Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Projeg Amended Site Plan/Amended Conditions No

MARIPOSA COUNTY

TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJEG AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

~AACH 18, 10 II MARCH 18.2011

TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJEG AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZON ING AMEN DMENT NO. 2011-043

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEClARATION

Reviewed and Approved by: MARIPOSA COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Prepared By:

DESIGN, COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT Blair, Church & flynn ECORP (on511hing. Inc. H.T. Harvey & Anociates Illingworth and Rodkin Moore Twining Anociates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . I

2 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ..••...... ••• . 3

3 PROJECT DESCRiPTION...... 7

4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS 25

i. AESTHETiCS 25 II. AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES 27 III. AIR QUALITY 29 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES...... • 36 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES... . 41 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 44 VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 48 VIII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 50 IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 53 X. LAND USE 57 XI. MINERAL RESOURCES 59 XII. NOiSE "' 60 XVI. TRANSPORTATIONfTRAFFIc.. 66 XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SySTEMS 69 XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SiGNIFICANCE...... •..... • 72 5. APPLICANTS AGREEMENT TO MITIGATION 75

6 MITIGATiON MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 79

7 REPORT PREPARERS 83

Attachments Attachment A: State and Public Agency Comments Attachment B: Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 1010·161 GENERAL pLANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] TABLE or CONTENTS

Figures Figure 3-1 Regional Location 8 Figure 3-2 Project Site 10 Figure 3-3 Existing \Y/astewater Treatment Systems 11 Figure 3-4 Current Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan Land Use Classifications for Tenaya Property 12 Figure 3-5 Location and Type of Existing Trees 14 Figure 3-6 WWTP Site Grading Plan 16 Figure 3-7 Proposed W\VTP Building Elevations 18 Figure 3-8 Plan of the Proposed WWTP Construction Site 19 Figure 3-9 Proposed \Vastewater Treatment Process Flow 21

Tables Table 3-1 RWQCB Order No. 99-086 Waste Discharge Requirements (Summary) 23 Table 4-1 Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources 31 Table 4-2 Maximum Measurements 33 Table 4-3 Existing Traffic Conditions at Project Site Entrances 68 '.

INTRODUCTION

This document is an Initial Study (IS) for the Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project prepared by Mariposa County to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), if a proposed project is to be carried out by a non· governmental person or entity, a public agency such as a City or a County shan act as the Lead Agency with responsibility for preparing an EIR Or Negative Declaration for the project. Pursuant to Section 15051 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Mariposa County is the Lead Agency for the Tena)'a Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project (Amended Site Plan/Amended Conditions 2010"161/ General Plan/Specific Plan/Zoning Amendment No. 2011-043).

The Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project (proposed Project) would take place at Tenaya Lodge at Yosemite (Tenaya Lodge), a classic mountain resort set in heavily forested lands outside the south gate of Yosemite National Park in the unincorporated community of Fish Camp, in Mariposa County, Cali fornia. The overall Lodge property includes the Tenaya Cottages, located adjacent to the main lodge facility on parcel APN 010-410-013. The proposed Project would involve the demolition and decom missioning of existing wastewater treatment systems, construction and operation of a replacement wastewater treatment plant (W\VTP), and improvements to an existing access road leading to the site of the proposed WWTP. Implementation of the Project would require amending the land use map in the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan by reclassifying a 5.02-acre portion of parcel APN 010· 410-013 west of Jackson Road from Single-Family Residential (5-acre minimum) to Resort Commercial.

A. Report Orgallizatioll

This Initial Study is organized into the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction. This Chapter provides an introduction and overview of the Initial Study document.

Chapter 2: Initial Study Checklist. This Chapter summarizes pertinent project details, including lead agency contact information} project location, and General Plan and Zoning designations.

Chapter 3: Project Description. This Chapter describes the location and seuing of the proposed Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project, along with its principal components. The Chapter also describes the policy setting and implementation process for the Project. MARIPOSA COUN"fY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDI"fIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) tNTRODUCTION

Chapter 4: Environmental Checklist and Findings. Making use of the CEQA Appendix G Environ mental Checklist, this Chapter identifies and discusses anticipated impacts from the proposed Project, providing substantiation of the findings made. The Chapter concludes with the determination, based on the analysis contained in this Initial Study, that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate for the proposed Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project.

2 2 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

I. Project Title: Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project (Amended Site Plan/Amended Conditions 2010-161 / General Plan/Specific Plan/Zoning Amendment No. 2011-043)

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Mariposa Counry Planning Depanment P.O. Box 2039 5100 Bullion Street Mariposa, CA 95338-2039

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Damon Golubics, Senior Planner (209) 742-1250

4. Project Locatiou: 1122 Highway 41 Fish Camp, CA 93623

5. Project Applicant's Name and Address: DNC Parks & Resorts at Tenaya, Inc. 40 Fountain plaza Buffalo, NY 14202-2885

6. General Plan Land Use Designation: See Project Description below

7. Zoning: See Project Description below

8. Description of Project: See Project Description below

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: See Project Description below

10. Other Public Ageucies Whose Approval is Required: Regional Water Qualiry Control Board (RWQCB)

3 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

All documents cited in this report and used in its preparation are hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. Copies of documents referenced herein are available for review at the Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bullion Street, Mariposa, CA, 95338, except fot the Cultural Re sources Inventory, which is confidential.

ENVIRONMENTAL FAGORS POTENTIALLY AFFEGED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a Potentially Significant Impact, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Aesthetics 0 Land Use/Planning 0 Agriculture & Forestry Resources 0 Mineral Resources 0 Air Quality 0 Noise ~ Biological Resources 0 Population & Housing ~ Cultural Resources 0 Public Services 0 Geology & Soils 0 Recreation 0 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 0 Transponation/Traffic 0 Hazards & Hazardous Materials 0 Utilities & Service Systems 0 Hydrology & Water Quality 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance

Determination: On the basis of t!tis initial evaluation: o I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATNE DECLARATION will be prepared. t:8). I find that although the proposed Project could !tave a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

D I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVI RONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

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

4 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161. GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 201 I-O~J INlllAL STUDY CH[crLIST

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

Date

Approved by:

Date

5 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENl' NO. 2011·043 IN.ITIAL STUDY CHECKLISl

6 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This Initial Study has been prepared for the Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Tmaya Lodge at Yosemite (Tenaya Lodge) is located in the unincorporated community of Fish Camp, in Mariposa County, California. The pro posed Project would take place at Tenaya Lodge/Tenaya Cottages and would involve the demolition and decommissioning of existing wastewater treatment systems, construction and operation of a re placement Wastewater treatment plant (W\VTP), and improvements to an existing access road leading to the site of the proposed WWTP.

A. Background

Tenaya Lodge is a classic mountain resort set in heavily forested lands outside the southern gate of Y0 semite National Park and adjacent to the Sierra National Forest. Built in 1990, Tenaya Lodge offers guests accommodations in cottages and a 244-room destination hotel, in addition to providing on-site amenities and access to a range of recreational activities in the surrounding region.

\Vastewater from Tenaya Lodge is currently treated in two separate systems: a batch reactor and pack~ age filtration unit system which processes effluent from the hotel, and a separate treatment system for the cottages which discharges into two 1,500 gallon septic tanks and a leaching field. Tenaya Lodge is permitted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to treat an average monthly flow of up to 80,000 gallons per day (gpd); however, on peak days, the treatment plant serving the hotel receives as much as 125,000 gpd and is currently incapable of properly treating this flow vol ume. Additionally, the underground storage tanks of the existing systems are corroded and leaking. Consequently, Tenaya Lodge needs to upgrade its existing wastewater facilities.

B. Site Location and Cbaracteristics

The proposed Project site (area to be disturbed by construction/demolition activities) is located almost entirely on the Tenaya Lodge property, 2 miles south of Yosemite National Park in the unincorporated community of Fish Camp, California. Situated off State Route 41, the site is about 35 miles south of Yosemite Village and 60 miles north of Fresno. The regional location of the Project site is shown on Figure 3-1.

7 MARI'OSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROIECT AHENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDTITIONS NO 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN / SPECIFIC PLAN I ZONING AHENDMENT NO 2011.0'lJ 'ROJECT DESCIlI'TION

•

F~h Ca.1'W Q QTen Lodge

OC2-'_

L:,:=:._ ~o 2M"" I

FIGURE ]-1

REGIONAL LOCATION .... AII.IPO$A COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGII.AOE PROJECT A .... ENOED SITE PLAN/AI"IENOEO CONOITIONS NO. 1010"'1 GENEII.AL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AI"I£NOI"IENT NO. 1011.0<4) PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Project site has a total area of approximately 5 acres and is located along the southern edge of the Tenaya Lodge/Cottages property as shown in Figure 3-2. The area in this figure identified as "Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Site" encompasses the construction/demolition area associated with the Pro· ject. It is bounded by the Sierra National Forest to the south and State Route 41 to the northwest. The cottages at Tenaya Lodge lie immediately to the north of the Project site (the 5.02-acre area to be reclas sified and the location of the proposed WWTP), ~hile the hotel is to the northeast. The portion of the Project site which is outside of the Tenaya Lodge/Cottages property line is within the easement along Jackson Road.

The Tenaya Lodge/Cottages property is composed of two adjacent parceJs and ponions of the Project site lie within each parcel. The proposed WWTP would be located on the 11.58-acre cottages parcel (APN 01Q.41Q-013), while the exiSting WWTP and leaching field which serves the hotel are localed on the main Lodge parcel (APN 01Q.41Q-012). The location of the existing wastewater treat'mem facilit'ies on the Tenaya Lodge/Cottages property is shown in Figure 3-3. The current Specific Plan Land Use Classifications for each of the two parcels which make up lhe Tenaya property are shown in Figure 3-4.

C. Proj~t Components

The five principal componenu of the Project are described below. The existing hotel, cottages, and on site amenities would remain in oper.nion for the duration of the Project. Demolition of the existing wastewater treatment systems would take place after the replacement WWTP becomes operational.

1. Amendment of Planning Documents and Permits The proposed Project involves the construction and operation of a WWTP on the ponion of the Pro ject site west ofJackson Road which is currently classified Single-Family Residential (5-acre minimum) under the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan. A WWTP, however, is not a use permitted on land classified Singl('-Family Residential. Therefore, an amendment to the General Plan cbanging the Specific Plan Land Use Classificoltion of this portion of pared APN 01Q.41().013 from Single-Family Resid('ntial (5-acre minimum) to Resort Comm('rcial would be required. East of Jackson Road, pared APN 01CHl().013 is currently classified Resort Commercial under the Specific Plan. If the Mariposa County Board of Supervisors approve th(' proposed General Plan/Specific Plan/Zoning Amendment, roughly 5.02 acres of land would be reclassified Resort Commercial and as a result the whol(' of parcel APN 01Q.41Q-013 would become Resort Commercial. A Gen('ral Plan amendment is required becaus(' the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan is included as Volume D of the Mariposa County General Plan and amending the Specific Plan requires a General Plan amendment.

9 MAftl'OSA COUNTY TEN"'" LODGE fACILITIES UPGR.ADE PROJECT AMENDED StT[ PLAN/AMENDfD CONOTITIONS NO 2010-II>t GENERAL PLAN I SPECIFIC PLAN / ZONING AMENDMENT NO 2011·0~3 ,ftOJECT OESCftl'TION

5oI.=.H.T.~ & Auocwes, 2010.

FIGURE )-2

PROJECT SITE "AII.IPOSA COUNTY T£NATA LOD(;t fACilITIES UP(;RADf PROI£CT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMEND[D CONDTlltONS NO 2010.161 (;[NtRAL PLAN I SP[ClflC PLAN / ZONIN(; AMENDMENT NO 2011-041 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEGEND:6 __, u.

______....1"PO...... O:OU'R~~_ , ••

_.•

\ ,~.'" -', \ \ ..-....,. \ , ... ~ , \...... \ "r- •• / \ \ ;' - \ \ ---) ....-- ...... / W.0,5IEW.Tffl lPE.T\EN11'1 AJlr

SoI.ruo: 8C&F. 20 I0.

FIGURE 3-3

EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS MARIPOSA COUNTY ltNAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE Pt./;.NJAMENDEO CONDT1TIONS NO. 2010-161 Gl;NGRAL I'LAN j SPECIFiC PLAN { ZONING AMENDMENT NO 2011-0-13 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

o 2S0 SOO FEET LOCATION 013+! 11.f;S ACPES LI__L-__I CJ SINGH FAMILY RESHrENTIAL Iii fj ACJ~E t1INlf.HjH fW RESOR1 COMMERCIAl f L j

FIGURE 3-4

CURRENT FISH CAMP TOWN PLANNING AREA SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE TENAYA PROPERTY MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011~04J PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Additionally, the conditions of approval and the approved site plan for Conditional Use Permit No. 241, under which the Cottages at Tenaya (formerly Apple Tree Inn) operate, require amendment in order to allow construction of a WWTP on the cottage parcel (APN 010-410-013).

2. Construction of Replacement WWTP The replacement WWTP would he constructed at the location of the existing septic tanks which serve the cottages, shown in Figure 3-2. The new treatment plant would have the capacity to process up to 125,000 gpd, which would be sufficient to handle peak daily flow volumes from the lodge and cottages. A total area of approximately 1.8 acres would be required for the replacement WWTP and associated structures. The estimated time frame for completion of this component of the proposed Project is 8 months. a. Clearing and Grubbing Prior to the start of construction activities, clearing and grubbing of the construction site would be re quired. The area around the existing leach field is partially cleared, however some additional trees would need to be removed to allow for construction of the WWTP. Figure 3-5 shows the location and' type of existing trees on the Project site. Up to 16 large diameter trees and possibly some smaller trees would need to be removed. No black oaks would be removed, and the removal of trees would be lim ited to those that are directly impacted by construction.

The area for tree removal would be clearly demarcated and the work plan would specify that no tree outside the demarcated area is to be damaged or removed. If any tree outside the demarcated area is damaged, replanting would be required. Trees removed from within the demarcated area would be kept on-site and used for firewood or construction at Tenaya Lodge. There would be no sale of timber from trees proposed for removal as part of the Project. As such, the removal of these trees would be exempt from conversion permit and timber harvesting requirements pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 14, Section 1104.1, Conversion Exemptions. In compliance with Section 1104.1, a Notice of Conversion Exemption Timber Operations would be prepared by a registered professional forester and submitted to the Director of Forest Practices. b. Demolition of the Cottages' Existing Wastewater Treatment System Constructed in 1996, the cottage wastewater treatment system is composed of leach lines and septic tanks as shown in Figure 3-3. The tanks and leach lines would be removed after clearing and grubbing and prior to installation of four new underground storage tanks for the replacement WWTP. A permit from the Mariposa County Department of Health would be required for this work, and compliance with permit conditions would ensure public health risks associated with exposure of people to effluent or sewage contaminated materials are reduced to the maximum extent practicable. The cottages would remain open during the demolition and construction period, with bypass pumping of effluent to the existing hotel waStewater treatnlent system as needed.

13 ,.. ... 111"05 .. COUNTY T(NAYA LOOGE fACILlllfS UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AM(NDED COND11TIONS NO. 2010_161 GENERAL PLAN f SPECHIC PLAN / ZONING AMENDMENT NO 2011-0~1 "1I0JECT DESCIIIPTION

Sourte: H.T. ~ & As5oo;ates.. 20 10.

FIGURE )-5

LOCATION AND TYPE OF EXISTING TREES MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 PROJECT OESCHIPTION

c. Site Grading To construct level access, building, and parking areas for the replacement \V\XTTP, a net volume of ap proximately 9,000 cubic yards of imported fill would be required. As sbown in Figure 3-6, graded fill slopes up to aboUl 30 feet bigh would be constructed along the west and south of the WWTP building area, while to the north of the proposed parking lot, CUl slopes up to aboUl 20 feet high would be con structed. Maximum cut depths will be about 8 feet below existing grade. Gradient of all slopes would be 2 horizontal (H) to 1 vertical M.

Topsoil removed would be stockpiled for reuse later in landscape or non-structural areas. A Stormwa ter pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) containing erosion control measures as required under the Can· struction General Permit would be prepared and implemented for the Project. The site would also be graded to prevent erosion that could result from stormWater and snowmelt runoff flowing over the face of cut and fill slopes. Additionally, after construction is complete, all disturbed areas would be planted with erosion-resistant vegetation suited to the area. Slopes would be inspected periodically for erosion and repaired immediately if detected.

In general, the on-site native and fill soils that would be encountered during grading are considered geo logically stable; however, undocumented fill soils comprising loose silty sands were encountered in a test boring drilled on the Project site.! These undocumented fill soils appear to be related to previous grading associated with installation of the existing leach lines. As the undocumented fill soils may not have been placed with proper compactive effort or properly keyed and benched into underlying materi als, they could be susceptible to settlement, sliding, and surface and/or subsurface erosion. Therefore, in order to prevent differential settlement, the area around the proposed WWTP would be excavated and the undocumented fill removed prior to placement of new engineered fill, structures, and pave ments. Additionally, over-excavation would be conducted to limit the variations in fill thickness below structures and reduce the potential for excessive differential settlement due to the cut/fill transition.

Removal of undocumented soils and transport of imported fill to the Project site would occur over a period of approximately 2 months. A tOlal net volume of rougbly 9,000 cubic yards is anticipated, which would be the equivalent of approximately 600 truck loads, based on a typical truck capacity of 15 cubic yards. To effectively manage construction related traffic and ensure there is no significant impact on circulation and roadways in the vicinity of the Project site, a Construction Management Plan would be prepared and submitted to Mariposa County for approval prior to commencement of construction activities. This plan would identify construction phasing, the number and type of vehicles to be used, tbe routes they would follow to access the site, and other information required by the County.

I Moore Twining Associates, September 2010, Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation, Pre. posed \Vastewater Treatment Plant at Tenaya Lodge.

15 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACiliTIES UPGRAPE PROJECT AMENDED SITE f'LAN/AMENDE!) CONDTITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN ( SPECIFIC PLAN I ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-0,13 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

.,\'\\

SITE AND GRADING LEGEND ~ C)~~) 0·<:.ol"''''''-_''''''''"_''''~"''''''''''' 0""""""''''''''~'' ", ....,.,.,,,. ~. ~·~·~W'M~" ",·_-_·:=·:~: ~~ ~._->-- :.~.. @ ,.~ ,,~_ -..,.." __ ~ C"","",,'; f._ . . _..-=:-.. _-...... ').'-_.. _ ... ..-'..-=-'._.. .j 0)"*"""" . ,_.,,,,.,,, ,,,...... Sourct!: H,T Harvey & Associates. 20 r0

FIGURE J·6

WWTP SITE GRADING PLAN MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-04) PROJECT DESCRIPTiON

d. Erection of Structures Following grading of the site, a concrete slab and foundations for the building to house the WWTP equipment would be laid. As shown in Figure 3-7, the WWTP building itself would be a prefabricated metallic structure approximately 27 feet tall, with approximately 4,500 square feet of enclosed floor area and an additional 450 square feet of covered storage space. The \X'WTP building would have three pe destrian doors and two lS-foot-wide by 12-foot-high manual roll up doors. Approximately 60 feet to the east of the WTTP building, a headworks system and cover structure would be built to receive and filter wastewater before processing in the WWTP. Building materials used for the WWTP structures would have a low reflective index as required by Mariposa County General Plan Implementation Meas ure 11-ld(l). Additionally, in compliance with Occupational Health and Safety (OSHA) standards, wall mounted lighting would be provided on the \X'WTP building and the headworks structure. Exte rior lighting would comply with International Dark Sky Lighting standards and the conditions of ap proval for Conditional Use Permit No. 241. e. Installation of Utilities and Infrastructure A new 8-inch diameter gravity sewer main would be installed to convey wastewater from the hotel and cottages to the replacement WWTP. The sewer main would run along Jackson Road and the access road leading to the replacement WWTP as shown in Figure 3-8. Additionally, a recycled water trans mission line with 6-inch diameter pipes would be installed along the same alignment to convey treated water to the existing hotel wastewater disposal system. An 8-inch water main would also be installed along this alignment to provide potable water for sinks and toilets in the WWTP building as well as for wash-down of the WWTP equipment. The new water main would have sufficient capacity for required fire flows, typically 15,000 gallons per minute.

The existing overhead power line would be preserved in place; however, the existing underground tele phone line would be relocated per Sierra telephone specifications as required for construction. A 7,700 square foot asphalt parking lot with eleven parking spaces would also be constructed to accommodate employee and maintenance vehicles. The parking lot would be graded to drain stormwater runoff to the surrounding area of pervious surface for percolation and infiltration into the ground.

Upon completion of construction activities, disturbed areas would be re-seeded in compliance with Mariposa County revegetation standards.

3. Access Road Improvements As shown on Figure 3-8, the existing access road running from Jackson Road to the site of the replace ment WWTP would be widened, and resurfaced as part of the proposed Project. Currently, there is a 10-foot-wide dirt road connecting the location of the cottage septic system and Jackson Road. This roadway would be widened to 14 feet and paved with asphalt. The existing alignment would be pre served and a concrete drainage ditch with a width of approximately 2 feet would be added along the

17 MARIPOSA COUNTY TfNAYA LODGE FACILITIES Uf'GRt~DE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PlANfAMENOr:D CONDTITIQNS NO, 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN I SPECIFIC PLAN I ZONING t,MENDMfNT NO. 2011-043 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

@ RI('.Hr SIDE ElfVAT'IDN

INrERIQR ElEVArION ®It ....,.,'-,.

I .~ Source: BC&F, 20 I O.

FIGURE ]·7

PROPOSED WWTP BUILDING ELEVATIONS MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LoDGr FACILITIES UPGRADE PR.OJECT AMENDED SirE PLAN/AMENDED CONDTITIONS NO 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN I ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-0'13 PROJECT DESCRIPTION f~~--- .."....----. ..~.,,----.-.-..-...... -....-. -".-....-.-".."----..-.~- ....~---- -~

I: I . ___ I I I .----"~ I I L...---- J ..---r' j EX/SliNG PROPERTY L}N£ -.-- I 1 I \ 0-{,,«- ..~.---.-/".. ~ ;f! ~O ..V I ~«-..7 I s-{"../

,·,TIJRMSH AM) WWolJ .. "'=n> ...mt r"/ PrP

""""".>I AMJ lH'iTN.t 1(" SfIIV! PtPftM; -Sff-5'/tm .-,

! ,;; ,.~".~:.·Ifp ',1 ',,' ',j} bm: unuTY LEG£ND·-----,·,-~-_·w"W--"~-----.- .. --.-~~ 1~0~~':::"W'''':.~:J~rm "'~~CAJIONU/C"(U'r.lDr-""'-""') j"" I 1IttU1R(>mm PllWf:RPOIE I ! ®CO'«I7/iJ(:T~=IlE1... EB OflJR>11W_...,,"'" Fl."" I i """w ....""'= ~ '.w<, str WMffi. 6 Fl."" "",.. I ® fIJT<> o.rn I"J;"- I I .""'-~~~@ ~- ; I ~AMJ .m~wr :::=~ EX/STfN~_PROP£R~_~ ~~~;~=:.~-::~~Ejj_! 0 HS,." '.w<, -"'" GAUc>I :; 1.. ••---••---••---..---..---..- __..-_-..---..---..---..----.---..------1,. : =:="" r J Source: HoT Harvey & AssoCiates, 20 IO.

FIGURE 3-8

PLAN OF THE PROPOSED WWTP CONSTRUCTION SITE MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

outside of the roadway so as to prevent erosion. Runoff from the ditch would flow into tributaries of Lewis Fork Creek, following the natural drainage pattern of the area.

Additionally, access for maintenance vehicles would be provided from the southern edge of the prop erty along the existing PG&E easement. Aggregate base, an all-weather surface material, would be laid down along the easement as shown in Figure 3-8.

4. WWTP Operations and Wastewater Monitoring a. WWTP Operations The proposed W\VTP is a tertiary treatment system that combines an activated sludge process, mem~ branes to filter the wastewater, and an ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system in a single, compact unit. Wastewater from the cottages and the hotel would be conveyed to a headworks system by way of the gravity sewer main, as shown in Figure 3~8. In the headworks system, wastewater would be filtered through dual bar screens with 3 miIIimeter openings, before being transferred to the main treatment system. Filtered material captured in the screens would be washed, compacted, and then disposed of at the Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill.

The wastewater treatment process flow is pictured in Figure 3-9. Upon entry into the main treatment system, filtered wastewater would be collected in a 50,000 gallon underground fiberglass equalization tank with aeration to provide mixing. Two emergency storage tanks, each with a capacity of 50,000 gallons, would also be provided to accommodate excess effluent. From the equalization tank, effluent would flow through the treatment process, passing through the anoxic tank, the aeration tank, and then to tbe membrane tanks. The blowers, turbidimeter, permeate pump, feed forward pumps, piping and valves required for wastewater treatment would be contained on a packaged equipment skid. Processed effluent would be treated with sodium hypochlorite in the UV disinfection system, also housed on the equipment skid, and then transferred to the effluent storage tank at the end of the process. Sludge sepa rated from the effluent in the treatment process would be dewatered using a centrifuge transferred from the existing hotel treatment system. The treatment process would yield approximately 113 pounds of sludge per day, which would fill one 10 cubic yard roll-off bin every two weeks. Sludge resulting from the treatment process would be hauled off-site by a local disposal service and disposed of at the Mari posa County Sanitary Landfill.

After treatment, processed wasteWater would be pumped from the effluent tank back to the existing disposal system of the hotel treatment plant via the recycled water line. The existing disposal system, which has a permitted capacity of 80,000 gpd, would be preserved and re-used in combination with the replacement WWTP. The system consists of a leach field into which processed wastewater is released 5 feet below ground, and a sballow sub-surface irrigation system, which is used to irrigate a grassy hill to the north of the hotel. Under saturated conditions, the leach field has a disposal capacity of 23,850 gpd, and the subsurface drip irrigation system provides an additional 64,250 gpd of disposal capacity for

20 MARIPOSA COUNTY TCi'JAYA LODGE FACILiTiES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLt\N/AMENDED CONDTITIONS NO, 2010-161 GENERAL PI,AN SPEClFIC PLAN I ZONING AMEN[)M[NT NO, 1011-0,13 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEGEND

INF/.U(Nr GRA\Il'TY MBR EffiUENT SCREeN£(} INF/.UENf WASJr ACT/VA1TD SLUDGE LIFT SfA110N INFLUENT WAS PUMP UFT SfA110N PUMP f:X1S71NG SEWER UNt D,lfRG£NCY OY!"RFlOW D(JS1lNG EFFlUENf UNF: FINAl. EmU(Nr GRAI/ITY CHECK VAL\If FINAl. £ffiUENf PUMP ISOl.A71ON VALVE RU/JRN ACllVATnl SWX£ RU/JRN SWDCE F/.OW MtTrR MOTORIZED ISOLA71ON VALVE RAS PUMP FEW FOWARD F/.OW EXlS1lNG PIPELINE/EOUiPMENr FITD FORWARD PUMP

r------~---l I I m~PICl'~'~r""l( I ~o.ooo lJ\(.(ON~ I I = t ~------.z I Effl.uwr ~i'tlRo'l'f" 'ANK I ~O.OOiJ Qlj,1{JH5 I ~=====:===~'''~======~:J------~------''''- )iL. ...J I® PROCeSS SCHeMAnc

I.. Source: H.T. Harvey & Associates. 20 I0

FIGURE J·9

PROPOSED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESS FlOW MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010_161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] PROJECT DESCRIPTION

a total disposal capacity of 88,100 gpd in the existing disposal system. This would be sufficient to treat the average daily flow of 85,000 gpd projected from the replacement W'\'(lTP. In times of peak daily flow, which occur primarily during summer months, treated wastewater in excess of the capacity of the disposal system would be used for irrigation of additional landscaping features on the Lodge property.

The sub-surface irrigation system is a network of pipes 6-inches below the surface and bubblers which irrigate the soil at ground-level.1 The irrigation system currently operates on the Lodge property using potable water. Once the replacement WWTP comes online, the connection to the potable water source would be closed and a new connection to the recycled water main would be made to allow processed effluent to be used for irrigation. Initial calculations indicate that the replacement WWTP would use about 20 percent less energy and 30 percent less water than the existing wastewater treatment systems at Tenaya Lodge;'

In addition to treatment equipment, the WTTP building would also include office and laboratory space, lockers, showers, a bathroom, and additional storage space. The centrifuge uses a polymer, which would be stored in 55-gallon drums in the WWTP building. Sodium hypochlorite used to disinfect the effluent and clean the membranes would also be stored in 55 gallon drums in the WWTP building. Chemicals used in the treatment process would be stored in the building in compliance with federal, State, and local regulations.

b. Wastewater Monitoring A testing plan would be developed to ensure the replacement WWTP complies with RWQCB require ments. As the proposed replacement WWTP would dispose on-site, the Wastewater Discharge Re quirements of RWQCB Order No. 99-086 would apply. A summary of these requirements is show in Table 3-1 below. Additionally, the effeers of wastewater on groundwater in the surrounding area would be monitored through a network of eight groundwater wells around the subsurface disposal area. c. Recycled Water Use As described above, the sub-surface irrigation system makes use of recycled water to irrigate a grassy hill to the north of the hotel. Groundwater is used for irrigation of other landscaping features at Tenaya Lodge because the existing WWTP serving the hotel does not meet California Code of Regulations, Title 22 conditions for use of treated effluent on above-ground landscaping. The proposed replacement WWTP, however, would meet Title 22 requirements for redundancy and alarms, as well as standards for treatment and disinfection of wastewater. Consequently, operation of the proposed replacement

1 A bubbler is a water emission device that applies water directly to the soil surface, or that throws water a short distance, on order of one foDt, before water contacts the soil.

3 Mike Gilbert, Senior Project Manager, Delaware North Companies Inc., Personal Communication with DC&E, October 8, 2010.

22 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAyA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010.161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] PROJECT DESCHIPTION

TABLE 3-1 RWQCB ORDER No. 99-086 WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS (SUMMARY)

Seveu-Day Me- Constituent Units 30·Day Average dian BOD; mg/l < 10 Total Suspended Solids mg/l < 10 Settleable Solids mill <0.1

Total Coliform Organisms MPN/lOOml 0

Turbidity NTU <0.5

Nitrate Nitrogen mg/l <10 Source: Blair, Church & Flynn, 2010.

\X'WTP would allow for the use of recycled water on above. ground landscaping, reducing the amount of local groundwater used for irrigation at Tenaya Lodge. Additional monitoring would be required, along with changes to the irrigation system to disconnect the existing irrigation system from the pota ble domestic water system. All areas that are recycled with treated effluent would be posted witb signs to notify people of its use and all piping and appurtenances would be purple in color as required by law.

5. Demolition and Decommissioning of Existing Wastewater Treatment Systems As described above, the existing septic tanks and leach fields that serve the cottages would be decommis· sioned and removed to allow for construction of the replacement WWTP; however, the existing hotel wastewater treatment system would remain in operation until the replacement WWTP comes online.

As shown in Figure 3-8, the existing hotel wastewater treatment system consists of four buildings, six underground treatment tanks, two underground storage tanks, and associated underground pipelines and electrical conduits. The system was built in 1989 and upgraded in 1991 and 1999 to provide addi tional treatment and disposal capacity. After decommissioning of the system, the four buildings and the concrete foundations and slabs on which they are constructed would be demolished and removed. The underground tanks, pipelines, and conduits would also be removed, together with the 6-foot tall wooden fence that surrounds the plant. As the underground tanks are currently corroded and leaking, it is anticipated that soil testing and possibly remediation may be required once the tanks are removed. Soil remediation would be done in compliance with State and local regulations.

The existing disposal system, composed of a leach system and a subsurface irrigation system located north of the hotel, would be maintained and re-used in combination with the replacement \V\'\7TP as described above.

23 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 PR.OJECT DESCRIPTiON

Decommissioning and demolition of the existing system is expected to take four weeks to complete and work would involve the use of an excavator, small crane, loader, and trucks to haul the debris to the Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill site.

D. Project Objectives

The ohjeetives of the proposed Project are as follows:

• Replace the two existing wastewater treatment systems which do not adequately serve the needs of Tenaya Lodge with a single, consolidated WWTP;

• Cost-effectively upgrade wastewater treatment infrastructure at Tenaya Lodge in order to provide sufficient capacity for peak daily flows and to correct for capacity and treatment deficiencies in the eXIstmg systemsj

• Use recycled water treated in the WWTP for on-site irrigation at Tenaya Lodge.

E. Required Permits and Approvals

• Approval of amended conditions for Conditional Use Permit No. 241 • Approval of amended site plan for Conditional Use Permit No. 241 • Tree Removal Permit • Grading and Excavation Permits • Demolition Permit • General Permit for Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity • Mariposa County Health Department permi,t for sewage disposal system removal

24 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

A. Discussion ofEnvironmental Evaluation

Items identified in each section of the environmental checklist below are discussed following that sec tion. Required mitigation measures are identified where necessary to reduce a projected impact to a level that is determined to be less than significant.

B. Sources

All documents cited in this report and used in its preparation are hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. Copies of documents referenced herein are available for review at the Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bullion Street, Mariposa, CA, 95338. This includes the following documents: • Mariposa County Wide General Plan EIR (2006) • Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan (2009)

• Mariposa CountyJ Grading and Excavation Ordinance • Mariposa County, Final EIR for the County Wide General Plan (2006) • CalFire, Statewide Fire Threat Map • California Scenic Highway Mapping Systems (CaITrans) • Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Biotic Report • Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation, Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant, Tenaya Lodge

Less Than Significant Potentially With less I. AESTHETICS Significant Mitigation Than No Would the projett: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Have asubstantial adverse effect on ascenic vista? 0 0 II 0 b)Substanlially damage stenit resources, induding, but not limited to, trees, rotk outtrop- pings and historit buildings within a State stenic highway? 0 tJ 0 II c) Substantially degrade the existing visual tharaeter or quality of the site and its surround- II ings? 0 0 0 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 0 0 II tJ

25 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC pLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 tNVIRONI1FNTf~L CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

Existing Conditions The proposed Project site is 2 miles south of Yosemite National Park and adjacent to the Sierra Na tional Forest; both of which contain important scenic resources. The Wawona Road segment of State Route 41 in Yosemite Valley, a roadway which is eligible for designation as a State Scenic Highway al though not currently officially designated as such, runs to the northwest of the site. I

The Project site is located almost entirely on the Tenaya Lodge property, a heavily forested patch of land whose principal visual feature is the hotel, located in a clearing near the center of the property. The three·storey hotel building is situated on elevated terrain, with views north toward Yosemite and south toward the Town of Oakhurst. The exterior of the building features natural materials such as stone and wood, with stucco painted in muted colors. Immediately around the hotel are landscaped grounds, with a swimming pool, surface parking, and paved paths and vehicular drive aisles. The cot tages are located on a heavily forested hill to the west of the hotel, visually and physically separated from it.

The Project site itself totals roughly 5 acres landing size, approximately 2 acres of which is developed with roads and the existing hotel wastewater treatment system. The remainder of the site is dominated by coniferous tree canopy, with an unpaved access road leading from Jackson Road to a partially cleared area around the existing septic tanks which service the cottages.

Discussion 0) Would the projed have asubstantial adverse effect on 0 scenic visto? The proposed WWTP would be located at the end of an access road leading offJackson Road in a heav ily forested area not visible from State Route 41 or other portions of the Project site. The building would be approximately 27 feet tall at its highest point and would be painted in muted colors. Given its setting and appearance, the \XT\VTP and associated structures would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista in the surrounding area. (Less than significant) b) Would the projed substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings within aState scenic highway? As described above, State Route 41 is not currently designated as a State Scenic Highway. Additionally, the WWTP and associated structures would be located in a heavily forested area and would not be visi ble from State Route 41. Therefore, the proposed Project would not substantially damage scenic re sources within a State scenic highway. (No impact)

I California Department of Transportation (CalTrans). California Scenic Highway Mapping Systems. http://wwv:.dot.ca.gOY/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/I accessed on August 17, 2010.

26 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONs NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 21)11·041 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FJNDING$

c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? As described above, the WWTP and associated structures would be located in a heavily forested area not visible other ponions of the Project site. The WTTP building itself would be a relatively small metallic structure painted in muted colors. The WTTP would be built on the location of the existing septic tanks and leach field serving the cottages; however, some clearing and grubbing would be required and up to 16 trees would be removed during construction. Overall, the proposed Project would not have a significant adverse impact on the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. (Less tban significant) d) Would the project create anew source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighffime views in the area? Wall mounted lighting would be provided on the WWTP building and the headworks structure in compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards.' Lighting in stalled would comply with International Dark Sky Association standards as required by Mariposa County General Plan Implementation Measure II-ld(l) and conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 241, under which the Cottages at Tenaya (formerly Apple Tree Inn) operate. Additionally, building materials used for the WWTP structures would have a low reflective index. As such, given the specifications of the light and building materials to be used as well as the tree canopy that screenS the

Project site from surrounding residential properties and the Cottages at Tenaya J the proposed Project would not produce substantial light or glare that would adversely affect views in the area. (Less tban significant)

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less II. AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES Significant Mitigation Than No Would the projett: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importante (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and 0 0 0 iii! Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agritultural use, or aWilliamson Act contract? 0 0 0 iii! c) Conflitt with existing zoning for, or tause rezoning of. forest land (as defined in Publit Resources Code section 12220(g», timberland (as defined by Publit Resources Code settion 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government 0 0 0 iii! Code Section 511 04(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? 0 0 iii! 0 e) Involve other changes In the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or of conversion of 0 0 0 II forest land to non-forest use?

, OSHA, http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table~ STANDARDS&p_ id=9883 accessed an August 17, 2010.

27 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) FNVIRONMEHTAL CHECKLiST AND FINDINGS

Existing Conditions The proposed Project site does not contain areas of farmland or Williamson Act properties.' As de scribed above, the Sierra National Forest lies to the south of the Project site. The Project site itself is heavily forested, although neither of the two parcels is classified General Forest in the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan, which is incorporated into the Mariposa County Wide General Plan: Under the Specific Plan, the Tenaya Lodge parcel (APN 010-410-012) is classified Resort Commercial and Single-Family Residential 2.5-acre minimum, while the Tenaya Cottages parcel (APN 010-410-013) is split zoned Resort Commercial and Single Family Residential 5-acre minimum.

Discussion a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shawn on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? As described above, the Project site does not contain areas of farmland or Williamson Act properties. Additionally, the eastern portion of Mariposa County, where the Project site is located, is not included on the Mariposa County Important Farmland Map (2008) prepared for the California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Preservation. (No impact) b) Would the project conflict with an existing Williamson Act contract? As described above, the Project site does not contain Williamson Act properties and there are no Wil liamson Act properties in the vicinity of the Project site. (No impact) c) Would the project conflict with existing zomng for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 5t tM(g))? As described above, neither of the twO parcels on which the Project site is located is classified General Forest. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. (No impact) d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Although the proposed WWTP would be built on land previously developed for the existing cottage wastewater treatment system, some additional clearing would be required prior to construction and up

3 Mariposa County Wide General Plan EIR (2006), http://ca-mariposacoumy.civicplus.com/ index.aspx?NID=792 accessed on August 18, 2010. ~ Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan (2009), http://ca. mariposacoum}'.civicplus.com/index.aspx?NID=789, accessed August 16,2010.

28 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA lODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJE.CT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010_161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011.043 ENVIRO~-.j·MENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

to 16 large diameter trees would be removed. All trees removed would be cut and used for firewood or construction on the Tenaya Lodge property. There would be no sale of timber from trees proposed for removal as part of the Project. As such, the removal of these trees would be exempt from conversion permit and timber harvesting requirements pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 14, Section 1104.1, Conversion Exemptions. As described above, in compliance with Section 1104.1, a Notice of Conversion Exemption Timber Operations would be prepared by a registered professional forester and submitted to the Director of Forest Practices. Therefore, the removal of trees proposed as part of the Project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to conversion of loss of forest land Or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (Less tban Significant) e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their lacotion or nature, could result in conversion allarmlond to non-agricultural use or of conversion 01 forest land to non·forest use?

As described above, the Project site borders Sierra National Forest lands and land to the west across State Route 41 is classified General Forest. The proposed Project would upgrade wastewater treatment infrastructure at an existing resort facility and would not result in the conversion of designated forest land to non-forest use. There is no agricultural land in the vicinity of the Project site. (No impact)

less Than Significant Potentially With less III. AIR QUALITY Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) ConOict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 0 0 III 0 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air III quality violation? 0 0 0 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project area is in non·attainment under applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative Standards for ozone 0 0 III 0 precursors or other pollutants)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 0 0 III 0 e) Create objectionable odors affecting asubstantial number of people? 0 0 III 0

Existing Conditions a. Local Air Quality Setting The Tenaya Lodge/Yosemite area is isolated from portions of the Central Valley foothills with severe air quality impacts. As a result, air quality is very good, with only localized areas of unhealthy air pol lutant levels. Wood smoke is the primary source of air pollutants, resulting in emissions of particulate matter. Other sources of air pollution include automobiles and trucks. Small miscellaneous sources such as lawn mowers, char broilers, gasoline stations, and many other small business operations also contribute air pollution in the area.

29 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-f61 GENERAL PLANISPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHr;:CKLIST AND FINDINGS

Air pollutant concentrations are affected by botb emissions and meteorology. While meteorology tends to create short-term variations in pollutant concentrations, changes in emissions create long-term variations. Topographical and meteorological conditions are important factors in affecting local air pollutant concentrations. Meteorological effects such as wind speed, wind direction and air temperature gradients interact with topographical features to direct the movement and dispersal of air pollutants. The Tenaya Lodge/Yosemite area lies adjacent and upwind of the San Joaquin Valley, one of the most polluted areas in California. While there are relatively few major point sources in the San Joaquin Val ley Air Basin, area and mobile source emissions are significant. The principal air pollutants of concern in the air basin ~re ozone precursors {nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds} from mobile sources and particulates from road dust, agricultural activities, construction, and burning.

Strong sunlight provides a catalyst for ozone precursor pollutants to react in the atmosphere and form high levels of ground level ozone smog. Thus, highest annual ambient ozone-smog levels typically oc cur from May to October. In winter, periods of stagnant air {calm or very low wind speeds} can occur, especially between storms. This stagnation can allow respirable particulate levels to build up to un healthful levels in localized areas, especially when fireplaces are being heavily used. b. Criteria Air Pollutants The federal and California Clean Air Acts have established ambient air quality standards for different pollutants. National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) were established by the federal Clean Air Act of 1970 (amended in 1977 and 1990) for six "criteria" pollutants. In 1997, EPA established an 8 Hour standard for ozone and annual and 24-hour standards for very fine particulate matter (PM",).

California established ambient air quality standards as early as 1969 through the Mulford-Carrell Act. Pollutants regulated under the California Clean Air Act are similar to those regulated under the federal Clean Air Act and includes California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS).

The California Air Resources Board and local air quality agencies operate air pollutant monitoring sta tions and report results. These stations measure the ambient concentrations of criteria air pollutants as well as several additional pollutants regulated by the State. Monitored ambient air pollutant concentra tions reflect the number and strength of emission sources and the influence of topographical and mete orological factors.

Table 4-1 below describes the standards, effects, and sources of criteria air pollutants. The ambient air quality standards incorporate a margin of safety and are designed to protect those segments of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress. Sensitive receptors include asthmatics, the very young, the eld erly, people weak from other illness or disease, or persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise.

30 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PtANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO, 2011-0'13 [NVIROHi1[HlAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

TABLE 4-1 CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT STANDARDS, EFFECTS, AND SOURCES

Federal Averaging California Primary Pollutant Health and Pollutant Time Standard Standard Atmospheric Effects Major Pollutant Sources 1 hour 0.09 ppm Irritation and possibly permanent lung Motor vehicles, including refining and gaso- Ozone (0,) damage. line delivery. 8 hours 0.07 ppm 0.075 ppm" Carbon 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Deprives body of oxygen in the blood. Primarily gasoline-powered internal combus- .. Monoxide Causes headaches and worsens respira- tlon engllles. (CO) 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm tory problems. Annual Irritating to eyes and respiratory tract. Motorvehicles, petroleum refining, power Nitrogen .03 ppm 53 ppb Dioxide Average Colors atmosphere reddish-brown. plants, aircraft, ships, and railroads. (N02) 1 hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb Annual Irritates and may permanently injure res- Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur re- 0.03 ppm Sulfur Average piratory tract and lungs. Can damage covery plants, and metal processing. Dioxide 1 hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb plants, destructive to marble, iron, and (S02) steel. Limits visibility and reduces 24 hours 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm sunlight. Respirable 24 hours 5Ol'g/m' 15Ol'g/m' May irritate eyes and respiratory tract, Industrial and agricultural operations, com- Particulate decreases in lung capacity, cancer, and bustion, atmospheric photochemical reac- Matter (pM!Q) Annual 2Ol'g/m' increased mortality. Produces haze and tioDS, and natural activities (e.g. ocean limits visibility. Fine 24 hours 351'g/m' sprays). Particulate Matter (PM!.s) Annual 121'g/m' 151'g/m' Monthly 1.5l'g/m' Disturbs gastrointestinal system, and Present source: lead smelters, battery manu- causes anemia, kidney disease, and neu- facturing and recycling facilities. Past source: Lead (Pb) Quarterly 1.5 I'g/m' romuscular and neurologic dysfunction combustion of leaded gasoline. (in severe cases.)

31 MARIPOSA COUNTY TE:NAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 ENV1RONI1ENTAL CHECKLI.ST AND FINDINGS

Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollution levels somewhat above the ambient air quality standards before adverse health effects are observed. c. Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) Another group of substances found in ambient air is referred to as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) under tbe Federal Clean Air Act and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) under tbe California Clean Air Act. These contaminants tend to be localized and are found in relatively low concentrations in ambient air; however, they can result in adverse chronic health effects if exposure to low concentrations occurs for long periods. They are regulated at the State and federal level.

Diesel particulate matter, contained in diesel exhaust, emitted by diesel engines, is coated with chemi cals, many of which have been identified by EPA as HAPs, and by CARB as TACs. Diesel engines emit particulate matter at a rate about 20 times greater than comparable gasoline engines and over 90 percent of diesel exhaust particles consist of PM,.5, wbich can be inhaled and trapped in the lung possi bly leading to adverse health effects. California has adopted a comprehensive diesel risk reduction pro gram to reduce DPM emissions 85 percent by 2020. Additionally, the U.S. EPA and CARB adopted low sulfur diesel fuel standards in 2006 that reduce diesel particulate matter substantially. d. Existing Pollution Levels Air quality along the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range is generally very good due to the rural nature of the region and the almost persistent flow of air across the region. However, smog, or ozone, PMID, and PM,.5 are air quality problems for the Yosemite area. Monitoring of ozone levels show that Mariposa County is in nonattainment for both State and federal Ozone (OJ) standards. The National Park Ser vice has conducted some ozone monitoring at Yosemite in the past. That data along with data com piled by the U.S. EPA provide estimates of maximum ozone levels throughout the United States Na tional Park Service Air Atlas. 5 These data indicate that maximum one·hour ozone concentrations are above 90 parts per billion (Ppb), which is the most stringent ambient air quality standard.

Elevated PMIO levels are somewhat problematic in Mariposa County as well as most of California. PMlo concentrations are the result of both localized and regional emissions. The nearest monitoring station to the site is at the Yosemite Village Visitor Center, and derailed data from the Station is shown below in Table 4-2. Measured concentrations over the last three years have exceeded the State 24-hour stan dard on up to 19 monitoring days per year; however, there have been no recorded exceedances of the federal 24-hour standard.' There was insufficient (or no) data available to determine the value of PM,.; concentrations and if there were any days that exceeded the State or federal standards.

5 http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/AirAtlas/index.cfm.

6 PMlC is measured every sixth day in accordance with a national monitoring schedule.

32 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011.043 ENVIf\ONM[::NTAL CHECKLIST AND flt'JDINGS

TABLE 4-2 MAXIMUM MEASUREMENTS

California Measured Levels' (~g/m3) National Ambi- Ambient Average ent Air Quality Air Quality Location Time Standard Standard 2007 2008 2009 PMIll at Yosemite Village Visitor - Center Ncar Tenaya Lodge

24-Hour 150 "g/m' 116 118 82 Yosemite Village Visitor 50 "g/m' Center Annual 50 "g/m' 20 ~g/m' " ·e 24

Ozone at Yosemite National Park- Turtleback Dome Ncar Tenaya Lodge

YosemIte. V·llI age V··ISltOr I-Hour 0.09ppm 0.11 0.11 0.10 _ Center 8-Hour 0.075ppm 0.085 0.088 0.086 " ... Data set is less than 80% complete, and therefore, annual averages cannot be computed. "The national 1-hour ozone standard was rcvoked in Junc 2005 and is no longer in effect. Values excceding a Statc or federal standard are shown in bold. Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2010.

In regions where State air quality standards for CO, S02, NOx, or ozone are exceeded, the California Clean Air Act requires Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs) to prepare air quality attainment plans. Attainment plans also serve as a road map for achieving federal attainment status. Locally pre pared attainment plans are not required for areas that violate State PMlo standards. The Clean Air Act requires that the Slate air quality standards be met as quickly as possible, but it does not set precise deadlines for attainment. At the time of preparation of this Initial Study, the Mariposa County APCD had not yet adopted an air quality attainment plan to address ozone exceedance.

Discussion aJ Would the projed conilid with or obstruct implementation 01 the applicable air quality plan? As described above, the proposed Project sire is in an air basin which is in nonattainment of both fed eral and State ozone standards. Under the California Clean Air Act, the Mariposa County APCD is required to prepare an ozone air quality attainment plan to address this situation; however, at the time of preparation of this Initial Study the attainment plan had not yet been prepared. Nevertheless, while construction activities associated with the proposed Project could contribute to increased ozone concen trations in Mariposa County, such contributions would be relatively small and limited to the period of demolition and construction, expected to last approximately eight months.

33 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL plANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

As the Mariposa County APCD has not yet adopted an air quality attainment plan, the proposed Pro ject would result in a less than significant impact. (Less than Significant) b) Would the projert violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? As described above, the proposed Project site is in an air basin which is in nonattainment of both fed eral and State ozone standards. Additionally, PMIC concentrations in excess of State standards have been recorded at the Yosemite Village Visitor Center monitoring station.

Construction of the Project would result in fugitive emissions of dust from trenching, excavation, and grading activities, as well as exhaust emissions from construction equipment and associated truck and vehicle traffic. Fugitive dust could result in substantial PMIO emissions that could elevate concentrations at nearby sensitive receptors such as the cottages and the hotel. Although fugitive dust emissions would be limited to the period of construction) if uncontrolled, construction activities could lead to localized exceedances of ambient air quality standards.

Project grading activities, however, would be subject to the Mariposa County Grading and Excavation Ordinance (Title 15, Chapter 15.28, Mariposa County Code), which specifies compaction requirements that must be met for grading activities in order to minimize dust emissions. Although dust emissions are not typical during winter months, for grading during summer months) additional soil moisture is typically required for dust control. Compliance with the provisions of the County Grading and Exca vation Ordinance would therefore ensure that dust related PM10 emissions are minimized to the maxi mum extent practicable. As such) air quality impacts associated with fugitive dust emissions would be less than significant.

Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not violate or contribute to a violation of other air quality standards. Truck traffic associated with the transport of soil to and from the site would result in C02 emissions; however) Mariposa County is in an air basin which is in attainment of both federal and State CO, standards and CO, emissions from construction truck traffic would not ex ceed the threshold of 100 tons per year established by Mariposa County APCD Rules 419 and 420. Based on an estimated 1,200 one-way truck trips over a two-month period and a distance of 40 miles per trip, total CO, emissions for the life of the Project would be approximately 71 tons.' Consequently, overall, impacts associated with air quality standard violations would be less than significant. (Less tban Significant)

7 CO, calculation: 1343 grams/mile x 40 miles/trip x 30 trips/day)/453.5924 grams/lb~ 3,552.971b/day x 40 days ~ 142,118.78 Ibs/2000 Ibs/ton = 71 tons of CO,.

34 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011~04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND F1NDINGS

c) Would the Project result in acumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project area is in non-attainment under applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative Standards for ozone precursors or other pollutants)? As described above, the proposed Project site is in an air basin which is in nonattainment of both fed~ eral and State ozone standards and PMIO concentrations in excess of State standards have been recorded in the vicinity of the Project site. Project demolition and construction activities would generate fugitive dust and vehicle exhaust emissions; however, these emissions would be localized and temporary, limited to the construction period. Once the WWTP becomes operational, the treatment process is almost en~ tirely enclosed and only very small quantities of hydrogen sulfide and nitrogen would be generated. Consequently, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to ozone or PMIO concentrations and impacts would be less than significant. (Less tban Significant) d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? During demolition and construction of the Project, truck traffic would generate C02 emissions. An estimated 600 return trips would be required to transport soils required over a period of twO months, which would generate approximately 71 tons of CO,. This would be less than the threshold of 100 tons per year established by Mariposa County APCD Rules 419 and 420. Demolition and construction ac tivities would also generate PMw in the form of fugitive dust and vehicle exhaust; however, as described above, these emissions would be localized, limited to an eight-month period, and reduced to the maxi mum extent practicable by compliance with the Mariposa County Grading and Excavation Ordinance. Emissions of diesel particulate matter from construction trucks would be largely limited to the two~ montb period of soil transport and would therefore not pose a substantial human health risk.

Once the \VWTP becomes operational, the treatment process is almost entirely enclosed and only very small quantities of hydrogen sulfide and nitrogen are generated. Therefore, overall, impacts related the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations would be less than significant.. (Less than Sigllificant) e) Would the project create objectionable odors affeding asubstantial number of people? The Project would involve the construction and operation of a replacement WWTP at Tenaya Lodge. The proposed wastewater treatment process involves aeration, which helps to eliminate odors from waste. Additionally, the treatment process takes place almost entirely in closed, vented tanks, which further minimizes the potential for objectionable odors to be detected by guests at the Lodge. There fore, the Project would not generate objectionable odors affecting substantial numbers of people and impacts would be less than significant. (Less d,an Significallt)

35 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL pLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMeNTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

less Than Significant Potentially With less IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Significant Mitigation Than No WDuid the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect. either directly Dr through habitat mDdificatiDns. Dn any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, of special status species in local Of regional IIi!l plans. pDlicies. Dr regulatiDns. Dr by the CaiifDrnia Department Df Fish and Game Dr US 0 D 0 Fish and Wiidliie Service) b) Have a substantiai adverse effect Dn any riparian habitat Dr Dther sensitive natural community identified in iDeal or regiDnai pians. pDlicies, regulatiDns, Dr by the CalifDrnia Oe- DD IIi!l 0 partment Df Fish and Game Dr US Fish and Wildlife Service) c) Have a substantial adverse effect Dn federally protected wetlands as defined by SectiDn 404 Df the Clean Water Act 0ncfuding. but nDt limited ID, marsh, vernal pDDI. coastal, etc.), DD III 0 through direct remDval, filling, hydrDIDgical interruptiDn Dr Dther means) d) Intertere substantially with the mDvement Df any native resident Dr migratDry fish Dr wildlife species or with established native resident or migratDry wildlife corridDrs, Dr impede D IIi!l 0 D the use Df native wildlife sites) e) CDnflict with any IDeal ordinances Dr pDlicies prDtecting biDIDgical resDurces) 0 D III D CDnflict with an adDpted Habital CDnservatiDn Plan, Natural CDmmunity CDnservatiDn o IIi!l Plan Dr Dther approved IDcal, regiDnal Dr State habitat conservatiDn plan) D 0 0

Existing Conditions The property is at an elevation of approximately 5100 feet on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada. This elevation and latitude in the central Sierra Nevada is within the main timber belt in the region and is dominated by lower montane mixed conifer fares!. The climate is generally warm and dry in the summer, with cool, wet winters. Winter precipitation can be in the form of rain or snow, and this ele vation is often within the transition zone between the two forms of precipitation. The average daily high temperature for Fish Camp is approximately 46°F in January and 72°F in July. A detailed de scription of the biological setting of the Project site and its vicinity is included in Appendix A of this Initial Study.

The proposed Project site totals 5 acres, of which approximately 2 acres are already developed with roads, parking lots, buildings, and associated facilities servicing the main lodge. The remaining 3 acres of the Project site are dominated by lower montane coniferous forest, with an existing septic tank and leaching field within this forested area of the western parcel (APN 010-410-013). No part of the pro posed Project site has waters or wetlands under potential jurisdiction by the US Army Corps of Engi neers (USACE); however, there is a small, isolated wetland which hosts patches of rushes between State Route 41, Jackson Road, and the access road for the WWTP site. This wetland is protected by state wide policies including the Wetlands Conservation Policy (Executive Order W-59-93), also known as the State's "no net loss" policy for wetlands, and would likely be regulated by the CDFG and the Re gional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as well. A narrow erosion channel carries wa.ter from

36 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

the wetland feature to the southwest, becoming amorphous approximately 50 feet south of the property boundary. The erosion channel does not support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream-dependent terrestrial wildlife.

Discussion The discussion of environmental impacts and findings below is drawn from the findings and conclu sions of a Biotic Report prepared for the proposed Project. The Biotic Report was prepared by HT Harvey Associates and is available for review at the Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bul lion Street, Mariposa, CA.

0) Would the project have a substantial adverse elfec( either directly or through habitat modilications, on a plant or animal population, or essential hab,)a( defined os 0 candidate, sensitive or special-status species? The Project site provides suitable foraging and denning habitat for Pacific fisher, a California Species of Special Concern and a candidate for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). If Pacific fishers occupy the constnlCtion zone or immediately adjacent areas at the time of construction, distur bance could destroy occupied dens or cause fisher to abandon dens. Construction during the denning season could result in the incidental loss of kits or otherwise lead to den abandonment. Reductions in the number of this rare species, directly or indirectly through den abandonment or reproductive sup pression, would constitute a significant impact. To reduce the potential impact on this species to a less than-significant level, the following mitigation measure is proposed for inclusion in the conditions of approval for the Project:

Mitigation Measure BIO-l: Any medium or larger (;;e 20 inches in diameter) trees selected for re moval shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for potential dens (cavities, entrance holes) suitable for Pacific fisher. Cavities suitable for fisher will be examined with portable camera probes to de termine fisher presence. A disturbance-free buffer of 300 feet shall be flagged around each occupied den. If a potential den is not occupied, the tree may be removed under the direction of the quali fied biologist.

If avoidance of an occupied den is not possible, the Project Proponent shall coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the Service) and CDFG and take the following steps to passively remove the fisher outside of the kit-rearing season (1 June to 1 February):

• Occupied trees shall be monitored daily by a qualified biologist for a period of 7 days to deter mine whether the den has been temporarily vacated.

37 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 EI\jvIRONMENTAL Cf-l[CKLISl AND FII\j[)INGS

vacated the den. Tree removal shall take place immediately following confirmation that the den has been vacated as noted above.

Monitoring for Mitigation Measure BIO-l: This mitigation measure will be monitored by the Mariposa County Planning Department through the Project construction permitting process.

Currently, the Project site also provides suitahle and occupied habitat for two other California Species of Concern: California spotted owl and northern goshawk. If California spotted owls or northern gos hawks occupy the construction zone or immediately adjacent areas at the time of construction, distur bance could destroy occupied nests or cause birds to abandon nests. Construction during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandon ment. Reductions in the numbers of these species, directly or indirectly through nest abandonment or reproductive suppression, would constitute a significant impact. Furthermore, raptors, including owls, and their nests are protected under both federal and State laws and regulations, including the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code section 3503.5 (see "Disturbance of Nesting Migratory Birds" be low). Therefore, to reduce the potential impact on these species to a less-than-significant level, the fol lowing mitigation measure is proposed for inclusion in the conditions of approval for the Project:

Mitigation Measure BIO~2: Any construction activities such as tree removat site grading, etc., oc curring on the proposed Project site within the general avian nesting season, between March 1 and August 31, shall require a pre-construction survey conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if the construction activity violates the provisions of Fish and Game Code, sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. This pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of any demolition/construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (FebruaryI through April 30) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities during the late part of the breeding season (May I through September 15)_

For California spotted owl and northern goshawks, a qualified hiologist shall conduct the focused breeding season surveys within the construction zone and a surrounding 500-foot buffer. If nests are found during the survey, a 500-foot disturbance-free buffer shall be established around each nest in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and demarcated by fencing or flagging. Where a biological evaluation by a qualified biologist determines that a nest site would be shielded from planned activities by topographic or other features that would mini mize disturbance, the buffer distance may be reduced.

38 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 ENVIRONt-1ENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

biologist, in consultation witb CDFG, shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer to be established around the nest.

Monitoring for Mitigation Measure BIO-2: This mitigation measure will be monitored by the Mariposa County Planning Department through the project construction permitting process..

Additionally, the Project site currently provides suitable roosting habitat for three special-status bat species possible in the region: Pallid bat, Townsend's big-eared bat, and Western red bat. If any special status bats occupy the construction zone or immediately adjacent areas at the time of construction, dis turbance could destroy occupied roost sites in trees and buildings. Reductions in the numbers of these species, through roost site destruction, would constitute a significant impact. To reduce this potential impact on these species to a less-than-significant level} the fonowing mitigation measure is proposed for inclusion in the conditions of approval for the Project: '

Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Any medium or larger (20 12-inch diameter) trees or snags selected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for presence of foliage-roosting bats (western red bat) and potential dens (cavities, entrance holes) suitable for other special-status bats (pallid bat and Townsend's big-eared bat). Cavities suitable as special-status bat roosts shall be examined for roost ing bats using a portable camera probe or similar technology. Buildings with potential for support ing special-status bats (pallid bat and Townsend's big-eared bat) shall be inspected by a qualified bi ologist for evidence of roosting colonies. If present, roosts (including day and night roosts, hiber nacula, and maternity colonies) and a 300-foot disturbance_free buffer surrounding each roost shall be flagged. If avoidance is not possible, the roosting bats shall be passively evicted under the direction of a qualified biologist (as determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFG). The qualified biologist shall facilitate the removal of roosting bats outside of the winter hibernation (I November to 1 March) and maternity roosting (I March to 31 July) periods through the following means:

• Opening the roosting area to allow airflow through the cavity or building (air flow disturbance).

• \Y/aiting a minimum of one night for roosting bats to respond to air flow disturbance, thereby allowing bats to leave during nighttime hours when predation risk is relatively low and chances of finding a new roost is greater than in the daytime.

39 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLiST AND FINDINGS

• Disturbing roosts at dusk just prior to roost removal the same evening to allow bats to escape during nighttime hours.

Monitoring for Mitigation Measure BIO-2: This mitigation measure will be monitored by the Mariposa County Planning Depanment through the project construction permitting process.

After implementation of the above-listed mitigation measures, impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be less than significant. (Less tban Significant) b) Would the project have a substantial adverse elfect on any riparian habitat or other sensilive natural cammunity type? As described above the eastern ponion of the Project site is developed with the existing hotel wastewa ter treatment system and Jackson Road, while the western portion of the Project site is dominated by montane coniferous forest. The only water features on the Project site are the small, isolated wetland, which hosts patches of rushes, and the narrow erosion channel running from it, which does not suppon aquatic life, riparian vegetation, Or stream-dependent terrestrial wildlife. Consequently, the Project would not have substantial adverse effects on riparian or other sensitive natural community types. (Less than Significant) c) Would the praject have asubstantial adverse effect on federally pratected wetlands as delined by Section 404 of the aeon Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? This Project would require excavation and site grading with imponed fill at the location of the pro posed WWTP. There is an unnamed stream which drains to the Lewis Fork of the Fresno River ap proximately Y4 mile south of the site that could be impacted by uncontrolled runoff from the construc' tion site. This would violate section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The RWQCB can assume jurisdiction over lands upon which activities take place that could reasonably result in degradation of water quality of traditional waters of the state. The proposed WWTP construction site is approximately 1.8 acres in size, and would be required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharge of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity. The Construction General Permit Would require the develop~ ment and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and this plan is re quired to list all Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used in preventing uncontrolled storm water runoff from the construction site. Because of this requirement, the effects of the Project on wet lands would be less than significant without mitigation. (Less than Significant) d) Would the praject interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildilfe species, their wildille corridors or nursery sites 7 Migratory birds are known or are expected to nest on and in the vicinity of the Project site. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in migratory birds

40 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011.04] ~·NVIRONMr,;NTAl CHECKl.IST AND FINDINGS

except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. This Act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs. Consrruction disturbance during the breeding sea son could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered "take" by CDFG. Loss of fertile eggs or nesting birds, or any activities resulting in nest abandonment, could con stitute a significant impact if the species is particularly rare in the region. Construction activities such as tree removal, site grading, etc., that disturb a rare nesting bird on the site or inlmediately adjacent to the construction zone could therefore constitute a significant impact. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, described above, requires either that tree pruning or removal be conducted outside of the general avian nesting season, or that if pruning or removal must be conducted between February 1 and September 15, a pre-construction survey conducted by a qualified biologist/botanist shall be undertaken to determine if such removal violates the provisions of the Fish 'and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513), and drat mitigation measures be implemented as required to prevent significant impacts. As such, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would ensure that impacts to native migratory species would be less than significant. (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorpo· rated) e) Would the project conflict with ony locol ordinances ar policies protecting bialogicol resources? The Project would not conflict with any local ordinances or policies protecting biological resources, including Mariposa County General Plan Policy 11-4a, which seeks to conserve and enhance the ecosys tems, plant communities, wildlife habitats, and the inherent diversity of both plant and animal species for the recreational, commercial, aesthetic, and basic ecosystems needs of the County. (Less than Signifi· cant)

I) Would the project conflict with on odopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other appraved local regional or State habitat conservation plan?

There are no adopted habitat conservation plans which would apply to the Project area. Although the Project could involve the removal of up to 16 large diameter trees and some smaller trees in the vicinity of the proposed replacement WWTP, the removal of native trees would be limited only to those di rectly impacted by construction activities, as is consistent with General Plan Policy 11-4a(2). Therefore, associated impacts would be less tban significant. (Less tban Significant)

less Than Significant Potentially With less v. CULTURAL RESOURCES Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined III in § 15064.57 0 0 0

41 MARIPOSA COUNTY TE:NAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043 ENVIRONMENTr~L CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

less Than Significant Potentially With less V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Significant Mitigation Than Na Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pur- b) Ii!II suanl to § t5064.5? 0 0 0 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological reSource or site or unique geologic Ii!II feature? 0 0 0 d) Disturb any human remains, including those 'Interred outside of formal cemeteries? 0 Ii!II 0 0

Existing Conditions Ten previous cultural resource investigations carried out within a 0.25 mile radius of the Tenaya Lodge property have primarily revealed the presence of historical sites associated with local logging activities in the 19'" and 20'" Centuries. Present-day Jackson Road is part of the historic Madera-Sugar Pine Rail road grade, constructed and operated becween 1900 and 1925. Today the ties and rails have been re moved and the only indication of the railroad site remaining is the grade itself. The grade is the only historic-era structure known to exist within the proposed Project site.s A field survey conducted in July 2010 found no historic refuse, railroad ties, or any other resources associated with the railroad either along]ackson Road or as it passes through the Project site.

The Project site falls within the ethnographic territory of the Southern Sierra Miwok.' Kawinucha, the closest Southern Sierra Miwok village to the Project site, is located approximately three miles to the north, directly south of the southern fork of the Merced River. A search of the Sacred Land File by the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) did not indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources on the Tenaya Lodge property. The Fish Camp Town Planning Area Spe cific Plan does not indicate the presence of any known archaeological or paleontological resourCes on the Project site. tO

A detailed description of the cultural context of the Project site and its vicinity is included in Appendix B of this Initial Study, Cultural Resources Inventory Report.

8 Ecorp Consulting, August2010, Cultural Resources Inventory Report.

9 Ecorp Consulting, August 2010, Cultural Resources Inventory Report.

10 Mariposa County Planning Department, 2006, Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan (Volume IT of the General Plan).

42 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043 ENVIRONl1ENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

Discussion The discussion of environmental impacts and findings below is drawn from the findings and conclu sions of a Cultural Resources Inventory Report prepared for the proposed Project. The Cultural Re sources Inventory Report was prepared by ECORP Consulting.

a) Wauld the project cause asubstantial adverse change in the significance of ahistorical resource? As described above, the Madera~Sugar Pine Railroad grade is the only historic~era structure known to exist within the proposed Project site. While the Project does not propose modifications to or excava tion of the railroad grade, there remains a possibility that unrecorded cultural resources could be pre~ sent beneath the ground surface of the grade or other locations within the Project site, and that such resources could be exposed during demolition and construction activities. To reduce potential adverse impacts associated with an unanticipated discovery to a less~than~significant level, the following mitiga tion measure is proposed for inclusion in the conditions of approval for the Project:

Mitigation Measure CUL~l: During grading, construction, or any activity that involves ground dis turbance necessary to implement project conditions of approval, if any signs ofprehistoric, historic, archaeologicat or paleontological resourceS are evident, all work activity within 50 feet of the find shall stop and the Mariposa Counry Planning Department shall be notified immediately. No work shall be done within 50 feet of the find until the Mariposa County Planning Department, in consul tation with a representative of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County has identified ap propriate mitigation measures to protect the find and those measures have been implemented by the applicant. Protection measures for the site may include, but shall not be limited to, requiring the project applicant to hire a qualified archaeologist who shall conduct necessary inspections and research, and who may supervise all further ground disturbance activities and make any such rec ommendations as necessary to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. In addition to the Planning Department, the Mariposa County Coroner and the American Indian Council of Mari posa County shall be notified should human remains be discovered. Representatives of the Ameri can Indian Council of Mariposa County shall be requested to be on-site during disturbance and!or removal of human remains. Should any Native American artifact or human remains be discovered, a representative of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County shall be on-site to monitor the remainder of the excavation activities.

Monitoring for Mitigation Measure CUL-l: This mitigation measure will be monitored by the Mariposa County Planning Depanment through the project construction permiuing process.

After implementation of the above-listed mitigation measure, potential impacts to historical resources would be less than significant. (Less thall Significant)

43 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010wl61 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AliD FINDINGS

b) Would the project cause 0 substontial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource? Although there are no known archaeological resources on the proposed Project site, it is possible that unanticipated resources could be present beneath the ground surface. Adoption and implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-l, described above, however, would reduce potential impacts associated with unanticipated discovery to a less-than-significant level. (Less than Significant) c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy aunique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feoture? Although the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan does not identify any paleontological re sources on the Project site, it is possible that unanticipated resources could be present beneath the ground surface. Adoption and implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-l, described above, how ever, would reduce potential impacts associated with unanticipated discovery to a less~than-significant level. (Less than Significant) d) Would the project disturb ony human remoins, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Although there are no known human remains on the proposed Project site, it is possible that unantici pated remains could be present beneath the ground surface. Adoption and implementation of Mitiga tion Measure CUL-l, described above, however, would reduce potential impacts associated with unan w ticipated discovery to a less-than-significant level. (Less than Significant)

less Than Significant Potentially With less VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Significant Mitigation Than No WDuid the project: Impact Incorporated Significant tmpact 0) ExpDse peDple Dr structures tD pDtential substantial adverse effects, including the risk Df IDss, injury or death invDlving: i) Rupture Df a knDwn earthquake fault, as delineated Dn the mDst recent Alquist-PriDID Earthquake Fault ZDning Map issued by the State GeDIDgist fDr the area Dr based Dn 0 0 IIiII 0 Dther substantial evidence Df aknDwn fault? ii) Strong seismic grDund shaking? 0 0 IIiII 0 iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including IiquefactiDn? 0 0 IIiII 0 iv) Landslides, mudslides or Dther similar hazards? 0 0 IIiII 0 b) Result in substantial sDil erosiDn Dr the IDss Df tDpsDil? 0 0 0 IIiII c) Be IDcated Dn ageDIDgic unit Dr sDil that is unstable, Dr that wDuld become unstable as a result of the project, and pDtentially result in Dn- Dr Dff-site landslide, lateral spreading, 0 0 IIiII 0 subsidence, liquefactiDn Dr collapse? d) Be IDcated Dn expansive sDil, creating substantial risks tD life Dr property? 0 0 IIiII 0

44 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010.161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMEN1' NO. 2011·04) ENVIRONI'1t:NTAL CHECKLIS'l AND FINDINGS

less Than Significant Potentially With less VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of seplic tanks or alternative waste IIiI water disposal systerns where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 0 0 0

Existing Conditions The 5-acre Project site slopes toward the southwest from Jackson road across the site. Ground slope gradients vary within the site: near Jackson Road, slopes are 1.5 horizontal (H) ro 1 vertical (V) Or sceeper; at the eastern edge of the proposed parking lot, slopes are 3H ro1V ro 6H to IV ; and in the vicinity of the proposed \VWTP building, slopes are about 4H ro IV or flatter. I] Elevations across rhe site area range from a high of about 5,095 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) near the intersection of the site access road with Jackson Road, to a low of about 5,015 feet AMSL in the extreme southwest part of the site.

Soil investigations undertaken for the Project site found silty sand colluvial soils in all of the test bor ings, extending ro weak, weathered rock at depths of about 8 ro 28 feet below surface grade (BSG). The investigation also encountered fill soils comprising loose silty sands in a boring drilled in the vicinity of the existing leach line trenches in the area of the proposed \VWTP building. The fill soils encountered may be the result of previous grading conducted ro achieve relatively flat terraces for installation of the leach lines.

The Project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known mapped fault rupture traces are present on the site.12 The region as a whole has not experienced a large number of landslides and the potential for landslide hazards is considered low according ro the US Geological Sur vey repon. 1J Existing native or cut slopes exhibiting significant rock fall hazard were not noted on the proposed W\'QTP site, nor were potentially expansive clay soils. As previous soil borings conducted on the Tenaya Lodge property found groundwater at a depth of 25 feet BSG, perched groundwater could be encountered during construction of the Project - especially during the spring - and dewatering may be required.

11 Moore Twining Associates, September 2010, Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation, Pro posed \'lastewater Treatment Plant at Tenaya Lodge.

12 Moore Twining Associates, September 2010, Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation, Pnr posed Wastewater Treatment Plant at Tenaya Lodge. This report is available for review at the Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bullion Street, M~lriposa) CA.

B Moore Twining Associates, September 2010, Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation, Pro· posed Wastewater Treatment Plant at Tenaya Lodge. This report is available for review at the Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bullion Street, Mariposa, CA.

45 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILI1"IES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-04) ENVIRONf1ENTAL CHfCKLIST AND FINDINGS

A detailed description of the geological and soil conditions of the Project site and its vicinity is included in Appendix C of this Initial Study.

Discussion The discussion of environmental impacts and findings below is drawn from the findings and conclu sions of a Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation Report prepared for the proposed Project. The Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Investigation Report was prepared by Moore Twining Associ ates and is available for review at the Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bullion Street, Mariposa, CA. a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse elfect~ including the risk of los~ injury or death involving: D Rupture of a known earthquake foul, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Mop issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of aknown fault? The Project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known mapped fault rupture traces are present on the site. The potentially activ'e Melones fault is the closest active or potentially active fault, located approximately 8 miles west of the site. Considering the distance be tween the site and known active or potentially active faults, there would be no impact related to the potential for fault rupture. (No impact)

iD Strong seismic ground shaking? The Project site is located in a tectonically active region and would be subjected to seismic ground shaking in the event of an earthquake occurring on regional faults. However, the proposed WWTP would be designed and built in compliance with the standards of the California Building Code, which account for the maximum considered earthquake ground motion. With compliance, impacts related to seismic shaking would be reduced to a less-than·significant level. (Less than Significant)

iiD Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Liquefaction, lateral spreading and seismic settlement are conditions that can occur under seismic shaking from earthquake events. However, given the relatively shallow depth to weathered rock, the potential for liquefaction, lateral spreading, and seismic settlement is minimal. Additionally, the pro posed WWTP would be designed and built in compliance with the California Building Code, and therefore impacts from seismic-related ground failure would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Less than Significant)

46 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04J ENVIR,ONI1ENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

ivy Landslides, mudslides or ather similar hazards? As described above, the Project site is located in a region where the potential for landslide hazards is considered low. Given the native slope gradients and soil and rock conditions of the Project site, as well as the lack of evidence of recent landslide slope movements, the potential for future instability of the native slopes is also considered low. As loose rock materials exposed in cut slopes should be re moved from the face of the slopes as part of slope grading, rock fall hazards associated with cut slopes would be reduced to the maximum extent practicable. Overall, impacts from landslides, mudslides, and similar hazards would be less than significant. (Less tball Sigllificam) b) Would the project result in substantial sail erosion or the lass of topsoil? The area around the proposed \VWTP would need to be cleared and graded prior to construction. Topsoil removed would be stockpiled for reuse later in landscape or non-structural areas. A SWPPP containing erosion control measures as required under the Construction General Permit would be pre pared and implemented for the Project. The site would also be graded in compliance with the Mariposa County Grading and Excavation Ordinance (Title 15, Chapter 15.28, Mariposa County Code), which contains standards for soil compaction, sediment control during construction, and re-vegetation follow ing construction as well as other standards. The Ordinance also contains drainage plan requirements which ensure that modification to existing drainages are done in such a way as to maintain the function and capacity of the affected drainage course following construction. Therefore, implementation of the SWPPP and compliance with the Mariposa County Grading and Excavation Ordinance would ensure that impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. (Less tball Sigllifi cam) c) Would the project be located an ageologic unit or sail that is unstable, or that would become unstable as aresult of the project and potentially result in an- or off-site landslide, laterol spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? As described above, the Project site is located in an area where the risk of landslide hazards and seismi cally-induced ground failure is considered low. In general, the on-site native and fill soils anticipated to be encountered during grading are considered geologically stable; however, undocumented fill soils comprising loose silty sands were encountered in a test boring. These undocumented fill soils appear to be related to previous grading, and considering the areal extent of the existing leach lines, it is likely that a significant quantity of undocumented fill soils is located in this area. As the undocumented fill soils may not have been placed with proper compaetive effort or properly keyed and benched into underly ing materials, they could be susceptible to settlement, sliding, and surface and/or subsurface erosion. Therefore, in order to prevent differential settlement, the area around the proposed \VWTP would be excavated and the undocumented fill removed prior to placement of new engineered fill, structures, and pavements, as described above in Chapter 2 of this Initial Study. Additionally, the Project grading plan calls for the over-excavation of the w\VTP site in order to limit the variations in fill thickness below structures and reduce the potential for excessive differential settlement. The grading plan would be

~7 MARIPOSA COUNTY t'ENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 E N VI RON 11 E N TAL C H (:C K, LIS TAN 0 r: I N DIN G S

prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer and would conform with applicable local, State, and fed eral regulations, including Mariposa County Code, OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construc tion (29 CFR part 1926), and Assessor's Regulations. Consequently, the Project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable and impacts would be less than significant. (Less tban Signifi· cant) d) Would the project be located on expansive sail, creating substantial risks to life or property? Potentially expansive soils were not encountered either during the investigation of soils on the pro~ posed Project site or in previous soil surveys undertaken on the Tenaya Lodge property. Accordingly, the potential for damage to buildings) structures) etc. resulting from existing on~site expansive soils is low and associated impacts would be less than significant. (Less tban Significant) e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed Project involves the construction and operation of a WWTP for the Tenaya Lodge prop erty. The proposed WWTP is a tertiary treatment system which would replace the existing septic tanks and leach fields which currently Serve the cottages. Wastewater from the cottages and the hotel would be treated in the proposed w\XTTP so as to separate waste products (sludge) for disposal at Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill, as described in Chapter 3 of this Initial Study. Recycled water generated in the treatment process would be used for irrigation or disposed of on~site in the existing disposal system. As such, septic tanks are not contemplated for the Project and impacts would be less than significant. (Less tban Significant)

less Than Significant Potentially With less VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have IfI!l asignificant impact on the environment? 0 0 0 b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted lor the IfI!l purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs? 0 0 0

Existing Conditions The principal sources of GHG emissions in California are transportation and electric power generation. Taken together these two sources emit approximately 60 percent of GHGs in the stare. H Motor vehicle

14 California Air Resources Board, http://arb.ca.gov/cclinventory/data/data.htm, accessed on August 18, 2010.

48 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDiTIONS NO. 2010.161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 ENV!RONt1ENTAL CHECkLIST AND FIND!NGS

emission standards and electrical facility operational emissions, however, are not subject to regulation by Mariposa County. Mariposa County does not currently bave any guidelines or thresholds of signifi

cance for assessing GHG emissions. 15

Discussion a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have asignificant impact on the environment? As the proposed WWTP would replace tbe existing plant and septic tanks at Tenaya Lodge, the Project would not result in the generation of new GHG emissions associated with maintenance vehicles or em ployees. Once the replacement \XTWTP becomes operational, the majority of the treatment process would be enclosed and the only air pollutants produced would be very small, almost immeasurable quantities of hydrogen sulfide and nitrogen. 16 Additionally, initial calculations indicate that the re placement W\XfTP would use about 20 percent less energy than the existing wastewater treatment sys tems at Tenaya Lodge. 17 As such, indirect GHG emissions associated with energy use from implemen tation of the Project are anticipated to be less than under existing conditions.

During the demolition and construction phase of the proposed Project, equipment such as excavators, cranes, pavers, and trucks to haul debris and deliver materials would be used. Construction equipment of this nature would emit GHGs; however, given the scope and timeframe of the proposed Project, as sociated GHG emissions would be relatively small, localized, and limited to a period of approximately 8 months. Additionally, as discussed above under Section III, Air Quality, Mariposa County is in an air basin which is in attainment of both federal and State C02 standards and C02 emissions from con struction truck traffic would not exceed the threshold of 100 tons per year established by Mariposa County APCD Rules 419 and 420.

Consequently, both directly and indirectly, the Project's GHG emissions would be less than significant. (Less thall Significant) b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adapted for the purpose of re ducing the emissions of GHGs? As described above, Mariposa County does not have any guidelines or thresholds for assessing GBGs; however, given the scope and timeframe of the Project, GHG emissions from construction equipment

15 Dave Conway, Deputy Air PolImion Control Officer, Mariposa County Air Pollution Control Dis trict. Personal Communication with DC&E. Friday August 20, 2010.

16 Beth Montanez, Project Engineer, Blair, Church & Flynn. Personal Communication with DC&E, Oc· tober 20,2010.

17 Mike Gilbert, Senior Project Manager, Delaware North Companies Inc., Personal Communication with DC&E, October S, 2010.

49 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 1010·161 G ENE R ALP LAN /SPECIFICP LAN / Z 0 N I N GAM END M-E NT NO. 201 1·04 J ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

would be relatively small, localized, and limited to a period of about 8 months. Once operational, the replacement WWTP would emit only very small, almost immeasurable quantities of hydrogen sulfide and nitrogen, and is anticipated to consume ahout 20 percent less energy than the existing wastewater treatment systems at Tenaya Lodge.

As Mariposa County does not have any guidelines or thresholds for assessing GHGs, the proposed Pro ject would result in a less than significant impact. (Less than Significant)

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less VIII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine trans· mil port, use or disposal of hazardous materials? 0 0 0 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foresee- able upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the 0 0 mil 0 environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 0 0 0 mil d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant haz- 0 0 0 mil ard to the public or the environment? e) Expose people or structures to asignificant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are 0 0 mil 0 intermixed w',th wildlands? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response 0 mil plan or emergency evacuation plan? 0 0 0 g) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety haz· 0 0 0 mil ard for people living or working in the project area? h) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area? 0 0 0 mil

Existing Conditions The Project would take place on che Tenaya Lodge property, 2 miles south of Yosemice National Park in the unincorporated community of Fish Camp, California. The surrounding area is heavily forested and the Project site is classified as being at High or Very High threat of wildfire on the CalFire State wide Threat Map.I' In general, the risk of wildfire is high in a large portion of Mariposa County be cause the County is covered by a combination of grasslands, chaparral, and forests that can become very

18 CalFire, Statewide Fire Threat Map, http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/wehdata/maps/statewide/fthreat_map.pdf, accessed on October 5, 2010.

50 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACiLITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010-161 G,ENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011~04J ENVIRONMENTAL CHECK1.IST AND FINDINGS

flammable during dry weather, particularly between June and September, when wind and beat contrib ute to the fire danger. Mariposa County has developed a countywide Wildfire Hazard Safety Plan, which includes standards for fire prevention, fuel management, and fire suppression. Additionally, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), the USDA Forest Service, the Depart ment of Interior National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management have responsibility for wild land fires within their jurisdictions within Mariposa County. Each agency has developed approaches and mitigations to address the threat of wildfires.

Mariposa County manages and coordinates emergency response activities in conjunction with the Cali fornia State Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). Additionally, the County has de veloped a Draft Evacuation Plan of Mariposa County, which is part of its Draft Emergency Plan (Au gust 2003), and includes initial response operations, extended response operations, and recovery opera tions, as well as providing guidance for field responders for initial response to emergencies.

A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment conducted for the Tenaya Lodge Property in November 2009 involved a site visit to observe locations of stored chemicals, workspace notification procedures, and secondary containment areas for appropriated materials, as well as follow up discussions with the Lodge Engineering Department. The Assessment found that hazardous waste materials are not accumulated on the facility and all hazardous materials are used for their intended purpose until spent. Tenaya Lodge is an ISO 14001 certified facility and the Lodge maintains a Spill, Prevention, Containment, and Control Plan (SPCCP) and a Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). In compliance with the SPCCP, a response station (absorbent pillows, socks, etc.) has been set up for containment of potential spills in the hazardous materials storage area, east of the Tenaya Lodge adjacent to the loading dock. Additionally, the HMMP requires adequately trained personnel to comply with the appropriate opera tions, monitoring and potential emergency response needed at the site. Currently, six Lodge employees are 40-hour OSHA Hazardous Waste Operations trained.

The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment revealed no recognized environmental conditions (RECs) l in connection with tbe Tenaya Lodge property or the Project site ' Tbere are no sites on the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List) on the Tenaya Lodge property or in the surrounding area. The nearest airpon to the Project site is Mariposa-Yosemite Airport, located ap proximately 22 miles to the west.

19 Vern Bennett, Senior Phase II Supervisor, Moore-Twining Associates, Personal Communication with DC&E, October 5,2010.

51 MARIPOSA COUNTY "tENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND (IND1NGS

Discussion a) Would the praject create asignilicant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal 01 hazardous materials? Operation of the replacement WWTP would involve the use of chemicals. The WWTP centrifuge uses a polymer and sodium hypochlorite would be used to disinfect the effluent and clean the membranes of the proposed WWTP equipment. These ch~micals would be stored in 55-gallon drums in the WWTP building. As described above, the Lodge is ISO 14001 certified and maintains both a SPCCP and a HMMP which establish procedures applicable to the chemicals used. Continued compliance with ap plicable federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that potential impacts from the routine trans port, use, and disposal of hazardous materials associated with the Project would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) b) Would the project create asignilicant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably loreseeoble upset ond occident canditions involving the releose 01 hazardous moterials into the environment? As described above, the Lodge is ISO 14001 certified and maintains both a SPCCP and a HMMP which establish procedures applicable to the chemicals used. In the event of a spill, the emergency response and procedures outlined in Section 2.1 of the SPCCP would be implemented. Consequently, the Pro ject would not create significant hazards related to risk of upset or spill of hazardous materials and im pacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) c) Would the project emit hozardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile 01 an existing or proposed school? Wawona Elementary School, located approximately 10 miles north of Fish Camp along State Route 41, is the closest school to the Project site. Therefore, there would be no impact related to hazardous emis sions or the handling of hazardous materials within a Y4-mile of a school. (No impact) d) Would the project be located on a site which is inc/uded on a list 01 hozardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 ond, as aresult, create asignilicant hazard to the public or the environment? As described above, there are no Cortese List sites on the Project site, and therefore no associated risks to the public or the environment. (No impact) e) Would the project expose people or structures to asignilicant risk 01 foss, injury or deoth involving wildland lires? As described above, the Project site is in a location classified as being at High or Very High threat of wildfire on the CalFire State-wide Threat Map. However, the proposed Projecr would nor place addi tional people or structures at risk of damage from wildfires. Compliance with the Mariposa County Wildfire Safery Hazard Plan would ensure that wildfire risks are mitigated to the maximum extent prac ticable. In addition, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), the USDA For est Service, the Department of Interior National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management have

52 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

developed approaches to mitigate the risk of wildfires and emergency response plans for implementa tion in the event of outbreak. Consequently, the Project would result in a less-than·significant impact related to wildfires. (Less tban Significant)

f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergenc; response plan or emergenc; evacuation plan? Continued implementation of the SPCCP and continued compliance with relevant State and local plans and procedures would ensure that the Project results in a less-than-significant impact with respect to emergency response and evacuations. (Less tban Significant) g) For aproject within an airport land use plan or, where such aplan has not been adopted, within two miles 01 apublic airport or public use airport, result in asafety hazard for people living or working in the project area?

The nearest airport is approximately 22 miles to the west. The Project site is not within the safety zone of an airport and the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people in the vicinity of the Project site. (No impact) h) For aproject within the vicinity of aprivate airstrip, result in asafety hazard for people living or working in the project area? The Project site is not located within 2 miles of an airstrip. Therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people in the vicinity of the Project site. (No impact)

less Than Significant Potentially With less IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 0 0 IIIIl 0 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or intertere substantially with groundwaler recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a significant lower- 0 0 IIIIl 0 ing of the local groundwater table level? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through Ihe alteration of the course of astream or river, orsubstantially increase the rate or amount IIIIl of runoff in a manner which would result 'In substantial eros'lon, siltation or flooding on- Cl 0 0 or off-site? d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned IIIIl stormwater drainage systems? 0 0 0 e) Provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or otherwise substantially de- IIIIl grade water quality? 0 0 0 oPlace occupied development within a lOG-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Rood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delinea- 0 0 0 IIIIl tion map?

53 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·/61 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011.-04) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

less Than Significant Potentially With less IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact g) Place within a IOO-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood 1I0ws? o o o h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving 1I00ding, IIlI including flooding as a result of the failure 01 a levee or dam? o o o i) Potentially be inundated by seiche, tsunami, or mudllow? o o IIlI o

Existing Conditions The Project site is located on a spur ridge at an elevation of 5,100 feet. The northern portion of the site drains into Big Creek, while the southern portion of the site, including the location proposed for the WWTP, drains south into trihutaries of Lewis Fork Creek. Soils on the Project site have good perme ability and absorb rainfall readily, resulting in relatively low runoff volume. Tbe steeper terrain of the site, which includes slopes with gradients ranging between 15 and 60 degrees, generates the greatest vol ume of stormwater runoff; however, the extensive tree and bush canopy on the site tends to reduce runoff volume and attenuate the flow rate during the early part of a storm.

The Mariposa County Grading and Excavation ordinance contains provisions governing grading and excavation that seek to control erosion and ensure adequate drainage.2c Section 15.28.110 stipulates pa rameters for drainage and terracing, including design of drainage facilities and recommended methods of erosion control such as check dams, cribbing, or riprap. Section 15.28.120 specifies additional erosion control measures required to protect the faces of cut and fill slopes against erosion.

Due to the steep terrain, hazards from flooding are generally low in Mariposa County.1! There are no FEMA-delineated areas of potential flood hazard on or in the vicinity of the Project site." There are no dams in the vicinity of the Project site which could potentially expose people and structures to risk of inundation in the event of dam failure. The Project site is served by water drawn from three active on site wells with a combined maximum capacity of approximately 210,000 gallons per day (gpd).2J Cur rently, average daily domestic water demand is approximately 58,000 gpd and maximum daily demand

20 Mariposa County, Grading and Excavation Ordinance, http://www.mariposacounty.org/D ocumentView.aspx?DID=573, accessed on October 6, 2010.

21 Mariposa County, County Wide General Plan (2006), http://www.mariposacounty.org/ index.aspx?NID=458, accessed on August 18, 2010.

21 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), http://www.msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/ stores/servlet/Ferna\'VelcomeView?storeId = lOOOl&catalogld= lOOOl&langld=·l, accessed on August 19, 2010.

13 Dave Mowry; Blair, Church & Flynn. Personal communication with DC&E, January 15, 2010.

54 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONOITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011_043 ENViRONf1ENTAL CHECKLiST AND FINDINGS

is about 120,000 gpd. Groundwater quality is monitored through a network of eight monitoring weIls on-site.

The risk of inundation from tsunamis, seiche, or muclflow at the Project site is low. Mariposa County is located inland and is not subject to the effects of tsunamis. Lake McClure, located 72 miles to the west of the Project site, is the only large body of water in Mariposa County that could potentiaIly be affected by seiche, the seismically induced osciIlation of a landlocked body of water. The California Department of Conservation has not completed mapping of landslide hazard areas for Mariposa County; however, most of the soils in the County have minimal amounts of clay and low shrink-swell potential and therefore are not generally susceptible to landslides.

Discussion a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

As described above in Chapter 3 of this Initial Study, a testing plan would be developed to ensure the replacement WWTP complies with the Wastewater Discharge Requirements of RWQCB Order No. 99-086, which would apply to rhe Project. A summaty of these requirements is show in Table 3-1, above. Additionally, the effects of wastewater on groundwater in the surrounding area would be moni tored through a network of eight groundwater wells around the subsurface disposal area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. (Less than Significant) b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be anet deficit in aquifer volume or asignificant lowering of the local groundwater table level? The capacity of existing groundwater wells is more than sufficient to serve the needs of the Lodge. The proposed WWTP would use potable water for sinks and toilets in the \XTWTP building, as well as for equipment vnsh down; however, this would not represent additional demand over existing quantities as the proposed WWTP would replace an existing facility on-site. While the Project would create new areas of impervious surface, the surrounding area} including the heavily forested 48-acre Tenaya Lodge property and adjacent Sierra National Forest} would remain pervious. As a result, the Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplied or interfere with groundwater recharge. (Less than Sig· nificant)

c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drDJlwge paffern of the site or area, including through the alterotian of the caurse of astream or river, or substantially increase the rote or amount of runoff in amanner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding an- or off-site? The proposed Project would not substantially alter existing drainage patterns. Stormwater and snow melt from the \XTWTP building roof and parking lot would drain into the surrounding pervious area and, ultimately, into tributaries of Lewis Fork Creek. Runoff from the access road would flow into a

55 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENI:RAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

drainage ditch to be provided along one side of the roadway, and then it would follow the natural drainage pattern of the site, eventually discharging into tributaries of Lewis Fork Creek.

Grading and excavation work would be done in compliance with County Code to ensure adequate drainage and erosion control. As described in Chapter 3 of this Initial Study, a SWPPP containing ero sion control measures as required under the Construction General Permit would be prepared and im plemented for the Project. The site would also be graded to prevent erosion that could result from stormwater and snowmelt runoff flowing over the face of cut and fill slopes. Additionally, after con struction is complete, all disturbed areas would be planted with erosion-resistant vegetation suited to the area. Slopes would be inspected periodically for erosion and repaired immediately if detected.

ThereforeJ the Project would not result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding on- or off-site. Im pacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) d) Would the project creote or contribute runoff woter which would exceed the copocity of existing or pfanned stormwa ter drainage systems? The proposed Project involves the construction of a replacement WWTP, an adjacent parking lot, and an improved access road which would add areas of impervious surface to the site. In total, approxi. mately 1.8 acres of new impervious surface would be createdj however, the new areas of hardscape would be relatively small and surrounded by larger areas of pervious surface, including the heavily for ested 4S-acre Tenaya Lodge property and adjacent Sierra National Forest. As described above, a new drainage ditch would be provided along one side of the access road to accommodate runoff and direct flows into tributaries of Lewis Fork Creek. Stormwater and snowmelt from the WWTP building and parking lot would flow into the surrounding areas of penrious surface, draining eventually into tributar ies of Lewis Fork Creek. Therefore, the Project would not create or contribute runoff in excess of stormwatet drainage capacity and impacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) e) Would the project provide substantial odditional sources of polluted runoff, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Runoff from the access road and parking lot that would be constructed adjacent to the replacement WWTP could comain toadway pollutants; however, as the volume of traffic would be low, the level of pollutants would be negligible and implementation of the SWPPP required under the Construction General Permit would ensure that there would be a less-than-significant impact on water quality. (Less than Significant)

56 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL pLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 ENVIROt>IMENTAL CHECKLiST AND FINDINGS

I) Would the project place occupied development within a lOa-year flood hazard area as mapped an a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Mop or other flood hazard delineation map? The proposed Project does not involve the construction of housing and there are nO FEMA delineated areas of flood hazard on the Project site. (No impact)

g) Would the project place within a lOa-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flaws? There are no FEMA-delineated areas of potential flood hazard on or in the vicinity of the Project site. (No impact)

h) Would the project expose people or structures to asignificant risk of lass, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as aresult of the failure of alevee or dam? There are no dams in the vicinity of the Project site which could potentially expose people and struc tures to risk of inundation in the event of dam failure. The Hendricks Dam, the nearest dam to the Projeer site, is located approximately 30 miles to the southwest and is not connected to the Project site by a watercourse. (No impact)

i) Would the project potentially be inundated by seiche, tsunami or mudflaw? As described above, the proposed Project site is not at r.isk of seiche or tsunamis. Although there are slopes on the Project site, the risk of mudslides is low because vegetation coverage on the slopes is ex tensive and the soils are not generally susceptible to sliding. Impacts due to inundation from seiche, tsunami, or mudslides would be less than significant. (Less tban Significant)

less Than Significant Potentially Wilh Less X. LAND USE Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 IIII!I b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdic tion over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local IIII!I coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating 0 0 0 an environmental effect? c) Conllict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of a government agency with jurisdiction over land in Qurisdiction) that has been adopted for the purpose 01 avoiding o o o or mitigating an environmental effect.

Existing Conditions As described above, the Project site is located almost entirely on the Tenaya Lodge property, bounded by the Sierra National Forest to the south and State Route 41 to the northwest. There are private

57 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043 ENVIRONl'lE:NTAL CHECKl,I.S1 AND FIt-IDINGS

properties on either side of the highway to the oorth of rhe Tenaya Lodge property. The Project site and the Tenaya Lodge property are located in the unincorporated community of Fish Camp, which is governed by the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan.

The Tenaya Lodge property is composed of two adjacent parcels, and Figure 3-4 shows the current Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan Land Use Classifications for each parcel. The Project site straddles the boundaty between the tWO parcels and portions of it lie within each parcel. The eastern portion of the Project site is developed with the existing hotel wastewater treatment system and Jackson Road. This portion of the Project site is located on the larger of the two parcels that make up the Tenaya Lodge/Cottages property, APN 010-410-012. This portion of the Project site, containing the existing WWTP, is classified Resort Commercial under the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan, which is incorporated into the Mariposa County General Plan. The western portion of the Pro ject is almost entirely covered with tree canopy and contains the existing septic tank and leach field which serves the Cottages at Tenaya (formerly called the Apple Tree Inn), as well as an unpaved access road leading off Jackson Road. This portion of the Project site is located on the smaller of the two Tenaya parcels, APN 010-410-013. The western portion of the Project site is classified Single-Family Residential (S-acre minimum) under the Specific Plan,

Discussion 0) Would the project physically divide on established cammunity' As described above, the Project would take place almost entirely on the Tenaya Lodge property, with a small portion of the Project site located within the existing easement on National Forest Service lands along Jackson Road. The project involves construction and operation of a replacement w\VTP on the location of an existing septic tank and leaching field. As such, the Project would not divide an existing community and there would be no associated impact. (No impact) b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of on agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the generol plan, specific plan, local coastal progrom or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating on environmental effect? The Project proposes changing the Specific Plan Land Use Classification for a S.02-acre portion of par cel APN-OIO-410-013-O located west of Jackson Road. In order to allow for the construction and opera tion of a WWTP on this portion of the parcel, the Specific Plan Land Use Classification would be changed from Single'Family Residential (S-acre minimum) to Resort Commercial. East ofJackson Road, parcel APN 010-410-013 is currently classified Resort Commercial, and the south ern portion of the adjacent parcel on the Tenaya Lodge property (APN 010-410.012), where the hotel is ' located, is also currently classified Resort Commercial. Wastewater treatment facilities serving a resort commercial project are included as an appurtenant use under Conditional Use Permit approvals and are an allowed use in the Resort Commercial land use classification. The Mariposa County Board of Su-

58 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) ENVIHONMEr'>J1AL CHECKL1.ST AND FINDINGS

pervisors would need to adopt a Specific Plan amendment for the proposed change in Specific Plan Land Use Classification in order for the replacement WWTP to be constructed in the proposed location on parcel APN 010-410-013. The Project includes a General Plan amendment because the Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan is included in Volume II of the Mariposa County General Plan and as such, amending the Specific Plan requires a General Plan amendment. Therefore, with approval of the proposed Project and adoption of a Specific Plan amendment, impacts related to conflicts with the established land use plans and policies associated with the proposed Project would be less than signifi cant. (Less than Significant)

c) Would the project canflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of a government agency with jurisdiction over land in (jurisdiction) that has been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No such plans exist that would apply to the Project, and therefore there would be no associated impact. (No impact)

less Than Significant Potentially With less XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the State, or of a locally·important mineral resource recovery site deline IlI!!I ated on a mineral resource plan, local general plan, specific plan or other land use 0 0 0 plan?

Existing Conditions Mineral production is not a major contributor to the Mariposa County economy today, although it has been an integral part of the history of the County and an economic asset in the past:H Mineral deposits in the County are found primarily along the mineralized fault belt known as the "Mother Lode," which stretches north and northwest from Mariposa through the Central Sierra Mountains. The Project site is not identified as containing mineral deposits in the County Wide General Plan.

There are currently six operational mines and quarries in Mariposa County.!5 The closest to the Project site is the Fremont and Long Consolidated Mine, located approximately 25 miles to the west.

!4 Mariposa County, Final EIR for the County Wide General Plan (2006), http://www.mariposacounty. org/index.aspx?NID=458, accessed on August 19,2010.

2; Mariposa County, County Wide General Plan (2006), http://w\\r~v.mariposacounty.org/ index.aspx?NID=458, accessed on August 18,2010.

59 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) ENvIRONr-1ENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

Discussion oj Would the praject result in the loss of availability of aknown mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the State, or of a locally-important mineral resource recavelJl site delineated on a mineral resource plan, local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? As described above, the Project site does not contain a General Plan-delineated mineral recovery site and the proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. (No impact).

less Than Significant Potentially With less XII. NOISE Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in Ihe local IiIIi generai plan or noise ordinance, or other applicable standards? 0 0 0 b) Create a substantiai temporary, periodic or permanent increase in ambient noise leveis in IiIIi the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 0 0 c) Expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise IiIIi levels? 0 0 0 d) Expose people living or working in the project area to excessive noise from a public or IiIIi private airport? 0 0 0

Existing Conditions The rural lifestyle found in Mariposa County results in a noise environment which is typically well below 55 dB (A) CNEL." The Project site is set in heavily forested land on the Tenaya Lodge property, and the principal source of noise in the vicinity is State Rouce 41, which runs adjacent to the proposed location for the replacement \X7WTP.

The Mariposa County General Plan Noise Element includes the goal of preventing and suppressing objectionable levels, frequencies, and times durations of noise by controlling noise at its source. 27 The County has not established numerical thresholds for acceptable levels oJ construction or operational nOIse.

26. The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) refers to the average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.

27 Mariposa County, County \Vide General Plan (2006), http://www.mariposacounty.org/ index.aspx?NID=458, accessed on August 18,2010.

60 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDI.TIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

Discussion a) Would the project expose people to or generote noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or other applicable standards? The Project would involve the consolidation of wastewater treatment facilities at Tenaya Lodge and operation of a replacement WWTP in a new location on the propeny. As such the Project would not add any new, permanent sources of noise. Pumps similar to those which would be used in the replace~ ment WWTP are already used on-site in the existing hotel WWTP. A new emergency generator would be located near the proposed WWTP building; however, the generator would be used for emergency purposes only and therefore would generate only intermittent noise on relatively rare occasions such as power outages and test periods.

The nearest noise-sensitive receivers are the Tenaya Cottages located across Jackson Road several hun dred feet away from the proposed WWTP and shielded by intervening terrain. Pumps would be lo cated within the proposed WWTP building and therefore pump noise would be inaudible at the nearest cottages. Noise from the emergency generator would be audible at the cottages when in use; however this would be for shon periods of time when the power is out and during testing periods that would occur during the day outside of noise sensitive times. Overall, noise resulting from operation of the Project would be minimal and no adjacent land uses would be impacted. Construction noise is dis~ cussed below under criterion C. (Less tban Significant) b) Would the project expose people to or generate excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? The Project would not result in exposure of persons at off-site locations to excessive vibration levels in either its construction or operational phase. Heavy construction equipment capable of generating sub stantial vibration levels (e.g. tracked vehicles) would be used to fill in areas excavated during the re moval of existing tanks; however, this activity would take place about 200 to 300 feet away from the cottages, which are the nearest sensitive receivers) and vibration would not be perceptible at that dis ranee. Closer to the cottages, jackhammers and trenching equipment would be used for the installation of pipelines. Perceptible vibration levels generated by this equipment, if any, would be shan-term and intermittent and would not be substantial at nearby receivers. (Less tban Significant) c) Would the project create asubstantial temporary, periodic or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the pro ject vicinity above levels existing withaut the project? As described above in the discussion of criterion XII.a, the Project would not result in significant opera tional noise impacts. Construction noise associated with trenching activities and the operation of large tractors, loaders) dozers, and other heavy construction equipment would cause ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project site to rise temporarily during the construction phase of the Project; how ever) adjacent land uses would not be substantially impacted as a result. Yosemite Mountain Ranch)

61 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011_04) ENVIRONt1ENTAL CH[CKLI51 AND FINDINGS

situated in a General Forest zone, is to the west of the Project site, and Sierra National Forest lies to the south and east. The nearest noise-sensitive receivers are the Tenaya Cottages, located across Jackson Road several hundred feet away from the proposed WWTP. Intervening terrain would serve as a noise buffer. Additionally, construction contract terms and conditions would be established so as to limit noise impacts on guests at the hotel and cottages on the Tenaya Property. Further, construction noise would occur intermittently and impacts would be temporary in nature, ceasing once the project be comes operational. Therefore, impacts from the Project associated with temporary, periodic, or per manent increases in ambient noise levels would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) d) Would the project expose people living or working in the project area to excessive noise from a public or private air port? The Project site is not in the vicinity of an airstrip. Mariposa-Yosemite Airport, located approximately 22 miles to the west of the Tenaya Lodge property, is the closest airport to the Project site. Addition ally, the Project does not propose noise-sensitive land uses, and therefore, there would be no impact. (No impact)

less Than Significant Potentially With less XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: tmpact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Induce substantial unexpected population growth or growth for which inadequate plan' ning has occurred, either directly (lor example, by proposing new homes and businesses) 0 0 IIIiI 0 or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of IIIiI replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 0 c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement IIIiI housing elsewhere? 0 0 0

Existing Conditions In 2001, the population of Mariposa County was estimated at 17,195." Population growth in the County has been steady since the 1990s, largely as a result of in-migration. The arrival of newly-retired people is a notable trend in the County, as is the construction of an increasing number of retirement homes.

RegionallOurism is the hean of the Mariposa Couney economy, and Tenaya Lodge is one of the largeS! employers in the County.

18 Mariposa County, County \Vide General Plan (2006), http://www.mariposacounty.org/ index.aspx?NID=458, accessed on August 18, 2010.

62 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) ENVIRONHENTAL (HECKLIS"r AND FINDINGS

Discussion a) Would the projed induce substantial unexpeded population growth or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastrudurej? The Project would involve the construction and operation of a replacement WWTP at Tenaya Lodge. Construction activities are expected to be completed within a period of approximately 8 months and workers would be drawn from the local labor pool. Operation of the proposed replacement WWTP would not result in an increase in the number of employees or visitors to the Tenaya Lodge property. Therefore, the Plan would not induce substantial unexpected population growth and impacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units, necessitating the construdion of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed \Xf\X'TP would be built on the site of the existing septic tanks and leach field serving the cottages at Tenaya Lodge. As such, no housing units would be displaced and construction of replace ment units would not he required. (No impact) c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? As described above, the proposed WWTP would be huilt on a site partially developed witb wastewater treatment facilities and no housing units would be displaced. Accordingly, no people would be dis placed as a result of either construction or operation of the Project. (No impact)

less Than Significant Potentially Wilh less XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause signifi cant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other pertonnance objectives lor any 01 the public services: Fire protection? o o III o Police protection) o o II!I!I o Schools? o o o II!I!I

63 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] fNVIRONMI:.NTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

Existing Conditions Mariposa County Fire Department Company 33, located on the northwest side of the community of Fish Camp, provides fire protection senrices for Fish Camp, \X1awona, and Yosemite West. The com pany has two fire engines and also carries Jaws of Life equipment,29 Law Enforcement services are pro vided by the Mariposa County Sheriff's Office, which operates out of eight facilities, with the main office and five of the facilities located in the Town of Mariposa.'" The closest school to the Project site is Wawona Elementary School, located approximately 10 miles north of Fish Camp along State Route 41.

Discussion a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facihiies, the canstruction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: (i) Fire protection? The Project would consolidate existing wastewater treatment facilities in a replacement WWTP at Tenaya Lodge. As such, the Project would not create any new fire risks. The proposed w\VTP building would he built in compliance with the 2008 California Building Code and as described above in Section VIII of this Initial Study, the Lodge maintains Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP) which contains safety procedures. Therefore, Project impacts to fire protection ser vices would be less than significant. (Less than Significant)

(ii) Police protection? Operation of the replacement WWTP would not increase the number of employees at Tenaya Lodge or the number of visitors to the resort. As such, operation of the Project would nOt create new security risks or increase opportunities for crime. Therefore, Project impacts to police protec tion services would be less than significant. (Less than Significant)

(iii) School,? Operation of the replacement WWTP would not increa,e the number of employees at Tenaya Lodge or bring new residents to Mariposa County. As such, there would be no impact on schools. (No impact)

29 Mariposa County, Fish Camp Company 33, http://www.mariposacounty.org/illdex.aspx?nid=642.ac cessed on October 22,2010.

3D Mariposa County \Vide General Plan EIR (2006), http://ca-rnariposacounty.civicplus.com/ index.aspx?NID=792 accessed on August 18, 2010.

64 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENOED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010~161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN{ZONING· AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

less Than Significant Potentially With Less 'IN PARKS AND RECREATION Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact ,) Increase the use of existing neighborhood ,nd region,1 p,rks or other recre,tional facili ties, such th,t subst,ntial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be aceeler 0 0 III!I 0 ,ted? b) Result in subst,nt;,1 adverse physical imp,cts associ,ted with the provision of new or physically ,Itered park ,nd recreation,1 facilities, or result in the need for neVi or physically III!I ,Itered park ,nd recre,tional facilities, the construction of which could cause significant o o o environmental impacts?

Existing Conditions Yosemite National Park and Sierra and Stanislaus National Forests, in close proximity to the Project sire} offer a wide array of recreational opportunities, including fishing, hunting, camping} hiking} sight seeing, horseback riding, skiing, bicycling, or off-highway vehicle (OHV) recreation. Additionally, in winter cross-country skiing} snowshoeing, and snowmobiling frequently take place on unplowed roads in Mariposa County.)l Local recreation services are provided by the Mariposa County Park and Rec reation Department} which has 60.5 acres of recreation facilities. There are also recreational opportuni ties available on the Tenaya Lodge property} which offers a variety of amenities on-site including a swimming pool and mountain bike rental.

Discussion 0) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facihiies, such that substantial physicol deteriorotion of the facility would occur or be acceleroted? The Project would consolidate existing wastewater treatment facilities in a replacement w\XlTP at Tenaya Lodge. Operation of the replacement \XlWTP would not attract new residents to Mariposa County or increase the number of visitors to Tenaya Lodge. As such, it would not increase the use of parks and recreational facilities in the vicinity of the Project site and impacts would be less than signifi~ cant. (Less tbl1l1 Sigllificallt) b) Would the project result in substantial adverse physicol impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered pork and recreational facilities, or result in the need for new or physically altered pork and recreational facili ties, the construction of which could cause signilicant environmental impacts? The Project would consolidate existing wastewater treatment facilities in a replacement w\XlTP at Tenaya Lodge. Operation of the replacement WWTP would not attract new residents to Mariposa County or increase the number of visitors to Tenaya Lodge. As such, it would not require construction

31 Mariposa County, County Wide General Plan (2006), http://www.rnariposacounty.org/ index.aspx?NID=458, accessed on August 18; 2010.

65 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILI"IES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL pLANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 Et'JVIRONl'1tNfAL CHECK,LIST AND FINDlt~GS

of new or altered parks and recreational facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. (Less tball Sigllificallt)

less Than Significant Potentially With less XVI. TRANSPORTATION{fRAFFIC Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: tmpact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Conflict with an applicabfe plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the pertormance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes 01 transportation including mass transit and non·motorized travel and relevant components of the dr- 0 0 I!I!I 0 eulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and maSS transit? b) Conllict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by 0 0 I!I!I 0 the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a I!I!I change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 0 0 0 d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous I!I!I intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 0 0 0 e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 I!I!I 0 (onllict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding pubfic transit, bicycle, or o I!I!I pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the pertormance or salety of such facilities? 0 0 0

Existing Conditions State Route 41 runs immediately to the northwest of the Project site and provides vehicular access to the Tenaya Lodge property. State Route 41 originates near Morro Bay, travels through Fresno, Oak hurst, and Fish Camp to its terminus in Yosemite Valley. On average, approximately 1,550 vehicles per day travel along State Route 41 through Fish Camp, although volumes are nearly double that amount during the summer months.}2 North of Miami Mountain Road, State Route 41 currently operates at LOS C or better]) Chowchilla Mountain Road, an unpaved roadway running through forest land, can provide secondary access to the Project site during summer months, connecting the unincorporated community of Fish Camp with State Route 49 via State Route 41.

There are two entrances to the Project site, both of which lead off State Route 41. The main drive en trance to the site is located closer to Fish Camp, while the second entrance is further to the south, via Jackson Road. Both roads intersect with State Route 41 and both are unsignalized. The main drive is a

32 Mariposa County (2009), Fish Camp Town Planning Area Specific Plan, http://ca-mariposacounry. civicplus.com/index.aspx?NID=452, accessed on August 16, 2010. n Mariposa County Wide General Plan ErR (2006), http://ca-mariposacounty. civicplus.com/index.aspx?NID=792 accessed on August 18,2010.

66 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECifiC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] [NVIRONf1EN'TAL CHECKLISl AND FfNDINGS

paved road that leads to a multi-level surface parking lot to the west of the hotel as shown on Figure 3-2, terminating at a service area where deliveries are made. Jackson/Big Sandy road is an unpaved access road which provides fire and service access.

An analysis of existing traffic conditions conducted at the two entrances to the Lodge property indi cated that both entrances currently operate at level of service (LOS) B or better, as shown below on Table 4_3."

Discussion a) Would the Project conllid with an applicoble plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effediveness for the performance of the arwlation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non motorized travel and relevant components of the arwlation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? The proposed Project would not substantially affect the performance of the circulation system. Opera tion of the proposed replacement \XTWTP would not result in an increase in the number of employees or visitors to the Tenaya Lodge propeny. As such, operation of the Project would not be expected to generate additional vehicle trips to and from Tenaya Lodge.

During the construction phase of the Project, the heaviest truck traffic would occur during grading ac tivities, when soil would be transponed to and from the site. A total net volume of approximately 9,000 cubic yards is anticipated, which is roughly the equivalent of 600 truck loads, based on a typical truck capacity of 15 cubic yards. Over the course of two months this would mean approximately 30 one-way truck trips per day, or 3.75 one-way trips per hour. To ensure Project construction traffic is managed to avoid a significant impact on the circulation system, a Construction Management Plan would be prepared and submitted to the County prior to commencement of construction activities.

The plan would describe construction phasing, the number and type of vehicles to be used, and the routes they would follow, as well as the specific methods to be used for management and control of truck traffic to, from, and within the Project site.

The Project would have a significant impact if it would cause a decline from existing LOS to LOS E on a State Highway or County intersection. As described above, State Route 41 currently operates at LOS C or better north of Miami Mountain Road, and both intersections providing access to the Tenaya

34 Level of senrice (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream. Level of service assesses conditions in terms of speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. Six levels of service are defined by letter designations from LOS A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions, and LOS F the worst. These LOS definitions are widely used in the field of traffic engineering and are defined in the Transportation Research Board's Highway Capacity Manual.

67 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 FNVIRONr'l£NTAL CHECf~LrSl AND FINDINGS

TABLE ~-3 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AT PROJECT SITE ENTRANCES

Friday PM Saturday Midday

Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay State Rotite 41 at Main Drive Entrance

Southbound Lelt A 7.6 A 7.7

Westbound Approach B 10.7 B 10.1

State Route 41 atJackson/Big Sandy Rd EntratlCC

\Vestbound Left A 7.5 A 7.7

Northbound Approach A 9.8 A 9.6 Source: TPG Consultants 2009.

Lodge property and the Project site currently operate at LOS A or LOS B during peak AM and PM periods. As the addition of approximately four peak hour trips per day would be relatively small in relation to the existing volume of traffic on State Route 41 and as implementation of the Construction Management Plan would control the flow of construction traffic, the Project would not result in a sig nificant impact on the performance of the circulation system. Overall, impacts would be less than sig nificant. (Less than Significant) b) Would the project conflict with on applicoble congestion management progrom, including, but not limited to level of service standards and trovel demand measures, or ather standards established by the county congestian management agency for designated roads or highways or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads ar highways? State Route 41 is not identified as a critical roadway in the Mariposa County Regional Transportation Plan. Additionally, as discussed above, neither operation or construction of the proposed Project would generate a substantial increase in traffic or appreciably affect LOS on roadways in the County. Consequently, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to congestion man agement. (Less than Significant) c) Would the project Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?

The nearest airport to the project site is Mariposa.Yosemite Airport, located approximately 22 miles to the west. The Project involves the construction and operation of a replacement \VWTP and it does not have the potential to affect air traffic patterns, either directly or indirectly. (No impact)

68 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS N.O. 2010~161 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043 ENVIRONr-1ENTAL CHECKLIS1 AND FINDINGS

d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersec tions) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? The Project does not propose any roadway design features which could pose hazards. As described above, the Project would involve tbe widening and resurfacing of the access road leading to the location of the proposed replacement W\xrTP. The access road would be built to contemporary design standards and would comply with any applicable standards in the Mariposa County Road Road Improvement Policy and the Mariposa County Improvement Standards. Consequently, the Project would not su1;J stantially increase roadway hazards and impacts would be less than significant. (l,ess than Significant) e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?

The access road leading to the proposed WWTP would be designed in compliance with the provisions of the General Plan, including Goal 9-1 which requires that all development have safe and adequate ac cess. Additionally, compliance with the 2008 California Building Code and its provisions for emer gency access would ensure there is a less~than-significant impact on emergency access. (Less than Signifi cant) f) Would the project conflict with adopted policie~ plans, or progroms regarding public tronsi( bicyde, or pedestrion facilities, or otherwise decrease the performonce or safety of such facilities? The proposed Project involves construction and operation of a replacement W\xrTP at the Tenaya Lodge resort. It would Ilot generate an increase in either population or employment and as such it would not affect transit ridership or the use of bicycle or pedestrian infrastructure in the County. Con sequently, the Project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities and impacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant)

less Than Significant Potentially With less XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Significant Mitigation Than No Wouid the project impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality III Control Board? 0 0 0 b) Require or resuft in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of III existing facilifies, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 0 0 0 c) Require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental ef- 0 0 III 0 fects? d) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental ef- 0 0 III 0 fects?

69 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SIIE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLANfSPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] ENyIRONt1[NTAL CHtCKLISl AND fINDINGS

less Than Significant Potentially With Less XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact e) Have insufficient waler supplies available to selVe the project from existing and identified III entitlements and resources? DD D DHave insufficient wastewater treatment capacity available to selVe the project's projected demand in addition to existing demand as determined by the wastewater treatment pro- DD III D vider which serves or may serve the project? g) Not be selVed by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the III buildout of the project's solid waste disposal needs? DD 0 h) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? D 0 III 0

Existing Conditions As described above, Tenaya Lodge is served by water drawn from four active on-site wells and wastewa ter is treated in the two existing on-site systems. Because wastewater is treated on~site, the Wastewater Discharge Requirements of RWQCB Order No. 99-086, summarized in Table 2-1 in the Project De scription of this Initial Study, would apply. Solid waste from the proposed project would be disposed of in the Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill, located approximately 2.2 miles north of Mariposa on State Route 49. Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill has a permitted capacity of 1,971,000 cubic yards and an estimated life through 2065."

Discussion a) Would the projed exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? As the proposed WWTP would dispose of wastewater on-site, the Wastewater Discharge Requirements of RWQCB Order No. 99-086 would apply. A testing plan would be developed to ensure compliance with RWQCB requirements and groundwater quality in the vicinity of the proposed \v\VTP would be monitored through the existing network of eight monitoring wells. Consequently, the Project would not violate RWQCB standards and impacts would be less than significant. (Les5 than Significant) b) Would the project require or result in the construdion ofnew water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could couse significant environmental effects? The proposed Project would involve the construction and operation of a replacement WWTP for the Terraya Lodge resort_ As described above, the proposed WWTP would replace the two existing systems which require upgrade and would provide additional treatment capacity to accommodate peak wastewa ter flows that cannot be adequately treated on-site at the moment. Associated environmental impacts,

35 CalRecycle, Landfill Facility Profile, http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Profiles/ Facility/LandFill/LFProfilel.asp?COID= 22&FAC!D=22-AA-0001, accessed on September 29, 2010.

70 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GJ:NERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011.04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLiST AND FINDfNGS

including impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, water quality, and wastewater facilities are discussed in this Initial Study. As described above, with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-l, BIO-l through BIO-4, CUL-l, and NOISE-I, environmental effects would be mitigated to less than-significant levels. (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)

c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could couse significont environmental effects? To accommodate stormwater runoff and snowmelt, a 2-foot wide drainage ditch would be provided along the outside of the access road leading to the proposed \'V'WTP. Runoff from the roadway would be directed into the ditch, flowing toward tributaries of Lewis Fork Creek and the natural drainage pat tern of the area would be preserved. The drainage ditch would be a relatively minor addition and com pliance with applicable building codes would ensure that associated impacts would be less than signifi cant. (Less than Significant) d) Would the project have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing and identified entitle ments and resaurces? As described above in Section IX of this Initial Study, water is supplied from three actives wells on the Tenaya Lodge property and the capacity of existing groundwater wells is more than sufficient to serve the needs of the Lodge. The proposed WWTP would use potable water for sinks and toilets in the WWTP building, as well as for equipment wash down; however, this would not represent additional demand over existing quantities as the proposed WWTP would replace an existing facility on-site. Con sequently, water supply from existing sources on the Tenaya Lodge property would be sufficient to serve the Project and impacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) e) Would the project have insufficient wastewater treatment capacity available to serve the project's projected demand in addition /0 existing demand as determined by the wastewater treatment provider which serves ar may serve the praject? As described above, the Project would treat wastewater from the Tenaya Lodge property on-site and would not require treatment by an off-site provider. Construction of the proposed replacement \XI\VTP would allow for the treatment of 125,000 gallons per day of wastewater, which is sufficient to accommodate peak daily flows from the Lodge property. (Less than Significant) f) Would the project not be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity ta accommadate the buildout of the projec(s solid waste dispasal needs? Filtered material and dewatered sludge resulting from the wastewater treatment process would be off hauled and disposed of at Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill. The total estimated volume of material off-hauled would be approximately 5 cubic yards per week. Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill has approximately 61 percent of its 1,971,000 cubic yards of permitted capacity remaining and an estimated

71 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) EhlVIRONI1ENTAL CHECKLiST AND Flt>JDINGS

life through 2065. The Project would therefore be served by a landfill with sufficient capacity and im pacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant) g) Would the projecl comply with lederal, slale, and locol slatutes and regulations related 10 solid waste?? As described above) filtered material and dewarered sludge resulting from the wastewater treatment process would be hauled off-site and disposed of at Mariposa County Sanitary Landfill. Storage, trans port, and disposal of solid waste would be done in full compliance with applicable federal, State, and Counry regulations so as to ensure a less-than-significant impact. (Less than Significant)

less Than Significant Potentially With less XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Significant Mitigation Than No Would the project: Impact Incorporated Significant Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, re- D 0 0 duce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Callfornia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are consider- l1li able when viewed in connection wilh the effects of past projects, the effects of other cur- 0 0 0 rent projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects l1li on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 0 0 0 oj Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality 01 the environment substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, couse a fish or wildlife population to drap below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate aplant or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of arare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate impor tant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The Project would take place almost entirely on the property of Tenaya Lodge, a classic mountain reo sort set in heavily forested land near Yosemite National Park. The proposed WWTP would be built on the site of existing septic tanks and leach fields, minimizing the amount of land to be developed. After construction, the surrounding area would remain densely forested and highly pervious. The natural drainage pattern would be preserved.

As described above, the Project site contains suitable foraging and denning habitat for Pacific fisher and suitable and occupied habitat for California spotted owl and northern goshawk. All three species are listed as California Species of Concern, and the Pacific fisher is also a candidate for listing under FESA. Mitigation Measures BIO-I, BIO-2, and BIO-3 require that action be taken to identify and protect po-

72 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

tential habitat for these species and implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure that po tential impacts to the animals would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Additionally, migratory birds are known or expected to nest in the vicinity of the Project sitej however implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce associated impacts to a less than significant level.

A field survey of the Project site and surrounding area found no historic or cultural resources associated with the Madera-Sugar Pine Railroad grade, the only historic age structure in the vicinity of the Project site. Additionally! there are no known Native American cultural resources present on the Project site or in its vicinity. In the event that unanticipated historic or cultural resources are discovered during construction of the Project, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-l would ensure that it is han dled in accordance with federal, State, and local regulations, thereby mitigating potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Consequently, the Project would not degrade the quality of the environment, reduce or endanger plant, animal, or fish habitat, or eliminate important cultural resources. Overall, impacts would be less than significant after implementation of the required Mitigation Measures. (Less than Significant with Mitiga· tion Incorporated) b) Does the project have impocts thot are individually llinited, but cumulatively consideroble? ('Cumulotively consider able" means that the incrementol effects of aproject are consideroble when viewed in connedion with the effects of post projeds, the effects of other current projects, ond the effeds of proboble future projects)? The proposed Project would involve the construction and operation of a replacement WWTP on a lo cation at the Tenaya Lodge property already developed with septic tanks and leach fields. The Project would involve the development of less than 2 additional acres of land and the surrounding area would remain in its current heavily forested natural state. During the construction phase of the Project, fugi tive dust and vehicle exhaust emissions would be generated. Associated impacts, however, would be localized and limited in duration. Additionally, compliance with the Mariposa County Grading and Excavation Ordinance would reduce impacts to the maximum extent practicable. Construction traffic would be controlled through the implementation of the Project Construction Management Plan so as to avoid a significant impact to the circulation network. Potential impacts to biological and cultural resources would similarly be limited to the construction phase and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable by Mitigation Measures BIO-! through BIO-3 and CUL-l. Consequently, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact. (Less tban Significant witb Mitigation Incolporated)

73 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 1010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011~04] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND FINDINGS

c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The proposed Projecr involves the construction and operation of a replacement W\VTP at Tenaya Lodge. As described above, the wastewater treatment process would be almost entirely enclosed and would not generate substantial pollutants. A testing plan would be developed to ensure the replacement w\VTP complies with RWQCB requirements, and the effects of Wastewater on groundwater in the surrounding area would be monitored through a network of eight groundwater wells around the sub surface disposal area.

During the construction phase of the Project, increased ambient noise levels would be generated; how ever, effects would be localized and limited in duration. Additionally, given the distance of sensitive receivers from the sources of construction noise and the intervening terrain significant noise~related impacts are not anticipated. Therefore, the proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse ef fect on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Impacts would be less than significant. (Less than Significant )

74 s. ApPLICANT'S AGREEMENT TO MITIGATION

The Project applicant, represented by Michael Gilbert, agrees to the following mitigation measures as required by Section 15070(b)(1) of tbe CEQA Guidelines and Project plans will be modified to avoid potential adverse environmental effects of the Project as identified in this study:

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1 Any medium or larger (;=: 20 inches in diameter) trees selected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for potential dens (cavities, entrance holes) suitable for Pacific fisher. Cavities suitable for fisher will be examined with portable camera probes to determine fisher presence. A disturbance-free buffer of 300 ft shall be flagged around each occupied den. If a potential den is not occupied, the tree may be removed under the direction of the qualified biologist.

If avoidance of an occupied den is not possible, the Project Proponent shall coordinate with the U.S. Fish and \Vildlife Service (the Service) and CDFG and take the following steps to passively remove the fisher outside of the kit~rearing season (1 June to 1 February):

• Occupied trees shall be monitored daily by a qualified biologist for a period of 7 days to de~ termine whether the den has been temporarily vacated.

• Once it has been determined that the den waS vacated, the unoccupied den tree shall be re moved the same day under the direction of the qualified biologist. If the den remains occu pied, the qualified biologist shall monitor the den weekly until it has been determined that the fisher has vacated the den. Tree removal shall take place immediately following confirmation that the den has been vacated as noted above.

BIO-2 Any construction activities such as tree removal, site grading, etc., occurring on the proposed Pro· ject site within the general avian nesting season, between March 1 and August 31, shall require a pre-construction survey conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if the construction activ ity violates the provisions of Fish and Gallie Code, sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. This pre· construction survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of any demo~ lition/construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February 1 through April 30) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities during the late part of the breeding season (May 1 through September 15).

For California spotted owl and northern goshawks, a qualified biologist shall conduct the focused breeding season surveys within the construction zone and a surrounding soD-foot buffer. If nests are found during the survey, a SOO-foot disturbance·free buffer shall be established around each nest in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and demarcated by fencing or flagging. Where a biological evaluation by a qualified biologist determines that a nest site would be shielded from planned activities by topographic or other features that ~",'ould minimize disturbance, the buffer distance may be reduced.

75 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDI1"ONS NO. 2010-161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011-043 APPLICANT'S AGREEI1EN1 TO MITIGATION

For all other bird species, the qualified biologist conducting the focused breeding season survey shall inspect all potential nest substrates in and immediately adjacent to the impact area for nests. If an active nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed by these activities, the biologist, in consultation with CDFG, shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer to be established around the nest.

A copy of the results of any survey conducted shall be provided to the Mariposa County Planning Department together with the evidence that any required mitigation measures have been imple mented prior to such construction activity occurring on-site. BIO-3 Any medium or larger (;=: 12-inch diameter) trees or snags selected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for presence of foliage-roosting bats (western red bat) and potential dens (cavities, entrance holes) suitable for other special-status bats (pallid bat and Townsend's big-eared bat). Cavities suitable as special:"'status bat roosts shall be examined for roosting bats using a port able camera probe or similar technology. Buildings with potential for supporting special-status bats (pallid bat and Townsend's big-eared bat) shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for evi dence of roosting colonies. If present, roosts (including day and night roosts, hibernacula, and maternity colonies) and a JOO-foot disturbance-free buffer surrounding each roost shall be flagged.

If avoidance is not possible, the roosting bats shall be passively evicted under the direction of a qualified biologist (as determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFG). The qualified biologist shall facilitate the removal of roosting bats outside of the winter hibernation (l November to 1 March) and maternity roosting (1 March to 31 July) periods through the follow ing means:

• Opening the roosting area to allow airflow through the cavity or building (air flow distur bance).

• \Vaiting a minimum of one night for roosting bats to respond to air flow disturbance, thereby allowing bats to leave during nighttime hours when predation risk is relatively low and chances of finding a new roost is greater than in the daytime.

• Disturbing roosts at dusk just prior to roost removal the same evening to allow bats to escape during nighttime hours.

CULTURAL RESOURCES

CUL-l During grading, construction, or any activ~ty that involves ground disturbance necessary to im plement project conditions of approval, if any signs of prehistoric, historic, archaeological, or pol· leontological resources are evident, all work activity within SO feet of the find shall stop and the Mariposa County Planning Department shall be notified immediately. No work shall be done within 50 feet of the find until the Mariposa County Planning Department, in consultation with a representative of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County has identified appropriate mitigation measures to protect the find and those measures have been implemented by the appli cant. Protection measures for the site may include, but shall not be limited to, requiring the pro-

76 19:55:55 01-20-1970 3/4 310322475B DOUBLE TREE HOTEL_LA

HA R, I P 0 5 A CO UN" Y TENAYA LODGe FACiLITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AHENbED SiTE PlANIAKENDED CONDITiONS No. 1010-'" Gt'NEAAl PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/lONING AHENDHENT NO. 1011·04] /,PPtl(IIt\I'S ACRE~'MENr 10 MitiGATION

I~CI applicant to hlf'r .t qu.dified archaeologist tl,

ommendations ;IS necessary to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. In addition co the Planning Department, [he Mariposa County Coroner and the American Indi-1n Council of Mari posa County shall be notified should human remaim be discovered~ Representatives of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County shall be requested to be on-site during dluumance a~d/or removal of human remains. Should any Native American anifact or human remains be discovered, a representative of the American rnwan Council of Maripos:l. COUnty shall be on-site to monitor [he remainder of the excavation activities.

-AP-pr-ov-'ed-='~b-y:~---~ s!d-,--/!((

Michael Gilbert, senioQjett Manager Delaware North Cumpanies, Inc. Representative of the Project Applicant for Tenaya Lodge Facilities Upgrade Project Amended Site Plan!Amended Conditions No. 201().I61 General Plan/Specific PlanlZoning Amendment No. 2011-043 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010"161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 APPLICANT'S AGREEHFNT TO I11TIGATION

78 6 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

The following table summarizes mitigation measures proposed for inclusion in the conditions of ap proval for the Project and the method for mitigation monitoring.

No. Mitigation Measure Mitigation Monitoring BIO-! Any medium or larger (2:: 20 inches in d.iameter) trees se This mitigation measure will be lected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biologist monitored by the Mariposa for potential dens (cavities, entrance holes) suitable for Pa· County Planning Department eifie fisher. Cavities suitable for fisher will be examined through the project construction with portable camera probes to determine fisher presence. permitting process. A disturbance·free buffer of 30D ft shall be flagged around each occupied den. If a potential den is nOt occupied, the tree may be removed under the direction of the qualified biologist.

• Occupied trees shall be monitored daily by a qualified biologist for a period of 7 days to determine whether the den has been temporarily vacated.

• Once it has been determined that the den was vacated, the unoccupied den tree shall be removed the same day under the direction of the qualified biologist. If the den remains occupied, the qualified biologist shall monitor the den weekly until it has been determined that the fisher has vacated the den. Tree removal shall take place immediately following confirmation that the den has been vacated as noted above. BIO-2 Any construction activities such as tree removal, site grad This mitigation measure will be ing, etc., occurring on the proposed Project site within the monitored by the Mariposa general avian nesting season, between March 1 and August County Planning Department 31, shall require a pre-construction survey conducted by a through the project construction qualified biologist to determine if the construction activity permitting process. violates the provisions of Fish and Game Code, sections 3503,3503.5, and 3513. This pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the initiation

79 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLAN/AMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLANISPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011~041 r1!TIG/'l.,TIOr-J t10NITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAr1

No. Mitigation Measure Mitigation Monitoring of any demolition/construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (March 1 through April 30) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activi ties during the late part of the breeding season (?v:1ay 1 through August 31).

For California spotted owl and northern goshawks, a quali fied biologist shall conduct the focused breeding season surveys within the construction zone and a surrounding Soo~foot buffer. If nests are found during the survey, a 500 foot disturbance-free buffer shall be established around each nest in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and demarcated by fencing or flag ging. \X!here a biological evaluation by a qualified biologist determines that a nest site would be shielded from planned activities by topographic or other features that would minimize disturbance, the buffer distance may be reduced.

For all other bird species, the qualified biologist conducting the focused breeding season survey shall inspect all poten tial nest substrates in and immediately adjacent to the im~ pact are'l for nests. If an active nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed by these activities, the biologist, in consultation with CDFG, shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer to be established around the nest.

A copy of the results of any survey conducted shall be pro vided to the Mariposa County Planning Department to gether with the evidence that any required mitigation measures have been implemented prior to such construc tion activity occurring on-site. BIO-3 Any medium or larger (=:: 12-inch diameter) trees or snags This mitigation measure will be selected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biolo· monitored by the Mariposa gist for presence of foliage.roosting bats (western red bat) County Planning Department and potential dens (cavities, entrance holes) suitable for through the projectconstruction other special-status bats (pallid bat and Townsend's big permitting process. eared bat). Cavities suitable as special~status bat roosts shall be examined for roosting bats using a portable camera probe or similar technology. Buildings with potential for supportingspecial-status bats (pallid bat and Townsend's big-eared bat) shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for evidence of roosting colonies. If present, roosts (including

80 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SITE PLANfAMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010.161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04) MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

No. Mitigation Measure Mitig~ltion Monitoring day and night roosts, hibernacula, and maternity colonies) and a 300·foot disturbance·free buffer surrounding each roost shall he flagged. Ifavoidance is not possible, the roosting bats shall be pas. sively evicted under the direction of a qualified biologist (as determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFG). The qualified biologist shall facilitate the removal of roosting bats outside of the winter hibernation (1 No· vember to 1 March) and maternity roosting (1 March to 31 July) periods through the following means;

• Opening the roosting area to allow airflow through the cavity or building (air flow disturbance).

• Waiting a minimum of one night for roosting hats to respond to air flow disturbance, thereby allowing hats to leave during nighttime hours when predation risk is relatively low and chances of finding a new roost is greater than in the daytime.

• Disturbing roosts at dusk just prior to roost removal the same evening to allow hats to escape during night~ time hours.

81 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA L.ODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITiONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PlANfZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·04] f111lGATION MONITORING AND RCPORllt-.JG PROGRAM

No. Mitigation Measure Mitigation Monitoring CUL-l During grading, construction, or any activity that involves This mitigation measure will be ground disturbance necessary to implement projecl conditions monitored by the Mariposa of approval, if any signs of prehistoric, historic, archaeological, County Planning Department or paleontological resources are evident, all work activity within through the project construction 50 feet of the find shall stop and the Mariposa County Planning permitting process. Department shall be notified immediately. No work shall be done within 50 feet of the find until the Mariposa County Plan ning Department, in consultation with a representative of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County has identified appropriate mitigation measures to protect the find and those measures have been implemented by the applicant. Protection measures for the site may include, but shall not be limited to, requiring the project applicant to hire a qualified archaeologist who shall conduct necessary inspections and research, and who may supervise all further ground disturbance activities and make any such recommendations as necessary to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. In addition to the Planning De partment, the Mariposa County Coroner and the American Indian Council of Mariposa County shall be notified should human remains be discovered. Representatives of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County shall be requested to be on site during disturbance and/or removal of human remains. Should any Native American artifact or human remains be dis covered, a representative of the American Indian Council of Mariposa County shall be on-site to monitor the remainder of the excavation activities.

82 7 REPORT PREPARERS

This report was prepared by consultants with guidance from lead agency staff, as listed below:

A. Lead Ca1lsultallt

Design, Community & Environment 1625 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 300 Berkeley, CA 94709 Phone: 510-848-3815 Fax: 510-848-4315

B. SUbcOI/sultallts

Air Quality Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 505 Petaluma Blvd. south Petaluma, CA 94952 Phone: 707-766-7700 Fax: 707-766-7790

Biological Resources H.T. Harvey & Associates 7815 N. Palm Avenue Suite 310 Fresno, CA 93711 Phone: 559.476.3160 Fax: 559.476.3170

Cultural Resources ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2525 Warren Drive Rocklin, California 95677 Phone: 916-782-9100 Fax: 916-782-9134

83 MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AMENDED SiTE PLANfAMENDED CONDITIONS NO. 2010·161 GENERAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 2011·043 REPORT PREPARERS

Geology and Soils Moore Twining Associates, Inc. 2527 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Phone: 559-268-7021 Fax: 559-268-7126

Noise Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 505 Petaluma Blvd. sOUlh Petaluma, CA 94952 Phone: 707-766-7700 Fax: 707-766-7790

Utilities and Service Systems Blair, Church & Flynn Consulting Engineers 451 Clovis Avenue, Suite 200 Clovis, CA 93612 Phone: 559-326-1400 Fax: 559-326-1500

C. Initial Study Managers and Reviewers

Mariposa County Planning Department Damon Golubics - Senior Planner Skip Strathearn - Senior Planner

84 ATTACHMENT A

STATE AND PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS ATTACHEMENT A CONTENTS

Mariposa County Resource Conservation District

Sierra Telephone

Brian Mattos, Fish Camp Planning Advisory Committee

CalTrans District Office 6

Mariposa County Health Department

California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region MARIPOSA COUNTY TENAYA LODGE FACILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT GENERAL PLAN{SPECIFIC PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 1011·043 APPENDIX A CONTENTS Page 1 of 1

Damon Golubics

From: Alman, Dawn - Mariposa, CA [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 1:46 PM To: Damon Golubics RECEIVED Cc: hubert@stLnet DEC 062010 Subject: Comments to 2010-161 Attachments: Alman, Dawn - Mariposa, CA.vcl Mariposa Counly Planning Dept. Hi Mr. Golubics,

The Mariposa County Resource Conservation District Comments are as follows:

I. This project should be conditioned to follow the Mariposa County Grading ordinance Chap 15-28.120 sec. a, b, & c. All disturbed soils after construction and improvements should be seeded with 20-25 pounds per acre and covered with weed free hay or rice straw to protect against rain drop impact sheet/rill erosion. Seeding should be done during November-December to ensure moisture for germination or otherwise irrigated in during the dry months.

Mike Hubert Director ofthe MCRCD

Dawn Afman District Conservationist Mariposa County LPO PO Box 746 5009 Fairgrounds Road Mariposa, CA 95338 office: 209 966-3431 lax: 209742-7508

12/6/2010 ERRA TELEPHON

December 6, 2010 RECEIVED DEC 1 0 2010 Mariposa County Planning Department Mariposa Coullly Planning Dept Damon Golubics Post Office Box 2039 Mariposa, California 95338

Planner: Damon Golubics

File #: Amended Site Plan 2010-161; Conditional Use Perrnitto Allow a Waste Water Treatment Plant

Applicant: Delaware North Companies

We have reviewed the amended site plan to allow Delaware North Companies to construct a waste water treatment plant on APN 010-410-013, which will be serving both APN's 010-410-012 & 013.

As the construction plans are proposed, the waste water treatment plant would be built and excavation would occur in an area where we have existing fiber optic cable. We will need to relocate our cable prior to the start of construction of the proposed waste water treatment plant. In order to begin our relocation, we will need to obtain a new easement from Delaware North Companies to circumvent their proposed project area. We will be contacting the Project Manager, Michael Gilbert, to arrange for obtaining this easement and to engineer the relocation of our fiber plant.

We have no objections to this proposed parcel split as long as we are granted the requested telephone easement and our fiber cable is safely rerouted.

tr/Th~h': II MarcMc~a~ Outside Plant Engineering Supervisor

MM/ss

P05.T OffICE Box 219 • OAKHUIlST, CI\UFORNIA 93{)44~0219 THEPHON[ 559~683~4bl1 FACSIMIl,E 559.b03.6913 www.sierriltelephone.com Damon Golubics

From: Brian & Lynn Mattos [blmattos@stLnet] Sent: Tuesday, December 14,20105:50 PM To: Damon Golubics SUbject: Request for Comments: Amended Site Plan 2010-161

Thank you for requesting comments on Amended Site Plan 2010-161. The proposed project sounds like a great way to deal with the stinky existing plant in the middle of the newly combined properties and another opportunity for Delaware North Companies to expand their water reduction and recycling programs, which have already decreased their well pumping in Fish Camp by more than four million gallons.

I have not seen the proposed mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to local wildlife, but I believe that those can mostly be scheduling construction activities to avoid sensitive life stages, especially for the migrating species. Thanks for considering all of Fish Camp's residents!

Brian Mattos 7621 Forest Drive Box 221 Fish Camp, CA 93623

1 Page 1 of 1

Damon Golubics

From: Jennifer Bryan-Sanchez [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 10:29 AM To: Damon Golubics Cc: Michael Navarro Subject: RE: Amended Site Plan 2010-161, CUP 241 (Tenaya WWTP) Attachments: ASP 2010-161 FOR CUP 241.pdf

GODd Morning Mr. GDlubics,

Regarding Amended Site Plan 2010-161 for the CDnditiDnal Use Permit 241, Tenaya Cottages (WWTP), Caltrans has "No Comment". For you records and convenience, I have attached to this email a copy of the cover sheet with Caitrans' "ND Comment". Thank YDU fDr the oppDrtunity to review this prDject. I look fDrward tD reviewing future projects for you.

Thanks,

Jennifer Bryan-Sanchez Associate Transportation Pianner CalTrans District Office 6 1352 W. Olive Ave. Fresno, CA. 93728 (559)488-7307

12115/2010 fYlf 4J - D...... ::..:.. I 81f1 i/_ MARIPOSA PLANNING '1(1~J;:" r, .• COUNTY OF MARlPOSA 'g-...... - 5100 BULLION STREET' POST OFFICE BOX 2039 MARIPOSA. CALIFORNIA 953J8-2039 209 142 2{)q·742-1150' fA., 209 74~ ~24

Kris Schenk. Director ls~h,nl.." manpos.1C'{)umj 01" Damon Golubics. Senior Planner d£olubu:.Sl mallp<'lSollCOUnl)' OIl:

REQUEST FOR COM~IENT

Date: November 30, 2010 Applicant: Delaware North COmpanIes Application Type I File #: Amended Site Plan 2010-161 Site Address: 1122 Highway 41, Fish Camp, CA 93623

Dear Reviewing Agency, Mariposa Planning thanks you for your continued partidpation to creating quality developments In Mariposa County. We value your comments and hope for your continued partidpation In a planning process meant to Inform applicants of your concerns and requirements. No doubt. this early Involvement eliminates or minimizes problems that would othefWlse arise. Once again, we request your comments and encourage them to be submitted to our office In writing by December 20, 2010. Ir during this time you find a need for additional Information, then contact the assigned project planner by this date so that we can acquire the information for you. State law places a deadline on such requests, so please do not miss your opportunity.

Assil!l1ed Project Planner; Damon Golubics 209-742-1250 [email protected]

PrOJect Descnption: The Mariposa Coumy Planning Department has received an application for Amended Conditions from Delaware Nonh, applicant to Amend lhe site plan and conditions of approval for Conditional Use Penrllt 241 (Tenaya Cottages; formerly Apple Tree Inn) 10 allo.... for the constmcnon ofa wastewater treannenl planl on lhe site The treatmenl plant y.ould serve both the Tenaya Lodge and the Tenaya Cottages. and would have a capacity of 125.000 gallons per day. The plant would consist of four 50,000 gallon underground storage tanks, a treatment plant building of approximately 5,225 sq. ft. and 27 feel high, a 400 sq. ft, headworks structure, and a 7.000 sq ft. parking facility with 8 spaces. An 8·inch diameter rewer main from Lhe lodge site 10 the new lreatment plant and a 6-inch recycled water line 10 transmIt water back to the leachfield system at the lodge sHe would be installed along Jackson Road. The eltisting septic system consisting of two 3.000 !?allon seplic tanks and multiple leach lines althe Tenaya Conages site, and the existing waste"'aler treaunent plant at the Tenaya Lodge site .... ould be removed. The parcel on whic.h the ne\\ treatmenl planl would be located (the Tenaya COttages site) is 1166 acres 1Il siz.e. The new treatment plant would be located on a ponioo of the sile that is 1Il the Single Family Residential f)-acre minimum) land use classification A total area of apprml.lmately 1.8 acres would be required for the replacement "'aslewater treatment plant and associated structures. The APN for the parcel is 010-410-013. The APN forthe adjacent Tenaya Lodge parcel is () I0-41 0-012

A cultuml resources stud)' was prepared for lhe project site and there were no significant resource!. found. A biological re3QUrces study of the site was conducted and it found potentially Significant impacts to Pacific fisher, California spotted 0\\ Is and nonhem goshawks. special statuS baLS. and nesting birds. Mitigation measures 3re proposed to reduce these pot("ntlal1) significant impacts to less than signifieanl levels. These issues will be discussed In the Initial Srudy thai \\ ill be prepared for the project Cahfomlll law requires the C'ou... ry 10 only apprme proJ«I~ .... hen pooenually significant unpacts ha\e been nutigated nus 1S accomplt. h~d Ihrough the COfllhuon!t of Bppro\al thai )OUT agent re..:ommends \1anpo~ Plannmg operate:; under lhe assumptl~ that .lgencu:s halle \aluable comment that define and sp«ll) required proJe\:t standards Y.(' abo understand thal agenclc ta,.: mulup e du~ and pnonhes and thaI urnn occasion an agent) may nol comment by the deadline e'tn though 11 rna) ha\'e ISSU~ "Ith the Prol~l. Lnfornmately Maripo~a Planning ha:. boIh statulory and ordmanoe deadlme.. for proces~ing apphcauons 'he il« 'lOlalmg Sute 13" and local code If"e do not meet our deadhnl"5 Statlne reqUires }OUf 1 mel) f'e!i;1"Pn.-.e end failure to comment may rrcclud(' your Imposlllon of requm:ments laler Our preference l~ for some type of CClmmUI1lCatlO~\ier.an e-mail-that states no comment. so that we \';no\l, )OU haH: at least rt\ ie"ed the propol'ed appllcauon and \\e ~now)'ou hale no is..ues Failure to pro'IJ- anv commenb pnOr to deadlines imposed by state !a.... means Ihat \H" rna) ha\e 10 mole f01"\1.llJd "ltM the project to the Planning CommiSSion ""1l an ~sumpuon then: are n" condillons needed anJ thaI the projccl as propo~ lHe('~ your agency 's requIrements "Commission Level- Project Re, ie" Benchmark \Ieelings Date Meettng... Applicant and Agent Introduces the project 10 SUtlT Agency Comments Draft Conditions Due - (nol attended b) appliuDt or agent) cc: PrOject Applicant and Agent RevISIon Date: Apnl 23, 2004

!rJ}lsiIO

II No ComNlem- \ -n ~p0rW:h(JYl ~Ylner Page I of I

Skip Strathearn

From: Damon Golubics Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 11 :55 AM To: Skip Strathearn Subject: FW: AP 2010-161 Cottages @ Tenaya Amended Site Plan

As promised, here are Dave Conway's comments.

From: Dave Conway sent: Thursday, December 23, 20104:13 PM To: Damon Golubics; Mike Mellana; [email protected] Cc: Rachelle Irby; Karen Christenson; Sarah Williams Subject: AP 2010-161 Cottages@ Tenaya Amended Site Plan

Damon, The Mariposa County Health Department has reviewed the above-mentioned project. The project as we understand it will remove much of the existing infrastructure serving the sewage disposal system for the cottages. It is unclear if the new plant will use any of the existing leachfleld that currently serves the cottages or not. While this office has no objection to the project we are concerned that the existing leachfields serving the main Tenaya Lodge may not be adequate to accommodate the additional daily flows from the cottages. We are also concerned that excavation for the underground tanks may uncover or remove a portion of the leachfield serving the cottages creating a potential public health threat posed by runoff of the sewage effluent and or contact with sewage contaminated materials. This office will need to see an engineering report addressing these concerns including proposed mitigation prior to construction beginning. The applicant must obtain a permit to repair, replace or remove any portion of the sewage disposal system from this office.

The former Apple tree inn had a specific condition of approval preventing the removal of trees from the area partly due to the concern that their removal will result in raising the groundwater levels. While this is not much of a concern for the proposed wastewater plant it is a concern if any of the area will continue to be used for subsurface disposal.

David L. Conway I REHS Director, Environmental Health Division Mariposa County Health Department Deputy Air Pollution Control Officer Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District 5100 Bullion Street, P.O. Box 5 Mariposa, CA 95338 (209) 966-2220

1/3/2011 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Katherine Hart, Chair Arnold Linda S. Adams 1685 E Sireet. Fre.no. Cellfornia 93706 SecretBty for (559) 445-5116' FaK (559) 445·5910 Schwarzanegger Envlronmanla/ http://vr..vW.waterboards.ca,gov/cantralvalJey GovernDr Protection

30 December 2010 RIEtr;lEfi~lE[Q)

JAN 04 2011 Damon Go lubics, Project Planner County of Mariposa Planning Department Mariposa County Planning Dept. 5100 BullionStreet P.O. Box 2039 Mariposa, CA 95338

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS, AMENDED SITE PLAN 2010·161, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 241 (TENA YA LODGE), DELAWARE NORTH COMPANIES, FISH CAMP, MARIPOSA COUNTY

The County of Mariposa Planning Department (County) circulated a Request for Comments leller dated 30 November 2010 conceming an Amended Site Plan 2010-161 for the Delaware North Companies (Discharger) regarding the construction of a new wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) at the existing Tenaya Lodge and the Tenaya Collages (formerly Apple Tree Inn) in Fish Camp, Mariposa County. The new WWTF would serve both the Tenaya Lodge and the Tenaya Collages and would replace an existing WWTF at the Tenaya Lodge and the existing septic system at the Tenaya Collages. The Tenaya Lodge already has Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Order 99-086 that regUlates a discharge of up to 50,000 gallons per day ofwastewater to leach fields.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (hereafter Central Valley Water Board) staff has reviewed the above referenced Request for Comments leller. The Request for Comments letter indicates cultural resources and biologicaLstudies have been conducted. Any possible mitigation measures will be addressed in an Initial Study that is to be prepared for the proposed project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The project description states that the new WWTF will consist of: four 50,000 gallon storage tanks; a new treatment plant building, new headworks, and a 7,000 square foot parking area.

California Environmental Protection Agency

ORscyc/ed Peper Maliposa County Planning Department -2- 30 December 2010 Delaware North Properties

Central Valley Water Board staff generally concurs with the proposed project and the proposed removal of the eXisting septic system at the site. Additional information and reports are reqUired for the project to address the proposed changes including but not limited to:

• In accordance with section 15073(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the County should circulate the Initial Study and any supporting documents (Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, etc) through the State Clearinghouse: and

• The Discharger must submit a Report of Waste Discharge (RWD) and/or Technical Reports to the Central Valley Water Board 140 days prior to discharge to address changes to the existing WWTF and any potential degradation from the new WWTF.

The Initial Study and/or Technical Reports should include an Antidegradation Analysis to assess the potential impact to water quality, recommend proposed mitigation measures, and if necessary, to address the potential impacts. A copy of the RWD should also be submitted to the Department of Public Health for review and comment.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed project. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Jeff Pyle at (559) 445-5145 or bye-mail at [email protected].

W. DALE HARVEY Senior Engineer RCE No. 55628

cc Delaware North Companies, Fish Camp ATTACHMENT B

DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROPOSED MARIPOSA COUNTY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

(Pursuant to California Administrative Code, Section 15070)

APPLICANT/PROJECT: Delaware North Companies; Amended Site Plan/Amended Conditions No. 2010-161; General Plan/Specific Plan/Zoning Amendment 2011-043

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the adopted site plan and conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit 241 to allow the construction of a wastewater treatment plant on the Tenaya Cottages site (APN 010-410-013) in the community of Fish Camp. The plant will serve the cottages and the Tenaya Lodge. Amend the Fish Camp Town Planning Area land use map by reclassifying 5.02 acres of APN 010-410-013 from the Single Family Residential (five-acre minimum) land use classification to the Resort Commercial classification

No significant effect is based on the following findings: The impacts related to the project are individually limited. Many will have short-term implications and are typical to new construction. Complying with existing regulations and ordinances, and adopted mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts relating to the issues of biological resources, cultural resources and noise provide a means of reducing the impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project does not have the potential to significantly degrade the quality of environment.

No plant communities and/or wildlife habitat will be removed or damaged as part of this project with the implementation of a mitigation measure that will protect nesting birds.

No evidence has been presented that would suggest that the project has the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. There are no significant impacts related to the project that are expected to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly with the implementation of mitigation measures. Based upon the environmental review conducted within the Initial Study for the project, and the anticipated level of impact as a result of the project, a mitigated negative declaration is adopted for the project.

(Additional Findings to be inserted when adopted by the Mariposa County Planning Commission)

No significant effect is based on review procedures of the following County Departments or Divisions: Mitigated Negative Declaration for Amended Site Plan/Amended Conditions No. 2010-161; General Plan/Specific Plan/Zoning Amendment No. 2011-043; Delaware North Companies, applicant Page 2 of 2

Building Division County Health Department Planning Commission Public Works Department

Other: California Department of Fish and Game, the American Indian Council of Mariposa County (Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation), additional tribes on the Native American contact list for Mariposa County maintained by the California Native American Heritage Commission, CalFire, and Regional Water Quality Control Board. (Applicable state agencies were provided the opportunity to comment on the Initial Study/proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration through the State Clearinghouse process.)

No significant effect is also based on the following:

See attached Mitigation Measures/Mitigation Monitoring adopted by Mariposa County Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-

The Initial Study was prepared by Design, Community & Environment and is on file at Mariposa County Planning Department, 5100 Bullion Street, Mariposa, California 95338.

KRIS SCHENK, Director Date Mariposa County Planning Department