office, Project Development Unit
1402 Maple Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
Phone: 650-369-4715
Email: [email protected]
Timeframe: January 2018 to September 2021
Scope of Work: MIG prepared the County Government Campus Development Project EIR. The project consisted of a new county office building (7 stories, 156,000 square feet) and associated parking garage (1,200 stalls) in downtown Redwood City. The EIR’s noise analysis evaluated construction and operational noise levels from sources such as the parking garage and building mechanical equipment at nearby sensitive and school receptor locations Following certification of the EIR, MIG assisted the County with construction noise barrier design and noise monitoring services to ensure sensitive receptors were not impacted by adverse construction noise levels.

Key Personnel: Chris Dugan (Lead Technical Analyst) and Phillip Gleason (Analyst / Field Monitor)
576
Page | 1

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES
MIG, Inc.

City-Wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update

1. PARTIES:

The parties to this contract are the City of Yreka, a municipal corporation of the State of California (the City) and MIG, Inc. (Planning Consultant).

This AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this 19 day of July, 2022.

2. SCOPE OF SERVICES:
(a) The services to be provided by Planning Consultant are described in Exhibit “A” which is made a part of this Agreement as if it were fully set forth at length here at. (b) Planning Consultant represents and warrants that all Planning Consultant services shall be provided by a person or persons duly licensed by the State of California to provide the type of services described in paragraph (a), as required.
(c) Planning Consultant shall furnish all equipment, supplies, and facilities necessary and convenient to perform properly the services required herein. Without limitation, Planning Consultant shall supply any needed computer equipment.
(d) Additional Work Assignments. Upon presentation of a request for an estimate to perform additional work outside the scope presented in Exhibit A, Planning Professional shall provide a proposal that includes a good faith estimate of the scope, charges, and schedule for the additional assignment. Work shall be undertaken only as specifically authorized in writing by the City. City shall be afforded the opportunity to revise project budget, scope, or make other changes City desires before charges for work have exceeded the original cost estimate and authorization. Planning Consultant retains the right to reject specific assignments and rejection of an assignment does not terminate this Agreement.
(e) Litigation Support. Planning Consultant shall receive compensation for preparing for and/or appearing in any litigation at the request of City, except: (1) if such litigation costs are incurred by the Planning Consultant in defending its work or services or those of any of its subconsultants; or (2) as may be required by the indemnification requirements of the Planning Consultant. Compensation for litigation services requested by the CITY shall be paid at a mutually agreed upon rate and/or at a reasonable rate for such services. 577
Page | 2

3. PAYMENT:
(a) Payment for services. The City shall pay for services performed in accordance with this contract according to the payment and fee schedule contained in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

No contract price changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without City’s prior written approval. Any additional services requested in writing that is not listed or covered in this Agreement will be extra work, less any amounts deemed to be a setoff and shall be payable at either a negotiated fixed fee or, if time and materials, at the established rates and expenses.

The amount of the request for payment which is approved by City shall be paid to the Planning Consultant, less the amount of all previous payments and less all valid setoffs.

Valid setoffs shall include:
(a) The cost to correct defective services which has not been remedied by the Planning Consultant; or
(b) Claims against the Planning Consultant or any of its subcontractors for services or materials furnished; and or
(c) Failure of Planning Professional to make proper payments to any subcontractors, employees, suppliers or materialsmen; and or (d) Costs resulting from default by Planning Consultant on any other term or condition of this Contract.

City reserves the right to withhold final payment to the extent that:
(a) There are defective services not remedied by the Planning Consultant; or (b) There are claims against the Planning Consultant or any of its subcontractors for labor or materials furnished; or
(c) The Planning Professional has not made proper payments to subcontractors, employees or materialmen; or
(d) The Planning Professional has defaulted on any other term or condition of this Agreement.

The acceptance by the Planning Consultant of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims by the Planning Consultant except those previously made in writing and still unsettled.

No services shall be performed by Planning Consultant in excess of the total contract price without City’s prior written approval.

Planning Consultant shall maintain accounting records including the following information: names and titles of employees or agents, types of services performed, and times and dates of all services performed in connection with this Agreement which is billed on an hourly basis.
578
Page | 3
Planning Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the cost, expenses and receipts and other information required by City for any services provided where compensation is on the basis of hourly rates, subcontractor costs or other direct costs.

Planning Consultant shall maintain accurate records on services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible.

At any time during the term of this Agreement, City may request that Planning Consultant perform “extra work.” As used herein, “extra work” means any services that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the project, but which the parties hereto did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the time of the execution of this Agreement.

Planning Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, extra work without City’s prior written approval and authorization.
(b) Reimbursement of expenses. Planning Consultant will be reimbursed for actual, reasonable and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of services in accordance with the expense reimbursement schedule included in Exhibit B. Planning Consultant shall not charge the City for time spent preparing invoices beyond the costs specified in the Planning Consultant’s budget estimate incorporated as Exhibit B. The hourly compensation provided for in this Agreement shall include all overhead, markups and personal transportation costs. (c) Maximum payment. The maximum payment under this contract for services incurred outside of an approved specific project scope and, if authorized, reimbursement of expenses, shall not exceed Fifty-five Thousand and no cents ($55,000.00) payable in dollars of the United States of America for the duration of the project. (d) Invoices. Planning Consultant shall submit monthly itemized billings to City’s Administrator, allocated by Task according to Exhibit A, Scope of Services and in a form acceptable to City, as well as any documentary evidence required by City. City’s Administrator shall review the invoice for accuracy. City shall pay to Planning Consultant all charges determined to be accurate by City’s Administrator in the regular course of business. Payments are subject to a final audit upon completion of services or other termination of this contract.

Planning Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the services performed during the preceding month and charged in accordance with the hourly rates set out in Exhibit B. The Planning Consultant shall provide separate invoices for each specific project and grant task at the request of the Administrator. All invoices shall be itemized, and state that such services were performed and were necessarily incurred. The itemized statement shall specifically set forth compensation and expenses by assigned task, the total compensation and expenses for each task billed as of the date of the statement, and the total billing for all compensation and expenses from contract inception to the date of the statement. City reserves the right to require substantiation of any item of claimed expense. 579
Page | 4
Overly generalized listing of task descriptions are not acceptable, rather, Planning Consultant shall provide a detailed description which will provide a meaningful record to an independent auditor reviewing task description. Any work product or memoranda or other written material described in the entries shall be produced for City as requested.

Billings under this agreement shall not be provided in more than fifteen-minute increments and shall represent the devotion of a full fifteen minutes before such an increment is billed. Under no circumstances shall Planning Consultant use “block billing” procedures, wherein a list or series of activities is done each day with only an aggregate amount of time specified. Instead, Planning Consultant shall provide a fully detailed specific entry for each separate task and subtask reflecting the time for such task or subtask.

The City shall act to approve or deny each invoice submitted by Planning Consultant within thirty days from receipt of the invoice. Payment shall be mailed to Planning Consultant within fourteen days of City’s approval.
(e) Audit of Records. Planning Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records of all payrolls, expenditures, disbursements and other cost items charged to the City or establishing the basis for an invoice. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Planning Consultant shall allow City Administrator to inspect, examine, copy and audit such records during regular business hours upon 24 hours notice.

In addition to the accounting records, Planning Consultant shall allow City the right to examine and audit all records, and to make transcripts thereof as necessary, allow inspections of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities relating to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment or for so long as required by any grant funding this agreement.

4. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE:
(a) Planning Consultant will perform the services according to a schedule agreed to by both parties. Performance under this Agreement shall commence immediately upon City’s issuance of a Notice to Proceed and shall continue until all authorized services are approved by City. Planning Consultant shall perform diligently and continuously to complete all services set forth in the Scope of Services. In the event that Planning Consultant fails to strictly adhere to the times for performance as hereinafter provided, City may in its sole and absolute discretion terminate this Agreement.

If additional funding is not authorized to pay for professional services beyond those services authorized by the Notice to Proceed in this Agreement, City and Planning Consultant shall negotiate modifications to the schedule to accommodate the availability of funds. If the schedule calls for the services to be performed in phases or discrete increments, Planning Consultant shall not proceed from one phase or increment to the next without written authorization from the Contract Administrator. Unless there are subsequent modifications to the schedule, the Planning Consultant will complete all services by as shown on the schedule.

In the event of a dispute between the parties concerning the interpretation of this Agreement, 580
Page | 5
Planning Consultant shall not be excused from any scheduled completion date provided for by this Agreement, but shall diligently proceed with all Services to be performed. No Services shall be delayed or postponed by Planning Consultant, pending resolution of any disputes with the City unless otherwise agreed to by both parties in writing.

The services shall be performed on a continuous, ongoing basis. Planning Consultant will meet with the Contract Administrator as needed to evaluate workload and schedule upcoming activities and staffing needs. The Planning Consultant and Contract Administrator will set mutually acceptable timing requirements at the time the work to be performed is assigned. Planning Professional shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance IN WRITING to the Contract Administrator no later than ten calendar days after the start of the condition allegedly causing the delay, and not later than the date on which performance is due. Contract Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond the control of the Planning Consultant.

For all time periods not specifically set forth in this Agreement, the Planning Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, including but not limited to telephone, fax, hand delivery, email, or mail. (b) Extension of time for unforeseen circumstances. In the event that the Planning Consultant is unable to meet the completion date or schedule of services, if any, due to circumstances beyond Planning Consultant’s reasonable control, such as war, riots, strikes, lockouts, work slowdown or stoppage, except strikes, lockouts, or work slowdown or stoppage of Planning Consultant’s employees or subcontractors, acts of god, such as floods or earthquakes, and electrical blackouts or brownouts, Planning Consultant shall inform the Contract Administrator of the additional time required to perform the work and the Contract Administrator may adjust the schedule.

5. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE:
(c) All services shall be performed by Planning Consultant and each of its employees in accordance all applicable legal requirements and shall meet and conform with generally accepted professional practices and principles and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by members of Planning Consultant's profession currently practicing design and construction management services in California. By delivery of completed work, Planning Consultant certifies that the work conforms to the requirements of this contract and all applicable federal, state and local laws, specific funding program requirements, and the professional standard of care in California.

City has relied upon the professional training and ability of Planning Consultant to perform the services and Scope of Services hereunder as a material inducement to enter into this Agreement. Planning Consultant shall therefore provide properly skilled professional and technical personnel to perform all services required by it to be performed under this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any person or persons assigned by Planning Consultant to
581
Page | 6
perform Services pursuant to this Agreement, Planning Consultant shall remove any such person immediately upon receiving written notice from City of its desire for removal of such person or persons.

All compensation payable to Planning Consultant hereunder shall be paid by City. Planning Consultant acknowledges and recognizes that Services under this Agreement have its source from tax dollars from tax payers of the State of California and that, given this fact, a heightened duty of care exists in Planning Consultant to ensure that Planning Consultant scrupulously adheres to principles of moderation, frugality and cost consciousness in carrying forth the goals of and completing the pursuant to this Agreement (b) Planning Consultant is responsible for making an independent evaluation and judgment of all conditions affecting performance of the work, including without limitation site conditions, existing facilities, seismic, geologic, soils, hydrologic, geographic, climatic conditions, applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and all other contingencies or design considerations. Data, calculations, opinions, reports, investigations, and other similar information provided by the City relating to site, local, or other conditions is not warranted or guaranteed, either expressly or implied, by the City. (c) Planning Consultant's responsibilities under this section are shall not be delegated.

Planning Consultant shall be responsible to the City for acts, errors, or omissions of Planning Consultant's subcontractors.
(d) Whenever the scope of work requires or permits review, approval, conditional approval or disapproval by the City, it is understood that such review, approval, conditional approval or disapproval is solely for the purposes of administering this contract and determining whether the Planning Consultant is entitled to payment for such work, and not be construed as a waiver of any breach or acceptance by the City of any responsibility, professional or otherwise, for the work, and shall not does not relieve the Planning Consultant of responsibility for complying with the standard of performance or laws, regulations, industry standards, or from liability for damages caused by negligent acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, or the willful misconduct of Planning Consultant.

6. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR:

Planning Consultant is an independent contractor. Neither Planning Consultant nor any of Planning Consultant's officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors, if any, is an employee of the City by virtue of this contract or performance of any work under this contract.

Planning Consultant is not a designated employee within the meaning of the Political Reform Act because Planning Consultant:
a) Will conduct research and arrive at conclusions with respect to his/her rendition of information, advice, recommendations, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the City or of any City official, other than normal agreement monitoring; 582
Page | 7
and possesses no authority with respect to any City decision beyond rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel.
b) Does not make or participate in the making of any governmental decisions regarding approval of a rate, rule, or regulation, the adoption or enforcement of laws; c) Does not make or participate in the issuance, denial, suspension or revocation of permits, licenses, applications, certificates, approvals, orders, or similar authorization or entitlement;
d) Does not make or participate in authorizing the City to enter into, modify, or renew a contract;
e) Does not make or participate in granting City approval to a contract that requires City approval and to which the City is a party, or to the specifications for such a contract; f) does not make or participate in granting City approval to a plan, design, report, study, or similar item;
g) Does not make or participate in adopting, or granting City approval of, policies, standards, or guidelines for the City or for any subdivision thereof. h) Does not serve in a staff capacity with the City and in that capacity participate in making a governmental decision or otherwise perform the same or substantially all the same duties for the City that would otherwise be performed by an individual holding a position specified in the City’s Conflict of Interest Code under Government Code Section 87302.

In the event the City officially determines that Planning Consultant must disclose its financial interests by completing and filing a Fair Political Practices Commission Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests, Planning Consultant shall file the subject Form 700 with the City Clerk’s Office pursuant to the written instructions provided by the Office of the City Clerk.

7. SUCCESSOR AND ASSIGNS:

Planning Consultant shall not subcontract, assign or transfer voluntarily or involuntarily any of its rights, duties, or obligations under this contract without the express written consent of the City in each instance.

All representations, covenants and warranties specifically set forth in this Agreement, by or on behalf of, or for the benefit of any or all of the parties hereto, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of such party, its successors and assigns. This Agreement and any portion thereof shall not be assigned or transferred, nor shall any of the Planning Consultant’s duties be delegated, without the express written consent of the City. Any attempt to assign or delegate this Agreement without the express written consent of City shall be void and of no force or effect. Consent by City to one assignment shall not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment.

8. SUBCONTRACTORS:
(a) City and Planning Consultant recognize and acknowledge that Planning Consultant is hereunder employed in a position where Planning Consultant will be rendering services of a 583
Page | 8
special, unique, unusual and extraordinary character requiring extraordinary ingenuity and effort by Planning Consultant. The parties hereto recognize that a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement is the reputation, experience, and competence of Planning Consultant. This Agreement and any portion thereof shall not be assigned or transferred, nor shall any of Planning Consultant’s duties be delegated, without the express written consent of City. Any attempt to assign or delegate this Agreement without the express written consent of City shall be void and of no force or effect. Consent by City to one assignment shall not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Planning Consultant shall provide qualifications of assignees for review by City, which will not unreasonably withhold consent. Planning Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed without the prior written authorization of City. If City consents to said subcontract, Planning Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts or omissions of subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise is required by law. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. (b) When subcontracting of Services is permitted, Planning Consultant shall pay subcontractor within 45 days of receipt of payment by City for work performed by a subcontractor and billed by the Planning Consultant. Use of the term subcontractor in any other provision of this contract shall not be construed to imply authorization for Planning Consultant to use subcontractors for performance of any service under this contract. (c) The City is an intended beneficiary of any work performed by the subcontractor for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the subcontractor and the City.

9. PLANNING CONSULTANT'S EMPLOYEES:
(d) The key personnel to perform the services shall be assigned at the beginning of the project and shall remain assigned through completion of the services, unless otherwise mutually agreed by the parties in writing, or caused by hardship or resignation in which case substitutes shall be subject to City approval.
(e) Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Planning Consultant is aware of the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and shall comply with those requirements, including, but not limited to, verifying the eligibility for employment of all of Planning Consultant’s officers, employees, agents and subcontractors that are included in this contract.
(f) Limitation of City Liability. The payment made to Planning Consultant pursuant to this contract shall be the full and complete compensation to which Planning Consultant and Planning Consultant’s officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors are entitled for performance of any work under this contract. Neither Planning Consultant nor Planning Consultant’s officers or employees are entitled to any salary or wages, or retirement, health, 584
Page | 9
leave or other fringe benefits applicable to employees of the City. The City will not make any federal or state tax withholdings on behalf of Planning Consultant. The City shall not be required to pay any workers' compensation insurance on behalf of Planning Consultant. (d) Indemnification for Employee Payments. Planning Consultant agrees to defend and indemnify the City for any obligation, claim, suit or demand for tax, retirement contribution including any contribution to the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), social security, salary or wages, overtime payment, or workers' compensation payment which the City may be required to make on behalf of Planning Consultant or any employee of Planning Consultant, or any employee of Planning Consultant construed to be an employee of the City, for work done under this contract. This is a continuing obligation that survives the termination of this contract.

10. FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES:
(di) Civil Rights Act. Planning Consultant agrees to comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, the California Fair Employment Practices Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, any other applicable federal and state laws and regulations hereinafter enacted.
(dii) Indemnification for Employee Behavior. To the fullest extent permitted by law and without limitation by the provisions of Section 19 relating to insurance, the Planning Consultant shall also indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, and its directors, officers, employees and agents from and against all liability (including without limitation all claims, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments, associated investigation and administrative expenses, and defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs, and costs of alternative dispute resolution) resulting from any claim of discrimination or harassment, including but not limited to sexual harassment, arising from the conduct of the Planning Consultant or any of the Planning Consultant's officers, employees, agents, licensees, or subcontractors. In the event of a discrimination or harassment complaint against any employee, agent, licensee or subcontractors of the Planning Consultant or its subcontractors, the Planning Consultant shall take immediate and appropriate action in response to such complaint, including, but not limited to termination or appropriate discipline of any responsible employee, agent, licensee or subcontractors. The provisions of this Section survive completion of the services or termination of the Contract.

11. WORKPLACE CONDUCT AND BEHAVIOR:

Planning Consultant and Planning Consultant’s officers, employees, agents and subcontractors shall comply with a Substance-free Work Place Policy, and other rules and regulations governing work place safety, conduct, and behavior, for any portion of the work performed on the premises of the City or using City facilities or equipment.

12. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT:
585
Page | 10
Upon delivery, the work product, including without limitation, all original reports, writings, recordings, drawings, files, and detailed calculations developed under this contract are the property of the City. Planning Consultant agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this contract shall be vested in the City and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the City.

City acknowledges that its use of the work product is limited to the purposes contemplated by the scope of work and that the Planning Consultant makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. In return for Planning Consultant’s relinquishment of ownership, CITY agrees to waive any claim against Planning Consultant and indemnify and hold Planning Consultant harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss arising from unauthorized re-use of Planning Consultant’s instruments of service by CITY.

13. DELIVERABLES:

All printed material, if any, required to be submitted by Planning Consultant as a final deliverable and produced using computer software shall include, as part of that deliverable, copies of all pertinent computer files on flash drive or online dropbox software. Computer files shall use MS Word© for documents, and MS Excel© for spreadsheets and estimates, ESRI products for mapping projects, and AutoCAD © .dwg for drawing files. At the conclusion of the project, electronic copies of final (or as-built) plans and specifications shall be provided on a flash drive in native and Adobe Acrobat .pdf formats for the City’s permanent records.

14. CHANGES IN WORK:

No payment for changed or additional work shall be made unless the changed or additional work has first been approved in writing by the Contract Administrator and the parties have agreed upon the appropriate adjustment, if any, to the payment schedule and maximum payment amount for the changed or additional work. The Contract Administrator may order changes or additions to the scope of work. Whether a change or addition to the scope of work is proposed by the Planning Consultant or ordered by the Contract Administrator, the parties shall in good faith negotiate an appropriate adjustment, if any, to the payment schedule and maximum payment for the changed or additional work. An approved change or addition, along with the payment adjustment, if any, will be effective upon an amendment to this contract executed by both parties. The amendment shall not render ineffective or invalidate unaffected portions of this contract.

15. CONFIDENTIALITY:
(a) Confidential Nature of Information. Planning Consultant shall treat all information obtained from the City in the performance of this contract as confidential and proprietary to the City. Planning Consultant shall treat all records and work product prepared or maintained by Planning Consultant in the performance of this contract as confidential. (b) Limitation on use and disclosure. Planning Consultant agrees that it will not use any 586
Page | 11
information obtained as a consequence of the performance of work for any purpose other than fulfillment of Planning Consultant's scope of work. Planning Consultant will not disclose any information prepared for the City, or obtained from the City or obtained as a consequence of the performance of work to any person other than the City, or its own employees, agents or subcontractors who have a need for the information for the performance of work under this contract unless such disclosure is specifically authorized in writing by the City.
(c) Security plan. If requested by the Contract Administrator, Planning Consultant shall prepare a security plan to assure that information obtained from the City or as a consequence of the performance of work is not used for any unauthorized purpose or disclosed to unauthorized persons. Planning Consultant shall advise the City of any request for disclosure of information or of any actual or potential disclosure of information. (d) Survival. Planning Consultant’s obligations under this paragraph shall survive the termination of this contract.

16. PROHIBITED INTEREST:

No official or employee of the City who is authorized in such capacity on behalf of the City to negotiate, make, accept, or approve, or take part in negotiating, making, accepting, or approving this contract, shall become directly or indirectly interested in this contract or in any part thereof. No officer or employee of the City who is authorized in such capacity and on behalf of the City to exercise any executive, supervisory, or similar functions in connection with the performance of this contract shall become directly or indirectly interested personally in this contract or any part thereof.

Planning Consultant agrees that its firm has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for Planning Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract, and that Planning Consultant has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent upon, or resulting from, the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this provision, the City shall have the right to terminate this contract without liability, or, in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fees, gift, or contingent fee.

17. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

Planning Consultant shall not make or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Planning Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Planning Consultant knows or has reason to know Planning Consultant has a direct or indirect financial interest other than the compensation promised by this contract. Planning Consultant will not have such interest during the term of this contract. Planning Consultant will immediately advise the City’s Administrator and the City Attorney if Planning Consultant learns of a financial interest of Planning Consultant's during the term of this contract. If
587
Page | 12
Planning Consultant’s participation in another City project would create an actual or potential conflict of interest, in the opinion of the City, the City may disqualify Planning Consultant from participation in such other project during the term of this Contract.

18. INDEMNIFICATION:

To the fullest extent permitted by law, whenever Planning Consultant and Planning Consultant’s Related Parties are performing services Planning Consultant shall indemnify, defend (at Planning Consultant’s sole cost and expense and with legal counsel approved by City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), protect and hold harmless City and City’s Related Parties (collectively, the “Indemnified Parties”), from and against any and all Liabilities of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a “Claim”; collectively, “Claims”) which may arise from or in any manner relate to (directly or indirectly), arise out of, or pertain to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Planning Consultant’s Activities, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for damages arising from the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful acts of the City and City’s Related Parties provided such active negligence is determined by agreement between parties or by the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. Instances where Indemnified Parties are shown to have been actively negligent and where Indemnified Parties active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of Planning Consultant will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of Indemnified Parties. Planning Consultant’s obligations under this section apply regardless of whether or not such Liabilities was caused in part or contributed to by Indemnified Parties.

Without limiting Planning Consultant's obligation to indemnify City upon City’s request, Planning Consultant shall indemnify, hold harmless, protect and defend with legal counsel acceptable to the City at Planning Consultant’s sole cost, City from and against all Liabilities, paid, incurred or suffered by, or asserted against City in a judicial, administrative or regulatory forum or otherwise, whether well founded or not, for regardless of nature or type that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, reckless, or willful misconduct of the Planning Consultant or Planning Consultant's Related Parties, any of Planning Consultant’s Activities.

Should conflict of interest principles preclude a single lawyer from representing both Planning Consultant and Indemnified Parties, or should City find Planning Consultant’s legal counsel unacceptable, then Planning Consultant shall reimburse Indemnified parties for their costs of defense, including without limitation, reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation. Planning Consultant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against Indemnified Parties covered by this indemnity obligation. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement.

For purposes of defense and indemnification relating to this Agreement:
588
Page | 13
(1) “Liabilities” means liabilities, lawsuits, claims, judgments, demands, clean-up orders, damages (whether in contract or tort, including personal injury, death at any time, or property damage), costs, expenses, loss, penalties and other detriments of every nature and description whatsoever, including all costs and expenses of litigation or arbitration, attorney’s fees (whether City’s or Planning Consultant's staff attorneys or outside attorneys) and court costs, whether under state or federal law except liabilities caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the indemnified party.
(2) “City’s Activities” means liability for death or bodily injury to persons, injury to property, or other loss arising out of actions that are the sole negligence, willful misconduct or defects in design furnished by City or arising from the active negligence of City.
(3) “City and City’s Related Parties” means City and City’s elected officials, officers, volunteers, representatives, partners, designees, attorneys, employees, agents, successors and assigns, and any lender of City with an interest in the Project that is the subject of this contract.
(3) “Planning Consultant and Planning Consultant’s Related Parties” includes Planning Consultant and its respective officers, directors, shareholders, members, partners, agents, employees, subcontractors, Planning Consultants, licensees, invitees, guarantors or affiliates. "Affiliates" means a person that directly or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls, or is controlled by, or is under common control with, the Planning Consultant, where construction or interpretation of "control" shall be governed by Rule 144 of the Securities Act of 1993. Planning Consultant shall use best efforts, or cause such persons to use best efforts, to provide City's legal counsel all reasonably necessary information relevant to such persons, including proper and legal corporate names and relationship (or lack thereof) to Planning Consultant's articles of incorporation, certificates of good standing, and other documentation related directly or indirectly to alleged liabilities.
(4) “Planning Consultant’s Activities” means any actions or omissions of Planning Consultant or Planning Consultant’s Related Parties in the performance of this Agreement directly or indirectly arising from Planning Consultant or Planning Consultant’s Related Parties Scope of Services and as set out in as well as any breach of representation or warranty of Planning Consultant set forth in this Agreement, including Exhibit A and Exhibit B, of which are hereby incorporated in this Agreement.

The provisions of this Section shall survive termination of this Agreement and Sections relating to insurance does not limit its provisions.
589
Page | 14

19. INSURANCE
Planning Consultant shall procure and maintain during the period of performance of this contract and for 24 months following completion, insurance from insurance companies authorized to do business in the State of California, as set forth in this section and Exhibit “C”, attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement as if it were fully set forth at length at this point. These policies shall be primary insurance as to the City so that any other coverage held by the City shall not contribute to any loss under Planning Consultant's insurance.

20. ACCIDENT REPORTS:

Planning Consultant shall immediately report (as soon as feasible, but not more than 24 hours) to the Contract Administrator and City’s Risk Administrator any accident or other occurrence causing injury to persons or property during the performance of this Contract. If required by the City’s Risk Administrator, the report shall be made in writing and shall include, at a minimum: (a) the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the persons involved, (b) the names, addresses and telephone numbers of any known witnesses, (c) the date, time and description of the accident or other occurrence.

21. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES:

22. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT:

The parties shall be excused from performing their respective obligations hereunder in the event they are prevented from so performing by reason of floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, other "acts of God", war, civil insurrection, riots, and other similar catastrophic events which are beyond the control of and not the fault of the party claiming excuse from performance hereunder. Labor unrest, including but not limited to strike, work stoppage or slowdown, sickout, picketing, or other concerted job action conducted by Planning Consultant's employees or directed at Planning Consultant is not an excuse from performance and Planning Consultant shall be obligated to continue to provide service notwithstanding the occurrence of any or all of such events. In the case of labor unrest or job action directed at a third party over whom Planning Consultant has no control, the inability of Planning Consultant to provide Agreement Services due to the unwillingness or failure of the third party to provide reasonable assurance of the safety of Planning Consultant's employees while providing Agreement Services to minimize any confrontation with pickets shall, to that limited extent,
590
Page | 15
excuse performance. The foregoing excuse shall be conditioned on Planning Consultant's cooperation in providing Services at different times.

The party claiming excuse from performance shall, within two (2) days after such party has notice of such cause, give the other party notice of the facts constituting such cause and asserting its claim to excuse under this Section.
(a) City’s Rights. The City has the right to terminate or abandon any portion or all of the work by giving 10 days written notice. Upon receipt of a notice of termination, Planning Consultant shall perform no further work except as specified in the notice. Before the date of termination, Planning Consultant shall deliver to City all work product, whether completed or not, as of the date of termination and not otherwise previously delivered. The City shall pay Planning Consultant for services performed in accordance with this contract before the date of termination. If this contract provides for payment of a lump sum for all services or by task and termination occurs before completion of the work or any defined task which according to the performance schedule was commenced before the notice of termination, the fee for services performed shall be based on an amount mutually agreed to by the City and Planning Consultant for the portion of work completed in conformance with this contract before the date of termination. In addition, the City will reimburse Planning Consultant for authorized expenses incurred and not previously reimbursed.

The City shall not be liable for any fees or costs associated for the termination or abandonment except for the fees, and reimbursement of authorized expenses, payable pursuant to this section.

In addition to any and all other legal or equitable remedies, in the event that Planning Consultant, for any reason whatsoever, fails, refuses or is unable to perform Services which it is required by the Agreement to perform, at the time and in the manner provided in this Agreement, then City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cause to be performed such Services with other personnel.

The Services of Planning Consultant may be immediately terminated, without notice, at any time prior to the expiration of the term of this Agreement by:
1) The occurrence of circumstances that make it impossible and impractical for the business of City to be continued;
2) The death of the Planning Consultant or City;
3) The loss of the Planning Consultant or City of legal capacity; 4) The loss by the City or Planning Consultant of the legal capacity to contract; 5) Habitual neglect by the Planning Consultant of Planning Consultant's duties, unless waived by the City;
6) Continued incapacity on the part of the Planning Consultant to perform his/her duties, unless waived by the City;
591
Page | 16
7) If the City ceases the operation of all its operations in this area, then this Agreement shall terminate as of the effective date of the discontinuance of such operation.
(b) Planning Consultant's Rights. Planning Consultant, if Planning Consultant is not in default or breach, may terminate Planning Consultant's obligation to provide further services under this contract upon 30 days’ written notice only in the event of a material default by the City, which default has not been cured within 30 days following the written notice.

23. SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS:

All terms, conditions, and provisions of this contract shall apply to and bind the respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the parties. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to affect the limitation on assignment.

24. DAMAGE OR LOSS OF EQUIPMENT OR FACILITIES:
(a) General Obligation. Planning Consultant shall pay to the City the replacement cost of any equipment or repair cost of any facilities provided by the City for Planning Consultant's use in performance of services that is lost or damaged by Planning Consultant or Planning Consultant's officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors. (b) Keys. During the term of the contract, Planning Consultant may be issued keys to City facilities in order to perform the scope of work. Keys shall not be loaned, duplicated, or given to anyone not authorized to have the keys. Planning Consultant will sign for each key and each key will be returned to the project Administrator when access to that area is no longer authorized, or at the end of the contract term, whichever is applicable. Should keys become lost or stolen, Planning Consultant shall immediately notify the Contract Administrator. A charge will be assessed for all expenses incurred by the City, including the replacement of locks, lock cores, keys, and other materials necessary to ensure the City security level is returned to the same level existing prior to the loss of the key(s).

25. ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS:

During the course of this contract, communications may occur through sending, receiving or exchanging electronic versions of documents and e-mails using commercially available computer software and Internet access. Planning Consultant and the City acknowledge that the Internet is occasionally victimized by the creation and dissemination of so-called viruses, or similar destructive electronic programs. Planning Consultant and the City view the issues raised by these viruses seriously and have invested in document and e-mail scanning software that identify and reject files containing known viruses. Planning Consultant agrees to update its system with the software vendor’s most current releases at regular intervals.

Because of the virus scanning software, the respective computer systems of the parties may occasionally reject a communication. The parties acknowledge that this occurrence is to be expected as part of the ordinary course of business. Because the virus protection industry is generally one or two steps behind new viruses, neither party can guarantee that its respective communications and documents will be virus free. Occasionally, a virus will escape and go 592
Page | 17
undetected as it is passed from system to system. Although each party will use all reasonable efforts to assure that its communications are virus free, neither party warrants that its documents will be virus free. Each party agrees to advise the other if it discovers a virus in its respective system that may have been communicated to the other party.

26. LAWS AND VENUE:

The laws of the State of California govern this contract and disputes arising out of or relating to the contract or the parties’ relationship. Any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to the contract or the parties’ relationship shall be brought in a state court situated in Siskiyou County, State of California unless transferred by court order pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Sections 394 and 395. Any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to the contract or the parties’ relationship brought in a federal court shall be in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

27. ADMINISTRATION:
(a) Planning Consultant's business identification. Planning Consultant's agent for service of process is Chris Dugan. Planning Consultant's California Secretary of State’s identification number and Federal ID Number or Social Security Number under which payments will be reported on a W-9 before the first payment under this agreement is processed.

Planning Consultant's contact information is:

Address: MIG, Inc.
431 I Street, Suite 108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 956-3802
Email: [email protected]
(b) City’s Representative. The City’s representative for administration of this contract is Juliana Lucchesi, Planning Director or her designee, who is the designated Contract Administrator or City Representative. The City may change the Contract Administrator at any time upon notice to the Planning Consultant.
593
Page | 18
(c) Planning Consultant's Representative. The Planning Consultant's representative for administration of this contract is Chris Dugan who is designated as the Project Administrator. The Planning Consultant may change the Project Administrator upon written notice to and approval by the Contract Administrator.
(d) Notices. Any notice or instrument required to be given or delivered by law or this contract shall be effective upon receipt thereof and shall be by personal service or delivered by depositing the same in any United States Post Office, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed to:

City:

City of Yreka Planning Department
Attn: Juliana Lucchesi, AICP
701 4th Street,
Yreka, CA 96097
With a copy to:

Dohn R. Henion
Yreka City Attorney
280 Fairway village Ln.

Roseburg, OR 97471
Planning Consultant:

MIG, Inc.

Attn: Chris Dugan, Director of Noise Services
Mailing Address:
431 I Street, Suite 108
Sacramento, CA 95814
594
Page | 19
Either party may change the address or identity of the person for notices under this paragraph by written notice to the other delivered in accordance with this paragraph. (e) Routine Administrative Communications. Routine administrative communication required to be in writing may be by personal delivery, mail, facsimile transmission or electronic mail as agreed between the Planning Consultant and Contract Administrator.

28. ADVICE OF COUNSEL:

The parties agree that they are aware that they have the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms, and conditions of this contract, and that the decision of whether or not to seek the advice of counsel with respect to this contract is a decision which is the sole responsibility of each of the parties hereto. This contract shall not be construed in favor or against either party by reason of the extent to which each party participated in the drafting of the contract.

29. INDEPENDENT REVIEW:

Each party hereto declares and represents that in entering this contract it has relied and is relying solely upon its own judgment, belief and knowledge of the nature, extent, effect and consequence relating thereto. Each party further declares and represents that this contract is being made without reliance upon any statement or representation not contained herein of any other party, or any representative, agent, or attorney of any other party.

30. TIME:

Time is of the essence in this contract. Any reference to days means calendar days unless otherwise specifically stated.

31. ASSIGNMENT OF ANTI-TRUST CLAIMS:

The Planning Consultant offers and agrees to assign to the City all rights, title and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under Section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 15) or under the Cartwright Act [Chapter 2 (commencing with § 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code], arising from purchases of goods, services, or materials pursuant to the contract. This assignment shall become effective at the time the City tenders final payment to Planning Consultant, without further acknowledgment by the parties. The Planning Consultant shall have the rights set forth in Sections 4553 and 4554 of the Government Code.

32. TAXES:

The Planning Consultant shall pay all applicable federal, state, and local excise, sales, 595
Page | 20
business license, consumer use, and other similar taxes required by law for the execution of the work.

33. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement are severable and shall remain valid and enforceable.

34. AMENDMENTS.

This Agreement may be amended at any time only by mutual written consent of the parties.

35. WAIVER.

A waiver by any party of any breach of any term, covenant or condition herein contained or a waiver of any right or remedy of such party available hereunder at law or in equity shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition herein contained or of any continued or subsequent right to the same right or remedy. No party shall be deemed to have made any such waiver unless it is in writing and signed by the party so waiving.

36. COMPLETENESS OF INSTRUMENT.

This Agreement, together with its specific references and attachments, constitutes all of the agreements, understandings, representations, conditions, warranties and covenants made by and between the parties hereto. Unless set forth herein, neither party shall be liable for any representations made express or implied.

37. SUPERSEDES PRIOR AGREEMENTS.

It is the intention of the parties hereto that this Agreement shall supersede any prior agreements, discussions, commitments, representations, or agreements, written or oral, between the parties hereto.

38. ATTORNEY’S FEES.

If any action at law or in equity, excepting an action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce provisions of this Agreement by reason of the alleged failure of the other to perform or keep any provision or this Agreement to be performed or kept, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding (including appeal) shall be entitled to recover court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees (including reasonable value of services rendered by attorney’s employed by City) which may be set by the Court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which such party may be entitled. As used herein, the “prevailing party” means the party who dismisses an action or proceeding in exchange for payment of substantially all sums due, performance of provisions allegedly breached, or other considerations substantially equal to the relief sought by said party, as well as the party in whose favor final judgment is rendered. 596
Page | 21

39. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS.

Planning Consultant's services hereunder shall be conducted in accordance with all the laws, ordinances, rules and regulations applicable to such business as set forth by the City, State of California, and the United States government. Planning Consultant agrees to indemnify City against any damages, expenses, or price reductions under this Agreement resulting from Planning Consultant or Planning Consultant's lower-tier subcontractors' failure to comply with the above laws and regulations.

40. COUNTERPARTS.

This Agreement may be executed simultaneously and in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

41. OTHER DOCUMENTS.

The parties agree that they shall cooperate in good faith to accomplish the object of this Agreement and to that end, agree to execute and deliver such other and further instruments and documents as may be necessary and convenient to the fulfillment of these purposes.

42. AUTHORITY.

All parties to this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the power and authority to enter into this Agreement in the names, titles, and capacities herein stated and on behalf of any entities, persons, estates, or firms represented or purported to be represented by such entity(s), person(s), estate(s), or firm(s) and that all formal requirements necessary or required by any stated and/or federal law in order to enter into this Agreement have been fully complied with. Further, by entering into this Agreement, neither party hereto shall have breached the terms or conditions of any other contract or agreement to which such party is obligated, which such breach would have a material effect hereon.

42. OTHER TERMS.

Exhibit C to this Agreement is hereby attached and made a part of this Agreement as if fully set forth at length hereat.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this contract on the following date. “Planning Consultant”
MIG, Inc.
________________________________
[Signing Representative]
Principal
597
Page | 22
ATTEST:
_________________________________
“CITY”
City of Yreka, A Municipal Corporation
__________________________________
Jason Ledbetter, City Manager
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Shella Rhetta Hogan, City Clerk
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Exhibit B: Rates and Budget Schedule
Exhibit C: MIG, Inc. Insurance
598
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Task 1: Project Initiation / Kick-off Meeting
Upon authorization to proceed, MIG would meet with the key City personnel assigned to implement the noise study and oversee preparation of the General Plan Noise Element. Generally, during this meeting, MIG and the City would: 1) Establish roles and responsibilities and lines of communication; 2) Review the proposed work plan and receive comments and suggestions from City staff; 3) Receive any additional information and City has related to the noise study; and 4) Confirm project deliverables, budget, and schedule.

MIG would engage the City on its essential goals and objectives for the noise study and Noise Element update and answer any questions the City has about noise monitoring, noise modeling, or the preparation of the noise study. At this time, MIG anticipates the issues that will warrant early discussion and consideration include:
2044 General Plan Growth Projections and Land Use Changes: The noise study will be used to prepare an updated General Plan Noise Element. Understanding potential growth – both in terms of population and land use changes – will help MIG identify necessary ambient noise monitoring sites, data needed for noise modeling, and preliminary strategies for developing noise standards.

Traffic Data: Data regarding traffic volumes, fleet mix, travel speed, and other variables is necessary to perform traffic noise modeling. MIG would work the City to identify sources of existing and future traffic data sources, such as the most recent “speed survey” or data from City or regional traffic studies.

MIG notes this task DOES NOT include travel time between MIG offices and the City of Yreka.

Travel time is presented separately in Task 7 for ease of budgeting and accounting purposes.

Task 1 deliverables include:
• Kick-off meeting agenda, notes, and action items.

The community noise surveys would include a combination of short-term (typically 10 to 30 minutes) and long-term (24 to 48 hours) measurement locations intended to:
• Provide direct observations of existing noise sources in and near the different areas of the City.
• Measure existing ambient noise levels in and near the City under different seasons and conditions.
• Inform how the City’s existing ambient noise environment may change with implementation of the 2044 General Plan.
599
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Agreement for Professional Planning Services: MIG, Inc. July 19, 2022 • Check/improve traffic, fairground, and stationary noise model predictions (see Task 3).

Each survey would include weekend and weekday monitoring to ensure any weekend tourism effects are captured during the community noise surveys. MIG would repeat noise measurement locations during each survey to provide a record of seasonal differences in ambient noise levels throughout the City. MIG would prepare a preliminary map of noise monitoring locations for the City’s review and select final noise monitoring locations in coordination with the City. The precise number of short- and long-term noise monitoring locations would be determined as part of Task 2; however, as set forth in the task assumptions below, MIG’s SOW assumes each community noise survey would include up to 4 long-term and 10 short-term monitoring sites. All short-term noise measurements would be permanently attended by one of the qualified staff listed in Section 1 of this proposal. Staff would also periodically attend long-term measurement locations. MIG would conduct the community noise survey with digital sound level meters that meet American National Standards Institute requirements for a Type 1 or Type 2 integrating sound level meter.

Staff would calibrate each sound meter immediately before and after each ambient noise monitoring session, and ambient noise levels would be continuously collected over the sample period in a time resolution (e.g., 1-minute, 10-minute, 1-hour) sufficient to characterize the ambient noise environment and capture short-term noise events and increases in noise levels above typical background conditions. MIG staff would also document meteorological and other pertinent environmental factors that occurred during attended monitoring sessions.

MIG notes this task DOES NOT include travel time between MIG offices and the City of Yreka.

Travel time is presented separately in Task 7 for ease of budgeting and accounting purposes.

Task 2 deliverables include:
• Preliminary and final Community Noise Survey Map (prepared using Google Earth or GIS software)
• All community noise survey data files, including digital calibration and data records (Microsoft Excel format) and attended noise monitoring notes (PDF format).

Task 3: Model Traffic and Rail Noise Levels
Concurrent with the community noise survey described in Task 2, MIG would begin to collect the data needed to model and predict traffic noise levels in the City, such as, but not limited to, traffic 600
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Agreement for Professional Planning Services: MIG, Inc. July 19, 2022 volumes, vehicle fleet characteristics, travel speeds, etc. Once all necessary data is collected, MIG would proceed with modeling traffic noise levels.

MIG would model traffic noise levels using the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM), Version 3.0 (V. 3.0). TNM is a computer software program that uses traffic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, roadway geometry, and other variables to compute short- and long-term traffic noise levels at user-defined receptor distances from the roadway center.

The City has indicated that the Yreka-Western Railroad is not currently in operation nor expected to resume operation soon. Although the railroad is not currently in operation, the City’s General Plan update could provide guiding policy direction for up to 20 years. MIG, therefore, recommends including basic information on potential rail noise levels that might occur in the future. Such information could include estimates of historical rail noise levels in the City, data from other jurisdictions, or theoretical noise generation levels from standard rail data sources such as the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Impact Assessment document.

MIG would model traffic noise levels for the following features:

Highways: Interstate 5, State Route 3 (Montague Road/Main Street/Fort Jones Road), State Route 263 (Main Street), assumed to be up to 15 different highway segments (or 30 total model runs for existing and future conditions).

Local roadways: South Phillipe Lane, Oregon Street, West Miner Street, East Oberlin Road, Greenhorn Road), assumed to be up to 15 different road segments (or 30 total model runs for existing and future conditions).

MIG would predict traffic noise levels on a 24-hour basis using the day-night noise level (DNL, or Ldn) basis.3 Noise levels would be predicted at specific receptor distances (e.g., 50 or 100 feet from the roadway or rail track center), which would then be used to develop and identify the distance to specific noise contour levels (e.g., the distance to a specific roadway segment’s 55 DNL, 60 DNL, or 65 DNL noise contour).

Task 3 deliverables include:
• Preliminary and final list of highway and road segments to be modeled. • All TNM model input, output, and related MIG data development and processing files. 601
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Agreement for Professional Planning Services: MIG, Inc. July 19, 2022 • High- and low-resolution traffic and rail noise contour maps in PDF, JPEG, and GIS data formats.

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• MIG would model up to 30 total different road segments (including highways) for existing and future conditions (60 total modeled segments for existing and future conditions). • MIG would not model any rail track segments.
• The City would provide necessary traffic noise model information for local road segments (e.g., speed limits, road widths, etc.).
• MIG would collect necessary highway traffic model information from Caltrans.

Task 4: Prepare Draft and Final Noise Report
Following the completion of the technical work identified in Tasks 2 and 3, MIG would prepare a clear and concise noise report that:
• Summarizes key acoustic terms, sound propagation concepts, analytical considerations, and typical human responses to adverse noise levels.
• Presents the methodology and results of the community noise survey conducted in Task 2. • Presents the methodology and results of the traffic noise modeling conducted in Task 3.

Task 4 deliverables include:
• A draft and final City-wide noise study document complete with graphics and technical appendices (Microsoft Word and PDF formats).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:
• MIG would prepare one (1) Administrative Draft City-wide noise study for City review and address/respond to one (1) compiled set of comments from City staff on the draft Noise Study before finalizing the document for public use.
602
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Agreement for Professional Planning Services: MIG, Inc. July 19, 2022 • The City-wide noise study document will be prepared using Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat PDF (i.e., not publishing software such as InDesign).

Task 5: Prepare Draft and Final Noise Element
The City’s 2044 General Plan Update provides an opportunity to comprehensively address issues critical to Yreka’s future. The Government Code (Section 65302) requires each General Plan to include a Noise Element and establishes minimum content requirements for such elements. The technical noise study completed in Task 4 will develop the noise level information required to be included in the General Plan update (e.g., traffic noise contour maps), whereas the Noise Element itself will establish the City’s local noise policy and regulations based on any public input received to date. Following completion of the technical noise study, MIG would meet with the City to discuss and strategize policy and program development for the updated Noise Element based on the data in the technical noise study, community concerns, and the development patterns specific to the 2044 General Plan planning process. The Noise Element will include:
• Brief background information on environmental and community noise issues. • Noise level information for traffic, rail, aviation, fairground, commercial facilities, and other sources stipulated by General Plan Guidelines.
• Standards and policies that clearly articulate the City’s procedures for the review, evaluation, and control of community noise levels (as well as any potential vibration issues). The policies would include references to noise and land use compatibility standards for different land use zones, specific standards for different noise sources (e.g., transportation vs. stationary noise sources), noise evaluation and control requirements for individual development projects, and preferred noise attenuation/mitigation strategies.

Task 5 deliverables include:
• A draft and final Noise Element document complete with graphics (Microsoft Word and PDF formats).

To achieve the City’s requested scope of work within the currently identified budget, MIG’s proposal assumes:

MIG would prepare one (1) Administrative Draft Noise Element for the City’s review and address/respond to one (1) compiled set of comments from City staff on the draft Noise Element before finalizing the document for public use.
• The Noise Element document will be prepared using Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat PDF (i.e., not publishing software such as InDesign).
603
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Agreement for Professional Planning Services: MIG, Inc. July 19, 2022 Task 6: Meetings
This task consists of MIG staff time to prepare and participate in up to one (1) meeting where the noise study and/or noise element is presented to City decision makers or staff and/or the public.

MIG may present or support City staff in the presentation of the noise study and/or Noise Element at these meetings.

MIG notes this task DOES NOT include travel time between MIG offices and the City of Yreka.

Travel time is presented separately in Task 7 for ease of budgeting and accounting purposes.

Task 6 deliverables include:
• Presentation materials (up to 15 PowerPoint slides per presentation).

MIG notes that mileage, lodging, and per diem expenses associated with intra-City travel and overnight stays to conduct the community noise monitoring survey are included in the Task 2 budget line item.

Task 7 Deliverables and Assumptions
There are no specific deliverables for Task 7 (mileage reports and travel expense receipts would be included in the invoices prepared as part of Task 8).

Revised Task 8: Administration and Management
This task consists of regular coordination with the City and management of the MIG team to complete work tasks on time and within budget. This task also assumes MIG would provide monthly invoices to the City with a brief report on progress in maintaining the project schedule and budget.
604
Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Agreement for Professional Planning Services: MIG, Inc. July 19, 2022 Revised Task 8 Deliverables and Assumptions
Task 8 deliverables include:
• Monthly invoices with supporting mileage logs, expense receipts, and progress report.

1. Kick-off Meeting(B) 6 $1,170 6 $990 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 12 $2,160 $228 $2,388 Review City data 0 $0 3 $495 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 3 $495 $0 $495 Meeting/Scouting 6 $1,170 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 6 $1,170 $228 $1,398 Agenda/Minutes 0 $0 3 $495 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 3 $495 $0 $495

2. Community Noise Surveys(B) 0 $0 10 $1,650 56 $7,840 32 $3,040 0 $0 98 $12,530 $1,075 $13,605 Draft Noise Map 0 $0 1 $165 2 $280 2 $190 0 $0 5 $635 $0 $635 Final Noise Map 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2 $190 0 $0 2 $190 $0 $190 Noise Survey (2) 0 $0 6 $990 48 $6,720 0 $0 0 $0 54 $7,710 $1,075 $8,785 Data Processing 0 $0 3 $495 6 $840 28 $2,660 0 $0 37 $3,995 $0 $3,995

3. Model Traffic Noise Levels 0 $0 8 $1,320 0 $0 46 $4,370 22 $2,530 76 $8,220 $0 $8,220 Data Collection 0 $0 1 $165 0 $0 8 $760 0 $0 9 $925 $0 $925 Compile Inputs 0 $0 1 $165 0 $0 8 $760 0 $0 9 $925 $0 $925 TNM Runs (60) 0 $0 4 $660 0 $0 24 $2,280 0 $0 28 $2,940 $0 $2,940 Compile Rail Data 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 $380 0 $0 4 $380 $0 $380 Contour Maps 0 $0 2 $330 0 $0 2 $190 22 $2,530 26 $3,050 $0 $3,050

4. Draft and Final Noise Study 0 $0 14 $2,310 0 $0 40 $3,800 8 $920 62 $7,030 $0 $7,030 Draft Study 0 $0 12 $1,980 0 $0 36 $3,420 7 $805 55 $6,205 $0 $6,205 Final Study 0 $0 2 $330 0 $0 4 $380 1 $115 7 $825 $0 $825

5. Draft and Final Noise Element 0 $0 28 $4,620 0 $0 48 $4,560 6 $690 82 $9,870 $0 $9,870 Draft Study 0 $0 26 $4,290 0 $0 40 $3,800 5 $575 71 $8,665 $0 $8,665 Final Study 0 $0 2 $330 0 $0 8 $760 1 $115 11 $1,205 $0 $1,205

6. Meetings 0 $0 5 $825 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 5 $825 $0 $825
Meeting Prep (1) 0 $0 2 $330 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2 $330 $0 $330 Meetings (1) 0 $0 3 $495 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 3 $495 $0 $495

7. Travel(C) 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 40 $3,800 0 $0 40 $3,800 $1,217 $5,017 Kick-off Meeting 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $950 0 $0 10 $950 $304 $1,254 Noise Surveys (2) 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 20 $1,900 0 $0 20 $1,900 $608 $2,508 Public Meetings 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $950 0 $0 10 $950 $304 $1,254

8. Management 16 $3,120 12 $1,980 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 28 $5,100 $0 $5,100 Contracting 4 $780 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 $780 $0 $780
Bi-monthy calls 0 $0 12 $1,980 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 12 $1,980 $0 $1,980 Invoicing 12 $2,340 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 12 $2,340 $0 $2,340 TOTAL BUDGET, W/O OPTIONS 22 $4,290 83 $13,695 56 $7,840 206 $19,570 36 $4,140 403 $49,535 $2,520 $52,055 3rd Noise Survey 0 $0 3 $495 22 $3,080 12 $1,140 0 $0 37 $4,715 $538 $5,253 3rd Noise Survey (1) 0 $0 1 $165 20 $2,800 0 $0 0 $0 21 $2,965 $538 $3,503 3rd Noise Survey Data Processing 0 $0 2 $330 2 $280 12 $1,140 0 $0 16 $1,750 $0 $1,750 Travel Time and Expenses 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $950 0 $0 10 $950 $304 $1,254 3rd Noise Survey Travel (1) 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $950 0 $0 10 $950 $304 $1,254 OPTIONAL TASKS SUBTOTAL 0 $0 3 $495 22 $3,080 22 $2,090 0 $0 47 $5,665 $842 $6,507 TOTAL BUDGET WITH OPTIONS 22 $4,290 86 $14,190 78 $10,920 228 $21,660 36 $4,140 450 $55,200 $3,362 $58,562

TABLE NOTES
A) CD = Chris Dugan, PG = Phil Gleason, KK = Kasey Kitowski, and BD = Becca Dannels Prep for: J. Lucchesi, City of Yreka Prep by: Chris Dugan, MIG Date: 06/09/22

BD - GIS III
B) Task 1 kick off meeting and Task 2 community noise survey expenses include: 75 miles intra city mileage ($0.575/mile), 1 night (Task 1) and 3 nights (Task 2) hotel @ $96/night, 1st and last day per diem at $44.25/day, 2 days per diem at $59/day. Mileage based on 2022 IRS business travel rate and hotel/per diem based on federal GSA rates. Task 2 assumes two noise surveys.

C) Task 7 travel assumes 5 hours/260 miles one way from MIG Sacramento (431 I St.) to Yreka City Hall (701 4th St). Travel time for Task 1 andTask 6 is billed at $95/hr.

OPTIONAL TASKS
Revised Budget Estimate: Yreka City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update TASK

STAFF/RATE(A)

TOTAL MIG TOTAL
BUDGET CD - SR. PM III CD - SR. ANLY II PG - ANLY IV KK - ANLY I Exhibit B: Rates and Budget Schedule
606
BILLING RATES – 2022
Unless specified otherwise by prior agreement, invoices are submitted monthly showing time and charges for professional services by staff category and a separate figure for expenses. Invoices are payable upon receipt. Invoices unpaid past 30 days are subject to interest at 1 1/2% per month. MIG Inc., labor includes all overhead.

Rates subject to increase effective January 1 of each year.

STAFF BILLING RATES
CATEGORY $/HR
Senior Principal/CEO 325
Principal 220
Director/Senior Project Manager III 195
Senior Project Manager II 175
Senior Project Manager I 165
Project Manager II 145
Project Manager I 130
Senior Biologist II/Senior Analyst II 165
Senior Biologist I/Senior Analyst I 150
Biologist IV/Analyst IV 140
Biologist III/Analyst III 130
Biologist II/Analyst II 115
Biologist I/Analyst I 95
Senior Archaeologist/Historian 165
Senior Archaeologist/Historian 150
Project Archaeologist/Historian IV 140
Project Archaeologist/Historian III 130
Project Archaeologist/Historian II 115
Project Archaeologist/Historian I 95
QSP Stormwater Compliance Inspector 95
Qualified SWPPP Developer/Practitioner
(QSD/QSP) 145
CATEGORY $/HR
Senior Landscape Architect 175
Landscape Architect 145
Landscape Designer 115
Senior Planner 180
Planner 145
Associate Planner 120
Assistant Planner 90
ADA Specialist 135
Senior Facilitator 180
Outreach Specialist (bilingual) 120
Associate Facilitator 110
Strategic Communications Expert 195
Arts Director 180
Senior Web Designer 155
Design Visualization 150
Graphic Designer 140
GIS Specialist 130
CAD/GIS/Graphic Analyst III 115
CAD/GIS/Graphic Analyst II 105
CAD/GIS/Graphic Analyst I 95
Support Staff 95
Field Crew II 85
Field Crew I 70

EXPENSES
CATEGORY Basis
Commercial travel Cost+10%
Automobile travel Current IRS rate
Lodging/Meals Cost+10%
Photocopy (A and B sizes) $0.10/image
Color copies $0.50/image
Commercial report reproduction Cost+10%
Noise meter setup $50/unit/day
Bat acoustic detector $50/unit/night
Subcontractors Cost+10%
Other (lab, materials, etc.) Cost+10%
607

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE
INSURER F :

INSURER E :

INSURER D :

INSURER C :

INSURER B :

INSURER A : NAIC #
NAME: CONTACT
(A/C, No): FAX
E-MAIL ADDRESS:

PRODUCER
(A/C, No, Ext): PHONE

INSURED
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

OTHER:
(Per accident)
(Ea accident)
$
$
N / A

SUBR WVDADDL
INSD

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $
$
$
$ PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY (Per accident)
BODILY INJURY (Per person) COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT

AUTOS ONLY

AUTOS ONLY AUTOS NON-OWNED OWNED SCHEDULED

ANY AUTO

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

Y / N WORKERS COMPENSATION
AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
(Mandatory in NH) DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
If yes, describe under

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
$
$
$ E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEEE.L. EACH ACCIDENT EROTH- STATUTE PER
(MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS POLICY EXP(MM/DD/YYYY) POLICY EFFLTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER INSR
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

EXCESS LIAB
UMBRELLA LIAB EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $
$
OCCUR
CLAIMS-MADE DED RETENTION $
PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $ PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ MED EXP (Any one person) $
EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTED
PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $ COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO- JECT LOC

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)

CANCELLATION

CERTIFICATE HOLDER
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
HIRED

AUTOS ONLY
6/27/2022
AssuredPartners Design Professionals Insurance Services, LLC 3697 Mt. Diablo Blvd Suite 230
Lafayette CA 94549
The Certfiicate Team [email protected] License#: 6003745 Berkley Insurance Company 32603 MIGINC0-01 Travelers Property Casualty Company of America 25674 MIG, Inc.

Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.
800 Hearst Ave
Berkeley CA 94710
The Travelers Indemnity Company of Connecticut 25682 154180549 B X 1,000,000 X 1,000,000 X Contractual Liab 10,000 Included 1,000,000 2,000,000 X Y Y 6801H899998 8/31/2021 8/31/2022
2,000,000
C 1,000,000 X
X X
Y Y BA0S579947 8/31/2021 8/31/2022
B X X 10,000,000 Y Y CUP0H758762 8/31/2021 8/31/2022
10,000,000 X
0 B Y UB2L553909 8/31/2021 8/31/2022
X
1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
A Professional Liability N Y AEC904725003 8/31/2021 8/31/2022 Each Claim Annual Aggregate
$5,000,000
$5,000,000
Umbrella Liability policy is a follow-form underlying General Liability/Auto Liability/Employers Liability.

RE: Yreka City-wide Noise Study and Noise Element Update The Entity, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are named as Additional Insured as respects General and Auto Liability as required per written contract or agreement. General Liability and Auto Liability are Primary/Non-Contributory per policy form wording. Insurance coverage includes waiver of subrogation per the attached. 30 Days Notice of Cancellation 30 Days Notice of Cancellation
City of Yreka Planning Department
Attn: Juliana Lucchesi, AICP
701 4th Street
Yreka CA 96097
608
  

  
609
  

  
610

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
c. Method Of Sharing
If all of the other insurance permits contribution
by equal shares, we will follow this method also.

Under this approach each insurer contributes
equal amounts until it has paid its applicable
limit of insurance or none of the loss remains,
whichever comes first.

If any of the other insurance does not permit
contribution by equal shares, we will contribute
by limits. Under this methoo, each insurer's
share is based on the ratio of its applicable limit
of insurance to the total applicable limits of
insurance of all insurers.
d. Primary And Non-Contributory Insurance If
Required By Written Contract
If you specifically agree in a written contract or
agreement that the insurance afforded to an
insured under this Coverage Part must apply on
a primary basis, or a primary and noncontributory basis. this insurance is primary to other insurance that is available to such insured
which covers such insured as a named insured,
and we will not share with that other insurance,
provided that:
(1) The "bodily injury'' or "property damage" for
which coverage is sought occurs; and
(2) The "personal and advertising injury" for
which coverage is sought is caused by an
offense that is committed;
subsequent to the signing of that contract or
agreement by you.

5. Premium Audit
a. We will compute all premiums for this Coverage
Part in accordance with our rules and rates.
b. Premium shown in this Coverage Part as
advance premium is a deposit premium only. At
the close of each audit perioo we will compute
the earned premium for that period and send
notice to the first Named Insured. The due date
for audit and retrospective premiums is the date
shown as the due date on the bill. If the sum of
the advance and audit premiums paid for the
policy period is greater than the earned
premium, we will return the excess to the first
Named Insured.
c. The first Named Insured must keep records of
the information we need for premium
computation, and send us copies at such times
as we may request.

6. Representations
By accepting this policy, you agree:
a. The statements in the Declarations are
accurate and complete;
b. Those statements are based upon
representations you made to us; and
c. We have issued this policy in reliance upon
your representations.

The unintentional omission of, or unintentional error
in, any information provided by you which we relied
upon in issuing this policy will not prejudice your
rights under this insurance. However, this provision
does not affect our right to collect additional
premium or to exercise our rights of cancellation or
nonrenewal in accordance with applicable insurance
laws or regulations.

7. Separation Of Insureds
Except with respect to the Limits of Insurance, and
any rights or duties specifically assigned in this
Coverage Part to the first Named Insured, this
insurance applies:
a. As if each Named Insured were the only
Named Insured; and
b. Separately to each insured against whom claim
is made or "suit" is brought.

8. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others
To Us
If the insured has rights to recover all or part of any payment we have made under this Coverage Part,
those rights are transferred to us. The insured must
do nothing after loss to impair them. At our request,
the insured will bring "suit" or transfer those rights
to us and help us enforce them.

9. When We Do Not Renew
If we decide not to renew this Coverage Part, we will
mail or deliver to the first Named Insured shown in
the Declarations written notice of the nonrenewal
not less than 30 days before the expiration date.

If notice is mailed, proof of mailing will be sufficient proof of notice.

SECTION V - DEFINITIONS

1. "Advertisement" means a notice that is broadcast or
published to the general public or specific market
segments about your goods, products or services
for the purpose of attracting customers or
supporters. For the purposes of this definition:
a. Notices that are published include material
placed on the Internet or on similar electronic
means of communication; and
b. Regarding websites, only that part of a website
that is about your goods, prooucts or services
for the purposes of attracting customers or
supporters is considered an advertisement.

Page 16 of 21 ends

Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission.

Policy #
6801H899998
611

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
occupational therapist or occupational that is available to any of your "employees" therapy assistant, physical therapist or for "bodily injury" that arises out of providing speech-language pathologist; or or failing to provide "incidental medical services" to any person to the extent not (b) First aid or "Good Samaritan services" subject to Paragraph 2.a.(1) of Section II by any of your "employees" or "volunteer Who Is An Insured. workers", other than an employed or volunteer doctor. Any such "employees" K. MEDICAL PAYMENTS INCREASED LIMIT or "volunteer workers" providing or failing The following replaces Paragraph 7. of to provide first aid or "Good Samaritan SECTION III LIMITS OF INSURANCE: services" during their work hours for you will be deemed to be acting within the 7. Subject to Paragraph 5. above, the Medical scope of their employment by you or Expense Limit is the most we will pay under performing duties related to the conduct Coverage C for all medical expenses of your business. because of "bodily injury" sustained by any

3. The following replaces the last sentence of one person, and will be the higher of:

Paragraph 5. of SECTION III LIMITS OF a. $10,000; or
INSURANCE:
b. The amount shown in the Declarations of For the purposes of determining the this Coverage Part for Medical Expense
applicable Each Occurrence Limit, all related
Limit. acts or omissions committed in providing or
failing to provide "incidental medical L. AMENDMENT OF EXCESS INSURANCE services", first aid or "Good Samaritan CONDITION PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY services" to any one person will be deemed The following is added to Paragraph 4.b., to be one "occurrence".

Excess Insurance, of SECTION IV

4. The following exclusion is added to COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY Paragraph 2., Exclusions, of SECTION I CONDITIONS:

COVERAGES COVERAGE A BODILY
This insurance is excess over any of the other

INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE
insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent LIABILITY:
or on any other basis, that is Professional Sale Of Pharmaceuticals Liability or similar coverage, to the extent the
"Bodily injury" or "property damage" arising loss is not subject to the professional services out of the violation of a penal statute or exclusion of Coverage A or Coverage B. ordinance relating to the sale of M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION pharmaceuticals committed by, or with the WHEN REQUIRED BY WRITTEN CONTRACT knowledge or consent of the insured. OR AGREEMENT

5. The following is added to the DEFINITIONS
Section: The following is added to Paragraph 8., Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, "Incidental medical services" means: of SECTION IV COMMERCIAL GENERAL a. Medical, surgical, dental, laboratory, x- LIABILITY CONDITIONS:
ray or nursing service or treatment,
If the insured has agreed in a written contract or advice or instruction, or the related agreement to waive that insured's right of
furnishing of food or beverages; or
recovery against any person or organization, we b. The furnishing or dispensing of drugs or waive our right of recovery against such person medical, dental, or surgical supplies or or organization, but only for payments we make appliances. because of:

6. The following is added to Paragraph 4.b., a. "Bodily injury" or "property damage" that Excess Insurance, of SECTION IV occurs; or COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
CONDITIONS: b. "Personal and advertising injury" caused by an offense that is committed; This insurance is excess over any valid and collectible other insurance, whether primary, subsequent to the signing of that contract or excess, contingent or on any other basis, agreement.

Policy #
6801H899998

COMME A RCI L AUTO
THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES T EH POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.

BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED
This n n o i s n e dorseme t m d fie i surance provi t o l w ded under he f l o ing:

BUSI S U C E O NE S A TO OV RAGE F RM

MO R R E E G O TO CA RI R COV RA E F RM
The fol w s lo ing i added to Paragraph c. in A.1., Who between you and that person or organization, that is Is An Insured, of SECTION II COV R T S E ED AU O sig u f r ned by yo be o e the "bodil " r y injury or "prope ty LI L T V R ABI I Y CO E AGE in the BUSINE O SS AUT dama " s ge occur and that is in eff ce t during the policy COVERAGE FORM and Paragraph e. in A.1., Who Is period, to name as an additional insured for e Cov red An Insured, of SECTION II COV T S ERED AU O Autos i e Liabil ty Cov rage, but on r a ly fo dam ges to LI L T V ABI I Y CO ERAGE in the MOTOR CARRIER which this insurance applies d an only to the ext f ent o COVERAGE FORM, whicheve v r Co erage Form is that person r r i n 's o o ganizat o 's liab i r n il ty fo the co duct par f o c : t o y ur poli y of h s anot er "in ured".

This n u s n z i cl de any perso or organi ation who you are req r r ui ed unde a written contr c r r m a t o ag ee ent CA T 0 4 37 2 16 © 2016 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 1 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission.

Policy:

BA0S579947
613

 

   
 

 
       


      
      
       
      

      

                
 
      




     
           
      
       
      


Policy#: BA0S579947
614

COMMERCIAL AUTO
THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.

BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following:

AUTO DEALERS COVERAGE FORM

BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM

MOTOR CARRIER COVERAGE FORM
The following replaces Paragraph A.5., Transfer of required of you by a written contract executed Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, of the prior to any "accident" or "loss", provided that the CONDITIONS Section: "accident" or "loss" arises out of the operations

5. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Oth- contemplated by such contract. The waiver apers To Us plies only to the person or organization desigWe waive nated in such contract. any right of recovery we may have against any person or organization to the extent
CA T3 40 02 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 1 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission.

Policy #
BA0S579947

WORKERS COMPENSATION
AND

EMPLOYERS LIABILITY POLICY
ENDORSEMENT WC 99 03 76 ( A)
POLICY NUMBER:

WAIVER OF OUR RIGHT TO RECOVER FROM OTHERS

ENDORSEMENT CALIFORNIA
(BLANKET WAIVER)
We have the right to recover our payments from anyone liable for an injury covered by this policy. We will not enforce our right against the person or organization named in the Schedule.

The additional premium for this endorsement shall be % of the California workers' compensation premium.

Schedule
Person or Organization Job Description
This endorsement changes the policy to which it is attached and is effective on the date issued unless otherwise stated.
(The information below is required only when this endorsement is issued subsequent to preparation of the policy.)
Insurance Company Countersigned by
DATE OF ISSUE: Page 1 of 1
Any Person or organization for which the insured has agreed by written contract executed prior to loss to furnish this waiver.

UB2L553909 Travelers Property Casualty Company of America 6/27/2022 616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624

Yreka City CouncilJuly 19, 2022

Yreka City Council
July 19, 2022