Yuba City City Council
May 2, 2023

The City has adopted a Reasonable Accommodations Policy that provides a procedure for receiving and resolving requests for accommodation to participate in this meeting. Please visit yubacity.net ADA & Accessibility Resources page. If you need assistance in order to attend the City Council meeting, or if you require auxiliary aids or services, e.g., hearing aids or signing services to make a presentation to the City Council, the City is happy to help. Accommodations should be requested as early as possible as additional time may be required in order to provide the requested accommodation; 72 hours in advance is suggested. Please contact City offices at (530) 822-4817 or (TTY: 530-822-4732), so such aids or services can be arranged. Requests may also be made by email at [email protected] or [email protected] or mail City Clerk, 1201 Civic Center Blvd, Yuba City, CA 95993.

AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

REGULAR MEETING

CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF YUBA CITY
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING

COUNCIL CHAMBERS/VIRTUAL
MAYOR ● Wade Kirchner
VICE MAYOR ● Shon Harris
COUNCILMEMBER ● Marc Boomgaarden
COUNCILMEMBER ● Michael Pasquale
COUNCILMEMBER ● Dave Shaw
CITY MANAGER ● Diana Langley
CITY ATTORNEY ● Shannon L. Chaffin
1201 Civic Center Blvd
Yuba City CA 95993
Wheelchair Accessible
AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING

CITY COUNCIL - CITY OF YUBA CITY
MAY 2, 2023
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING

COUNCIL CHAMBERS/VIRTUAL
Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s office at 1201 Civic Center Blvd., Yuba City, during normal business hours. Such documents are also available on the City of Yuba City’s website at www.yubacity.net, subject to staff’s availability to post the documents before the meeting.

The Council Chambers will be open for public attendance and participation. The meeting will also be live streamed for public viewing, but not participation, at the following link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_InSt-CCwRAG3z-B_RyDbvQ. Emailed comments sent to [email protected] at least 24 hours before the meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to the meeting. Please identify the Agenda item(s) addressed by the comments.

Regular Meeting
Call to Order
Roll Call
__ Mayor Kirchner
__ Vice Mayor Harris
__ Councilmember Boomgaarden
__ Councilmember Pasquale
__ Councilmember Shaw
Invocation/Inspiration
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Agenda Modifications/Approval of Agenda
Ceremonial Presentations

1. May is Older Americans Month Proclamation

2. Small Business Month and April 30th - May 6th is National Small Business Week, Proclamation
Public Communication

3. Appearance of Interested Citizens
You are welcome and encouraged to participate in this meeting. Public comment is taken on action items appearing on the Consent Calendar or Business Items on the Agenda when they are called. Public comment on any other items within the scope of the City’s jurisdiction, including items not listed on the Agenda will be considered at this time. Public comment is limited to three minutes per speaker. Members of the public submitting written requests at least 24 hours prior to the meeting will be allotted five minutes to comment per speaker. Repetitive

comments may be limited, and large groups are encouraged to select representatives to express the opinions of the group.

Consent Calendar
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and can be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time that Council votes on the motion unless members of the City Council request specific items to be discussed or removed from the Consent Calendar for individual action.

4. Minutes of the April 18th meeting
Recommendation: Approve the mintues of the April 18th meeting

5. Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision (Acceptance of Public Improvements) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution accepting certain street and related improvements pursuant to the Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision Agreement with James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000, and authorizing the Subdivider to file a Notice of Completion. [Subdivision is located south of Monroe Road and east of Royo Ranchero Drive]

6. Thiara Estates Subdivision
Recommendation: Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-13 by adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for RZ 22-07 and TSM 22-08, and rezoning Assessor’s Parcels 17-066-003, -005, and 021 from R-1X20 to R-1, located on the west side of Tuly Parkway across from the terminus of Bradley Estates Drive and bordering the east side of Elmer Avenue, and waive the second reading

7. Update of Safe and Sane Fireworks Regulations
Recommendation: Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of Yuba City regulating the use of fireworks by adding Section 4-11.02 (Discharge of Fireworks) of Chapter 11, and amending Section 4-17.20
(Exemptions [Noise Regulations]) of Chapter 17 and Section 5602 of Chapter 5 (Fire Prevention), and adding Section 5602.2 (dangerous fireworks) to Section 4-5.02 of Chapter 5, all of Title 4 of the Yuba City Municipal Code by title only and waive the second reading
Business Items

8. Plumas Street Improvements Design Award
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution Awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Melton Design Group, Inc. of Chico, CA for the Plumas Street Improvements Project (Preliminary Engineering Services) in the amount of $185,700, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City, subject to review and approval as to legal form by the City Attorney

9. Housing Element GPA/Rezone Project
Recommendation: A. Conduct a Public Hearing, and;
B. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-07 by

adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Implementing Policies of the 2021-2029 Housing Element
project, and adopt General Plan Amendment 22-03 for
approximately 75.89 acres located throughout the City
(Assessor’s Parcel Number 59-020-017, 59-020-015, 61-120- 004, 59-530-034, 59-020-018, 59-020-016, 51-393-003, 51-393- 002, 57-150-078, 57-150-004, 57-150-050, 58-120-001, 57-220- 065, 53-470-088, 53-470-079, 53-470-083, 53-470-087, 53-470- 076, 53-470-085, 53-470-078, 53-470-077, 53-470-081, 53-470- 086, 53-470-095, 53-470-082, 53-470-092, 53-470-080, 53-470- 090, 53-470-096, 53-470-089, 53-470-093, 53-470-084, 53-470- 094, 53-470-098, and 53-470-097); and
C. Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City to adopt Rezone 22-04 for the Implementing Policies of the 2021-2029 Housing Element project for approximately 75.89 acres, which includes an X29 Combining District on 14.95 acres, located throughout the City (Assessor’s Parcel Number 59-020- 017, 59-020-015, 61-120-004, 59-530-034, 59-020-018, 59-020- 016, 51-393-003, 51-393-002, 57-150-078, 57-150-004, 57-150- 050, 58-120-001, 57-220-065, 53-470-088, 53-470-079, 53-470- 083, 53-470-087, 53-470-076, 53-470-085, 53-470-078, 53-470- 077, 53-470-081, 53-470-086, 53-470-095, 53-470-082, 53-470- 092, 53-470-080, 53-470-090, 53-470-096, 53-470-089, 53-470- 093, 53-470-084, 53-470-094, 53-470-098, and 53-470-097), by title only and waive the first reading

10. Merriment Village Apartments - Homekey 3.0 Grant Application Submittal Recommendation: A. Adopt a Resolution authorizing a joint application with Habitat for Humanity Yuba/Sutter, Inc, to apply for Homekey 3.0 funds through the State Department of Housing and Community
Development for a 79-unit affordable housing project located at 428 North Walton Avenue, which is Phase 1 of the proposed 217-unit Merriment Village Apartments
B. Authorize the Mayor to submit a Funding Commitment letter for the City to contribute $1,787,922 in development fee waivers and $155,000 annually of Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funds, provided that the City continues to receive PLHA funds
Future Agenda Items

11. Future Agenda Items
- Councilmember Pasquale
- Councilmember Boomgaarden
- Councilmember Shaw
- Vice Mayor Harris
- Mayor Kirchner
Reports and Communications

The following reports and communication items are provided for the Council’s information. No action can be taken on items under this section unless the Council agrees to include it on a subsequent agenda

12. City Manager's Report

13. City Council Reports
Adjournment

Proclamation
of the City Council
Older Americans Month
May 2023
WHEREAS, nearly 22,300 residents of Yuba City and the surrounding area are now 60 years of age or older who enrich our community through their diverse life experiences; and WHEREAS, Yuba City is committed to strengthening our community by connecting with and supporting older adults, their families, and caregivers and acknowledging their many valuable contributions to society; and
WHEREAS, Yuba City recognizes the importance of bringing together all generations and engaging in activities that promote physical, mental, and emotional well-being for the benefit of all; and
WHEREAS, our local communities can enhance the lives of older Americans by:
• promoting home and community-based services that support independent living • involving older adults in community events and other activities • providing opportunities for older adults to work, volunteer, learn, lead, and mentor NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Wade Kirchner, Mayor of the City of Yuba City on behalf of the entire Council does hereby proclaim May 2023 to be Older Americans Month. We urge every resident to take time during this month to recognize older adults and the people who serve them as essential and valuable members of our community.

Done on this 2nd day of May, 2023 in the City of Yuba City, County of Sutter, State of California.

Proclamation
of the City Council
MAY IS

SMALL BUSINESS MONTH AND WEEK
APRIL 30 – MAY 6, 2023
WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City recognizes May is National Small Business Month & Week. The dedication and entrepreneurial spirit of small businesses that keep the YubaSutter region’s economy growing stronger; and WHEREAS, it is the collaborative mission of the City of Yuba City working in partnership with The Yuba Sutter Chamber of Commerce, and other organizations to help our businesses develop and thrive; and
WHEREAS, small businesses are not only the engines of our economic progress, they employ local residents and they are the heart and soul of our community; and WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City appreciates the support provided to our small businesses by the Yuba Sutter Chamber of Commerce and other organizations; and WHEREAS, during the month of May and the week of April 30 - May 6, 2023, the National Small Business Administration and the Yuba Sutter Chamber of Commerce are celebrating Small Business Month and Week.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Wade Kirchner, Mayor of the City of Yuba City and on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim April 30 - May 6, 2023, as “Small Business Week” and the entire month of May as Small Business Month in the City of Yuba City and urge all citizens to acknowledge and celebrate the achievements made by small business both locally and nationally.

Done this 2nd day of May 2023, at the City of Yuba City, County of Sutter, State of California.

CITY OF YUBA CITY
Public Communication
Members of the public may address the City Council on items of interest that are within the City’s jurisdiction. Individuals addressing general comments are encouraged to limit their statements.

Procedure
You are welcome and encouraged to participate in this meeting. Complete a Speaker Card located in the lobby and give to the Clerk, public comment is taken on action items appearing on the Consent Calendar or Business Items on the Agenda when they are called. Public comment on any other items within the scope of the City’s jurisdiction, including items not listed on the Agenda, will be considered at this time.

When a matter is announced, wait to be recognized by the Mayor to provide your comments to the Council. Comments should begin by providing your name and place of residence. A three minute limit is requested when addressing Council.

Request for additional time to address Council
Members of the public submitting written requests at least 24 hours prior to the meeting will be allotted 5 minutes to comment per speaker. Repetitive comments may be limited, and large groups are encouraged to select representatives to express the opinions of the group.

Procedure
When requesting to comment, please indicate your name and the topic and mail to:

City of Yuba City
Attn: City Clerk
1201 Civic Center Blvd
Yuba City CA 95993
Or email to:

Jackie Sillman, City Clerk
[email protected]

Agenda Item 4

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: May 2, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Administration Department
Presentation By: Ciara Wakefield, City Clerk Administrator Summary
Subject: Minutes of the April 18th meeting
Recommendation: Approve the mintues of the April 18th meeting Fiscal Impact: None
Attachments:

1. 04-18-2023 Regular Meeting Minutes (DRAFT)
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Ciara Wakefield
City Clerk Admininstrator
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

MINUTES (DRAFT)

CITY COUNCIL - CITY OF YUBA CITY
APRIL 18, 2023
6:00 P.M. REGULAR

MEETING COUNCIL

CHAMBERS/VIRTUAL
Regular Meeting
Call to Order
The Regular Meeting of the City Council called to order by Mayor Kirchner at 6:00 PM Roll Call

Present: Mayor Kirchner and Councilmembers Boomgaarden, Harris, and Pasquale

Absent: Councilmember Shaw
[Councilmember Shaw arrived at 6:03 PM]
Invocation/Inspiration
Pastor Chris Finchum – CityWalk Church Yuba City
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Joseph Hale – Habitat for Humanity
Agenda Modifications/Approval of Agenda
Staff requested that Item 6 be pulled from Consent and heard as the first matter of Business Ceremonial Presentations

1. Child Abuse Prevention Month Proclamation
Mayor Kirchner presented a proclamation to Michelle Downing, Executive Director of Casa de Esperanza

2. Outgoing Planning Commissioners, Michele Blake and Lorie Adams Proclamation
Mayor Kirchner presented proclamations to Michele Blake and Lorie Adams Public Communication

3. Appearance of Interested Citizens
No public comment

Consent Calendar
Councilmember Boomgaarden moved and Councilmember Shaw seconded the motion to approve Consent Calendar items 4-5, and 7-8:

4. Minutes of the April 4, 2023 meeting
Approve the April 4, 2023 minutes

5. Henson Ranch Estates – Phase 1 Subdivision (Subdivision Agreement and Final Map Approval)
Adopt a Resolution approving the execution of a Subdivision Agreement with YC Hooper Ventures, LLC, A California Limited Liability Company providing for public improvements associated with the Henson Ranch Estates – Phase 1 Subdivision Map, approving the Henson Ranch Estates – Phase 1 Subdivision Final Map, accepting dedication of rights-of-way and easements shown thereon and authorizing the filing of the map. (Subdivision is located north of North Colusa Frontage Road, East of Hooper Road, and west of El Margarita Road) [Item 6 moved to Business Items]

6. Wastewater Treatment Facility Peterbilt Crane Truck Award Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of one (1) Peterbilt Model 537 Crane Truck to Dobbs Heavy Duty Holdings, LLC DBA Dobbs Peterbilt of Federal Way, WA in the amount of $300,000, including tax and a 10% contingency, by piggybacking on Sourcewell Contract No. 060920-PMC, with the finding that it is in the best interest of the City

7. Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program
A. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Chief of Police to accept the Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant and approve expenditure recommendations
B. Authorize the Chief Financial Officer to make budget adjustments as necessary

8. Community Sponsorship Request
Consider the sponsorship request from Shri Guru Ravidass Temple, and if approved: Adopt a Resolution to approve a monetary sponsorship request from the Shri Guru Ravidass Temple of $2,500.00 to assist in funding the Cultural Community Parade
The motion was passed unanimously
Business Items
[Item 6 moved from Consent Calendar]

6. Wastewater Treatment Facility Peterbilt Crane Truck Award [Staff presentation and memo revised recommendation]
Councilmember Shaw moved and Councilmember Pasquale seconded the motion to:

A. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of one (1) Peterbilt Model 537 Crane Truck to Dobbs Heavy Duty Holdings, LLC DBA Dobbs Peterbilt of Federal Way, WA in the amount of $300,000, including tax and a 10% contingency, by piggybacking on Sourcewell Contract No. 060920-PMC, with the finding that it is in the best interest of the City B. Approve an increase to the capital acquisition budget allocation for the WWTF Mechanic Crane Truck in the amount of $50,000 for a total capital asset value of $300,000
The motion was passed unanimously

9. Special Event Permit Process
Received a presentation regarding the proposed Special Event Permit Process Heather Esemann spoke
Caroline (Last Name Unknown) spoke
Sarb Thiara spoke
Sandee Drown spoke
No action. Council provided direction to staff

10. Update of Safe and Sane Fireworks Regulations
Mayor Kirchner opened a Public Hearing
No public comment
Mayor Kirchner closed the Public Hearing
Vice-Mayor Harris moved and Councilmember Boomgaarden seconded the motion to:

Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of Yuba City regulating the use of fireworks by adding Section 4-11.02 (Discharge of Fireworks) of Chapter 11, and amending Section 4-17.20 (Exemptions [Noise Regulations]) of Chapter 17 and Section 5602 of Chapter 5 (Fire Prevention), and adding Section 5602.2 (dangerous fireworks) to Section 4-5.02 of Chapter 5, all of Title 4 of the Yuba City Municipal Code by title only and waive the first reading
The motion was passed unanimously

11. Station 4 Training Grounds - Drill Tower Purchase
Councilmember Boomgaarden moved and Vice-Mayor Harris seconded the motion to:

Adopt a Resolution authorizing the sole source purchase of an Affordable Drill Tower from Affordable Drill Towers, LLC, of Austin, TX in the amount of $132,785 and adoption of Categorical Exemptions
The motion was passed unanimously

12. Fire Station No. 2 Dorm Room Addition
Councilmember Shaw moved and Councilmember Pasquale seconded the motion to:

Adopt a Resolution approving the plans and specifications for the Fire Station No. 2 Expansion Project located at 1641 Gray Avenue and authorizing advertisement for bids on the project
The motion was passed unanimously

13. Rezone (RZ) 22-07, Pre-annexation Zoning for the Thiara Estates Subdivision (TSM 22-08)
Mayor Kirchner opened a Public Hearing
Caroline (Last Name Unknown) spoke
Bob Farley spoke
Rick Blue spoke
Ravi (Last Name Unknown) spoke
Alexander Cervantes spoke
AJ Hyatt spoke
Aletha Martin spoke
Heather Esemann spoke
Mayor Kirchner closed the Public Hearing
Councilmember Shaw moved and Vice-Mayor Harris seconded the motion to:

Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-13 by adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for RZ 22-07 and TSM 22-08 and rezoning Assessor’s Parcels 17-066-003, - 005, and 021 from R-1X20 to R-1, located on the west side of Tuly Parkway across from the terminus of Bradley Estates Drive and bordering the east side of Elmer Avenue, and waive the first reading
The motion was passed unanimously

14. Water Supply Outlook
Heather Esemann spoke
Councilmember Boomgaarden moved and Councilmember Pasquale seconded the motion to:

Adopt a Resolution declaring that water supply conditions are such that they dictate and justify the reduction of mandatory conservation measures from Stage 3 “Severe Shortage” to Stage 1 “Water Alert” of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan
The motion was passed unanimously

15. Second Groundwater Well - Award for Construction of Phase 2 and Amend Professional Services Agreement

Councilmember Boomgaarden moved and Councilmember Shaw seconded the motion to:

Adopt a Resolution which takes the following actions:

A. Award a construction contract to Auburn Constructors LLC of Sacramento, CA in the amount of their total bid of $1,994,300 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City, subject to review and approval as to legal form by the City Attorney
B. Authorize Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with West Yost and Associates, Inc. of Davis, CA for Engineering Services During Construction in the amount of $270,800, subject to material terms, with the finding that it is in the best interest of the City The motion was passed unanimously

16. Merriment Village Apartments - Homekey 3.0 Grant Application Submittal Councilmember Shaw moved and Councilmember Boomgaarden seconded the motion to:

Authorize the City Manager to continue to work with Habitat for Humanity to apply for Homekey 3.0 funds through the State Department of Housing and Community Development for a 79- unit affordable housing project located at 428 North Walton Avenue, which is Phase 1 of the proposed 217-unit Merriment Village Apartments
The motion was passed with four (4) votes [Pasquale opposed]

10. Update of Safe and Sane Fireworks Regulations
[Mayor Kirchner reopened Item 10 so that the Ordinance title could be read into the record] Vice-Mayor Harris moved and Councilmember Boomgaarden seconded the motion to:

Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of Yuba City regulating the use of fireworks by adding Section 4-11.02 (Discharge of Fireworks) of Chapter 11, and amending Section 4-

17.20 (Exemptions [Noise Regulations]) of Chapter 17 and Section 5602 of Chapter 5 (Fire Prevention), and adding Section 5602.2 (dangerous fireworks) to Section 4-5.02 of Chapter 5, all of Title 4 of the Yuba City Municipal Code by title only and waive the first reading Again, the motion was passed unanimously
Future Agenda Items

17. Future Agenda Items
No suggestions were made
Reports and Communications

18. City Manager's Report

19. City Council Reports
- Councilmember Boomgaarden
- Councilmember Pasquale

- Councilmember Shaw
- Vice Mayor Harris
- Mayor Kirchner
Adjournment
Mayor Kirchner adjourned the Regular Meeting of the City Council at 8:50 PM _____________________________
Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk

Agenda Item 5

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: May 2, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision (Acceptance of Public Improvements) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution accepting certain street and related improvements pursuant to the Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision Agreement with James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000, and authorizing the Subdivider to file a Notice of Completion. [Subdivision is located south of Monroe Road and east of Royo Ranchero Drive]
Fiscal Impact: City will become responsible for maintenance costs of the public improvements.

Purpose:

To accept the infrastructure improvements associated with the Dunn Ranch Estates Development for public use and initiate the one (1) year warranty period.

Council’s Strategic Goal:

Acceptance of these improvements coordinates with the Council Strategic Goal related to Infrastructure. The action is necessary to comply with the Development Subdivision Agreement and transfer the private development to the City as public infrastructure.

Background:

On November 16, 2021, Council authorized Resolution No. 21-168 to execute a Subdivision Agreement with the Subdivider, James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000, regarding the development of the Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision (SM 20-06) (Attachment 2). Per the agreement, the Subdivider was to construct the determined improvements and, upon completion, dedicate and offer the improvements to the City to constitute public improvements.

Analysis:

The Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision street and related improvements have been constructed to the satisfaction of the City. At this time, the Subdivider is requesting acceptance of the improvements so that the one (1) year warranty period can begin. All of the required improvements within the subdivision have been constructed in conformance with the approved plans and specifications. With the acceptance, the Subdivider will provide security for the guarantee and warranty of the work in the amount of 10% of the cost of the improvements, which equates to $281,736.70.

Fiscal Impact:

With the acceptance of the improvements, the City will become responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the public improvements, including the water, sewer, storm-drain lines, streets, streetlights, and landscaping. Residents within the subdivision will participate in Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District No. 5K_16, which will pay for the proportional share of the maintenance of the streetlights and landscaping. Maintenance costs for the water and sewer lines will come from the Water Enterprise and Sewer Enterprise funds, respectively, and maintenance of the streets and storm drains will be funded with road funds and the established Community Facilities District for the subdivision.

Alternatives:

Do not accept the improvements.

Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution accepting certain street and related improvements pursuant to the Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision Map Agreement with James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000, and authorizing the Subdivider to file a Notice of Completion. [Subdivision is located south of Monroe Road and east of Royo Ranchero Drive].

Attachments:

1. Resolution - Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision (Acceptance of Public Improvements)

2. Dunn Ranch Estates Location Map
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Kevin Bradford
Deputy PW Director – Engineering
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. _______

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY

ACCEPTING CERTAIN STREET AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS

PURSUANT TO THE DUNN RANCH ESTATES SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 3, 2021, BETWEEN THE CITY OF YUBA CITY AND JAMES R. SCOTT, TRUSTEE OF THE SCOTT FAMILY TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 6, 2000, AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBDIVIDER TO FILE THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION.

WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City (City) has heretofore contracted with James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000 for certain work pursuant to that Dunn Ranch Estates Subdivision Agreement dated December 3, 2021, between the City of Yuba City and James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000 as a condition of approval for Subdivision Map No. 20-06; and
WHEREAS, said work of improvements called for by said Agreement for street and related improvements was completed to the satisfaction of the City, and a maintenance bond insuring the work of improvements from a maintenance standpoint for a period of one (1) year from and after completion has been provided.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the City Council of the City of Yuba City hereby accepts the work performed on those certain improvements, the subject of the Subdivision Agreement between the City of Yuba City and James R. Scott, Trustee of The Scott Family Trust dated November 6, 2000, and authorizes and directs the Subdivider to execute and record a Notice of Completion in connection with said work of improvement.

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 2nd day of May, 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

ATTACHMENT 2

HWY 20
R
O
Y
O
R
A
N
C
H
E
R
O
R
D

COLUSA FRONTAGE RD

MONROE DR MONROE RD
T
E
AL H
OLLO
W
D
R

PARIS WAY

GRANITE DR

LIBBY LN

STONEGATE DR
D
O
N
A
WAY
S
T
O
N
E
Y
D
R

JORI CT

SAM BRANNAN WAY

MARCOS CT

ALICIA CT

JOHN FREEMONT WAY
P
E
B
BLE
C
T
M
A
R
BLE
C
T
HWY 20

COLUSA FRONTAGE RD
Figure 1: Location Map: Dunn Ranch Estates
Tentative Subdivision Map 20-06
Project Site
1 inch = 300 feet

Agenda Item 6

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: May 2, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Development Services Department
Presentation By: Doug Libby, Deputy Director of Development Services Summary
Subject: Thiara Estates Subdivision
Recommendation: Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-13 by adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for RZ 22-07 and TSM 22-08, and rezoning Assessor’s Parcels 17-066-003, -005, and 021 from R-1X20 to R-1, located on the west side of Tuly Parkway across from the terminus of Bradley Estates Drive and bordering the east side of Elmer Avenue, and waive the second reading Fiscal Impact: The cost for processing land use entitlements is funded by the project applicant through the payment of application fees.

Purpose:

To rezone 8.19 acres removing the X20 Overlay District for the Thiara Estates Subdivision Map (TSM 22-08) that was contingently approved by the Planning Commission.

Council’s Strategic Goal:

This item meets the City Council’s strategic goal of business friendly. Establishing appropriate preannexation zoning for this subdivision will align the zoning and development with the city's development standards.

Background:

The applicant/owner, Sarbjit Thiara Jr., filed applications RZ 22-07 and Tentative Subdivision Map TSM 22-08, Thiara Estates.

On March 22, 2023, the Yuba City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing. Concerns expressed by the public included potential increased traffic on Elmer Avenue, Bradley Estates Drive, and the existing traffic issues with drop-off and pick-up at the nearby Butte Vista Elementary School.

Additionally, impacts of two-story homes on existing adjacent development was discussed.

After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission unanimously:

1. Adopted Resolution PC 23-07 recommending approval of RZ 22-07 to the City Council together

with Environmental Assessment 22-13; and

2. Adopted Resolution PC 23-08 contingently approving TSM 22-08 On April 18, 2023, the City Council conducted a public hearing for RZ 22-07 and Environmental Assessment 22-13. The City Council voted 5-0 in approval to advance RZ 22-07 and EA 22-13 to a second reading on May 2, 2023.

Although the property has been utilized as an orchard, it has been designated for single-family residential development for many years. The Sutter County General Plan has designated the property in this area for single-family residential development (at up to 8 residences per acre) since at least 1996. The Yuba City General Plan has designated the property as Low Density Residential (2-8 residences per acre) since at least 2004. This proposal is consistent with both Sutter County and Yuba City General Plans, and it is consistent with the R-1 pre-annexation zoning that was previously applied to the property. There have been several other similar subdivisions in this area in previous years, as City services are available to this urbanizing area within Yuba City’s existing sphere of influence.

Analysis:

TSM 22-08 is a 34 single-family residential lot subdivision located on approximately 8.19 acres. Lot sizes range from 6,457 square feet up to 9,834 square feet. The gross density of the project is approximately 4.3 residences per acre, and an existing single-family residence will be removed as part of project development. The subdivision will connect with Tuly Parkway on the east and Elmer Avenue on the west.

Pre-annexation Rezone 22-07 will remove the X20 Combining District from this property. The X20 District provides specific development criteria to this and neighboring properties and provides 12 development related criteria that must be met in order to develop the property (a copy of that criteria is attached to this staff report). Nine of the criteria have since been incorporated into ordinance, practices, or procedures rendering them unnecessary today. There are three criteria that are not incorporated into today’s practices that would affect the viability of the project if left intact. These include:
• A requirement that a Development Agreement between the developer and the City be approved as part of any project;
• The project must provide an affordable housing component (to be negotiated as part of the Development Agreement); and
• The minimum lot size is one-acre (compared to 5,000 square feet for the R-1 District).

The removal of the X20 Combining District from this property is consistent with the Council’s decision in May of 2021 to rescind the 2005 Growth Policies which contained similar provisions. The resulting zoning of this proposal would be R-1, Single Family Residential.

The subject property is currently in an unincorporated area of Sutter County but is within the City’s longestablished sphere of influence. If this project is approved, the project will not be able to develop until annexation is approved by the Sutter County Local Agency Formation Commission (Sutter LAFCo).

The applicant intends to apply to LAFCo following the City’s application process.

Compatibility with neighboring uses:

The project is located on the western edge of the City. As growth in this part of the urban area has in

recent years been moving west, there has been new residential development. As such, the area has been transitioning from agricultural uses (primarily small orchards) to single-family residential development. The interface between farming and residential development is often times difficult for both farming and the nearby residents. But as this transition in this area is temporary, requiring buffers, like distance and separation of use requirements, is not effective. Agricultural buffers are only effective for establishing more permanent boundaries. Better long-term planning is to separate the uses. That is, let this urbanizing area build-out, and protect agricultural lands in more rural locations along the perimeter of the Yuba City sphere of influence.

This new subdivision will also be located next to existing single-family residential development.

Historically the City has been respectful of existing single-story homes by limiting neighboring new homes to a single story. As has been the standard with other developments with similar issues, a condition has been included for the proposed new homes that will abut existing single-story residences.

They are limited to single-story construction, or some residences may have a second story with no overlooking windows. The condition limits lots 1 through 8, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27 to single story construction or any back-facing windowsills on the upper floor of a two-story residence are to be a minimum of 6.0 feet above the floor, and prohibits second story balconies, or as otherwise approved by the Development Services Director.

Logical path of growth
Although this property is currently utilized as an orchard, and this development means the loss of that 8-acre orchard, this property is in a logical growth area for the City within the City’s long-established sphere of influence. As discussed above, the area has been planned by both Sutter County and Yuba City for this growth for at least 30 years. The construction of Tuly Parkway that adjoins this property further increases the viability of this site for urban growth. The agricultural use of this site, with increasing urban development around it, will become more and more difficult to conduct as this area grows.

Traffic
The project will create new internal roadways with access to the surrounding streets. It will connect Elmer Avenue to Tully Parkway/Bradley Estates Drive which connect with Blevins Road and other points east. Per the proposed Conditions of Approval, the developer will dedicate appropriate right-ofway and construct and/or pay for their portions of Elmer Avenue and Tuly Parkway as well as the internal streets. This includes curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and decorative masonry walls and landscaping, as appropriate.

To analyze the effects on the existing street system from this additional traffic, a traffic study was Table 1: Bordering Information and Uses
General Plan
Land Use Classification
Zoning Existing
Land Use
Project
Site
Low Density Residential
(LDR)
One-Family
Residential (R-1)
Orchard and a boarded-up singlefamily residence.

North LDR R-1 Single-family residences.

East LDR R-1 Tuly Parkway and single-family
residences across the parkway.

West LDR R-1 Estate sized single-family
residences and orchard.

South LDR R-1 Estate sized single-family
residence.

prepared (Wood Rodgers, Thiara Estates Traffic Operation Memorandum, November 30, 2022) (Study). The Study estimates that the subdivision will generate approximately 374 new daily vehicle trips (a trip is one-way), most of which will utilize the Tuly Parkway/Bradly Estates Drive intersection. (A copy of the full traffic study is attached to the Environmental Assessment attached to this staff report).

Tuly Parkway/Bradley Estates Drive: Upon completion of the subdivision the Study provides that most project related traffic will utilize Tuly Parkway, but until the Parkway is opened to Butte House Road, much of the traffic will utilize Tuly Parkway and Bradley Estates Drive to access Blevin Road. As Tuly Parkway and Bradley Estates Drive are not used to a level that effect capacity, the Study concludes that there is adequate capacity in both of those roadways for the additional trips.

Elmer Avenue and Blevin Road: Of concern were the project’s potential effects on the Elmer Avenue/Butte House Road intersection and the Blevin Road/Butte House Road intersection. Both the Yuba City and Sutter County General Plans (Elmer Ave.) consider the standard for acceptable street and intersection flows to be LOS D or better. As can be seen in Table 2 below, the existing LOS at those intersections are currently acceptable and construction of these 34 homes will not alter that, with changes to the intersection delays not likely to be noticeable. Per the Study, signalization of those intersections is not recommended at this time.

Even under the cumulative scenario, which projects traffic levels on these roadways to 2035, the traffic flow remains at an acceptable level of service. The Study also considered the effects on Elmer Avenue if Tuly Parkway is not completed. It concluded that the traffic levels would not be significantly affected by removal of Tuly Parkway.

Table 2: Elmer Way and Blevins Road Operations
Intersection LOS Criteria Peak Existing Existing Plus Project hour Delay (sec) LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS
Elmer Ave./Butte AM 17.1 C 17.2 C
House Road
D or better
PM 22.1 C 22.6 C
Blevin Rd./Butte AM 14.3 B 14.7 B
House Road
D or better
PM 27.1 D 28.9 D
Other conclusions of the traffic study are:
• Emergency access is considered adequate.
• The project will provide adequate connectivity to existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Another consideration not discussed in the traffic study is the potential benefit to existing Elmer Avenue residents. This subdivision will provide an additional southerly exit for Elmer Avenue residents other than the Elmer Avenue/Butte House Road intersection, via the new connection through the subdivision to Tuly Road and Bradley Estates Drive.

New development will be required to pay City wide traffic impact fees and the development will construct the west portion of Tuly Parkway from Bradley Estates Drive to the north property line of this project area, which aids the ultimate General Plan goal of connecting Tuly Parkway to Butte House Rd

to alleviate traffic impact at Blevin/Butte House and Elmer/Butte House.

Availability of City services:

City water, wastewater and stormwater drainage will be extended to the property.

Eliminating the X20 Combining District:

As discussed in the Background section above, the X20 Combining District was adopted in 2004 to implement the new General Plan. It contains 12 criteria that is to be required of new development.

Since that time there have been other ordinances adopted and programs established that accomplish many of those items, making them duplicative today. That includes nine of the criteria to pay sewer, water, park, school, and other development impact fees, make proper drainage improvements, pay a fair share of upgraded or new collector and arterial streets, and levee improvements, and entry into a Community Facilities District to fund police/fire operations, and park maintenance.

Other criterion that seemed justified at that time, but is no longer needed, is that the project must participate in an affordable housing program that was anticipated to be implemented. Since that time, the City has developed other strategies for affordable housing, as most recently contained in the 2021- 2029 Housing Element so this criterion has been superseded by the new Housing Element.

There is a criterion to enter into a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City.

The stated need is to implement the City’s Housing program. As stated above, the housing problem has otherwise been addressed, negating the need for a development agreement.

A criterion requires a one-acre minimum lot size. One-acre minimum lot size would be inconsistent with the General Plan. The Low-Density Residential land use designation in which this property lies has an allowed density range of 2-6 residences/acre. The one-acre minimum translates to a density of 1 residence/acre – outside of the permitted density range. Also, if the one-acre minimum lot size is implemented for this subdivision the project would be reduced to eight lots instead of the 34 that are proposed. This raises a major concern. At this reduced density, to accommodate new growth, it would be an inefficient use of land, causing considerable sprawl, and a waste of much more agricultural land.

Further, the cost of providing City services to those properties at this low density would be prohibitive to all but the wealthiest.

Map Approval Prior to Annexation
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66454 (the State Subdivision Map Act), a city may process and approve a proposed subdivision of unincorporated territory adjacent to a city but must condition its approval that the subdivision cannot be built until annexation is approved. This requirement has been reflected as proposed Condition No. 6.

Environmental Considerations:

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 finding of the mitigated negative declaration is that, with the proposed mitigations for Greenhouse Gases Geology and Soils, and Tribal Cultural Resources this 34 single-family residential lot subdivision

will not create any significant environmental impacts. As a result, the filing of a mitigated negative declaration is appropriate in accordance with the provisions of CEQA. The proposed mitigations are included in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program.

Fiscal Impact:

The cost for processing land use entitlements is funded by the project applicant fees as adopted by the City Council.

Alternatives:

1. Deny the application to approve Environmental Assessment 22-13, Rezone 22-07 and the associated Tentative Subdivision Map 22-08.

2. Provide staff with alternate direction.

Recommendations:

Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yuba City approving Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-13 by adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for RZ 22-07 and TSM 22-08, and rezoning Assessor’s Parcels 17-066-003, -005, and 021 from R-1X20 to R-1, located on the west side of Tuly Parkway across from the terminus of Bradley Estates Drive and bordering the east side of Elmer Avenue, and waive the second reading.

Attachments:

1. City Council Ordinance approving Environmental Assessment 22-13 and RZ 22-07

2. X20 Overlay District

3. Subdivision Map TSM 22-08, Thiara Estates, and Conditions of Approval

4. Environmental Assessment 22-13
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Doug Libby, AICP
Deputy Director of Development Services
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

1 ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 22-13 BY ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR RZ 22-07 AND TSM 22-08 AND REZONING ASSESSOR’S PARCELS 17-066-003, -005, AND 021 FROM R-1X20 TO R-1, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF TULY PARKWAY

ACROSS FROM THE TERMINUS OF BRADLEY ESTATES DRIVE AND
BORDERING THE EAST SIDE OF ELMER AVENUE.

WHEREAS, the City received a tentative subdivision map application for this property in July 2022 to subdivide the approximately 8.19-acre property into 34 single-family residential lots, and a rezoning of the property (RZ 22-07) to delete the X20 Combining District from the existing R-1X20 zoning located on the west side of Tuly Parkway across from the terminus of Bradley Estates Drive; and
WHEREAS, as a result the following entitlements are being considered for approval:
• Rezone (RZ) 22-07: which proposes to amend the zone district from a One Family Residence combined with the X20 Combining District (R-1X20) to a One Family Residence District (R-1)
• Tentative Parcel Map (TSM) 22-08: which proposes to subdivide 8.19 acres into 34 single family residential lots
• Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-13
(collectively “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the X20 Combining District was added to this and nearby properties in 2004 as part of a potential annexation into the City. At that time the new General Plan had been recently adopted and this zoning was added to ensure that the new policies and programs in the General Plan be implemented. Since that time many of the criteria have been incorporated into standard practice; and
WHEREAS, a review of the X20 zoning concluded that its twelve criteria of development were no longer necessary due to more recent actions to implement these standards citywide or that they are no longer needed (Exhibit “A”); 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 proposing a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 22-13) for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2023, the Planning Commission concurrently conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Environmental Assessment 22-13, Rezone 22-07, and Tentative Subdivision Map 22-08, 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 Planning Commission, after which public testimony was closed; and WHEREAS, after deliberation and consideration of all relevant items, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving

2 Environmental Assessment 22-13 and Rezone 22-07 and contingently approved Tentative Subdivision Map 22-08.

WHEREAS, on April 18, 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; and 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 approve Rezone 22-07 and the associated Environmental Assessment (EA) 22-13 adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project.

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 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.

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 adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration 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 authorize 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. Rezone Findings. The City Council finds that Rezone 22-07 is consistent with the General Plan and the General Plan goals and policies as amended and as further described above; 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

3 will allow for the creation of quality balanced neighborhoods that provide housing options for the City.

5. Approval of Rezone 22-07. The City Council approves Rezone 22-07 and reclassifies the zone districts for those districts as depicted in Exhibit A shown on the zoning map of the City of Yuba City from One-Family Residence District, X20 Combining District (R-1X20) to OneFamily Residence District (R-1).

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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 18th day of April 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:

4 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: Rezone 22-07
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.

5 EXHIBIT A

6

ATTACHMENT 2

YUBA CITY
X Districts
Updated | August 2022
X20 Area: West side of Elmer Road, south of the westerly extension of Lizanne Drive, and the area lying between Tuly Parkway right of way and the section of Tierra Buena which as annexed to the City in April of 2004 along with the area lying between Vine Avenue and the westerly extension of Lizanne Drive.

Conditions of Preannexation Zoning
The preannexation zoning of the Property is approved subject to the following conditions.

These conditions shall only apply to divisions of land requiring a subdivision map or to any multifamily development of five residences or more.

1. Prior to the approval of any subdivision map for said Property, or prior to any multi-family development of five residences or more of said Property, a Development Agreement must be entered into with the City. At a minimum, the Development Agreement shall address conditions of development and the financing of roads, parks, public facilities, sewer, water, drainage, and surrounding infrastructure as established in the General Plan.

The approval of said preannexation zoning in no way obligates the City to enter into a Development Agreement. The City shall have complete discretion whether to approve a Development Agreement and in approving the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement.

2. Prior to the City finalizing a Development Agreement, the developer of the Property shall provide written documentation from the affected school district that the developer has satisfied said school district's requirements for school infrastructure. This would generally apply to any developments over 4 residential units. The School District would expect, at a minimum, that all residential developments enter into a Mello Roos District and that depending on the size of development, land dedication and school development may be an alternative, subject to negotiation with the District.

3. Drainage plans shall be provided for all subdivisions of land within the Property and shall comply with the City and County's master drainage plans.

4. All residential subdivisions within the Property shall include an affordable housing component that meets the minimum production standard of affordable housing outlined in the regional compact with SACOG adopted by the City of Yuba City in November 2004. There are a variety of options of how best to meet the affordable housing requirement. These options would be subject to negotiations between the City and developer and shall be part of the Development Agreement.

5. All residential subdivisions within the Property shall meet the minimum standards for residential design as established by the City Council.

6. Sewer and water fees, including connection fees and the installation of major trunk lines from both plants, shall be incorporated into the cost of development and shall be part of the Development Agreement.

7. Development within the Property shall be required to pay its fair share of major roadwork as part of the development and, may require construction of collector and arterial roads that will adequately address infrastructure concurrent with the proposed development.

This will be negotiated as part of the Development Agreement.

8. Payment of impact fees, which incorporate the public improvements necessary to implement the General Plan, shall be required and will be part of the Development Agreement. These fees will be estimates and final payment will be based on a formally adopted impact fee study approved by the City Council. In addition to the park impact fee, the Quimby Act shall also apply.

9. Payment of a fee to address levee improvements and potential flood issues shall be required as part of the Development Agreement.

10. Any development within the Property shall require the Property entering into a Community Facilities District to assist in funding police, fire and park maintenance.

11. Any development within the Property shall address the community design policies in the General Plan including walkable, livable concepts and address the village concept as provided for in the General Plan.

12. The minimum lot size for the lots shown as R-1-X20a shall be one acre as shown on Exhibit A.

ATTACHMENT 3

NVES
N
N V E
S

1 CITY OF YUBA CITY

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 22-08
MARCH 22, 2023

THIARA ESTATES
APNs: 17-066-003, -005, -021

NOTICE TO PROJECT APPLICANT
In accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), the imposition of fees, dedication, reservations or exactions for this project are subject to protest by the project applicant at the time of approval or conditional approval of the development or within ninety (90) calendar days after the date of imposition of fees, dedications, reservation, or exactions imposed on the development project. This notice does not apply to those fees, dedications, reservations, or exactions which were previously imposed and duly noticed; or, where no notice was previously required under the provisions of Government Code Section 66020(d)(1) in effect before January 1, 1997.

IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
Please note that this project is subject to a variety of discretionary conditions of approval. These include conditions based on adopted City plans and policies, those determined through tentative subdivision map review and environmental assessment essential to mitigate adverse effects on the environment including the health, safety, and welfare of the community, and recommended conditions for development that are not essential to health, safety, and welfare, but would on the whole enhance the project and its relationship to the neighborhood and environment.

Discretionary conditions of approval may be appealed. All code requirements, however, are mandatory and may only be modified by variance, provided the findings can be made.

All discretionary conditions of approval will ultimately be deemed mandatory unless appealed by the applicant to the City Council within 10 days after the decision by the Planning Commission. In the event you wish to appeal the Planning Commission’s decision or discretionary conditions of approval, you may do so by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state the grounds for the appeal and wherein the Commission failed to conform to the requirements of the zoning ordinance. This should include identification of the decision or action appealed and specific reasons why you believe the decision or action appealed should not be upheld.

These conditions are applicable to any person or entity making use of this tentative subdivision map, and references to “developer” or “applicant” herein also include any applicant, property owner, owner, leasee, operator, or any other person or entity making use of this tentative subdivision map.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. To the furthest extent allowed by law, applicant/property owner shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures,

2 damages and costs (including attorney's fees, litigation expenses and administrative record preparation costs) arising from, resulting from, or in connection with any ThirdParty Action (as hereinafter defined). The term “Third Party Action” collectively means any legal action or other proceeding instituted by (i) a third party or parties, or (ii) a governmental body, agency or official other than the City, that: (a) challenges or contests any or all of these Conditions of Approval or any approval associated with entitlements associated with the project (collectively “Approvals”); or (b) claims or alleges a violation of CEQA or another law in connection with the Approvals by the City, or the grant, issuance or approval by the City of any or all Approvals. Applicant’s/property owner’s obligations under this paragraph shall apply regardless of whether City or any of its officers, officials, employees, consultants, agents or volunteers are actively or passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties forfeitures, costs or damages caused solely by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. The provisions of this section shall survive any termination, revocation, overturn, or expiration of an approval.

Nothing in this section shall obligate the City to defend any claim and the City shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement arising from any such claim not defended by the City, unless the City approves the settlement in writing. Nor shall the City be prohibited from independently defending any claim, and if the City does decide to independently defend a claim, the applicant/property owner shall be responsible for City’s attorneys’ fees, expenses of litigation, and costs for that independent defense, including the costs of preparing any required administrative record. Applicant/property owner shall submit all documents filed in the Third-Party Action for review and approval of the City Attorney prior to filing of said documents on behalf of the City.

The City may, at any time, require the applicant to reimburse the City for costs that have been, or which the City reasonably anticipates will be, incurred by the City during the course of processing or defending any Third-Party Actions. The City shall provide applicant/property owner with an invoice detailing all reasonable costs incurred. Applicant/property owner shall tender to the City payment-in-full of all reasonable and necessary costs within thirty (30) days from the date upon the invoice. Applicant/property owner shall contact the City within a reasonable time to arrange any extension of the thirty (30) day time period for payment-in-full of the invoiced amount. Applicant/property owner further acknowledges and agrees, failure to timely tender payment-in-full to the City shall be considered a breach and noncompliance with the conditions of approval for the project. Applicant/property owner shall also be required, upon request of the City, to deposit two month’s estimated costs anticipated by the City to be incurred, which may be used by the City as a draw down account to maintain a positive balance pending tender of payment by Applicant/property owner as noted herein.

2. Standard Cultural Resource: The following cultural resource COA are applicable to all approved applications associated with TSM 22-08.
• Prior to and during construction of each phase or individual construction activity undertaken as part of the project and to mitigate potential impacts to cultural resources, the following steps shall be taken:
• Prior to excavation and construction on the project site, the prime construction contractor and any subcontractor(s) shall be cautioned on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly destroying historic or prehistoric cultural resources or

3 removing artifacts such as, but not limited to, prehistoric ground stone, projectile points, shell middens, or debitage, human remains, historic materials such as, but not limited to, bottles or cans and other cultural materials from the project site.

Responsibility: Project Applicant, Prime Construction Contractor, Subcontractors
Timing: Prior to excavation and construction
Funding: Project Applicant
• Prior to any demolition, excavation, or construction, the project applicant shall identify a qualified archaeologist to be on call if any cultural resources are identified, or if required by the City. The City shall approve the selected archaeologist prior to issuance of the any permit that includes soil disturbance, if any cultural resources are identified and/or required by the City. When excavation of greater than four (4’) feet is anticipated, a Tribal Monitor may be required.

Responsibility: Project Applicant, City
Timing: Prior to any demolition, excavation or construction.

Funding: Project Applicant
• In the event of a find, reasonable time shall be allowed for the qualified archaeologist to conduct additional subsurface testing, analysis, and reporting, if warranted. During this time, excavation and construction shall not be allowed in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 50-meter radius, or approximately 164- feet, or within a larger area as determined by the qualified archaeologist), However, activities may continue in other areas of the project site if so, determined by the qualified archaeologist.
• If any find is determined to be significant by the qualified archaeologist, representatives of the project developer or construction contractor and the City, and the qualified archaeologist, shall meet to determine the appropriate course of action.

Responsibility: Project Archaeologist, Project Applicant, Construction Contractor, City
Timing: Prior to any work within a 50-meter radius, or approximately 164-feet, of the find
Funding: Project Applicant
• All cultural materials recovered as part of the testing or monitoring program shall be subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and reporting prepared according to current professional standards. A copy of the report and analysis shall be provided to the California Historical Resources Information System Northwest Information Center for recordation.

Responsibility: Project Archaeologist, City
Timing: After Report and Analyses is completed
Funding: Project Applicant
In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5 (e)(1)(A)(B), in the event of the discovery or recognition of any human remains on the project site during development, the following steps shall be taken:

4 • There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the Monterey County coroner is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. Possible indications of burials could include a layer of shells placed over the burial. • If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, then the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (“Commission”) within twentyfour (24) hours. The Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (“MLD”) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

Responsibility: Project Contract, Project Applicant, City Timing: In Event of Discovery or Recognition of any Human Remains Funding: Project Applicant
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or their authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if the:
a) Commission is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within forty-eight (48) hours after being notified by the Commission;
b) Descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) Landowner or their authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.

Responsibility: Project Applicant, NAHC, MLD, City
Timing: After Discovery of Human Remains
Funding: Project Applicant

3. The lot design on the subdivision maps shall be designed in substantial conformance with the TSM 22-08, as appropriate, and as approved by the Planning Commission.

4. The project development shall comply with all CEQA mitigation measures identified in Environmental Assessment 22-13 dated March 22, 2023.

5. The development and operation of the project shall comply with all local, state, and federal codes (including Building and Fire codes) and local development standards. o The Developer or Representative shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the City prior to performing any work within public rights of way.

6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66454, prior to recording of a final map, annexation of the project site to the City of Yuba City is required through the Sutter County Local Area Formation Commission (Sutter LAFCO).

5 7. Approval of TSM 22-08 is shall be null and void without annexation of the affected lands into the City’s jurisdictional boundary within the timeframe permitted by Yuba City Municipal Code Section 8-2.610.

8. Lot 1, 23, and 24 and along Elmer Avenue shall be constructed with six-foot decorative masonry block wall.

9. To limit visibility, provide privacy and to minimize conflicting views of adjacent properties, the Tentative Map dated January 2022 (filed with the City on August 8, 2022) is restricted as follows:
o Lots 1 through 8, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27 are to be restricted to single story construction or any back-facing window sills on the upper floor of a two-story residence are to be a minimum of 6.0 feet above the floor, and additionally, shall not establish second floor balconies facing single-story homes, or as otherwise approved by the Development Services Director.

10. The development and operation of the project shall comply with all local, state, and federal codes (including Building and Fire codes) and local development standards. o The Developer or Representative shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the City prior to performing any work within public rights of way.

11. Storage of construction material is not allowed in the travel way.

12. To help contain fugitive dust, construction sites shall be watered down during the construction phase of the project or as directed by the Public Works Department.

13. Paved streets shall be swept frequently (water sweeper with reclaimed water recommended; wet broom) if soil material has been carried onto adjacent paved, public thoroughfares from the project site.

14. The Developer, at their expense, shall be solely responsible for all quality control associated with the project. The quality control shall include, but is not limited to, the following: survey work, potholing existing utilities, all geotechnical testing, soil reports, concrete testing, asphalt testing, and any other required special testing/inspections.

The City will only perform necessary testing to assure compliance.

15. A Subdivision/Improvement Agreement outlining any costs (hot tap, connection fee, fair share contribution, etc.) associated with the development shall be accepted by the City prior to recordation of map, or prior to approval of the Improvement Plans, whichever comes first.

16. The applicant shall be required to pay all applicable fees, including but not limited to, Sutter County, and/or Yuba City determined fees.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT

17. The improvement plans for the development of the subject property shall include all measures required to ensure that no increased drainage runoff resulting from the development of the property flow onto the adjacent lands or that the development will not impede the drainage from those properties. The rear yards and/or side yards of the lots that are created by this subdivision that are adjacent to existing residential development shall have the same finish grade elevation as those lots within

6 tolerances as approved by the Public Works Department. If retaining walls are required they shall be constructed of concrete or masonry block.

18. A master grading plan of the subdivision shall be submitted to the Public Works Department as part of the improvement plans.

PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENT PLANS

19. Fire hydrants shall be included throughout the project as approved by the Yuba City Fire Marshal.

20. Obtain all necessary approvals from City, State, and Federal agencies, utilities and other effected parties that are required for the project including, but not limited to, the preparation of drawings, studies, reports, permit applications, and payment of fees.

The Developer shall provide evidence, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, that all such obligations have been met.

21. The Developer shall dedicate right-of-way to the City as follows, or as approved by the Public Works Director:
o Tuly Parkway: a total width of 101.0 feet, including a 12.0-foot public utility easement.
o Elmer Avenue: on the east side, shall have right-of-way dedicated to a width of 45.5 feet (centerline to back of new 6.0-foot-high block wall), including a

10.0-foot PUE (35.5 feet east of centerline of roadway to back of new 6.0- foot-high block wall).
o Interior residential streets (Bradley Estates Drive, Rumi Street, easterly portion of Ameera Street, and Rohin Court):
i. Detached sidewalk option -- Right-of-way shall be dedicated to a width of 38.0 feet together with a 19.5-foot PSE behind the right-of-way. A

12.0-foot wide PUE shall be dedicated along the sidewalk with 2.0- foot located underneath the sidewalk along each side of the roadway. ii. Attached sidewalk option -- Right-of-way shall be dedicated to a width of 46.0 feet. A 12.0-foot wide PUE shall be dedicated adjacent to the right-of-way with 2.0-foot located underneath the sidewalk along each side of the roadway.
iii. A combination of the attached and detached sidewalk options to provide street trees and meeting City design standards (westerly portion of Ameera Street -- Right-of-way shall be dedicated to a width of 45.0 feet (back of sidewalk at the north side of Ameera Street to the north property line of APN 17-066-044). A 12.0-foot wide PUE shall be dedicated adjacent to the right-of-way with 2.0-foot located underneath the sidewalk.
o All necessary right of way and easements are to be dedicated with the recordation of the Final Map.

22. The Developer shall construct frontage improvements to City standards as follows, or as approved by the Public Works Director:
o Tuly Parkway:
i. 6.0-foot high masonry block wall
ii. 12.0-foot wide public utility easement area with landscaping and irrigation
iii. 6.0-foot wide sidewalk

7 iv. 6.0-foot wide landscaped parkway strip (measured from face of sidewalk to back of curb) with City approved street trees, landscaping, and irrigation
v. 2.5-foot wide barrier curb and gutter
vi. 18.0-foot wide asphalt road section
vii. 12.0-foot wide landscaped median including a 6” barrier curb at the perimeter. The median shall include City-approved street trees, landscaping, and irrigation
viii. Streetlights
o Elmer Avenue:
i. 22.0-foot-wide asphalt road section - centerline of Elmer Road to lip of gutter
ii. 2.5-foot wide barrier curb and gutter
iii. 6.0-foot wide landscaped parkway strip (measured from back of curb to face of sidewalk) with City approved street trees, landscaping, and irrigation
iv. 5.0-foot wide detached sidewalk
v. 10.0-foot wide public utility easement adjacent to the sidewalk with landscaping and irrigation
vi. 6.0-foot high masonry block wall
vii. Streetlights
viii. fire hydrants
ix. storm drainage facilities
x. barricade
xi. roadway striping
xii. roadway signage
o Interior residential streets (Bradley Estates Drive, Rumi Street, Ameera Street [east of APN 17-066-004], and Rohin Court):
i. Detached sidewalk option -- Streets shall be designed/constructed to a width of 37.0 feet back of curb to back of curb with parking permitted on both sides. Frontage improvements shall include street section, curb, gutter, 6.0-foot wide landscape parkway strip (measured from back of curb), 4.0-foot wide sidewalk, street trees, and streetlights.

1. The landscape plan for the front yard, including the area between the sidewalk and curb, shall be handled by each individual lot improvement. The irrigation system shall be designed to accommodate the street tree and shall meet the City’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

2. The landscaping in the parkway strip is to have a coordinated theme referenced on the public improvement plans, or as approved by the Development Services Director.
ii. Attached sidewalk option -- Streets shall be designed/constructed to a width of 37.0 feet back of curb to back of curb with parking permitted on both sides. Frontage improvements shall include street section, curb, gutter, a 4.0-foot wide attached sidewalk, and streetlights.

1. Curb bulb-outs (a contained area for the street trees) shall be installed with the following characteristics, or as otherwise determined by the Public Works Director:
a. 8.0-feet long by the width of the parking lane
b. Spaced between 30-feet and 45-feet apart, alternating sides of the street through the street length
c. Shall not be placed over any service laterals
d. Detached from the standard curb and gutter adjacent
6” barrier curb to the curb and gutter

8 e. Planted with City approved trees prior to the Certificate of Occupancy of the adjacent residence.

2. The landscape plan for the front yard is required and shall be handled by each individual lot improvement.
iii. A combination of the attached and detached sidewalk options to provide street trees and meeting City design standards, or as approved by the Public Works Director.
o Interior residential street (Ameera Street [north of APN 17-066-004], north to south):
i. 4.0-foot sidewalk
ii. 6.0-foot wide landscaped parkway strip (measured from face of sidewalk to back of curb) with City approved street trees, landscaping, and irrigation
iii. 2.5-foot wide rolled curb and gutter
iv. 26.0-foot wide asphalt road section
v. 2.5-foot wide barrier curb and gutter
vi. 4.0-foot wide landscaped strip (measured from back of curb to north property line of 17-066-004) with City approved street trees, landscaping, and irrigation

23. Road work on Tuly Parkway shall be constructed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, up to and including the following, or as otherwise determined by the Public Works Director:
a) The existing storm drain main and water main shall be extended in Tuly Parkway south of Bradley Estates Drive to the south property line of the proposed subdivision.
b) South of Bradley Estates Drive, the pavement shall stop at the existing street barricades, unless otherwise determined by the Public Works Director. c) An off-site transition of the paved roadway, curb, gutter, sidewalk and striping/pavement markings shall be constructed from the north property line of the proposed subdivision to, at a minimum, Nick Ct (Valencia Estates). The Developer shall receive fee credits for this off-site work as determined by the Public Works Director.
d) Provisions for northbound and southbound left turn pockets, from Tuly Parkway to Bradley Estates Drive shall be incorporated in the design of the landscaped median. The stacking portion of the left turn pocket shall be a minimum of 65.0 feet, or as otherwise determined by the Public Works Director. Pavement delineation at the turn pockets shall be part of the improvements.

24. Road work on Elmer Avenue shall be constructed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, up to and including the following, or as otherwise determined by the Public Works Director:
a) North of Ameera Street, Elmer Avenue shall have a full street section constructed, unless otherwise determined by the Public Works Director.

There shall be a “stepped” block wall installed along the west property line of Lot 1 (as said Lot 1 is shown on the Tentative Map 22-08, dated January 2022). A street barricade shall be installed at the north end of the paved shoulder.
b) A street light shall be installed at the intersection of Ameera Street and Elmer Avenue.

9 c) Adjacent to APN 17-066-004, the road section width and specifications can be modified as approved by the Public Works Director to facilitate construction within the existing right of way. The sidewalk can be attached and there shall be no requirement for a PUE, street trees, street lights, or landscaped parkway strip.
d) Between the north side of the walkway at Rohin Court and APN 17-066-004, Elmer Avenue shall have a full street section constructed, unless otherwise determined by the Public Works Director.
e) The construction of the street section on Elmer Avenue, between the south side of the walkway at Rohin Court and the westerly prolongation of the southerly property line of the proposed subdivision, may be deferred, unless otherwise determined by the Public Works Director.

25. An access point through the block wall, between Rohin Court and Elmer Avenue shall be provided and have the following design characteristics:
a) The distance between the pilasters (at the ends of the masonry block walls) shall be wide enough to allow emergency vehicle access. b) A concrete walkway not less than 6.0 feet wide shall be provided. c) The area shall be illuminated with a decorative light, unless a street light is nearby, and/or as approved by the Public Works Director. d) A fold down/hinged bollard shall be placed in the walkway to prevent vehicular access. The walkway shall be widened at the bollard, as necessary to comply with safety requirements, as approved by the Public Works Director.

26. The Developer shall comply with all City requirements related to drainage, including design, construction, and payment of fees in accordance with the Northwest Drainage Study. Any modifications and/or required updates shall require a submittal of a drainage plan for any drainage improvements for the proposed development. A drainage analysis, along with calculations, shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The analysis shall include, but is not limited to:
a. Grading and drainage plan showing the proposed drainage conveyance and storage system.
b. Supporting calculations demonstrating adequacy of conveyance capacity and storage volume. The calculation analysis shall meet the requirements of the Yuba City Basin Drainage Study.
c. Storm Drain Collection Systems- For the design of all pipeline conveyance facilities, the Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) shall be maintained a minimum of one foot below the gutter flow line of all drain inlets and at least one foot below all maintenance hole rims during a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. The storm drain minimum pipe size shall be 12 inches. The minimum velocity shall be 2 fps.
d. Street Flow-The street system shall be designed to convey the 100-year,24- hour runoff while maintaining a water surface at least 1 foot below the adjacent building pad elevations (or alternatively, the building pad elevations shall be at least 1 foot above the 100-year water level). The grading plan shall ensure that the 100-year, 24-hour runoff can be conveyed through the development and to the receiving drainage facility.
e. Drainage systems (pipes and street systems) shall be designed to accommodate the runoff from the ultimate development of the entire upstream watershed.

10 f. Detention Basins - A 100-year, 24-hour storm shall be used for sizing any detention basin(s) included in the approved drainage plan detention storage facilities. The detention basin release rate from any such detention basin(s) during a 100-year, 24-hour storm after development must be equal to or lower than the runoff rate from the detention basin's tributary area before development. The Developer can provide a drainage study addressing storm water mitigation through onsite storage (Phase 2 State Water Resources Control Plan – 80% of two-year storm), perforated pipes, and oversizing storm drainage pipes upon approval of the Public Works Director to eliminate need for a detention pond.
g. The Drainage Study shall be completed and stamped by a Professional Engineer and determined by the City Engineer and/or the Sutter County Water Agency Engineer to be comprehensive, accurate, and adequate.

27. Only one detention pond and/or water quality basin shall be utilized if required to meet stormwater requirements throughout the entire subdivision. Mechanical water quality devices and/or oversized pipes are preferred. Should a basin be necessary it is to include, but not be limited to a vehicle pull out area, solid masonry wall adjacent to residential, decorative perimeter fencing with accessible sized gate, landscaping, and access to the inlet and outlet in the basin as approved by the Public Works Director. Maintenance costs associated with the basin and/or mechanical water quality device(s) are to be included in the applicable Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District.

28. The development shall comply with Yuba City’s stormwater requirements and PostConstruction Standards Plan. The Post Construction information can be found here:
https://www.yubacity.net/city_hall/departments/public_works/engineering/stormwate r_management

29. All development shall be designed to local, state, and federal flood standards.

30. The proposed waterline that is part of this subdivision shall loop through the subdivision and through Elmer Avenue with provisions for future north and south extensions in Elmer Avenue. The proposed main that is to be constructed in Elmer Avenue shall be a 12” main as outlined in the Water Treatment Plant and Distribution System Master Plan dated January 2019.

31. The structural section of all road improvements shall be designed using the Caltrans empirical R-value method. A geotechnical investigation shall determine the R-value of the existing soil in accordance with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. The structural section shall be designed to the following standards:
a. Use 3” minimum for residential, 4” minimum for collectors and 6” minimum for arterials, of ‘Type A’ asphaltic concrete over Class 2 aggregate base (the thickness of the base shall be designed to the R-value of the soil) b. Use a traffic index of 6 for residential streets
c. Use a traffic index of 7 for collector streets
d. Use a traffic index of 10 for arterial streets
A copy of the geotechnical investigation, including R-value determination, test locations and structural section calculations, shall be submitted with the first improvement plan check.

11 32. Striping, pavement markings and traffic signage shall be provided on all streets as necessary and as required by the Public Works Department. Signage restricting parking and red painted curbing shall be installed where appropriate. Speed limit signs shall be installed at locations determined by the Public Works Department. All required speed limit signs shall be shown on the Improvement Plans.

33. The street trees and street lighting are public improvements which shall meet the Parks Division Planting Standards and City Standard Details and be included in the Improvement Plans and Specifications for the subdivision when the improvement plans are submitted for the first improvement plan check.

34. The Improvement Plans shall show provisions for the placement of centralized mail delivery units in the PUE. Developer shall provide a concrete base for placement of the centralized mail delivery unit. Specifications and location of such base shall be determined pursuant to the applicable requirements of the Postal Service and the City Public Works Department, with due consideration for street light location, traffic safety, security and consumer convenience.

35. Required Improvement Plan Notes:
a. "Any excess materials shall be considered the property of the contractor/owner and shall be disposed of away from the job site in accordance with applicable local, state and federal regulations."
b. "During construction, the Contractor shall be responsible for controlling noise, odors, dust and debris to minimize impacts on surrounding properties and roadways. The Contractor shall be responsible for all construction equipment to be equipped with manufacturers approved muffler baffles. Failure to do so may result in the issuance of an order to stop work.”
c. “If any hazardous waste is encountered during the construction of this project, all work shall be immediately stopped and the Sutter County Environmental Health Department, the Fire Department, the Police Department, and the City Inspector shall be notified immediately. Work shall not proceed until clearance has been issued by all of these agencies.”
d. "The Contractor(s) shall be required to maintain traffic flow on affected roadways during non-working hours, and to minimize traffic restriction during construction.

The Contractor shall be required to follow traffic safety measures in accordance with the “California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, latest edition.” The City of Yuba City emergency service providers shall be notified, at least two working days in advance, of proposed construction scheduled by the contractor(s).”
e. “Soil shall not be treated with lime or other cementitious material without prior express permission by the Public Works Department.”
f. “Where an excavation for a trench and/or structure is five (5) feet deep or more, the contractor shall conform to O.S.H.A. requirements. The contractor shall provide a copy of the approved O.S.H.A. permit, and shoring details and calculations prepared by California licensed structural engineer to the Public Works Department, prior to beginning construction.”
g. “Should any field conditions, conflicts, errors, and/or omissions be overlooked during the design review process, or during construction of the development, then any additional work identified during construction shall be implemented by the Developer at the Developer’s expense.”

12 36. In addition to the street lights provided on the interior streets, street lights shall be installed along the west side of Tuly Parkway, the length of the proposed development. Where there are existing lights on the opposite side of Tuly Parkway, the new light locations should be staggered between them.

PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS

37. All existing structures, well(s), septic tank(s), and service lines shall be destroyed in accordance with the requirements of the Sutter County Environmental Health and Yuba City Building Departments, respectively. Connections shall be made to public sewer and water. The Developer shall pay all applicable fees.

38. Prior to backfilling, the Developer shall vacuum test all manholes to ensure no leakage will occur.

39. Prior to final paving, the Developer shall hydroflush, and televise, all storm drain mains and all sewer mains. In addition, prior to the City’s acceptance of the subdivision improvements, and at the Public Works Department’s discretion, the storm sewer and sewer mains shall be re-hydroflushed.

40. Prior to final paving, the Developer shall televise all sewer laterals. If any debris, dirt, and/or material is found in the lateral, then the Developer shall clean it at his expense, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.

41. The contractor shall maintain record drawings of the improvements and keep them on site at all times. When the project is complete, the contractor shall deliver a marked set of plans to the Engineer of Record. The Engineer of Record shall update the improvement plans with the record information. Once the changes have been added to the plans, the Engineer of Record shall submit both an electronic copy (Civil 3D version 2017 or newer) and a hard copy to the City. The City will not accept the completion of the improvements until the electronic copy and hard copy have been submitted.

42. Public improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Standards, including current Water / Wastewater Master Plans and Specific Plan documents, or as approved by the Public Works Director. Costs are to be determined and reflected in the Subdivision Agreement.

43. The existing utility poles, and associated overhead utility improvements, within the project boundaries shall be undergrounded to facilitate power and communications service to APN 17-066-004. The development shall be serviced with underground utilities; no overhead utilities will be allowed.

PRIOR TO FINAL MAP RECORDATION

44. The development shall pay for operations and/or maintenance for police, fire, parks, drainage, and ongoing street maintenance costs. This condition may be satisfied through participation in a Mello-Roos CFD, by payment of cash in an amount agreed to by the City, by another secure funding mechanism acceptable to the City, or by some combination of those mechanisms. The City shall be reimbursed actual costs associated with the formation of, or annexation to, the district. The property shall annex in to an existing CFD.

13 45. The property shall petition for formation of a Zone of Benefit of the Yuba City Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District for the purpose of maintaining; street trees which are to be planted along all streets, street lights, fencing, block walls, barricades, and any detention / water quality basin(s) or devices. The Engineering Division shall be reimbursed actual costs associated with the formation of the district.

46. The existing properties within the proposed subdivision are part of the Northwest Yuba City Drainage Area Master Drainage Plan and are subject to its proportional share of drainage improvement fees as outlined in said Plan. Current fees are calculated per acre and indexed to a current value that is in effect at the time the Subdivision/Improvement Agreement is executed.

47. Should a detention pond or water quality basin be utilized, the basin parcel(s) shall be dedicated to the City of Yuba City as determined by the Public Works Director.

48. All public street lighting shall be dedicated to the City of Yuba City.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT

49. The Developer’s Superintendent/Representative shall submit three (3) sets of Pacific Gas and Electric approved utility plans showing joint trench locations and distribution lines prior to issuance of first building permit.

50. The West Yuba City Sewer Trunk Line fees, as stated in the City of Yuba City Fee Schedule, shall be paid. The fee value to be used is the value in effect at the time a building permit is issued for any particular parcel.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY

51. The curb, gutter, sidewalk, and lot drainage shall be inspected and approved by the City. Any curb, gutter and sidewalk which is not in accord with City standards or is damaged before or during construction, shall be replaced. All sidewalks along the City right-of-way shall be free of any non-control joint cracking. In addition, any concrete with cracks, chips, blemishes, and spalling greater than an inch in diameter shall be replaced from control joint to control joint.

52. All street lighting shall be constructed per the Improvement Plans and energized prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy or as approved by the Development Services Director.

53. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, all underground utilities, public improvements, and site improvements, including rough grading, shall be completed in accordance with City requirements.

MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible
Party
Monitoring
Party Timing

3.7 Geology
and Soils
Paleontological Mitigation
Measure 1: This Mitigation
Measure shall be placed as a
note on the Demolition and
Developer Developer,
Public Works
Dept.,
Development
During
grading
phase

14 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/academi
c 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
Services
Dept.

15 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.

Developer Development
Services
Dept.

Prior to
issuance of
building
permits.

3.18. Tribal
Cultural
Resources
TCR 1 If potential tribal
cultural resources (TCRs)
are discovered during
ground disturbing
construction activities, all
work shall cease within 100
feet of the find (or an
appropriate distance based
on the apparent distribution
of the TCR). A qualified
cultural resources specialist
meeting the Secretary of
Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards for
Archaeology, as well as
Native American
Representatives from
traditionally and culturally
affiliated Native American
Tribes that have engaged in
consultation for the project
will be invited to assess the
significance of the find and
make recommendations for
further evaluation and
treatment as necessary.

Culturally appropriate
treatment may include, but
is not limited to, processing
materials for reburial,
minimizing handling of
cultural objects, leaving
objects in place within the
landscape, or returning
Developer Developer,
Public Works
Dept.,
Development
Services
Dept.

During
construction
phase

16 objects to a location within
the project area where they
will not be subject to future
impacts. The United Auburn
Indian Community of the
Auburn Rancheria (Tribe)
does not consider curation
of TCR’s to be appropriate
or respectful and request
that materials not be
permanently curated,
unless requested by the
Tribe.

The types of treatment
preferred by UAIC that
protects, preserves, or
restores the integrity of a
TCR may include Tribal
Monitoring, or recovery of
cultural objects, and reburial
of cultural objects or cultural
soil that is done in a
culturally appropriate
manner. Recommendations
of the treatment of a TCR
will be documented in the
project record. For any
recommendations made by
traditionally and culturally
affiliated Native American
Tribes that are not
implemented, a justification
for why the
recommendation was not
followed will be provided in
the project record.

If articulated or
disarticulated human
remains are discovered
during ground disturbing
construction activities or
ground disturbing activities,
all work shall cease within
100 feet of the find, and the
provisions provided in the
Health and Safety Code
Section 7054 shall apply. If
the remains are determined
by the County Coroner to be
human and that of a Native
American, then Public
Resources Code 5097.98,
5097.99. 5097.991, and

17 compliance with the
provisions of CEQA
Guidelines Section
15064.5(e)(1) and (2) shall
be implemented.

ATTACHMENT 4

Environmental Assessment 22-13
For Thiara Estates Subdivision
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for
Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) 22-08 and Rezone (RZ) 22-07 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
March 2023

1 This page intentionally left blank.

2 Table of ContentsTable of Contents...................................................................................2

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

2. Project Description ....................................................................................................................7 Project Title...................................................................................................................................7 Lead Agency Name and Address...................................................................................................7 Contact Person and Phone Number .............................................................................................7 Project Location ............................................................................................................................7

2.5 7
Project Applicant ......................................................................................................................................7 Property Owner ............................................................................................................................7 General Plan Designation..............................................................................................................7 Zoning............................................................................................................................................8

2.10 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting................................................................................................12

2.11 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May be Required.........................................................12

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.? ............................................................13

2.13 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:..............................................................................13 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:........................................................................................14

3. Environmental Checklist and Impact Evaluation........................................................................16 Aesthetics....................................................................................................................................16 Agricultural and Forestry Resources...........................................................................................19 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................................23 Biological Resources....................................................................................................................31 Cultural Resources......................................................................................................................35

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

3.7 Geology and Soils........................................................................................................................39

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

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................................48

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality.........................................................................................................53

3 3.11 Land Use and Planning................................................................................................................57

3.12 Mineral Resources ......................................................................................................................58

3.13 Noise ...........................................................................................................................................60

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

3.15 Public Services.............................................................................................................................68

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

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

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources............................................................................................................75

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

3.20 Wildfire........................................................................................................................................83

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................................85

4. Section References and/or Incorporated by Reference..............................................................87

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 the proposed Thiara Estates Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) 22-08 and Pre-annexation Rezoning (RZ) 22-07 (Project).

TSM 22-08 is a proposed 34 single-family residential lot subdivision located on approximately 8.19 acres.

The proposed lot sizes range in size from 6,457 square feet up to 9,834 square feet. The gross density of the project is approximately 4.3 residences per acre. The subdivision will connect to Tuly Parkway on the east and Elmer Avenue on the west, providing a direct linkage between those roadways. An existing singlefamily residence will be removed as part of the project.

RZ 22-07 is a request to remove the X20 Combining Zone District from the existing R-1 X20 pre-annexation zoning from this same property. The X20 District provides 12 specific development criteria to this and neighboring properties that must be met in order to develop. Nine of the criteria have since been incorporated into City ordinance, practices, or procedures making them un-necessary today. There are three criteria that are not typically applied by the City to projects but would affect the Project if left intact.

These include:
• A requirement that a Development Agreement between the developer and the City be approved as part of any project;
• A residential project must provide an affordable housing component (to be negotiated as part of the Development Agreement); and
• The minimum lot size is one-acre (which would otherwise be 5,000 square feet for the R-1 Zone District).

The resulting pre-annexation zoning will be R-1.

The subject property is currently in an unincorporated area of Sutter County. If this proposal is approved by the City, the Project will not be triggered until the annexation into the City is completed. In the future, LAFCo will consider an application to annex this property to the City. As such LAFCo will likely utilize this environmental document for its review.

This subdivision is considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as the City has discretionary authority over the Project, with public review and consideration by the City of Yuba City Planning Commission and the 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 tentative subdivision map and provide an environmental assessment for consideration by the Planning Commission. In addition,

5 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 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, and one technical appendix. 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.

6 Purpose of Document
The proposed subdivision and rezoning will undergo a public review process by the Planning Commission that will make a recommendation to the City Council for a decision. If approved as proposed, the project will result in annexation of the land to Yuba City and construction of 34 single-family residences. The Planning Commission and City Council review 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.

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 www.yubacity.net/environmental. 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 20-day review period will commence on March 2, 2023 and end on March 22, 2023 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

7 2. Project Description
Project Title
Tentative Subdivision Map 22-08: Thiara Estates Subdivision, and Pre-annexation Rezoning 22-07.

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 8.19-acre property is located on the west side of Tuly Parkway across from Bradley Estates Drive.

Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 17-066-003, -005, and -021.

2.5 Project Applicant
Sarbjit Thiara Jr.
2599 Reed Road
Yuba City, CA 95993
Property Owner
Sarbjit Thiara Jr.
2599 Reed Road
Yuba City, CA 95993
General Plan Designation
The site is designated Low Density Residential (LDR). The LDR designation allows a residential density ranging between 2 and 8 residences per acre. As proposed, the Project will have a density of approximately 4.3 residences per acre.

8 Zoning
Existing
One-Family Residential Zone District Combined with an X20 Combining Zone District (R-1X20). The requirements of the X20 District are:

The pre-annexation zoning of the Property is approved subject to the following conditions. These conditions shall only apply to divisions of land requiring a subdivision map or to any multi-family development of five residences or more.

1. Prior to the approval of any subdivision map for said Property, or prior to any multi-family development of five residences or more of said Property, a Development Agreement must be entered into with the City. At a minimum, the Development Agreement shall address conditions of development and the financing of roads, parks, public facilities, sewer, water, drainage, and surrounding infrastructure as established in the General Plan. The approval of said pre-annexation zoning in no way obligates the City to enter into a Development Agreement. The City shall have complete discretion whether to approve a Development Agreement and in approving the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement.

2. Prior to the City finalizing a Development Agreement, the developer of the Property shall provide written documentation from the affected school district that the developer has satisfied said school district's requirements for school infrastructure. This would generally apply to any developments over 4 residential units. The School District would expect, at a minimum, that all residential developments enter into a Mello Roos District and that depending on the size of development, land dedication and school development may be an alternative, subject to negotiation with the District.

3. Drainage plans shall be provided for all subdivisions of land within the Property and shall comply with the City and County's master drainage plans.

4. All residential subdivisions within the Property shall include an affordable housing component that meets the minimum production standard of affordable housing outlined in the regional compact with SACOG adopted by the City of Yuba City in November 2004. There are a variety of options of how best to meet the affordable housing requirement. These options would be subject to negotiations between the City and developer and shall be part of the Development Agreement.

5. All residential subdivisions within the Property shall meet the minimum standards for residential design as established by the City Council.

6. Sewer and water fees, including connection fees and the installation of major trunk lines from both plants, shall be incorporated into the cost of development and shall be part of the Development Agreement.

7. Development within the Property shall be required to pay its fair share of major roadwork as part of the development and, may require construction of collector and arterial roads that will adequately address infrastructure concurrent with the proposed development. This will be negotiated as part of the Development Agreement.

8. Payment of impact fees, which incorporate the public improvements necessary to implement the General Plan, shall be required and will be part of the Development Agreement. These fees will be

9 estimates and final payment will be based on a formally adopted impact fee study approved by the City Council. In addition to the park impact fee, the Quimby Act shall also apply.

9. Payment of a fee to address levee improvements and potential flood issues shall be required as part of the Development Agreement.

10. Any development within the Property shall require the Property entering into a Community Facilities District to assist in funding police, fire and park maintenance.

11. Any development within the Property shall address the community design policies in the General Plan including walkable, livable concepts and address the village concept as provided for in the General Plan.

12. The minimum lot size for the lots shown as R-1X20 shall be one acre as shown on Exhibit A.

Proposed
One-Family Residential (R-1) Zone District.

10 Figure 1: Location Map

11 Figure 2: Subdivision Map

12 2.9 Project Description
This is a request to approve Thiara Estates Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) 22-08 and Pre-annexation Rezoning (RZ) 22-07 (Project).

TSM 22-08 is a proposed 34 single-family residential lot subdivision located on approximately 8.19 acres.

The proposed lot sizes range in size from 6,457 square feet up to 9,834 square feet. The gross density of the project is approximately 4.3 residences per acre. The subdivision will connect to Tuly Parkway on the east and Elmer Avenue on the west. An existing single-family residence will be removed as part of the project.

RZ 22-08 is a request to remove the X20 Combining Zone District from the existing R-1 X20 pre-annexation zoning from this property. The X20 District provides specific development criteria to this and neighboring properties. The X20 provides 12 development related criteria that must be met in order to develop the property (a copy of that criteria is attached to this staff report). Nine of the criteria have since been incorporated into ordinance, practices, or procedures making them un-needed today. There are three criteria that are not practiced today but would affect the project if left intact. These include:
• A requirement that a Development Agreement between the developer and the City be approved as part of any project;
• The project must provide an affordable housing component (to be negotiated as part of the Development Agreement); and
• The minimum lot size is one-acre (vs 5,000 square feet for the R-1 District).

The resulting pre-annexation zoning will be R-1.

The subject property is currently in an unincorporated area of Sutter County. If this proposal is approved by the City, the project will not be triggered until the annexation into the City is also completed by LAFCo.

LAFCo has a pending application to consider that item upon approval of this proposal by the City.

2.10 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Setting: The site, located in northwest Yuba City, is currently utilized for an orchard. It is located in an area that is generally transitioning from agricultural (orchard) uses to residential subdivisions.

2.11 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May be Required ▪ Feather River Air Quality Management District, Dust Control Plan, Indirect Source Review.

Table 1: Bordering Uses
North: Single-family residences.

South: Estate sized single-family residence.

East: Tuly Parkway and single-family residences across the parkway.

West: Estate sized single-family residences and orchard.

13 ▪ Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.

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.

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 X Cultural Resources Energy
X Geology/Soils X Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazard & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water
Quality
Land Use Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation 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

14 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.
________________________________________ March 2, 2023
Doug Libby, Deputy Director of Development Services
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.

15 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.

16 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 non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views
of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized
area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality?
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 several miles northwest of the project site, are visibly prominent throughout Yuba City and Sutter County. The Sutter Buttes comprise the long-range 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.

17 ▪ 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. However, the Design Guidelines do not apply to single-family residences.

3.1.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal regulations relating to aesthetics include: 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 designation of state scenic highways. There are no designated state scenic highways in the view shed of the Project site.

18 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 officially designated scenic vistas in Yuba City; the Project would therefore have no adverse effect on an official scenic vista. As the Project is within an existing residential area the subdivision will not interfere with any distant scenic views. The subdivision itself, visible from both Tuly Parkway and Elmer Road will have those frontages lined with a six foot high decorative masonry wall as well at least a 10-foot wide landscaped strip, with trees planted 30 feet on-center. As such, views of the development from those streets will primarily be of landscaping and trees. As such, the scenic impact is considered to be a less than significant impact.
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. Additionally, there are no state scenic highways in Yuba City or Sutter County. As a result, no impacts are anticipated
c) In non-urbanized 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?
The subdivision is within the Yuba City urbanized area. The City does not have design standards for singlefamily residences. Regarding the aesthetics associated with the design of the subdivision the City does have design standards for decorative masonry walls, landscaping, and trees along subdivision perimeter streets. As those standards must be met, the impacts on resulting visual character of the subdivision from nearby streets will be less than significant.

19 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
The City requires new streets to have streetlights, so there will be new street lighting within and on the perimeter of the Project. However, street lighting does not extend much beyond the immediate vicinity and also street lighting is not typically considered a significant impact unless there are nearby special circumstances, which there is not. The street lighting will also be consistent with the street lighting of neighboring subdivisions. Further, the lighting from the new homes typically does not extend much beyond the property lines. Therefore, since there are no unique circumstances, the impacts from new street and home lighting should be less than significant.

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

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

20 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.

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

21 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 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.

22 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 8.19 acres of farmland quality soils, and currently has an orchard on it. The 2018 Department of Conservation Important Farmland Map for Sutter County identifies the Project site as “Unique Farmland.” But this property, as well as being small for an agricultural use, is also within the Yuba City urban area and has other urban uses around it. As such it has for many years been designated in the Yuba City General Plan for urban uses, 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 would be protected. This property is already designated for single-family residential development by Sutter County today with the ability to develop with the same density as specified by the Yuba City General Plan. As this Project has been designated for urban uses for many years thus within the General Plan’s area of anticipated loss of agricultural land and is already designated for suburban development by Sutter County, the impact on agriculture land loss is considered to be less than significant. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

23 The property, as well as the neighboring properties, are currently zoned for non-agricultural uses by Sutter County and they are not under Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, this Project will not conflict with any agricultural zoned properties. 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 are no forests or 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 proposed Project 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? As the area has been designated for urban uses for many years by both Sutter County and Yuba City, the site is within an area already served by City services and developed with residential uses. Further, while this property and a nearby property remain as an orchard, other neighboring properties have been developed with non-agricultural uses. No properties within the area are under the Williamson Act. There are also no forestlands on the Project site or in the vicinity. Therefore, the impacts on agricultural lands and timberlands from this proposal will be less than significant.

Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Table 3-3: Air Quality
Would the project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? X

24 d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
X

3.3.1. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Yuba City is located within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB), which consists of the northern half of the Central Valley and approximates the drainage basin for the Sacramento River and its tributaries. The SVAB is bounded on the west by the Coast Range, on the north by the Cascade Range, on the east by the Sierra Nevada, and on the south by the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The intervening terrain is flat, and approximately 70 feet above sea level. The SVAB consists of the counties of Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Sacramento, Shasta, Sutter, Tehama, Yolo, and Yuba and portions of Placer and Solano Counties.

Hot dry summers and mild rainy winters characterize the Mediterranean climate of the Sacramento Valley. The climate of the SVAB is dominated by the strength and position of the semi-permanent highpressure cell over the Pacific Ocean north of Hawaii. In summer, when the high-pressure cell is strongest and farthest north, temperatures are high and humidity is low, although the incursion of the sea breeze into the Central Valley helps moderate the summer heat. In winter, when the high-pressure cell is weakest and farthest south, conditions are characterized by occasional rainstorms interspersed with stagnant and sometimes foggy weather. Throughout the year, daily temperatures may range from summer highs often exceeding 100 degrees Fahrenheit and winter lows occasionally below freezing. Average annual rainfall is about 20 inches with snowfall being very rare. The prevailing winds are moderate in strength and vary from moist clean breezes from the south to dry land flows from the north.

In addition to prevailing wind patterns that control the rate of dispersion of local pollutant emissions, the region experiences two types of inversions that affect the vertical depth of the atmosphere through which pollutants can be mixed. In the warmer months in the SVAB (May through October), sinking air forms a "lid" over the region. These subsidence inversions contribute to summer photochemical smog problems by confining pollution to a shallow layer near the ground. These warmer months are characterized by stagnant morning air or light winds with the delta sea breeze arriving in the afternoon out of the southwest. Usually, the evening breeze transports the airborne pollutants to the north and out of the SVAB. During about half of the day from July to September, however, a phenomenon called the “Schultz Eddy” prevents this from occurring. Instead of allowing the prevailing wind patterns to move north carrying the pollutants out of the valley, the Schultz Eddy causes the wind pattern to circle back south.

This phenomenon exacerbates the pollution levels in the area and increases the likelihood of violating federal or State standards. The Schultz Eddy normally dissipates around noon when the Delta sea breeze begins. In the second type of inversion, the mountains surrounding the SVAB create a barrier to airflow, which can trap air pollutants in the valley. The highest frequency of air stagnation occurs in the autumn and early winter when large high-pressure cells lie over the valley. The air near the ground cools by radiative processes, while the air aloft remains warm. The lack of surface wind during these periods and the reduced vertical flow caused by less surface heating reduces the influx of outside air and allows air pollutants to become concentrated in a stable volume of air. These inversions typically occur during winter nights and can cause localized air pollution "hot spots" near emission sources because of poor dispersion. The surface concentrations of pollutants are highest when these conditions are combined with smoke from agricultural burning or when temperature inversions trap cool air and pollutants near the ground. Although these subsidence and radiative inversions are present throughout much of the year, they are much less dominant during spring and fall, and the air quality during these seasons is generally good.”

25 Local Climate: The climate of Sutter County is subject to hot dry summers and mild rainy winters, which characterize the Mediterranean climate of the SVAB. Summer temperatures average approximately 90 degrees Fahrenheit during the day and 50 degrees Fahrenheit at night. Winter daytime temperatures average in the low 50s and nighttime temperatures are mainly in the upper 30s. During summer, prevailing winds are from the south. This is primarily because of the north- south orientation of the valley and the location of the Carquinez Straits, a sea-level gap in the coast range that is southwest of Sutter County.

Criteria Air Pollutants: Criteria air pollutants are a group of pollutants for which federal or State regulatory agencies have adopted ambient air quality standards. Criteria air pollutants are classified in each air basin, county, or in some cases, within a specific urbanized area. The classification is determined by comparing actual monitoring data with State and federal standards. If a pollutant concentration is lower than the standard, the area is classified as “attainment” for that pollutant. If an area exceeds the standard, the area is classified as “non-attainment” for that pollutant. If there is not enough data available to determine whether the standard is exceeded in an area, the area is designated “unclassified.” Ambient Air Quality Standards: Both the federal and State government have established ambient air quality standards for outdoor concentrations of various pollutants in order to protect public health. The federal and State ambient air quality standards have been set at levels whose concentrations could be generally harmful to human health and welfare and to protect the most sensitive persons from experiencing health impacts with a margin of safety. Applicable ambient air quality standards are identified later in this section. The air pollutants for which federal and State standards have been promulgated and which are most relevant to air quality planning and regulation in the air basins include ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, suspended particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, and lead. In addition, toxic air contaminants are of concern in Sutter County. Each of these pollutants is briefly described below.

Ozone (O3): is a gas that is formed when reactive organic gases (ROGs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX), both byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust and other processes undergo slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light wind, and warm temperature conditions are favorable to the formation of this pollutant.

Carbon Monoxide (CO): is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of fuels. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during the winter morning, with little to no wind, when surfacebased inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion engines, unlike ozone, motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the SVAB. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections.

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX): is the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases, all of which contain nitrogen and oxygen in varying amounts. Many of the nitrogen oxides are colorless and odorless.

However, one common pollutant, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) along with particles in the air can often be seen as a reddish-brown layer over many urban areas. Nitrogen oxides form when fuel is burned at high temperatures, as in a combustion process. The primary manmade sources of NOX are motor vehicles, electric utilities, and other industrial, commercial, and residential sources that burn fuels.

Nitrogen oxides can also be formed naturally.

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) and Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5): consist of extremely small, suspended particles or droplets 10 microns and 2.5 microns or smaller in diameter. Some sources of suspended particulate matter, like pollen and windstorms, occur naturally. However, in populated areas,

26 most fine suspended particulate matter is caused by road dust, diesel soot, and combustion products, abrasion of tires and brakes, and construction activities.

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2): is a colorless, extremely irritating gas or liquid. It enters the atmosphere as a pollutant mainly as a result of the burning of high sulfur-content fuel oils and coal, and from chemical processes occurring at chemical plants and refineries.

Lead: occurs in the atmosphere as particulate matter. The combustion of leaded gasoline is the primary source of airborne lead. Since the use of leaded gasoline is no longer permitted for on-road motor vehicles, lead is not a pollutant of concern in the SVAB.

Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs): are known to be highly hazardous to health, even in small quantities. TACs are airborne substances capable of causing short-term (acute) and/or long-term (chronic or carcinogenic) adverse human health effects (i.e., injury or illness). TACs can be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline stations, automobiles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, and painting operations.

TAC impacts are assessed using a maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) that estimates the probability of a potential maximally exposed individual (MEI) contracting cancer as a result of sustained exposure to toxic air contaminants over a constant period of 24 hours per day for 70 years for residential receptor locations. The CARB and local air districts have determined that any stationary source posing an incremental cancer risk to the general population (above background risk levels) equal to or greater than 10 people out of 1 million to be excessive. For stationary sources, if the incremental risk of exposure to project-related TAC emissions meets or exceeds the threshold of 10 excess cancer cases per 1 million people, the CARB and local air district require the installation of best available control technology (BACT) or maximum available control technology (MACT) to reduce the risk threshold. To assess risk from ambient air concentrations, the CARB has conducted studies to determine the total cancer inhalation risk to individuals due to outdoor toxic pollutant levels. The CARB has conducted studies to determine the total cancer inhalation risk to individuals due to outdoor toxic pollutant levels. According to the map prepared by the CARB showing the estimated inhalation cancer risk for TACs in the State of California, Sutter County has an existing estimated risk that is between 50 and 500 cancer cases per 1 million people.

A significant portion of Sutter County is within the 100 to 250 cancer cases per 1 million people range.

There is a higher risk around Yuba City where the cancer risk is as high as 500 cases per 1 million people.

There are only very small portions of the County where the cancer risk is between 50 and 100 cases. This represents the lifetime risk that between 50 and 500 people in 1 million may contract cancer from inhalation of toxic compounds at current ambient concentrations under an MEI scenario.

3.3.2. Federal Regulatory Setting
Clean Air Act: The federal Clean Air Act of 1970 (as amended in 1990) required the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop standards for pollutants considered harmful to public health or the environment. Two types of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) were established. Primary standards protect public health, while secondary standards protect public welfare, by including protection against decreased visibility, and damage to animals, crops, landscaping and vegetation, or buildings.

NAAQS have been established for six “criteria” pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and lead (Pb).

3.3.3. State Regulatory Setting

27 California Air Resources Board: The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the state agency responsible for implementing the federal and state Clean Air Acts. CARB has established California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), which include all criteria pollutants established by the NAAQS, but with additional regulations for Visibility Reducing Particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride. The proposed Project is located within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin, which includes Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Tehama, Shasta, Yolo, Sacramento, Yuba Sutter and portions of Placer, El Dorado and Solano counties. Air basins are classified as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified. The FRAQMD is comprised Sutter and Yuba Counties. Attainment is achieved when monitored ambient air quality data is in compliance with the standards for a specified pollutant. Non-compliance with an established standard will result in a nonattainment designation and an unclassified designation indicates insufficient data is available to determine compliance for that pollutant.

California Clean Air Act: The CCAA requires that all air districts in the state endeavor to achieve and maintain CAAQS for Ozone, CO, SO2, and NO2 by the earliest practical date. The CCAA specifies that districts focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources, and the act provides districts with authority to regulate indirect sources. Each district plan is required to either (1) achieve a five percent annual reduction, averaged over consecutive 3-year periods, in district-wide emissions of each non-attainment pollutant or its precursors, or (2) to provide for implementation of all feasible measures to reduce emissions. Any planning effort for air quality attainment would thus need to consider both state and federal planning requirements.

CARB Portable Equipment Registration Program: This program was designed to allow owners and operators of portable engines and other common construction or farming equipment to register their equipment under a statewide program so they may operate it statewide without the need to obtain a permit from the local air district.

U.S. EPA/CARB Off-Road Mobile Sources Emission Reduction Program: The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires CARB to achieve a maximum degree of emissions reductions from off-road mobile sources to attain State Ambient Air Quality Standards (SAAQS); off- road mobile sources include most construction equipment. Tier 1 standards for large compression-ignition engines used in off-road mobile sources went into effect in California in 1996. These standards, along with ongoing rulemaking, address emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and toxic particulate matter from diesel engines. CARB is currently developing a control measure to reduce diesel PM and NOX emissions from existing off-road diesel equipment throughout the state.

California Global Warming Solutions Act: Established in 2006, Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) requires that California’s GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This will be implemented through a statewide cap on GHG emissions, which will be phased in beginning in 2012. AB 32 requires CARB to develop regulations and a mandatory reporting system to monitor global warming emissions level.

3.3.4. Regional Regulatory Setting
Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD): The FRAQMD is a bi-county district formed in 1991 to administer local, state, and federal air quality management programs for Yuba and Sutter Counties within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. The goal of the FRAQMD is to improve air quality in the region through monitoring, evaluation, education and implementing control measures to reduce emissions from stationary sources, permitting and inspection of pollution sources, enforcement of air quality regulations and by supporting and implementing measures to reduce emissions from motor vehicles.

28 The FRAQMD adopted its Indirect Source Review guidelines document for assessment and mitigation of air quality impacts under CEQA in 1998. The guide contains criteria and thresholds for determining whether a project may have a significant adverse impact on air quality, and methods available to mitigate impacts on air quality. FRAQMD updated its Indirect Source Review Guidelines to reflect the most recent methods recommended to evaluate air quality impacts and mitigation measures for land use development projects in June 2010. This analysis uses guidance and thresholds of significance from the 2010 FRAQMD Indirect Source Review Guidelines to evaluate the proposed project’s air quality impacts.

According to FRAQMD’s 2010 Indirect Source Review Guidelines, a project would be considered to have a significant impact on air quality if it would:
▪ Generate daily construction or operational emissions that would exceed 25 pounds per day for reactive organic gases (ROG), 25 pounds per day for oxides of nitrogen (NOX), or 80 pounds per 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.

29 ▪ 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 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? Grading the site and creation of building pads will briefly create equipment exhaust and fugitive dust.

Ongoing air quality impacts will be from exhaust generated by vehicle traffic from the new residences.

Standards set by FRQAMD, CARB, and Federal agencies apply to this Project. An Indirect Source Review (ISR) application will be filed with the Air District by the developer to address emissions from construction.

FRAQMD’s 2010 Screening Criteria for Air Quality Operational Impacts indicates the threshold for significant daily emissions for single-family residential projects is 130 dwelling units. The proposed project will allow for the development of 34 new residential lots. The proposed project will not exceed FRAQMD’s established threshold for potential significant impacts. As a result, a less than significant impact is anticipated.

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.

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 on the subdivision, 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 Project construction and from vehicle traffic generated by the new residents following the construction of the single-family residences.

However, the proposed Project is not large 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

30 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.

Butte Vista School is a sensitive receptor within 1,000 feet of the Project. However, 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;
▪ 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.

With the inclusion of these standards into the construction of the subdivision, the impact on the school will 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 single-family residences and the ongoing living conditions typically do not generate objectionable odors. As such, the impact of the Project creating local offensive odors would be less than significant.

31 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
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 8.19-acre level property is within the Yuba City urbanized area with existing single-family residences on all around it. The site has been used and continues to be used as an orchard, with no native habitat remaining. 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

32 “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.
▪ 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

33 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.

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? 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 has been no special status species identified on the site or within the vicinity. 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

34 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. As this property does not fall within this area, no adverse impacts to special status species will occur.
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, over a mile 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?
The site has been previously disturbed over many years for agricultural use, and no native trees or other 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 this 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.

35 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.

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]).

36 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 § 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).

In response to AB 52, 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 ▪ Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
▪ Estom Yomeka Maidu Tribe of the Enterprise Rancheria
▪ Mechoopda Indian Tribe
▪ Pakan’yani Maidu of Strawberry Valley

37 ▪ Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians
▪ Ione Band of Miwok Indians

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 is an existing residence on the property that will be removed as part of the development. However, the residence does not appear to be old enough to be of historical significance, nor does the General Plan EIR identify it as historically significant. Therefore, the potential impact on any historical resource is considered a less than significant impact.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5.

Please see c) below for the response to this item.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? The 8.19-acre property has been utilized for many years as an orchard and a single-family residence. No formal cemeteries or other places of human internment are known to exist on the proposed Project site.

The United Auburn Indian Community responded to the City’s request for comments in an email to the City dated September 6, 2022, stating that the property is not sensitive for tribal cultural resources, so it declined to consult or comment on the project. The Tribe recommended that the “Unanticipated Discoveries” mitigation should be utilized. Since 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 3-6: 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

3.6.1 State Regulatory Setting

38 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 will 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 is 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 single-family residences, the main sources of energy consumption would be household operations and vehicle usage. However, since FRAQMD did not respond otherwise, the 34 new residences and their associated operation of vehicles is not a large enough impact on air quality to be considered significant and the project falls under FRAQMD’s thresholds of significance.

As a result, Project impacts related to energy consumption are considered less than significant.

39 b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? As the project is built-out, new home construction is required to comply with applicable state and local ordinances for energy efficiency. As a result, the Project’s impacts are considered to 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

40 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 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

41 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.

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

42 (shrink/swell). Swelling soils contain high percentages of certain kinds of clay particles that are capable of 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

43 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.

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?
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 considered to be 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

44 Implementing Policies 9.2-I-1 through 9.2-I-8, which pertain to minimizing risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic hazards, and the building codes reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level.
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 considered to be a less than significant impact.
iv. Landslides?
According to the City General Plan EIR, due to the flat topography, landslides, and mudflows are not a risk in the City limits or within the City’s Sphere of Influence. As a result, no impacts are anticipated. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Most of the 8.19 acres will 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 drainage system. However, as part of the grading and construction of the subdivision, 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?
The General Plan EIR, which includes planning of the City sphere of influence, does not identify this site or vicinity within the City sphere of influence as being located in an area having unstable soil, landslide area, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. As a result, no impacts are anticipated. 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. As a result, no impacts are anticipated. 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? All new residences to be constructed 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?

45 Due to prior ground disturbances from agricultural and residential uses it 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
Paleontological Mitigation Measure 1: Mitigation Measure 1 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

46 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.

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 propose 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?

47 Please see b) below for an answer to this item.
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 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 this subdivision will create GHG emissions due to the use of motorized construction equipment. The emissions will be from construction equipment during the construction of the apartments. Once completed, vehicle traffic generated by auto use from the new residences will contribute GHG gases. Due to the small size of the Project, it 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.

48 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,

49 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.

50 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

51 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?
Please see b) below for an answer to this item.
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 hazardous materials associated with the construction of this subdivision will be those materials associated with grading and construction equipment, which 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 anticipated hazardous waste generated by the Project would be household hazardous waste. Assuming proper and legal disposal of those wastes there should not be a significant impact from hazardous materials.

52 c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Butte Vista School is within one-quarter mile of the Project. Construction that would result from development of this subdivision would likely generate construction equipment emissions. However, the time for operating equipment on the Project site is short. Assuming proper use of the fuels, solvents, and oil for the grading and paving equipment, there should not be any significant impacts to school students.

Similarly, for household hazardous waste generated by new residences, assuming proper and legal use and disposal there will be no significant impacts to the school. 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 significant 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 not located within the adopted Sutter County Airport or the Yuba County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plans nor is it within two miles public use airport. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The Yuba City Fire and Police Departments serve this area. Neither agency has expressed concern over impacts the Project may have on any emergency response plans. Accordingly, there will be no significant impacts anticipated to result from this Project.
g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
The Project site is located within the urban area and the urban area is surrounded by irrigated agricultural lands. There are no wildlands on the site or in the immediate vicinity. As a result, a less than significant impact is anticipated from potential wildland fires.

53 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 impeded 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.

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

54 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-annual-chance 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.
▪ 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.

55 ▪ 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. Local Regulatory Setting
The City requires demonstration of a viable water supply, storm water treatment planning and drainage controls as part of all new development.

3.10.4 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. The plant also sometimes utilizes a groundwater well in addition to surface water supplies due to recent drought conditions. Since the new residences will only receive water through the City system, it is unlikely that the Project could impact the water quality in the City system.

56 All of the wastewater generated by the 34 new residences will flow into the City wastewater treatment facility which is in compliance with all state water discharge standards. The wastewater from the new residences is not expected to generate any unique type of waste that would cause the system to become out of compliance with state standards.

All storm water runoff associated with the Project will ultimately drain into the Sutter By-Pass and ultimately 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. These measures are implemented through standard project conditions.

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. As a result, a less than significant impact is anticipated. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impeded sustainable groundwater management of the basin? All of the new residences that will result from construction of this subdivision will be connected to the City’s water system. 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 in its system. As a result a less than significant impact is anticipated.
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 that 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 construct the local collection facilities and pay the appropriate drainage fees. 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 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 within the Feather River levee system.

57 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 and is provided 200 year flood protection by the levee improvements completed by the Sutter Buttes Flood Control Agency (SBFCA). 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 and a less than significant impact is anticipated. 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 and these are implemented through the City’s standard conditions of approval. 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 8.19-acre property that primarily utilized as an orchard. Around the property is primarily single-family residential uses and some remnant farming. As both the County and City General Plans have designated this area for residential development many years ago, it is expected that much of the property in the vicinity will also at some point be built out with residences or a related urban development.

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

58 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?
Please see b) below for a response to this item.
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? This subdivision will not physically divide an established community. The buildout of this property as proposed will be consistent with the General Plan. It will be similar to other residential subdivisions in the vicinity with similar street construction, landscaping, street lighting, and other subdivision improvements required by the City. As such, rather than dividing an established community, this subdivision will continue the planned street pattern, fitting in with the neighboring residential development. Some of the new residences will also be restricted to a single-story construction in order to assure neighborhood compatibility. Therefore, there will not be significant effect caused by this Project not being consistent with a land use plan or by dividing a community.

Regarding the proposed pre-annexation zoning, there are proposed changes to the criteria by which the property could be developed. Of the 12 criteria, nine of them are funding or related issues that have been superseded by other City standards or programs, so there would be no environmental impact. The elimination of the one-acre minimum lot size would be to correct a general plan consistency issue. The affordable housing issue has been superseded by the new citywide housing element policies thus no potential environmental impact. The elimination of the requirement for a Development Agreement (for affordable housing) is not an environmental issue and a less than significant impact is anticipated.

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

59 3.12.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
There are no federal regulations pertaining to mineral resources relevant to the proposed Project.

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?

60 Please see b) for a response to this item.
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 zone within the City limits, and no mineral extraction facilities currently exist within the City. The property contains no known mineral resources and there is little opportunity for mineral resource extraction. Additionally, the site has nearby residential uses, which generally are considered incompatible with mineral extraction facilities. As such the Project will not have an impact on mineral resources. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.

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

61 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, 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. The FTA has identified the human annoyance response to vibration levels as 75 VdB.

3.13.4 State Regulatory Setting

62 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.

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.

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

63 ▪ 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.
▪ 9.1-I-7 Minimize vehicular and stationary noise sources and noise emanating from temporary activities, such as construction.

Table 2: 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