Yuba City City Council
July 18, 2023

01248.0005/876584.1 55
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) that can be used for planning purposes. Flood hazard areas identified on the Flood.

Insurance Rate Map are identified as a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). SFHA are defined as the area that will be inundated by the flood event having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The 1-percent annual chance flood is also referred to as the base flood or 100-year flood.

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

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

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 56
 The most prevalent groundwater contaminants affecting California’s community drinking water wells are arsenic, nitrate, gross alpha activity, and perchlorate.

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

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

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

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

3.10.3 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Most of the City’s public water supply comes from the Feather River. The water is pumped from the river to the Water Treatment Plant located in northern Yuba City. The plant also sometimes utilizes a groundwater well in addition to surface water supplies due to recent drought conditions. Since the new residences that will be constructed will only receive water through the City system, it is unlikely that the Project could impact the water quality in the City system.

All of the wastewater generated by the Project will flow into the City wastewater treatment facility which is in compliance with all state water discharge standards. As such, wastewater is not expected to generate any unique type of waste that would cause the system to become out of compliance with state standards.

01248.0005/876584.1 57
All storm water runoff associated with the project will drain into the Live Oak Canal and ultimately into the Feather River. The water quality of the stormwater runoff is addressed through General Plan Implementing Policies 8.5-I-1 through 8.5-I-10 which require a wide range of developer and City actions involving coordination with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, protecting waterways, and following Yuba City’s adopted Best Management Practices for new construction.

With the level of oversight on the City’s water supply, and enforcement of Best Management Practices at construction sites, potential impacts on the City’s water and waste-water systems or storm water drainage system from this RZ/TPM is less than significant.
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 proposed 72 new residences will be connected to the City’s water system. While consumer 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. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned 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 the new subdivision which will ultimately drain into the Feather River. The Project will be required to construct the local collection facilities and pay the appropriate fees to Yuba City for its fair share of improvements and expansion to the existing drainage system that it will be connected too. Also, as noted above, all new construction must involve use of Best Management Practices. Assuming all required standards are met impacts from additional storm water drainage from the site will be less than significant.

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, the Project’s impacts on high-water flows within the Feather River levee system will be less than significant.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, this portion of the City is outside of the 100- year flood plain. The City is not close to the ocean or any big lakes so a seiche is unlikely to happen in or

01248.0005/876584.1 58
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, or mudflow or landslide. Therefore, there is no potential for significant impacts from any of these types of events.
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Regarding impacts on a groundwater management plan, the City primarily utilizes surface water from the Feather River for its water supply, so any impact on groundwater would be less than significant. Regarding water quality, as noted in Part a) above, all new construction is required to utilize of Best Management Practices. Assuming all required standards are met the impacts to stormwater runoff water from this subdivision will be less than significant. 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 property was previously utilized as a mobile home park but was previously cleared of all development and vegetation. The area abuts a mix of multiple-family and single-family residential uses and commercial uses. The General Plan and zoning have planned this property for duplex/half-plex development since its adoption in 2004, potentially longer. Half-plexes are not out of place within this eclectic area as their impacts due to their density and use is between single-family and multiple-family uses.

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 59
lands are to be used, where growth will occur, the density/intensity and physical form of that growth, and key design considerations.

3.11.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Physically divide an established community?
This is an infill development that is consistent with the General Plan and the use fits the zoning applied to the property (The rezoning is more to resolve a technical problem of duplexes vs. half-plexes). As the previous use of this site was a mobile home park, the proposed half-plexes are of a similar density. The half-plexes are expected to be compatible with the neighboring duplexes and multiple-family residential uses and are likely beneficial to the nearby commercial activities (more shoppers). As a result, there are no impacts anticipated by this proposed project regarding dividing an established community. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The Project is consistent with the General Plan and the uses allowed by the zoning. The proposed PD zoning is intended to allow half-plexes instead of duplexes, but the Project will still be at a lower density than the neighboring apartments. The subdivision will also meet all City design and development standards. As such there are no conflicts with policies or programs that would cause any environmental impacts.

3.12 Mineral Resources
Table 3-12: Mineral Resources
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or
other land use plan?
X

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 60
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?
See b) below.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? The property contains no known mineral resources and there is little opportunity for mineral resource extraction. 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. Additionally, the site has nearby residential uses, which generally is considered incompatible with mineral extraction facilities. As such the Project will not have an impact on mineral resources.

01248.0005/876584.1 61

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

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

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

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

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 62
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
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

01248.0005/876584.1 63
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 Plan 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:
o Screen and control noise sources, such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment,
o Increase setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings, o Retain fences, walls, and landscaping that serve as noise buffers, o Use soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows, and o Control hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup, to minimize noise impacts.
 9.1-I-3: In making a determination of impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), consider an increase of four or more dBA to be "significant" if the resulting noise level would exceed that described as normally acceptable for the affected land use in Figure 5.  9.1-I-4: Protect especially sensitive uses, including schools, hospitals, and senior care facilities, from excessive noise, by enforcing “normally acceptable” noise level standards for these uses.  9.1-I-5: Discourage the use of sound walls. As a last resort, construct sound walls along highways and arterials when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility.
 9.1-I-6: Require new noise sources to use best available control technology (BACT) to minimize noise from all sources.
 9.1-I-7: Minimize vehicular and stationary noise sources and noise emanating from temporary activities, such as construction.

01248.0005/876584.1 64
Figure 1: Noise Exposure

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

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

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

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 65
City of Yuba City Municipal Code: Title 4, Chapter 17, Section 4-17.10(e) of the Yuba City Municipal Code prohibits the operation of noise‐generating construction equipment before 6:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. daily, except Sunday and State or federal holidays when the prohibited time is before 8:00 a.m. and after 9:00 p.m.

3.13.6 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
A temporary increase in noise will occur during construction of the subdivision followed by noise from the construction of the residences. All of this will primarily occur during daylight hours, Monday through Saturday. Noise from construction activities would contribute to the noise environment in the immediate Project vicinity. This could have an impact on existing nearby residences. Activities involved in construction could generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in Table 2, ranging from 79 to 91 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, without feasible noise control (e.g., mufflers) and ranging from 75 to 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, with feasible noise control. However, due to the limited duration of the construction activities, that the construction will occur during the less sensitive daylight hours, the noise effects from this activity are expected to be less than significant.

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

Without Feasible Noise Control
(2) With Feasible Noise Control
Dozer or Tractor 80 75
Excavator 88 80
Scraper 88 80
Front End Loader 79 75
Backhoe 85 75
Grader 85 75
Truck 91 75
(1) US Environmental Protection Agency. “Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances.” Figure IV.H‐4. 1971. (2) Feasible noise control includes the use of intake mufflers, exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds operating in accordance with manufacturers specifications Once constructed the residences are generally not considered to be significant noise generators. As such the new residences are not expected in any significant way to raise the ambient noise levels in the surrounding residential neighborhood.

For these reasons, the noise impacts from adding new residences to a residential area is expected to be less than significant.
b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?

01248.0005/876584.1 66
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods employed. Operation of construction equipment causes ground vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Table 3 describes the typical construction equipment vibration levels.

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

Vibration levels of construction equipment in Table 3 are at a distance of 25 feet from the equipment. As noted above, construction activities are limited to daylight hours. Infrequent construction-related vibrations would be short-term and temporary, and operation of heavy-duty construction equipment would be intermittent throughout the day during construction. Therefore, with the short duration of grading activities associated with the Project, the approximate reduction of 6 VdB for every doubling of distance from the source, and consideration of the distance to the nearest existing residences, the temporary impact to any uses in the vicinity of the project will be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The Project is not within an airport land use plan. There are no public or private airports or airfields located in this vicinity. Therefore, this impact is not applicable to the Project.

01248.0005/876584.1 67

3.14 Population and Housing
Table 4-14: Population and Housing
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

3.14.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
The property was previously utilized as a mobile home park but has been cleared of all development and vegetation. The area abuts a mix of multiple-family and single-family residential uses and commercial uses. The General Plan and zoning have planned this property for residential densities consistent with duplex/half-plex development. Half-plexes are not out of place within the exiting eclectic area as their level impacts due to their density and use is between single-family and multiple-family uses.

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

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

Housing elements are prepared approximately every five years (eight following implementations of Senate Bill [SB] 375), following timetables set forth in the law. The housing element must identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs and “make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community,” among other requirements. The City adopted its current Housing Element in 2013.

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

01248.0005/876584.1 68
In the greater Sacramento region, which includes the City of Yuba City, SACOG has the responsibility of developing and approving an RHNA and a Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) every eight years (Government Code, Section 65580 et seq.). This document has a central role of distributing the allocation of housing for every county and city in the SACOG region. Housing needs are assessed for very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate households As described above, SACOG is the association of local governments that includes Yuba City, along with other jurisdictions comprising the six counties in the greater Sacramento region. In addition to preparing the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the region, SACOG approves the distribution of affordable housing in the region through its RHNP. SACOG also assists in planning for transit, bicycle networks, clean air and serves as the Airport Land Use Commission for the region.

3.14.5 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The General Plan designates this property for this type of residential use and density, and all City services are available to the property. Further, the proposed use is compatible with neighboring development.

Therefore, there will not be unplanned growth resulting from this Project an no impacts are anticipated. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
There was a mobile home park on this site that was removed prior to this Project proposal. As such there will not be any residences lost as a result of this Project.

01248.0005/876584.1 69

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

3.15.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Law enforcement for the proposed new development will be provided by the Yuba City Police Department. Fire protection is provided by the Yuba City Fire Department. Nearby parks and other urban services that may be utilized by new residents, including streets, water, sewer stormwater drainage will also be provided by Yuba City. The nearby Tierra Buena School and River Valley High School are part of the Yuba City Unified School District.

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 70
apparatus access roads, fire safety during construction and demolition, and wildland urban interface areas.

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

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

3.15.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire Protection: The Fire Department reviewed the proposal and did not express concerns.

Since all new housing development pays development impact fees intended to offset the cost of additional fire facilities and equipment costs resulting from this growth, the impacts on fire services will be less than significant.
ii. Police Protection: The Police Department reviewed the proposal and did not express concerns. Since all new housing development pays impact fees that intended to offset the cost of additional police facilities and equipment resulting from this growth the impacts on police services will be less than significant.
iii. Schools: New residences will pay the Yuba City Unified School District adopted school impact fees that are intended to provide the new resident’s fair share for expanded or new educational facilities needed to accommodate this new growth. Therefore, the impact on schools will be less than significant.
iv. Parks: The City charges a park impact fee for each new residence that is utilized to purchase parkland and construct new parks. Therefore, the impact on parks from this project will be less than significant.
v. Other Public Facilities: The Project will be connected to City water and wastewater systems.

Each new residential connection to those systems must pay connection fees that are utilized for expansion of the respective treatment plants. The City also collects impact fees for County services that are provided to the new residences, such as the library system and justice system. Therefore, the impact on other public facilities will be less than significant.

01248.0005/876584.1 71

3.16 Recreation
Table 3-16: Recreation
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
X

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

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

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

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

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 72

3.16.5 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? See b) below.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? This Project’s 72 new residences will have access to the City’s park system, thus increasing park usage.

The City, however, charges a park impact fee for each new residence, to be utilized to purchase parkland and construct new parks in proportion to growth of the community. This fee is intended to offset the impact on parks as it provides for expansion of the City’s park system. There will be a development agreement accompanying this subdivision that, if approved, will provide additional funding for neighborhood parks. Therefore, due to the park fees the impact on parks from this Project will be less than significant.

3.17 Transportation/Traffic
Table 4-17: Transportation Recreation
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X

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

Several federal regulations govern transportation issues. They include:

01248.0005/876584.1 73
 Title 49, CFR, Sections 171-177 (49 CFR 171-177), governs the transportation of hazardous materials, the types of materials defined as hazardous, and the marking of the transportation vehicles.
 Title 49 CFR 350-399, and Appendices A-G, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, address safety considerations for the transport of goods, materials, and substances over public highways.

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

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

3.17.3. Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
The proposed subdivision is within an existing suburban area, much of which is already built out. The sole ingress and egress to this property is Walton Avenue. There was formerly a mobilehome park on this property which generated similar amounts of traffic onto Walton Avenue. As such, any increase in auto traffic will be minimal. Walton Avenue and the nearest intersections, Walton Avenue/Bridge Street and Walton Avenue/Franklin Road are within acceptableCity level of service standards and are not expected to deteriorate below these standards by the traffic generated by this proposal. This Project will also be providing all pedestrian and bicycle improvements onto Walton Avenue. Since the traffic generated by this Project meets all City standards, traffic impacts on Walton Avenue and neighboring intersections will be less than significant.
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? This CEQA section describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts in terms of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). SACOG, in “Technical Advisory: On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA” provides two criteria for which if the project meets either of them, the traffic impacts

01248.0005/876584.1 74
are considered less than significant. One criterion is that the project generates less than 110 vehicle trips per day is considered to be less than a significant impact. The Project will exceed this criterion, so it is not considered any further in this review. The second criterion is that if a project, on a per capita or per employee basis, the VMT will be at least 15 percent below that of existing development is a reasonable threshold for determining significance. SACOG also has released a draft document (SB 743 regional screening maps) that provides mapping data indicating the average miles traveled for different areas within and around Yuba City. The range of the categories are:
• Less than 50% of regional average
• 50-85% of regional average
• 85-100% of the regional average
• 115-150% of the regional average
• More than 150% of the regional average
Per the SACOG maps for the Project area, the estimated average vehicle distance traveled per residence is in the 50-85% range of the norm. In other words, per the SACOG regional screening maps this subdivision is located in an area that meets the 15 percent vehicle trip reduction criteria. Thus, the transportation impacts from this subdivision are consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063.4(b) and it follows that the traffic impacts generated by this project are considered to be less than significant. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? As this Project will replace a mobile home park on the property the quantity of traffic will not be significantly different. The Public Works review of the Project did not indicate that there are any street design issues on nearby streets. Therefore, any increase in street hazards generated by this Project are less than significant.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
The Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the Project plans and did not express concerns about emergency access to the property. Therefore, the impacts on emergency services will be less than significant.

01248.0005/876584.1 75

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Table 3-18: Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project cause of substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
X
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

X

3.18.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
This section describes the affected environment and regulatory setting for Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs). The following analysis
 Ethnographic overview of the Nisenan culture.
 Environmental Impact Report for the City of Yuba City General Plan (2004).  Consultation record with California Native American tribes under Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18.

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 76
Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines TCRs for the purpose of CEQA as:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; and/or
b. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; and/or
c. a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

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

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

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

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

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

The basic subsistence strategy of the Nisenan was seasonally mobile hunting and gathering. Acorns, the primary staple of the Nisenan diet, were gathered in the valley along with seeds, buckeye, salmon, insects, and a wide variety of other plants and animals. During the warmer months, people moved to mountainous areas to hunt and collect food resources, such as pine nuts. Bedrock and portable mortars and pestles were used to process acorns. Nisenan settlement patterns were oriented to major river drainages and tributaries. In the foothills and lower Sierra Nevada, Nisenan located their villages in large flats or ridges near major streams. These villages tended to be smaller than the villages in the valley (Wilson and Towne 1978:389–390).

Trade provided other valuable resources that were not normally available in the Nisenan environment.

The Valley Nisenan received black acorns, pine nuts, manzanita berries, skins, bows, and bow wood from the Hill Nisenan to their east, in exchange for fish, roots, grasses, shells, beads, salt, and feathers (Wilson

01248.0005/876584.1 77
and Towne 1978). To obtain, process, and utilize these material resources, the Nisenan had an array of tools to assist them. Wooden digging sticks, poles for shaking acorns loose, and baskets of primarily willow and redbud were used to gather vegetal resources. Stone mortars and pestles were used to process many of the vegetal foods; baskets, heated stones, and wooden stirring sticks were used for cooking. Basalt and obsidian were primary stone materials used for making knives, arrow and spear points, clubs, arrow straighteners, and scrapers. (Wilson and Towne 1978.)
Nisenan settlement locations depended primarily on elevation, exposure, and proximity to water and other resources. Permanent villages were usually located on low rises along major watercourses. Village size ranged from three houses to 40 or 50 houses. Larger villages often had semi-subterranean dance houses that were covered in earth and tule or brush and had a central smoke hole at the top and an entrance that faced east (Wilson and Towne 1978:388). Early Nisenan contact with Europeans appears to have been limited to the southern reaches of their territory. Spanish expeditions intruded into Nisenan territory in the early 1800s. In the two or three years following the gold discovery, Nisenan territory was overrun by immigrants from all over the world. Gold seekers and the settlements that sprang up to support them were nearly fatal to the native inhabitants. Survivors worked as wage laborers and domestic help and lived on the edges of foothill towns. Despite severe depredations, descendants of the Nisenan still live in their original land area and maintain and pass on their cultural identity.

3.18.4 Summary of Native American Consultation
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
 Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians
 Ione Band of Miwok Indians

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

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

Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change to a TCR, defined in Section 21074 as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a Native American tribe that are:
 Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources;

01248.0005/876584.1 78
 Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision k of Section 5010.1; and/or
 Determined by the City to be significant, as supported by substantial evidence, including:
o A cultural landscape with a geographically defined boundary; o A historical resource as described in Section 21084.1 (either eligible for or listed on the California Register of Historical Resources or listed on a local registry); o A unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2; and/or o A non-unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2.

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

3.18.7 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k).

See b) below.
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.

In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

The City solicited consultation with culturally affiliated California Native American tribes (regarding the proposed project in accordance with AB 52 to which no tribes responded. No known TCRs have been identified (as defined in Section 21074) within the proposed project area. Given the level of previous disturbance within the Project area, it is not expected that any TCRs would remain. However, during grading and excavation activities, there is a potential to encounter native soils, which may contain undiscovered TCRs. In the unlikely event resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities that are associated with Native American culture, compliance with the TCR Mitigation Measures provided below would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level.

3.18.8 Tribal Cultural Mitigation Measure
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation 1: Unanticipated Discoveries: If any suspected TCRs are discovered during ground disturbing construction activities, all work shall cease within 100 feet of the find, or an agreed upon distance based on the project area and nature of the find. A Tribal Representative from a California Native American Tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated

01248.0005/876584.1 79
with a geographic area shall be immediately notified and shall determine if the find is a TCR (PRC 21074). The Tribal Representative will make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment as necessary.

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

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 80

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Table 3-19: Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water or wastewater
treatment or storm drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
projected demand in addition to the existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
X

3.19.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment
Water: The water supply source for the City is surface water from the Feather River with use of a backup groundwater well. The City of Yuba City is a public water agency with approximately 18,045 connections.

City policy only allows areas within the City limits to be served by the surface water system.

Wastewater: Yuba City owns, operates, and maintains the wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal system that provides sewer service to approximately 60,000 residents and numerous businesses. The remainder of the residents and businesses in the Yuba City Sphere of Influence (SOI) are currently serviced by private septic systems. In the early 1970s, the City’s original sewage treatment plant was abandoned, and the current Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) was constructed.

Reuse and Recycling: Solid waste generated in Yuba City is collected by Recology Yuba-Sutter. Recology offers residential, commercial, industrial, electronic, and hazardous waste collection, processing, recycling, and disposal, as well as construction and demolition waste processing, diversion, and transfer to a disposal facility. The City’s municipal solid waste is delivered to the Ostrom Road Landfill; a Statepermitted solid waste facility that provides a full range of transfer and diversion services. As of June 2021,

01248.0005/876584.1 81
the Recology Ostrom Road Landfill Remaining Site Net Airspace is 33,764,000 cy; and has a remaining capacity of 21,297,000 tons; and remaining landfill service life is 53 years.

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

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

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

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

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

Regional Water Quality Control Boards: The primary responsibility for the protection of water quality in California rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The State Board sets statewide policy for the implementation of state and federal laws and regulations. The Regional Boards adopt and implement Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans), which recognize regional differences in natural water quality, actual and potential beneficial uses, and water quality problems associated with human activities.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit: As authorized by the Clean Water Act (CWA), the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into water of the United States. In

01248.0005/876584.1 82
California, it is the responsibility of Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to preserve and enhance the quality of the state’s waters through the development of water quality control plans and the issuance of waste discharge requirements (WDRs). WDRs for discharges to surface waters also serve as NPDES permits.

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

3.19.4 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water or wastewater treatment or storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? See b) below.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? The Project will connect to both the City’s water and wastewater treatment systems. The Yuba City Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) has available capacity to accommodate new growth. The WWTF current permitted capacity is 10.5 mgd (annual average dry weather flow). The existing average influent flow to the WWTF is approximately 6 mgd. The remaining treatment capacity at the WWTF can be used to accommodate additional flow from the future developments.

The City’s Water Treatment plant (WTP), for which its primary source of water is from the Feather River, also has adequate capacity to accommodate this Project. The WTP uses two types of treatment systems, conventional and membrane treatment. The permitted capacity of the conventional WTP is 24 million gallons per day (mgd). The membrane treatment system has a permitted capacity of 12 mgd. Water produced from the conventional and the membrane treatment plants are blended for chlorine disinfection. Operating the conventional and membrane treatment facilities provides a total WTP capacity of 36 mgd. The City is permitted to draw 30 mgd from the Feather River. The current maximum day use is 26 mgd. The City also has an on-site water well at the water plant that supplements the surface water when needed.

For both facilities there are City adopted master plans to expand those plants to the extent that they will accommodate the overall growth of the City.

The ongoing expansions of those plants to accommodate growth beyond this Project are funded by the connection fees paid by each new connection. Therefore, the impact on the water and wastewater treatment facilities will be less than significant.

Stormwater drainage in this area is provided by Yuba City. A drainage analysis was prepared for this Project and reviewed by Public Works Dept., determining that the stormwater drainage system was adequate for this Project, and also that the developer must pay fees for their fair share of future improvements to the system. As such, the impacts on the stormwater drainage system will be less than significant.

The extension of electric power facilities, natural gas facilities and telecommunication facilities are provided by private companies, none of which have voiced concerns over the extensions of their services

01248.0005/876584.1 83
to this Project site. With these considerations the impact on these facilities are expected to be less than significant.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projected demand in addition to the existing commitments? See Parts a) and b), above.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

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

3.20 Wildfire
Table 3-20: Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

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

01248.0005/876584.1 84

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

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

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

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

Impacts of the project related to these issues would be less than significant.

01248.0005/876584.1 85

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

3.21.1 Impact Assessment/Environmental Consequences:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number, or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
The land was stripped many years ago of native vegetation and more recently a mobilehome park was removed from the property. The property is currently vacant of buildings and vegetation and there are no waterways or nearby riparian areas. Therefore, this Project will not significantly degrade the quality of the natural environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate an important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

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

01248.0005/876584.1 86
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects.

The traffic generated by the development is within what was anticipated in the General Plan which considered anticipated future growth of the area. The City has adequate water and wastewater capacity, and the Project will be extending those services to the site. Stormwater drainage will also meet all City standards. As this Project is within the urban area there will not be a loss of agricultural land. The school district has not indicated that they lack capacity to provide proper educational facilities to the new students. The FRAQMD also did not comment that the project would create any significant cumulative impacts on air quality. Therefore, there are no impacts that will be individually limited but that will create significant cumulative impacts.
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The proposed Project in and of itself will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

Construction-related air quality, noise, and hazardous materials exposure impacts would occur for a very short period and only be a minor impact during that time period. Therefore, the proposed Project with its mitigation measures will not have any direct or indirect significant adverse impacts on humans.

01248.0005/876584.1 87

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sutter County General Plan.

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

Yuba Sutter Transit Route Map.

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

California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2016. EnviroStor. Available at http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/

01248.0005/876584.1 88
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program – Sutter County Important Farmland Map.

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

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

City of Yuba City Wastewater Master Plan.

Sutter County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, April 1994.

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

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

01248.0005/876584.1 89
Appendix A

MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PLAN
West Walton Village
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration EA 23-02 For Tentative subdivision Map 23-01 and Rezoning PD18

01248.0005/876584.1 90
City of Yuba City

MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PLAN
West Walton Village
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration EA 23-02 For Tentative subdivision Map 23-01 and Rezoning PD18
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 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
Developer Public Works
Dept.,
Development
Services
Dept.

During
construction
phase

01248.0005/876584.1 91
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
Gases
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation 1: The site
grading process 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.

3.5. Cultural
Resources;

3.18. Tribal
Cultural
Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation 1:

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

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

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

Developer Public Works
Dept.,
Development
Services Dept
During
construction
phase

01248.0005/876584.1 92
The contractor shall implement any
measures deemed by the CEQA lead
agency to be necessary and feasible to
preserve in place, avoid, or minimize
impacts to the resource, including but
limited to, facilitating the appropriate
tribal treatment of the find, as
necessary. Treatment that preserves or
restores the cultural character and
integrity of a Tribal Cultural Resource
may include Tribal monitoring, culturally
appropriate recovery of cultural objects,
and reburial of cultural objects or
cultural soil.

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

Agenda Item 6

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Administration Department
Presentation By: Diana Langley, City Manager
Summary
Subject: Designation of Voting Delegates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference in September 2023
Recommendation: Designate Mayor Wade Kirchner to serve as the Voting Delegate for the 2023 League of California Cities Annual Conference in September 2023, and designate Vice Mayor Shon Harris to serve as an alternate Fiscal Impact: $600 for conference registration per attendee Purpose:

To ensure that Yuba City has a voice regarding policy direction at the 2023 League of California Cities (LOCC) Annual Conference.

Council's Strategic Goal:

As the LOCC is influential in regard to legislative affairs, the City Council's participation in the Annual Conference addresses all of the Council's Strategic Goals.

Background:

The LOCC Annual Conference is being held September 20-22, 2023, in Sacramento. An important part of the Annual Conference is the Annual Business Meeting, scheduled for Friday, September 22nd.

At this meeting, the LOCC membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish LOCC policy.

Analysis:

In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, the City Council must designate a voting delegate.

An alternate voting delegate may also be appointed. The LOCC's bylaws state that designating a voting delegate and alternate must be done by City Council action and cannot be accomplished by the individual action of the Mayor or City Manager. The names of the voting delegate and alternate must be submitted to the LOCC by August 28th.

Fiscal Impact:

The registration fee for the LOCC Annual Conference is $600 per attendee, and funds were included in the FY 23/24 budget for the Mayor and Vice Mayor to attend the Annual Conference.

Alternatives:

Designate another Councilmember as the Voting Delegate or alternate.

Recommendation:

Designate Mayor Wade Kirchner to serve as the Voting Delegate for the 2023 League of California Cities Annual Conference in September 2023, and designate Vice Mayor Shon Harris to serve as an alternate.

Attachments:

1. Attachment 1 - LOCC Annual Conference Voting Delegate Packet Prepared By: Submitted By:

Diana Langley
City Manager
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org DATE: Wednesday, June 21, 2023
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Sept. 20-22, 2023, Sacramento SAFE Credit Union Convention Center
Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy.

Taking place on Sept. 22, the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions.

To cast a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official.

Please complete the attached voting delegate form and email it to Cal Cities office no later than Monday, August 28.

New this year, we will host a pre-conference information session for voting delegates to explain their role. Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide preconference communications with voting delegates.

Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference.

Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. When completing the attached Voting Delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken or have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council.

Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone.

Council Action Advised by August 28, 2023

Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration is open on the Cal Cities website.

For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly.

Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.

Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the SAFE Credit Union Convention Center in Sacramento, will be open at the following times:

Wednesday, Sept. 20, 8:00 a.m.- 6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Sept. 21, 7:30 a.m.- 4:00 p.m. On Friday, Sept. 22, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting.

The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.

Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.

Once again, thank you for completing the voting delegate and alternate form and returning it to Cal Cities office by Monday, Aug. 28. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at [email protected].

Attachments:
• General Assembly Voting Guidelines
• Voting Delegate/Alternate Form
• Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly

1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.

6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.

CITY: ________________________________________
2023 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM
Please complete this form and return it to Cal Cities office by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates.

To vote at the General Assembly, voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council.

Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the General Assembly. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the voting delegate desk.

1. VOTING DELEGATE
Name:

Title:

2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _______________________________
Email: ______________________________

3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _____________________________

ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES OR ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s).

Name: ____________________________________ Email: _________________________________ Mayor or City Clerk: ________________________ Date: __________ Phone: ________________ (circle one) (signature) Please complete and email this form to [email protected] by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Sixty days before the
Annual Conference and
Expo, Cal Cities members
may submit policy
proposals on issues of
importance to cities. The
resolution must have the concurrence
of at least five additional member cities
or individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions
Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure that we are representing California cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policy that erodes local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how Resolutions and the General Assembly works.

The petitioned resolution
is an alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during the
annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of member
cities, and submitted to the Cal Cities
President at least 24 hours before the
beginning of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities President
assigns general resolutions
to policy committees where
members review, debate,
and recommend positions for
each policy proposal. Recommendations are
forwarded to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions
Committee includes
representatives from
each Cal Cities diversity
caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly
is a meeting of the
collective body of
all voting delegates —
one from every
member city.

Seven Policy
Committees meet
throughout the year to
review and recommend
positions to take on
bills and regulatory
proposals. Policy
committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division,
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee.

Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also
considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a
member-informed
process, grounded
in the voices and
experiences of city
officials throughout
the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions Committee
considers all resolutions.

General Resolutions approved1
by either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee
are next considered by the General
Assembly. General resolutions not approved,
or referred for further study by both a policy
committee and the Resolutions Committee
do not go the General Assembly. All
Petitioned Resolutions are considered by the
General Assembly, unless disqualified.2
• Voting delegates will receive increased communications to prepare them for their role during the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly will take place earlier to allow more time for debate and discussion.
• Improvements to the General Assembly process will make it easier for voting delegates to discuss and debate resolutions.

What’s new in 2023?
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f).

Agenda Item 7

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;Public Works & Development Services Director
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: SACOG Fund Exchange Agreement (Authorization to execute) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Fund Exchange Agreement with the Sacramento Area Council of Governments agreeing to have federal funds be de-programmed from the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project and re-programmed to the Walton Avenue Complete Streets project
Fiscal Impact: Potential schedule and cost savings for City and outside agencies resulting from elimination of federal requirements for one City project.

Purpose:

To improve efficiencies in managing, designing, and constructing transportation projects receiving Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) grant funding.

Council’s Strategic Goal:

This project addresses the City Council’s Strategic Goal of improving the City’s infrastructure.

Background:

The City received grant funding for the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project in the amount of $250,000 from SACOG in the 2019 Funding Round. The scope of this project involves completing the environmental and design phases of improvements to Bridge Street between State Route 99 and Gray Avenue.

The Walton Avenue Complete Streets project received $3,750,000 from SACOG in the 2021 Regional Funding Program and $300,000 in Community Design Grant funds re-programmed from the Butte House Road Complete Streets project. It also has at least $1,000,000 of local funds committed to it for the construction phase. This amount is susceptible to required increases during the design of the project.

SACOG offers its member agencies the opportunity to reduce the number of its federalized projects. A benefit of this program is that it could enable the City to save money and time by delivering more projects with local funds and eliminate any federal funding requirements. For any projects that already

have federal funds, adding more federal funds will not affect the delivery or timeline.

Analysis:

Rather than deliver the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project with Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) funds, staff requests to de-program those funds and reprogram the project with local funds. SACOG would, in turn, re-program the Walton Avenue Complete Streets project with an additional $250,000 in federal funds. By exchanging the grant funding from the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project with the local funds from Walton Avenue Complete Streets project, the local funding required to deliver the Walton Avenue Complete Streets project will be reduced by $250,000 while also eliminating the federal requirements for the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project.

Staff is requesting authorization for the City Manager to execute the Fund Exchange Agreement with SACOG agreeing to the transfer of funds.

Fiscal Impact:

The transfer of funds between the two projects results in no net fiscal impact. However, there is potential schedule and cost savings for City and outside agencies resulting from elimination of federal requirements for the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project.

Alternatives:

Do not authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement to have funds transferred and deliver the projects as currently programmed.

Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Fund Exchange Agreement with Sacramento Area Council of Governments agreeing to have federal funds de-programmed from the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project and re-programmed to the Walton Avenue Complete Streets project.

Attachments:

1. Resolution - SACOG Fund Exchange Agreement
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Kevin Bradford
Deputy Public Works Director - Engineering
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. _______

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FUND EXCHANGE AGREEMENT WITH

THE SACRAMENTO AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SACOG) AGREEING TO HAVE

FEDERAL FUNDS BE DE-PROGRAMMED FROM THE BRIDGE STREET RECONSTRUCTION

DEVELOPMENT PHASE PROJECT AND RE-PROGRAMMED TO THE WALTON COMPLETE

STREETS PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City (City) received grant funding from SACOG in the 2019 Funding Round in the amount of $250,000 through the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program for the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project; and WHEREAS, the City received grant funding from SACOG in the 2021 Regional Funding Round in the amount of $3.75 million for the Walton Avenue Complete Streets project; and WHEREAS, SACOG offers a Fund Exchange Agreement to improve the project delivery process for the two aforementioned projects by transferring the grant funding from the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project, which would allow the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project to be delivered without any federal funding requirements; and WHEREAS, completing a project entirely with local funds would potentially save time and money, as well as benefit the public; and
WHEREAS, SACOG requires the City to formally execute the Fund Exchange Agreement for transfer of funds in order to facilitate the programming changes.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Yuba City as follows:

1. The City Council finds that all of the facts set forth in the recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.

2. The City Council of the City of Yuba City does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute the Fund Exchange Agreement (attached as Exhibit A) with the Sacramento Area Council of Governments requesting that federal funds be de-programmed from the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project and re-programmed to the Walton Avenue Complete Streets project.

3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

The foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Yuba City at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18 th day of July, 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

_________________________
Wade Kirchner, Mayor
Ciara Wakefield, City Clerk Administrator

APPROVED AS TO FORM
COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY:
_________________________
Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Attachment(s):

A. Exhibit A – Fund Exchange Agreement

EXHIBIT A

June 28, 2023
RE: Fund Exchange for City of Yuba Projects
[Date]
James Corless, Executive Director
Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG)
1415 L Street, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Fund Exchange for Yuba City Projects
Dear Mr. Corless:

This letter confirms the agreement between Yuba City (City) and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) for a fund exchange between projects to consolidate federal funds into fewer projects.

SACOG ID Project Name SACOG Funds Local Funds
SUT56276 Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase $250,000 SUT56278 Walton Avenue Complete Streets $250,000
Total Amount $250,000 $250,000
Background
Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase
This project received $250,000 from SACOG in the 2019 Funding Round. Rather than deliver this with Surface Transportation Block Grant Program funds, the City would like to remove the $250,000 of STBGP and replace them with local funds. SACOG would, in turn take back the $250,000 of STBGP funds and program the funds to Walton Avenue Complete Streets (SUT56278).

Walton Avenue Complete Streets
This project received $4,050,000 from SACOG in the 2021 Regional Funding Program. It also has at least $1,000,000 of local funds committed to it for the construction phase. Rather than deliver the project with the $1,000,000 of local funds, the City would like to transfer $250,000 of the local funds to the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project (SUT56278). The $250,000 of local funds would be replaced with $250,000 of STBGP funds from the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project (SUT56276).

Purpose of Fund Exchange
The primary purpose of this agreement is to allow City to reduce the number of its federalized projects.

A benefit is that it could enable the City to save money and time by delivering the Bridge Street Reconstruction Development Phase project with local funds. Since Walton Avenue Complete Streets is already funded with federal funds, adding more funds will not affect its delivery or timeline.

June 28, 2023
RE: Fund Exchange for City of Yuba Projects
Agreement
The City and SACOG now agree that SACOG will program $250,000 in federal funds as follows:

1. De-program $250,000 in STBGP funds from SUT56276,

2. Program $250,000 in STBG to SUT26278.

Any unspent STBG on SUT26278 would be eligible for the City’s use on other projects, contingent upon consistency with SACOG’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan and timely delivery. SACOG agrees to complete this Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) revision by July 20, 2023.

The City agrees to the terms of this agreement.
_______________________________________ _________________________________ Diana Langley Date
City Manager
Yuba City
I, the undersigned, concur with and agree to the terms stipulated in the above letter. _______________________________________ _________________________________ James Corless Date
SACOG
Executive Director

Agenda Item 8

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: Anneka Sewer Replacement Project (Plans and Specifications) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution adopting a CEQA Class 1 Categorical Exemption, approving the plans and specifications for the Anneka Sewer Replacement Project and authorizing advertisement for bids on the project
Fiscal Impact: Engineer’s Estimate: $475,000 – Account No. 1104 (Recurring Collection or Rehabilitation System Projects)
Purpose:

To maintain the City’s wastewater collection system operational effectiveness through proactive rehabilitation and major maintenance.

Council's Strategic Goal:

This project addresses the City Council's Strategic Goal of improving the City's Infrastructure.

Background:

The existing wastewater collection system in Yuba City is aging. In some cases, pipelines are beyond their service life and at or near failure. In an ongoing effort to replace failing sewer pipelines, a list of priority locations has been developed. This list combines pipeline segments highlighted on the 2020 Wastewater Master Plan and pipeline segments actively monitored by the City’s maintenance crews.

Public Works maintenance crews utilize a Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) truck to perform Television Inspections (TVI) of pipelines. Prior to performing TVI, the pipeline is cleaned via a process known as Hydro-cleaning which uses highly pressurized air and water jets to spray the pipe interior to remove debris.

Through ongoing maintenance of the sewer pipeline on Anneka Lane, Public Works Staff discovered the existing Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) segment contains large sections of pipe that are missing, cracked, sagging, and/or deteriorated to a point that further maintenance activity is impossible.

The proposed project would replace approximately 340 linear feet (LF) of VCP sewer pipe on Anneka Lane and install new manholes where appropriate.

Analysis:

The plans, specifications, and estimate for the Anneka Lane Sewer Replacement Project have been completed by Public Works staff. With Council approval of the plans and specifications and authorization to bid, staff anticipates the following schedule to complete the project:

Advertise for bid: July 2023
Open bids: August 2023
Award contract: September 2023
Start of construction: October 2023
Complete construction: November 2023
The plans and specifications for the project are on file in the Public Works Department at City Hall and at www.yubacity.net/publicworksplans for review. The City’s Public Works Department will perform construction management and inspection.

Fiscal Impact:

The estimated total project cost is approximately $475,000. This estimate includes 20% contingency.

Account No. 1104 (Recurring Collection or Rehabilitation System Projects) has approximately $928,000. Detailed fiscal impacts and any appropriate transfers of funds will be presented to Council at the time of award based on actual bid amounts.

Environmental:

Staff has determined that this project falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, as the replacement of existing sewer pipeline is defined as a repair, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing public facilities involving negligible or no expansion.

Further, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set form in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to this project.

Alternatives:

Do not approve the plans and specifications and delay the project. This may result in significant impacts to sewer service to City residents on Anneka Lane.

1. Direct staff to modify the proposed plans and specifications.

Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution adopting a CEQA Class 1 Categorical Exemption, approving the plans and specifications for the Anneka Lane Sewer Replacement Project and authorizing advertisement for bids on the project.

Attachments:

1. Anneka Sewer Replacement RESOLUTION 23-06

2. Exhibit A - Project Exhibit
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Nick Menezes
Assistant Engineer
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. _________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY ADOPTING A CEQA CLASS 1 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, APPROVING

THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ANNEKA LANE SEWER
REPLACEMENT PROJECT (23-06), AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT

FOR BIDS ON THE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department intends to solicit bids for construction of the Anneka Lane Sewer Replacement Project (23-06) (Project).

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved and ordered by the City Council of Yuba City as follows:

1. The City has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project relative to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and the City Council finds and determines that the project falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, as the replacement of existing sewer pipeline is defined as a repair, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing public facilities involving negligible or no expansion. Further, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set form in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to this project.

2. The plans and specifications for the Project are approved.

3. The Public Works Department is hereby authorized and directed to advertise for bids for the Project.

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 18th day of July 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(s):

A. Exhibit A – Project Exhibit

ANNEKA LANE STATE ROUTE 99

BRIDGE STREET

FRANKLIN AVE WALTON AVE

EXHIBIT A

PROJECT EXHIBIT
NTS

PROJECT LOCATION

Agenda Item 9

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;Public Works and Development Services Director
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project (Award Construction Contract) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution awarding a construction contract to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. of Livermore, CA in the amount of their total base bid plus bid alternative of $347,536.00 for the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project
Fiscal Impact: $441,036.00 – Total Project Cost
CIP Account No. 1220 (ADA Public Facilities Sidewalk Improvements) $347,536.00 – Contract Award Amount
$76,000.00 – (22%) Construction Contingency
$17,500.00 – (5%) Construction Management
Purpose:

To award the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project to continue to improve and maintain the City's infrastructure.

Council’s Strategic Goal:

This project addresses the City Council’s Strategic Goal of improving the City’s infrastructure.

Background:

On July 17, 2012, the City adopted the ADA Self-Evaluation & Transition Plan for the Public Right of Way (Transition Plan). This Transition Plan identifies physical obstacles in Yuba City’s public right-ofway facilities that limit accessibility of activities to individuals with disabilities. In addition, the Transition Plan describes methods to achieve ADA compliance and identifies priorities for implementation.

Using the priorities noted in the Transition Plan, as well as complaints logged through the City’s YC311 system and directly with the Public Works Department, the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project scope of work includes the upgrade of 27 pedestrian access ramps and 497 square feet of sidewalk at locations shown on Attachment 2. This is also a part of the general repairs necessary to the upkeep of the City’s sidewalk, curbs, and gutters and addresses City Council’s Strategic Goal of improving the City’s infrastructure.

On May 16, 2023, Council approved the plans and specifications for the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project and authorized the Public Works Department to advertise for bids.

Analysis:

The ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project was advertised for bids beginning May 25, 2023.

Plans and specifications were published on Public Purchase and provided to local builder/contractor exchanges. On June 20, 2023, four (4) bids were received and opened by the City Clerk. The bid opening list and Engineer’s Estimate are shown below.

Company Total Base Bid

1. FBD Vanguard $323,876.00

2. MCE Corporation $327,372.00

3. Central Valley Engineering & Asphalt, Inc. $416,669.00

4. Hyatt Contracting $428,274.00
Engineers Estimate: $325,000.00
The project also contained an alternate bid schedule which included the construction of two additional ramps; though the project specifications required that the contract would be awarded based upon the Total Base Bid. FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. was the low, responsible, and responsive bidder based upon Total Base Bid. Note that while the bid proposal provided all estimated quantities, units of measure, item prices, and total amount for each item, it did not include the base bid total amount of all items. However, this can be easily determined given the detailed bid information, the base bid plus the bid alternative grand total was included (which is what is proposed to be awarded), all numbers are internally consistent within the bid packet, and the bidder did not receive an advantage from this minor oversight.

As such, Staff recommends that FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. be awarded a contract in the amount of their total base bid of $323,876.00, plus their bid alternative in the amount of $23,660, for a total contract amount of $347,536.00.

Contract administration and inspection of the project will be performed by Public Works Department staff. Project construction is expected to begin in August 2023 and continue through October 2023.

Fiscal Impact:

The estimated total project cost is $441,036.00, which consists of the following components:

Construction Contract: $ 347,536.00
Construction Contingency: $ 76,000.00
Construction Management: $ 17,500.00
Total: $ 441,036.00
Staff is requesting a contingency of $76,000 and construction management of $17,500. This equates to approximately 22% construction contingency and 5% construction management funds. Based on recent feedback from staff, the construction contingency was adjusted from the standard 15% to 22% to account for an additional two ramps along Stabler Lane that have recently been brought to staff's attention that are in need of rehabilitation. Additionally, there are several other unpredictable variables associated with this project, such as poor soil conditions, ADA constraints, and potential conflicts with utilities in the curb ramp areas.

The project will be funded through Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Account No. 1220 (ADA Public Facilities Sidewalk Improvements). Fund sources are:

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds: $ 441,036.00 Streets and Roads funds: $ 0.00
Total: $ 441,036.00
Environmental:

City staff completed all necessary environmental documents required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and has determined that the project is categorically excluded under 24 CFR 50.20(a)(1), special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers that restrict the mobility of accessibility to elderly and persons with disabilities.

Staff has also performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project relative to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and determined that it falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, as concrete replacement and utility alignment adjustments within existing City facilities is defined as repairs, maintenance, or minor alterations of existing public facilities, involving negligible or no expansion. Further, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in CEQA Guidelines 15300.2 apply to this project.

Alternatives:

Reject the bids, and either delay or cancel the project, which will result in a potential loss of CDBG funding or provide staff with alternative direction regarding priority locations.

Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution awarding a construction contract to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. of Livermore, CA in the amount of their total base bid plus their bid alternative of $347,536.00 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.

Attachments:

1. Resolution – ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project

2. Project Location Map
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Fabiola Vazquez
Assistant Engineer
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. _________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY

AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO FBD VANGUARD
CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF THEIR TOTAL BASE BID PLUS BID ALTERNATIVE OF $347,536.00 FOR THE ADA RAMP AND

SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City (City) advertised for bids for the City’s ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project; and
WHEREAS, in response to the advertisement, the City received four (4) bids for the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project in the following bid amounts:

WHEREAS, the City Public Works Department has reviewed the four bids, and examined FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. and its bid response, found it to be both the lowest qualified responsive and responsible bidder, and has recommended it for award of this project; and,
WHEREAS, the City desires to award the bid to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. of Livermore, CA and enter into an agreement with FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. to construct the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project including the bid alternative.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Yuba City as follows:

The City Council of the City of Yuba City does hereby accept the four bids received as noted above, finds that FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, and awards the construction contract to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. in the total base bid plus bid alternative amount of $347,536.00 for the ADA Ramp and Sidewalk Improvements Project. Said contract agreement shall substantially comply with the terms and conditions presented in the draft agreement attached to this Resolution, shall be subjected to review and approval as to legal form by the City Attorney, and the City Manager shall be authorized to execute the same on behalf of the City of Yuba City.

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 18 th
day of July 2023.

AYES:

Company Total Base Bid

1. FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. $323,876.00

2. MCE Corporation $327,372.00

3. Central Valley Engineering and Asphalt, Inc. $416,669.00

4..Hyatt Contracting, Inc. $428,274.00; and

NOES:

ABSENT:

Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________
Ciara Wakefield, City Clerk Administrator

APPROVED AS TO FORM
COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY:

Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Exhibit(s):

A. (Draft) Agreement – Contract 1220-CON-23

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF YUBA CITY

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

CONTRACT AGREEMENT

ADA RAMP & SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
CONTRACT NO. 1220-CON-23
THIS AGREEMENT, made and concluded this ____ day of _________________ 20___, between the City of Yuba City, party of the first part, and FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., Contractor, party of the second part.

ARTICLE I. – WITNESSETH, that for and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinafter mentioned to be made and performed by the said party of the first part under the conditions expressed in the two bonds bearing even date with these presents and hereunto annexed, the said party of the second part agrees with the said party of the first part, at his own proper cost and expense, to do all the work and furnish all the materials, except such as are mentioned in the specifications to be furnished by said party of the first part, necessary to construct and complete in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, construction on various roads, all in accordance with the Special Provisions hereto annexed and also in accordance with the Standard Specifications of the State of California Department of Transportation dated 2022, the Standard Plans dated 2022, the “Labor Surcharge” and “Equipment Rental Rates” in effect on the date the work is accomplished, and the “General Prevailing Wage Rates” of the State of California Department of Transportation, which said Special Provisions, Standard Plans, Standard Specifications are hereby specially referred to and by such reference made a part hereof.

The Special Provisions and the project plans for the work to be done are entitled:

ADA RAMP & SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
Which are hereby made part of this contract.

ARTICLE II. – The said Contractor agrees to receive and accept the following prices as full compensation for furnishing all materials and for doing all the work contemplated and embraced in this Agreement; also for all loss or damage arising out of the nature of the work aforesaid, or from the action of the elements, or from any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in the prosecution of the work until its acceptance by the City of Yuba City and for all risks of every description connected with the work; also for all expenses incurred by or in consequence of the suspension or discontinuance of work and for well and faithfully completing the work, and the whole thereof, in the manner and according to the plans and specifications and the requirements of the Engineer under them, to wit.

ARTICLE III. – The said party of the first part hereby promises and agrees with the said Contractor to employ, and does hereby employ, the said Contractor to provide the materials and to do the work according to the terms and conditions herein contained and referred to, for the prices hereinafter set forth, and hereby contracts to pay the same at the time, in the manner and upon the conditions above set forth; and the said parties for

themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, do hereby agree to the full performance of the covenants herein contained.

ARTICLE IV. – By my signature hereunder, as Contractor, I certify that I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract.

ARTICLE V. – It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should there be any conflict between the terms of this instrument and the bid or proposal of said Contractor, then this instrument shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the said terms of said proposal conflicting herewith.

ARTICLE VI. – The City of Yuba City hereby employs Contractor to provide material and to do the work according to the terms and conditions herein contained and referred to for the following prices to be paid at the time, in the manner and upon the conditions hereinafter set forth.

ARTICLE VII. – The improvement contemplated in the performance of this contract is an improvement over which the City of Yuba City shall exercise general supervision.

ARTICLE VIII. – The statement of prevailing wages appearing in the General Prevailing Wage Rates is hereby specifically referred to and by this reference is made a part of this contract. It is further expressly agreed, by and between the terms of this instrument and the bid or proposal of said Contractor, that this instrument shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the said terms of said proposal conflicting herewith.

ADA RAMP & SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
CONTRACT NO. 1220-CON-23
Bid
Item Item Description Estimated Quantity
Unit of
Measure
Item Price Total
Amount
1 Mobilization/Demobilization & Traffic
Control 1 LS $52,296.00 $52,296.00
2 Construct ADA-Compliant Curb Ramp
(Includes concrete removal; utility lid
adjustments as necessary; storm
drainage grate, DI, and main
relocation as necessary; signage
relocation as necessary; installation of
aggregate base as necessary;
pavement restoration as necessary;
striping and marking as necessary;
and installation of new ADA-compliant
curb ramp.)
25 EA $9,100.00 $227,500.00
3 Construct Sidewalk 497 SF $40.00 $19,880.00
4 Reconstruct Heavy Duty Driveway
ST11 (Includes Pavement
Restoration)
1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000.00
5 Reconstruct Valley Gutter ST7
(Includes Pavement Restoration) 188 SF $50.00 $9,400.00

6 Replace Benchmark ST13 4 EA $2,700.00 $10,800.00
Base Bid Total = $323,876.00
Bid Alternate A – (Additional ADA-Compliant Curb Ramps) 1 Construct ADA-Compliant Curb Ramp
(Includes concrete removal; utility lid
adjustments as necessary; storm
drainage grate, DI, and main
relocation as necessary; signage
relocation as necessary; installation of
aggregate base as necessary;
pavement restoration as necessary;
striping and marking as necessary;
and installation of new ADA-compliant
curb ramp.)
2 EA $11,830.00 $23,660.00
Base Bid + Add Alternate A Total = $347,536.00
Approved as to legal form:

City Attorney
City of Yuba City

CITY OF YUBA CITY
Diana Langley
City Manager
Date

CONTRACTOR
Company Name
By and Title (signature)
Date
By and Title (printed)

Address
Telephone Number

ATTACHMENT 2

ADA RAMP & SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION MAP 0' 1500' 3000'
1" = 1500'

BRIDGE ST
SR-20

BUTTE HOUSE RD
PLUMAS BLVD SR-99 LIVE OAK BLVDGRAY AVE CLARK AVE

QUEENS AVE
AREA A
AREA B
AREA C
AREA D
AREA E
Area Intersection
A Queens Ave/Granada Way
A Queens Ave/La Cresenta Ct
A Queens Ave/La Palma Ct
B Gray Ave/Melton Dr
B Gray Ave/La Colina Ln
C Clark Ave/Lewis Ave
D Reeves Ave/Cooper Ave
D Reeves Ave/Orange St
D Reeves Ave/Olive St
D Reeves Ave/Chestnut St
D Reeves Ave/Almond St
D Reeves Ave/Walnut St
E Percy Ave/Palm Ave
E Percy Ave/Brooks Ave
E Percy Ave/Elm St

Agenda Item 10

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: Wastewater Treatment Facility RAS & WAS Pump Replacement Project (Award Construction Contract)
Recommendation: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yuba City awarding a construction contract to TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. of Sacramento, CA in the amount of their total bid of $276,760.00 (WWTF RAS/WAS Pump Replacement Project) Fiscal Impact: $328.274.00 – Total Project Cost
$328,274.00 – CIP Account No. 1103 (Recurring Plant Project) $328,274.00 - Total Construction Cost
$276,760.00 - Contract Award Amount
$41,514.00 - (15%) Construction Contingency
$10,000 - (3.6%) City Administration
Purpose:

To maintain the City’s wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) operational effectiveness through proactive rehabilitation and major maintenance.

Council’s Strategic Goal:

This project addresses the City Council’s Strategic Goal to maintain and improve the City’s infrastructure.

Background:

The WWTF operates (4) Return Activated Sludge Pumps (RAS) and (2) Waste Activated Sludge Pumps within the primary and secondary treatment processes. In early 2022, one of the RAS pumps failed; replacement parts are no longer manufactured due to the age of the pumps and the WWTF maintenance team was unable to bring the pump back into operation. With one RAS pump out of service, the WWTF is operating with reduced effectiveness within this portion of the treatment process.

The loss of additional pumps would severely jeopardize the overall treatment process potentially violating our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Waste Discharge Requirements.

In order to safeguard against this concern, the Public Works Department proposes the replacement of

(4) RAS and (2) WAS Pumps. On March 1, 2022, Council authorized the purchase of these pumps and they have since been procured. Woodard & Curran, the design consultant for the recent WWTF Improvements Project, developed the plans and specifications for the replacement of the RAS/WAS pumps and will be providing engineering services during construction.

Analysis:

The WWTF RAS/WAS Pumps Replacement Project was advertised for bids beginning June 13, 2023.

Plans and specifications were posted on publicpurchase.com and provided to local builder/contractor exchanges. On July 6, 2023, four (4) bids were received and opened by the City Clerk. A list of the bids received and the Engineer’s Estimate are shown below.

Company Total Bid
TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. $276,760.00
Koch & Koch Inc. $339,826.00
W.M. Lyles, Co. $324,900.00
Auburn Constructors $392,300.00

Engineer’s Estimate $240,000.00
TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. is the low, responsible, and responsive bidder.

The City’s Public Works Department will perform construction management and inspection.

Fiscal Impact:

The estimated total project cost is approximately $328,274.00 which consists of the following components:

Construction Contract $276,760.00
Construction Change Order Contingency (15%) $ 41,514.00 City Administration (3.6%) $ 10,000.00

Total $328,274.00
Staff is proposing a $41,514.00 construction contingency which equates to approximately 15% in contingency funds. Replacing six (6) RAS/WAS Pumps requires installation of multiple valves and modification of existing piping which present the risk of unforeseen construction conditions.

The project will be funded through CIP Account No. 1103 (Recurring Plant Projects). There is approximately $594,000 in this account.

Environmental:

On June 6, 2023 City Council adopted a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Class 1 Categorical Exemption. There has not been any substantial new information acquired nor changes to the project since it was evaluated, and no further evaluation for this portion of the project is required under CEQA.

Alternatives:

Delay award or reject the bids and cancel the project.

Recommendation:

Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yuba City awarding a construction contract to TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. of Sacramento, CA in the amount of their total bid of $276,760.00 (WWTF RAS/WAS Pump Replacement Project).

Attachments:

1. Attachment 1 - RESOLUTION - WWTF RAS&WAS

2. Exhibit A - (Draft) 22-15 RAS & WAS Contract
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Nick Menezes
Assistant Engineer
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. _________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO TNT INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTORS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF THEIR TOTAL BID OF $276,760.00 (WWTF RAS/WAS PUMP

REPLACEMENT PROJECT)
WHEREAS, the City of Yuba City (City) advertised for bids for the City’s WWTF RAS/WAS Pumps Replacement Project (Project); and,
WHEREAS, in response to the advertisement, the City received four (4) bids for the Project in the following bid amounts:

TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. $276,760.00
Koch & Koch, Inc. $33,826.00
W.M. Lyles, Co. $324,900.00
Auburn Constructors $392,300.00; and
WHEREAS, the City Public Works Department reviewed the four (4) bids, and examined TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. and its bid response, found it to be both the lowest qualified responsive and responsible bidder, and has recommended it for award of this project; and,
WHEREAS, the City desires to award the bid to TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. and enter into an agreement with TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. to construct the Project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. There has not been any substantial new information acquired nor changes to the project since it was evaluated, and no further evaluation for this portion of the project is required under CEQA.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Yuba City as follows:

1. The City Council of the City of Yuba City does hereby accept the four (4) bids received as noted above, finds that TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, and awards the construction contract to TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. in the total amount bid of $276,760.00 for the WWTF RAS/WAS Pumps Replacement Project. Said contract agreement shall substantially comply with the terms and conditions presented in the draft agreement attached to this Resolution, shall be subjected to review and approval as to legal form by the City Attorney, and the City Manager shall be authorized to execute the same on behalf of the City of Yuba City.

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 18th day of July, 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM
COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY:

Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Exhibit(s):

A. (Draft) Agreement – TNT Industrial Contractors, Inc. Contract No. 22-15

ATTACHMENT 2

Agenda Item 11

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Administration Department
Presentation By: Diana Langley, City Manager
Summary
Subject: Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution modifying the timing of collection of the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee
Fiscal Impact: Approval of this item will defer the collection of the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee from prior to the recordation of any subdivision map to upon issuance of a building permit or prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, in alignment with the payment of other development impact fees.

Purpose:

To modify the timing of the payment of the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee to align with the timing of the payment of other City development impact fees.

Council's Strategic Goal:

This aligns with Council's goal of Business Friendly, as it gives developers within the Harter Specific Plan area the option to pay the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee at the same time that other development impact fees are due.

Background:

On October 26, 2004, the City Council approved the Harter Specific Plan and adopted Resolution No. 04-198 approving the Harter Specific Plan Financing Strategy and Phasing Plan (Financing Plan), which outlined the infrastructure improvements required as a result of new development in the Harter Specific Plan area. The Financing Plan also analyzed and determined an infrastructure improvement fee necessary to finance the required infrastructure improvements.

On November 2, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-203 which established the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee (Harter Fee). Section 2(b) of the Resolution states, "The Harter Fee shall be calculated upon the approval of a subdivision map and shall be paid prior to the recordation of any subdivision map. For projects that are subject to building permits, but not subdivision map approval, the Fee shall be both calculated and paid upon issuance of the building permit. In accordance with the terms of the Plan, a developer may construct improvements in lieu of paying the Fee and said construction shall constitute full and complete satisfaction of the applicable

Fee."
However, in regard to payment of City development impact fees, Municipal Code Section 8-10.101, Development Impact Fee, requires that the, "development impact fee shall be paid by each developer, at the option of the developer, either prior to issuance of a building permit or prior to issuance of a certification of occupancy for the commercial or industrial project or the respective dwelling units in a residential project, or at such earlier time permitted by law, as set forth in, if applicable, Government Code Section 66007."
Staff received a request from D.R. Horton, the developer of Harter Estates South, a 77-unit single family home residential subdivision, and Harter Estates North, a 73-unit single family home residential subdivision, to modify the timing of the payment of the Harter Fee from prior to the recordation of the subdivision map to prior to issuance of building permit.

Analysis:

As City development impact fees for residential subdivisions are not due until prior to issuance of building permit or certificate of occupancy, staff is supportive of D.R. Horton's request and recommends that payment of the Harter Fee be modified to align with the timeline for payment of City development impact fees. This will allow the Harter Fee to be collected, at the option of the developer, prior to issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy.

Fiscal Impact:

Approval of this item will defer the collection of the Harter Fee from prior to the recordation of any subdivision map to upon issuance of a building permit or prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, in alignment with the payment of other development impact fees.

Alternatives:

Do not modify the timing of payment of the Harter Fee for residential developments and continue to make payment due prior to recordation of the subdivision map.

Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution modifying the timing of collection of the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee.

Attachments:

1. Resolution - Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Fee

2. D.R. Horton Request
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Diana Langley
City Manager
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY

MODIFYING THE TIMING OF PAYMENT OF THE HARTER SPECIFIC PLAN

INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT FEE
WHEREAS, on October 26, 2004, the City Council approved the Harter Specific Plan and adopted Resolution No. 04-198 approving the Harter Specific Plan Financing Strategy and Phasing Plan (Financing Plan); and
WHEREAS, the Financing Plan outlined the infrastructure improvements required as a result of new development in the Harter Specific Plan area; and
WHEREAS, the Financing Plan also analyzed and determined an infrastructure improvement fee necessary to finance the required infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-203 which established the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee (Harter Fee) in which Section 2(b) requires that the Harter Fee be calculated upon the approval of a subdivision map and shall be paid prior to the recordation of any subdivision map; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section 8-10.101, Development Impact Fee, allows for City development impact fees to be paid, at the option of the developer, either prior to issuance of a building permit or prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or at such earlier time permitted by law, as set forth in, if applicable, Government Code Section 66007.” WHEREAS, the City Council has received a request from D.R. Horton, a developer within the Harter Specific Plan Area, to modify the timing of the payment of the Harter Fee from prior to recordation of the subdivision map to prior to issuance of a building permit; and WHEREAS, as City development impact fees are not due until prior to issuance of building permit or certificate of occupancy, staff is supportive of D.R. Horton’s request and recommends that the timing of the payment of the Harter Fee be modified to align with the timeline for payment of City development impact fees for all developments within the Harter Specific Plan Area.

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

1. The City Council supports the request to modify the timing of the collection of the Harter Fee.

2. The Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee shall be paid by each developer, at the option of the developer, either prior to issuance of a building permit or prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or at such earlier time permitted by law, as set forth in, if applicable, Government Code Section 66007.

The forgoing Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yuba City was duly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of July, 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

ATTACHMENT 2

D.R. HORTON • EXPRESS • EMERALD • FREEDOM
3000 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 130 • Roseville, CA 95661 • O 916.297.4461 • drhorton.com June 26, 2023
Diana Langley
City Manager
City of Yuba City
1201 Civic Center Boulevard
Yuba City, CA 95993
Re:   Petition to Modify Timing of Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee Payment for Harter Estates South and Harter Estates North Subdivisions Dear Ms. Langley:

The undersigned representative of D.R. Horton (“Developer”) is requesting the City of Yuba City (“City”) revise the Harter Specific Plan Infrastructure Improvement Fee (“Harter Fee”) by modifying the timing of payment from approval of a subdivision map to building permit.  The Harter Fee was adopted in 2004 pursuant to Resolution 04‐203 (“Resolution”).   Section 2 (a) of the Resolution states, “The Harter Fee shall be calculated upon the approval of a subdivision map and shall be paid prior to the recordation of any subdivision map.” Changing the Harter Fee payment obligation from approval ofsubdivision map to building permit will (i) attach fee payment to when development impacts occur and (ii) increase project feasibility.

The Developer is preparing to request City Council approval of the subdivision map for Harter Estates South which includes seventy‐seven (77) single family detached residential lots (Exhibit A), and plans to process the subdivision map for Harter Estates North in the future which includes seventy‐three (73) single family detached residential lots (Exhibit B).  This letter acts as a formal petition to the City for the purpose of modifying the payment trigger of the Harter Fee for Harter Estates South and Harter Estates North subdivisions.

Sincerely,
Bonnie Chiu
Vice President, Forward Planning
cc: Ben Moody, City of Yuba City
Ashley Potocnik, City of Yuba City
Brady Tacdol, D.R. Horton
Mike Whipple, Develop & Financial Advisory

D.R. HORTON • EXPRESS • EMERALD • FREEDOM
3000 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 130 • Roseville, CA 95661 • O 916.297.4461 • drhorton.com Exhibit A
Harter Estates South
Subdivision Map

HARTER ESTATES SOUTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121154 SHEET 1 OF 5 BEING PORTION OF LOTS 1, 4, AND 5 AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAPENTITLED "MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 43 , SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS

VICINITY MAP

NOT TO SCALE

BUTTE HOUSE RD

HARTER PARKWAY
STATE ROUTE 20

JEFFERSON AVENUE

RUTH AVENUE

HOOPER ROAD

STATE OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERCITY OF YUBA CITY
I, JACKIE SILLMAN, CLERK OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY HAS, BYRESOLUTION NO. DULY AND REGULARLY PASSED BY SAID COUNCIL ON THE DAY OF , 20 , APPROVED THE WITHIN
MAP OF "HARTER ESTATES SOUTH" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONAL

APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP, HERETOFORE FILED AS APPROVED, AND BY SAID RESOLUTION HAS ACCEPTED ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC ITEM(S) 1, 2, 3 AND 4SHOWN IN THE OWNER'S OFFER OF DEDICATION.

JACKIE SILLMAN

CITY CLERK, CITY OF YUBA CITY

CITY CLERK CERTIFICATE
} SS

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, XXXXXXXXXX, AS HOLDER OF RECORD TITLE INTERESTS, OF THE HEREIN SUBDIVIDED LANDS, HEREBY CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND RECORDATION OF THIS PLAT OF "HARTER ESTATES SOUTH" AND OFFER FOR DEDICATION AND DO PARTICIPATE IN SAID OFFER OF DEDICATION AND DO HEREBY DEDICATE THE FOLLOWING:

1. 38' STRIPS OF LAND IN FEE TITLE INDICATED ON SAID PLAT AND DESIGNATED AS BLACKBERRY DRIVE,

CRANBERRY WAY, RASPBERRY WAY, AND STRAWBERRY DRIVE, AS WELL AS STRIPS OF LAND IN FEE TITLE INDICATED ON SAID PLAT AND DESIGNATED AS RUTH AVENUE AND VINE AVENUE. 2. EASEMENTS INDICATED AS 12.0' PUE (PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT) FOR, BUT NOT LIMITED TO ELECTRICAL,

WATER, SEWER, GAS, STORM DRAINAGE, COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, AND ALL APPURTENANCES THERETO. OWNER EXPRESSLY COVENANTS NOT TO UNREASONABLY RESTRICT, OBSTRUCT OR INTERFERE

WITH SAID PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT OR THE USE THEREOF BY THE CITY, ITS AGENTS OR ANY

FRANCHISEE

3. PARCELS OF LAND IN FEE, INDICATED ON SAID PLAT AND DESIGNATED AS "LOT A".

4. EASEMENT FOR ACCESS TO AND THE MAINTENANCE OF A WALL AND FOOTINGS AND ALL APPURTENANCES PERTAINING THERETO ON, OVER, UNDER AND ACROSS THOSE STRIPS OF LAND GENERALLY 2 FEET IN WIDTH LYING CONTIGUOUS TO LOTS 54-69, DESIGNATED AS "2' WALL EASEMENT"

XXXXXXXX
BY: XXXXXXXX TITLE: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

OWNER'S STATEMENT
A.) OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
B.) PROPERTY BEING DEDICATED:

1. BEING ALL THAT REAL PROPERTY AS SHOWN AS ITEM 1 IN OWNER'S OFFER OF DEDICATION.

C.) THE CITY OF YUBA CITY SHALL RECONVEY THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO THE ABOVE-NAMED OWNER, OR SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST, IF THE CITY DETERMINES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODESECTION 66477.5 THAT THE SAME PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE PROPERTY WAS DEDICATED DOES NOT EXIST, OR THE PROPERTY OR ANY PORTION THEREOF IS NOT NEEDED FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES.

NOTE: THE LOTS ON THIS MAP ARE SUBJECT TO:

1. ASSESSMENT FROM COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) 2021-1, RESOLUTION NUMBER ______________, RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. ______________ ON _____________________.

2. ASSESSMENT FROM YUBA CITY LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT _____________________, RESOLUTION NUMBER ______________, RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO.______________ ON _____________________.

3. ANY STREET, DRAINAGE, PUBLIC UTILITY, OR OTHER EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY.

4. THE CITY OF YUBA CITY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 19-04 APPROVED ON APRIL 28, 2021. 5. SUBJECT TO SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, RESOLUTION NUMBER ___________ RECORDEDAS DOCUMENT NO._______________ ON _________________.

CERTIFICATE FOR FEE DEDICATION
BENJAMIN K. MOODY
CITY SURVEYOR P.L.S. 9018
EXPIRES: 9-30-2023
DATED:CITY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
I, BENJAMIN K. MOODY, CITY SURVEYOR OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY, DO HEREBY

STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT.THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FILED SURVEY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISIONMAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF XXXXXXX, ON JANUARY 1, 2023. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE APPROVED OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP; THAT ALL THE

MONUMENTS ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY THE POSITIONS INDICATED AND ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED.

I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY ME AND THAT THE

SUBDIVISION, AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP IS SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS SAIDSUBDIVISION APPEARED ON THE APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP AND ANY APPROVED

ALTERATIONS THEREOF, AND THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT

OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ANY LOCAL ORDINANCES APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH.

BY:

SURVEYOR'S STATEMENTCITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENTRECORDER'S CERTIFICATEFILED THIS DAY OF , 2023, AT : .M. INBOOK OF SURVEYS, AT PAGE AT THE REQUEST OF MHM INC.DONNA M. JOHNSTONSUTTER COUNTY RECORDERFILE NO.P.L.S. 8457JOHN S. MALLENEXPIRES: 12-31-2022 FEE PD.

DEPUTY

PLANNING DIVISION

CITY OF YUBA CITYSTATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIS MAP HAS BEEN EXAMINED THIS __________ DAY OF ______________ , 2023, FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP AND THE

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THEREOF AS APPROVED BY THE YUBA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL 28, 2021. PLANNER'S STATEMENT O
N
N
O
E H
S N
T AT E

ROF P JO
I

SS O L VL
N
7 5
A
8 F C
L . S
IF L
4 RO
EN
AI R
YO E
U
A
M
AL L
S. NDAS R

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE

IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

COUNTY OF STATE OF }SS

ON BEFORE ME
, NOTARY PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED , WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S)

WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEDTO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED

CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE

PERSON(S), OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.WITNESS MY HAND.

SIGNATURE OF NOTARY

NOTARY'S NAMEMY COMMISSION NUMBER MY COMMISSION EXPIRES PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS (County)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I, NICHOLAS F. VALENCIA, TAX COLLECTOR FOR THE COUNTY OF SUTTER, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SEC. 66492 THAT THE RECORDS OF MY OFFICE SHOW THAT THERE ARE NO LIENS AGAINST THE LANDS SHOWNHEREON OR ANY PART THEREOF FOR UNPAID TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 062-310-014-000
DATE:NICHOLAS F. VALENCIA, TREASURER AND TAX COLLECTOR

COUNTY OF SUTTER, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR'S STATEMENTAS TO LIENS FOR TAXES NOT YET PAYABLE, I ESTIMATE THAT THERE ARE TAXES IN THEAMOUNT OF $ FOR 2022-2023, WHICH ARE A LIEN BUT NOT YET PAYABLE. I CERTIFY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SEC. 66493 THAT SECURITY HASBEEN DEPOSITED WITH THE COUNTY CONDITIONED UPON THE PAYMENT OF SAID TAXESNOT YET PAYABLE.

EXPIRES: 06-30-24
DATED:

BENJAMIN K. MOODYCITY ENGINEER, R.C.E. 72383

HARTER ESTATES SOUTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121154 SHEET 2 OF 5

ON BEFORE ME
, NOTARY PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED
, WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S)

WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED

TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED

CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE

PERSON(S), OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

WITNESS MY HAND.

SIGNATURE OF NOTARY

NOTARY'S NAMEMY COMMISSION NUMBER MY COMMISSION EXPIRES PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS (County)COUNTY OF STATE OF
}SS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATEVERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE

DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

BENEFICIARY'S STATEMENT
BY:PRINT NAME: TITLE:

SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.73 ACRES
LOTS = 12.28 ACRESROADS = 2.45 ACRES

BASIS OF BEARINGSRECORD REFERENCES
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21- 09 - DOCUMENT NO. 2021-0023789(R2) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R3) BRYN MAWR ESTATES - UNIT 3, BOOK 12 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 230(R4) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)
(R5) RIGHT OF WAY OF A PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED NOVEMBER 12, 1963 IN BOOK 634 OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 235, SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS
(R6) MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 43
LEGEND

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE
BEING PORTION OF LOTS 1, 4, AND 5 AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAPENTITLED "MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 43 , SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS

S89°26'21"W 636.98' (R1, R4 & M)
S00°23'17"E (R1, R4 & M) 848.04' (R1 & M)
N89°38'08"E 637.10' (R1, R4 & M)
N00°23'47"W 560.26' (R1 & M)
S00°23'47"E 281.32' (R1, R4 & M)
N89°36'43"E 268.00' N89°36'43"E 262.00'
N89°36'43"E 262.00'
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
S00°00'11"E 158.31' (R3)
S00°23'17"E 158.34' (M) S00°00'11"E (R3) S00°23'17"E 558.62' (M) N89°36'43"E 91.87' N53°33'07"E
134.95'

CURVE DATA
R=400.00 Δ=54°22'50"L=379.65'

CURVE DATA
R=400.00 Δ=14°10'51"L=99.00'
CURVE DATA (R1&R2)
R=400.00 Δ=42°57'06"L=299.88'
LINE DATA (R1&R2)
S65°14'52"E

13.54'

CURVE DATA
R=250.00 Δ=12°21'49"
L=53.95'

CURVE DATA
R=200.00 Δ=48°25'25"L=169.03'
LINE DATA (R1)
S79°09'10"W31.21'
LINE DATA (R1)
S70°41'53"W75.57'
LINE DATA (R1)
S57°35'18"W75.57'
LINE DATA (R1)
S45°46'06"W

63.20'
LINE DATA (R1)
S51°46'01"W50.00'
LINE DATA (R1)
S53°32'58"W

84.18'

SE CORNER OF
LOT 5 OF R6
NW CORNER OFLOT 1 OF R6

NE CORNER OF
LOT 1 OF R6
CURVE DATA (R1&R2)
R=360.00
Δ=41°37'06"
L=261.50'
CURVE DATA (R1&R2)
R=440.00
Δ=31°30'00"
L=241.90'
S00°00'11"E (R3)
S00°23'17"E 130.99' (M) SW CORNER OF LOT 5 OF R6
FD 3/4' PIPE PER
R3
LINE DATA (R1)
N03°47'44"W

44.71'
S00°00'11"E 847.88' (R1) S00°23'17"E 847.95' (M)
1/2"
0 SCALE:1"=100'
1" 3"
50'
0 100' 300'
SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.73 ACRES
LOTS = 12.28 ACRESROADS = 2.45 ACRES

BASIS OF BEARINGS

RECORD REFERENCESLEGEND
S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

HARTER ESTATES SOUTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121154 SHEET 3 OF 5

VINE AVENUE
SEE SHEET 4

FOR DETAIL
APN 062-310-015-000

PARCEL B
LLA 21-09

RUTH AVENUE

RASPBERRY WAY

CRANBERRY WAY

STRAWBERRY DRIVE

BLACKBERRY DRIVE

JEFFERSON
AVENUE

HARTER PARKWAY
APN 062-310-009-000

PARCEL D
LLA 21-10
APN 062-310-021-000

PARCEL C
LLA 21-10
SEE SHEET 5

FOR DETAIL
BRYN MAWR ESTATES UNIT 3
BOOK 12 OF SURVEYS,
PAGE 230

SUBDIVISION OF A
PORTION OF LOT 1 OF
SUBDIVISION NO 2 OF

THE ELMER TRACT
BOOK 5 OF SURVEYS,
PAGE 89
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21- 09 - DOCUMENT NO. 2021-0023789(R2) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R3) BRYN MAWR ESTATES - UNIT 3, BOOK 12 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 230(R4) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)
(R5) RIGHT OF WAY OF A PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED NOVEMBER 12, 1963 IN BOOK 634 OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 235, SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS
(R6) MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 43
BEING PORTION OF LOTS 1, 4, AND 5 AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAPENTITLED "MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 43 , SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS

(E) 25' R/W
(E) 40' R/W
(E) 40' R/W (R2)
(E) 40' R/W (R2)
(E) 10' PUE (R2)
12,259 SF
LOT 1
C1
S00° 23' 47"E
176.01
N64° 38' 30"E

66.63 13,932 SF
LOT 2
S00° 23' 47"E
105.31
N54° 26' 02"E

56.92 73.03
N51° 17' 09"E

78.57 8,019 SF
LOT 3
6,319 SF
LOT 4
7,247 SF
LOT 7
7,239 SF
LOT 8
7,142 SF
LOT 9
6,918 SF
LOT 10
6,909 SFLOT 11
7,345 SF
LOT 12

47.57 N36° 26' 53"W
116.81
N51° 19' 35"E

10.94 73.03
C3
C4
C5
N65° 51' 49"E
C2
N51° 19' 35"E

59.06 C6
N40° 55' 10"W
115.69
S26° 35' 42"E

11.13 C8
C7
N26° 35' 42"W
116.16

36.92 C9
N00° 23' 17"W
131.70
N89° 26' 21"E

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E
131.68

46.79 N00° 23' 17"W
131.53
N89° 26' 21"E

55.00 55.00
N00° 23' 17"W
125.87

16.05 N00° 51' 12"W

5.50 N89° 26' 21"E 39.00

55.00 55.00
N00° 23' 17"W
125.87

55.00 N89° 26' 21"E

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E
125.70

55.00 N00° 23' 17"W
125.53
C11
C12
N00° 23' 17"W
113.99

60.00 25.82
N43° 01' 46"W
171.42
N89° 26' 21"E
157.97
C13
8,450 SF
LOT 14
6,160 SF
LOT 15
S00° 23' 17"E

56.10 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

62.88 13.50

92.06 C20
S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 6,160 SF
LOT 16
6,160 SF
LOT 17
6,160 SF
LOT 18
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
6,720 SF
LOT 336,445 SF
LOT 34
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 5.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

60.00 S89° 36' 43"W
112.00

17.86 N00° 23' 17"W

50.00 10.00
N89° 36' 43"E
100.00
C15
11,182 SF
LOT 35
N00° 23' 17"W

45.00 N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N00° 23' 17"W

62.88 C14
C16
S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 7,194 SF
LOT 36
6,160 SF
LOT 37
C17 92.00

65.00 45.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
6,160 SF
LOT 527,194 SF
LOT 53
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00

92.00 S00° 23' 17"E

65.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

45.00 C30

45.00 7,978 SF
LOT 54
6,651 SF
LOT 55

45.84 N53° 32' 58"E

84.18 C39
S45° 43' 40"E
110.00
N51° 46' 01"E

50.00 N36° 26' 53"W
110.00
C35
C36
C34
S70° 41' 53"W75.57

2.00 S57° 35' 18"W75.57
6,911 SF
LOT 59
7,614 SF
LOT 60

50.00 S89° 36' 44"W

70.00 90.00 C31
LOT 5

28.26 Area : 8,794 SF
8,106 SF
LOT 6

VINE AVENUE
JEFFERSON AVE.

STRAWBERRY DRIVE
19' R/W
12' PUE
19' R/W
N89°36'43"E 262.00'
S00°23'17"E 158.34' (M)
N89°36'43"E

91.87'
N53°33'07"E
134.95'
(E) 10' PUE (R2)
12' PUE
12' PUE
C10
12,225 SF
LOT 13
S38° 58' 00"E
110.00
LOT A
Area : 7,166 SF
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
S00°23'17"E 558.00' 2' WALL EASEMENT

2.00 2.00

2.00 2.00
N89°26'21"E 524.98'

21.94 2.00(P) 42' R/W
S00°00'11"E 158.31' (R3) S00°23'17"E 158.34' (M)
19' R/W
19' R/W
C38
6,289 SF
LOT 56
6,938 SF
LOT 57
6,938 SF
LOT 58
S25° 51' 24"E
110.00
S79° 09' 10"W31.21
C33
C37

30.79 S45° 46' 06"W63.20
S89° 36' 44"W

41.02 2.00
N00° 23' 16"W
110.00

2.87 C32
S12° 44' 33"E
110.00

CURVE TABLE
CURVE #
C1
C2
C3C4C5C6C7C8C9
C10
C11
C12C13C14C15C16C17C18C19C20
C21
C22C23C24C25C26C27C28C29C30
C31
C32C33C34C35C36C37C38C39
LENGTH
158.54

89.72 13.23

71.5329.7321.7537.0551.4093.47

8.21 16.6419.74

45.2241.32

27.74 16.64

31.4231.4231.4231.3631.4231.42

16.64 34.6933.6258.74

6.98 16.64

31.4231.4231.4247.2550.10

50.11 37.63

12.43 37.4129.71

95.68 RADIUS
360.00360.00360.00
440.00

20.00 269.00269.00
181.00181.00181.00

30.0050.0050.0050.0050.0030.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0030.0050.0050.0050.0050.0030.0020.0020.0020.00 219.00219.00219.00219.00231.00231.00

20.00 440.00
DELTA
025°13'57"014°16'48"002°06'19"009°18'50"085°09'42"004°37'58"007°53'32"016°16'20"029°35'12"002°36'01"031°47'17"022°37'10"051°49'06"047°21'01"031°47'17"031°47'18"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"089°49'38"090°00'00"090°00'00"031°47'18"039°44'50"038°31'16"067°18'25"008°00'05"031°47'18"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"012°21'41"013°06'27"013°06'35"009°50'42"003°05'02"009°16'47"085°06'41"012°27'34" 50'
0 25' 50' 100'

GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET )
SEE SHEET 5 HARTER ESTATES SOUTH CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121154 SHEET 4 OF 5 SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.73 ACRES
LOTS = 12.28 ACRES
ROADS = 2.45 ACRES

BASIS OF BEARINGS

RECORD REFERENCES LEGEND

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457

CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21- 09 - DOCUMENT NO. 2021-0023789(R2) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R3) BRYN MAWR ESTATES - UNIT 3, BOOK 12 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 230(R4) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)
(R5) RIGHT OF WAY OF A PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED NOVEMBER 12, 1963 IN BOOK 634 OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 235, SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS
(R6) MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 43
BEING PORTION OF LOTS 1, 4, AND 5 AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAPENTITLED "MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 43 , SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS

6,160 SF
LOT 18
6,160 SF
LOT 19
S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 S89° 36' 43"W
112.00

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
6,160 SF
LOT 20
6,160 SFLOT 21
6,160 SF
LOT 22
6,160 SF
LOT 23
6,160 SF
LOT 24
7,754 SF
LOT 25
7,754 SF
LOT 266,160 SF
LOT 27
6,160 SF
LOT 28
6,160 SF
LOT 29
6,160 SF
LOT 30

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 S00° 23' 17"E

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
C21 92.00
N00° 23' 17"W

70.00 S00° 23' 17"E

50.00 C19

50.00 92.00

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 6,160 SFLOT 31
6,160 SF
LOT 326,720 SF
LOT 33
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00 N89° 36' 43"E 112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 60.00
S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
6,160 SF
LOT 37
6,160 SF
LOT 38
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
6,160 SF
LOT 39
6,160 SF
LOT 40
6,160 SFLOT 41
6,160 SF
LOT 42
6,160 SF
LOT 43
7,754 SF
LOT 44
7,754 SF
LOT 456,160 SF
LOT 466,160 SF
LOT 476,160 SF
LOT 486,160 SF
LOT 496,160 SF
LOT 50
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 55.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 55.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00

55.00 55.00
N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

92.00 N00° 23' 17"W

70.00 50.00 C18

50.00 S89° 36' 43"W
112.00

92.00 C29
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00
S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 55.00
S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
6,160 SF
LOT 51
6,160 SF
LOT 52
S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
112.00

55.00 S89° 36' 43"W
112.00
N00° 23' 17"W

55.00 55.00

55.00 S70° 41' 53"W

75.57 2.00
S89° 36' 44"W

70.00 6,217 SF
LOT 62
6,217 SF
LOT 63
6,218 SF
LOT 64
6,218 SF
LOT 65
6,218 SF
LOT 66
6,158 SF
LOT 67
9,812 SF
LOT 68
11,585 SF
6,850 SF LOT 69
6,730 SF LOT 70
LOT 71
6,728 SF
LOT 72
6,727 SF
LOT 73
6,725 SF
LOT 74
6,724 SF
LOT 75
N89° 36' 43"E
111.04

55.00 N89° 36' 43"E
111.04 2.00

2.00 N89° 36' 43"E
111.05
N89° 36' 43"E
111.06 2.00

2.00 55.00
C27 C28

33.02 N89° 36' 43"E
111.07 2.00
N89° 36' 43"E
103.32 2.00
126.31
130.10
N08° 20' 49"W
101.67 C25

2.36 72.00
N00° 23' 17"W
112.18

8.86 C23
C24
N00° 23' 17"W
112.15

60.00 60.00
N00° 23' 17"W
112.13

60.00 60.00
N00° 23' 17"W
112.10

60.00 60.00
N00° 23' 17"W
112.08

60.00 60.00
N00° 23' 17"W
112.05

60.00 60.00
6,722 SF
LOT 76
8,315 SF
LOT 77

60.00 N00° 23' 17"W
112.05

60.00 60.00
N00° 23' 17"W
112.03

55.00 C22
S00° 23' 17"E

92.00 75.00
19' R/W
12' PUE
N89°36'43"E 268.00' N89°36'43"E 262.00'
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
S00°00'11"E (R3) S00°23'17"E 558.62' (M)
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
S00°23'17"E 558.00'
2' WALL EASEMENT
S00°00'11"E (R3) S00°23'17"E 130.99' (M) 19' R/W 12' PUE 19' R/W
12' PUE
19' R/W
12' PUE
12' PUE
19' R/W
19' R/W
12' PUE
S79° 09' 10"W31.21
S89° 36' 44"W

41.02 6,762 SFLOT 61

59.83 2.00

59.83 2.00

55.00 55.00

55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00

55.00 55.00 55.00
C26
S58° 24' 18"E
133.03

44.12 S89° 36' 43"W
111.03
C18C19
C20
C21
C22C23C24
C25
C26C27
C28C29
C30
C31
C32C33C34
C35
C36C37
C38C39

31.4231.42

31.36 31.4231.42

16.64 34.69

33.6258.74

6.98 16.64

31.4231.4231.4247.2550.10

50.11 37.63

12.43 37.41

29.71 95.68

20.0020.0020.0020.0020.0030.0050.0050.0050.0050.0030.0020.0020.0020.00 219.00219.00219.00219.00231.00231.00

20.00 440.00
090°00'00"090°00'00"089°49'38"090°00'00"090°00'00"031°47'18"039°44'50"038°31'16"067°18'25"008°00'05"031°47'18"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"012°21'41"013°06'27"013°06'35"009°50'42"003°05'02"009°16'47"085°06'41"012°27'34"

CURVE TABLE
CURVE # LENGTH RADIUS DELTA

BASIS OF BEARINGS

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.73 ACRES
LOTS = 12.28 ACRESROADS = 2.45 ACRES
50'
0 25' 50' 100'

GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET )
SEE SHEET 4

HARTER ESTATES SOUTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121154 SHEET 5 OF 5

RECORD REFERENCESLEGEND
S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE

BLACKBERRY DRIVE

RASPBERRY WAY

RUTH AVENUE

CRANBERRY WAY
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21- 09 - DOCUMENT NO. 2021-0023789(R2) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R3) BRYN MAWR ESTATES - UNIT 3, BOOK 12 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 230(R4) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)
(R5) RIGHT OF WAY OF A PARCEL OF LAND DEEDED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED NOVEMBER 12, 1963 IN BOOK 634 OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 235, SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS
(R6) MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 43
BEING PORTION OF LOTS 1, 4, AND 5 AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAPENTITLED "MAP OF THE SOUTH 51.51 ACRES OF THE WEST ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 15 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, MT. DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN", FILED IN BOOK 1 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 43 , SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS
N89°38'08"E 637.10' (R1, R4 & M)
N00°23'47"W 560.26' (R1, R4 & M)

D.R. HORTON • EXPRESS • EMERALD • FREEDOM
3000 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 130 • Roseville, CA 95661 • O 916.297.4461 • drhorton.com Exhibit B
Harter Estates North
Subdivision Map

HARTER ESTATES NORTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121185 SHEET 1 OF 4

BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL A AS DESCRIBED THE GRANT DEED FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21-10 RECORDED FEBRUARY 18, 2022 IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2022-0002643.

VICINITY MAP

NOT TO SCALE

BUTTE HOUSE RD

HARTER PARKWAY
STATE ROUTE 20

JEFFERSON AVENUE

RUTH AVENUE

HOOPER ROAD

STATE OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERCITY OF YUBA CITY
I, JACKIE SILLMAN, CLERK OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY HAS, BYRESOLUTION NO. DULY AND REGULARLY PASSED BY SAID COUNCIL ON THE DAY OF , 20 , APPROVED THE WITHIN
MAP OF "HARTER ESTATES NORTH" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONAL

APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP, HERETOFORE FILED AS APPROVED, AND BY SAID RESOLUTION HAS ACCEPTED ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC ITEM(S) 1, 2 AND 3SHOWN IN THE OWNER'S OFFER OF DEDICATION.

JACKIE SILLMAN

CITY CLERK, CITY OF YUBA CITY

CITY CLERK CERTIFICATE
} SS

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, XXXXXXXXXX, AS HOLDER OF RECORD TITLE INTERESTS, OF THE HEREIN SUBDIVIDED LANDS, HEREBY CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND RECORDATION OF THIS PLAT OF "HARTER ESTATES NORTH" AND OFFER FOR DEDICATION AND DO PARTICIPATE IN SAID OFFER OF DEDICATION AND DOHEREBY DEDICATE THE FOLLOWING:

1. 38' STRIPS OF LAND IN FEE TITLE INDICATED ON SAID PLAT AND DESIGNATED AS SOUTH ELMER ROAD,

PIONEER DRIVE, PINER COURT, PINER WAY, GERALD DRIVE, ROESLER DRIVE TARRANGO WAY, ORLIN DRIVE AND GEORGE DRIVE. 2. EASEMENTS INDICATED AS 12.0' PUE (PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT) FOR, BUT NOT LIMITED TO ELECTRICAL,WATER, SEWER, GAS, STORM DRAINAGE, COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, AND ALL APPURTENANCES THERETO. OWNER EXPRESSLY COVENANTS NOT TO UNREASONABLY RESTRICT, OBSTRUCT OR

INTERFERE WITH SAID PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT OR THE USE THEREOF BY THE CITY, ITS AGENTS OR ANYFRANCHISEE

3. EASEMENT FOR ACCESS TO AND THE MAINTENANCE OF A WALL AND FOOTINGS AND ALL

APPURTENANCES PERTAINING THERETO ON, OVER, UNDER AND ACROSS THOSE STRIPS OF LAND GENERALLY 2 FEET IN WIDTH LYING CONTIGUOUS TO LOTS 1-4, 25, 54-61, DESIGNATED AS "2' WALL EASEMENT"

XXXXXXXX
BY: XXXXXXXX TITLE: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

OWNER'S STATEMENT
A.) OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
B.) PROPERTY BEING DEDICATED:

1. BEING ALL THAT REAL PROPERTY AS SHOWN AS ITEM 1 IN OWNER'S OFFER OF DEDICATION.

C.) THE CITY OF YUBA CITY SHALL RECONVEY THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED PROPERTY TO THE ABOVE-NAMED OWNER, OR SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST, IF THE CITY DETERMINES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODESECTION 66477.5 THAT THE SAME PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE PROPERTY WAS DEDICATED DOES NOT EXIST, OR THE PROPERTY OR ANY PORTION THEREOF IS NOT NEEDED FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES.

NOTE: THE LOTS ON THIS MAP ARE SUBJECT TO:

1. ASSESSMENT FROM COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) 2021-1, RESOLUTION NUMBER ______________, RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. ______________ ON _____________________.

2. ASSESSMENT FROM YUBA CITY LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT _____________________, RESOLUTION NUMBER ______________, RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO.______________ ON _____________________.

3. ANY STREET, DRAINAGE, PUBLIC UTILITY, OR OTHER EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY.

4. THE CITY OF YUBA CITY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 19-01 APPROVED ON APRIL 28, 2021. CERTIFICATE FOR FEE DEDICATION BENJAMIN K. MOODY
CITY SURVEYOR P.L.S. 9018
EXPIRES: 9-30-2023
DATED:CITY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
I, BENJAMIN K. MOODY, CITY SURVEYOR OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY, DO HEREBY

STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT.THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FILED SURVEY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISIONMAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF XXXXXXX, ON JANUARY 10, 2023. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE APPROVED OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP; THAT ALL THE

MONUMENTS ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY THE POSITIONS INDICATED AND ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED.

I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY ME AND THAT THE

SUBDIVISION, AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP IS SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS SAIDSUBDIVISION APPEARED ON THE APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP AND ANY APPROVED

ALTERATIONS THEREOF, AND THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT

OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ANY LOCAL ORDINANCES APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH.

BY:

SURVEYOR'S STATEMENTCITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENTRECORDER'S CERTIFICATEFILED THIS DAY OF , 2022, AT : .M. INBOOK OF SURVEYS, AT PAGE AT THE REQUEST OF MHM INC.DONNA M. JOHNSTONSUTTER COUNTY RECORDERFILE NO.P.L.S. 8457JOHN S. MALLENEXPIRES: 12-31-2022 FEE PD.

DEPUTY

PLANNING DIVISION

CITY OF YUBA CITYSTATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIS MAP HAS BEEN EXAMINED THIS __________ DAY OF ______________ , 2023, FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP AND THE

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THEREOF AS APPROVED BY THE YUBA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL 28, 2021. PLANNER'S STATEMENT O
N
N
O
E H
S N
T AT E

ROF P JO
I

SS O L VL
N
7 5
A
8 F C
L . S
IF L
4 RO
EN
AI
R
YO E
U
A
M
AL L
S. NDAS R

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE

IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

COUNTY OF STATE OF }SS

ON BEFORE ME
, NOTARY PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED , WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S)

WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEDTO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED

CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE

PERSON(S), OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.WITNESS MY HAND.

SIGNATURE OF NOTARY

NOTARY'S NAMEMY COMMISSION NUMBER MY COMMISSION EXPIRES PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS (County)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I, NICHOLAS F. VALENCIA, TAX COLLECTOR FOR THE COUNTY OF SUTTER, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SEC. 66492 THAT THE RECORDS OF MY OFFICE SHOW THAT THERE ARE NO LIENS AGAINST THE LANDS SHOWNHEREON OR ANY PART THEREOF FOR UNPAID TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 062-310-017-000
DATE:NICHOLAS F. VALENCIA, TREASURER AND TAX COLLECTOR

COUNTY OF SUTTER, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR'S STATEMENTAS TO LIENS FOR TAXES NOT YET PAYABLE, I ESTIMATE THAT THERE ARE TAXES IN THEAMOUNT OF $ FOR 2022-2023, WHICH ARE A LIEN BUT NOT YET PAYABLE. I CERTIFY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SEC. 66493 THAT SECURITY HASBEEN DEPOSITED WITH THE COUNTY CONDITIONED UPON THE PAYMENT OF SAID TAXESNOT YET PAYABLE.

EXPIRES: 06-30-24
DATED:

BENJAMIN K. MOODYCITY ENGINEER, R.C.E. 72383

HARTER ESTATES NORTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121185 SHEET 2 OF 4

BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL A AS DESCRIBED THE GRANT DEED FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21-10 RECORDED FEBRUARY 18, 2022 IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2022-0002643.

ON BEFORE ME
, NOTARY PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED , WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S)

WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED

TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED

CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE

PERSON(S), OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

WITNESS MY HAND.

SIGNATURE OF NOTARY

NOTARY'S NAMEMY COMMISSION NUMBER MY COMMISSION EXPIRES PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS (County)COUNTY OF STATE OF }SSACKNOWLEDGMENT

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATEVERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE

DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

BENEFICIARY'S STATEMENT
BY:PRINT NAME: TITLE:

SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.53 ACRES
LOTS = 10.48 ACRESROADS = 4.05 ACRES

BASIS OF BEARINGSRECORD REFERENCES
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21 - 10 - DOCUMENT NO. 2022-0002643(R2) RECORD OF SURVEY FOR SIERRA CENTRAL CREDIT UNION - BOOK 18 OF ROS PAGES 239 (2016)
(R3) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R4) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029548(R5) GRANT DEED FOR TANK / PARK PARCEL- DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029549(R6) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)
LEGEND

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE

6,904 SF
Lot 38
5,250 SF
Lot 39
5,250 SF
Lot 40
5,250 SF
Lot 41
5,250 SF
Lot 42
5,182 SF
Lot 43
10,187 SF
Lot 44
9,152 SF
Lot 45
6,742 SF
Lot 46
5,264 SF
Lot 47
5,790 SF
Lot 48
5,790 SF
Lot 49
5,790 SF
Lot 51
5,790 SF
Lot 50
5,790 SF
Lot 52
5,455 SF
Lot 53
8,680 SF
Lot 54
9,048 SF
Lot 55
5,739 SF
Lot 56
7,264 SF
Lot 57
6,875 SF
Lot 58
8,926 SF
Lot 59
7,838 SF
Lot 60
7,443 SF
Lot 61
7,190 SF
Lot 62
5,250 SF
Lot 63
5,250 SF
Lot 64
5,250 SF
Lot 65
5,250 SF
Lot 66
6,739 SF
Lot 67
6,739 SF
Lot 68
5,250 SF
Lot 69
5,250 SF
Lot 70
5,250 SF
Lot 71
5,250 SF
Lot 72
6,749 SF
Lot 73

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

38.93'
S29° 21' 38"E

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
125.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

47.17'

55.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

70.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

55.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

50.00'
N89° 56' 06"E
105.00'

85.00'
C9
C10

36.67'
C6
N32° 42' 14"E

11.27'
S89° 56' 06"W

97.81'
N00° 03' 54"W

93.21'
S06° 43' 52"W

11.27'
S89° 56' 06"W

2.91'
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
C14
C15
S00° 03' 54"E

55.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
S00° 03' 54"E

55.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
S00° 03' 54"E

55.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
S00° 03' 54"E

55.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
S00° 03' 54"E

55.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
N89° 56' 06"E
105.27'

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

50.00'
C17
S81° 32' 19"W

98.87'
N00° 03' 54"W

73.76'

17.15'
C16 C18
S48° 18' 05"W
159.20'
N00° 03' 54"W
125.26'
C19
S00° 03' 54"E

98.23'
S89° 56' 06"W
111.83'
S89° 56' 06"W

46.44'

26.13'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
C20
C21

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
C23
S89° 56' 06"W

69.91'

45.11'
C22
C24
S89° 56' 06"W

65.75'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

52.42'
C3
C4

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

65.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

85.00' C8 45.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

45.00'
C7
N00° 03' 54"W

85.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
C5 46.04' C6 45.00'
(E) 10.0' PUE
(P) 62.5' R/W
(E) 48.0' R/W
N70°17'09"W 653.55'
S62° 08' 50"W

90.18'
C104
N00° 03' 54"W

46.04'
C105
N89° 56' 06"E

10.00'
S00° 03' 54"E

38.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

9.88'
C106
C107
S89° 56' 06"W
368.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
381.37'
C111
C112
S89° 56' 06"W

15.50'
N00° 03' 54"W

85.04'
N00° 03' 54"W

24.13'
C113
N00° 03' 54"W
248.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
192.22'
C115
N00° 03' 54"W
152.40'
N00° 03' 54"W
132.62'
C122

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

2.1' WC

2.2' WC

15.41 S00°03'54"E (R1,R3,R7, & M) 1102.54' (M) 1102.74' (R3) 2.13' WC 2.13' WC

2.13' WC

2.05' WC

2.05' WC

2.13' WC
S70° 17' 09"E

49.52'
S70° 17' 09"E

58.45'
S70° 17' 09"E

58.45'
S70° 17' 09"E
141.67'
C13

55.00' 55.00'
C11
C12
N00° 03' 54"W

51.01'
N70°17'09"W 2831.09' (R1, R2 & M) TO MON. IN WELL AT THARP ROAD 577.46'
(R4)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
(R1)
2253.63' TO MON. IN WELL AT THARP ROAD
S70° 17' 09"E
155.55'

BASIS OF BEARINGS
Curve Table
Curve #
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5C6C7C8C9
C10
C11
C12C13C14C15C16C17C18C19C20
C21
C22C23C24
Length

51.76 730.57

33.81 82.8938.9731.4231.4231.4231.42

19.72 57.45

27.58 60.0838.42

15.7213.53

29.8841.1541.15

11.4613.53

31.1385.45

1.91 Radius
850.00850.00

20.00 1019.001019.00

20.0020.0020.0020.0030.00
1039.50

20.0044.5044.5030.0030.0050.0050.0050.0050.0030.0020.00 1019.001019.00
Delta
003°29'21"049°14'43"096°51'08"004°39'39"002°11'28"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"037°39'19"003°10'00"079°00'40"077°21'44"049°27'47"030°01'45"025°50'31"034°14'18"047°09'23"047°09'23"013°07'58"025°50'31"089°10'47"004°48'16"000°06'26" C105
C106C107C108C109C110
C111
C112C113C114
C115
C116C117C118C119C120
C121
C122

31.4231.7382.96

13.53 123.70

13.53 97.7577.80
100.04

70.73 100.04

70.7377.78

46.4146.41

47.90 69.38
163.69

20.0020.00
981.00

30.0050.0030.00
1000.001000.001000.001000.001000.001000.001019.00

30.0030.00
1019.00
981.00
1000.00
090°00'00"090°53'13"004°50'42"025°50'55"
141°44'52"
025°50'56"005°36'01"004°27'28"005°43'55"004°03'08"005°43'55"004°03'08"004°22'23"088°38'28"088°38'28"002°41'36"004°03'08"009°22'43"

HARTER ESTATES NORTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121185 SHEET 3 OF 4 BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL A AS DESCRIBED THE GRANT DEEDFOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21-10 RECORDED FEBRUARY 18, 2022 INDOCUMENT NUMBER 2022-0002643.

SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.53 ACRES
LOTS = 10.48 ACRESROADS = 4.05 ACRES

BASIS OF BEARINGSRECORD REFERENCESLEGEND

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457

CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE
50'
0 25' 50' 100'

GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET )
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21 - 10 - DOCUMENT NO. 2022-0002643(R2) RECORD OF SURVEY FOR SIERRA CENTRAL CREDIT UNION - BOOK 18 OF ROS PAGES 239 (2016)
(R3) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R4) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029548(R5) GRANT DEED FOR TANK / PARK PARCEL- DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029549(R6) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)

7,531 SF
Lot 1
6,150 SF
Lot 2
5,577 SF
Lot 3
5,807 SF
Lot 4
7,276 SF
Lot 13
5,250 SF
Lot 14
5,250 SF
Lot 15
5,250 SF
Lot 16
5,250 SF
Lot 17
6,739 SF
Lot 18
6,739 SF
Lot 19
5,250 SF
Lot 20
5,250 SF
Lot 21
5,250 SF
Lot 22
5,250 SF
Lot 23 7,577 SF Lot 24
7,455 SF
Lot 25
5,627 SF
Lot 26
5,790 SF
Lot 27
5,264 SF
Lot 28
6,508 SF
Lot 29
10,937 SF
Lot 30
7,731 SF
Lot 31
5,182 SF
Lot 32
5,250 SF
Lot 33
5,250 SF
Lot 34
5,250 SF
Lot 35
5,250 SF
Lot 36
7,568 SF
Lot 37

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.0' R/W

19.3' R/W

19.0' R/W

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE 12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE

12.0' PUE
S89° 56' 06"W
111.83'
S89° 56' 06"W

46.44'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

69.91'
C61
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'
C24
C25

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'
C34
N00° 03' 54"W

98.23'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

26.13'
C33
C35
N34° 30' 44"W
128.26'
C36
N73° 31' 19"W
101.97'
N00° 03' 54"W
111.09'
S89° 56' 06"W

8.55'
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

79.33'
C37 C38
N00° 03' 54"W

50.00'

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'

55.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
105.27'
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'
C40
N00° 03' 54"W

55.00'

18.71'
C39 C28
S19° 14' 55"W
N90° 00' 00"W 17.52'
134.52'
N00° 03' 54"W

64.48'
N89° 56' 06"E

65.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

45.00'
C31

85.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'

50.00' 50.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

70.84'
C29 S00° 03' 54"E

43.54'
C30
C28
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

49.79'
C26
C27
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

85.00' C32 45.00'

55.00'
N89° 56' 06"E
140.18'
S00° 25' 01"E

20.85'
C60
C59
C58
S89° 56' 06"W
106.78'

40.26'
C57
S69° 58' 43"W

50.00'
N87° 00' 42"W

34.33'
C56
6,938 SF
Lot 5
5,278 SF
Lot 6
5,250 SF
Lot 7
6,739 SF
Lot 8
6,739 SF
Lot 9
5,250 SF
Lot 10
5,250 SF
Lot 11
6,739 SF
Lot 12
S89° 56' 06"W

65.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

85.00' C53 45.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'

50.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S00° 03' 54"E
105.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

50.00'

50.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

65.00'

45.00'
C54
S00° 03' 54"E

85.00'
N87° 00' 42"W

44.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
106.50'
S00° 03' 54"E

88.87'
C51
C55
N00° 03' 54"W
105.01'
N00° 03' 54"W
105.00'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

85.00'
S89° 56' 06"W

45.00'
C52
2' WC
2' WC
2' WC
(E) 58.0' R/W
(E) 10.0' PUE
C107
LOT A
1,675 SF
S42° 52' 30"E

28.73'
S87° 00' 42"E
201.86'
C45
N77° 49' 50"E

10.96'
S00° 03' 54"E
248.00'
N00° 03' 54"W
248.00'
S89° 56' 06"W
128.71' N87° 00' 42"W
176.99'
C114
C50
N87° 00' 42"W

91.83'
N89° 56' 06"E
105.00'
N89° 56' 06"E
268.00'
N89° 56' 06"E
378.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

53.71'
C115
N00° 03' 54"W

24.12'
C116
S00° 03' 54"E
254.01'
N00° 03' 54"W

82.54'
C117
C118
N89° 56' 06"E

9.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

38.00'
N89° 56' 06"E

9.00'
C119
C120
C121
N00° 03' 54"W

82.78'

50.00'
N00° 03' 54"W

24.12'

18.7' R/W

17.9' R/W
S89° 56' 06"W

97.29'
C42
C43
N89° 56' 06"E

8.13' C44
N90° 00' 00"W

55.50'
S00° 03' 54"E69.63'
(P) 68.5' R/W
C46
N00° 00' 00"E

47.66'
S89° 56' 06"W

58.90'
S88° 32' 18"E52.27'
S00°25'01"E

55.44'(R1)
(R1,R5, & M)
(R1, R5) (R1, R5)
(R1, 54)
(R1, R5)
(R1, R5, & M)
N90°00'00"E
190.01'
S00°03'54"E (R1, R6, & M) 1102.54' (M) 1102.74' (R1)
(R1)
(R1, R5)
(R1)
C1
C2
C63

2.03' WC

2.05' WC

2.08' WC

50.00'
N89° 56' 06"E
116.77'
N89° 56' 06"E
129.71'

50.00'
(R2)
(R2)
2' WC 2.11'
WC
C68 (TOTAL) C1 & C2 (R2) C47
C48
C49
Curve Table
Curve # Length Radius Delta
C24C25C26C27C28C28C29C30
C31
C32
C33C34C35C36C37C38C39C40
C42
C43C44C45C46C47C48C49C50
C51
C52
C53C54C55C56C57C58C59C60
C61
C62
C63C64C65C66C67C68

1.91 77.7439.79

48.98 70.14

30.6041.4731.4231.4231.42

13.5311.46

41.1541.5829.45

13.5313.53

23.9729.53

13.53 31.42
102.04

33.50 13.53
123.70

13.53 53.29

50.0331.4231.4231.42

32.4830.35

45.4851.00

51.65 35.76

39.79 47.90
247.65

77.78 82.9631.73

46.41 782.33
1019.00
981.00

25.00 981.00

50.00 1019.001019.00

20.0020.0020.0030.0050.0050.0050.0050.0030.0030.0050.0050.0030.0020.00 481.00481.00

30.0050.0030.00
1000.001019.00

20.0020.0020.0020.0020.00
918.50918.50918.50918.50

25.00 1019.00
908.00
1019.00
981.00

20.0030.00
850.00
000°06'26"004°32'26"091°11'29"002°51'40"080°22'25"001°43'14"002°19'54"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"025°50'31"013°07'58"047°09'23"047°38'57"033°44'44"025°50'31"025°50'31"027°28'00"033°50'37"025°50'31"090°00'00"012°09'18"003°59'28"025°50'31" 141°44'56"
025°50'31"003°03'12"002°48'46"090°00'00"090°00'00"090°00'00"093°03'12"086°56'48"002°50'13"003°10'52"003°13'20"002°13'51"091°11'29"002°41'36"015°37'36"004°22'23"004°50'42"090°53'13"088°38'28"052°44'04" C1
C2

51.76 730.57
850.00850.00
003°29'21"049°14'43"
C115C116C117C118C119C120
C121
C122
100.04

70.7377.78

46.4146.41

47.9069.38
163.69
1000.001000.001019.00

30.0030.00
1019.00
981.00
1000.00
005°43'55"004°03'08"004°22'23"088°38'28"088°38'28"002°41'36"004°03'08"009°22'43"

HARTER ESTATES NORTH

CITY OF YUBA CITY
JANUARY 2023
CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SUTTERPREPARED BY: MHM INC. 1204 "E" STREET, MARYSVILLE, CA 9590121185 SHEET 4 OF 4 BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL A AS DESCRIBED THE GRANT DEEDFOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21-10 RECORDED FEBRUARY 18, 2022 IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2022-0002643.

SUBDIVIDED AREA = 14.53 ACRES
LOTS = 10.48 ACRESROADS = 4.05 ACRES

BASIS OF BEARINGSRECORD REFERENCESLEGEND

BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THAT RECORD OF
SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 18 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS AT PAGE 239,SUTTER COUNTY RECORDS.

S.F.
()
PUE
M

EMBRACES RECORD DATAPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTMEASURED

SQUARE FEET

BASIS OF BEARINGSFOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN
SET 5/8" REBAR W / CAP LS 8457CALCULATED POINT - NOTHING

FOUND OR SETFOUND STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT

SET STANDARD CENTERLINE MONUMENT
(B.O.B.)
PSE
50'
0 25' 50' 100'

GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET )
(R1) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 21 - 10 - DOCUMENT NO. 2022-0002643(R2) RECORD OF SURVEY FOR SIERRA CENTRAL CREDIT UNION - BOOK 18 OF ROS PAGES 239 (2016)
(R3) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029547(R4) GRANT DEED FOR RIGHT OF WAY - DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029548(R5) GRANT DEED FOR TANK / PARK PARCEL- DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0029549(R6) UNRECORDED ALTA SURVEY FOR HARTER PACKING COMPANY BY VON GELDERN ENGINEERING (1985)
(R1,R5)(R1,R5)(R1,R5)(R1,R5)(R1,R5)

Agenda Item 12

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Ben Moody, Public Works & Development Services Director Summary
Subject: Harter Estates South (Annexation #4 of property in CFD 2021-1) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution annexing a certain area, Harter Estates South, within the City Limits into an existing Community Facilities District (CFD No. 2021-1) to fund municipal services, and filing said Resolution, along with the Fouth Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien, in the office of County Recorder of the County of Sutter
Fiscal Impact: This CFD annexation will provide $515.10 per single family unit annually, with provisions for inflation
Purpose:

To include new residential development in a Community Facilities District (CFD) to pay for impacts to City Services.

Council’s Strategic Goals:

This item addresses the City Council’s Strategic Goal of operating government in a fiscally responsible and responsive manner.

Background:

The City's adopted policy and Project Conditions of Approval for new residential development include a requirement that the development pay for its share of operations and/or maintenance for police, fire, parks, drainage, and ongoing street maintenance costs. On April 28, 2021, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Map SM 19-04, Harter Estates South, to subdivide a 14.73-acre parcel into 77 single family residential parcels located on the west side of the Harter Specific Plan Area, east of Ruth Avenue, and south of Vine Avenue. Planning Commission Condition of Approval No. 34 contains the requirement to pay for operations and/or maintenance for police, fire, parks, drainage, and ongoing street maintenance costs.

The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Act) provides a mechanism for cities to form CFDs in order to finance the provision of certain municipal services. The types of services that may be provided by a CFD are as follows:

1. Police

2. Fire

3. Recreation and Library

4. Maintenance of parks, parkways and open space

5. Maintenance of Roadways

6. Flood and storm protection services

7. Hazardous substance removal or remediation
On May 18, 2021, Council adopted Resolution 21-047 establishing policies related to CFDs for services. At this same meeting, Council adopted Resolution 21-048 stating its intention to establish City of Yuba City Community Facilities District 2021-1 (Municipal Services) (CFD 2021-1), authorize the levy of a special tax within the district, and authorize the annexation of future territory into the future annexation area by unanimous written approval
On July 6, 2021, Council voted the Initial Property (Dunn Ranch Estates – Unit 1 Subdivision [56 residential lots] at the southeast corner of Royo Ranchero Drive and Monroe Drive) to be part of CFD 2021-1 and subject to the special taxes therein. Council also voted to include a Future Annexation Area. The Future Annexation Area consists of several undeveloped, residential zoned properties generally in the western and southern Yuba City Urbanized Area. The Future Annexation Area allows new property owners to annex to the district by unanimous written consent, which streamlines the CFD annexation process.

Analysis:

The Developer of Harter Estates South has executed an Unanimous Approval of Annexation to a Community Facilities District (CFD 2021-1) to satisfy this condition. Harter Estates South will be the fourth property to annex to CFD 2021-1 (Annexation No. 4), and will be subject to the special taxes therein.

In Resolution 21-048, Council directed the preparation of the Report for CFD 2021-1 to show the services to be provided in CFD 2021-1. The Hearing Report for CFD 2021-1 follows the same methodology used in the formation of CFD 2017-1, which initially established a maximum levy of $425 annually per single family residential unit with an escalation factor equal to the percentage escalation of the City’s combined Police and Fire Department budgets, up to a maximum escalation of 4 percent.

The current levy in fiscal year 2023/24 is $515.10 annually per single family residential unit and $375.72 annually per multi-family residential unit, which will be subject to future escalation in accordance with the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax.

A Notice of Special Tax Lien is to be recorded concurrently with the boundary map (Annexation No .4 – Harter Estates South) in the Office of the County Recorder for the County of Sutter, State of California.

The lien of the Special Tax is a continuing lien which shall secure each annual levy of the Special Tax within the area of Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South).

Fiscal Impact:

A total of 77 residential parcels are contained in Harter Estates South resulting in a total current annual levy of $39,662.70, based on fiscal year 2023/24 rates.

The developer is responsible for covering the costs of annexing to the CFD.

Alternatives:

Do not adopt a resolution annexing Harter Estates South into CFD No. 2021-1 to fund Municipal Services, and direct staff on other acceptable means of assuring this development contributes its fair

share of impacts to services.

Recommendation:

Adopt a Resolution annexing a certain area Harter Estates South, within the City Limits into an existing Community Facilities District (CFD No. 2021-1) to fund municipal services, and filing said Resolution, along with the Fourth Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien, in the office of County Recorder of the County of Sutter.

Attachments:

1. Resolution approving Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) to CFD 2021-1 with Exhibits

2. Fourth Amendment to Notice of Special Tax Lien with Exhibits Prepared By: Submitted By:

Kevin Bradford
Deputy Public Works Director – Engineering
Diana Langley
City Manager

01248.0008/729597.1 AL 1
ATTACHMENT 1

2 RESOLUTION NO. ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

YUBA CITY IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY

OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2021-1 (MUNICIPAL SERVICES) APPROVING
ANNEXATION NO. 4 (HARTER ESTATES SOUTH) TO SAID

DISTRICT RELATING TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE

WEST SIDE OF THE HARTER SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, EAST
OF RUTH AVENUE, AND SOUTH OF VINE AVENUE.

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2021, this City Council adopted a resolution entitled “A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Yuba City Declaring Its Intention To Establish Yuba City Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services), To Authorize The Levy Of A Special Tax Therein To Finance Certain Services And To Authorize The Annexation Of Future Territory In The Future Annexation Area To The District By Unanimous Written Approval” (the “Resolution of Intention”), stating its intention to form Yuba City Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services) (the “CFD”), pursuant to Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing with Section 53311, of the California Government Code (the “Act”) and a future annexation area to the CFD (“Future Annexation Area”); WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention, setting forth a description of the proposed boundaries of the CFD and Future Annexation Area, services to be financed by the CFD (“Services”) and Future Annexation Area, including incidental expenses, and the rate and method of apportionment (the “Rate and Method”) of the special tax (the “Special Tax”) to be levied within the CFD to pay for the Services, is on file with the City Clerk and the provisions thereof are incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein; WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention set July 6, 2021, as the date for the joint public hearing on the establishment of the CFD, the extent of the CFD, the Future Annexation Area, the furnishing of the Services within the CFD, and the proposed Rate and Method; WHEREAS, a notice of the public hearing to be held on July 6, 2021 was published in accordance with the Act;
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2021, this Council held noticed joint public hearing as required by the Act and the Resolution of Intention relative to the proposed formation of the CFD and the Future Annexation Area;
WHEREAS, at the hearing all interested persons desiring to be heard for or against the establishment of the CFD, the extent of the CFD, the furnishing of the Services and the Rate and Method and the Future Annexation Area were heard and a full and fair hearing was held; WHEREAS, at the hearing evidence was presented to this Council on such matters before it, including a special report (the “Hearing Report”) as to the Services to be provided through the CFD and the costs;
WHEREAS, following the close of the hearing, written protests with respect to the formation of the CFD, the furnishing of specified types of services and the Rate and Method had not been filed with the City Clerk by fifty percent (50%) or more of the registered voters residing

3 within the territory of the CFD or property owners of one-half (1/2) or more of the area of land within the CFD and not exempt from the proposed special taxes; and WHEREAS, following the close of the hearing, written protests with respect to the Future Annexation Area, the furnishing of specified types of services and the Rate and Method had not been filed with the City Clerk by fifty percent (50%) or more of the registered voters residing within the territory of the CFD or Future Annexation Area or property owners of one-half (1/2) or more of the area of land within the CFD or Future Annexation Area and not exempt from the proposed special taxes; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-094, which is on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference, that ordered the formation of the CFD and Future Annexation Area, defined the public services (the “Services”) to be provided by the CFD, authorized the levy of a special tax on property within the CFD, preliminarily established an appropriations limit for the CFD, and approved future qualifying projects the ability to voluntarily annex into the Future Annexation Area by unanimous approval of the property owners, all pursuant to the Act; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-095 that called a special election for July 6, 2021, at which the questions of levying a special tax and establishing an appropriations limit with respect to the CFD were submitted to the qualified electors within the CFD; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-096, that declared the results of the special election and finding that more than two-thirds (2/3) of all votes cast at the special election were in favor of the issue presented, and such measure passed; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 2021 a notice of special tax lien was recorded with the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Sutter, as Document No. 2021-0012518 the “Notice of Special Tax Lien”), thereby giving notice that the lien to secure payment of the special tax was imposed on the land in the CFD; and
WHEREAS, the owner (the “Property Owner”) of the parcels listed in Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located within the Future Annexation Area (the “Property”) has agreed to mitigate certain impacts of the proposed development of the Property by paying for the Services financed by the CFD; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, the Property Owner has executed a unanimous approval, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Unanimous Approval”), constituting the Property Owner’s unanimous approval and unanimous vote in favor of the annexation of the Property to the CFD and the levy of special taxes on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now wishes to approve this Annexation No. 4 of the Property pursuant to the simplified process for annexations under Sections 53328.1, 53339.7 and/or 53339.8 of the Act and add Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) as part of the CFD.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY, ACTING AS

LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1 (MUNICIPAL SERVICES) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

4 1. Recitals. The City Council finds and determines that all the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.

2. Unanimous Approval. The City Council hereby receives and files the Unanimous Approval as Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) to the CFD, and hereby further authorizes and directs the officers of the City to do any and all things to execute and delivery all documents they may deem necessary or advisable in order to consummate the transaction described herein and to effectuate the purpose of this Resolution.

3. Approval of Annexation. The City Council hereby determines that the Property is added to and part of the CFD with full effect and the City Council approves and confirms the Rate and Method of Apportionment of the Special Tax attached to the Unanimous Approval this reference incorporated herein. The City Council hereby finds that the Property Owner’s unanimous written approval is equivalent to an election pursuant to Government Code Section 53339.7(a) of the Act. The Property is added to and part of the existing CFD with full legal effect, and the City Council shall levy any special tax within the annexed territory as specified in the Ordinance No. 005-021 adopted with respect to the CFD pursuant to Government Code Section 53340, any resolution related thereto and, as specified in the Resolution of Intention, and as specified in any other Ordinance, if any, adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 53340.

4. Consolidation of Annexed Map. The City Council hereby determines that the territory described in Exhibit C hereto, and further defined in the map entitled “Annexation Map No. 4 (Harter Estates South) of City of Yuba City Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services), City of Yuba City, County of Sutter, State of California” which is on file with the City Clerk, is added to and part of the CFD with full effect. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to endorse the certificates set forth on the map and to record the map in accordance with the provisions of Sections 3111, 3113 and 3113.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.

5. Validity of Procedures. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all prior proceedings and actions taken by the City Council pursuant to the Act in connection with the formation, voluntary annexation area and annexation of territory to the CFD, including this Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South), were and are valid and in conformity with the Act.

6. Amendment to Notice of Special Tax Lien. The City Clerk, or designee, is hereby directed to complete, execute and cause to be recorded in the office of County Recorder of the County of Sutter, an amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 3114.5 and 3117.5 of California Streets and Highways Code of the State of California within fifteen (15) days of the adoption of this Resolution, evidencing that the Property is added to the CFD.

7. Effective Date. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

5 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Yuba City at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of July, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST

Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Shannon L. Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
Exhibits:

A. Assessor parcel Numbers and Owners of Land
B. Unanimous Approval
a) Exhibit A – Description of Services
b) Exhibit B – Annexation No. 4, Rate and Method of Apportionment c) Exhibit C – Annexation Map No. 4 of Harter Estates South

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF YUBA CITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1
(MUNICIPAL SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 4 (HARTER ESTATES SOUTH)
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS AND OWNERS OF LAND
Assessor Parcel No(s) Name of Property Owner
62-310-014 D.R. Horton, CA2, Inc.,
A California corporation
That will become 77 lots with assessor parcel numbers
62-310-TBD D.R. Horton, CA2, Inc.,
A California corporation

EXHIBIT B

CITY OF YUBA CITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1
(MUNICIPAL SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 4 (HARTER ESTATES SOUTH)

UNANIMOUS APPROVAL
[attached]

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)

UNANIMOUS APPROVAL
of Annexation to a Community Facilities District and Related Matters City of Yuba City
Community Facilities District No. 2021-1
(Municipal Services)
Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)
To the Honorable City Council
City of Yuba City, as legislative body of
Community Facilities District No. 2021-1
(Municipal Services)
1201 Civic Center Boulevard,
Yuba City, California 95993
Members of the City Council:

This constitutes the Unanimous Approval (the “Unanimous Approval”) of D.R. Horton CA2, Inc., a California corporation, the record owner(s) (the “Property Owner”) of the fee title to the real property identified below (the “Property”) contemplated by Sections 53328.1 and/or 53339.3 et seq. of the MelloRoos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (the “Act”), to the annexation of the Property to the "City of Yuba City Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services)” (the “CFD”) and approval of the special taxes to be levied against the Property, and the undersigned hereby states, certifies, agrees and declares under penalty of perjury, as follows:

1. Property Owner. This Unanimous Approval is submitted by the Property Owner as the record owner(s) of fee title to the Property. The Property Owner has supplied to the City current evidence of its ownership of fee title to the Property. No parties are residing on the Property and therefore there are no registered voters on the Property.

2. Approval of Annexation. This Unanimous Approval constitutes the unanimous approval and unanimous vote by the Property Owner in favor of the annexation of the Property to the CFD. The CFD was formed to finance the municipal services, which are incorporated herein by this reference (the “Services”) described in Exhibit A hereto and made a part hereof. In such connection Property Owner has reviewed the list of the Services and hereby agrees, consents and approves to the Services and the Annexation of the Property to the CFD for the benefit of the City and the CFD.

3. Approval of Special Tax and the Services. This Unanimous Approval constitutes the unanimous approval and unanimous vote by the Property Owner in favor of the levy of special taxes (the “Special Taxes”) on the Property to finance the Services. The Special Taxes will be levied according to the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Taxes for the CFD attached hereto as Exhibit B and made a part hereof (the "Rate and Method"). In such connection property owner consents and approves of the Rate and Method and understands that such taxes shall be levied against the Property.

4. Approval of the Appropriations Limit. This Unanimous Approval constitutes the unanimous approval and unanimous vote by the Property Owner in favor of the appropriations limit

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)
established for the CFD. The Property Owner hereby approves, consents and agrees to the appropriations limit for the CFD of $1,700,000, pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, as adjusted for changes in the cost of living and changes in the population.

5. Waivers and Vote. Resolution No. 21-048 adopted by the City Council on May 18, 2021 and Resolution No. 21-094 adopted by the City Council on July 6, 2021 and Sections 53328.1 and 53339.3 of the Act provide an alternate and independent procedure for annexation to a community facilities district that simplifies the annexation process. Under such process, the Property Owner acknowledges and agrees that by executing this Unanimous Approval, the Property Owner is voluntarily waiving any and all right to an election held in accordance with Sections 53326, 53327, 53327.5, 53328, 53339.7, 53339.8 and other relevant provisions of the Act. The Property Owner hereby confirms that this Unanimous Approval constitutes its unanimous approval and unanimous vote as described herein and as contemplated by Section 53339.3 et seq. of the Act and for purposes of the California Constitution Article XIII A and XIII C. In lieu of an approval by public hearing, ballot and election, if any, the Property Owner intends for this Unanimous Approval to constitute its ballot and election and waiver of a public hearing.

Further, the Property Owner hereby waives all other rights with respect to the annexation of the Property, the levy of the Special Taxes on the Property in accordance with the rate and method of apportionment and the other matters covered in this Unanimous Approval.

6. Recordation of Amendment to Notice of Special Tax Lien. The Notice of Special Tax Lien for the CFD was recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Sutter, State of California on July 12, 2021, as Document No. 2021-0012518.

The Property Owner hereby understands and agrees, consents and approves to the City Clerk, or City designee, to execute and cause to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Sutter an amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien for the CFD as required by Section 3117.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code. The amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien shall include the Rate and Method as an exhibit thereto.

7. Authority Warranted. The Property Owner warrants to the City that the presentation of this Unanimous Approval, any votes, consents or waivers contained herein, and other actions for the annexation of the Property to the CFD and the levy of special taxes within the area of the Property shall do not constitute events of default or delinquencies under any existing or proposed financing documents entered into or to be entered into by the Property Owner for the Property, including any “due-onencumbrance” clauses under any existing security instruments secured by the Property.

8. Due Diligence and Disclosures. The Property Owner agrees to cooperate with the City and its attorneys and consultants and to provide all information and disclosures required by the City and/or the Act about the Special Taxes to purchasers of the Property or any part of it.

9. Agreements. The Property Owner further agrees to execute such additional or supplemental agreements as may be required by the City to provide for any of the actions and conditions described in this Unanimous Approval, including any cash deposit required to pay for the City’s costs in annexing the Property to the CFD.

10. The Property. The Property is identified below, and such Property Owner approves, consents and agrees that Property will be subject to the CFD upon recordation of the amendment to the

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)
Notice of Special Tax Lien. The Property is located in the Future Annexation Area of the CFD and the map is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

Assessor’s Parcel Number(s):

APN Acreage Anticipated Units Property Owner
62-310-014 14.73 77
D.R. Horton, CA2, Inc., a
California corporation
Acres: _14.73 _
By executing this Unanimous Approval, the Property Owner agrees, consents, declares and certifies to all of the above.

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)_
Property Owner
By: D.R. Horton, CA2, Inc., a California
corporation
By:

Name: Bonnie Chiu
Title: Vice President
Notice Address
Harter Estates Project Manager
3000 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 130
Roseville, CA 95661

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)

EXHIBIT A
Yuba City
Community Facilities District No. 2021-1
(Municipal Services)

DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES
The Services to be funded by the CFD include the following services and all incidental expenses related to such services, all of which are authorized by the Act:

PUBLIC SERVICES
(a) Police protection services;
(b) Fire protection and suppression services, ambulance and paramedic services; (c) maintenance of parks, parkways, streets, roads, and open space; (d) flood and storm protection services, including but not limited to the maintenance of storm drainage systems and sandstorm protection systems, (e) Services with respect to the removal or remedial action for the cleanup of any hazardous substance released or threatened to be released into the environment, subject to the limitations contained in Section 53313 of the Act;
(f) Maintenance and operation of any real property or other tangible property with an estimated useful life of five or more years that is owned by the local agency or by another local agency pursuant to an agreement entered into under Section 53316.2; and (g) costs incurred by the City and or County in formation of the district, annexation and annual contract administration.

In accordance with Section 53313 of the Act, the additional services may not supplant services available within the territory when the district was created or annexed.

The same types of services which are authorized to be financed by CFD No. 2021-1 are the types of services to be provided in the Future Annexation Area, as properties are annexed.

The services include operational and maintenance costs associated with providing such services.

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)

EXHIBIT B
City of Yuba City
Community Facilities District No. 2021-1
(Municipal Services)

RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
The Special Tax shall be levied in Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) in accordance with the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for City of Yuba City Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services) pursuant to the rate set forth in the attachment hereto.

01248.0008/694321.2 1 of 4

CITY OF YUBA CITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021‐1
(MUNICIPAL SERVICES)

RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
A Special Tax applicable to each Assessor's Parcel in Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services) [herein "CFD No. 2021-1"] shall be levied and collected according to the tax liability determined by the City Council, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of CFD No. 2021-1, through the application of the appropriate Special Tax rate, as described below. All of the property in CFD No. 2021-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions of Section E below, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided.

A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
"Acreage" or "Acre" means the land area making up an Assessor's Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable final subdivision map or other parcel map recorded at the County Recorder's Office.
"Administrative Expenses" means the costs incurred by the City to determine, levy and collect the Special Tax, including salaries of City employees and fees of consultants and the costs of collecting installments of the Special Taxes upon the general tax rolls; preparation of required reports, and any other costs required to administer the CFD No. 2021-1 as determined by the Finance Director. "Administrator" means the person or firm designated by the City to administer the Special Taxes according to this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. “Annual Tax Escalation Factor” means an annual increase in the Maximum Special Tax following the Base Year in an amount not to exceed four percent (4%). The Annual Tax Escalation Factor shall be based on the budgeted escalation of the City of Yuba City’s combined Police and Fire Departments from the previous fiscal year.
"Assessor's Parcel" or "Parcel" means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel number.
"Assessor’s Parcel Map" means an official map of the County Assessor designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel number.
"Authorized Services" means the public services authorized to be funded by CFD No. 2021-1 as set forth in the documents adopted by the City Council when the CFD No. 2021-1 was formed. "Base Year" means Fiscal Year 2020-2021.
"City" means the City of Yuba City.

01248.0008/694321.2 2 of 4
"City Council" means the City Council of the City of Yuba City, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2021-1.
"County" means Sutter County, California.
"Developed Residential Property" means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels of Taxable Property for which a use permit or building permit for new construction of a residential structure was issued prior to June 30 of the preceding Fiscal Year.
"Finance Director" means the Finance Director for the City or his or her designee or successor. "Fiscal Year" means the period starting on July 1 and ending on the following June 30. "Maximum Special Tax" means the maximum Special Tax determined in accordance with Section C below that can be levied on Taxable Property in any Fiscal Year. “Multi-Family Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all units in CFD No. 2021-1 for which a building permit was issued or may be issued for construction of a residential structure with multiple units that share common walls, all of which are offered for rent to the general public. "Public Property" means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 that is owned by the federal government, State of California, County, City, or other public agency. “Residential Unit(s)” means an individual lot of land for which a building permit could be issued to construct one or more residential dwelling units.
“Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property for which a map has been recorded designating individual Residential Units.
“Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 for which a map has been recorded designating the Assessor’s Parcel as a lot for which a building permit could be issued and the Assessor’s Parcel cannot be classified as a Residential Property.
"Special Tax" means any tax levied to pay for Authorized Services and Administrative Expenses. “Single Family Property” means buildings containing one dwelling unit located on a single lot that are individually owned, including attached or detached residences (i.e., townhome unit and/or condominium units).
"Taxable Property" means all Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 designated as Developed Residential Property.
“Undeveloped Residential Property” means all Parcels of Residential Property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 that are not Developed Residential Property, as determined by the Administrator.
"Unit" means an individual single family detached unit or an individual residential unit within a duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhome, condominium, or apartment structure.

01248.0008/694321.2 3 of 4

CATEGORIZING PARCELS FOR ANNUAL TAX LEVY
Each Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall identify the current Assessor's Parcel numbers for all Parcels within CFD No. 2021-1, and each parcel shall be classified as Developed Residential Property, NonResidential Property, Public Property, or Undeveloped Residential Property, and shall be subject to the levy of annual Special Taxes determined pursuant to Sections C and D below.

B. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE
All Taxable Property within the CFD No. 2021-1 shall be subject to a Maximum Special Tax that will be levied each Fiscal Year to pay for Authorized Services. As discussed above, the Administrator shall rely first on the Land Use Designation for a Parcel to determine the appropriate Maximum Special Tax in Table 1, below, but, in the absence of an assigned Land Use Designation, the Administrator shall refer to the Zoning Designation and land use to be built on the Parcel. The following Maximum Special Tax rates apply to all Parcels of Developed Property within CFD No. 2021-1:

Each Residential Unit is subject to the Maximum Special Tax shown in Table 1, below.

Non- Residential Property, Undeveloped Property, and Public Property is not subject to the Maximum Special Tax.

Table 1
Property Land Use Fiscal Year 2020/21 Maximum Special Tax Amount *
Single Family Property $467.10 per Single Family Residential Unit Multi-Family Property $340.70 per Multi-Family Residential Unit Undeveloped Residential Property $0 per Assessor’s Parcel * Beginning July 1, 2021 and each July 1 thereafter, all of the Maximum Special Taxes shown in Table 1 above shall be adjusted by applying the Annual Tax Escalation Factor.

C. METHOD OF LEVY AND COLLECTION OF SPECIAL
TAX
Each Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall levy the Maximum Special Tax on each Parcel of Developed Property in CFD No. 2021-1. The Special Tax for CFD No. 2021-1 shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes provided, however, that CFD No. 2021-1 may (under the authority of Government Code Section 53340) in any particular case bill the taxes directly to the property owner off the County tax roll, and the Special Tax will be equally subject to foreclosure if delinquent.

D. LIMITATIONS
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no Special Tax shall be levied on Public Property, Non-Residential Property, or Undeveloped Residential Property.

01248.0008/694321.2 4 of 4
E. FUTURE ANNEXATIONS
It is anticipated that additional properties will be annexed to CFD No. 2021‐1 from time to time.

The property to be annexed will be assigned to the appropriate Maximum Special Tax rate for the Tract or Tracts when annexed, as pursuant to California Government Code section 53339 et seq.

In certain cases, it may be determined that a potential property to be annexed may require a higher cost to provide City services than other areas of the City (e.g., if it possesses a large quantity of City- owned infrastructure that requires maintenance). As each annexation is proposed, the City may elect to prepare an analysis to determine the annual cost for providing Services, and may incorporate unique zones with varying Maximum Special Tax rates. Such zones may be referred to by reference to a letter or number on the boundary map, and adjust the rates in Table 1 of such annexation to reflect the applicable rates.

The City may adopt a future annexation area in the future and allow for annexation by unanimous written consent.

F. INTERPRETATION OF SPECIAL TAX FORMULA
The City reserves the right to make minor administrative and technical changes to this document that do not materially affect the rate and method of apportioning the Special Tax. In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be left to the City's discretion. Interpretations may be made by the City by ordinance or resolution for purposes of clarifying any vagueness or ambiguity in this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.

G. TERM
The Special Tax shall be collected in perpetuity.

H. APPEALS
Any property owner claiming that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the Administrator not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. The Administrator shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the decision of the Administrator requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s) to compensate for the overpayment of the Special Tax.

Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)

EXHIBIT C
Yuba City
Community Facilities District No. 2021-1
(Municipal Services)
ANNEXATION MAP NO. 4 (HARTER ESTATES SOUTH) OF YUBA CITY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1
(MUNICIPAL SERVICES)], CITY OF YUBA CITY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA [see attached]

Proposed Boundary Map of CFD No. 2021-1 Annexation No. 4 City of Yuba City, Sutter County, California
20 HARTER RD

RUTH AVE

SPIRIT DR

EL MARGAR TI A RD

COLUSA FRONTAGE RD

REDDING AVE

BRYN MAWR DR

ADAMS RD

JEFFERSON AVE

V LI LA AVE

ORO GRANDE ST

K MI BERLY DR

HARTER PRKWY

SERENA DR

TIERRA BUENA RD

SOMBRA CT

BRYAN WAY

BUTTE HOUSE RD

POOLE BLVD

EL MARGAR TI A RD
20 1
.
inch = 435 feet
Legend
Parcels subject to the CFD
Existing City Limit Boundaries
Harter Estates South

1 ATTACHMENT 2

2 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
AFTER RECORDATION RETURN TO:

City of Yuba City
Attn: City Clerk
1201 Civic Center Boulevard
Yuba City, California 95993

FOURTH AMENDMENT TO NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN
City of Yuba City
Community Facilities District No. 2021-1
(Municipal Services)
Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South)
Pursuant to the requirements of Sections 3114.5 and 3117.5 of the Streets and Highways Code and Government Code Section 53311, et seq., the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Yuba City, acting on behalf of City of Yuba City Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services) (the “CFD”), HEREBY GIVES NOTICE that a lien is hereby imposed on taxable property within the property described herein Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South), which has been annexed to the CFD to secure payment of a special tax (“Special Tax”) which the City Council of the City of Yuba City (the “City”), County of Sutter (the “County”), State of California, is authorized to annually levy for the following purpose of financing the following services:
(a) Police protection services;
(b) Fire protection and suppression services, ambulance and paramedic services;
(c) maintenance of parks, parkways, streets, roads, and open space; (d) flood and storm protection services, including but not limited to the maintenance of storm drainage systems and sandstorm protection systems, (e) Services with respect to the removal or remedial action for the cleanup of any hazardous substance released or threatened to be released into the environment, subject to the limitations contained in Section 53313 of the Act; (f) Maintenance and operation of any real property or other tangible property with an estimated useful life of five or more years that is owned by the local agency or by another local agency pursuant to an agreement entered into under Section 53316.2; and

3 (g) costs incurred by the City and or County in formation of the district, annexation and annual contract administration.

The services include operational and maintenance costs associated with providing such services.

The Special Tax is authorized to be levied within the CFD that has now been officially formed and includes Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) and the lien of the Special Tax is a continuing lien which shall secure each annual levy of the Special Tax and which shall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid, if applicable, permanently satisfied, and canceled in accordance with law or until the Special Tax ceases to be levied and a notice of cessation of Special Tax is recorded in accordance with Section 53330.5 of the Government Code.

The rate, method of apportionment, and manner of collection of the authorized special tax is as follows: The rate and method of apportionment of the authorized Special Tax is as shown in the Rate and Method of Apportionment set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Rate and Method”). The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure, sale and lien priority in case of delinquency as is provided for ad valorem taxes; provided, however, the CFD may utilize a direct billing procedure for any Special Taxes that cannot be collected on the County tax roll or may elect to collect the Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations. Conditions under which the obligation to pay the special tax may be prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien of the special tax canceled are as follows: The Special Tax is levied perpetually as provided in the Rate and Method and there are no conditions upon which it may be prepaid.

Notice is further given that upon the recording of this notice in the Office of the County Recorder of Sutter County, the obligation to pay the Special Tax levy shall become a lien upon all non-exempt real property within the area of Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) in accordance with Sections 3114.5, 3115.5 and 3117.5 of the Streets and Highways Code.

The (a) names of the owner(s) of the real property included within the annexed property to the CFD as they appear on the last secured assessment roll as of the date of recording of this Notice and (b) the Assessor’s tax parcel(s) numbers of all parcels or any portion thereof which are included within Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) to the CFD and not exempt from the special tax, are as set forth on the attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit B.

Reference is made to the boundary map of the Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) to the CFD recorded concurrently herewith in the Book of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts in the Office of the County Recorder

4 for the County of Sutter, State of California, which map is now the final boundary map of Annexation No. 4 (Harter Estates South) to the CFD. The Boundary Map of the original district is Recorded as Document No. 2021-0012517 in Book 3 of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Pages 93 through 96, in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Sutter, State of California.

Reference hereby is made to the Amendment to Notice of Special Tax Lien to the CFD recorded as Document No. 2021-0012518 in the Records of the County Recorder of the County of Sutter.

For further information concerning the current and estimated tax liability of owners or purchasers of real property subject to this special tax lien, interested persons should contact the City of Yuba City, City Hall, Finance Director, 1201 Civic Center Boulevard Yuba City, California 95993, telephone number 530/822-4618 Dated: As of _________________, 2023
By: _________________________________________
Ciara Wakefield, Deputy City Clerk
City of Yuba City

A-1

EXHIBIT A
See Rate and Method of Apportionment Attached
(Insert RMA)

01248.0008/694321.2 1 of 4

CITY OF YUBA CITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021‐1
(MUNICIPAL SERVICES)

RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
A Special Tax applicable to each Assessor's Parcel in Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Municipal Services) [herein "CFD No. 2021-1"] shall be levied and collected according to the tax liability determined by the City Council, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of CFD No. 2021-1, through the application of the appropriate Special Tax rate, as described below. All of the property in CFD No. 2021-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions of Section E below, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided.

A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
"Acreage" or "Acre" means the land area making up an Assessor's Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable final subdivision map or other parcel map recorded at the County Recorder's Office.
"Administrative Expenses" means the costs incurred by the City to determine, levy and collect the Special Tax, including salaries of City employees and fees of consultants and the costs of collecting installments of the Special Taxes upon the general tax rolls; preparation of required reports, and any other costs required to administer the CFD No. 2021-1 as determined by the Finance Director. "Administrator" means the person or firm designated by the City to administer the Special Taxes according to this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. “Annual Tax Escalation Factor” means an annual increase in the Maximum Special Tax following the Base Year in an amount not to exceed four percent (4%). The Annual Tax Escalation Factor shall be based on the budgeted escalation of the City of Yuba City’s combined Police and Fire Departments from the previous fiscal year.
"Assessor's Parcel" or "Parcel" means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel number.
"Assessor’s Parcel Map" means an official map of the County Assessor designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel number.
"Authorized Services" means the public services authorized to be funded by CFD No. 2021-1 as set forth in the documents adopted by the City Council when the CFD No. 2021-1 was formed. "Base Year" means Fiscal Year 2020-2021.
"City" means the City of Yuba City.

01248.0008/694321.2 2 of 4
"City Council" means the City Council of the City of Yuba City, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2021-1.
"County" means Sutter County, California.
"Developed Residential Property" means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels of Taxable Property for which a use permit or building permit for new construction of a residential structure was issued prior to June 30 of the preceding Fiscal Year.
"Finance Director" means the Finance Director for the City or his or her designee or successor. "Fiscal Year" means the period starting on July 1 and ending on the following June 30. "Maximum Special Tax" means the maximum Special Tax determined in accordance with Section C below that can be levied on Taxable Property in any Fiscal Year. “Multi-Family Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all units in CFD No. 2021-1 for which a building permit was issued or may be issued for construction of a residential structure with multiple units that share common walls, all of which are offered for rent to the general public. "Public Property" means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 that is owned by the federal government, State of California, County, City, or other public agency. “Residential Unit(s)” means an individual lot of land for which a building permit could be issued to construct one or more residential dwelling units.
“Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property for which a map has been recorded designating individual Residential Units.
“Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 for which a map has been recorded designating the Assessor’s Parcel as a lot for which a building permit could be issued and the Assessor’s Parcel cannot be classified as a Residential Property.
"Special Tax" means any tax levied to pay for Authorized Services and Administrative Expenses. “Single Family Property” means buildings containing one dwelling unit located on a single lot that are individually owned, including attached or detached residences (i.e., townhome unit and/or condominium units).
"Taxable Property" means all Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 designated as Developed Residential Property.
“Undeveloped Residential Property” means all Parcels of Residential Property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2021-1 that are not Developed Residential Property, as determined by the Administrator.
"Unit" means an individual single family detached unit or an individual residential unit within a duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhome, condominium, or apartment structure.

01248.0008/694321.2 3 of 4

CATEGORIZING PARCELS FOR ANNUAL TAX LEVY
Each Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall identify the current Assessor's Parcel numbers for all Parcels within CFD No. 2021-1, and each parcel shall be classified as Developed Residential Property, NonResidential Property, Public Property, or Undeveloped Residential Property, and shall be subject to the levy of annual Special Taxes determined pursuant to Sections C and D below.

B. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE
All Taxable Property within the CFD No. 2021-1 shall be subject to a Maximum Special Tax that will be levied each Fiscal Year to pay for Authorized Services. As discussed above, the Administrator shall rely first on the Land Use Designation for a Parcel to determine the appropriate Maximum Special Tax in Table 1, below, but, in the absence of an assigned Land Use Designation, the Administrator shall refer to the Zoning Designation and land use to be built on the Parcel. The following Maximum Special Tax rates apply to all Parcels of Developed Property within CFD No. 2021-1:

Each Residential Unit is subject to the Maximum Special Tax shown in Table 1, below.

Non- Residential Property, Undeveloped Property, and Public Property is not subject to the Maximum Special Tax.

Table 1
Property Land Use Fiscal Year 2020/21 Maximum Special Tax Amount *
Single Family Property $467.10 per Single Family Residential Unit Multi-Family Property $340.70 per Multi-Family Residential Unit Undeveloped Residential Property $0 per Assessor’s Parcel * Beginning July 1, 2021 and each July 1 thereafter, all of the Maximum Special Taxes shown in Table 1 above shall be adjusted by applying the Annual Tax Escalation Factor.

C. METHOD OF LEVY AND COLLECTION OF SPECIAL
TAX
Each Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall levy the Maximum Special Tax on each Parcel of Developed Property in CFD No. 2021-1. The Special Tax for CFD No. 2021-1 shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes provided, however, that CFD No. 2021-1 may (under the authority of Government Code Section 53340) in any particular case bill the taxes directly to the property owner off the County tax roll, and the Special Tax will be equally subject to foreclosure if delinquent.

D. LIMITATIONS
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no Special Tax shall be levied on Public Property, Non-Residential Property, or Undeveloped Residential Property.

01248.0008/694321.2 4 of 4
E. FUTURE ANNEXATIONS
It is anticipated that additional properties will be annexed to CFD No. 2021‐1 from time to time.

The property to be annexed will be assigned to the appropriate Maximum Special Tax rate for the Tract or Tracts when annexed, as pursuant to California Government Code section 53339 et seq.

In certain cases, it may be determined that a potential property to be annexed may require a higher cost to provide City services than other areas of the City (e.g., if it possesses a large quantity of City- owned infrastructure that requires maintenance). As each annexation is proposed, the City may elect to prepare an analysis to determine the annual cost for providing Services, and may incorporate unique zones with varying Maximum Special Tax rates. Such zones may be referred to by reference to a letter or number on the boundary map, and adjust the rates in Table 1 of such annexation to reflect the applicable rates.

The City may adopt a future annexation area in the future and allow for annexation by unanimous written consent.

F. INTERPRETATION OF SPECIAL TAX FORMULA
The City reserves the right to make minor administrative and technical changes to this document that do not materially affect the rate and method of apportioning the Special Tax. In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be left to the City's discretion. Interpretations may be made by the City by ordinance or resolution for purposes of clarifying any vagueness or ambiguity in this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.

G. TERM
The Special Tax shall be collected in perpetuity.

H. APPEALS
Any property owner claiming that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the Administrator not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. The Administrator shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the decision of the Administrator requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s) to compensate for the overpayment of the Special Tax.

B-1

EXHIBIT B

APN OWNER
62-310-014 D.R. Horton, CA2, Inc., a California corporation

Agenda Item 13

CITY OF YUBA CITY

STAFF REPORT
Date: July 18, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council;
From: Public Works Department
Presentation By: Joshua Wolffe, Associate Engineer
Summary
Subject: Yuba City Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (Stabler Lane/Garden Highway Area) Resolution of Intent
Recommendation: A. Adopt the following Resolutions to continue the Maintenance District, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972:
o Resolution Approving the Engineer’s Report, Yuba City Landscape Maintenance District No. 1
o Resolution of Intention to Order Improvements, Yuba City Landscape Maintenance District No. 1
B. Set a Public Hearing for August 15, 2023 at 6:00 PM to establish assessments for FY 2023-24
Fiscal Impact: Receipt of assessments and expenditures of funds for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1
Purpose:

To continue to recover costs to provide lighting and landscape maintenance throughout the City pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution.

Council Strategic Goal:

Levying Yuba City Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (LLMD No. 1) addresses the City Council’s Strategic Goal of maintaining infrastructure and fiscal responsibility.

Background:

The City annually levies and collects a special assessment in order to maintain and service landscaping that provides special benefit to the parcels identified in Landscape Maintenance District 1 (Attachment 1, Exhibit A). The assessments were approved by the property owners of record through a protest ballot proceeding at the time the District was formed.

District 1 includes the Stabler Lane area (A) and Garden Highway area (B, B_1, and B_2). Zones A and B do not have provisions for a cost of living adjustment (COLA) and have historically been charged

the maximum levy allowed in order to cover the expenses. Zones B_1 and B_2 do have provisions for a COLA which is based on the Consumer Price Index from January to January.

In previous years, the expenditures in District No. 1 exceeded the revenue due to increasing costs and the lack of COLA provisions, creating negative Reserve Fund Balances. With recent aggressive costcutting measures that have reduced professional services, water, and administration expenses, the revenues have exceeded the expenditures in District No. 1.

The City previously attempted to modify District No. 1 to include the COLA provisions, but residents within the District opposed the modification. In order to restore higher maintenance levels, additional funding sources and/or a new Proposition 218 process will need to be approved.

Analysis:

The Engineer’s Annual Report has been prepared and is on file in the City Clerk’s office. The report describes the District, the improvements therein, the method of assessment, and the proposed assessment for each parcel. The Resolution approving the Annual Report and the Resolution of Intention to order improvements are required by state law to continue the District. The proposed action in this report sets a public hearing for the Council meeting to be held on August 15, 2023 to establish assessments for the coming year.

Fiscal Impact:

The proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 23/24 are shown in Attachment 3.

The projected revenue, expenditures, and cash balance, which include capital reserve, for the Districts are as follows:

District
– Zone
of
Benefit
Revenue Expenditures Projected
Reserve Fund
Balance as of
7/1/24*
1 - A $22,007 $18,609 $79
1 – B** $66,315 $65,186 $13,952
*The Projected Reserve Fund Balance is the total of the Capital Replacement Reserve plus the Operating Reserve.
**Dollar amounts for both Zones of Benefit B, B_1, and B_2 are included within “1-B” row of table.

The reserve balance in Zone of Benefit B consists of General Fund transfers that were unspent from previous years. Staff recommends maintaining this reserve balance to cover unforeseen expenses that may come up throughout the year. Moving forward, the City may be required to reduce maintenance levels in District No. 1, or utilize General Fund Gateway Maintenance Transfer funds to maintain previous years’ level of maintenance.

Alternatives:

1. Council may reduce the assessment amounts which will affect future revenue and expenditure amounts in FY 2023-24, or cancel the District and find alternative funding sources to maintain the landscaping.

2. Council may direct City staff to follow legal procedures in order to modify District No. 1 to include an adjustment to match current expenditures with COLA provisions to avoid revenue

shortfalls in the future.

3. Council may direct other fund sources to supplement the District revenues based on previous Fiscal Year expenditures. In previous fiscal years, the average expenditure dollar amount in Zone of Benefit B was approximately $100,000 with revenues being approximately $65,000.

Recommendation:

A. Adopt the following Resolutions to continue the Maintenance District, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972:
• Resolution Approving the Engineer’s Report, Yuba City Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 • Resolution of Intention to Order Improvements, Yuba City Landscape Maintenance District No. 1
B. Set a Public Hearing for August 15, 2023 at 6:00 PM to establish assessments for FY 2023-24 Attachments:

1. Resolution LLMD 1 Approve Engineer's Report

2. Exhibit A - District Maps LLMD 1

3. Resolution LLMD 1 Set Public Hearing Date

4. Attachment 3 - Proposed Assessments

5. Attachment 4 - Engineer's Report District 1
Prepared By: Submitted By:

Josh Wolffe
Associate Civil Engineer
Diana Langley
City Manager

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. _________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUBA CITY APPROVING THE ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR THE YUBA CITY
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (STABLER LANE/GARDEN

HIGHWAY AREA)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Yuba City previously formed Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (“District”), pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500) (the “Act”); and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2023, pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the City Council initiated proceedings by adopting a Resolution describing improvements and ordering the City Engineer to file a report with regard to the District for the 2023-24 Fiscal Year; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared and filed a written report with the City Clerk entitled “City of Yuba City, Landscape Maintenance District No. 1, Zone of Benefit A, Zone of Benefit B, Zone of Benefit B_1, Zone of Benefit B_2, 2023/2024 Engineer’s Annual Levy Report” (the “Engineer's Report”) as called for in said Resolution and under and pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this City Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said Engineer’s Report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that no portion of the report requires or should be modified in any respect.

WHEREAS, the City Council desires to formally approve the Engineer’s Report, as filed, pursuant to Section 22623 of the Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Yuba City as follows:

1. The above recitals are true and correct, and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

2. The City Council finds that the Engineer’s estimate prepared by the City Engineer of the itemized costs and expenses of said work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said Engineer’s Report be, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily approved and confirmed.

3. The City Council finds that the diagram showing the District referred to and described in said Engineer’s Report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of the land within said District, is the same as existed at the time of passage of said Resolution and is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed.

4. The City Council finds that the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in said District is in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivisions, respectively, from the work and incidental expenses as contained and detailed in the Engineer’s Report, which is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed.

5. The City Council hereby approves the “City of Yuba City, Landscape Maintenance District No. 1, Zone of Benefit A, Zone of Benefit B, Zone of Benefit B_1, Zone of Benefit B_2, 2023/2024 Engineer’s Annual Levy Report.” Said report shall serve as the Engineer’s Report for the purposes of subsequent proceedings for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1.

6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.

The foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Yuba City at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of July, 2023 AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Wade Kirchner, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ciara Wakefield, City Clerk Administrator

APPROVED AS TO FORM

COUNSEL FOR YUBA CITY
Shannon L. Chaffin, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP