Yuba City City Council
January 17, 2023

28 day for PM10; or generate annual construction or operational emissions of ROG or NOX that exceed 4.5 tons per year.

Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2015 Air Quality Attainment Plan: As specified in the California Clean Air Act of 1988 (CCAA), Chapters 1568-1588, it is the responsibility of each air district in California to attain and maintain the state’s ambient air quality standards. The CCAA requires that an Attainment Plan be developed by all nonattainment districts for O3, CO, SOx, and NOx that are either receptors or contributors of transported air pollutants. The purpose of the Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2015 Triennial Air Quality Attainment Plan (TAQAP) is to comply with the requirements of the CCAA as implemented through the California Health and Safety Code. Districts in the NSVPA are required to update the Plan every three years. The TAQAP is formatted to reflect the 1990 baseline emissions year with a planning horizon of 2020. The Health and Safety Code, sections 40910 and 40913, require the Districts to achieve state standards by the earliest practicable date to protect the public health, particularly that of children, the elderly, and people with respiratory illness.

Health and Safety Code Section 41503(b): Requires that control measures for the same emission sources are uniform throughout the planning area to the extent that is feasible. To meet this requirement, the NSVPA has coordinated the development of an Attainment Plan and has set up a specific rule adoption protocol. The protocol was established by the Technical Advisory Committee of the Sacramento Valley Basin-wide Air Pollution Control Council and the Sacramento Valley Air Quality Engineering and Enforcement Professionals, which allow the Districts in the Basin to act and work as a united group with the CARB as well as with industry in the rule adoption process. Section 40912 of the Health and Safety Code states that each District responsible for, or affected by, air pollutant transport shall provide for attainment and maintenance of the state and federal standards in both upwind and downwind Districts.

This section also states that each downwind District’s Plan shall contain sufficient measures to reduce emissions originating in each District to below levels which violate state ambient air quality standards, assuming the absence of transport contribution
Construction Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants: The District recommends the following best management practices:
▪ Implement the Fugitive Dust Control Plan.
▪ Construction equipment exhaust emissions shall not exceed FRAQMD Regulation III, Rule 3.0, ▪ Visible Emissions limitations (40 percent opacity or Ringelmann 2.0). ▪ The contractor shall be responsible to ensure that all construction equipment is properly tuned and maintained prior to and for the duration of onsite operation. ▪ Limiting idling time to 5 minutes – saves fuel and reduces emissions. ▪ Utilize existing power sources or clean fuel generators rather than temporary power generators. ▪ Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation, and satellite parking areas with a shuttle service. Schedule operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours. Minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes. Provide a flag person to guide traffic properly and ensure safety at construction sites.
▪ Portable engines and portable engine-driven equipment units used at the project work site, with the exception of on-road and off-road motor vehicles, may require California Air Resources Board (ARB) Portable Equipment Registration with the State or a local district permit. The owner/operator shall be responsible for arranging appropriate consultations with the ARB or the

29 District to determine registration and permitting requirements prior to equipment operation at the site.

3.3.5. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Site grading will briefly create equipment exhaust and fugitive dust. The new interior driveway system that will serve the individual self-storage units and vehicle storage area will be paved, which will generate some air pollutants. Ongoing air quality impacts will be from exhaust generated by vehicle traffic from customers driving to and from the facility. Standards set by FRQAMD, CARB, and Federal agencies relating to the proposed Project will apply to this Project. Prior to the initiation of construction, a Fugitive Dust Control Plan will be submitted to FRAQMD as a part of standard measures required by the District. An Indirect Source Review (ISR) application will be filed with the Air District to address emissions from construction.

Since the developer must prepare an air quality analysis and incorporate all of the resulting conditions into the Project and that a fugitive dust control plan be submitted prior to beginning work, any potential significant environmental impacts should be reduced to less than significant. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
The Project would result in limited generation of criteria pollutants during its construction and on an ongoing basis from vehicle traffic generated by customers driving to and from the facility. However, the proposed self-storage facility is a low traffic generator and FRAQMD did not comment that the standards would be exceeded by this project to the extent of being cumulatively significant. Therefore, the cumulative impacts are considered to be less than significant. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The FRAQMD defines sensitive receptors as: facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. FRAQMD states that if a project is located within 1,000 feet of a sensitive receptor location, the impact of diesel particulate matter shall be evaluated. According to the FRAQMD’s Indirect Source Review Guidelines, “Construction activity can result in emissions of particulate matter from the diesel exhaust (diesel PM) of construction equipment.

There are no sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of the project. Even so, the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to reduce the impact from off-road diesel equipment include:
▪ Install diesel particulate filters or implement other ARB-verifies diesel emission control strategies on all construction equipment to further reduce diesel PM emissions beyond the 45% reduction required by the Districts Best Available Mitigation Measure for Construction Phase; ▪ Use equipment during times when receptors are not present (e.g., when school is not in session or during non-school hours; or when office buildings are unoccupied); ▪ Establish staging areas for the construction equipment that are as distant as possible from off-site receptors;

30 ▪ Establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric powered equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment or generators, where feasible; ▪ Use haul trucks with on-road engines instead of off-road engines even for on-site hauling; ▪ Equip nearby buildings with High Efficiency Particle Arresting (HEPA) filter systems at all mechanical air intake points to the building to reduce the levels of diesel PM that enter the buildings; and/or,
▪ Temporarily relocate receptors during construction.

Therefore, the air pollution impacts on sensitive receptors is expected to be less than significant. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Construction of the storage units and the ongoing storage of household items and vehicle storage typically do not generate objectionable odors. As such, the impact of the Project creating local offensive odors would be less than significant.

Biological Resources
Table 3.4: Biological Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X

31 f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X

3.4.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
The 4.9-acre level property is within the Yuba City urbanized area. The site has been previously graded with no native habitat remaining. The site is near light industrial type uses and multiple-family residential use. There are no known on-site or nearby riparian or critical habitat areas.

3.4.2. Federal & State Regulatory Setting
Threatened and Endangered Species: State and federal “endangered species” legislation has provided California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited distribution and/or low or declining populations. Species listed as threatened or endangered under provisions of the state and federal endangered species acts, candidate species for such listing, state species of special concern, and some plants listed as endangered by the California Native Plant Society are collectively referred to as “species of special status.” Permits may be required from both the CDFW and USFWS if activities associated with a proposed project will result in the “take” of a listed species. “Take” is defined by the state of California as “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill” (California Fish and Game Code, Section 86). “Take” is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include “harm” (16 USC, Section 1532(19), 50 CFR, Section 17.3). Furthermore, the CDFW and the USFWS are responding agencies under CEQA. Both agencies review CEQA documents in order to determine the adequacy of their treatment of endangered species issues and to make projectspecific recommendations for their conservation.

Migratory Birds: State and federal laws also protect most birds. The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16U.S.C., scc. 703, Supp. I, 1989) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in migratory birds, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. This act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs.

Birds of Prey: Birds of prey are also protected in California under provisions of the California Fish and Game Code, Section 3503.5, which states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “taking” by the CDFW.

Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters: Natural drainage channels and adjacent wetlands may be considered “Waters of the United States” subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE. The extent of jurisdiction has been defined in the Code of Federal Regulations but has also been subject to interpretation of the federal courts.

Waters of the U.S. generally include:
▪ All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters, which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.

32 ▪ All interstate waters including interstate wetlands. ▪ All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce. ▪ All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition.
▪ Tributaries of waters identified in the bulleted items above.

As determined by the United States Supreme Court in its 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) decision, channels and wetlands isolated from other jurisdictional waters cannot be considered jurisdictional on the basis of their use, hypothetical or observed, by migratory birds. Similarly, in its 2006 consolidated Carabell/Rapanos decision, the U.S.

Supreme Court ruled that a significant nexus between a wetland and other navigable waters must exist for the wetland itself to be considered a navigable, and therefore, jurisdictional water.

The USACE regulates the filling or grading of Waters of the U.S. under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The extent of jurisdiction within drainage channels is defined by “ordinary high-water marks” on opposing channel banks. All activities that involve the discharge of dredge or fill material into Waters of the U.S. are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE. Such permits are typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that result in no net loss of wetland functions or values. No permit can be issued until the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issues a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (or waiver of such certification) verifying that the proposed activity will meet state water quality standards.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15380: Although threatened and endangered species are protected by specific federal and state statutes, CEQA Guidelines section 15380(d) provides that a species not listed on the federal or state list of protected species may be considered rare or endangered if the species can be shown to meet certain specific criteria that define “endangered” and “rare” as specified in CEQA Guidelines section 15380(b).

3.4.3. Local Regulatory Setting
The General Plan provides the following policies for the protection of biological resources within the project area:

8.4-G-1 Protect special status species, in accordance with State regulatory requirements.

8.4-G-2 Protect and enhance the natural habitat features of the Feather River and new open space corridors within and around the urban growth area.

8.4-G-3 Preserve and enhance heritage oaks in the Planning Area.

8.4-G-4 Where appropriate, incorporate natural wildlife habitat features into public landscapes, parks, and other public facilities

8.4-I-1 Require protection of sensitive habitat area and special status species in new development site designs in the following order: 1) avoidance; 2) onsite mitigation; 3) offsite mitigation. Require assessments of biological resources prior to approval of any development within 300 feet of any creeks, sensitive habitat areas, or areas of potential sensitive status species.

33 8.4-I-2 Require preservation of oak trees and other native trees that are of a significant size, by requiring site designs to incorporate these trees to the maximum extent feasible.

8.4-I-3 Require to the extent feasible, use of drought tolerant plants in landscaping for new development, including private and public projects.

3.4.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Response provided in section b) below.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
There have been no special status species identified on the Project site or within the vicinity of the site.

According to the Yuba City General Plan EIR, the only designated special status vegetation species within Yuba City and its Sphere of Influence is the Golden Sunburst, a flowering plant that occurs primarily in the non-native grasslands and is threatened mostly by the conversion of habitat to urban uses. The habitat area for this species occurs at the extreme eastern boundary of the Planning Area at the confluence of the Feather and Yuba Rivers. This property does not fall within this area, and no significant adverse impacts to special status species will occur because of this project. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No wetlands or federal jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are present within the proposed Project area or general vicinity. There would be no impact on any wetland areas or waterways. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The proposed Project would not disturb any waterways, as the nearest waterway is the Feather River to the east. Therefore, migratory fish would not be affected. Nor are there any significant native trees proposed to be removed that could be potential nesting habitat for raptors and migratory birds that may choose to nest in the vicinity of the Project. As such there would be no significant impacts on fish or wildlife habitat.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

34 No native trees or other known biological resources that would be protected by local policies or ordinances remain on the Project site. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on biological resources caused by the Project.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans in the vicinity of this Project.

Cultural Resources
Table 3.5: Cultural Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5.

X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource pursuant
to § 15064.5.

X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries? X

3.5.1. Federal Regulatory Setting
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended), Section 106: The significance of cultural resources is evaluated under the criteria for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. The criteria defined in 36 CFR 60.4 are as follows:

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and:
▪ That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
▪ That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or ▪ That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or ▪ That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history.

Sites listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP are considered to be historic properties. Sites younger than 50 years, unless of exceptional importance, are not eligible for listing in the NRHP.

35 3.5.2. State Regulatory Setting
CEQA requires consideration of project impacts on archaeological or historical sites deemed to be "historical resources." Under CEQA, a substantial adverse change in the significant qualities of a historical resource is considered a significant effect on the environment. For the purposes of CEQA, a "historical resource" is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (Title 14 CCR §15064.5[a][1]-[3]). Historical resources may include, but are not limited to, "any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California" (PRC §5020.1[j]).

The eligibility criteria for the California Register are the definitive criteria for assessing the significance of historical resources for the purposes of CEQA (Office of Historic Preservation). Generally, a resource is considered "historically significant" if it meets one or more of the following criteria for listing on the California Register:
▪ Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage.
▪ Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. ▪ Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. ▪ Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1[c])
In addition, the resource must retain integrity. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (CCR Title 14, § 4852(c)).

Historical resources may include, but are not limited to, "any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California" (PRC §5020.1[j]).

California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5: Health and Safety Code states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroner’s authority. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

3.5.3. Native American Consultation
In September of 2014, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 52, which added provisions to the PRC regarding the evaluation of impacts on tribal cultural resources under CEQA, and consultation requirements with California Native American tribes. In particular, AB 52 now requires lead agencies to analyze project impacts on “tribal cultural resources” separately from archaeological resources (PRC §

36 21074; 21083.09). AB 52 also requires lead agencies to engage in additional consultation procedures with respect to California Native American tribes (PRC § 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3).

Comments on the Project were requested on August 31, 2022, from the United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria and Miwok Tribe. The United Auburn Indian Tribe responded that they had no comments and that the standard mitigation measures should be applied to the Project.

Additional details on tribal comments are provided in Section 3.18, Tribal Cultural Resources.

3.5.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5.

There are no existing structures on the property. Therefore, the potential significant impacts on any historical resources, directly or indirectly, is less than significant. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5.

Response provided in section c) below.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? The 4.9-acre property that will be developed is vacant. No formal cemeteries or other places of human internment are known to exist on the proposed Project site. However, there still remains the potential for previously unknown sub-surface resources to be present. In order to avoid potential impacts to unknown remains, mitigation measures provided in Section 3.18 are provided to ensure impacts are less than significant.

3.6 Energy
Table 3.66: Energy
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X

37 3.6.1 State Regulatory Setting
California has implemented numerous energy efficiency and conservation programs that have resulted in substantial energy savings. The State has adopted comprehensive energy efficiency standards as part of its Building Standards Code, California Codes of Regulations, Title 24. In 2009, the California Building Standards Commission adopted a voluntary Green Building Standards Code, also known as CALGreen, which became mandatory in 2011. Both Title 24 and CALGreen are implemented by the City of Yuba City in conjunction with its processing of building permits.

CALGreen sets forth mandatory measures, applicable to new residential and nonresidential structures as well as additions and alterations, on water efficiency and conservation, building material conservation, interior environmental quality, and energy efficiency. California has adopted a Renewables Portfolio Standard, which requires electricity retailers in the state to generate 33% of electricity they sell from renewable energy sources (i.e., solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric from small generators, etc.) by the end of 2020. In 2018, SB 100 was signed into law, which increases the electricity generation requirement from renewable sources to 60% by 2030 and requires all the state's electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045.

3.6.2. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation? Project construction would involve fuel consumption and use of other non-renewable resources.

Construction equipment used for such improvements typically runs on diesel fuel or gasoline. The same fuels typically are used for vehicles that transport equipment and workers to and from a construction site.

However, construction-related fuel consumption would be finite, short-term, and consistent with construction activities of a similar character. This energy use would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.

Electricity may be used for equipment operation during construction activities. It is expected that more electrical construction equipment would be used in the future, as it would generate fewer air pollutant and GHG emissions. This electrical consumption would be consistent with other construction activities of a similar character; therefore, the use of electricity in construction activities would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary, especially since fossil fuel consumption would be reduced.

Moreover, under California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard, a greater share of electricity would be provided from renewable energy sources over time, so less fossil fuel consumption to generate electricity would occur.

The Project would be required to comply with CALGreen and with the building energy efficiency standards of California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6 in effect at the time of Project approval. Compliance with these standards would reduce energy consumption associated with project operations, although reductions from compliance cannot be readily quantified. Overall, Project construction would typically not consume energy resources in a manner considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.

Following construction of the self-storage units, the main sources of energy consumption would be ongoing operations and vehicle usage. However, self storge facilities are a low user of energy and the vehicle usage is also low compared to most uses. As such, the Project’s impacts related to energy consumption are considered less than significant.

38 b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? The Project would be consistent with applicable state and local plans to increase energy efficiency. Thus, the Project’s impacts would be less than significant.

3.7 Geology and Soils
Table 3.7: Geology and Soils
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Directly or indirectly expose people or structures
to potential substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area, or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resources or site or unique
geologic feature?
X

3.7.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Topography and Geology: According to the Sutter County General Plan, Sutter County is located in the flat surface of the Great Valley geomorphic province of California. The Great Valley is an alluvial plain

39 approximately 50 miles wide and 400 miles long in the central portion of California. The Great Valley’s northern portion is the Sacramento Valley, drained by the Sacramento River, and its southern portion is the San Joaquin Valley, drained by the San Joaquin River. The geology of the Great Valley is typified by thick sequences of alluvial sediments derived primarily from erosion of the mountains of the Sierra Nevada to the east, and to a lesser extent, erosion of the Klamath Mountains and Cascade Range to the north. These sediments were transported downstream and subsequently laid down as a river channel, floodplain deposits, and alluvial fans.

Seismic Hazards: Earthquakes are due to a sudden slip of plates along a fault. Seismic shaking is typically the greatest cause of losses to structures during earthquakes. Earthquakes can cause structural damage, injury, and loss of life, as well as damage to infrastructure networks such as water, power, gas, communication, and transportation lines. Other damage-causing effects of earthquakes include surface rupture, fissuring, settlement, and permanent horizontal and vertical shifting of the ground. Secondary impacts can include landslides, seiches, liquefaction, and dam failure.

Seismicity: Although all of California is typically regarded as seismically active, the Central Valley region does not commonly experience strong ground shaking resulting from earthquakes along known and previously unknown active faults. Though no active earthquake faults are known to exist in Yuba City, active faults in the region could generate ground motion felt within the County. Numerous earthquakes of magnitude 5.0 or greater on the Richter scale have occurred on regional faults, primarily those within the San Andreas Fault System in the region. There are several potentially active faults underlying the Sutter Buttes, which are associated with deep-seated volcanism.

The faults identified in Sutter County include the Quaternary Faults, located in the northern section of the County within the Sutter Buttes, and the Pre-Quaternary Fault, located in the southeast of the City, just east of where Highway 70 enters into the County. Both Faults are listed as non-active faults but have the potential for seismic activity.

Ground Shaking: As stated in the Sutter County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, although the County has felt ground shaking from earthquakes with epicenters located elsewhere, no major earthquakes or earthquake related damage has been recorded within the County. Based on historic data and known active or potentially active faults in the region, parts of Sutter County have the potential to experience low to moderate ground shaking. The intensity of ground shaking at any specific site depends on the characteristics of the earthquake, the distance from the earthquake fault, and on the local geologic and soils conditions. Fault zone maps are used to identify where such hazards are more likely to occur based on analyses of faults, soils, topography, groundwater, and the potential for earthquake shaking sufficiently strong to trigger landslide and liquefaction.

Liquefaction: Liquefaction, which can occur in earthquakes with strong ground shaking, is mostly found in areas with sandy soil or fill and a high-water table located 50 feet or less below the ground surface.

Liquefaction can cause damage to property with the ground below structures liquefying making the structure unstable causing sinking or other major structural damage. Evidence of liquefaction may be observed in "sand boils,” which are expulsions of sand and water from below the surface due to increased pressure below the surface.

Liquefaction during an earthquake requires strong shaking and is not likely to occur in the city due to the relatively low occurrence of seismic activity in the area; however, the clean sandy layers paralleling the Sacramento River, Feather River, and Bear River have lower soil densities and high overall water table are potentially a higher risk area if major seismic activity were to occur. Areas of bedrock, including the Sutter Buttes have high density compacted soils and contain no liquefaction potential, although localized areas of valley fill alluvium can have moderate to high liquefaction potential.

40 Landslides: Landslides are downward and outward movements of slope forming materials which may be rock, soil, artificial fill, or combinations of such materials. The size of landslides varies from those containing less than a cubic yard of material to massive ones containing millions of cubic yards. Large landslides may move down slope for hundreds of yards or even several miles. A landslide may move rapidly or so slow that a change of position can be noted only over a period of weeks or years. A similar, but much slower movement is called creep. The susceptibility of a given area to landslides depends on a great many variables. With the exception of the Sutter Buttes, Yuba City is located in a landslide-free zone due to the flat topography. The Sutter Buttes are considered to be in a low landslide hazard zone as shown in Bulletin 198 by the California Division of Mines and Geology.

Soil Erosion: Erosion is a two-step process by which soils and rocks are broken down or fragmented and then transported. The breakdown processes include mechanical abrasion, dissolution, and weathering.

Erosion occurs naturally in most systems but is often accelerated by human activities that disturb soil and vegetation. The rate at which erosion occurs is largely a function of climate, soil cover, slope conditions, and inherent soil properties such as texture and structure. Water is the dominant agent of erosion and is responsible for most of the breakdown processes as well as most of the transport processes that result in erosion. Wind may also be an important erosion agent. The rate of erosion depends on many variables including the soil or rock texture and composition, soil permeability, slope, extent of vegetative cover, and precipitation amounts and patterns. Erosion increases with increasing slope, increasing precipitation, and decreasing vegetative cover. Erosion can be extremely high in areas where vegetation has been removed by fire, construction, or cultivation. High rates of erosion may have several negative impacts including degradation and loss of agricultural land, degradation of streams and other water habitats, and rapid silting of reservoirs.

Subsidence: Subsidence is the sinking of a large area of ground surface in which the material is displaced vertically downward, with little or no horizontal movement. Subsidence is usually a direct result of groundwater, oil, or gas withdrawal. These activities are common in several areas of California, including parts of the Sacramento Valley and in large areas of the San Joaquin Valley. Subsidence is a greater hazard in areas where subsurface geology includes compressible layers of silt and clay. Subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal generally affects larger areas and presents a more serious hazard than does subsidence due to oil and gas withdrawal. In portions of the San Joaquin Valley, subsidence has exceeded 20 feet over the past 50 years. In the Sacramento Valley, preliminary studies suggest that much smaller levels of subsidence, up to two feet may have occurred. In most of the valley, elevation data are inadequate to determine positively if subsidence has occurred. However, groundwater withdrawal in the Sacramento Valley has been increasing and groundwater levels have declined in some areas. The amount of subsidence caused by groundwater withdrawal depends on several factors, including: (1) the extent of water level decline, (2) the thickness and depth of the water bearing strata tapped, (3) the thickness and compressibility of silt-clay layers within the vertical sections where groundwater withdrawal is occurring, (4) the duration of maintained groundwater level decline, (5) the number and magnitude of water withdrawals in a given area, and (6) the general geology and geologic structure of the groundwater basin.

The damaging effects of subsidence include gradient changes in roads, streams, canals, drains, sewers, and dikes. Many such systems are constructed with slight gradients and may be significantly damaged by even small elevation changes. Other effects include damage to water wells resulting from sediment compaction and increased likelihood of flooding of low-lying areas.

Expansive Soils: Expansive soils are prone to change in volume due to the presence of moisture. Soft clay soils have the tendency to increase in volume when moisture is present and shrink when it is dry (shrink/swell). Swelling soils contain high percentages of certain kinds of clay particles that are capable of

41 absorbing large quantities of water, expanding up to 10 percent or more as the clay becomes wet. The force of expansion is capable of exerting pressure on foundations, slabs, and other confining structures.

Soils: The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service) has mapped over 40 individual soil units in the county. The predominant soil series in the county are the Capay, Clear Lake, Conejo, Oswald, and Olashes soils, which account for over 60 percent of the total land area. The remaining soil units each account for smaller percentages the total land area. The Capay and Clear Lake soils are generally present in the western and southern parts of the county. The Conejo soils occur in the eastern part closer to the incorporated areas of the county. Oswald and Olashes soils are located in the central portion of the county extending north to south, with scattered areas along the southeastern edge of the county. Soil descriptions for the principal soil units in the county are provided below. These descriptions, which were developed by the NRCS, are for native, undisturbed soils and are primarily associated with agricultural suitability. Soil characteristics may vary considerably from the mapped locations and descriptions due to development and other uses. Geotechnical studies are required to identify actual engineering properties of soils at specific locations to determine whether there are specific soil characteristics that could affect foundations, drainage, infrastructure, or other structural features.

3.7.2 Federal Regulatory Setting
Historic Sites Act of 1935: This Act became law on August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 461-467) and has been amended eight times. This Act establishes as a national policy to preserve for public use historic sites, buildings, and objects, including geologic formations.

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program: The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), which was first authorized by Congress in 1977, coordinates the earthquake-related activities of the Federal Government. The goal of NEHRP is to mitigate earthquake losses in the United States through basic and directed research and implementation activities in the fields of earthquake science and engineering. Under NEHRP, FEMA is responsible for developing effective earthquake risk reduction tools and promoting their implementation, as well as supporting the development of disaster-resistant building codes and standards. FEMA's NEHRP activities are led by the FEMA Headquarters (HQ), Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Risk Reduction Division, Building Science Branch, in strong partnership with other FEMA HQ Directorates, and in coordination with the FEMA Regions, the States, the earthquake consortia, and other public and private partners.

3.7.3 State Regulatory Setting
California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act: The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (originally enacted in 1972 and renamed in 1994) is intended to reduce the risk to life and property from surface fault rupture during earthquakes. The statute prohibits the location of mot types of structures intended for human occupancy across the traces of active faults and regulates construction in the corridors along active faults.

California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act: The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act is intended to reduce damage resulting from earthquakes. While the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act addresses surface fault rupture, the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act addresses other earthquake-related hazards, including ground shaking, liquefaction, and seismically induced landslides. The state is charged with identifying and mapping areas at risk of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, and other hazards, and cities and counties are required to regulate development within mapped Seismic Hazard Zones.

42 Uniform Building Code: The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 is assigned to the California Building Standards Commission, which, by law, is responsible for coordinating all building standards. The California Building Code incorporates by reference the Uniform Building Code with necessary California amendments. The Uniform Building Code is a widely adopted model building code in the United States published by the International Conference of Building Officials. About one-third of the text within the California Building Code has been tailored for California earthquake conditions.

Paleontological Resources: Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of plants and animals and associated deposits. The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology has identified vertebrate fossils, their taphonomic and associated environmental indicators, and fossiliferous deposits as significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. Botanical and invertebrate fossils and assemblages may also be considered significant resources. CEQA requires that a determination be made as to whether a project would directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature (CEQA Appendix G(v)(c)). If an impact is significant, CEQA requires feasible measures to minimize the impact (CCR Title 14(3) Section 15126.4 (a)(1)). California Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 (see above) also applies to paleontological resources.

3.7.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a. Directly or indirectly expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

According to the Yuba City General Plan, no active earthquake faults are known to exist in Sutter County, although active faults in the region could produce ground motion in Yuba City (Dyett & Bhatia, 2004). The closest known fault zone is the Bear Mountain Fault Zone, located approximately 20 miles northeast of Yuba City (California Geological Survey [CGS], 2015). Potentially active faults do exist in the Sutter Buttes, but those faults are considered small and have not exhibited activity in recent history. Because the distance from the City to the closest known active fault zone is large, the potential for exposure of people or structures to substantial adverse effects from fault rupture is low. Considering that the Building Code incorporates construction standards for minimizing earthquake damage to buildings, and the low potential for a significant earthquake activity in the vicinity, the potential for adverse impacts from an earthquake is less than significant.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
In the event of a major regional earthquake, fault rupture or seismic ground shaking could potentially injure people and cause collapse or structural damage to existing and proposed structures. Ground shaking could potentially expose people and property to seismic-related hazards, including localized liquefaction and ground failure. However, all new structures are required to adhere to current California Building Code standards. These standards require adequate design, construction, and maintenance of structures to prevent exposure of people and structures to major geologic hazards. General Plan Implementing Policies 9.2-I-1 through 9.2-I-8 and the building codes reduce the potential impacts to less than significant.

43 iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? The proposed Project is not located within a liquefaction zone according to the California Department of Conservation’s California Geologic Survey regulatory maps. Regardless, all new structures are required to adhere to current California Building Code standards. These standards require adequate design, construction, and maintenance of structures to prevent exposure of people and structures to major geologic hazards. Therefore, the potential impact from ground failure is less than significant. iv. Landslides?
According to the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the General Plan, due to the flat topography, landslides, and mudflows are not considered to be a risk in the City limits or within the City’s Sphere of Influence.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The 4.9 acres would be disturbed during site grading. Even though the area is relatively flat, during site grading a large storm could result in the loss of topsoil into the City/Gilsizer drainage system. However, as part of the grading and construction of the self-storage buildings, the applicant will be required to follow Best Management Practices (BMP’s) and provide erosion control measures to minimize soil runoff during the construction process. Therefore, impacts from soil erosion are less than significant. c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
See d) below.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? The extreme southwest corner of the Yuba City Sphere of Influence is the only known area with expansive soils. The Project area is not located within that area and therefore will not be impacted by the presence of expansive soils.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The Project will be connected to the City’s wastewater collection and treatment system. No new septic systems will be utilized. As such, there will be no new impacts from septic systems. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resources or site or unique geologic feature? Due to prior ground disturbancesfor agricultural usesit is unlikely that any paleontological resources exist on the site. However, the following mitigation measure shall apply if any paleontological resources are discovered:

3.7.5 Paleontological Mitigation Measures

44 Paleontological Mitigation Measure 1: This Mitigation Measure shall be placed as a note on the Demolition and Grading Plans. If paleontological resources are found, the construction manager shall halt all activity and immediately contact the Development Services Department at 530-822- 4700.

Mitigation shall be conducted as follows:

1. Identify and evaluate paleontological resources by intense field survey where impacts are considered high;

2. Assess effects on identified sites;

3. Consult with the institutional/academic paleontologists conducting research investigations within the geological formations that are slated to be impacted;

4. Obtain comments from the researchers;

5. Comply with researchers’ recommendations to address any significant adverse effects were determined by the City to be feasible.

In considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting paleontologist, the City’s Community Development Department Staff shall determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, project design, costs, Specific or General Plan policies and land use assumptions, and other considerations. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources is carried out.

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 3.8: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
X

3.8.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Mandatory Reporting Rule (40 CFR Part 98), which became effective December 29, 2009, requires that all facilities that emit more than 25,000 metric tons CO2-equivalent per year beginning in 2010, report their emissions on an annual basis. On May 13, 2010, the USEPA issued a final rule that established an approach to addressing GHG emissions from stationary sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA) permitting programs. The final rule set thresholds for GHG emissions that define when permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities.

45 In addition, the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA (Supreme Court Case 05-1120) found that the USEPA has the authority to list GHGs as pollutants and to regulate emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) under the CAA. On April 17, 2009, the USEPA found that CO2, CH4, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride may contribute to air pollution and may endanger public health and welfare. This finding may result in the USEPA regulating GHG emissions; however, to date the USEPA has not proposed regulations based on this finding.

3.8.2 State & Local Regulatory Setting
The City’s Resource Efficiency Plan as designed under the premise that the City, and the community it represents, is uniquely capable of addressing emissions associated with sources under the City’s jurisdiction and that the City’s emission reduction efforts should coordinate with the state strategies of reducing emissions in order to accomplish these reductions in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The City developed this document with the following purposes in mind:
▪ Local Control: The Yuba City Efficiency Plan allows the City to identify strategies to reduce resource consumption, costs, and GHG emissions in all economic sectors in a way that maintains local control over the issues and fits the character of the community. It also may position the City for funding to implement programs tied to climate goals. ▪ Energy and Resource Efficiency: The Efficiency Plan identifies opportunities for the City to increase energy efficiency and lower GHG emissions in a manner that is most feasible within the community. Reducing energy consumption through increasing the efficiency of energy technologies, reducing energy use, and using renewable sources of energy are effective ways to reduce GHG emissions. Energy efficiency also provides opportunities for cost‐savings. ▪ Improved Public Health: Many of the GHG reduction strategies identified in the Efficiency Plan also have local public health benefits. Benefits include local air quality improvements; creating a more active community through implementing resource‐efficient living practices; and reducing health risks, such as heat stroke, that would be otherwise elevated by climate change impacts such as increased extreme heat days.

Demonstrating Consistency with State GHG Reduction Goals—A GHG reduction plan may be used as GHG mitigation in a General Plan to demonstrate that the City is aligned with State goals for reducing GHG emissions to a level considered less than cumulatively considerable.

3.8.3 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
See response to b) below.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as greenhouse gases (GHGs) because they capture heat radiated from the sun as it is reflected back into the atmosphere, similar to a greenhouse. The accumulation of GHGs has been implicated as a driving force for Global Climate Change. Definitions of climate change vary between and across regulatory authorities and the scientific community, but in general can be described as the changing of the climate caused by natural fluctuations and the impact of

46 human activities that alter the composition of the global atmosphere. Both natural processes and human activities emit GHGs. Global Climate Change is a change in the average weather on earth that can be measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Although there is disagreement as to the speed of global warming and the extent of the impacts attributable to human activities, the vast majority of the scientific community now agrees that there is a direct link between increased emission of GHGs and long-term global temperature. Potential global warming impacts in California may include, but are not limited to, loss in snowpack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years. Secondary effects are likely to include a global rise in sea level, impacts to agriculture, changes in disease vectors, and changes in habitat and biodiversity.

GHG impacts are considered to be exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective (CAPCOA).

The proposed construction of these self-storage facilities will create GHG emissions due to the use of motorized construction equipment. The emissions will be from construction equipment during the construction of the facility. Once completed, vehicle traffic generated by auto use to and from the facility will contribute GHG gases. The small amount of traffic generated by the self-storage facilities is not expected to create significant greenhouse gas emissions. However, on a cumulative scale, possible reasonable reductions could be applied to the project in order to further minimize those impacts.

Specifically addressing this proposal, the City’s Resource Efficiency Plan addresses greenhouse gas concerns and provides a description of greenhouse gas reduction measures. A mitigation measure is included that requires the project incorporate the relevant greenhouse gas reduction measures. With this mitigation the impacts from greenhouse gases will be less than significant.

3.8.4 Greenhouse Mitigation Measure
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measure 1: The site grading process shall comply with the GHG Reduction Measures provided in the adopted Yuba City Resource Efficiency Plan.

47 3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Table 3.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X

3.9.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA): The USEPA was established in 1970 to consolidate in one agency a variety of federal research, monitoring, standard setting, and enforcement activities to ensure environmental protection. USEPA's mission is to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment — air, water, and land — upon which life depends. USEPA works to develop and enforce regulations that implement environmental laws enacted by Congress, is responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental programs, and delegates to states and tribes the responsibility for issuing permits and for monitoring and enforcing compliance. Where national standards are not met, USEPA can issue sanctions and take other steps to assist the states and tribes in reaching the desired levels of environmental quality.

Federal Toxic Substances Control Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act/Hazardous and Solid Waste Act: The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) established a program administered by the USEPA for the regulation of the generation,

48 transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act/Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This law (U.S.

Code Title 42, Chapter 103) provides broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA establishes requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites; provides for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and establishes a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party can be identified. CERCLA also enables the revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP (Title 40, Code of Federal Regulation [CFR], Part 300) provides the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and/or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List (NPL).

CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) on October 17, 1986.

Clean Water Act/SPCC Rule: The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq., formerly the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972), was enacted with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. As part of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. EPA oversees and enforces the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation contained in Title 40 of the CFR, Part 112 (Title 40 CFR, Part 112) which is often referred to as the “SPCC rule” because the regulations describe the requirements for facilities to prepare, amend and implement Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans: A facility is subject to SPCC regulations if a single oil storage tank has a capacity greater than 660 gallons, or the total above ground oil storage capacity exceeds 1,320 gallons, or the underground oil storage capacity exceeds 42,000 gallons, and if, due to its location, the facility could reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the “Navigable Waters” of the United States. Other federal regulations overseen by the U.S. EPA relevant to hazardous materials and environmental contamination include Title 40, CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter D – Water Programs and Subchapter I – Solid Wastes. Title 40, CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter D, Parts 116 and 117 designate hazardous substances under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act: Title 40, CFR, Part 116 sets forth a determination of the reportable quantity for each substance that is designated as hazardous. Title 40, CFR, Part 117 applies to quantities of designated substances equal to or greater than the reportable quantities that may be discharged into waters of the United States.

The NFPA 70®: National Electrical Code® is adopted in all 50 states. Any electrical work associated with the Proposed Project is required to comply with the standards set forth in this code. Several federal regulations govern hazards as they are related to transportation issues. They include:

Title 49, CFR, Sections 171-177 (49 CFR 171-177), governs the transportation of hazardous materials, the types of materials defined as hazardous, and the marking of the transportation vehicles. 49 CFR 350-399, and Appendices A-G, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, address safety considerations for the transport of goods, materials, and substances over public highways. 49 CFR 397.9, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974, directs the U.S. Department of Transportation to establish criteria and regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials.

49 3.9.2 State Regulatory Setting
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA): The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) was created in 1991 by Governor’s Executive Order. The six boards, departments, and office were placed under the CalEPA umbrella to create a cabinet-level voice for the protection of human health and the environment and to assure the coordinated deployment of State resources. The mission of CalEPA is to restore, protect, and enhance the environment to ensure public health, environmental quality, and economic vitality under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR).

Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC): DTSC is a department of Cal/EPA and is the primary agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, cleans-up existing contamination, and looks for ways to reduce the hazardous waste produced in California. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code. Other laws that affect hazardous waste are specific to handling, storage, transportation, disposal, treatment, reduction, cleanup, and emergency planning. Government Code Section 65962.5 (commonly referred to as the Cortese List) includes DTSC listed hazardous waste facilities and sites, DHS lists of contaminated drinking water wells, sites listed by the SWRCB as having UST leaks and which have had a discharge of hazardous wastes or materials into the water or groundwater, and lists from local regulatory agencies of sites that have had a known migration of hazardous waste/material.

Unified Program: The Unified Program (codified CCR Title 27, Division 1, Subdivision 4, Chapter 1, Sections 15100- 15620) consolidates, coordinates, and makes consistent the administrative requirements, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities of the following six environmental and emergency response programs:
▪ Hazardous Waste Generator (HWG) program and Hazardous Waste On-site Treatment activities; ▪ Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) program Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan requirements;
▪ Underground Storage Tank (UST) program;
▪ Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory (HMRRP) program; ▪ California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) program; ▪ Hazardous Materials Management Plans and Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement (HMMP/HMIS) requirements.

The Secretary of CalEPA is directly responsible for coordinating the administration of the Unified Program.

The Unified Program requires all counties to apply to the CalEPA Secretary for the certification of a local unified program agency. Qualified cities are also permitted to apply for certification. The local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) is required to consolidate, coordinate, and make consistent the administrative requirements, permits, fee structures, and inspection and enforcement activities for these six program elements in the county. Most CUPAs have been established as a function of a local environmental health or fire department.

Hazardous Waste Management Program: The Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) regulates hazardous waste through its permitting, enforcement, and Unified Program activities in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 25135 et seq. The main focus of HWMP is to ensure the safe storage, treatment, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes.

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB): The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) was created by the California legislature in 1967. The mission of SWRCB is to ensure the highest reasonable

50 quality for waters of the State, while allocating those waters to achieve the optimum balance of beneficial uses. The joint authority of water allocation and water quality protection enables SWRCB to provide comprehensive protection for California’s waters.

California Department of Industrial Relations – Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal OSHA): In California, every employer has a legal obligation to provide and maintain a safe and healthful workplace for employees, according to the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 (per Title 8 of the CCR). The Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) program is responsible for enforcing California laws and regulations pertaining to workplace safety and health and for providing assistance to employers and workers about workplace safety and health issues. Cal/OSHA regulations are administered through Title 8 of the CCR. The regulations require all manufacturers or importers to assess the hazards of substances that they produce or import and all employers to provide information to their employees about the hazardous substances to which they may be exposed.

California Fire Code: The California Fire Code is Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also referred to as the California Building Standards Code. The California Fire Code incorporates the Uniform Fire Code with necessary California amendments. This Code prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for the safeguarding to a reasonable degree of life and property from the hazards of fire explosion, and dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling and use of hazardous materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the use or occupancy of buildings or premises and provisions to assist emergency response personnel.

3.9.3 Local Regulatory Setting
Sutter County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan: The SCACLUP was adopted in April 1994 by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). SACOG is the designated Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba Counties under the provisions of the California Public Utilities Code, Chapter 4, Article 3.5, Section 21670.1 Airport Land Use Commission Law. The purpose of the ALUC law is to (1) protect public health, safety, and welfare through the adoption of land use standards that minimize the public’s exposure to safety hazards and excessive levels of noise, and (2) Prevent the encroachment of incompatible land uses around public-use airports, thereby preserving the utilities of these airports into the future.

3.9.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Response provided in section b) below.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
The only hazardous materials associated with the construction of this self-storage complex will be those materials associated with grading and construction equipment. This typically includes solvents, oil, and fuel. Provided that these materials are legally and properly used and stored, the proposed Project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. On an ongoing basis the only anticipated hazardous waste generated by the occasional users of the facility that throw away unwanted items. It is

51 possible an unwanted item could contain a hazardous material. However, assuming proper and legal disposal of those wastes there should not be a significant impact from hazardous materials. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? There is not a school within one-quarter mile of the Project. Further, assuming proper use of the fuels, solvents, and oil for the grading and paving equipment, there should not be any potential significant impacts. Therefore, assuming proper and legal use and disposal there will be no significant impacts from the waste generated by the self-storage units.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The property is not on any listings of sites that are contaminated by hazardous wastes. Therefore, there is not a potential for any impacts from a known hazardous materials site. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
The Project is located within the boundary of the Sutter County Airport Land Use Plan. The Plan provides polices regulating land uses near the airport. Regarding building height, the very minor portion of the Project that will be two-stories is below the several imaginary cones that limit height around the airport.

It may be possible in future years, however, that the trees planted to landscape the property could grow into one of those zones. This should not be significant as the trees can be topped if needed.

There are also three safety zones around the airport that limit uses, the Clear Zone, the Approach and Departure Zone, and the Overflight Zone. The Project is outside of the Clear Zone, which is the area within 200 feet of the end of the runway. The Project is also outside of the Approach and Departure Zone which is the area extending beyond the 200-foot Clear Zone for 2,000 feet. The project is within the Overflight Zone, which is the area overflown by aircraft during normal traffic pattern procedures but outside of the Clear Zone and Approach and Departure Zone. This Zone limits uses, but the proposed self-storage facility is not limited in this zone as it is a low population density use.

Therefore, the proposed project is in conformance with the Sutter Airport Land Use Plan and therefore is not a potential for significant impacts on the users of the Project nor to airport operations. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The Yuba City Fire Department and Police Department serve this area. Neither agency has expressed concern over impacts the Project may have on any emergency response plans. Accordingly, there will not be a potential for any significant impacts on emergency response or evacuation plans in the vicinity. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

52 The Project site is located within the Yuba City urban area and the urban area is surrounded by irrigated agricultural lands. There are no wildlands on the site or in the immediate vicinity. Accordingly, there will be no significant impacts from potential wildland fires.

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Table 3.10: Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? X ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite?
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X

3.10.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
Clean Water Act: The Clean Water Act (CWA) is intended to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters (33 CFR 1251). The regulations implementing the CWA protect waters of the U.S. including streams and wetlands (33 CFR 328.3). The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality by regulating point source and some non-point source discharges. Under Section 402 of the CWA, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process was established to regulate these discharges.

53 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zones: The National Flood Insurance Act (1968) makes available federally subsidized flood insurance to owners of flood-prone properties. To facilitate identifying areas with flood potential, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has developed Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) that can be used for planning purposes. Flood hazard areas identified on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map are identified as a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). SFHA are defined as the area that will be inundated by the flood event having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The 1-percent annual chance flood is also referred to as the base flood or 100-year flood.

SFHAs are labeled as Zone A, Zone AO, Zone AH, Zones A1-A30, Zone AE, Zone A99, Zone AR, Zone AR/AE, Zone AR/AO, Zone AR/A1-A30, Zone AR/A, Zone V, Zone VE, and Zones V1-V30. Moderate flood hazard areas, labeled Zone B or Zone X (shaded) are also shown on the FIRM, and are the areas between the limits of the base flood and the 0.2-percent-annual-chance (or 500-year) flood. The areas of minimal flood hazard, which are the areas outside the SFHA and higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent-annualchance flood, are labeled Zone C or Zone X (unshaded).

3.10.2 State Regulatory Setting
State Water Resources Control Board: The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is the agency with jurisdiction over water quality issues in the State of California. The WRCB is governed by the PorterCologne Water Quality Act (Division 7 of the California Water Code), which establishes the legal framework for water quality control activities by the SWRCB. The intent of the Porter- Cologne Act is to regulate factors which may affect the quality of waters of the State to attain the highest quality which is reasonable, considering a full range of demands and values. Much of the implementation of the SWRCB's responsibilities is delegated to its nine Regional Boards. The Project site is located within the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control board.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB): administers the NPDES storm waterpermitting program in the Central Valley region. Construction activities on one acre or more are subject to the permitting requirements of the NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction Activity (General Construction Permit). Additionally, CVRWQCB is responsible for issuing Waste Discharge Requirements Orders under California Water Code Section 13260, Article 4, Waste Discharge Requirements.

State Department of Water Resources: California Water Code (Sections 10004 et seq.) requires that the State Department of Water Resources update the State Water Plan every five years. The 2013 update is the most current review and included (but is not limited to) the following conclusions:
▪ The total number of wells completed in California between 1977 and 2010 is approximately 432,469 and ranges from a high of 108,346 wells for the Sacramento River Hydrologic Region to a low of 4,069 wells for the North Lahontan Hydrologic Region. ▪ Based on the June 2014 California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) basin prioritization for California’s 515 groundwater basins, 43 basins are identified as high priority, 84 basins as medium priority, 27 basins as low priority, and the remaining 361 basins as very low priority.
▪ The 127 basins designated as high or medium priority account for 96 percent of the average annual statewide groundwater use and 88 percent of the 2010 population overlying the groundwater basin area.

54 ▪ Depth-to-groundwater contours were developed for the unconfined aquifer system in the Central Valley. In the Sacramento Valley, the spring 2010 groundwater depths range from less than 10 feet below ground surface (bgs) to approximately 50 feet bgs, with local areas showing maximum depths of as much as 160 feet bgs.
▪ The most prevalent groundwater contaminants affecting California’s community drinking water wells are arsenic, nitrate, gross alpha activity, and perchlorate.

California Government Code 65302 (d): The General Plan must contain a Conservation Element for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, river and other waters, harbors, fisheries, wildlife, minerals, and other natural resources.

That portion of the conservation element including waters shall be developed in coordination with any County-wide water agency and with all district and city agencies which have developed, served, controlled, or conserved water for any purpose for the County or city for which the plan is prepared.

Coordination shall include the discussion and evaluation of any water supply and demand information described in Section 65352.5 if that information has been submitted by the water agency to the city or County. The conservation element may also cover:
▪ The reclamation of land and waters.
▪ Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and other waters. ▪ Regulation of the use of land in stream channels and other areas required for the accomplishment of the conservation plan.
▪ Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion of soils, beaches, and shores. ▪ Protection of watersheds.
▪ The location, quantity, and quality of the rock, sand, and gravel resources. ▪ Flood control.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: On September 16, 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed historic legislation to strengthen local management and monitoring of groundwater basins most critical to the state’s water needs. The three bills, SB 1168 (Pavley) SB 1319 (Pavley) and AB 1739 (Dickinson) together makeup the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act comprehensively reforms groundwater management in California. The intent of the Act is to place management at the local level, although the state may intervene to manage basins when local agencies fail to take appropriate responsibility. The Act provides authority for local agency management of groundwater and requires creation of groundwater sustainability agencies and implementation of plans to achieve groundwater sustainability within basins of high and medium priority.

3.10.3 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Most of the City’s public water supply comes from the Feather River. The water is pumped from the river to the Water Treatment Plant located in northern Yuba City. Due to occasional drought conditions the plant also sometimes utilizes a groundwater well in addition to its surface water supplies. Since the selfstorage facility will only receive water through the City system, and wastewater disposal will be via the

55 City wastewater collection system, it is unlikely that the Project could adversely impact surface or groundwater quality.

All storm water runoff associated with the Project will ultimately drain into the Feather River. The water quality of the stormwater runoff is addressed through General Plan Implementing Policies 8.5-I-1 through

8.5-I-10 which require a wide range of developer and City actions involving coordination with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, protecting waterways, and following Yuba City’s adopted Best Management Practices for new construction.

With the level of oversight on the City’s water supply, and enforcement of Best Management Practices at construction sites, there will not be significant impacts on the City’s water and waste-water systems or storm water drainage system.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Even though the Project will be connected to the City’s water system, self-storage facilities are typically not significant water users. While consumption of City water will increase with the Project, very little, if any, groundwater will be utilized, as the City primarily utilizes surface water supplies. Therefore the impacts on groundwater resources will be minimal and will not have the potential to create any significant impacts.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned m stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? There will be an increased amount of stormwater drainage caused by new impermeable surfaces created by this development, which will ultimately drain into the Feather River. The Project will be required to connect to the City/Gilsizer County Drainage District collection facilities and pay the appropriate fees to the City and Drainage District for its fair share of improvements and expansion to the existing drainage system. Also, as noted above, all new construction must involve use of Best Management Practices.

Assuming all required standards are met there is not expected to be any significant impacts from additional storm water drainage from the site.
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency this portion of the City is outside of the 100- year flood plain. This is due to the existing levee system that contains seasonally high-water flows from the nearby Feather River from flooding areas outside of the levee system. Additional construction within the City that is outside of the levee system does not impact the levee system and therefore does not

56 increase, impede, or otherwise have any effect on the highwater flows within the levee system.

Therefore, there is no impact on the high-water flows that occur within the Feather River levee system. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? This portion of the City is outside of the 100-year flood plain. The City is not close to the ocean or any large lakes so a seiche is unlikely to happen in or near the City. The City is located inland from the Pacific Ocean, so people or structures in the City would not be exposed to inundation by tsunami. Mudflows and landslides are unlikely to happen due to the relatively flat topography within the project area. Thus, it is unlikely that the project site would be subject to inundation by a seiche, tsunami, mudflow, or landslide.

Therefore, there is no potential for significant impacts from any of these types of events. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
As noted above, all new construction is required to utilize Best Management Practices. Assuming all required standards are met, water quality of runoff water from the Project will not create any significant impacts. The City primarily utilizes surface water for its water source so there will be no significant impacts on groundwater.

3.11 Land Use and Planning
Table 3.11: Land Use and Planning
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to
a conflict with any land use plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X

3.11.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
The Project will be on an undeveloped 4.9-acre property that is abutted on three sides by existing light industrial uses or properties designated for light industrial type development, and on the fourth side by a multiple-family residential complex.

3.11.2 Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal or state regulations pertaining to land use and planning relevant to the proposed Project.

57 3.11.3 Local Regulatory Setting
Yuba City General Plan, Land Use Element: The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes guidance for the ultimate pattern of growth in the City’s Sphere of Influence. It provides direction regarding how lands are to be used, where growth will occur, the density/intensity and physical form of that growth, and key design considerations.

3.11.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences
a) Physically divide an established community?
This self-storage project will not physically divide an established community as it is an infill project on the perimeter of a light industrial area. Therefore, there is not a potential to divide an existing community. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? In this case the PD Zone District will revise the standards to fit the proposed Project. As such the standards are written for the specific use. In this case it is to reduce the front and rear setbacks, which otherwise would not meet City standards. Since the Project will meet the new PD standards, it does not conflict with any land use policies, and will therefore not create any significant environmental impacts due to conflicts with any regulation.

As the Project is also within the Sutter County Airport Land Use Plan, it must be consistent with the Airport Plan policies and standards. A review of those polices provides that the Project is consistent with the Airport Plan (See analysis in Section 3.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials, on page 50 of this report).

3.12 Mineral Resources
Table 3.12:: Mineral Resources
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or
other land use plan?
X

3.12.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations pertaining to mineral resources relevant to the proposed Project.

58 3.12.2 State Regulatory Setting
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975: Enacted by the State Legislature in 1975, the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), Public Resources Code Section 2710 et seq., insures a continuing supply of mineral resources for the State. The act also creates surface mining and reclamation policy to assure that:
▪ Production and conservation of minerals is encouraged; ▪ Environmental effects are prevented or minimized;
▪ Consideration is given to recreational activities, watersheds, wildlife, range and forage, and aesthetic enjoyment;
▪ Mined lands are reclaimed to a useable condition once mining is completed; and ▪ Hazards to public safety both now and in the future are eliminated.

Areas in the State (city or county) that do not have their own regulations for mining and reclamation activities rely on the Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Office of Mine Reclamation to enforce this law. SMARA contains provisions for the inventory of mineral lands in the State of California.

The State Geologist, in accordance with the State Board’s Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands, must classify Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) as designated below:
▪ MRZ-1. Areas where available geologic information indicates that there is minimal likelihood of significant resources.
▪ MRZ-2. Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicate that significant mineral deposits are located or likely to be located.
▪ MRZ-3. Areas where mineral deposits are found but the significance of the deposits cannot be evaluated without further exploration.
▪ MRZ-4. Areas where there is not enough information to assess the zone. These are areas that have unknown mineral resource significance.

SMARA only covers mining activities that impact or disturb the surface of the land. Deep mining (tunnel) or petroleum and gas production is not covered by SMARA.

3.12.3 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Response provided in section b) below.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? The Yuba City General Plan does not recognize any mineral resource zones within the City limits, and no mineral extraction facilities currently exist within the City. Because of this, the property contains no

59 known mineral resources and there is little opportunity for mineral resource extraction. As such the Project will have no impact on mineral resources.

3.13 Noise
Table 3.13: Noise
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
X

3.13.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment for Noise Noise can be generally defined as unwanted sound. Sound, traveling in the form of waves from a source, exerts a sound pressure level (referred to as sound level) which is measured in decibels (dB), with 0 dB corresponding roughly to the threshold of human hearing and 120 to 140 dB corresponding to the threshold of pain.

Sound pressure fluctuations can be measured in units of hertz (Hz), which correspond to the frequency of a particular sound. Typically, sound does not consist of a single frequency, but rather a broad band of frequencies varying in levels of magnitude (sound power). The sound pressure level, therefore, constitutes the additive force exerted by a sound corresponding to the frequency/sound power level spectrum.

The typical human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies of the audible sound spectrum. As a consequence, when assessing potential noise impacts, sound is measured using an electronic filter that de-emphasizes the frequencies below 1,000 Hz and above 5,000 Hz in a manner corresponding to the human ear’s decreased sensitivity to low and extremely high frequencies instead of the frequency midrange. This method of frequency weighting is referred to as A-weighting and is expressed in units of Aweighted decibels (dBA). Frequency A-weighting follows an international standard methodology of frequency de-emphasis and is typically applied to community noise measurements.

Noise exposure is a measure of noise over a period of time. Noise level is a measure of noise at a given instant in time. Community noise varies continuously over a period of time with respect to the contributing sound sources of the community noise environment. Community noise is primarily the product of many distant noise sources, which constitute a relatively stable background noise exposure,

60 with the individual contributors unidentifiable. The background noise level changes throughout a typical day, but does so gradually, corresponding with the addition and subtraction of distant noise sources such as traffic and atmospheric conditions. What makes community noise constantly variable throughout a day, besides the slowly changing background noise, is the addition of short duration single event noise sources (e.g., aircraft flyovers, motor vehicles, sirens), which are readily identifiable to the individual receptor. These successive additions of sound to the community noise environment vary the community noise level from instant to instant, requiring the measurement of noise exposure over a period of time to legitimately characterize a community noise environment and evaluate cumulative noise impacts.

3.13.2 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment for Groundbourne Vibration Vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. Vibration sources may be continuous, such as factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne sound, ground borne vibrations may be described by amplitude and frequency. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV), or root mean squared (RMS), as in RMS vibration velocity. The PPV and RMS (VbA) vibration velocity are normally described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal and is often used in monitoring of blasting vibration because it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings.

Although PPV is appropriate for evaluating the potential for building damage, it is not always suitable for evaluating human response. As it takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration signals, it is more prudent to use vibration velocity when measuring human response. The typical background vibration velocity level in residential areas is approximately 50 VdB. Groundborne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration-velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels.

Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground borne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. Construction vibrations can be transient, random, or continuous. The approximate threshold of vibration perception is 65 VdB, while 85 VdB is the vibration acceptable only if there are an infrequent number of events per day.

3.13.3 Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal Vibration Policies: The Federal Railway Administration (FRA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have published guidance relative to vibration impacts. According to the FRA, fragile buildings can be exposed to ground-borne vibration levels of 90 VdB without experiencing structural damage.97 The FTA has identified the human annoyance response to vibration levels as 75 VdB.

3.13.4 State Regulatory Setting
California Noise Control Act: The California Noise Control Act was enacted in 1973 (Health and Safety Code §46010 et seq.), and states that the Office of Noise Control (ONC) should provide assistance to local communities in developing local noise control programs. It also indicates that ONC staff would work with the Department of Resources Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to provide guidance for the preparation of the required noise elements in city and county General Plans, pursuant to Government Code § 65302(f). California Government Code § 65302(f) requires city and county general plans to include a noise element. The purpose of a noise element is to guide future development to enhance future land use compatibility.

61 Title 24 – Sound Transmission Control: Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) codifies Sound Transmission Control requirements, which establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards for new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family dwellings. Specifically, Title 24 states that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room of new dwellings Title 24, Part 2 requires an acoustical report that demonstrates the achievements of the required 45 dBA CNEL. Dwellings are designed so that interior noise levels will meet this standard for at least ten years from the time of building permit application.

3.13.5 Local Regulatory Setting
The City of Yuba City General Plan presents the vision for the future of Yuba City and outlines several guiding policies and policies relevant to noise.

The following goals and policies from the City of Yuba City General Plan1 are relevant to noise.

Guiding Policies
▪ 9.1-G-1 Strive to achieve an acceptable noise environment for the present and future residences of Yuba City.
▪ 9.1-G-2 Incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions and guide the location and design of transportation facilities to minimize the effects of noise on adjacent land uses. ▪ Implementing Policies
▪ 9.1-I-1 Require a noise study and mitigation for all projects that have noise exposure greater than “normally acceptable” levels. Noise mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the following actions:
▪ Screen and control noise sources, such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment,
▪ Increase setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings, ▪ Retain fences, walls, and landscaping that serve as noise buffers, ▪ Use soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows, and ▪ Control hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup, to minimize noise impacts. ▪ 9.1-I-3 In making a determination of impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), consider an increase of four or more dBA to be "significant" if the resulting noise level would exceed that described as normally acceptable for the affected land use in Figure 5. ▪ 9.1-I-4 Protect especially sensitive uses, including schools, hospitals, and senior care facilities, from excessive noise, by enforcing “normally acceptable” noise level standards for these uses. ▪ 9.1-I-5 Discourage the use of sound walls. As a last resort, construct sound walls along highways and arterials when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility.
▪ 9.1-I-6 Require new noise sources to use best available control technology (BACT) to minimize noise from all sources.

1 City of Yuba, 2004. City of Yuba General Plan. April 8, 2004.

62 ▪ 9.1-I-7 Minimize vehicular and stationary noise sources and noise emanating from temporary activities, such as construction.

Table 1: Noise Exposure

LAND USE CATEGORY
COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE - Ldn or CNEL (dBA)
50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential – Low Density
Single Family, Duplex, Mobile
Home
Residential – Multi-Family
Transient Lodging –
Motel/Hotel
Schools, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Auditorium, Concert Hall,
Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, Outdoor
Spectator Sports
Playgrounds, Neighborhood
Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables,
Water Recreation,
Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Business,
Commercial and Professional
Industrial, Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.

Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development generally should not be undertaken.

Source: State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2003. General Plan Guidelines.

63 City of Yuba City Municipal Code: Title 4, Chapter 17, Section 4-17.10(e) of the Yuba City Municipal Code prohibits the operation of noise‐generating construction equipment before 6:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. daily, except Sunday and State or federal holidays when the prohibited time is before 8:00 a.m. and after 9:00 p.m.

3.13.6 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
A temporary increase in noise will occur during construction of the self-storge facility. Construction will primarily occur during daylight hours, Monday through Saturday. Noise from construction activities would contribute to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. Activities involved in construction could generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in Table 2, ranging from 79 to 91 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, without feasible noise control (e.g., mufflers) and ranging from 75 to 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, with feasible noise control. However, due to the limited duration of the construction activities, that the construction will occur during the less sensitive daylight hours, and distance to the nearest residences, the noise impacts on the nearby residences will not have the potential to generate significant noise impacts.

Table 2: Noise Levels of Typical Construction
Type of Equipment (1) dBA at 50 ft.

Without Feasible Noise Control (2) With Feasible Noise Control Dozer or Tractor 80 75
Excavator 88 80
Scraper 88 80
Front End Loader 79 75
Backhoe 85 75
Grader 85 75
Truck 91 75
(1) US Environmental Protection Agency. “Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances.” Figure IV.H‐4. 1971.
(2) Feasible noise control includes the use of intake mufflers, exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds operating in accordance with manufacturers specifications Short-term noise impacts (and possibly some ground borne vibrations if site compaction is required prior to construction) can be expected resulting from site grading and construction activities. Constructionrelated noise impacts will be less than significant because adherence to City construction standards is required. These standards limit the hours of operation for construction and use of heavy machinery to daytime hours. Further the construction noise is of limited duration, further limiting any adverse impacts.

Once constructed the proposed self-storage facility is not expected to be a significant noise generator.

64 b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods employed. Operation of construction equipment causes ground vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Table 3 describes the typical construction equipment vibration levels.

Table 3: Typical Construction Levels
Equipment (1) VdB at 25 ft2
Small Bulldozer 58
Vibratory Roller 94
Jackhammer 79
Loaded Trucks 86
(1) US Environmental Protection Agency. “Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances.” Figure IV.H‐4. 1971.

Vibration levels of construction equipment in Table 3 are at a distance of 25 feet from the equipment. As noted above, construction activities are limited to daylight hours. Infrequent construction-related vibrations would be short-term and temporary, and operation of heavy-duty construction equipment would be intermittent throughout the day during construction. Therefore, with the short duration of grading activities associated with the project, the approximate reduction of 6 VdB for every doubling of distance from the source, the temporary impact to any uses in the vicinity of the project would be less than significant.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The Project is located within two miles of the Sutter County Airport and is subject to the polices of the Sutter County Airport Land Use Plan. The Sutter ALUC identifies the airport related 65 db (CNEL) contour for which the Project is located outside of its boundary. Further, the Project is not considered to be a noise sensitive use (such as a school), so is not subject to any restrictions due to airport noise. Therefore, there is not a potential for any significant noise impacts from the airport.

65 3.14 Population and Housing
Table 3.14: Population and Housing
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

3.14.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
The Project will be on an undeveloped 4.9-acre property that is abutted on three sides by existing light industrial uses or properties designated for light industrial type development, and on the fourth side by a multiple-family residential complex.

3.14.2 Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations, plans, programs, or guidelines associated with population or housing that are applicable to the proposed Project.

3.14.3 State Regulatory Setting
California law (Government Code Section 65580, et seq.) requires cities and counties to include a housing element as a part of their general plan to address housing conditions and needs in the community.

Housing elements are prepared approximately every eight years, following timetables set forth in the law.

The housing element must identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs and “make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community,” among other requirements. The City recently adopted its current Housing Element.

3.14.4 Regional Regulatory Setting
State law mandates that all cities and counties offer a portion of housing to accommodate the increasing needs of regional population growth. The statewide housing demand is determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), while local governments and councils of governments decide and manage their specific regional and jurisdictional housing needs and develop a regional housing needs assessment (RHNA).

In the greater Sacramento region, which includes the City of Yuba City, SACOG has the responsibility of developing and approving an RHNA and a Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) every eight years (Government Code, Section 65580 et seq.). This document has a central role of distributing the allocation

66 of housing for every county and city in the SACOG region. Housing needs are assessed for very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate households.2 As described above, SACOG is the association of local governments that includes Yuba City, along with other jurisdictions comprising the six counties in the greater Sacramento region. In addition to preparing the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the region, SACOG approves the distribution of affordable housing in the region through its RHNP. SACOG also assists in planning for transit, bicycle networks, clean air and serves as the Airport Land Use Commission for the region.3

3.14.5 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The completion of the proposed Project will result in approximately 90,000 square feet of self-storage units, RV parking and shipping container storage. This is on a property that is surrounded on three sides by other light industrial uses, or property designated for that type of use, and multiple-family uses along its north side. This is essentially an infill project. As such, City services and streets already serve this area.

Further, the Project is consistent with the General Plan, which describes the larger overall land use pattern for the City and all of the basic infrastructure needs to support that growth. Therefore, unplanned growth resulting from this Project will not occur and as a result does not have the potential to generate any significant impacts due to unplanned growth.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed Project will not result in the demolition of any residences.

2 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2012. Regional Needs Housing Plan 2013-2021. Adopted September 20, 2012.

3 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2017. About SACOG. SACOG website. Available: http://www.sacog.org/about/.

Accessed July 25, 2017.

67 3.15 Public Services
Table 3.15: Public Services
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered government
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
or other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X

3.15.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Law enforcement is provided by the Yuba City Police Department. Fire protection is provided by the Yuba City Fire Department. Nearby parks and other urban services including streets, water, sewer, and stormwater drainage will also be provided by Yuba City.

3.15.2 Federal Regulatory Setting
National Fire Protection Association: The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is an international nonprofit organization that provides consensus codes and standards, research, training, and education on fire prevention and public safety. The NFPA develops, publishes, and disseminates more than 300 such codes and standards intended to minimize the possibility and effects of fire and other risks. The NFPA publishes the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code, which provides requirements to establish a reasonable level of fire safety and property protection in new and existing buildings.

3.15.3 State Regulatory Setting
California Fire Code and Building Code: The 2013 California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations) establishes regulations to safeguard against hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises. The Fire Code also establishes requirements intended to provide safety and assistance to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provision of the Fire Code includes regulations regarding fire-resistance rated construction, fire protection systems such as alarm and sprinkler systems, fire service features such as fire apparatus access roads, fire safety during construction and demolition, and wildland urban interface areas.

68 California Health and Safety Code (HSC): State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California HSC, which includes regulations for building standards (as set forth in the CBC), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers, smoke alarms, childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.

California Master Mutual Aid Agreement: The California Master Mutual Aid Agreement is a framework agreement between the State of California and local governments for aid and assistance by the interchange of services, facilities, and equipment, including but not limited to fire, police, medical and health, communication, and transportation services and facilities to cope with the problems of emergency rescue, relief, evacuation, rehabilitation, and reconstruction.

3.15.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire Protection: The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not express concerns. All new development potentially adds to the Fire Department’s duties and responsibilities, but the development also pays proportional impact fees intended to offset the cost of additional Fire Department facilities and equipment. As such, the impacts on fire services will be less than significant.

Police Protection: The Police Department reviewed the proposal and did not express concerns. All new development potentially adds to the Police Department’s duties and responsibilities, but the development also pays proportional impact fees intended to offset the cost of additional Police Department facilities and equipment. As such, the impacts on police services will be less than significant.

Schools: Although there are no new residences proposed, the Project will have to pay the Yuba City Unified School District adopted school impact fees that are intended for non-residential development.

Therefore, the impact on schools will be less than significant.

Parks: There are no new residences proposed by this Project nor will it be a significant employer that could cause the need for more housing. As such, the impact on parks from this project will be less than significant.

Other Public Facilities: The project will be connected to the City water system and wastewater collection system. As such, the Project must pay connection fees that are utilized for expansion of the treatment plants. The City also collects impact fees for County services that are provided, such as the library system and justice system.

Accordingly, the project will have a less than significant impact regarding the provision of public services.

69 3.16 Recreation
Table 3.16: Recreation
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
X

3.16.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Yuba City has 22 City-owned parks and recreational areas, managed by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. This consists of four community parks, 15 neighborhood parks, and three passive or mini parks.

3.16.2 Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations regarding parks and open space that are applicable to the proposed Project.

3.16.3 State Regulatory Setting
State Public Park Preservation Act: The primary instrument for protecting and preserving parkland is the Public Park Preservation Act of 1971. Under the PRC section 5400-5409, cities and counties may not acquire any real property that is in use as a public park for any non-park use unless compensation or land, or both, are provided to replace the parkland acquired. This provides no net loss of parkland and facilities.

Quimby Act: California Government Code Section 66477, referred to as the Quimby Act, permits local jurisdictions to require the dedication of land and/or the payment of in-lieu fees solely for park and recreation purposes. The required dedication and/or fee are based upon the residential density and housing type, land cost, and other factors. Land dedicated and fees collected pursuant to the Quimby Act may be used for developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreational facilities.

3.16.4 Local Regulatory Setting
The Yuba City General Plan and the City’s Parks Master Plan provide a goal of providing 5 acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents, while it also requires 1 acre of Neighborhood Park for every 1,000 residents.

The City’s development impact fee program collects fees for new development which is allocated for the acquisition and development of open space in the City.

70 3.16.5 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Since there is no residential development associated with the Project, and also that self-storage facilities generate minimal new employment, the Project will not materially increase the use of the City’s park system. Therefore, the impact on the City park system from this Project is less than significant. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The Project does not propose to provide any on-site recreational facilities.

3.17 Transportation/Traffic
Table 3.17: Transportation Recreation
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X

3.17.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal Highway Administration: FHWA is the agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) responsible for the Federally funded roadway system, including the interstate highway network and portions of the primary State highway network. FHWA funding is provided through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficiency Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). SAFETEA- LU can be used to fund local transportation improvement projects, such as projects to improve the efficiency of existing roadways, traffic signal coordination, bikeways, and transit system upgrades.

Several federal regulations govern transportation issues. They include:

71 ▪ Title 49, CFR, Sections 171-177 (49 CFR 171-177), governs the transportation of hazardous materials, the types of materials defined as hazardous, and the marking of the transportation vehicles.
▪ Title 49 CFR 350-399, and Appendices A-G, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, address safety considerations for the transport of goods, materials, and substances over public highways.

3.17.2. State Regulatory Setting
The measurement of the impacts of a project’s traffic is set by the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15064.3 of the Guidelines states that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. VMT is a metric which refers to the amount of distance of automobile traffic that is generated by a project. Per the Guidelines “Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact.” “Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant environmental impact.” The CEQA Guidelines also states that the lead agency (Yuba City) may “choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled …”. As this is a new form of calculating significant traffic events, the City has not yet determined its own methodology to calculate levels of significance for VMT. Until that methodology is determined, for purposes of this initial study the information provided by the Sacramento Council of Governments (SACOG) and the CA Office of Planning and Research is utilized. A review of these studies indicates several factors that may be utilized for determining levels of significance. One is that if the project will generate less than 110 vehicle trips per day, it is assumed that with the small size of the project, the impact is less than significant. A second criteria is that for a project, on a per capita or per employee basis, the VMT will be at least 15 percent below that of existing development is a reasonable threshold for determining significance.

As this is a new methodology, future projects may utilize different criterion as they become available.

3.17.3. Local Regulatory Setting
The Yuba City General Plan Transportation Element has policies regulating all mode of transportation and related activities. Specifically, there are Implementing Policies regarding Traffic Levels of Service that are relevant to project review process:

5.2-I-12 Develop and manage the roadway system to obtain LOS D or better for all major roadways and intersections in the City. This policy does not extend to residential streets (i.e., streets with direct driveway access to homes) or bridges across the Feather River nor does the policy apply to state highways and their intersections, where Caltrans policies apply. Exceptions to LOS policy may be allowed by the City Council in areas, such as downtown, where allowing a lower LOS would result in clear public benefits. Specific exceptions granted by the Council shall be added to the list of exceptions below:
• SR 20 (SR 99 to Feather River Bridge) – LOS F is acceptable; • SR 20 (Feather River Bridge) – LOS F is acceptable;
• Bridge Street (Twin Bridges across the Feather River) – LOS F is acceptable; • Lincoln Road (New bridge across the Feather River) - LOS F is acceptable.

72 No new development will be approved unless it can be shown that required level of service can be maintained on the affected roadways.

5.2-I-13 Develop and manage residential streets (i.e., streets with direct driveway access to homes) to limit average daily traffic volumes to 2,500 or less and 85th percentile speeds to 25 miles per hour or less.

5.2-I-14 Require traffic impact studies for all proposed new developments that will generate significant amounts of traffic.

Specific thresholds will be based on location and project type, and exceptions may be granted where traffic studies have been completed for adjacent development.

5.2-I-15 Improve intersections as needed to maintain LOS standards and safety on major arterials.

3.17.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Self-storage facilities are very low generators of vehicle traffic due to having very few employees and also that the users infrequently utilize the facility. Therefore, development of this self-storage facility will generate little traffic and will not conflict with any programs, plans, or ordinances regarding transportation. There is a condition applied to the project prohibiting commercial truck parking so a potential from impacts on the nearby intersection from truck traffic is less than significant. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? This CEQA section describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts in terms of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). SACOG, in “Technical Advisory: On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA” provides two criteria for which if the project meets either of them, the traffic impacts are considered less than significant. One criterion is that the project generates less than 110 vehicle trips per day is considered to be less than a significant impact.

Following its initial opening when new tenants will be moving materials to the site, the Project will not generate traffic levels in excess of 110 trips per day. Since the Project will not exceed this criterion, the impacts from VMT are anticipated to be less than significant. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The Project will be accessed by Winship Road. Since self-storage facilities are very low traffic generators, it is not expected to cause any traffic concerns on this street. However, the nearby unsignalized intersection at Winship Road and Garden Highway could be impacted by this Project if the vehicle storage area is utilized for commercial truck parking. Therefore, there is a recommended condition included with the Project prohibiting commercial trucking within the Project area. The Yuba City Public Works Department has evaluated the proposal and concluded that with this condition, the Project did not significantly impact the intersection.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

73 The Fire Department and Police Department have reviewed the project plans and they did not express concerns about emergency access in the area.

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Table 3.18: Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project cause of substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

X

3.18.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
This section describes the affected environment and regulatory setting for Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs). The following analysis of the potential environmental impacts related to TCRs is derived primarily from the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Yuba City General Plan (2004) and consultation record with California Native American tribes under Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18.

3.18.2 State Regulatory Setting
Assembly Bill 52: Effective July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) amended CEQA to require that: 1) a lead agency provide notice to any California Native American tribes that have requested notice of projects proposed by the lead agency; and 2) for any tribe that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request for consultation, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Topics that may be addressed during consultation include TCRs, the potential significance of project impacts, type of environmental document that should be prepared, and possible mitigation measures and project alternatives.

Pursuant to AB 52, Section 21073 of the Public Resources Code defines California Native American tribes as “a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004.” This includes both federally and non-federally

74 recognized tribes.

Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines TCRs for the purpose of CEQA as:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; and/or
b. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; and/or
c. a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Because criteria a and b also meet the definition of a Historical Resource under CEQA, a TCR may also require additional consideration as a Historical Resource. TCRs may or may not exhibit archaeological, cultural, or physical indicators.

Recognizing that California tribes are experts in their TCRs and heritage, AB 52 requires that CEQA lead agencies initiate consultation with tribes at the commencement of the CEQA process to identify TCRs.

Furthermore, because a significant effect on a TCR is considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, consultation is required to develop appropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures.

3.18.3 Cultural Setting
The Nisenan (also referred to as Southern Maidu) inhabited the General Plan area prior to large-scale European and Euroamerican settlement of the surrounding area. Nisenan territory comprised the drainages of the Yuba, Bear, and American Rivers, and the lower drainages of the Feather River. The Nisenan, together with the Maidu and Konkow, their northern neighbors, form the Maiduan language family of the Penutian linguistic stock (Shipley 1978:89). Kroeber (1976:392) noted three dialects:

Northern Hill Nisenan, Southern Hill Nisenan, and Valley Nisenan. Although cultural descriptions of this group in the English language are known from as early as 1849, most of our current cultural knowledge comes from various anthropologists in the early part of the 20th century (Levy 1978:413; Wilson and Towne 1978:397).

The basic subsistence strategy of the Nisenan was seasonally mobile hunting and gathering. Acorns, the primary staple of the Nisenan diet, were gathered in the valley along with seeds, buckeye, salmon, insects, and a wide variety of other plants and animals. During the warmer months, people moved to mountainous areas to hunt and collect food resources, such as pine nuts. Bedrock and portable mortars and pestles were used to process acorns. Nisenan settlement patterns were oriented to major river drainages and tributaries. In the foothills and lower Sierra Nevada, Nisenan located their villages in large flats or ridges near major streams. These villages tended to be smaller than the villages in the valley. (Wilson and Towne 1978:389–390.)
Trade provided other valuable resources that were not normally available in the Nisenan environment.

The Valley Nisenan received black acorns, pine nuts, manzanita berries, skins, bows, and bow wood from

75 the Hill Nisenan to their east, in exchange for fish, roots, grasses, shells, beads, salt, and feathers (Wilson and Towne 1978). To obtain, process, and utilize these material resources, the Nisenan had an array of tools to assist them. Wooden digging sticks, poles for shaking acorns loose, and baskets of primarily willow and redbud were used to gather vegetal resources. Stone mortars and pestles were used to process many of the vegetal foods; baskets, heated stones, and wooden stirring sticks were used for cooking. Basalt and obsidian were primary stone materials used for making knives, arrow and spear points, clubs, arrow straighteners, and scrapers. (Wilson and Towne 1978.)
Nisenan settlement locations depended primarily on elevation, exposure, and proximity to water and other resources. Permanent villages were usually located on low rises along major watercourses. Village size ranged from three houses to 40 or 50 houses. Larger villages often had semi-subterranean dance houses that were covered in earth and tule or brush and had a central smoke hole at the top and an entrance that faced east (Wilson and Towne 1978:388). Early Nisenan contact with Europeans appears to have been limited to the southern reaches of their territory. Spanish expeditions intruded into Nisenan territory in the early 1800s. In the two or three years following the gold discovery, Nisenan territory was overrun by immigrants from all over the world. Gold seekers and the settlements that sprang up to support them were nearly fatal to the native inhabitants. Survivors worked as wage laborers and domestic help and lived on the edges of foothill towns. Despite severe depredations, descendants of the Nisenan still live in their original land area and maintain and pass on their cultural identity.

3.18.4 Summary of Native American Consultation
The City solicited consultation with culturally affiliated California Native American tribes (regarding the proposed project in accordance with AB 52. In response to AB 52, on August 31, 2022, the City supplied the following Native American tribes with a Project description and map of the proposed Project area and a request for comments:
• United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria • Miwok Tribe
The United Auburn Indian Community responded that it had no concerns provided the standard mitigations are applied to the Project, which has been done.

3.18.5 Tribal Cultural Resources within Project Area
In the absence of specific information from California Native American Tribes, information about potential impacts to TCRs or Native American Cultural Places was drawn from the ethnographic context (summarized above) and the results of a search of the Sacred Lands File of the NAHC. The ethnographic information reviewed for the project, including ethnographic maps, does not identify any villages, occupational areas, or resource procurement locations in or around the current project area. Further, the areas of highest sensitivity are closer to the Feather River. In addition, the Sacred Lands File failed to identify any sacred lands or tribal resources in or near the project area.

3.18.6 Thresholds of Significance
AB 52 established that a substantial adverse change to a TCR has a significant effect on the environment.

The thresholds of significance for impacts to TCRs are as follows:

Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change to a TCR, defined in Section 21074 as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a Native American tribe that

76 are:
▪ Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources;
▪ Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision k of Section 5010.1; and/or
▪ Determined by the City to be significant, as supported by substantial evidence, including:
o A cultural landscape with a geographically defined boundary; o A historical resource as described in Section 21084.1 (either eligible for or listed on the California Register of Historical Resources or listed on a local registry); o A unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2; and/or o A non-unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2.

In assessing substantial adverse change, the City must determine whether or not the project will adversely affect the qualities of the resource that convey its significance. The qualities are expressed through integrity. Integrity of a resource is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association [CCR Title 14, Section 4852(c)]. Impacts are significant if the resource is demolished or destroyed or if the characteristics that made the resource eligible are materially impaired [CCR Title 14, Section 15064.5(a)]. Accordingly, impacts to a TCR would likely be significant if the project negatively affects the qualities of integrity that made it significant in the first place. In making this determination, the City need only address the aspects of integrity that are important to the TCR’s significance.

3.18.7 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project cause of substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k).

There are no buildings on the property that will be removed as part of this Project. Therefore, there will be no potential significant impacts on any historical resources, directly or indirectly. ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

The UAIC provided that no known TCRs were identified (as defined in Section 21074) within the proposed project area. Given the level of previous disturbance within the Project area, it is not expected that any TCRs would remain. However, during grading and excavation activities, there is a potential to encounter native soils, which may contain undiscovered TCRs. In the unlikely event resources are discovered during

77 ground disturbing activities that are associated with Native American culture, compliance with the TCR Mitigation Measures provided below would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level.

3.18.8 Tribal Cultural Mitigation Measures
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation 1: Post Ground Disturbance A minimum of seven days prior to beginning earthwork, clearing, and grubbing, or other soil disturbing activities, the applicant shall notify lead agency of the proposed earthwork start-date. The lead agency shall contact the United Auburn Indian Community (UAIC) with the proposed earthwork start-date and a UAIC Tribal Representative or Tribal Monitor shall be invited to inspect the project site, including any soil piles, trenches, or other disturbed areas, within the first five days of groundbreaking activity, or as appropriate for the type and size of the project. During this inspection, a UAIC Tribal Representative or Tribal Monitor may provide an on-site meeting for construction personnel information on TCRs and workers awareness brochure.

If any TCRs are encountered during this initial inspection, or during any subsequent construction activities, work shall be suspended within 100 feet of the find and measures included in the Unanticipated Discoveries Mitigation Measure 2 shall be implemented. Preservation in place is the preferred alternative under CEQA and UAIC protocols, and every effort must be made to preserve the resources in place, including through project redesign.

The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by CEQA lead agency to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize significant effects to the resources, including the use of paid Native American Monitor during ground disturbing activities.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation 2: Unanticipated Discoveries: If any suspected TCRs are discovered during ground disturbing construction activities, all work shall cease within 100 feet of the find, or an agreed upon distance based on the project area and nature of the find. A Tribal Representative from a California Native American Tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area shall be immediately notified and shall determine if the find is a TCR (PRC 21074). The Tribal Representative will make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment as necessary.

Preservation in place is the preferred alternative under CEQA and UAIC protocols, and every effort must be made to preserve the resources in place, including through project redesign. Culturally appropriate treatment may be, but is not limited to, processing materials for reburial, minimizing handling of cultural objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, returning objects to a location within the project area where they will not be subject to future impacts. The Tribe does not consider curation of TCR’s to be appropriate or respectful and request that materials not be permanently curated, unless approved by the Tribe.

The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the CEQA lead agency to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the resource, including but limited to, facilitating the appropriate tribal treatment of the find, as necessary. Treatment that preserves or restores the cultural character and integrity of a Tribal Cultural Resource may include Tribal monitoring, culturally appropriate recovery of cultural objects, and reburial of cultural objects or cultural soil.

Work at the discovery location cannot resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of CEQA, including AB 523 has been satisfied.

78 3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Table 3.19: Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water or wastewater
treatment or storm drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
X

3.19.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Wastewater:

Yuba City owns, operates, and maintains the wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal system that provides sewer service to over 60,000 residents and numerous businesses. The remainder of the residents and businesses in the Yuba City Sphere of Influence (SOI) are currently serviced by private septic systems.

In the early 1970s, the City’s original sewage treatment plant was abandoned, and the current Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) was constructed.

Water:

The water supply source for the City is surface water from the Feather River with use of a backup groundwater well. The City of Yuba City is a public water agency with over 18,000 connections. City policy only allows areas within the City limits to be served by the surface water system.

Reuse and Recycling:

Solid waste generated in Yuba City is collected by Recology Yuba-Sutter. Recology offers residential, commercial, industrial, electronic, and hazardous waste collection, processing, recycling, and disposal, as well as construction and demolition waste processing, diversion, and transfer to a disposal facility. The

79 City’s municipal solid waste is delivered to the Ostrom Road Landfill; a State-permitted solid waste facility that provides a full range of transfer and diversion services. This landfill has a remaining capacity of 39,223,000 cubic yards (90 percent remaining capacity reported in 2007).4

3.19.2 Federal Regulatory Setting
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System: Discharge of treated wastewater to surface water(s) of the U.S., including wetlands, requires an NPDES permit. In California, the RWQCB administers the issuance of these federal permits. Obtaining a NPDES permit requires preparation of detailed information, including characterization of wastewater sources, treatment processes, and effluent quality. Any future development that exceeds one acre in size would be required to comply with NPDES criteria, including preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the inclusion of BMPs to control erosion and offsite transport of soils.

3.19.3 State Regulatory Setting
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB): Waste Discharge Requirements Program. State regulations pertaining to the treatment, storage, processing, or disposal of solid waste are found in Title 27, CCR, Section 20005 et seq. (hereafter Title 27). In general, the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Program (sometimes also referred to as the “Non-Chapter 15 (Non-15) Program”) regulates point discharges that are exempt pursuant to Subsection 20090 of Title 27 and not subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Exemptions from Title 27 may be granted for nine categories of discharges (e.g., sewage, wastewater, etc.) that meet, and continue to meet, the preconditions listed for each specific exemption. The scope of the WDRs Program also includes the discharge of wastes classified as inert, pursuant to Section 20230 of Title 27. Several programs are administered under the WDR Program, including the Sanitary Sewer Order and recycled water programs.

Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle): The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) is the State agency designated to oversee, manage, and track the 76 million tons of waste generated each year in California. CalRecycle develops laws and regulations to control and manage waste, for which enforcement authority is typically delegated to the local government. The board works jointly with local government to implement regulations and fund programs.

The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (PRC 40050 et seq. or Assembly Bill (AB 939, codified in PRC 40000), administered by CalRecycle, requires all local and county governments to adopt a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to identify means of reducing the amount of solid waste sent to landfills.

This law set reduction targets at 25 percent by the year 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. To assist local jurisdictions in achieving these targets, the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991 requires all new developments to include adequate, accessible, and convenient areas for collecting and loading recyclable and green waste materials.

Regional Water Quality Control Boards: The primary responsibility for the protection of water quality in California rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The State Board sets statewide policy for the implementation of state and federal laws and regulations. The Regional Boards adopt and implement Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans),

4 CalRecycle, 2017. Available: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/58-AA-0011/Detail/. Accessed August 15, 2017.

80 which recognize regional differences in natural water quality, actual and potential beneficial uses, and water quality problems associated with human activities.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit: As authorized by the Clean Water Act (CWA), the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into water of the United States. In California, it is the responsibility of Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to preserve and enhance the quality of the state’s waters through the development of water quality control plans and the issuance of waste discharge requirements (WDRs). WDRs for discharges to surface waters also serve as NPDES permits.

California Department of Water Resources: The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is a department within the California Resources Agency. The DWR is responsible for the State of California's management and regulation of water usage.

3.19.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water or wastewater treatment or storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Response provided in section b) below.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? Although this self-storge facility will be a low water user, it will connect to the City’s water system. The City’s Water Treatment plant (WTP), for which its primary source of water is from the Feather River, also has adequate capacity to accommodate this project. The WTP uses two types of treatment systems, conventional and membrane treatment. The permitted capacity of the conventional WTP is 24 million gallons per day (mgd). The membrane treatment system has a permitted capacity of 12 mgd. Water produced from the conventional and the membrane treatment plants are blended for chlorine disinfection. Operating the conventional and membrane treatment facilities provides a total WTP capacity of 36 mgd. The City is permitted to draw 30 mgd from the Feather River. The current maximum day use is 26 mgd. The City also has an on-site water well at the water plant that supplements the surface water when needed. The City has adopted a water master plan to expand the water treatment plant to the extent that it will accommodate the overall growth of the City.

The Yuba City Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) has available capacity to accommodate new growth. The WWTF current permitted capacity is 10.5 mgd (annual average dry weather flow). The existing average influent flow to the WWTF is approximately 6 mgd. The remaining treatment capacity at the WWTF can be used to accommodate additional flow from the future developments.

For both facilities there are City adopted master plans to expand those plants to the extent that they will accommodate the overall growth of the City. The ongoing expansions of those plants to accommodate growth beyond this Project are funded by the connection fees paid by each new connection. Therefore, the impact on the water and wastewater treatment facilities will be less than significant.

Stormwater drainage in this area is provided by a combination of Yuba City drainage lines and the Gilsizer County Drainage District. This Project has been determined by the respective agencies to be able to accommodate the additional drainage generated by this project. Further, the Project will be responsible

81 to pay the fees to the Drainage District which mitigates the Project’s impacts on the system. Thus, the impacts on the stormwater drainage system will be less than significant.

The connections to nearby electric power facilities, natural gas facilities and telecommunication facilities to this property are provided by private companies, none of which have voiced concerns over the extensions of their services to this Project site. With these considerations the impacts on these types of facilities are expected to be less than significant.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
The Project, which will generate a low quantity of wastewater, will connect to the City’s wastewater treatment system. The Yuba City Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) has available capacity to accommodate new growth. The remaining treatment capacity at the WWTF can be used to accommodate additional flow from the future developments.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Response provided in section e) below.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Recology Yuba-Sutter provides solid waste disposal for the area as well as for all of Sutter and Yuba Counties. There is adequate collection and landfill capacity to accommodate the proposed development.

82 3.20 Wildfire
Table 3.20: Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire
slope instability, or drainage changes?
X

3.20.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Wildland fires are an annual hazard in Sutter County, particularly in the vicinity of the Sutter Buttes, and, to a lesser degree due to urbanized development, Yuba City. Wildland fires burn natural vegetation on undeveloped lands and include rangeland, brush, and grass fires. Long, hot, and dry summers with temperatures often exceeding 100°F add to the County’s fire hazard. Human activities are the major causes of wildland fires, while lightning causes the remaining wildland fires. Irrigated agricultural areas, which tend to surround Yuba City, are considered a low hazard for wildland fires.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program identifies fire threat based on a combination of two factors: 1) fire frequency, or the likelihood of a given area burning, and 2) potential fire behavior (hazard). These two factors are combined in determining the following Fire Hazard Severity Zones: Moderate, High, Very High, Extreme. These zones apply to areas designated as State Responsibility Areas – areas in which the State has primary firefighting responsibility.

The project site is not within a State Responsibility Area and therefore has not been placed in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone.

3.20.2 Impact Assessment/ Environmental Consequences
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

83 As discussed in Section 3.17 of this Initial Study, Project construction is not expected to substantially obstruct emergency vehicles or any evacuations that may occur in the area. Project operations likewise would not obstruct any roadways. Therefore, the impacts of the Project related to emergency response or evacuations would be less than significant.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? The Project site is in a level urban area that with little, if any, native vegetation remaining, and the greater urban area is surrounded by irrigated farmland. This type of environment is generally not subject to wildfires near the urban area. In light of this, the exposure of new residents to wildfire is less than significant.
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
As discussed above, the site is not near any wildland areas and the Project itself will not create any improvements that potentially could generate wildfire conditions. As such the Project will not be constructing or maintaining wildfire related infrastructure such as fire breaks, emergency water sources, etc. Thus, the Project will not create any potential significant impacts that could result from these types of improvements.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The Project site is in a topographically flat area. There are no streams or other channels that cross the site.

As such, it is not expected that people or structures would be exposed to significant risks from changes resulting from fires in steeper areas, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Impacts of the project related to these issues would be less than significant.

84 3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Table 3.21: Mandatory Findings of Significance
Would the Project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, substantially reduce
the number, or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
example of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
X
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)
X
c) Have environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X

3.21.1 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number, or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The land was stripped many years ago of native vegetation for agricultural uses and was likely farmed for many years. Therefore, the construction of this self-storage facility will not significantly degrade the quality of the natural environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate an important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

The analysis conducted in this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration results in a determination that the proposed Project, with its mitigation measures, will have a less than significant effect on the local environment.

85 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects.

This Project is consistent with the and policies of the General Plan. As such the traffic generated by the Project is within what was anticipated in the General Plan which considered anticipated future growth of the area. The City has adequate water and wastewater capacity, and the Project will be extending those services to the site. Stormwater drainage will also meet all City standards. The City has good development and design standards that will be applied to the Project. The loss of agricultural land is cumulative but based on City and County agricultural protection program, the loss is limited to within the urban areas of the cities which is a minor portion of the entire County. The FRAQMD also did not comment that the Project would create any significant cumulative impacts on air quality. Therefore, there are no impacts that will be individually limited but cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The proposed Project in and of itself would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Construction-related air quality, noise, and hazardous materials exposure impacts would occur for a very short period and only be a minor impact during that time period. Therefore, the proposed Project would not have any direct or indirect significant adverse impacts on humans.

86 4. Section References and/or Incorporated by Reference According to Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, an ND may incorporate by reference all or portions of another document that is a matter of public record. The incorporated language will be considered to be set forth in full as part of the text of the ND. All documents incorporated by reference are available for review at, or can be obtained through, the City of Yuba City Development Services Department located at the address provided above. The following documents are incorporated by reference:

Sutter County Airport Land Use Plan, Adopted by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Airport Land Use Commission, April 1994.

Fehr & Peers, Inc. September 2020. SB 743 Implementation Guidelines for City of Yuba City.

Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, November 2017. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.

Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Hex Maps. Work VMT-2020 MTP/SCS (Adopted).

California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection (CDC DLRP). 2014. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Sutter County Important Farmland 2012. August 2014.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection (CDC DLRP). 2013. Sutter County Williamson Act FY 2013/2014.

Carollo. 2011. City of Yuba City 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011.

Yuba City, City of. 2016. City of Yuba City Municipal Code. https://www.municode.com/library/ca/yuba_city/codes/code_of_ordinances Dyett & Bhatia. 2004. City of Yuba City General Plan. Adopted April 8, 2004.

Yuba City General Plan, 2004 Environmental Impact Report. (SCH #2001072105).

Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 1995. Yuba-Sutter Bikeway Master Plan. December 1995. “Determination of 1-in-200 Year Floodplain for Yuba City Urban Level of Flood Protection Determination,” prepared for Yuba City by MBK Engineers, November 2015.

Sutter County General Plan.

Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD) CEQA Significance Thresholds.

Yuba Sutter Transit Route Map.

California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. “Fault Zone Activity Map.” AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zones.

87 California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2016. EnviroStor. Available at http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Sutter County Important Farmland Map.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Maps.

Carollo. 2011. City of Yuba City 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011.

City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan.

Sutter County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, April 1994.

Yuba County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, Sept. 2010.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2011. California Scenic Highway Mapping System website. Updated September 7, 2011. Available at
http://dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm

88 Appendix A

MITIGATION MEASURES AND

MONITORING PLAN
Nestory Park Self Storage
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration EA 22-12 For Rezoning PD17 and Development Plan 22-04, Nestory
Park Self Storage

89 City of Yuba City

MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PLAN
Nestory Park Self-Storage:

Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration EA 22-12 For Rezoning PD17 and Development Plan 22-04
Impact Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party / Agency
Responsible
Monitoring
Agency Party
Timing

3.7 Geology
and Soils
Paleontological Mitigation Measure 1:

This Mitigation Measure shall be placed
as a note on the Demolition and Grading
Plans. If paleontological resources are
found, the construction manager shall
halt all activity and immediately contact
the Development Services Department
at 530-822-4700.

Mitigation shall be conducted as
follows:

1. Identify and evaluate
paleontological resources by
intense field survey where
impacts are considered high;

2. Assess effects on identified sites;

3. Consult with the
institutional/academic
paleontologists conducting
research investigations within
the geological formations that
are slated to be impacted;

4. Obtain comments from the
researchers;

5. Comply with researchers’
recommendations to address
any significant adverse effects
where determined by the City to
be feasible.

In considering any suggested mitigation
proposed by the consulting
paleontologist, the City’s Community
Development Department Staff shall
determine whether avoidance is
necessary and feasible in light of factors
such as the nature of the find, project
design, costs, Specific or General Plan
policies and land use assumptions, and
Applicant or
Developer
Public Works
Dept.,
Development
Services
Dept.

During
construction
phase

90 other considerations. If avoidance is
unnecessary or infeasible, other
appropriate measures (e.g., data
recovery) shall be instituted. Work may
proceed on other parts of the project
site while mitigation for paleontological
resources is carried out.

3.8. Greenhouse
Gases
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation 1: The
site grading and construction of the
self-storage facility shall comply with
the GHG Reduction Measures
provided in the adopted Yuba City
Resource Efficiency Plan.

Applicant or
Developer
Development
Services
Dept. Prior to
issuance of
building
permits.

3.18. Tribal
Cultural
Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation 1:

Post Ground Disturbance A minimum of
seven days prior to beginning
earthwork, clearing, and grubbing, or
other soil disturbing activities, the
applicant shall notify lead agency of the
proposed earthwork start-date. The
lead agency shall contact the United
Auburn Indian Community (UAIC) with
the proposed earthwork start-date and
a UAIC Tribal Representative or Tribal
Monitor shall be invited to inspect the
project site, including any soil piles,
trenches, or other disturbed areas,
within the first five days of
groundbreaking activity, or as
appropriate for the type and size of the
project. During this inspection, a UAIC
Tribal Representative or Tribal Monitor
may provide an on-site meeting for
construction personnel information on
TCRs and workers awareness brochure.

If any TCRs are encountered during this
initial inspection, or during any
subsequent construction activities,
work shall be suspended within 100 feet
of the find and measures included in the
Unanticipated Discoveries Mitigation
Measure 2 shall be implemented.

Preservation in place is the preferred
alternative under CEQA and UAIC
protocols, and every effort must be
Applicant or
Developer
Developer,
Public Works
Dept.,
Development
Services
Dept.

During
construction
phase

91 made to preserve the resources in place,
including through project redesign.

The contractor shall implement any
measures deemed by CEQA lead agency
to be necessary and feasible to preserve
in place, avoid, or minimize significant
effects to the resources, including the
use of paid Native American Monitor
during ground disturbing activities.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation 2:

Unanticipated Discoveries: If any
suspected TCRs are discovered during
ground disturbing construction
activities, all work shall cease within 100
feet of the find, or an agreed upon
distance based on the project area and
nature of the find. A Tribal
Representative from a California Native
American Tribe that is traditionally and
culturally affiliated with a geographic
area shall be immediately notified and
shall determine if the find is a TCR (PRC
21074). The Tribal Representative will
make recommendations for further
evaluation and treatment as necessary.

Preservation in place is the preferred
alternative under CEQA and UAIC
protocols, and every effort must be
made to preserve the resources in place,
including through project redesign.

Culturally appropriate treatment may
be, but is not limited to, processing
materials for reburial, minimizing
handling of cultural objects, leaving
objects in place within the landscape,
returning objects to a location within
the project area where they will not be
subject to future impacts. The Tribe
does not consider curation of TCR’s to
be appropriate or respectful and
request that materials not be
permanently curated, unless approved
by the Tribe.

92 The contractor shall implement any
measures deemed by the CEQA lead
agency to be necessary and feasible to
preserve in place, avoid, or minimize
impacts to the resource, including but
limited to, facilitating the appropriate
tribal treatment of the find, as
necessary. Treatment that preserves or
restores the cultural character and
integrity of a Tribal Cultural Resource
may include Tribal monitoring, culturally
appropriate recovery of cultural objects,
and reburial of cultural objects or
cultural soil.

Work at the discovery location cannot
resume until all necessary investigation
and evaluation of the discovery under
the requirements of CEQA, including AB
523 has been satisfied.

93 Appendix B
DRAFT PD17 ZONE DISTRICT
Nestory Park Self Storage

94 Planned Development (PD) 17 Zone District
Purpose:

This zone district provides for permitted use and development standards on 4.90 acres located along the north side of Winship Road, approximately 430 feet east of Garden Highway (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 53-500-008 and 53-500-035).

Uses:

Permitted Uses:

The permitted use is limited to the facilities shown in the approved Development Plan (DP 22-04) as provided in Exhibit A, consisting of approximately 89,785 square feet of indoor self-storage units within six buildings, approximately 70 outdoor RV storage spaces and approximately 127 shipping containers.

Also included is an office/reception area near the entrance. No on-site caretaker residence is proposed.

Seven public parking spaces will be provided just outside the entrance gate. No commercial semi-trucks are allowed in the outdoor vehicle storage area.

Other Uses:

Any modifications or additions to the permitted uses shall first be required to have an approved Planning Commission Development Plan, as provided in Section 8-5.7001(c) of the Zoning Regulations.

Development Standards:

The development of the property shall be in accordance with the approved Development Plan except nominal modifications that result from more detailed design may be approved by the Development Services Director.

All of the Development Standards of the Light Industrial (M-1) Zone District shall apply except the following:
• The rear (north side) minimum yard shall be zero, provided the development is accompanied by an 18-inch-wide landscape strip located on the neighboring property, as provided in the approved Landscape Plan (Exhibit B) and which is used as a landscaped area as also approved in writing by the Regional Housing Authority, or if the landscaping is located on the Project site. • The front yard (south side) shall be a minimum of ten feet wide, provided it is landscaped as provided in the approved landscape plan.

4 Nestory Park DP 22-04 MND Final
Final Audit Report 2023-01-12
Created: 2023-01-12
By: Ashley Potocnik ([email protected])
Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAOhMRJL5uf4pCc4apBRVf5ggeW3IA2pTL "4 Nestory Park DP 22-04 MND Final" History
Document created by Ashley Potocnik ([email protected]) 2023-01-12 - 0:23:41 AM GMT
Document emailed to Doug Libby ([email protected]) for signature 2023-01-12 - 0:24:48 AM GMT
Email viewed by Doug Libby ([email protected])
2023-01-12 - 0:25:35 AM GMT
Document e-signed by Doug Libby ([email protected])
Signature Date: 2023-01-12 - 0:26:07 AM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed.
2023-01-12 - 0:26:07 AM GMT

Agenda Item 15

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: January 17, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Development Services Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: Consideration of General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06, and Rezone (RZ) 22- 08 in association with Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04: Spirit Drive Parcel Map
Recommendation: A. Conduct a Public Hearing; then
B. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15 by adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Spirit Drive Parcel Map project, and adopt General Plan Amendment 22-06 for approximately 8 acres located at the southeast corner of State Route 20 and El Margarita Road (Assessor’s Parcel Number: 63-010-141); and
C. Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City to adopt Rezone 22-08 for the Spirit Drive Parcel Map project located at the southeast corner of State Route 20 (Colusa Highway) and El Margarita Road (Assessor’s Parcel Number: 63-010-141) by title only and waive the first reading Fiscal Impact: The cost for processing land use entitlements is funded by the project applicant through the payment of application fees.

Purpose:

To consider General Plan Amendment 22-06 and Rezone 22-08 for 8 acres of the 19.99-acre parcel in association with Spirit Drive Parcel Map (TPM 22-04) located at the southeast corner of State Route 20 and El Margarita Road (APN: 63-010-141).

The GPA will re-designate eight acres of the 19.99-acre parcel from Office and Office Park (O) land use designation to a Regional Commercial (RC) designation. The remaining 11.99 acres will remain in the same O designation. The RZ will rezone the same eight acres from an Office Commercial Zone District combined with the X19 Zone District (C-O X19) to a General Commercial (C-3) Zone District.

Council’s Strategic Goal:

This item implements the Council’s goal of Business Friendly.

Background:

The applicant, Yanni Limited L.L.C., filed applications for GPA 22-06, RZ 22-08, and TPM 22-04, in August 2022.

The subject site is part of the previously approved Calvary Christian Center Use Permit (UP) 07-13 which permitted the development of a larger 23-acre site with an 80,000 square foot sanctuary building, a 16,380 square foot elementary school capable of accommodating over 300 students, a baseball diamond, soccer fields, and 612 parking spaces. Use Permit 07-13 was approved by Planning Commission on November 18, 2009, and has received six extensions of time with an expiration date of August 2, 2023.

In 2018, two acres of the 23-acre site were sold to the neighboring property to expand the John L.

Sullivan auto dealership (GPA 18-01, RZ 18-01, DP 18-01, and EA 18-06).

On December 14, 2022, the Yuba City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing, where no persons spoke in opposition to the project, and the Planning Commission unanimously:

1. Adopted Resolution PC 22-17 recommending approval of GPA 22-06 and RZ 22-08 to the City Council together with Environmental Assessment 22-15; and

2. Adopted Resolution PC 22-18 contingently approving TPM 22-04 Analysis:

The result of this project, if approved, would be two – four-acre parcels designated for general commercial uses, and an 11.99-acre parcel designated for office and related uses (there is an approved use permit for a church). The applicant has indicated they would like to locate an auto dealership(s) on one or both four-acre parcels, but no application has yet been filed. While no actual development project is proposed as part of this application, the newly applied Regional Commercial land use designation and accompanying C-3 zoning allows almost all commercial uses.

Compatibility with Neighboring Uses
TABLE 1: BORDERING LAND USES
North: State Route 20 (Colusa Highway).

South: Spirit Way and River Valley High School across
the street.

East: El Margarita Road with several single-family
residences across the street.

West: Auto dealership
The vacant site is surrounded by four different land uses, two of which that could be sensitive to neighboring commercial uses – River Valley High School on the south and single-family residences along the west side. The other two sides – an auto dealership to the east and SR 20 to the north, are very compatible with the proposal.

Regarding the nearby single-family residences, the portion of the project across El Margarita Road from the homes (the 11.99-acre Parcel 3 on the tentative parcel map) is designated for office type uses and is not proposed to be changed. A use permit for a church was previously approved for this property.

As such there will be no change in regard to compatibility with the future development of that 11.99

acres and the existing residences.

River Valley High School is across the street from the 8-acre area included in the GPA/RZ proposal.

While not ideal to place general commercial uses across from the high school, the situation already exists for the auto dealership next door. Staff is not aware of any incompatibility issues associated with that situation. The applicant has indicated that an auto dealership(s) is being considered for the two four-acre parcels, but almost all general commercial uses could be constructed on them. A significant landscape buffer would reduce any potential compatibility issues. Per the existing commercial development standards, a landscape buffer is required (10 or 20 feet, depending on project size), and if adequately landscaped this should be an appropriate buffer.

Traffic
Elimination of the X19 Zone District: The X19 Zone District was originally applied to this property to ensure that when the property is developed it will be responsible for paying its fair share of local transportation needs. Specifically, the X19 zoning identified several intersections, including Walton Avenue/Lassen Boulevard and Tharp Road/Lassen Boulevard, that were identified. At that time the improvements needed for these intersections to support local growth were not in place. The X19 zoning was added to provide an interim solution to that concern.

Since that time, according to the Public Works Department (November 1, 2022, memo from Ben Moody, Public Works Director), other programs have been established, making the X19 zoning unneeded. This includes the 2007 Yuba City Update of the AB 1600 Fee Justification Study, 2020 Traffic Model Update, 2021 Road Development Impact Fee Program, 2021 City of Yuba City Cumulative Traffic Forecasts and Operations Analysis, El Margarita Master Plan studies and various site-specific traffic studies performed in the area. Since there are now programs in place requiring those intersection improvements be timely made as part of developing these properties, and also that there is a mitigation measure applied to this project that refers to improvements to other nearby intersections (discussed below), the X19 Zone District is no longer necessary.

Other Intersections of Concern: There remains various intersections that are not included in the City’s Development Impact Fee Program that would be impacted from development of this 19.99 acres. As provided in the Traffic study prepared several years ago for the El Margarita Master Plan (Transportation Impact Study For the El Margarita Master Plan by Fehr & Peers, January 2015), there remain four nearby intersections that are currently impacted to the extent that they do not or will not in the future meet City level of service criteria. While much of this is due to traffic generated by the nearby high school just prior to and after school hours, new development in the vicinity will exacerbate this problem. Those intersections are:
• State Route 20/El Margarita Road
• Franklin Road/El Margarita Road
• El Margarita Road/Spirit Way
• Harter Parkway/Spirit Way
As this TPM/GPA/RZ is not an actual development project, it will not directly generate additional traffic.

But because the proposal will potentially allow for more intensive uses than presently allowed it could lead to development that will further exacerbate traffic impacts on these impacted intersections.

At this time the City does not have an adopted program to improve those intersections. As such a mitigation measure is included in the environmental document prepared for this project that provides for new development in this vicinity to pay its fair share for improving those intersections. The mitigation

requires that the City determine needed improvements at each of the intersections and the estimated cost be disaggregated per a fair share ratio to be paid by each new project.

Noise
Noise during construction of a commercial facility may be noticeable at the high school, based on a recent noise study for a nearby similar a situation. To lessen the noise on the high school campus a list of noise reduction actions that would lower the noise during construction are part of the mitigation measures recommended for the any future development projects that could result from this action.

Operational noise from a commercial development, likely an auto dealership(s), near the high school is not expected to be an issue as the situation has existed for some time from the existing auto dealership next door.

Availability of City Services
City water and wastewater are available to the property. A stormwater drainage system is nearby that will be operated and maintained by the City, and which connects with the greater system operated by the Sutter County Water Agency that drains into the Live Oak Canal.

Environmental Determination:

An environmental assessment was prepared for this project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. This process included the distribution of requests for comment from other responsible or affected agencies and interested organizations.

Based upon the attached environmental assessment and the list of identified mitigation measures, staff has determined that there is no evidence in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and recommends adoption of a mitigated negative declaration for this project. The findings of the mitigated negative declaration are that, with the proposed mitigations for Geology/Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, Transportation/Traffic, and Tribal Cultural Resources, the proposed TPM/GPA/RZ will not create any significant environmental impacts to the neighborhood or vicinity. As a result, the filing of a mitigated negative declaration is appropriate in accordance with the provisions of CEQA. The proposed mitigations are included with the project conditions of approval.

As a result, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for this project together with the recommended findings in accordance with the provisions of CEQA. The Mitigation Monitoring Program has been refined to clarify responsibilities for performance and monitoring of the same, and a noise mitigation measure clarified that it is the project that is responsible for noise mitigation.

Fiscal Impact:

The cost for processing land use entitlements is funded by the project applicant through the payment of application fees.

Alternatives:

1. Deny the application to establish General Plan Amendment 22-06 or Rezone 22-08.

2. Provide staff with alternate direction.

Recommendation:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing; then

2. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15 by adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Spirit Drive Parcel Map project, and adopt General Plan Amendment 22-06 for approximately 8 acres located at the southeast corner of State Route 20 and El Margarita Road (Assessor’s Parcel Number: 63-010-141); and

3. Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City to adopt Rezone 22-08 for the Spirit Drive Parcel Map project located at the southeast corner of State Route 20 (Colusa Highway) and El Margarita Road (Assessor’s Parcel Number: 63-010-141) by title only and waive the first reading.

Attachments:

1. City Council Resolution approving GPA 22-06 and EA 22-15

2. City Council Ordinance to Adopt RZ 22-08

3. Spirit Drive Location Map

4. Public Works Memo, dated November 1, 2022

5. Spirit Drive TPM 22-04

6. Environmental Assessment 22-15 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program Prepared By: Submitted By:

Ashley Potočnik
Development Liaison
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

1 RESOLUTION NO. ____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 22-15 BY ADOPTING A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR SPIRIT DRIVE PARCEL MAP PROJECT, AND ADOPT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 22-06 FOR APPROXIMATELY 8 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF STATE ROUTE 20 AND EL MARGARITA ROAD (ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER: 63-010-141)
WHEREAS, Yanni Limited L.L.C filed applications filed applications for General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06, Rezone (RZ) 22-08, and Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04 for the Spirit Drive Parcel Map project, in August 2022; and
WHEREAS, as a result the following entitlements are being considered by the City for approval:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06: which proposes to amend the land use designation of 8 acres from Office and Office Park to Regional Commercial. • Rezone (RZ) 22-08: which proposes to amend the zone district of the same 8 acres from an Office-Commercial Zone District combined with the X19 Zone District (C-O X19) to a Regional Commercial (C-3) Zone District.
• Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04: which proposes to create three parcels from a

19.99-acre parcel, which consists of two four-acre parcels and an 11.99-acre parcel for which the general plan and zoning will remain the same. • Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15
(collectively “Project”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (“CEQA”), the City, as the Lead Agency, has analyzed the proposed Project and has prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Assessment 22-15) for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission concurrently conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Project, at which time it received input from City Staff and the applicant; public comment portion was opened, and public testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was considered by the Planning Commission, after which public testimony was closed; and
WHEREAS, after deliberation and consideration of all relevant items, the Planning Commission contingently approved the Spirit Drive Parcel Map (TPM 22-04) and contingently adopted Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15; and
WHEREAS, after deliberation and consideration of all relevant items, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt Environmental Assessment 22-15 and General Plan 22-06, and adopt an Ordinance to approve Rezone 22-08; and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2023, the Yuba City Council conducted a Public Hearing to consider the Project and received both oral testimony and written information presented at the hearing regarding the General Plan Amendment and Rezone; and

2 WHEREAS, the City Council of Yuba City considered said recommendations of the Planning Commission on the matter and after review and consideration of the Environmental Assessment, the City Council now desires to find that Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15 prepared for the project is in conformance with State and local environmental guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt EA 22-15 and GPA 22-06.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Yuba City as follows:

1. Recitals. The City Council finds that the recitals are true and correct, and incorporates the same herein as if set forth in full.

2. CEQA Findings: The City Council of the City of Yuba City finds that an environmental assessment/ initial study was prepared for this project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The process included the distribution of requests for comments from other responsible or affected agencies and interested organizations. Preparation of the environmental assessment necessitated a thorough review of the proposed project and relevant environmental issues and considered previously prepared environmental and technical studies. While the proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, based on its independent judgement and analysis the City Council find that feasible mitigation measures or alternatives have been incorporated into the project in order to avoid the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment will occur. The project-specific mitigation measures included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects are set forth in the attached Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. With the project specific mitigations imposed, there is no substantial evidence in the record that this project may have significant direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on the environment.

Additionally, recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required. Although refinements were made to the Noise Mitigation Measure No. after circulation, the refinement merely clarifies that the project applicant/developer, not the City, is responsible for ensuring that construction noise complies with noise mitigation requirements. This update is an equal or more effective measure, and/or is information added that merely clarifies and amplifies the Mitigated Negative Declaration as contemplated by CEQA Guidelines section 15073.5(c).

3. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Based on the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Yuba City adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration as refined, that was prepared for the project, including the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as updated, as the project will not result in any significant, adverse environmental impacts with the mitigations proposed. The Yuba City Development Services Department is located at 1201 Civic Center Boulevard, Yuba City, CA 95993, and is recommended to be designated as the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decision is based. The City Council authorizes the Director, or designee, to execute and file with the Sutter County Clerk, as appropriate, a Notice of Determination for approval of the project that complies with the CEQA Guidelines.

4. General Plan Findings. The City Council finds that the public necessity, general welfare, good planning practices, public interest, and convenience warrant approval of General Plan Amendment 22-06, including the following:

3 a. Of the proposed three parcels on the 19.99-acre property, the 11.99-acre parcel will remain designated as Office and Office Park. The two-four acre lots would be redesignated to Regional Commercial. These designations are consistent with other policies and programs in the General Plan.

The project supports and forwards the following highlighted goals contained within the General Plan:

3.8-G-1: Maintain Yuba City’s prominence as the center of retail activity in Sutter County.

3.8-I-4: Ensure that neighborhood retail centers and commercial service buildings are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and with adjacent travel corridors

3.9-I-7: Establish setback, landscaping, and screening requirement for employment center development to provide adequate buffering adjacent to residential neighborhoods.

El Margarita Road, which borders the west side of the property, is designated in the General Plan as a minor arterial. The on-site portion of the street will be improved through conditions tied to development of the property as well as intersection improvements required by implementation of Transportation/Traffic Mitigation Measure 1 that will lead to establishing their fair share of the improvements needed due to the increase in traffic generated by future development, making the TPM/GPA/RZ consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element.

As determined in the mitigated negative declaration prepared for this proposal, there are no significant impacts on any agricultural land, biological resources, water quality, and air quality. Thus, the land division is consistent with the Environmental Conservation Element of the General Plan.

The site is flat and has all City services available to it or, in the case of stormwater drainage, the system will be designed and constructed to be part of a larger drainage system operated by the City and the Sutter County Water Agency. The environmental document prepared for the project did not find any environmental concerns that could not be mitigated to below a level of significance or where the inadequacies of the property that would provide concerns for its proposed development.

The 19.99-acre commercial land division is designated by the General Plan for two types of uses. The proposed 11.99-acre lot will remain designated for office development and related uses. The two proposed four-acre lots are designated for regional commercial uses. As all City services will be brought to the property and one end of the property is bordered by a City designated collector street, the access to the properties is designed to accommodate commercial levels of traffic. The three parcels are each large enough to accommodate office and commercial type uses.

Based on the mitigated negative declaration prepared for this project, with the proposed mitigation measures, the land division will not create any significant environmental impacts, including adverse impacts on fish and wildlife.

Every new lot will be connected to City water, wastewater, and stormwater drainage systems, all of which will avoid public health problems.

4 5. Approval of GPA 22-06. The City Council adopts General Plan Amendment No. 22-06 to redesignate eight acres of the 19.99-acre parcel from Office and Office Park (O) land use designation to a Regional Commercial (RC) designation as depicted in Exhibit A.

6. Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

The foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Yuba City at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of January, 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_____________________________
Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM

COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY
_________________________________
Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Exhibit A: General Plan Map, GPA 22-06

5 EXHIBIT A

6

ATTACHMENT 2

1 ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY TO ADOPT REZONE 22-08 FOR THE SPIRIT DRIVE PARCEL MAP PROJECT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF STATE ROUTE 20 (COLUSA HIGHWAY) AND EL MARGARITA ROAD (ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER:
63-010-141) .

WHEREAS, Yanni Limited L.L.C filed applications filed applications for General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06, Rezone (RZ) 22-08, and Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04 for the Spirit Drive Parcel Map project, in August 2022; and
WHEREAS, as a result the following entitlements are being considered for approval by the City:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06: which proposes to amend the land use designation of 8 acres from Office and Office Park to Regional Commercial. • Rezone (RZ) 22-08: which proposes to amend the zone district of the same 8 acres from an Office-Commercial Zone District combined with the X19 Zone District (C-O X19) to a Regional Commercial (C-3) Zone District.
• Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04: which proposes to create three parcels from a

19.99-acre parcel, which consists of two four-acre parcels and an 11.99-acre parcel for which the general plan and zoning will remain the same. • Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15.
(collectively “Project”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (“CEQA”), the City, as the Lead Agency, has analyzed the proposed Project and has prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Assessment 22-15) for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission concurrently conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Project, at which time it received input from City Staff and the applicant; public comment portion was opened, and public testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was considered by the Planning Commission, after which public testimony was closed; and
WHEREAS, after deliberation and consideration of all relevant items, the Planning Commission contingently approved the Spirit Drive Parcel Map (TPM 22-04) and contingently adopted Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15; and
WHEREAS, after deliberation and consideration of all relevant items, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt Environmental Assessment 22-15 and General Plan 22-06, and adopt an Ordinance to approve Rezone 22-08; and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2023, the Yuba the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the project, at which time it received input from City Staff, public comment portion was opened, and public testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was considered by the City Council, after which public testimony was closed and this ordinance introduced.

2 WHEREAS, the City Council of Yuba City considered said recommendations of the Planning Commission on the matter and after review and consideration of the Environmental Assessment, the City Council desires to find that Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-15 prepared for the project is in conformance with State and local environmental guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to approve RZ 22-08.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Yuba City does ordain as follows:

1. Recitals. The City Council finds that the recitals are true and correct, and incorporates the same herein as if set forth in full.

2. CEQA Findings: The City Council of the City of Yuba City has concurrently approved EA 22- 15 by adopting an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. With the project specific mitigations imposed, there is no substantial evidence in the record that this project may have significant direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on the environment. No further CEQA is required, as CEQA has been completed for this project.

3. Rezone Findings. The City Council finds that Rezone 22-08 is consistent with the General Plan as amended by General Plan Amendment 22-06. The City Council finds that Rezone 22-08 i) is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies as amended and as further described in the City Council’s Resolution approving General Plan Amendment 22-06; ii) is consistent with the purpose of the zoning ordinance to promote and protect the public’s health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience and general welfare; iii) the project would provide open space, light, air, privacy, convenience, access, aesthetic values, protection of environmental values, and protection of public and private improvements; and iv) the project will allow for the creation of quality economic growth and development for the City.

4. Approval of RZ 22-08. Based on the information provided above, the City Council of Yuba City adopts an Ordinance approving RZ 22-08 and reclassify the zone districts for those districts on the zoning map of the City of Yuba City from Office Commercial (C-O X19) to General Commercial (C-3), and associated refinements of existing zoned district map boundaries as depicted for approximately eight acres as shown in Exhibit A.

5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

6. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it to be published, in accordance with Government Code, Section 36933, or as otherwise required by law.

7. Effective Date of Resolution. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced by the City Council after waiving reading, except by Title, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of January

3 2023, and adopted the Ordinance after the second reading at a regular meeting held on the ______day of _____2023, by the following roll call vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Recused:

CITY OF YUBA CITY
_____________________________
Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM

COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY
_________________________________
Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Exhibit A: Zoning Map, Rezone 22-08
Exhibit B: X19 Zone District Description
I, ______________________________, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Yuba City, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of the Ordinance passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Yuba City on the date and by the vote indicated herein.

4 EXHIBIT A

5

6 EXHIBIT B

7

ATTACHMENT 3

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar,
GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus
DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the
GIS User Community
Spirit Drive Parcel Map | Location Map
GPA 22-06, RZ 22-08, PM 22-04, EA 22-15
I!
Project Location

ATTACHMENT 4

ATTACHMENT 5

711100

56.854LANE LINE
71110156.785LANE LINE
71110256.502FOG71110356.414LIP71110456.292FL
71110556.633TBC
711106

56.651
TBW
71110756.501TBW 711108

56.425TBC
71110956.062
FL
711110

56.246
LIP71111156.314FOG
71111255.992DI711113

55.808
DI
711114

55.879
DI
71111556.009DI
71111657.014
SDMH
71111758.547
FEN
71111857.748GRD
71111956.654LANE LINE
71112056.670LANE LINE
71112156.764
SSMH
71112256.752LANE LINE
71112356.826LANE LINE71112456.538FOG
71112556.408LIP71112656.325
FL
711127

56.648
TBC
711128

56.886
GRD
71112956.724GRD
71113056.530TBC71113156.226
FL
71113256.369LIP
71113356.462
FOG
71113456.736LANE LINE
71113556.802LANE LINE
71113656.341LANE LINE
71113756.330LANE LINE71113856.020
FOG
71113955.888LIP71114055.798
FL
71114156.086TBC
71114256.712GRD
71114356.331FH
71114456.272WV
71114556.273WV
71114656.268WV
71114756.006

LANE LINE
71114855.962LANE LINE71114955.668FOG
71115055.539
LIP71115155.458FL
711152

55.763
TBC
71115355.866GRD
71115455.922LITE POLE
711155

55.818
EVLT
71115655.842
EVLT711157

55.797
EVLT
711158

55.844
EVLT
71115955.426
GRD711160

55.349TBC71116155.023
FL
71116255.110
LIP
71116355.257
FOG
71116455.582

LANE LINE
711165

55.602

LANE LINE
71116655.229LANE LINE
711167

55.256

LANE LINE
71116854.800FOG
71116954.651LIP
71117054.481
FL
711171

54.958
TBC
71117254.430DI
71117354.528DI
71117454.498
DI71117554.394
DI
71117655.207GRD
71117756.017GRD
71117855.378GRD
71117955.262TBC71118054.915FL71118154.994LIP711182

55.143
FOG
71118355.466

LANE LINE
71118455.445LANE LINE
71118555.720LANE LINE
71118655.783LANE LINE
71118755.466FOG
71118855.339
LIP71118955.215FL
71119055.525TBC
71119155.628GRD
71119256.539
711193 GRD55.585

LITE POLE
71119455.624EVLT
71119555.602
EVLT
71119655.617EVLT
71119755.617
EVLT
71119855.956FH
71119956.021GRD
711200

55.869
TBC71120155.540
FL
71120255.642
LIP
71120355.728FOG
711204

55.886
WV
711205

55.891
WV
71120655.900
WV 711207

56.149
WV
711208

56.034

LANE LINE
71120955.971LANE LINE
71121056.364

LANE LINE
71121156.305LANE LINE
71121256.063FOG
71121355.984LIP
71121455.834
FL
71121556.178TBC
71121655.843GRD
71121756.157GRD
71121855.885TBC
71121955.561
FL
71122055.629LIP
71122155.765
FOG
71122256.044LANE LINE
71122356.120LANE LINE
71122455.983

LANE LINE
71122556.011LANE LINE
71122656.662
SIGN
71122755.050
DI
71122855.210DI
71122955.187
DI71123055.082
71123155.633TBC
71123255.139
FL71123355.366
LIP
71123455.905WV
71123555.443LIP
71123655.414
FL
71123755.738TBC
711238

55.616
LIP
71123955.555FL
71124055.912TBC
71124155.676TBC
71124255.654FL
71124355.763
LIP
711244

55.798
LIP
711245

55.693
FL
711246

55.732
TBC
71124756.091TBC
71124855.763FL
71124955.857LIP
71125055.980LIP
71125155.914FL
711252

56.256
TBC
71125356.260GRD
71125455.963GRD
71125556.590GRD
71125657.201GRD
71125756.679GRD
71125856.748TBC
71125956.394FL
71126056.463
LIP
711261

56.660
FOG
71126256.838LANE LINE
71126356.989LANE LINE
71126456.952LANE LINE
71126557.102LANE LINE
71126657.083LANE LINE
711267

56.880
CL
71126856.593FOG
71126956.280LIP
711270

56.204
FL
71127156.543TBC
71127256.873
GRD
71127357.706GRD
71127455.722DI
71127555.836 711276

55.840DI
71127755.755
71127856.426
FH 711279

57.861GRD
711280

56.497
GRD
71128156.237TBC
71128255.815
FL
71128355.964LIP
711284

56.429
FOG
71128556.389WV
71128656.384WV
711287

56.420
WV
71128856.663CL
71128957.060CL
71129056.836FOG
711291

56.374
LIP
71129256.313
FL
71129356.649
TBC
71129456.470GRD
71129557.527GRD
71129656.898SIGN
71129757.255LITE POLE71129857.156
EVLT
711299

57.077 71130057.036EVLT
711301

57.072
71130257.728GRD
711303

56.874
GRD
71130457.002TBC
71130556.631FL
71130656.709
LIP
71130757.295
FOG
71130857.404CL
711309

57.689SSMH
711310

57.652
WV
71131157.660
WV
71131257.626WV
71131357.610EVLT
71131457.668EVLT
71131557.761
71131657.635
EVLT
71131757.783PP
71131857.940FEN
71131957.557GUY
71132057.729GUY
71132158.201GUY
71132258.110GUY 711323

57.636
FH
71132457.619EP
71132557.761EP
71132657.502
EP
71132757.341
EP
71132858.677TOE
71132958.665TOE
71133058.142
TOE 711331

59.349GB
71133259.293GB
71133358.432TOE
71133457.958TOE
711335

59.368
GB
71133659.382GB
71133758.947GB
71133857.672TOE
71133960.485TOP
71134062.905TOP
71134162.630TOP
71134261.753TOP
71134362.135TOP
71134462.653GRD
71134563.058GRD
71150056.632CL
71150156.348
FOG
71150256.090FL
71150356.419TBC
71150456.368GRD
71150557.476GRD 711506

56.641
LP
71150757.322GRD
71150856.727TBC71150956.398FL
711510

56.522
LIP
71151156.633FOG
71151256.922CL
71151356.850CL
71151456.514CL
71151556.508CL
71151656.176FOG
71151756.029LIP
71151855.966FL
71151956.246
TBC71152056.832GRD
711521

56.562
GRD
71152255.869GRD711523

55.882
TBC711524

55.604
FL
71152555.690LIP
711526

55.808
FOG
711527

56.108
CL
711528

56.158
CL
71152955.804SSMH
71153055.739CL
71153155.728CL
71153255.425
FOG
71153355.264LIP
71153455.182FL
71153555.503
TBC
71153655.615GRD
711537

55.567
GRD
71153855.102GRD711539

55.087TBC71154054.708FL
71154154.800LIP
71154254.961FOG
71154355.330CL
711544

55.325
WV
71154555.317WV
71154655.302WV
711547

55.291
CL
711548

55.252
CL
71154955.274CL
71155054.936FOG
71155154.761LIP
71155254.664FL
71155354.960TBC
71155455.131GRD
71155555.631GRD
71155655.402GRD
71155755.328
TBC
71155854.995
FL
71155955.136LIP
71156055.246
FOG
711561

55.537
CL
71156255.522CL
71156355.715SSMH
71156455.753CL
71156555.823CL
71156655.504
FOG
711567

55.348
LIP
71156855.254FL
71156955.594TBC
711570

55.536
GRD
711571

56.110
GRD
71157255.911TBC
71157355.566
FL71157455.684LIP
711575

55.797
FOG
711576

56.156
CL
71157756.194CL
711578

56.217
CL71157956.180CL
71158055.930FOG
71158155.879LIP
711582

55.765
FL
71158356.051TBC
71158456.033GRD
71158556.208GRD
71158655.735TBC71158755.397
FL
71158855.485LIP
71158955.580FOG
71159055.867LL
71159155.972CL
711592

56.413
WV 71159356.412
WV
71159456.506
WV
71159556.531WV
71159656.684LL
71159756.407CL
71159856.117FOG
71159955.991LIP
71160055.902
FL
711601

56.248
TBC
71160256.533LP
71160356.624GRD
71160456.719GRD
711605

56.267
GRD
71160656.440
TBC
711607

56.115
FL
71160856.222LIP
71160956.385FOG
711610

56.643
CL
71161156.881LL
71161256.941CL
71161356.620
FOG
71161456.368
LIP
71161556.280FL
711616

56.655
TBC
711617

56.652
GRD
711618

57.063
GRD
71161956.503LP
71162057.492GRD
71162156.585GRD
71162256.316TBC
71162356.006
FL
71162456.095
LIP
71162556.443FOG
71162656.791
SSMH
71162756.742CL
71162856.700CL
71162956.481FOG
71163055.985LIP
711631

55.882
FL
711632

56.230
TBC
71163356.834GRD
71163456.396
FH
71163555.629
DI
711636

55.701 711637

55.646
DI
71163856.310WV
71163956.336WV
71164056.335WV
711641

57.415
GRD
711642

56.577
GRD
71164356.586EVLT
711644

56.647
EVLT
71164556.570EVLT
71164656.700TBC
71164756.323FL
71164856.370LIP
71164956.776
FOG
71165057.028CL
71165157.488CL
71165257.336FOG
71165356.844
LIP
71165456.718FL
711655

57.050
TBC
711656

57.232
TBC
71165756.955
FL
71165857.004EP
711659

57.904
EP
71166057.792EP
71166157.665EP
71166259.519GRD
71166359.856GRD
71166459.262GRD
71166558.702GRD
71166657.779GRD
71166758.196
GRD
71166857.880GRD
71166957.438GRD
71167059.480GRD
71167161.518GRD
71167262.878GRD
71167362.532GRD
71167458.631
FEN
71167558.562FEN
71167658.706FEN
71167758.440
FEN
711678

58.626
FEN
71167958.489
FEN
71168058.787FEN
71168159.214FEN
71168258.742
FEN
71168359.038FEN
71168458.407FEN
71168557.648FEN
71168657.478FEN
71168757.831FEN
71168856.891
FEN
71168957.421
711690 FEN58.687GRD
71169159.212GRD
711692

59.276
GRD
71169358.402GRD
71169458.134GRD
71169558.374GRD
71169658.436GRD
71169758.378GRD
71169857.579GRD
71169957.121GRD
71170056.732GRD
711701

57.392
GRD
71170257.634GRD
71170358.935GRD
71170458.020GRD
71170558.452
GRD
711706

59.817
GRD
71170757.629GRD
71170858.493GRD
71170957.550GRD
71171057.605GRD
711711

57.614
GRD
71171257.507
GRD
71171356.911GRD
711714

56.410
GRD
71171557.463GRD
71171657.642GRD
71171757.337GRD
71171857.461GRD
71171958.081GRD
711720

57.566
GRD
71172157.537GRD
71172256.419GRD
71172357.695GRD
71172457.658GRD
71172557.295GRD
71172657.511GRD
711727

56.719
GRD
71172856.182GRD
71172957.275GRD
711730

57.425
GRD
71173157.755GRD
71173257.671GRD
71173356.420GRD
71173456.691GRD
71173556.311GRD
71173656.330GRD
71173757.791GRD
71173857.927GRD
71173957.471GRD
71174057.217GRD
71174156.674GRD
71174256.526GRD
71174357.213GRD
71174456.728GRD
71174557.311GRD
71174657.465GRD
71174756.284GRD
71174856.418GRD
71174958.213GRD
71175057.922GRD
71175157.843GRD
71175257.640GRD
71175357.557GRD
71175457.460GRD
71175557.159GRD
71175657.031GRD
71175757.609GRD
71175857.700GRD
71175957.538GRD
71176057.647GRD
711761

58.154
GRD
711762

58.099
GRD
71176358.068GRD
71176457.675GRD
71176557.681GRD
71176658.098GRD
71176758.070GRD
71176858.241GRD
71176957.634GRD
1 4.00 ACRES 3 11.99 ACRES

SPIRIT DRIVE
STATE ROUTE 20 EB
STATE ROUTE 20 WB

EL MARGARITA ROAD
696.1'
728.2'
634.3'

21.6'
141.6'
602.8'

ABUUTTER'S RIGHTS RELINQUISHED
PER 618 DEEDS 276

SOUTH LINE OF STATE
ROUTE 20 PER 618 / 276
O.R.S.C.
62 FEET OF FEE ROW DEDICATED AS
PART OF PARCEL MAP 1228
10 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY

EASEMENT (PUE) DEDICATED AS
PART OF PARCEL MAP 1228
30 FEET OF FEE ROW DEDICATED AS
PART OF PARCEL MAP 1228
10 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY

EASEMENT (PUE) DEDICATED
AS PART OF PARCEL MAP 1228

SULLIVAN
63-010-142

SULLIVAN
63-010-101

SULLIVAN
63-010-103

YUBA CITY UNIFIED
63-010-089
MILNER
063-010-015
MILNER
063-010-082
HILL
063-010-016
MANN
63-010-017
DUTTON
63-010-024
DEAN
63-010-018
2 4.00 ACRES
698.8'
700.3'
249.8' 248.9'
249.8' 157.1' 91.7'
13 12
11 101817
16151413
12 23 24 25 26 27
34 35
46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53
22 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38
8 7
21 171819
20 56
78 9
10 11
432
19 MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL

2.43 AC NET

MEDIUM-LOW DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL

1.11 AC NET
3637 6
54312 33
32 30 31
16 15 14 13 12 11 10 920 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
18 19
17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
8 7
6 58 7
43 21

NGHBRHD PARK

0.68 AC NET

1.06 AC GROSS
28 29
2 MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL

3.37 AC NET
1 PARK/DETENTION POND

4.05 AC NET

MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL

2.57 AC NET
15 DETENTION POND

3.15 AC NET
1 MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL

2.30 AC NET
15 1

4.00 ACRES 3 11.99 ACRES 2 4.00 ACRES
SCALE 1' = 50'
0 25' 50' 100' 200'
PARCEL SUMMARY*
PARCEL 1 = 04.00 ACRESPARCEL 2 = 04.00 ACRESPARCEL 3 = 11.99 ACRES SUBTOTAL = 3 PARCELS 19.99 ACRES

EL MARGARITA ROAD PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED

SPIRIT DRIVE PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED
SUBTOTAL = 0.00 ACRES
(ROADWAYS)
TOTAL = 11.99 ACRES
*EL MARGARITA ROAD AND SPIRIT DRIVE WERE PREVIOUSLY
DEDICATED IN FEE TITLE TO CITY OF YUBA CITY AS PART OF PARCELMAP 1228 RECORDED ON DECEMBER 20, 2018.

LAND USE SUMMARY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SUTTER, CITY OF YUBA CITY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PARCEL 1: (APN 63-010-141)PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP 1228, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTYRECORDER OF SUTTER COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ON DECEMBER 20, 2018, IN BOOK 8 OFPARCEL MAPS, AT PAGE 98.

Exp. 12-31-22
No. C52593
N
A
S
R
EGIS
T
M
E
R
NAES
STAT
ERED
P
CI V I. MI

OF COFES IA L RD A

LI FORN
IONAL
EN
GINEE
R

LOCATION MAP

FIRE PROTECTION

CITY OF YUBA CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT

LAW ENFORCEMENT

CITY OF YUBA CITY POLICE

SANITARY SEWER

CITY OF YUBA CITY PUBLIC WORKS

DOMESTIC WATER

CITY OF YUBA CITY PUBLIC WORKS

STORM DRAINAGE

CITY OF YUBA CITY PUBLIC WORKS

AND SUTTER WATER AGENCY

ELECTRICITYPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRICNATURAL GAS (OPTIONAL)PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC

COMMUNICATION

AT&T AND COMCAST

CABLE (OPTIONAL)

COMCAST

PROJECT NOTES
GENERAL NOTES:

1. SUBDIVIDER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PHASE DEVELOPMENT AND FILE MULTIPLE FINAL MAPS PURSUANT TO SECTION 66456.1 (A) OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT.

2. A 10.0 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT SHALL BE LOCATED PROVIDED ON ALL STREETS. THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (PUE) WAS PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED AS PART OF PARCEL MAP 1228. NO ADDITIONAL DEDICATION REQUIRED.

3. THIS EXHIBIT IS FOR TENTATIVE MAP PURPOSES ONLY, ACTUAL DIMENSIONS, ROAD ALIGNMENTS, ACREAGE, AND YIELDS ARE TO BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL MAP.

4. THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, REZONE, AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT. A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WILL BE SUBMITTED SEPARATELY IF REQUIRED.

5. PARCEL NUMBERING IS FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES ONLY AND DOES NOT INDICATE PHASING ORDER OF DEVELOPMENT. ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT PHASING WILL BE ORDERLY AND WILL BE DETERMINED AT FINAL MAP AND/OR IMPROVEMENT PLAN STAGE.

6. ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES, SEPTIC TANKS, AND WELLS TO BE REMOVED OR DESTROYED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.7. OWNERS, APPLICANT, ATTORNEY, ENGINEER, AND SURVEYOR SHALL RECEIVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR NOTICES RELATED TO THIS PROJECT.

EXISTING USEVACANTEXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION

OFFICE & OFFICE PARKPROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
PARCEL 1 AND 2 - REGIONAL COMMERICALPARCEL 3 - OFFICE & OFFICE PARKEXISTING ZONING C-0X19

PROPOSED ZONING
PARCEL 1 AND 2 - C-3X24/25PARCEL 3 - C-0X19LEVEE PROTECTIONLEVEE DISTRICT NO. 9 OF SUTTER COUNTYELEMENTARTY SCHOOL DISTRICTYUBA CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTHIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTYUBA CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTIRRIGATION DISTRICT

NONE - INDIVIDUAL WATER WELLS

OWNERCALVARY CHRISTIAN CENTER ASSEMBLY OFGOD OF YUBA CITY 2620 COLUSA HIGHWAY
YUBA CITY, CA 95993
CONTACT: PASTOR CIOCIOLA
PHONE: (530) 673-6035

APPLICANTYANNI LIMITED LLC
350 ORANGE DRIVE
VACAVILLE, CA 95687
CONTACT: RAMI YANNI
PHONE: (707) 474-4842ENGINEER/SURVEYORMHM INCORPORATED
1204 E STREET, P.O. BOX B
MARYSVILLE, CA 95901
CONTACT: SEAN MINARD, P.E., P.L.S.

PHONE: (530) 742-6485
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.APN 63-010-141 (19.99 AC)AREA OF TENTATIVE MAP

19.99 GROSS ACRE
SURVEYORS STATEMENT:

I HEREBY STATE THAT ALL EASEMENTS OF RECORD ARE SHOWN ANDLABELED PER CLTA PRELIMINARY REPORT BY PLACER TITLE COMPANY ORDER NUMBER P-558445 DATED APRIL 25, 2022. THE UNDERWRITER IS WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY.

SEAN MINARD, P.E. 52593, P.L.S. 8397
TEL: 530.742.6485
FAX: 530.742.5639
1204 E STREET, P.O. BOX B
MARYSVILLE, CA 95901
ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS SINCE 1892
AUGUST 16, 2022

YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP

PM XXXX (SPIRIT DRIVE PARCEL MAP)
2INDICATES PROPOSED PHASE
CITY OF YUBA CITY PLANNING COMMISION APPROVAL:THE CITY OF YUBA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HAS CONSIDERED AND APPROVED RESOLUTION 22-0XX APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. XXXX DURING THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON ______________, 2022. ______________________________________________ CITY OF YUBA CITY DATE:

SCALE 1' = 1000'

HARTER PARKWAY

10.0'
PUE

2.5' 5.0'

18.0' ROADWAY

BARRIER CURB
& GUTTER
TYPE "A" ASPHALT

30.0' @ 2%
CLASS 2 A.B.

CL
PL

12.0'

TURN LANE

OR MEDIAN

SIDEWALK
2 LANE COLLECTOR - 84.0' R/W B NOT TO SCALE EL MARGARITA ROAD (LOOKING SOUTH)

NO IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED AT FINAL MAP

ALL IMPROVEMENT ARE PROPOSED AT BUILDING PERMIT FOR

EACH PARCEL

2.5'
TYPE "A" ASPHALT

30.0' @ 2%
CLASS 2 A.B.

5.0'

12.0'
TRAVEL
LANE

8.0'

PARKING

42.0' ROADWAY

ROLLED CURB
& GUTTER
NO GEO WASH BLVD.

SPIRIT WAY

EL MARGARITA ROAD

NORTH HARDING ROAD

LASSEN BLVD

EL MARGARITA ROAD PROPOSED PERKINS RANCH SUBDIVISION (PENDING) STATE ROUTE 20

6.0'
BIKE
LANE

12.0'
TRAVEL
LANE

8.0'

PARKING

6.0'
BIKE
LANE
CITY OF YUBA CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:THE CITY OF YUBA CITY COUNCIL HAS CONSIDERED AND APPROVED RESOLUTION 22-0XX APPROVING REZONE AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DURING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON ______________, 2022. ______________________________________________ CITY OF YUBA CITY DATE:

PUE SHALL BE A TOTAL OF 10 FEET

BEHIND PROPERTY LINE
MINOR COLLECTOR - 60.0' R/W (ATTACHED) A NOT TO SCALE NO IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED AT FINAL MAP

ALL IMPROVEMENT ARE PROPOSED AT BUILDING

PERMIT FOR EACH PARCEL
PL CL

5.0'
BIKE
LANE

11.0'
TRAVEL
LANE

0.5' 2.5'

30.0' ROADWAY

ROLLED CURB
& GUTTER

SIDEWALK
TYPE "A" ASPHALT

22.0' @ 2%
CLASS 2 A.B.

5.0'

12.0'

CONTINUOUS
TURN
POCKET

5.0'
BIKE
LANE

11.0'
TRAVEL
LANE

10.0'
PUE
PL

0.5' 2.5'

ROLLED CURB
& GUTTER

SIDEWALK
TYPE "A" ASPHALT

22.0' @ 2%
CLASS 2 A.B.

5.0'

10.0'
PUE

30.0' ROADWAY

UPRR (ABANDONED) MONROE ROAD

0.5'
ROW CL

10.0' 24.0' ROADWAY
PUE
PL

SIDEWALK

0.5'

ATTACHMENT 6

Environmental Assessment 22-15
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 22- 06, Rezone 22-08, and Tentative Parcel Map 22-04, Spirit Drive Parcel Map. The proposal will redesignate in the General Plan and rezone 8 acres from Office to Regional Commercial. A parcel map proposes to divide 19.99 acres (the 8 acres discussed above plus 11.99 acres) from a single parcel into three parcels of 4, 4, and

11.99 acres.

Prepared for:

City of Yuba City
1201 Civic Center Blvd.

Yuba City, CA 95993
Prepared By:

Denis Cook
Land Use Planning Consultant
and
City of Yuba City
Development Services Department
Planning Division
November 14, 2022

1 This page intentionally left blank.

2 Table of Contents

1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................4 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................4 Regulatory Information.................................................................................................................4 Document Format.........................................................................................................................5 Purpose of Document...................................................................................................................5 Intended Uses of this Document ..................................................................................................6

2. Project Description ....................................................................................................................6 Project Title...................................................................................................................................6 Lead Agency Name and Address...................................................................................................7 Contact Person and Phone Number .............................................................................................7 Project Location ............................................................................................................................7 Project Applicant...........................................................................................................................7 Property owner.............................................................................................................................7 General Plan Designation..............................................................................................................7 Zoning............................................................................................................................................7 Project description..........................................................................................................................7 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting............................................................................................12 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May be Required ........................................................12

2.12. Native American Tribe Consultation………………………………………………………………………………………10 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:..............................................................................13 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: .......................................................................................13

3. Environmental Checklist and Impact Evaluation........................................................................15 Aesthetics....................................................................................................................................15 Agricultural and Forestry Resources...........................................................................................18 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................................23 Biological Resources....................................................................................................................30 Cultural Resources......................................................................................................................34

3.6. Energy .........................................................................................................................................37

3.7. Geology and Soils........................................................................................................................38

3.8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.........................................................................................................45

3.9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................................47

3.10. Hydrology and Water Quality ....................................................................................................52

3 3.11. Land Use and Planning................................................................................................................56

3.12. Mineral Resources ......................................................................................................................57

3.13. Noise ...........................................................................................................................................59

3.14. Population and Housing..............................................................................................................66

3.15. Public Services.............................................................................................................................67

3.16. Recreation...................................................................................................................................70

3.17. Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................................71

3.18. Tribal Cultural Resources............................................................................................................74

3.19. Utilities and Service Systems ......................................................................................................80

3.20. Wildfire........................................................................................................................................84

3.21. Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................................86

4. Section References and/or Incorporated by Reference..............................................................88

4 CITY OF YUBA CITY
Development Services Department
Planning Division
1201 Civic Center Blvd. Yuba City, CA 95993 Phone (530) 822-4700

1. Introduction
Introduction
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared to identify any potential environmental impacts in the City of Yuba City, California (City) from proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06, Rezone (RZ) 22-08, and Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04 on a 19.99-acre parcel, titled Spirit Drive Parcel Map. The property is located at the southeast corner of State Route 20 and El Margarita Road.

The GPA will redesignate 8.0 acres from Office and Office Park (O) land use designation to a Regional Commercial (RC) designation. The remaining 11.99 acres will remain in the O land use designation.

The RZ will rezone the same properties from an Office Commercial Zone District combined with the X19 Zone District (C-O X19) to a General Commercial (C-3) Zone District. The deletion of the X19 Zone District would eliminate requirements for development of this property from paying its fair share of improvements to the Walton Avenue/Lassen Boulevard intersection, the Tharp Road/Lassen Boulevard intersection, as new standards have superseded that need. The remaining 11.99 acres will remain in the C-O X-19 Zone District.

TPM 22-04 will divide the 19.99-acre parcel into two – 4-acre parcels (the same 8 acres as the GPA & RZ) and a 11.99-acre parcel for which the general plan and rezoning is not proposed to be amended. While no actual development project is proposed as part of this application, the Regional Commercial land use designation and accompanying C-3 zoning allows for an entire range of commercial uses.

The 19.99-acre vacant property has full City services available to it. The applicant has indicated that they will propose to construct a car dealership(s) on either or both of the two 4-acre parcels. There is a previously approved use permit to construct a church on the 11.99-acre parcel.

The GPA/RZ/PM is considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as the City has discretionary authority over the Project. The Project requires discretionary review by the City of Yuba City Planning Commission and City Council.

This IS/MND has been prepared in conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15070. The purpose of the IS/MND is to determine the potential significant impacts associated with the proposed GPA/RZ/TPM and provide an environmental assessment for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. In addition, this document is intended to provide the basis for input from public agencies, organizations, and interested members of the public.

Regulatory Information
An Initial Study (IS) is an environmental assessment document prepared by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with the California Code of Regulations Title 14 (Chapter 3, §15000 et seq.), commonly referred to as the CEQA Guidelines - Section

5 15064(a)(1) states an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed project under review may have a significant effect on the environment and should be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less than significant. A negative declaration may be prepared instead; if the lead agency finds that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. A negative declaration is a written statement describing the reasons why a proposed project, not exempt from CEQA pursuant to §15300 et seq. of Article 19 of the Guidelines, would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why it would not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a negative declaration shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either:
a) The IS shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b) The IS identified potentially significant effects, but:
a. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study is released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur is prepared, and
b. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If revisions are adopted by the Lead Agency into the proposed project in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(b), a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is prepared.

Document Format
This IS/MND contains four chapters. Chapter 1, Introduction, provides an overview of the proposed Project and the CEQA environmental documentation process. Chapter 2, Project Description, provides a detailed description of proposed Project objectives and components. Chapter 3, Impact Analysis, presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analysis for all impact areas, mandatory findings of significance, and feasible measures. If the proposed Project does not have the potential to significantly impact a given issue area, the relevant section provides a brief discussion of the reasons why no impacts are expected. If the proposed Project could have a potentially significant impact on a resource, the issue area discussion provides a description of potential impacts, and appropriate mitigation measures and/or permit requirements that would reduce those impacts to a less than significant level. Chapter 4, List of Preparers, provides a list of key personnel involved in the preparation of the IS/MND.

Purpose of Document
The proposed GPA/RZ/TPM will undergo a public review process by the Planning Commission that will result in a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council followed by a public review by the City Council which will decide on the project. If approved as proposed, the 19.99-acre Project will consist of two – 4- acre parcels designated as Regional Commercial, and an 11.99-acre parcel designated for Office uses. This public review process is needed to assure that the project will be compatible with existing or expected neighboring uses and that adequate public facilities are available to serve the project.

6 This document has been prepared to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res.

Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 CCR §15000 et seq.). CEQA requires that all state and local government agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority before acting on those projects.

The initial study is a public document used by the decision-making lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the lead agency finds substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may have a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the lead agency is required to use a previously prepared EIR and supplement that EIR, or prepare a subsequent EIR to analyze at hand. If the agency finds no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment, a negative declaration shall be prepared. If in the course of the analysis, it is recognized that the project may have a significant impact on the environment, but that with specific recommended mitigation measures incorporated into the project, these impacts shall be reduced to less than significant, a mitigated negative declaration shall be prepared.

In reviewing all of the available information for the above referenced project, the City of Yuba City Planning Division has analyzed the potential environmental impacts created by this project and a mitigated negative declaration has been prepared for this project.

Intended Uses of this Document
In accordance with CEQA, a good-faith effort has been made during preparation of this IS/MND to contact affected public agencies, organizations, and persons who may have an interest in the proposed Project.

In reviewing the Draft IS/MND, affected and interested parties should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and ways in which the effects of the proposed project would be avoided or mitigated.

The Draft IS/ND and associated appendices will be available for review on the City of Yuba City website at http://www.yubacity.net. The Draft IS/MND and associated appendixes also will be available for review during regular business hours at the City of Yuba City Development Services Department (1201 Civic Center Boulevard, Yuba City, California 95993). The 30-day review period will commence on November 14, 2022 and end on December 14, 2022 at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing.

Written comments on the Draft IS/MND should be sent to the following address:

City of Yuba City
Development Services Department
1201 Civic Center Boulevard
Yuba City, CA 95993
e-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 530.822.4700

2. Project Description
Project Title
General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06, Rezone (RZ) 22-08 and Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04 titled Spirit Drive Parcel Map.

7 Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Yuba City
Development Services Department, Planning Division
1201 Civic Center Blvd.

Yuba City, CA 95993
Contact Person and Phone Number
Doug Libby, AICP
Deputy Director of Development Services
(530) 822-3231
[email protected]
Project Location
The 19.99 acres are located on the southeast corner of State Route 20 (Colusa Highway) and El Margarita Road. The Assessor’s Parcel Number is 63-010-141.

Project Applicant
Yanni Limited L.L.C.
641 Orange Drive
Vacaville, CA 95688
Property owner
Calvary Christian Center
2620 Colusa Highway
Yuba City, CA 95993
General Plan Designation
Existing: The Project is within the Office and Office Park (O) land use designation.

Proposed: Regional Commercial (RC) designation for only the two proposed four-acre parcels. No change is requested for the proposed 11.99-acre parcel.

Zoning
Existing: The 19.99-acre Project is within the Office Commercial Zone District combined with the X19 Zone District (C-O X19).

Proposed: General Commercial (C-3) Zone District for the two proposed four-acre parcels. No change is requested for the proposed 11.99-acre parcel, as it will remain zoned C-O X19.

8 Figure 1: Location Map – aerial photo.

9 Figure 2: General Plan Amendment (GPA) 22-06

10 Figure 3: Rezone (RZ) 22-08

11 Figure 4: Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 22-04

12 Project description
GPA 22-06, RZ 22-08 and TPM 22-04, is requested for a 19.99 parcel, titled Spirit Drive Parcel Map. The GPA will redesignate 8.0 acres from Office and Office Park (O) land use designation to a Regional Commercial (RC) designation. The remaining 11.99 acres will remain in the O land use designation.

The RZ will rezone the same properties from an Office Commercial Zone District combined with the X19 Zone District (C-O X19) to a General Commercial (C-3) Zone District. The deletion of the X19 Zone District would eliminate requirements for development of this property from paying its fair share of improvements to the Walton Avenue/Lassen Boulevard intersection, the Tharp Road/Lassen Boulevard intersection, as new standards have superseded that need. The remaining 11.99 acres will remain in the C-O X-19 zone District.

TPM 22-04 will divide a 19.99-acre parcel into two – 4-acre parcels (the same 8 acres as the GPA & RZ) and a 11.99-acre parcel for which the general plan and rezoning is not proposed to be amended. While no actual development project is proposed as part of this application, the RC land use designation and accompanying C-3 zoning allows for the entire range of commercial uses.

The 19.99-acre vacant property has full City services available to it. The applicant has indicated that they will propose to construct a car dealership(s) on either or both of the two 4-acre parcels. There is a previously approved use permit to construct a church on the 11.99-acre parcel.

Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Setting: The 19.99-acre flat property is vacant. There is an approved use permit for a church on the 11.99- acre parcel.

2.11. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May be Required ▪ Feather River Air Quality Management District, Dust Control Plan, Indirect Source Review. ▪ Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.
▪ Sutter County Water Agency (Live Oak Canal).

2.12. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
All geographically relevant Native American tribes were timely notified of the project, and consultation was not requested.

TABLE 1: BORDERING USES
North: State Route 20 (Colusa Highway).

South: Across Spirit Way is River Valley High School.

East: Auto Dealership.

West: Single-family residences across El Margarita Road.

13 2.13 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, as indicated by the checklist and subsequent discussion on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture & Forestry
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources XCultural Resources Energy
X
Geology/Soils XGreenhouse Gas Emissions Hazard & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources X
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation X Transportation X Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
Determination: On the basis of this initial evaluation:

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

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

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

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

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

Signature Date
Ben Moody
Director of Public Works and Development Services

14 2.14 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:

A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
“Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analysis,” as described below, may be cross referenced). A Mitigated Negative Declaration also requires preparation and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project.

Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts. Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used, or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

15 3. Environmental Checklist and Impact Evaluation
The following section presents the initial study checklist recommended by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Appendix G) to determine potential impacts of a project. Explanations of all answers are provided following each question, as necessary.

Aesthetics
Table 3.1: Aesthetics
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section
21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views
of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized
area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality.

X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
X

3.1.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Background views are generally considered to be long-range views in excess of 3 to 5 miles from a vantage point. Background views surrounding the project site are limited due to the flat nature of the site and the surrounding urban landscape. Overall, the vast majority of Sutter County is relatively flat, with the Sutter Buttes being the exception. The Sutter Buttes, located approximately 7 miles northwest of the project site, are visibly prominent throughout Yuba City and Sutter County. The Sutter Buttes comprise the longrange views to the northwest and are visible from the much of the City, except in areas where trees or intervening structures block views of the mountain range.

The City’s General Plan, more specifically the Community Design Element “establishes policies to ensure the creation of public and private improvements that will maintain and enhance the image, livability, and aesthetics of Yuba City in the years to come.”
The following principles and policies are applicable:
▪ Maintain the identity of Yuba City as a small-town community, commercial hub, and residential community, surrounded by agricultural land and convey, through land uses and design amenities, Yuba City’s character and place in the Sacramento Valley.

16 ▪ Recognizing the livability and beauty of peer communities with highly designed visual landscapes, commit to a focus on the visual landscape of Yuba City. ▪ Maintain, develop, and enhance connections between existing and planned neighborhoods. ▪ Create and build upon a structured open space and parks network, centered on two large urban parks and the Feather River Corridor.
▪ Strive for lush, landscaped public areas marked by extensive tree plantings. ▪ Design commercial and industrial centers to be visually appealing, to serve both pedestrians and automobiles, and to integrate into the adjacent urban fabric.

In addition to the City’s General Plan, the City provides Design Guidelines. The goal of the City’s design guidelines is to ensure the highest quality of building design: designs that are aesthetically pleasing; designs that are compatible with the surroundings in terms of scale, mass, detailing, and building patterns; designs that accommodate the pedestrian, automobile, bicycle, and transit circulation; and designs that consider public safety, public interaction, and historic resources. The design guidelines apply to all commercial development. However, this proposal does not include an actual development project, so no design review is involved with this process. Design Review will be utilized when a development is proposed.

3.1.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal regulations relating to aesthetics include the Organic Administration Act (1897), Multiple Use – Sustained Yield Act (1960), Wilderness Act (1964), Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (1976), Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The proposed Project is not subject to these regulations since there are no federally designated lands or rivers in the vicinity.

3.1.3. State Regulatory Setting
The California State Scenic Highway Program was created by the California Legislature in 1963 to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change which would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. The state laws governing the Scenic Highway Program are found in the Streets and Highways Code, Section 260 et seq. The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are either eligible for designation as scenic highways or have been so designated. These highways are identified in Section 263 of the Streets and Highways Code.

A highway may be designated scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler’s enjoyment of the view. When a city or county nominates an eligible scenic highway for official designation, it must identify and define the scenic corridor of the highway. A scenic corridor is the land generally adjacent to and visible from the highway. A scenic corridor is identified using a motorist’s line of vision. A reasonable boundary is selected when the view extends to the distant horizon. The corridor protection program does not preclude development but seeks to encourage quality development that does not degrade the scenic value of the corridor. Jurisdictional boundaries of the nominating agency are also considered. The agency must also adopt ordinances to preserve the scenic quality of the corridor or document such regulations that already exist in various portions of local codes. These ordinances make up the scenic corridor protection program. County roads can also become part of the Scenic Highway System. To receive official designation, the county must follow the same process required for official

17 designation of state scenic highways. There are no designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the project site.

California Building Code Title 24 Outdoor Lighting Standards: The requirements vary according to which “Lighting Zone” the equipment is in. The Standards contain lighting power allowances for newly installed equipment and specific alterations that are dependent on which Lighting Zone the project is located in.

Existing outdoor lighting systems are not required to meet these lighting power allowances. However, alterations that increase the connected load, or replace more than 50 percent of the existing luminaires, for each outdoor lighting application that is regulated by the Standards, must meet the lighting power allowances for newly installed equipment.

An important part of the Standards is to base the lighting power that is allowed on how bright the surrounding conditions are. The eyes adapt to darker surrounding conditions, and less light is needed to properly see; when the surrounding conditions get brighter, more light is needed to see. The least power is allowed in Lighting Zone 1 and increasingly more power is allowed in Lighting Zones 2, 3, and 4. By default, government designated parks, recreation areas and wildlife preserves are Lighting Zone 1; rural areas are Lighting Zone 2; and urban areas are Lighting Zone 3. Lighting Zone 4 is a special use district that may be adopted by a local government. The proposed Project is located in an urban area; thereby, it is in Lighting Zone 3.

3.1.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? There are no designated scenic areas within the vicinity, so there would not be impacts on a designated scenic area.

The primary background view of the property from the SR 20 passersby looking south is across the vacant Project area towards River Valley High School. Views to the Sutter Buttes from SR 20 will not be impacted as the Buttes are northwest of the project. With the development of this project, the view of the high school from the highway will be reduced, but this has not been considered a scenic vista. Development of this property that could result from this action will have to be reviewed for its aesthetic values at that time. As such, the aesthetic impact on the background views from this project is considered to be less than significant.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
The site is unremarkable in that it is flat with no topographic features, rock outcroppings, large heritage type trees, or buildings. As there is no actual development proposed as part of this application, design review and potential conflicts with zoning standards will be considered when a development proposal is submitted. As such, this GPA/RZ/TPM will have less than significant impacts on aesthetics. c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

18 The project is within the Yuba City urbanized area. While there is not a development project proposed, the approval of this GPA/RZ/TPM could lead to development of the property. The effect a future project will have on the local aesthetics will occur when a development project is proposed. A review of impacts on the visual character of the site and its surroundings will be made when a development project is being considered; however, the City will implement its adopted design guidelines and development standards and this will reduce significant impacts to a less than significant level. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

The project is within the urban area where outdoor lighting is already prevalent. To the east is an auto dealership with extensive outdoor lighting, and to the south is River Valley High School which has night lighting, including night lit athletic fields, and the north in which SR 20 has significant nighttime headlight traffic. While there is not a development project proposed, the approval of this GPA/RZ/TPM could lead to development of the property. The impact a future project will have on the local outdoor lighting will be addressed by the City implementing its adopted design and development standards for lighting at the time a specific project is proposed. As a result, a less than significant impact is anticipated.

Agricultural and Forestry Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared (1997) by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.

Table 3.2: Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code Section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in X

19 conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

3.2.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Sutter County is located within the northern portion of California’s Central Valley in the area known as the Sacramento Valley. It contains some of the richest soils in the State. These soils, combined with abundant surface and subsurface water supplies and a long, warm growing season, make Sutter County’s agricultural resources very productive. Sutter County is one of California’s leading agricultural counties, with 83 percent of the County’s total land acreage currently being used for agricultural purposes.

However, while Sutter County provides rich agricultural opportunities, the subject site is within an urban area and has been designated for urban uses for many years.

3.2.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
Farmland Protection Policy Act: The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), is the agency primarily responsible for implementation of the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA). The FPPA was enacted after the 1981 Congressional report, Compact Cities: Energy-Saving Strategies for the Eighties indicated that a great deal of urban sprawl was the result of programs funded by the federal government. The purpose of the FPPA is to minimize federal programs’ contribution to the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses by ensuring that federal programs are administered in a manner that is compatible with state, local, and private programs designed to protect farmland. Federal agencies are required to develop and review their policies and procures to implement the FPPA every two years (USDA-NRCS, 2011). 2014 Farm Bill: The Agricultural Act of 2014 (the Act), also known as the 2014 Farm Bill, was signed by President Obama on Feb. 7, 2014. The Act repeals certain programs, continues some programs with modifications, and authorizes several new programs administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA).

Most of these programs are authorized and funded through 2018.

The Farm Bill builds on historic economic gains in rural America over the past five years, while achieving meaningful reform and billions of dollars in savings for the taxpayer. It allows USDA to continue record accomplishments on behalf of the American people, while providing new opportunity and creating jobs across rural America. Additionally, it enables the USDA to further expand markets for agricultural products at home and abroad, strengthen conservation efforts, create new opportunities for local and regional food systems and grow the bio-based economy. It provides a dependable safety net for America's farmers, ranchers and growers and maintains important agricultural research, and ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all Americans.

Forestry Resources: Federal regulations regarding forestry resources are not relevant to the proposed Project because no forestry resources exist on the project site or in the vicinity.

3.2.3. State Regulatory Setting
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Definition of Agricultural Lands: Public Resources Code Section 21060.1 defines “agricultural land” for the purposes of assessing environmental impacts using the Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP was established in 1982 to assess the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural lands and the conversion of these lands. The FMMP provides analysis of agricultural land use and land use changes throughout California.

20 California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection: The California Department of Conservation (DOC) applies the NRCS soil classifications to identify agricultural lands, and these agricultural designations are used in planning for the present and future of California’s agricultural land resources. Pursuant to the DOC’s FMMP, these designated agricultural lands are included in the Important Farmland Maps (IFM) used in planning for the present and future of California’s agricultural land resources. The FMMP was established in 1982 to assess the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural lands and the conversion of these lands. The FMMP provides analysis of agricultural land use and land use changes throughout California. The DOC has a minimum mapping unit of 10 acres, with parcels that are smaller than 10 acres being absorbed into the surrounding classifications.

The list below provides a comprehensive description of all the categories mapped by the DOC. Collectively, lands classified as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland is referred to as Farmland.
▪ Prime Farmland. Farmland that has the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long‐term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. ▪ Farmland of Statewide Importance. Farmland similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
▪ Unique Farmland. Farmland of lesser quality soils used for the production of the State’s leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
▪ Farmland of Local Importance. Land of importance to the local agricultural economy as determined by each county’s board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. ▪ Grazing Land. Land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. This category was developed in cooperation with the California Cattlemen’s Association, University of California Cooperative Extension, and other groups interested in the extent of grazing activities.

The minimum mapping unit for Grazing Land is 40 acres.
▪ Urban and Built-up Land. Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to

1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10‐acre parcel. This land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, institutional, public administrative purposes, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes. ▪ Other Land. Land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry, or aquaculture facilities; strip mines and borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than 40 acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other Land.

California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act): The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly referred to as the Williamson Act, is promulgated in California Government Code Section 51200‐51297.4, and therefore is applicable only to specific land parcels within the State of California. The Williamson Act enables local governments to enter into contracts with private landowners for the purpose

21 of restricting specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space uses in return for reduced property tax assessments. Private land within locally designated agricultural preserve areas is eligible for enrollment under Williamson Act contracts. However, an agricultural preserve must consist of no less than 100 acres. In order to meet this requirement two or more parcels may be combined if they are contiguous, or if they are in common ownership.

The Williamson Act program is administered by the Department of Conservation (DOC), in conjunction with local governments, which administer the individual contract arrangements with landowners. The landowner commits the parcel to a 10‐year period, or a 20-year period for property restricted by a Farmland Security Zone Contract, wherein no conversion out of agricultural use is permitted. Each year the contract automatically renews unless a notice of non‐renewal or cancellation is filed. In return, the land is taxed at a rate based on the actual use of the land for agricultural purposes, as opposed to its unrestricted market value. An application for immediate cancellation can also be requested by the landowner, provided that the proposed immediate cancellation application is consistent with the cancellation criteria stated in the California Land Conservation Act and those adopted by the affected county or city. Non‐renewal or immediate cancellation does not change the zoning of the property.

Participation in the Williamson Act program is dependent on county adoption and implementation of the program and is voluntary for landowners.

Farmland Security Zone Act: The Farmland Security Zone Act is similar to the Williamson Act and was passed by the California State Legislature in 1999 to ensure that long-term farmland preservation is part of public policy. Farmland Security Zone Act contracts are sometimes referred to as “Super Williamson Act Contracts.” Under the provisions of this act, a landowner already under a Williamson Act contract can apply for Farmland Security Zone status by entering into a contract with the county. Farmland Security Zone classification automatically renews each year for an additional 20 years. In return for a further 35% reduction in the taxable value of land and growing improvements (in addition to Williamson Act tax benefits), the owner of the property promises not to develop the property into nonagricultural uses.

Forestry Resources: State regulations regarding forestry resources are not relevant to the proposed Project because no forestry resources exist on the project site or in the vicinity.

3.2.4. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
The proposed Project site consists of approximately 19.99-acres that is vacant of any development and also has not been in agricultural use for years. The 2018 Department of Conservation Important Farmland Map for Sutter County identifies the project site as “Grazing Land.” The project site is not considered to have Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance or Unique Farmland.

As development of this property could result from approval of the GPA/RZ, the loss of agricultural land is considered. Currently all four sides of the site are developed with urban type uses. Further, the property has for many years been designated in the City’s General Plan for urban uses, and for which overriding considerations for agricultural land loses within the City’s sphere of influence were made in the General Plan EIR. This is part of the larger scope agreed to by the City and Sutter County to allow urban development within the City’s sphere of influence, but that the great majority of the County’s agricultural lands outside of a city’s sphere of influence would be protected as open space. Considering this project

22 is within the General Plan’s area of anticipated loss of agricultural land, the impact on agriculture land loss will be less than significant.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? The proposed Project is currently zoned for urban type uses and the subject property is not under a Williamson Act contract. There will therefore be no impact related to a Williamson Act contract. See discussion above under item 3.2.4.a.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4256), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? The proposed Project is located in the Sacramento Valley in a relatively flat area that was utilized for agriculture but designated years ago for urban use. There is no timberland located on the Project site or within the vicinity of the Project. There will be no impact on existing zoning of forestland and the proposal will not cause the rezoning of any forestlands.
d) Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? There is no forested land on the Project site or within the vicinity of the Project; therefore, there will be no impact on forest land.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? The proposed Project is within an area already served by City services and the surrounding properties are developed with non-agricultural uses. There are no forestlands on the Project site or in the vicinity. No properties within the area are under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the impacts on agricultural lands from this proposal will be less than significant.