HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2006-058 - Stilllwater Business Park
..;
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - 58
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING
CERTIFYING AND APPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATElVIENTIREPORT EIS-EIR-I-OO
FOR THE STILL'WATERBUSINESS PARK PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Redding, as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), the delegated lead agency pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A),
and the Responsible Entity pursuant to the Housing and Urban Development NEP A regulations for
the Stillwater Business Park Project (Project), has conducted the following environmental review
for the proposed Project:
1. A Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for
review and comment on March 23, 2001 and July 23, 2003; and
2. A Notice ofIntent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was published in the
federal register on May 11,2004; and
3. A Notice of Availability for the Draft EIS/EIR was published in the federal register on
February 15,2005 and the Draft EIS/EIR was circulated for review and comment, ending on
May 2, 2005; and
4. A Notice of Availability for a Supplemental Draft EIS/EIR was published in the Federal
register on September 30,2005, and the Supplemental Draft EIS/EIR was circulated for public
comment, ending on November 14,2005; and
5. A series of public scoping sessions, public hearings, resource agency coordination meetings,
and an open house meeting were held to accept public comments and to discuss the project;
and
6. After closure of each public comment period, all comments received were summarized and
addressed in writing; and
7. Written comments on the Draft EIS/EIR and Supplemental Draft EIS/EIR by State and local
agencies and individuals and responses to comments are included in the Final EIS/EIR; and
8. The Final EIS/EIR 30-day public notice was published in the Federal register on March 2,
2006, and ended on April 3, 2006; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as required by the CEQA and NEP A
is included in the Final EIS/EIR; and
~
o
WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified potential significant impacts which will be mitigated to a less
than significant level after implementation of mitigation measures; and
z:.
o
~
o
o
~
I
'"
00
.
.
WHEREAS, written Findings, incorporated herein by attachment, must be developed by the
approving body as required by CEQA; and
WHEREAS, one air quality impact cannot be mitigated to a level considered less than significant,
thus a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been developed by the approving body pursuant
to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 11 ,2005, by the Planning Commission of the City
of Redding, and after accepting public comment and due consideration, the Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council make the necessary finding and take those seven actions as set
forth below.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Redding,
based upon the entire record of environmental review for the Stillwater Business Park Project,
certifies that:
1. The FEIR has been completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act;
and
2. The PEIR was presented to the City Council, and the City Council has reviewed and considered
the information contained in the PEIR; and
3. The PEIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis; and
4. The PElS meets the standards for EIS adequacy under NEPA; and
5. The PElS meets the standards for EIS adequacy under the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) NEPA regulations; and
6. The PElS meets the standards for EIS adequacy under the HUD regulations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOL V]~D that the City Council of the City of Redding, based upon
substantial evidence in the administrative record and Final EIS/EIR for the Stillwater Business Park,
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy
Act, hereby:
1. Approves the PROPOSED ACTION - ALTERNATIVE 2 , REVISED STILLWATER SITE, as described
in the Final EIR, and the Final EIS; and
2. Approves the Findings of Significant Effects; and
3. Adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
2
..
.
.
4. Adopts the Mitigation and Monitoring Program; and
5. Adopts the Final EIS; and
6. Authorizes the City Manager to prepare and file a Record of Decision and Notice of
Determination reflecting the City's action; and
7. Authorizes the City Manager or Designee to act as the Certifying Official for compliance with
HUD regulations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in the interest of being good stewards of the environment,
in the interest of furthering efforts to conserve important lands in and near the Stillwater Plains
Conservation Area, and in the interest of protecting those sensitive species and habitats that occur
within that area, the City Manager is directed to use best efforts to acquire or permanently protect
lands for additional conservation pUlposes, including preservation, restoration, and/or creation of
environmentally significant habitat within the Stillwater Plains Conservation Area or within the
Stillwater Creek watershed, or as close to those areas as possible. This acquisition and/or protection
effort by the City will further the purposes of the conservation efforts related to the Stillwater
Business Park Project, with no more than five acres of this land to be credited to the Stillwater
Business Park Project. The City acknowledges that this land is above and beyond the amount of
compensatory mitigation needed as set forth in the Stillwater Business Park Final EIS/EIR.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Redding at a regular meeting on this
18th day of April, 2006, by the following vote:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCIL MEl\1BERS: Dickerson, Mathena, Pohlmeyer, Stegall, and Murray
COUNCIL ME~ilBERS: None
COUNCIL MEl\ilBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
-
ATTEST: ,.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,
""".
~.~~
CONNIE STROH~1A.YER, Cit~
~~~~
RICHARD A. DUVERNAY, ity Attorney
3
.
.
STILI,W A TER BUSINESSP ARK PROJECT
Attachment to Resolution No. 2006 - 58
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council hereby finds that, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 (b) and State
CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the
whole administrative environmental record, including the Environmental Impact Statement prepared
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, the benefits of the proposed action -
Alternative 2, Revised Stillwater Site -- have been weighed against the unavoidable environmental
effects; and it has been determined that the unavoidable environmental effects are acceptable due to
the following considerations:
· The economic, social, and other considerations of the project outweigh the unavoidable air
quality impacts identified in the Findings.
· The need for a business pa.rk with large parcels capable of attracting large businesses is of
importance to the City.
· A business park of this kind will enhance the tax base, create a synergy that will attract
additional business to the area, and create more jobs.
· The identified unavoidable impacts to air quality are temporary, occurring only during
construction. They are not permanent impacts.
Additional mitigation measures ellS outlined in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) may
be available for further decreasing the impacts, but may not be enforceable, available, or desirable.
Information supporting the overriding factors is outlined in the FEIR, Section 4.8, Air Quality, and
in the Findings of Significant Effects.
"4
~.
.
.
Stillwater Business Park Project
SCH NO. 2001032106
Findings of Significant Effects
Introduction
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that no public agency shall approve or
carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed which identifies
one or more significant effects th,ereofunless such public agency makes one or more of the following
findings:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final
EIR.
2. Changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding, and such changes have been adopted by
such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, kgal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR (Cal. Pub. Res.
Code Section 21081).
CEQA further requires that where tht:~ decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR, but are not at least substantially mitigated,
the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR or
other information in the record (Section 15093[b] of the CEQA Guidelines).
The following Findings have been submitted to the administrative record for the project by the City
of Redding. They are attached to allow readers of this report an opportunity to review the potential
reasons for approving the project despite the unmitigated significant effects identified in the Final
EIR.
Project Description
The project proposes development of a business park through the acquisition of land, the
construction of major infrastructure components, and the provision of public services and utilities
to serve the development. The project proposed is the preferred alternative, Alternative 2, Revised
Stillwater Site as described in the EIR. The project site contains approximately 700 acres, of which
approximately 349 acres is developable. The site is located near the Redding Municipal Airport in
Redding, California. The site is situated at the southern end of the Stillwater Plains, a large terrace
landscape located between the Stillwater Creek drainage to the west and the Cow Creek drainage to
the east. The Stillwater Mitigation Bank is adjacent to the southeastern border of the site.
The purpose of the project is to develop a medium to large business park, which is part of a larger,
ongoing program to recruit new industry and businesses. This is in direct response to economic data
showing a need to enhance the ec:onomic stability and quality of life in the City of Redding (City)
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Business Park
./.
April 7. 2006
.
.
,,;
Metropolitan Statistical Area (generally the urbanized, south-central portions of the County,
including the city of Redding and its sphere of influence). Studies and real world experience show
that the limited availability ofattrilctive, fully-developed sites is one of the main constraints to new
industrial development in the area.
Once all pennits are obtained, the necessary infrastructure for development of the initial components
of the Project will be constructed. The "backbone" infrastructure system will extend utilities
throughout the project site in a logical and orderly manner. The electric utility alignment proposed
in the northern portion of the study area includes the Goodwater Avenue route, alternative
segment B. Initial improvements will be solely to construct the backbone roadway system, including
the alternative southern access. road. ]he development of lots is not foreseen to occur until after the
backbone system is installed.
CONCLUSIONS OF THE EIR
The final EIR evaluates the following environmental issues in relation to the project: Geology and
Soils; Vegetation, Wildlife, and Wetlands; Hydrology and Water Quality; Land Use; Cultural
Resources; Aesthetics, Traffic: and Circulation; Air Quality; Noise; Hazards and Hazardous
Materials; Public Utilities and SelVices; and Population and Housing. No other areas of significant
impact have been identified sinc:e circulation of the Draft EIR. The Final EIS/EIR identifies feasible
mitigation measures that reduce all potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level
except for one. As described in the Final EIS/EIR, impacts to air quality resulting from emissions
of nitrogen oxides (Nox) during short-term construction activities may remain significant even after
implementation of feasible mitigation measures. The final EIR also evaluates cumulative and
growth-inducing impacts, as well as alternatives to the proposed project components and the overall
project.
FINDINGS
The following findings are mad(~ pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and Title 14 of
the California Code of Regulations, Section 15091 and 15093 (State CEQA Guidelines).
. A. Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)-Findings-Feasible Mitigation Measures
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a), the City, having reviewed and
considered the information contained in the final EIR forihe project, the public record and the
administrative record, finds, pursuant to CEQA and that State CEQA Guidelines, that changes
or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate, avoid, or
substantially lessen the pot1entially significant direct environmental effects as identified in the
Final EIR with respect to the following:
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-2-
April 7, 2006
.
.
...
4.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Significant Impact 4.1.4-1
The main impact resulting from grading operations is the potential for erosion during and after the
construction.
Mitigation Measures .
Potential significant impacts resulting from th~ proposed. project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
meas\lrehas been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and is made
bindmg on the City through these fmdings.
4.1.4-1
Best. management practkes (BMP) shall be incOlporated and shall be of a design that is
consistent with the City of Redding's Stonn Water Quality Improvement Plan, the California
Stonn Water Quality Associations BMP Handbooks, the California Department of
Transportation stonn-water quality handbooks, or other such design practices that are deemed
suitable for the individual site use at the time of development.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially slignificant
impact to geology.and soils resources to a level considered less than significant.
4.2 VEGETATION, WILDLIFE, j~D WETLANDS
Significant Impact 4.2-1
Implementation of the project, including construction, operations, and maintenance activities, could
result in the direct loss of, orindilrect impacts to, riparian habitat or other sensitive plant communities
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
measures have been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
4.2-1A
The City shall appoint a qualified biologist to selVe as an environmental inspector. The
inspector will be involved throughout all construction phases of the project. His/her role will
be to obselVe, document, and enforce environmental compliance, as well as actively identify.
anticipate, and solve potential environmental compliance concerns.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Parle
-3-
April 7, 2006
.
.
...
4.2-1B
. To maintain riparian habitat and bank stability adjacent to abutments, the north and south
bridges across Stillwater Creek have been designed to avoid and minimize permanent
losses of riparian vegetation to the maximum extent practicable. Further,. the
environmental inspector will meet on site wi~ the construction contractor prior to the
start of constructi.on activities. Together they. will designate staging areas and
. construction access routes so as to avoid encroachment into riparian habitat and riparian
buffer where practicable and minimize encroachment where complete. avoidance is not
practicable.."Avoiided" riparian habitat will be clearly identified in the construction
drawings and contJractor work plans. Exclusionary fencing will be installed to mark
boundaries of all avoidedl riparian areas. All pedestrian and vehicular traffic into the
avoided areas delineated by the fencing shall be prohibited during construction. The
exclusionary fencing shall be inspected and maintained on a regular basis throughout the
project constructioll. Bridge construction will be scheduled for low flow periods (June 1
. to October 30) of Stillwater Creek to minimize impacts within the channe~.
. The project will avoid and minimize losses to riparian habitat within the project
construction limits to the maximum extent practicable, using the avoidance'measures
described above. In addition, where possible, long-term impacts on woody riparian .
vegetation should bc~ minimized by trimming trees and shrubs rather than removing entire
woody plants or by cutting trees or shrub~ at least 1 foot above ground level to leave root
systems intact and allow more rapid regeneration following construction. When a direct
loss of riparian habitat is llllavoidable, the City will plant at a minimum ratio of 3: 1 (new
plantings per woody riparian plant destroyed) for habitat permanently lost due to project
construction and at a ratio of2:1to compensate for habitat temporarily lost (e.g., areas
where vegetation was cleared for the temporary storage of construction equipment).
These replanting ratios will help e~ure successful establishment of at least one vigorous
plant for each plant removed to accommodate the project. Revegetation to mitigate for
permanent direct impacts will occur in areas suited to restoration to help ensure that no
net loss of riparian. habitat function and value occurs within the project area.
Revegetation to mitigate for temporary direct impacts will occur upon completion of the
project within the area( s) disturbed by construction activities. In addition, mitigation for
permanent impacts will be provided at a minimum ratio of 1: 1 on an area basis (area of
impact: area of compensation) or as agreed to in consultation with the permitting agency.
Replacement of permanently lost riparian habitat will occur adjacent to Stillwater Creek
and Churn Creek, within open areas upstream and downstream of the new bridges, and
adjacent to ditches and drainage systems that are determined by a qualified biologist to
be suitable. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist will meet onsite with the
contractor to count amd identify riparian tree and shrub species that would be removed
to accommodate construction of project components.
. Indirect impacts to riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a ratio of 0.5:1 (new plantings
per woody riparian plant within the area indirectly impacted) or as agreed to in
consultation with the permitting agency. Mitigation shall include planting of native
riparian trees and shrubs and will occur within the areas indirectly impacted or in other
areas within the project site that are determined by a qualified biologist to be suitable.
CEQA Findings, Stillwaler Business Park
-4-
April 7, 2006
..
.
.
.
Prior to construction, the City of Redding will develop a vegetation restoration plan for
permanent and construction-related direct and indirect i1I1pacts to riparian habitat. The
vegetation restoration plan will Identify suitable sites for mitigation of i1I1pacts, species
to be planted, and numbe.1'S and sizes of plantings. Further; it will describe plailting
techniques and required irrigatio~, prescribe methods to remove existing noxious weeds,
and establish reasonable performance standards and contingency measures. The
vegetation restorationplan shall be developed in consultation with the Corps, NOAA-
Fisheries, USFWS, and CDFG.. Followmgthe completion of construction activities,
plantings shall be lestablish~ using the above. guidelines and those set forth in the .
vegetation restoration plan. . All non-native species that are removed will be replaced
with native species.. Replacement trees and shrubs shall be planted in the appropriate.
season (Le., spring or fall) following the compl~tion of construction. Where constructed
drainage devices and improvements are required; they shall be pblCed in the least visible .
locations and naturalized through the use of river rock, ~rth-tone concrete; and/or native
plant materials. ,
The City of Redding will monitor the plantings annually for up to 5 years to ensure that
trees and shrubs have become established and that performance standards set forth in the
vegetation restoration plan have been met. Annual reports documenting the status of the
revegetation efforts will be prepared and submitted to the Corps, NOAA-Fisheries.
USFWS, and, CDFG; If performance sPilldards have not been met, the .collltingency
measures identified in the vegetation restoration plan (e.g.. supplemental planting) will
be i1I1plemented as'fiil;~cessa]ry. Once riparian mitigation has been successfully completed.
the City shall submit a memorandum to the Corps, NOAA-Fisheries, USFWS, and
CDFG documenting the results.
.
Findings
Implementation of these measures during construction will reduce the potentially significant
i1I1pacts to ripananhabitat and other sensitive plant communities to a level considered less than
significant.
Significant Impact 4.2.,.3
Implementation of the project, including construction, operations, and maintenance aCtivities, could
result in the direct discharge or fill of federally protected jurisdictional wetlands and other Waters
of the U.S.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant i1I1pacts.resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
measures have been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings. Additional permitting conditions required by
regulatory agencies will also be i1I1plemented as necessary.
4.2-3A
Prior to construction, the City shall use exclusionary fencing to mark the boundaries of
intermittent creeks and riverine waters (e.g., bed of Stillwater Creek) that are to be avoided.
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Business Park
-5-
April 7. 2006
.
.
They shall also mark the boundaries of all other waters of the U.S., including wetlands, which
are to be aVoided. Th.e exclusionary fencirtg shall be maintained in place throughout
construction. All pedestrian and. vehicular entry into the avoided waters delineated by the
exclusionary fencing shall be prohibited during construction.
4.2-3B
The following general w,etland BMP's will be implemented:
. Open Trench Consltructiol!1
Silt fences will be installed on either side of the wetland work path to contain the trench
spoil piles and prevent silmtion of adjacent wetland area, when applicable.
o The topsoil layer of wetland soils will be. separated from the underlying subsoil .
during excavation .md will be replaced in the original layering after cable
installation.
o The length of open-trench construction adjacent to wetlands will be minimized.
Trench plugs~~ill be installed at either end of the wetland installation to minimize
potential; runoff into the wetland. .
o Drainage patte:ms (channels) across the wetland will be reestablished as close to the
original locations and contours as possible.
o Documentation (written and photographic) of pre-and post -construction conditions
will be maintained by environmental compliance monitors. .
. Directional Bore
o Fluid flow controls will be available to contain any surface outflow of the fluid.
o Spill contaminant materials will be located on-site.
. Temporary Access Roads
o Temporary access roa.ds will cross drainage bottoms at nearly right angles and level
with the streambed gradient whenever possible.
o No perennial watercourses will be blocked or diverted.
.. Forded Crossings
o Forded crossings will be constructed without excavating stream bank or bed, if
possible. If grading is necessary, crossing will be accomplished by excavating a
ramp through the bank(s) to allow equipment access. If placement of gravel is
necessary, clean gravel suitable for salmon spawning shall be used:
o Topsoil will be: salvaged and protected from the area to be graded.
o Ramps will be graded so that soil is pushed away from the drainage, and the banks
will be contoured to blend the ramps as naturally as possible to the adjacent,
undisturbed re3lches of the streambank.
o Salvaged topsoil and graded soil will be placed a minimum of 10 feet from stream
banks and protected to minimize sediment transport to the aquatic environment.
o If the stream is flowing, an oil-absorbent boom will be placed across the channel
downstream of the crossing.
o If necessary methods (e.g., clean rock fIll, swamp mats) will be employed to
facilitate movement of equipment across the bed of the channel.
o Upon completion of construction in that zone, during site restoration, any mats will
be removed, rock fIll will either be removed or spread over the site, and topography
and vegetation will be reestablished.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater BrlSiness Park
-6-
April 7. 2006
.
.
..
o Forded crossings will not be used for flowing streams where multiple daily
crossings will occur.
. Culverts
o Cover and fiU material will consist of clean rock or gravel fill or other appropriate
medium.
o Culverts will he placed slightly below normal stream grade to avoid culvert outfall
.barriers.
o Where needed, the inlet and outlet will be armored. .
o Temporary diversion structures will be used during culvert installation as
necessary. .
. 0 The subcontractor will maintain the culverts or conduits such that drainage is not
inhibited and damage is not created on adjacent properties.
o If the stream is flowing, an oil-absorbent boom will be placed across the channel
downstream of the crossing.'
o Upon completion of constructio~ in that zon~, during site restoration, all culvert
materials will be removed and topography and vegetation reestablished.
In addition,in order to maintain habitat and bank stability adjacent to bridge abutments,
bridges will be designed to avoid and minimize to the extent practicable impacts to creek and
stream corridors. The following mitigation shall be implemented where construction activities
occur within 100 feet of the top of bank of any intermittent c~ek or riverine/perennial stream
. habitat:
. All trenching and construction activities across intermittent creek or perennial stream
features, including Stillwater Creek, Chum Creek, and Clover Creek, will be limited to
low-flow periods (June 1 to October 30 unless otherwise approved) to minimi7.e impacts
within the channel.
· Sediment curtains (upstream and downstream of the construction zone, placed so as to
allow for fish passalge at all times) or other suitable means will be used to prevent
sediment disturbed during (:onstruction activities (Le., trenching) from being tnmsported
and deposited outside of the construction zone.
· To the extent practicable, areas disturbed during construction that are not occupied by
permanent infrastruc:ture shall be returned to pre-construction contours. .
. Areas left bare following construction shall be revegetated.
Further, the construction ~mpact area for the alternative southern access road (Altennatives 1
and 2) shall be limited so as to avoid direct impacts to the four vernal pools along its route
(Le., impacts due to construction shall be limited to the width of the road, 84 feet, in those
areas adjacent to vernal pools rather than the typical 175-foot-wide construction zone).
4.2-3C
The intent of Mitigation Measure 4.2-3B is to ensure there is no net-loss of aquatic function
and value resulting from direct discharge of fill into waters of the U.S. during implementation
of the proposed project. In order to determine the total amount of direct discharges to be
compensated for, boundaries of waters of the U.S. shall be delineated in any areas of the
project site not previously delineated. The delineation will be conducted using the method
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-7-
April 7, 2006
.1
.
.
prescribed in the Corps dl~lineation manual (EnvironmentalLaboratOl)' 1987). The delineation
of the project site will be submitted to the Corps for verification where existing verifications
do not occur. The verifi,ed delineation shall be the basis' for determining the extent of direct
discharge into waters of the U.s.
Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts shall be achieved through on-site and off-
site preservation, creation, restoration, and eDhancement of wetland features in the Open Space
~a and other suitable locations. The City shall develop and implement an Open Space
Management Plan (OMlP) that includes a wetland preservation, creation, restoration, and
enhancement plan' prepared a(:cording to the guidance presented in. the Army Corps of
Engineers San Francisco and Sacramento Districts Special Public Notice "Mitigation and .
Monitoring Proposal Quidelines" dated December 30, 2004. The OMP shall be reviewed and
approved by the appropriative regulatory agencies through the state and federal permitting
programs. Implementation of.the OMP will ensure no net loss of function and value of
preserved waters of the n.s. due to project development. The OMP will identify measures that .
emphasize on-site, in-kind preservation, creation, restoration, and enhancement of aquatic
functions and values to th'e maximum extent practicable. The OMP shall identify specific sites
within the Open Space or elsewhere within the project site where mitigation measures can be
implemented in perpetuity. The OMP shall identify the management practices, monitoring
parameters, and performance criteria to mitigate for the direct discharges. .
The OMP shall identify lthe creation and restoration practices, monitoring parameters, and
performance criteria to lnitigate for the direct discharges. Typical mitigation measures,
monitoring parameters, and performance criteria for wetlands shall include:
. The target number of hydmphytic plant species to be established in the mitigation area
shall be the average number of obligate, facultative wetland, and facultative species that
occur in adjacent reference vernal poollswale habitat. Reference wetland habitat will be
identified in consultation with the Corps and CDFG.
. . The percent cover of obligate, facultative wetland, and facultative species within the
mitigation area shall not be less than 80 percent of the average percent cover occurring
in the reference vemal poollswale habitats.
. No visible erosion of topsoil shall occur within the mitigation area.
. Water depths, periods of inundation, and soil saturation in the mitigation are~l shall be
similar to conditions occurring in the reference wetlands.
If the performance critelia are not satisfied by the end of the fourth spring following
construction of the mitigation area, remediation measures identified in the OMP shall be
implemented. At a minimum, the monitoring program would consist of the filing of an annual
report to the Corps and ClDFG for 5 years. The mitigation shall be considered suc(:essful if
criteria are met for 3 consecutive years. The City or their appointed agent shall maintain the
mitigation site in perpetuity.
The City will acquire required compensatory mitigation via on-site and off-site preservation,
restoration, and enhancement of lands suited to these purposes.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-11-
April 7, 2006
.1
.
-
Except for features occupied or presumed occupied by federally listed vernal pool species,
mitigation will be provided at ratios not less than 2: 1 (mitigation to impact, acreage basis)., For
features occupied or presumed occupied by federally listed vemal pools species, mitigation
ratios presented for the occupying species will supersede those outlined here.
Findings
Implementation of these measures during construction will reduce the potentially significant -
impacts from direct projecteftectsop. federally protected jurisdictional wetlands and other
Waters of the D.S. to a 1c~vel considered less than significant.
Significant Impacts 4.2-4
Implementation of the project, including construction~ operations, and maintenance activities,'could
result in indirect impacts to federally protected jurisdictional wetlands and other Waters of the D.S.
Project indirect effects could result -from mOdification of local hydrology , degradation of water
quality through operation and construction activities, adverse modification ,of habitats caused by
human encroachment, and introduction and dispersal of invasive species. Indirect c;:ffects are
assumed when project activities are within 50 feet of Waters of the V.S.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below '
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
~easures have been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings. Additional pennitting conditions required by
regulatory agencies will also be implemented as necessary.
4.2-4A
Prior to construction, the City shall install flagging to delineate the outer edge of the buffer
zone for waters of the V.S. (50 feet). , The flagging shall be maintained in place throughout
construction. Entry Into the buffer zone bounded by the flagging shall be strictly prohibited
for those features within the Open Space Preserve and avoided to the maximum extent
practicable for the remaining features.
4.2-4B
Encroachment into the ,w.atershed (Cow Creek) of the adjacent Stillwater Plains Wetland
Mitigation Bank for temporary construction activities orplacement of permanent infrastructure
shall be prohibited. Prior to cOIllStruction the City shall obtain topographic mapping that is
sufficiently detailed so as to enable precise detennination of the boundary between the
Stillwater Creek watershed (west portion of site) and the Cow Creek watershed (east portion
, of site). Prior to construction the City shall revise the site layout for Alternatives 1 and 2 to
avoid such encroachment into the Cow Creek watershed and resultant indirect effects on vernal
pools in the Stillwater Plains Mitigation Bank.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
.9-
April 7, 2006
.~
.
Findings
Implementation of these measures during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impacts from indirect effects to federally protected jurisdictional wetlands and other Waters
of the U.S. to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.2-5
Implementation of the project,inCluding construction, operations, and maintenance activities, could
result in direct and indirect impacts to federally or state listed, proposed listed or candidate plant
species or their known or potentially ,occupied designated critical habitat. Species include the
slender Orcutt grass, Greene's tuctoria, and Bogg's Lake hedge hyssop.. Portions of the study area
has designated critical habitat for slender Orcutt grass~ Indirect effects cold include run-off of
. materials such as sediment, pollutants, and toxic materialsfroIll project construction areas or
building parcels after construction.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. ' The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings. The terms and conditions, along with other
measures developed through State and federal Endangered Species Act consultation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servict~ and the California Department of Fish and Game will be
adhered to. All permitting conditions required by other regulatory agencies will also be
implemented as necessa~y.
4.2-5
. Protocol-level floral surveys have been completed over the majority of the Alternatives 1
and 2 study area and portions of the Alternative 3 study area, and the project has been
designed to avoid known populations of federal and/or state listed plant spe(:ies to the
extent feasible.Plior to final project design, protocol-level floral surveys shall be
conducted in the unsurveyed portions of the study areas containing habitat suitable for
slender Orcutt grass, Greene's tuctoria, and Bogg's Lake hedge hyssop (e.g., vernal
pools). Surveys shall be conducted during the blooming periods for these species to
determine (1) if thle species occur and (2) the quality, location, and extent of any
populations. If any of these species are found, and occur within 250 feet of proposed
construction, the project will be redesigned to avoid the population(s) to the maximum
extent practicable. For those populations to be fully avoided, the following measures
shall be implemented:
o During the planning stages of the project, the known populations of slender Orcutt
grass, Greene's mctoria, and Bogg's Lake hedge hyssop in the project ama will be
included in the engineering drawings and all construction activities will be
conducted so as to avoid the populations. Complete avoidance of direct and
indirect impacts would be attained by maintaining a 250-foot buffer around the
known populations. However, a smaller buffer may be used if detailed topographic
information shows that the local hydrology drains away from the wetlands and
plants in question.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-10-
April 7, 2006
.
.
o Prior to the start of construction activities within the project area, exclusionary
fencing shall be erected around the buffer zones of the populations that will be
completely avoided. If necessary, a qualified botanist shall be present to assist with
locating populations of slender Orcutt grass, Greene's tuctoria, and Bogg's Lake
hedge hyssop. The e:xclusionary fencing shall be periodically inspected throughout
each period of construction and be repaired as necessary. All pedestrian and
vehicular entry into the completely avoided areas delineated by the fencing shall
be prohibited during construction. .
o To protect completely avoided populations from impacts associated with project
operations and secondary impacts due to human access, those populations and their
buffer zones within ~e core facilities area will be included within an Open Space
easement to be maintained in perpetuity. Additional measures to protect these
avoided populations from impacts associated with project operations will be
included in the OMP for the Stillwater Business Park Project. Such measures will
include, but aJre not limited to, fencing of known populations and/or'erecting signs
~t direct the public to keep out of sensitive features.
· If complete avoidance of a population of these federally or state listed plant species is not
feasible, then a species-spt~cific determination will be made by CDFG for state only listed
species and by CDFG and USFWS for jointly listed species as to the appropriate
mitigation ineasun~s to be employed. These measures will likely include habitat
preservation at a ratio of at least 2:1 (mitigation area to impacted area). Note that
preservation requrn:ments are not additive for each species present (Le., an area occupied
by one listed-plant species requires the same about of habitat preservation as an
equivalent area occupied by two or more listed plant species). Prior to impacting a state
listed species, the City will need to obtain an incidental take permit pursuant to Fish and
Game Code Section 2081(b). For jointly listed plant speciesCDFG may issue a
, consistency determination pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 2080.1 provided that
the terms of the federal biological opinion and/or incidental take statement willminimi7.:e
and fully mitigate the impacts of the taking. Restoration and protection ofhaibitat shall
be the focus of mitigation t~fforts for impacts to listed plant species; however, mitigation
measures may also include salvaging the seeds of the plants with subsequent replanting
in nearby suitable habitat. A detailed restoration and monitoring plan will be developed
by a qualified botanist and will contain, at a minimum, the following information:
o location of areas on- or off-site to restore plant populations.
o a description of the propagation and planting techniques to be employed in the
restoration effort.
o a timetable for implementation of the restoration plan.
o a monitoring plan and performance c~teria.
o a description of remedial measures to be performed in the event that initial
restoration measures are unsuccessful in meeting the performance criteria.
o a description of site maintenance activities to occur after restoration activities
(e.g., weed control, iIrigation, and control of herbivory by livestock and wildlife).
CEQA Flndingf, Stillwater BlIsiness Park
-11-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Findings
Im:plementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impacts due to direct and indirect effects on federally or state listed, proposed listed or
candidate plant species or their known or potentially occupied designated critical habitat to a
level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.2-6
Implementation of the project, including construction, operations~ and maintenance activiities, could
result in direct and indirect impacts to federally or state listed, proposed listed or candidate fish
species and their designated critical habitat. Anadromous fish species and/or their habitat occur
within Stillwater Creek. bldirect effects cold include run-off of materials such as sediment,
pollutants, and toxic materials from project const~ction areas or building parcels after construction.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
measures have been found to be feasible and are required ,as a condition of approvall and made
binding on the City through these fin~ings. The terms and conditions, along with other
measures developed through federal Endangered Species Act consultation with the National
Marine Fisheries Servict~ will be adhered to. All pennitting conditions required by other
regulatory agencies will .also be implemented as necessary.
4.2-6A
. The work period for in-chllllIlel construction will be approved by the Corps ill their 404
permit and by CDFG in their Section 1602 stream alteration agreement. To the
maximum extent practicable, in-channel construction will be restricted to the dry season
when stream flows have subsided and steelhead and salmon are not present. This will
avoid any potential for direct impacts to special-status fishes. If work cannot be
restricted to the dry season, the potential for direct impacts to migrating or rearing
steelhead and salmon will be minimized by the employment of slow, deliberate
movement of equipment in the channel and/or having a person walk aht~ad of the
equipment to scare fish away from the work area. In addition, the pressure c~xerted on
piles each time pile driving is initiated will be increased slowly to the desired operating
level over a period of several minutes, providing time for any fish sensitive to the
percussion wave to move out of the area.
. If work cannot be restricted to the dry season, work in the creek channel will be staged
so as to not restrict the stream flow and create an impediment to fish migration.
Providing at least one-half of the active channel width for bypass of stream flows at the
in-channel work site will provide sufficient fish passage. In addition, the period of time
that stream flows are constricted by coffer dam,s and work activities at the trenching
transect across the Stillwater Creek channel will be minimized.
. Erosion control work shall consist of application of erosion control materials within non-
riparian upland areas and approach fills, embankment slopes, excavation sllopes, and
other areas designated by the City. These materials shall consist of fiber, nativt~ grass and
forb seed (e.g., hydroseeding), commercial fertilizer, and water.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-/2-
April 7, 2006
.
.
. Activities that inc:rease the erosion potential within the project footprint shall be
restricted to the fullest extent possible to the relatively dry summer and early fall period
to minimize the potential, for rainfall. events to mobilize and transport sediment to
Stillwater Creek. If these activities must take place during the late fall, winter, or spring
then temporary erosion and sediment control structures will be in place and operational
at the end of each construction day and maintained until disturbed ground sUJfaces have
been successfully Ievegetated. '
. Areas where wetland and upland vegetation nt~ed to be removed shall be idlentified in
advance of ground disturbance and.limited to only those, areas that have been approved
by the City.
· Hydroseeding, or other Type-p erosion control, shall be applied to areas where
veg~tation has been removed to reduce short -teon erosion prior to the start of the rainy
season. Soils shall not be left exposed during the rainy season.
· Filter fences and catch basins shall be placed below all construction activiti4~s near the
bank of Stillwater Creek and Clover Creek, but not in contact with flowing water, to
intercept sediment. before it reaches the waterway.' These structures shall be installed
prior to any clearing or grading activities.
· Spoils sites shall be located such that they do not drain directly into surface water
features, if possible.. If a spoils site drains into a swface water feature, catch basins shall
be constructed to intercept sediment before it reaches the feature. Catch basins will be
sized appropriately" Spoils sites shall be graded and vegetated to reduce the potential for
erosion.
· Sediment control measures shall be in place prior to the onset of the rainy season and will
be monitored and maintained in ~ood working condition until the disturbed areas have
been revegetated.
· Appropriate monitoring measures shall be implemented by the City to document
compliance with the measures described above. Monitoring measures shall include
turbidity measureIl1t~nts below the work sites, inspection of catch basins and filter fences,
and monitoring of revegetation progress. The CVRWQCB will set allowablc~ turbidity
standards. In the eVt~mt that monitoring detects that turbidity standards are excc~eded (see
Section 4.3, Water Quality), work shall cease until levels are acceptable.
4.2-6B
To avoid "fracing" during directional boring and the subsequent discharge of drilling mud, the
contractor(s) will constantly monitor the drill for any significant loss of pressure. In the event
of a significant pressure loss, the contractor(s) will immediately cease drilling, inspect the
waterway for evidence of fracing, and notify the environmental monitor. In addition, because
surface frac-outs may take: place before a significant drop in pressure occurs, the contractor will
monitor the area being drilled under for the appearance of drilling mud, an indication of a
surface frac-out.
In the event of a frac-out, vacuum trucks with appropriate length hoses shall be placed at the
edge of the waterway to contain the frac-out. Sandbags and silt fencing shall be staged
downstream of construction, within the waterway channel, to contain any bore mud that
surfaces. Shovels and buckets will be available on-site to clean up any bore mud that the
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-13-
Apri/7,2006
.
.
vacuum trocks cannot re:move. Further, only bentonite fonnulations with nontoxic additives
sh,aII be used.
Findings .
Iniplementation of these measures during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impacts due to direct and indirect effects on federally or state listed, proposed listed or
candidate fish species and their designated critical habitat to a level considered less than
significant.
Significant Impact 4.2-'
Implementation of the project, including construction, operations, and maintenance activities, could
result in direct and indirect impacts to federally or state listed, proposed listed or candidate wildlife
species and their designated criltical habitat. The valley elderbeny longhorn beetle, vemall pool fairy
shriplp, and vernal pool tadpole shrimp occur within t.Qe project area. Indirect effects cold include
. mn-off of materials such as sediment, pollutants, and toxic materials from project construction areas
or building parcels after constlroction.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
measures have been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings. The tenns and conditions, along with other
measures developed through State and federal Endangered Species Act consultation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife SerVicc~ and the California Department of Fish and Game will be
adhered to. All permitting conditions required by other regulatory agencies will also be
implemented as necessary.
4.2-' A
Bank Swallow
· Grading and other construction activities should be scheduled to avoid the nestilDg season
(May through July) to the extent possible.
· Although bank swallows are not known to occur on the site, a pre-construction survey
for the species is necessary to ensure that its status (presence/absence) on the project site
has not changed between the completion of the b~ological surveys and tht: onset of
project construction. Therefore, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a \
pre-construction sUlVey for bank swallows within 500 feet of proposed cOlllStruction
zones situated withiln or adjacent to suitable bank swallow habitat. The survey may be
conducted no more than one week prior to the onset of any construction activity. If no
active nests are located, no further mitigation is necessary.
If an active nest(s) is localted within 500 feet of construction activities, it shall be mapped, and
a qualified biologist, in conSultation with CDFG, will determine the extent of a construction-
free buffer zone to be established around the nest. Active nests may not be removed until after
the young have fledged (based on field verification). A qualified biologist shall monitor the
nest to determine when the young have fledged and submit status reports to CDFG throughout
the nesting season.
. CEQA Findin/p. Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-/4.
April 7. 2006
.
.
4.2-7B
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp .
. Protocol-level surveys for vernal pool branchiopods have been completed over the
majority of the Altc~matives 1 and 2 study area and portions of the Alternative 3 study
area and vernal pool tadpole shrimp are known to occur in both study areas. For those
portions of the project area where protocol-level surveys have not been completed, the
City shall either (1) prior to const~ction, retain a qualified biologist to conduct protocol-
level surveys for listed vernal pool branchiopods following the USFWS Interim Survey
Guidelines to Pennittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(I)(A) of the
Endangered Species Act for Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods (1996a) to detennine
presence/absence; or (2). assume presence.
. Measures to avoid, :minimize, or mitigate direct and indirect impacts to vernalpool fairy
shrimp and vernal pool tadpole shrimp within 250 feet of the project disturbance shall
be incoJ:porated into the project, unless the USFWS permits a reduced setback.
Consultation with tbe USFWS is needed to detennfue the extent of mitigation that will
be required to address impacts. This mitigation will be accomplished in conjunction with
the Corps Section 404 pemiit process. Mitigation measures shall include the following
(pending consultation with the USFWS and Corps). .
o For every ac~e of known or presumed occupied habitat directly and indirectly
affected, at le:ast two vernal pool preserVation credits will be dedicated within a
Service-approved ecosystem preservation bank, or, ba~ed on USFWS evaluation
of site-specifi(: conservation values, 3 acres of vernal pool habitat may be preserved
on th~ project site or on another non-bank site located outside the project area, as
approved by the USFWS.
o For every acre of known or presumed occupied habitat directly impacted, at least
one vernal pool creation credit will be dedicated within a Service-approved habitat
mitigation bank, or, based on USFWS evaluation of site-specific cOIllServation
values, 2 acres of vernal pool habitat will be created or substantially restored or
enhanced and monitored on the project site or on another non-bank site located
outside the pmject area, as approved by the USFWS.
o Vernal pool habitat and associated upland habitat used as on-site mitigation will be
protected from adverse impacts and managed in perpetuity.
· In addition, the City shall implement Measure 4.2-4 with a 250 foot buffer zone for
Waters of the U.S. which contain listed vernal pool branchiopod species to avoid
potential indirect impacts to these listed species as a result of impaired water quality or
altered hydrology and Measure 4.2-3 to avoid potential impacts to vernal pool
branchiopods due to trenching activities.
4.2-7C
Valley Elderberry Longll1orn Beetle (VELD)
VELB are found exclusive~ly on elderberry shrubs. Thus, protection of this species is based on
protection of this shrub. The USFwS has adopted a standard mitigation protocol (USFWS
1999) for avoidance of impacts to VELB. Elderberry plants with one or more stems measuring
1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level and occurring where they may be directly or
indirectly effected by tht~ proposed action require mitigation. The standard mitigation
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-15-
April 7, 2006
.
.
measures will be implemented and are summarized below. However, formal consultation with
the USFWS will be required prior to any disturbance at the site in order to obtain the necessary
take pennit.
. All elderberry shrubs with one or more stems measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter
at ground level that occur on or adjacent to the proposed project site will be thoroughly
searched for beetle exit holes. In addition, all elderberry stems 1.0 inch or greater in
diameter at ground level will be tallied by diameter size class (protocol-Ievel.swveys
were completed in 2003 ,over all. of the Alternatives 1 and 2 core facilities and Open
Space; however, these sUlveys are valid for only 2 years).
. Complete avoidan<:e (Le., no adverse effects) may be assumed when a 100-foot (or
wider) buffedsestablished and maintained around elderberry plants containing stems
measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level. Measures to protect buffer
areas will be instituted prior to construction and will include fencing, signs, and worker
education programs
. . Any damage done to buffer areas during construction will be restored. In addition, the
areas will continue to be protected from damage after construction is complete. The City
shall retain a qualified biologist to prepare a written description of how the buffer areas
are to be restored, protected, and main~ined after construction is completed. Typical
measures include f~mcing, signs, weeding, and trash removal.
. Elderberry plants tbat cannot be avoided will be transplanted to a USFWS approved
conselVation area prior to construction under the supelVision of a qualified biologist.
Each elderberry stem measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level that is
adversely affected (Le., transplanted or destroyed) will also be replaced, in the
conservation area, with "elderberry seedlings or cuttings at a ratio ranging from 1:1 to 8:1
(new plantings to affected stems) dependent upon their location and sitze. The
conselVation area will be protected in perpetuity as habitat for the valley elderberry
longhorn beetle, and the City will provide a written monitoring plan tothe USFWS~
Findings
Implementation of these measures during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impacts due to direct and indirect impacts to federally or state . listed, proposed listed or
candidate wildlife species and their designated critical habitat to a level considered less than
significant.
Significant Impact 4.2-9
Implementation of the project, including construction, operations, and maintenance activities, could
result in direct and indirect impacts to some non-listed special status or protected species. Species
include the western spadefoot toad, northwestern pond turtle, and the western burrowing owl.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
measures have been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-/6-
April 7, 2006
.
.
4.2-9A
Western Spadefoot Toad
. Prior to construction, the City will retain a qualified biologist to present a Worker
Environmental Awareness Program. The program shall provide construction workers,
. contractors, and subcontractors with infonnation on their responsibilities with regard to
sensitive biological resources.
. Although western spadefoot toads are not known to, occur on the site, suitable habitat is
present and toads could move onto the site at any time. Thus, a pre-construction survey
for the species isnec~ssary to confirm its status (presence/absence) on the project site
immediately prior lto the onset of project construction. Therefore, the City shall retain
a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction sUlvey for the western spadefoot toad
including the area within 50 feet of suitable habitat (vernal pools, seasonal wetlands) a
maximum of one week prior to construction. If a western spadefoot toad is found, the
biologist shall move it to suitable habitat in a safe location outside of the construction
zone. In the event that a western spadefoot toad is obselVed within an active construction
zone, the contractor shall temporarily halt construction activities until a biologist has
moved the toad to a safe location outside of the construction zone, within similar habitat.
In addition, the City shalll implement Mitigation Measure 4.2-3 for addressing water quality
impacts to mItigate for potential indirect impacts to western spadefoot toads due to wastewater
. treatment and discharge, storm..water management, sedimentation, and accidental spills.
4.2-9B
Northwestern Pond Tu:rt1e
· Because turtles may move into and out of the project site atany time, a pre-construction
sUlVey for the species is necessary to confirm its status (presence/absence) on the site
immediately prior to the onset of project construction. Therefore, The City shall retain
a qualified biologist to conduct a minimum of one sUlVey of the project site for pond
turtles and their nests. TIle sUlVey shall occur in areas within 660 feet of the ordinary
. high water mark of Stillwater and Chum Creek as well as suitable ponds on or adjacent
to the site. The survey shall be conducted a maximum of one week prior to construction.
If a pond turtle is found within a construction impact zone, the biologist shall move it to
a safe location within similar habitat. If a pond turtle nest is found, the biologist shall
flag the site and detlermint:~ if construction activities can avoid impacting the Illest. If the
nest cannot be avoided, it will be excavated and re-buried at a suitable location outside
of the conStruction impact zone by a qualified biologist.
· In the event that a pond turtle is obselVed within an active construction zone, the
contractor shall temporarily halt in-stream construction activities until the individual has
been moved to a safe location outside of the construction zone, within similar habitat.
· In addition, the City shall implement the mitigation measures described in the Hydrology
and Water Quality Section to avoid potential impacts to water quality due to trenching
activities.
Further, the City shall implement Mitigation Measure 4.2-3 for addressing water quality
impacts to mitigate for potential indirect impacts to northwestern pond turtles due to
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-/7-
April 7, 2006
.
.
wastewater treatment and discharge, stonn-water management, sedimentation, and accidental
spills.
4.2-9C
Burrowing Owls
Although burrowing owls were: not obselVed within any of the three alternative si.tes during
reconnaissance .sUlVeys, suitable habitat is present. Therefore, protocol-level sUlVeys for
burrowing owls shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to any soil-altering activity
occurring within the p~ject area and a surrounding area of potential effect (the area within
approximately 250 feet of project boundaries). The sUlVeys shall be conducted perCDFG
guidelines. Pursuant to CDFG guidelines, if no owls are found then no further mitigation will.
be warranted since there is no evidence of their presence within the past 3 years. Iflburrowing
owls are found, consultation with, and authorization by, CDFG shall be required.
4.2-9D
Nesting Special-Status Birds (Yellow-breasted chat, Yellow Warbler, Loggerhead Shrike,
and Tricolored Blackbiird)
. Grading and other (;onstmction activities shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season
(March through SelPtember) to the extent possible. .
. If vegetation is to be removed by the project and all necessary approvals have been
obtained, potential nesting substrate (e.g. bushes, trees, grass, buildings) that will be
removed by the project may be removed between October 1 and February 28 (Le., outside
of the nesting season) to help preclude nesting.
. The City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction sUlVey within a
250-foot buffer around the proposed construction zones. The sUlVey may be conducted
no more than one week prior to the onset of any construction activity. If no al;tive nests
are located, no further mitigation is necessary.
. If active nests (nl~sts containing eggs or young) are located within 250 feet of
construction activities, their location shall be mapped and a qualified biologist, in
consultation with CDFG, will detennine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to
be established around the nest. Active nests may not be removed until after the young
have fledged (based on field verification). A qualified biologist shall monitor the nest
to determine when. the young have fledged and submit status reports to the CDFG
throughout the nesting season.
4.2-9E
Nesting Raptors
. Grading and other construction activities shall be scheduled to avoid the nestiing season
(February 15 through September 30) to the extent possible.
. If vegetation is to b~ removed by the project and all necessary approvals have been
obtained, potential nesting substrate (e.g. trees, shrubs) that will be removed by the
project may be removed between October I and February 14 (Le., outside tllle nesting
season for raptor species) to ensure that active raptor nest trees are not removed as a
result of project COl11struction activities.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Parle
-18-
April 7, 2006
.
.
. The. City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a minimum of one survey for
nesting raptors within a 250-foot buffer around proposed construction activities. The
survey may be conducted no more than one week prior to the onset of any construction
activity. Active raptor nests located within 250 feet of construction activiti(~s shall be
mapped.
If an active nest (a nest containing eggs or young) is found a qualified biologist, in consultation
with CDFG, will determine tht: extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established
around the nest. A qualified biologist shall monitor the nest(s) to determine when the young
have fledged and submit status reports to the CDFG, as appropriate, throughout the nesting
season. An active nest may only be removed after the young have fledged (based on field
verification) .
4.2-9F
Roosting Bats
. Although no special-status bats were observed during reconnaissance surveys, suitable
habitat is present and bats could move into or off of the site at any time. Thus, a pre-
construction survey for roosting bats shaH be conducted prior to any removal of
buildings, particulaldy those with closed areas such as an attic space; trees 312 inches in
diameter at 4.5 feet above grade; or bridges with expansion joints. The surv1ey will be
conducted by a qualified bat biologist (i.e., a biologist holding a CDFG collection permit
and a Memorandum of Understanding with CDFG allowing the biologist to handle and
collect bats). No aCltivities that would result in disturbance to active roosts of non-listed
special-status bats shaH proceed prior to the completed surveys. If no active roosts are
found, then no furth.er action would be warranted. Because bats are known to abandon
young when disturbed, if a maternity roost is located, a qualified bat biologist will
determine the extent of a construction-free zone to be implemented around thc~ roost. If
either a maternity roost or hibemacula is present, Mitigation Measure 42-9D or 4.2-9E
shall be implement(~. CDFG shall also be notified of any active nurseries within the
construction zone.
· If active maternity roosts or hibemacula are found, the project will be redesigned to avoid
the loss of the building or tree occupied by the roost if feasible.
· If an active nursery roost is located and the project cannot be redesigned to avoid removal
of the occupied tree or structure, demolition of that tree or structure should commence
before maternity colonies form (i.e., prior to March 1) or after young are volaIlt (flying)
(i.e., after July 31). The disturbance-free buffer zones described in Mitigation 1 should
be observed during the maternity roost season (March 1 - July 31)
If a non-breeding bat hibemacula is found in a structure or tree scheduled to be razed, the
individuals shall be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biollogist (as
determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with CDFG), by opening the roosting area
to allow air flow through the cavity. Demolition shall then follow no less than the following
day (i.e., there will be no less than one night between initial disturbance for air flow and the
demolition). This action shouldl allow bats to leave during dark hours, thus increasing their
chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight. Trees
. CEQA Findings, Stillwater BI4Siness Park
. -/9-
April 7, 2006
.
.
with roosts that need to be removed shall first be disturbed at dusk, just prior to removal that
same evening, to allow bats to escape during the darker hours.
4.2-9G
Low-sodium lighting will be used where feasible for illumination of parking lots, buildings,
etc. Streetlights will be shielded and directed downward to the street, away from the riparian
corridor and Open Spac€~, to the extent possible.
Findings
Implementation of these measures during construction, operations, and maintenance activities
will reduce the potentiaIny signiificant impacts due to direct and indirect effects on some non-
listed special status or protected species to a level considered less than significant.
4.3 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Significant Impact 4.3.4-1
The water quality of Stillwater CR:ek would be impacted by sediment resulting from grading
operations during construction.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by impll~mentation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings. Other mitigation measures developed for similar
impacts, e.g. mitigation measure 4.1.4-1 will also lessen the effects of this impact.
4.3.4-1
In addition to the erosion control measures identified in Mitigation Measures 4.1-1 and 4.1-2
in Section 4.1 - Geology and Soils, two new sediment ponds will need to be constructed as
identified in Figure 4.3-5.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction, operations, and maintenance activities
will reduce the potentially significant impacts to Stillwater Creek from sediment due to grading
operations to a level considered less than significant.
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Significant Impact 4.5.4-1
Site SIP # 1 has been avoided through Project redesign, however, should the Project proponent desire
to utilize this area, a mitigation measure is advanced. The likelihood of the site being de:veloped is
very low given that the site will be placed under a conselVation easement which protects it in
perpetuity .
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Bllsiness Parka
-20-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure is feasible and requin~ as a condition of approval and made binding on the City
through these findings.
4.5.4-1
Formal archaeological evaluation (i.e., archaeological testing to formally determine eligibility
and significance) would need to be undertaken and detailed recommendations for treatment
would be required to be advanced if the site were to be found eligible. Treatment could range
from avoidance to data l1ecovery excavations, depending on the fmdings of testing and the
nature of Project impacts"
Findings
Implementation of this measure throughout all project phases will reduce the potentially
significant impact to the site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.5.4-2
The present evaluation and recommendations are based on the findings of an inventory level survey
only. There is always the possibility that potentially significant unidentified cultural niaterials could
be encountered on or below the surfa.ce during the course of. future development or construction
activities.
Mitigation. Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below . The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.5.4-2
Previously unidentified cultural msources could be inadvertently encountered during the course
of construction activity. In the event of such a contingency, construction work will stop
immediately and additional consultation with a professional archaeologist will be necessary
to develop site-specific mitigation measures.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially siignificant
impact to the site to a lev(~l considered less than significant.
4.6 AESTHETICS
Significant Impact 4.6.3-1
The proposed project would urbanize a. large portion of undeveloped lands that ha e been historically
used for limited oat production and cattle grazing. Development of the site would be an (~xtension
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
.21-
April 7, 2006
.
.
of the existing urban edge of the Cit'1j. The scenic value of the site, albeit of little benefit to the
public, will be lost. The visual chara(:ter of the site will change thereby resulting in viswlI impacts
to the area.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.6.3-1
The site shall be zoned with the Planned Development Overlay (PD). As part ofthf: PD Plan,
when siting buildings, ca.re should be taken to minimize obstructing views of the: hills and
mountains. Landscaping should be utilized in strategic areas to minimize the visual impact of
the electrical transmission line poles. Visual corridors should be developed which allow
uninterrupted open space views of distant hills and mountains between buildings, unless
existing natural landscaping and/or topography currently are obstructing such views.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially s.ignificant
impact to the site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.6.3-2
Two electrical substations will be construction to provide electrical power to thc~ Project.
Distribution circuits from the substations will be placed underground except for two circuits which
will exist as underbuilds on all transmission structures, however, transmission lines would impact
the visual quality along Rancho Road. In addition, 100 foot microwave towers may be built at the
substations.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by imple:mentation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
4.6.3-2
As part of the PD Plan, landscaping will be planted as needed to screen the substations. The
type and amount will be specifically determined when plans are reviewed by the City, however,
to the maximum extent feasible, any views of the facilities from the Stillwater Park shall be
minimized.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impact to the site to a level considered less than significant.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bluiness Park
-22-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Significant Impact 4.6.3-3
Given the nature of the area, the project may introduce a significant new nighttime light source into
the area. There may be some light spill over onto adjacent properties, especially to residential
properties adjacent to the northeastern boundary of the site. Lighting is proposed along the backbone
road through the site. Light could affect areas along Stillwater Creek, impacting habitat areas.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure is feasible and required as a condition of approval and made binding on the City
through these fmdings.
4.6.3-3
To the extent practicablf:, low-Pressure sodium lighting shall be used for outdoor uses. No
light source shall be directed skyward. Light standards shall be no taller than 25 feet in height.
Outdoor lighting will be placed, designed, and directed to avoid light spillover into the riparian
habitat areas adjacent to Stillwater Creek. These standards shall be incorporated into the
PD Plan.
Findings
Implementation of this meaSUlie during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impact to the site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.6.3-4
The project could result in daytime glare resulting from the buildings, their architecture, and the
types of materials used.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.6.3-4
The use of muted or compatible architectural materials and colors will reduce the impact of
daytime glare.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impact to the site to a lev~~l considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.6.3-5
Proposed roadway improvements will create an impact by introducing new streets and widening
existing roadways in the Project vicinity.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-23-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to bt~ feasible and required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these [mdings.
4.6.3-5
Landscaping which includes tl-ees shall be required for new road construction and existing
road-widening improvements.
Findings
Implementation of this measure during construction will reduce the potentially significant
impact to the site to a level considered less than significant.
4.7 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATlON
Significant Impact 4.7.4-12
The southern extension of Road "A" from the project site to Airport Road is proposed for
construction during Phase 1 of the project. In order for it to function properly, the road must be
constructed to standards, which are identified as mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
4.7.4-12
The Road "A" southerly extension shall have a two-lane arterial cross-section and be classified
as a designated truck routl~. The newly fonned Airport Road/Road "A" intersection should be
installed with a traffic siignal. The currently existing Fig Tree Lane approach to Airport
Road/ Aero Street will be realigned to intersect with the southerly extension of Road "A" a
minimum of 400 feet from the space bar at the intersection. These improvements al-e the sole
responsibility of the Projt~ct.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.7.4-13
With development of Phase 1, the Airport Road corridor is projected to be the most impacted.
Several intersections will meet peak hour signal warrants and several roadway segments will exceed
the acceptable LOS "C"
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-24-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.7.4-13
Under Existing plus Phase-l conditions, the existing two-and-three-Iane arterial section shall
be widened to four-lane Cllrterial standards from the SR44 interchange through the intersection
with Knighten Road, as part of the ultimate plans for this segment to be a four-Iam~
expressway. Also, the existing two-lane arterial section shall be widened to four-lane arteria l
standards from Knighton Road to the intersection with Chum Creek Road/Dersch Road, as pa! ~
of the ultimate plans for this segment to be a four-lane expressway. In order to accommodate
the ultimate plans, these four-lane arterial sections are to be constructed as an expressway-
arterial "hybrid" including a center median
The Ailport Road intersections with SR44 eastbound and westbound ramps, Hartnell Avenue,
and Rancho Road shall b(;~ installed with traffic signals under existing plus Phase-l conditions.
Rate of development of Phase 1 shall determine time of installation. Intersection LOS and
traffic warrants will be analyzed on a biennial schedule by a traffic engineer and the necessary
improvements completed within one year of the first report that identifies LOS levels are below
C and/or traffic signal WCllrrants are met for the p.m. peak hour.
The recommended capacity and control improvements along Ailport Road corridor should be
integrated and appropriat1ely coordinated with the planned future improvement p~jects such
as the SR44/Ailport Road interchange (ultimate) improvements, Hartnell Avenue realignment
and extension and Venus Way e:xtension.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of the above off-site
improvements. The Project may have to make the necessary improvements without any
participation by other projects due to timing. However, some form of reimbursement
agreement should be entered into whereby the Project Proponent is reimbursed as other
projects in the area are developed.
Findings
hnplementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to tHe
site to a level considered lless them significant.
Significant Impact 4.7.4-14
Rancho Road is expected to se:rve as an important commuter travel route for the project. With
development of Phase 1, the intersections with Chum Creek Rd, Chum Creek/Victor Avenue, Shasta
View Drive, and Old Oregon Trail will meet peak hour signal warrants and the existing roadway
section from Ailport Rd to Old Oregon trail will exceed acceptable LOS "c" threshold. In addition,
CEQA Findings, Stillwater B/lsiness Park
-25-
April 7, 2006
.
.
the Victor Avenue and Chum Creek Road approaches to Rancho Road do not meet intersection
spacing requirements.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts re:sulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by impl1ementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
4.7.4-14
The intersections with Chum Creek Road, Shasta View Drive, Old Oregon Trail, and Chum
Creek/Victor shall be installed with traffic signals if these improvements have not been
constructed beforehand. In addition, the Victor Avenue and Chum Creek Road approaches to
Rancho Road shall be realigned and reconstructed so that the Rancho road/Chum Creek
RoadNictor A venue intersection operates acceptably. The widening of Chum Creek Road and
the bridge across Chum Creek from Victor to Bonnyview will also occur.
Rate of development of Phase 1 shall determine time of installation. Intersection LOS and
traffic warrants will be analyzed on a biennial schedule by a traffic engineer and the necessary
improvements completed! within one year of the first report that identifies LOS levels are below
C and/or traffic signal warrants are met for the p.m. peak hour.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of the above off-site
improvements. The Pro~ect may have to make the necessary improvements without any
participation by other projects, due to timing. However, some form of reimbursement
agreement should be entered into whereby the Project Proponent is reimbursed as other
projects in the area are d(~veloped.
The Rancho Road segment from Airport Road to Old Oregon Trail shall be widened to a three-
lane arterial standard under Existing plus Phase-l conditions.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.7.4-15
The Knighten Road corridor is expected to selVe as one of the important truck travel route
opportunities for project related truck trips. The unsignalized study intersection of Knighten Road
and Interstate 5 northbound ramps will meet the AM peak hour signal warrant
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-26-
April 7, 2006
.
.
4.7.4-15
A traffic signal will be installed at the northbound ramp intersection of Knighton Road and
Interstate 5. The recommended signalization of Interstate 5/Knighton Road northbound ramp
intersection should be appropriately integrated with long-term improvements planned for this
interchange, as well as improvements planned for the I-5/Riverside Avenue interchange. The
rate of development of Phase 1 shall determine time of installation. Intersection LOS and
traffic warrants will be analyzed on a biennial schedule by a traffic engineer and th(~ necessary
improvements completed within one year of the first report that identifies illS levels are below
C and/or traffic signal warrants are met for the p.m. peak hour.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of these off-site
improvements. The Project may have to make the necessary improvements without any
participation by other projects due to timing. However, some form of reimbursement
agreement should be enltered :into whereby the Project proponent is reimbursed as other
projects in the area are developed.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.7.4-16
The Riverside Avenue corridor is expected to serve as an important auto and truck travel route for
project related trips. The currently unsignalized study intersections along Riverside Avenue, namely
the intersections with Interstate 5 southbound and northbound, and North Street, will meet peak hour
signal warrants.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impalcts resulting from the proposed project would be reducedl to below
a level of significance by implementation of the ~itigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
4.7.4-16
The intersections with Intlerstate 5 southbound and northbound ramps, and North Street shall
be installed with traffic si.gnals under Existing plus Phase-l conditions. The recommended
signalization of Interstate 5/Riverside Avenue interchange ramp intersections should be
appropriately integrated with long-term improvements planned for this interchange, as well as
improvements planned for the Interstate 5/Knighton Road interchange.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of these off-site
improvements.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Business Park
-27-
April 7. 2006
.
.
4.8 AIR QUALITY
Significant Impact 4.8.3-2
Stationary industrial source emissions may result in impacts that exceed accepted thresholds upon
full build out of the Park. ROG, Nox and PM-lO may all exceed thresholds.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by impl1ementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.8.3-2
As noted in the Air Quallity Element, projects with less than "Threshold A" emissions must
apply only feasible Standard Mitigation Measures (SMM). No projects are expected to exceed
level "A II thresholds al1though additional emissions after permit applications containing
additional emissions are provided. These emissions should be considered togethf:r with the
operational emissions that are quantifiable now.
Projects exceeding Level liB II thresholds are required to implement all SMMs and BAMMs and
calculate emission reductions available from each mitigation measure using the reference
tables (orproject-specifi(; analysis) provided in the Air Quality Element of the General Plan.
All parcels shall be required to evaluate and quantify potential mitigation measures and
resulting emission reductions resulting for PM-lOsince to ensure that Level B thresholds are
not exceeded when considered together with emissions for requested use.
Page 36 of the Air Quality Element lists expected ranges and averages for emission reductions
for mitigation measures for commercial and industrial projects.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
4.9 NOISE
Significant Impact 4.9.4-1
The project will generate incn~ased traffic on the existing roadway network, with traffic noise
potentially increasing 0 to 10 dt~cibels Ldn over baseline conditions. Noise increases from project
traffic will result in impacts to n~sidences along Argyle Road, Rancho Road, and at certain locations
along Old Oregon Trail and AiJport Road.
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Business Park
-28-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed proJect would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.9.4-1 .
The following fundamental noise control techniques should be considered when reviewing
individual projects to be: developed on the parcels within the business park. For off-site road
mitigation, City policy requires noise barriers in the form of walls or berms, or combination
thereof along arterial streets that abut residential uses. Therefore, when off-site road
improvements are constmcted in the future to accommodate ultimate buildout of the business
park, noise barriers willl have to be constructed along Rancho Road, Argyle Road, and in
limited locations along Old On:gon Trnil and Airport Road where the underlying Genernl Plan
designation is residential. Noise tests should be conducted to confirm that existing thresholds
are being exceeded by 3 dB.
Use of Setbacks - Noise exposure may be reduced by increasing the distance between the noise'
sources and receiving use. Setback areas can take the form of open space, frontage roads,
recreational areas, stornge yards, etc. The available noise attenuation from this technique is
limited by the characteristics of the noise source, but is genernlly about 4 to 6 dB per doubling
of distance from the source.
Use of Barriers - Shielding by barriers can be obtained by placing walls, belms or other
structures, such as buildings, between the noise source and the receiver. The effectiveness of
a barrier depends upon blocking line-of-sight between the source and receiver, and is improved
with increasing the distance th,e sound must travel to pass over the barrier as compared to a
strnight line from source: to receiver. The difference between the distance over a barrier and
a strnight line between source and receiver is called the "path length difference," and is the
basis for calculating bander noise reduction.
Barrier effectiveness depends upon the relative heights of the source, barrier, and receiver. In
general, barriers are most effective when placed close to either the receiver or the source. An
intermediate barrier location yields a smaller path-length-difference for a given increase in
barrier height than does a location closer to either source or receiver.
For maximum effectiveness, barriers must be continuous and relatively airtight along their
length and heigbt. To (:fisure that sound trnnsmission through the barrier is insignificant,
barrier mass should be about 4 Ibs. /square foot, although a lesser mass may be ac(;eptable if
the barrier material provides sufficient transmission loss. Satisfaction of the above criteria
requires substantial and well-fltted barrier materials, placed to intercept line of sight to all
significant noise sources. Earth, in the form of berms or the face ofa depressed area, is also
an effective barrier material.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater B.uiness Park
.29-
April 7, 2006
.
.
The attenuation providf:d by a barrier" depends upon the frequency content of the source.
Generally, higher freqUfmcies are attenuated (reduced) more readily than lower frequencies.
This results because a given barrier height is relatively large compared to the shorter
wavelengths of high frequenc:y sounds, while relatively small compared to lthe longer
wavelengths of the frequency sounds. The effective center frequency for traffic noise is usually
considered to be 550 Hz. Railroad engines, cars and horns emit noise with differing frequency
content, so the effectivtmess of a barrier will vary for each of these sources. Frequency
analyses are necessary to properly calculate barrier effectiveness for noise from sources other
than highway traffic.
Site Design - Buildings can be placed on a project site to shield other structures or areas, to
remove them from noise-sensitive areas, and to prevent an increase in noise level caused by
reflections. The use of one building to shield another can significantly reduce oVI~rall noise
levels. Another option in site d1esign is the placement of relatively insensitive land uses, such
as commercial or storage: areas. between the noise source and noise-sensitive receivers.
Site design should also guard against the creation of reflecting surfaces which may increase
onsite noise levels. For e:xample, two buildings placed at an angle facing a noise source may
cause noise levels within that angle to increase by up to 3 dB. The open end of "U"-shaped
buildings should point away from noise sources for the same reason. Landscaping walls or
noise barriers located within a development may inadvertently reflect noise back to a noise-
sensitive area unless carefully located. Avoidance of these problems while attaining an
aesthetic site design requires close coordination between local agencies, the projeclt engineer
and architect, and the noise consultant.
Use ofVegetalion - Trees and other vegetation are often thought to provide signifi(~ant noise
attenuation. However, approximately 100 feet of dense foliage (so that no visual path extends
through the foliage) is n::quired to achieve a 5 dB attenuation of noise: Thus the use of
vegetation as a noise barrier should not be considered a practical method of noise control
unless large tracts of dense foliage are part of the existing landscape.
Vegetation can be used to acoustically "soften" intervening ground between a noise source and
receiver, increasing ground absorption of sound and thus increasing the attenuation of sound
with distance. Planting oftrees and shrubs is also of aesthetic and psychological value, and
may reduce adverse public reaction to a noise source by removing the source from vi.ew, even
though noise levels will be largely unaffected. .
In summary, the effects of vegetation upon noise transmission are minor and are primarily
limited to increased absorption of high frequency sounds and to reducing adverse public
reaction to the noise by providing aesthetic benefits.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the'
site to a level considered less than significant.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-30-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Significant Impact 41.9.4-2
On-site noise producing activities could affect existing noise sensitive receptors on the east side of
the project area.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts n~sulting from the proposed project would be reducf:d to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found. to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.9.4-2
.The CC&R's shall require all uses developed within the Park to generate noise levels which
comply with City of Redding and Shasta County Noise Element standards at nearby residential
uses.
During project review, the Development SeIVices Director shall make a determination as to
whether or not the proposed use would likely generate noise levels which could adversely
affect residences to the c~ast. If it is determined from this review that proposed llses could
generate excessive noise levels at existing noise-sensitive uses, the applicant shall be required
to prepare an acoustical analysis to ensure that all appropriate noise control measures are
incorporated into the pro~ect design so as to mitigate any noise impacts. Such noilse control
measures include, but an: not limited to, use of noise barriers, site-redesign, silencc~rs, partial
or complete enclosures of critical equipment, etc.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 4.9.4-3
Activities associated with construction will result in elevated noise levels, with maximum noise
levels ranging from 85 to 90 dB at 50 teet. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and
would likely occur during nomlal daytime working hours.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impa.cts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
4.9.4-3
Construction activities will adhere to the requirements of the City of Redding with respect to
hours of operation.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater BI/siness Park
-3/-
April 7, 2006
.
.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered. less than significant.
4.10 IIAZARDs AND lIAZARDous MATERIALS
Significant Impact 4.10.3-2
Uncontrolled spills during implementation of the project could cause impacts to soils and water
quality in the project area. Even with implementation of a hazardous substances handling plan,
accidental spills could occur.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measures below. The mitigation
measures have been found to be feasible and are required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City throu.gh these fmdings.
4.10.3-2A
In addition to operational controls implemented from various plans and .procedures,
engineering controls should be incorporated into the design of facilities built for companies
that will use hazardous substances. It is likely that all areas in which hazardous substances will
be used will be surfaced with concrete, asphalt, or other engineered material. In addiltion to the
standard surfacing, engin€;:ering controls could include bermed and lined areas where hazardous
materials will be offloadled, design of surface drainage so that spills, if they do occur, will
move towards areas that do not drain directly to watetways adjacent to the site, and/or
installation of collection sumps in offloading areas.
4. 1 0.3-2B
If not part of spill respon.se, en.vironmental monitoring should be conducted after a spill is
cleaned up to verify that contaminants do not remain in the environment. Depending on the
location of the spill, this monitoring could include sampling of soil, surface water, and/or
groundwater. At a minimum, the monitoring results should be reported to the Shasta County
Environmental Health De:partment. Submittal of results to additional agencies also may be
required. Post-spill monitoring will allow characterization of the extent of contamination, if
present, and allow development of remediation plans before contamination can reach deeper
groundwater (100 feet or more in the Project vicinity).
4.10.3-2C
If not part of spill response, an investigation of the conditions and practices that contributed
or led to the spill should be conducted by the responsible parties. Ideally, thisinf,ormation
would be used to update hazardous substances handling practices to reduce the chance for
additional spills. At a miinimum the investigation results should be reported to the Shasta
County Environmental Ht~alth Department. Submittal of results to additional agen.cies also
may be required.
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-32-
April 7. 2006
.
.
. Findings
Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the potentially significant impact to
the site to a level conside:red less than significant.
5.7 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Significant Impact 5.7.1-1
As a result of the project, the unsignalized Airport Road intersections with Hartnell A venU(;:, possibly
Venus Way, Rancho Road, Tenninal DrivewaylKnighten Road extension and Meadow View Drive
will be operating at unacceptable WS "F" under 2025 base conditions. In addition, eastbound and
westbound approaches at the Airport Road, Chum Creek RoadlDersch Road signalized inltersection
will not function properly.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be ft~asible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
5.7.1-1
The currently unsignalized Airport Road intersections with Hartnell Avenue, Rancho Road,
Terminal DrivewaylKnighton Road Extension and Meadow View Drive should be signalized
under year 2025 base conditions. The Airport RoadN enus Way Extension (future) intersection .
should also be signalized under year 2025 base conditions. Widening of the eastbound and
westbound approaches at the Airport Road/Chum Creek RoadlDersch Road signalized
intersection is recommended under year 2025 base conditions.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered 1c~ss than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.1-2
The Rancho Road intersections with Chum Creek Road, Shasta View Drive, Old Oregon Trail, and
the Chum CreekNictor Avenue intersection will exceed the acceptable WS "C" and operate at an
LOS "F." In addition, the Victor Avenue and Chum Creek Roadapproaches to Rancho Road do not
meet intersection spacing standards.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-33-
April 7, 2006
.
.
5.7.1-2
The Rancho Road intersections with Chum Creek RoadNictor A venue, Shasta View Drive
shall be installed with traffic signals if these improvements have not been constructed
beforehand. In addition, the Victor Avenue and Churn Creek Road approaches to Rancho
Road shall be realigned and reconstructed so that the Rancho Road/Chum Creek RoadNictor
Avenue intersection operates acceptably.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant im.pact to the
site to a level considered. less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.1-3
The unsignalized study intersections along Knighten Road, namely the intersections with Interstate
5 southbound and northbound ramps, will meet Caltrans peak hour volume Warrant 11 (urban areas)
during at least one peak hour period.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these findings.
5.7.1-3
The Knighton Road inten;ections with Interstate 5 southbound and northbound ramps shall be
installed with traffic signals. It is noted here that the Route 5/Knighton Road Interchange
Modifications and Knighton Road Extension PSR (Approved, Janual)' 1998) has considered
a four-lane overcrossing at the Knighton Road interchange along with other interchange
improvements. The PSR improvements are expected to provide sufficient capacity under year
2025 base conditions.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.1-4
The Riverside Avenue intersections with Interstate 5 southbound and northbound ramps, a.nd North
Street, will exceed the acceptable LOS "D" and "C" respectively.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater BI/siness Park
-34-
April 7, 2006
.
.
5.7.1-4
Traffic signals shall be installed at the Riverside Avenue intersections with Interstate 5
southbound and northbound ramps, and North Street. It is noted here that the North
Street/Riverside Avenue Improvements PSRE (Approved July 1999) recommended a four to
five-lane cross-section on NOllth Street and Riverside Avenue approaches at the North
Street/Riverside Avenue/Airport under 2020-2025 conditions. The PSRE improve:ments are
expected to provide sufficient capacity under year 2025 base conditions.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.2-14
The four-lane arterial section (or the expressway arterial "hybrid" section) for the Airport Road
segment between the SR44 interchangc~ and the intersection with Rancho Road will exceed illS "C."
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
5.7.2-14
A four-lane expressway section shall be constructed for the Airport Road section between
SR44 interchange and Rancho Road. The four-lane arterial section (or the expressway-arterial
''hybrid'' section) for the Airport Road segment south from Rancho Road through the
intersection with Chum Creek Road/Dersch Road can be maintained through Year 2025 Base
plus Project Build-out conditions.
The Shasta County Interch:ange hnprovement Study Final Report (prepared for Shasta County
RTP A, July 1996) has considered two conceptual interchange improvement alternatives forthe
SR.44/Airport Road/Old Oregon Trail interchange that both included a six-lane oveIcrossing
section on Airport Road. Preliminary analysis has indicated that both of these interchange
alternatives would provide: sufficient capacity to accommodate Year 2025 Base plus Project
Build-out conditions, while Alternative 2 (par-clo configuration with loop ramps) is expected
to provide more efficient tKaffic operations. '
All Airport Road study intersections shall operate as signalized intersections under Yc~ar 2025
Base plus Project Build-out conditions.
. The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of the above off-site.
improvements.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impa.ct to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-35-
April 7. 2006
.
.
I ,.
Significant Impact 5.7.2-15
The Rancho Road segment between Chum Creek Road and Airport Road will have an unacceptable
WS"D."
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implf~mentation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
5.7.2-15
The Rancho Road segment between Chum Creek Road and Airport Road shall be widened to
three-lane arterial standards.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of the improvement of the
road segment between alUm Creek Road and Airport Road.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.2-16
The Chum Creek Road segment between Interstate 5 and Victor Avenue will have an unacceptable
LOS "D."
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval alnd made
binding on the City through these findings.
5.7.2-16
The Chum Creek Road segment between Interstate 5 and Victor Avenue shall be widened to
four-lane arterial standards.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of the improvement of the
road segment between Int(~rstate 5 and Victor A venue.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.2-17
The Knighten Road segment between Interstate 5 and Chum Creek Road will have an unacceptable
LOS "D" and the intersections of Knighten Road with Chum Creek Road and with Intl~rstate 5
southbound ramps will meet pealk hour signal warrants.
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Business Park
-36-
April 7, 2006
.
.
:
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through th~$e findings.
5.7.2-17
The Knighton Road segment bc::tween Interstate 5 and Chum Creek Road shall be widened to
three-lane arterial standards, and traffic signals shall be installed at the intersections. Of
Knighton Road with Interstate ;5 southbound ramps.
The ultimate improvements identified in the Route 5/Knighton Road hlterchange
Modifications and Knighton Road Extension PSR (Approved, January 1998), that c:onsidered
a four-lane overcrossing at th~~ Knighton Road interchange along with other interchange
improvements, are proje:cted to provide sufficient capacity through Year 2025 Base plus
Project Build-out conditions.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of thesle off-site
improvements.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.2-18
The Riverside Avenue segment between Interstate 5 and North Street/Airport Road will operate at
an unacceptable LOS "D."
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by implementation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be fc::asible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City throur,h these fmdings. '
5.7.2-18
The Riverside Avenue segment between Interstate 5 and North Street/Airport Roadl shall be
widened to three-lane arterial standards.
It should be noted that the North Street/Riverside Avenue Improvements PSRE recommended
a four to five-lane cross-section OJ[} North Street and Riverside Avenue approaches at the North
Street/Riverside A venue/Airport under 2020-2025 conditions. The PSRE improvements are
expected to provide sufficiient capacity under Year 2025 Base plus Project conditions.
The Project Proponent shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of these off-site
improvements.
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Bllsiness Park
-37-
April 7. 2006
.
.
.
.01
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
Significant Impact 5.7.2-19
Hartnell Avenue between Airport Road and Argyle Road will operate at an unacceptable illS "D."
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to below
a level of significance by imph::mentation of the mitigation measure below. The mitigation
measure has been found to be feasible and is required as a condition of approval and made
binding on the City through these fmdings.
5.7.2-19
The Hartnell Avenue segment between Airport Road and Argyle Road shall be widened to a
three-lane arterial standa:rd.
The Project Proponent, shall pay the proportionate fair-share cost of thes1e off-site
improvements.
Findings
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impact to the
site to a level considered less than significant.
B. Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(2)
The decision maker, having ind,ependently reviewed and considered the information contained in the
fmal EIR. for the project and the public record, fmds that there are no changes or alterations to the
. project that avoid or substantiaHy lessen the significant environmental impacts that are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency.
C. Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3)-lnfeasible Mitigation Measures & Alternatives
The City of Redding, having reviewed and considered the infoimation contained in the fina.l EIR. and
its appendices for the project and the public record, finds that specific economic, legal, technological,
. .
social, or other considerations and benefits make infeasible the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the final EIR and its appendices, other than the propOSI~ action
Alternative 2, Revised Stillwate~r Site, as described above under the heading Project Description, and
as set forth below.
4.8 AIR QUALITY
Significant Impact 4.8.3-1
URBEMIS calculates construction impacts which include emission site grading, construction worker
vehicle trips, stationary equipment, mobile equipment (gas and diesel), architectural coatings, and
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bllsiness Park
.38-
April 7, 2006
.
.
.
. 'j.
'-,
"!
..
asphalt off-gassing. ROG (Reactive Organic Gases) impacts are significant in Phase 3 of
constroction during architectural coating and asphalt application. The impacts are higher than
thresholds allow for both minimum and maximum parcel sizes.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced to the extent
feasible, but may not be reduced below a level considered insignificant. This impact may result
in project effects that cannolt be mitigated. The mitigation measures below, however, have been
found to be feasible and an~ required as a condition of approval and made binding on the City
through these fmdings.
4.8.3-1A
Potential mitigation measums should be reviewed with the Air District. The following measures
were applied to reduce construction-related emissions. These measures are consistent with Goal
3, Policy 29 in the Air Quality Element to reduce particulate matter emissions from construction,
grading, and demolition to the maximum extent feasible. Table 4.8-6 identifies the reduced
emissions after application of mitigation measures.
Soil Disturbance:
· Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas
· Replace ground cove:r in disturbed area quickly
· Water exposed surfaces 3 times daily
· Cover stockpiles with tarp
. Water unpaved haullt'Oads
Off- and On-Road Measures
· Use aqueous diesel filters
· Diesel particulate traps
· Cooled exhaust gas mcirculation
ROG Coating measure:
Use coatings with no more than 0.0037 lbs/square foot of ROG (default is 0.185 but low and
zero ROG emission coatings are available
4.8.3-1B
The City shall explore the feasibility of requiring Mitigation Measure 4.8.3-1 in a Construction
Emission Mitigation Plan in order to reduce emissions below threshold levels to the: extent
possible. Other measures to include in the plan are:
· Equipment should not idle for more than 10 minutes.
· Equipment should not be altered to increase engine horsepower.
· Requiring particulate traps, oxidation catalysts, and other suitable control devices on all
construction equipment used at the construction site.
" Use ultra low sulfur diesel fuel (sulfur content of 15 ppm or less) or other suitable
alternative diesel fuel.
CEQA Findings, SIII/waler Business Park
-39-
April 7, 2006
.
.
.
. I.
..
.
Establishment of work limitations to minimize trips and to provide staging areas for
trucks located away from sensitive receptors.
.
4.8.3-1 C
Since construction emissions an~ higher than Level A thresholds, other potential mitigation
measures that shall be included in the construction phase would be to establish work limitations
such as minimizing trips and providing staging areas for trucks that are located a,way from
sensitive receptors such as the Valley Christian School or the future Veterans Home.
Another possibility, to the extent feasible, would be to phase construction over a longer time
period such as 36 to 48 months to minimize average daily effects. Other measures to explore
would include slower phasing ofthe architectural coatings and asphalt pavement phases as well
as lowering the amount of <coating thickness of painting materials or building footage.
Findings
Implementation of these mitigation measures may not reduce this impact at the project site to a
level considered less than significant. This potentially significant impact will. be acceptable to
the City for the reasons presented above as well as in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
Significant Impact 4.8.3-3
The nature of air pollution effects of any given stationary source depends on the nature of the use,
the amount of throughput, fuels used, equipment used, controls used and many other factors which
cannot be predicted without specifics on proposed uses such as would be provided by permit
applicants. It is impossible to d~:termine the potential stationary source impacts until specific permits
are applied for.
Mitigation Measures
Potential significant impacts resulting from this activity are unknown at this time. There is
insufficient information to make a determination regarding whether the impacts would be
significant or insignificant, and whether there are mitigation measures available that would be
effective at reducing impacts. The mitigation measure below provides information regarding the
potential for air quality impacts, but the lack of information makes this mitigation measure
infeasible at this time.
4.8.3-3
Appendix H in the Draft ErR provides discussion of each of the source categories and. presents
some examples of emissions from specific facilities that could be categorized into these source
categories. The City may wish to use this Appendix as a reference tool. However, until an actual
application is made .and information provided, specific mitigation measures cannot be
determined.
Findings
. Implementation of this mitigation measure is inadequate for addressing the potential c~ffects of
this impact. Based upon technological and other considerations, the lack of sufficient
CEQA Findin~. Stillwater Business Park
-40-
April 7. 2006
.
.
.
. l'
.
'.
.
information regarding the type or extent of the impact, and the unknown feasibility of mitigation,
the City is unable to implernent this mitigation measure.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT EIR EVALUATED TWO OTHER ALTERNAT][VES IN
ADDITION TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE. IT ALSO INCLUDED A
"NO PROJECT" ALTERNATIVE.
ALTERNATIVE l-'ORIGINAL STILLWATER SITE
Project Description
This alternative is in the sanle location as the proposed project alternative. The overa.ll project
description is the same as that described above. There are various differences in the on- and off-
site infrastructure facilities. One of the primary differences is that this alternative has greater
impacts to wetlands and sensitive species and their habitats in the northern portion of the site.
This alternative impacts over 2 aeres more of wetlands and approximately 6 acres more of
sensitive species habitats than the proposed project alternative. It also contains a road connection
to the east and more trails, which affect wetlands throughout the site. The electrical transmission
line is located in more sensitilve areas within the core project location. There is no conservation
easement to be placed along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site, which prevents
infrastructure connections tQi the adjacent properties.
Findings
The City of Redding, as the lead agency for the Stillwater Business Park, has determilned that
Alternative 1 is infeasible because it results in impacts to wildlife, vegetation, and wetland
communities that are unacceptable and difficult to mitigate. Potential impacts to the Stillwater
Plains Conservation Bank would likely be unacceptable to approving officials. Obtaining the
necessary regulatory agency permits and agreements for this alternative would require an
unacceptable period of time, with no guarantee of success. This alternative would be very
difficult and very costly to implement.
ALTERNATIVE 3 - JURIN RANclI SITE
This site is located on Rancho Road and AiIpo~ Road and totals 597 acres. Most of the site
would have to be acquired. The City owns a small portion of the site along Clover Creek. There
are 3 proposed residential developments nearing the end of their permitting and approval
processes that encompass most of the site. The project would have approximately 100 acres of
designated open space, which is about a third of the amoun~ within the proposed project. There
would be about 2 acres morc~ of wetlands impacts and 3 acres more of impacts to sl~nsitive
species and their habitats. The larger amount of wetland acreage impacted would make it more
difficult to support this location as the "LEDPA" alternative, or the alternative considered the
Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative as required by regulations of the
Environmental Protection Agl~ncy. After a tour of the site with resource agencies, it was felt that
the site was less desirable for development due to the diversity of its vegetation communities,
wetlands functions and values, and important biological elements. The site is much smaller than
CEQA Findings. Stillwater Business Park
-4/-
April 7. 2006
.
.
.
..
I .
..
..
the preferred alternative and lacks the large available parcels due to constraints on development
resulting from wetland features on the site.
Findings
The City of Redding, as thle lead agency for the Stillwater Business Park, has deten:nined that
Alternative 3 is infeasible lbecause it results in greater impacts to Waters of the United States
than other feasible alternatilves; it would not provide as much acreage as other altematives for
meeting the pUIpose and need of the project; and over the time period of the environmental
studies and preparation ofthe FEIR/EIS, the property was acquired and planned fordevl~lopment,
making it economically imeasible for the City to acquire for the project. Additionally, project
effects would have resulted in significant impacts even after implementation of an feasible
mitigation measures.
No PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The No Project alternative would not result in any of the direct environmental impaclts that the
proposed project would have. The City would save the initial resources expenditures as well as
all capital costs associated with developing and constructing the project. However, the City
would not benefit froni the long-tc;~Im economic returns that will be realized once the project is
operational. The potential financial returns anticipated from the project will far outweigh all
costs associated with establishing the site. There would not be a large-scale business park
available in Redding to attract large business. Industrial and large-business developmc;mt would
continue on a smaller scale" as it does today, which is undesirable to the City of Redding.
Findings
The City of Redding, as the lead agency for the Stillwater Business Park, has determined that the
No Project alternative is infl~asible because it does not provide a large scale business park in the
City and it would not provide the desired long-teIm economic returns.
4-4-06
RFPEIR\Stillwater CEQA Findings-JO.wpd
CEQA Findings, Stillwater Bluiness Park
-42-
April 7, 2006